10. Due Process/Hearing/Notice.
a. "All persons wanting to speak for or against the requested
amendment were given an opportunity to do so."
McKenzie v. Shelly, 77 Nev. 237, 240,
362 P.2d 268 (1961). No. 6.
b. "The law requires that zoning ordinances observe state
and federal constitutional provisions and requirements including that of due
process. State v. Hill, 59 Nev. 231, 90 P.2d 217 (1939). The governing
body of a city has the power to change // land use classifications, but no such
regulation may become effective until after notice and public hearing at which
interested parties and citizens shall have an opportunity to be heard."
Forman v. Eagle Thrifty Drugs & Markets,
89 Nev. 533, 538-539, 516 P.2d 1234 (1973). No. 16.
c. "When a statute requires notice and hearing as to the
possible effect of a zoning law upon property rights the action becomes quasi
judicial in character, and the statutory notice and hearing then becomes (sic)
necessary in order to satisfy the requirments of due process and may not be
dispensed with." Id. at 539.
d. "Before the granting of a special use permit,
NRS 278.315 requires a board of commissioners to hold a hearing. This statute
also provides that the applicant and each owner of property within 300 feet
must receive notice of the hearing by mail. Therefore, the county must personally
notify interested parties before granting a special use permit."
Bing Construction v. Douglas County,
107 Nev. 262, 265, 810 P.2d 768 (1991). No. 39.
e. "However, we are not convinced that just because the legislature
let individual counties determine their own procedure to alter zoning // in
derogation of a special use permit, counties are free to make changes without
personally notifying the citizens who will be directly affected. Due process
concerns require that a property owner must be notified when its rights are
changed, even if those rights are not vested." Id. at 265-266.
f. "Other states have held that upon a zoning change, the
failure to provide personal notice to an interested party is a violation of
due process." Id. at 266.
g. "[W]e conclude that a county may not choose to revoke
special uses without a valid reason, and therefore must provide personal notice
and a hearing to all parties who will be directly affected by the zoning change
or permit revocation." Id. at 266.
h. "Notice by publication could be sufficient to those who
are indirectly affected...." Id. 266, n. 4.