the phrase “the character of the neighborhood” was “not so vague and indefinite that uniform application could not be assured.”
How later courts described this case
- the phrase “the character of the neighborhood” was “not so vague and indefinite that uniform application could not be assured.”
- same as to local ordinances
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
Dissenting Opinion by
Mr. Chief Justice Bell:
I believe that junk and junkyards and junk dealers can and should be subject to ordinances, zoning acts and regulations. However, reasonable and definite standards must be provided. Aesthetics is not a reasonable standard. Not more than (at most) 6 out of 100 persons can agree on what is or is not “aesthetics” and therefore that standard is too vague and uncertain. It follows that the original ordinance was unconstitutional and it is clear that the amendment did not cure this unconstitutionality.