Citation Numbers: 374 S.W.2d 861
Judges: Clay
Filed Date: 1/24/1964
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 10/1/2021
Appellant sought to have the zoning classifications of a tract of land owned by it in Jefferson County changed from “E-3” Industrial to “E-4” Industrial. The Zoning Commission denied appellant’s application, and on appeal to the circuit court under KRS 100.057, after a trial de novo, the circuit court confirmed the action of the .Commission by denying the zoning change.
The only question before us is whether there was substantial evidence
The only reason shown by appellant for the requested reclassification was its own convenience. Without deciding the extent of the burden on appellant to establish a substantial basis for the change, and without examining the question of spot zoning in the light of Hodge v. Luckett, Ky., 357 S.W.2d 303, we are of the opinion the findings and conclusions of the circuit court were amply supported by the evidence and were in conformity with law.
The judgment is affirmed.
. The language generally used is “substantial evidence of probative value”. The phrase “of probative value” is surplusage. The evidence could not be substantial unless it possessed this persuasive quality.