SuperAmerica Group, Inc. v. City of Little Canada

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that incompatibility between proposed use and “definite and objective standards” in city’s comprehensive plan justified denial of conditional-use permit
• holding that expert testimony, which stated that proposed gas station would produce only a “relatively small” increase in traffic, did not mandate issuance of conditional use permit where city properly considered neighbors’ “concrete” observations concerning “existing, daily traffic problems”
• upholding denial of a conditional use permit based on traffic concerns where “witnesses spoke of existing, daily traffic problems” and gave specific examples of “current congestion”
• affirming denial of CUP where even applicant’s experts acknowledge that service station would cause some traffic congestion in already congested area

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).