Legal Opinion · Dissent

City of Atlanta v. Standish

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided March 12, 1987No. 44092Published

1DissentWeltner, Justice

I respectfully dissent. The majority suggests the absence of a “significant public benefit from the present zoning.” There is a benefit which is quite significant, and that is the continuation of the residential character of one of Atlanta’s close-in neighborhoods — many of which fall under increasing pressures for redevelopment to nonresidential uses.

The zoning of surrounding properties has not changed since the owners purchased the property a decade ago. Under present zoning, according to an appraiser, the property now is worth exactly two-thirds more than the purchase price — or an average…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Flournoy v. City of BrunswickSupreme Court of Georgia · 1981
  2. Avera v. City of BrunswickSupreme Court of Georgia · 1978
  3. Ohoopee Land Development Corporation v. Mayor & Council of WrightsvilleSupreme Court of Georgia · 1981

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API