City plan; planning board; scope; lands outside corporate limits.
Each city of the metropolitan class is authorized and required to prepare a plan for its future physical development and growth. Such plan shall be prepared and shall be carried out by an appropriate city board or official. The plan may include such lands outside the corporate limits of the city as may bear a relation to the development of the city. A planning board may be given such other powers and duties by statute or charter as may be appropriate, and on or after January 1, 1998, the planning board shall have one member qualified and appointed as provided in section 14-373.02.
Source:Laws 1921, c. 116, art. III, § 57a, p. 460; C.S.1922, § 3611; C.S.1929, § 14-359; R.S.1943, § 14-373; Laws 1959, c. 34, § 1, p. 191; Laws 1996, LB 575, § 1.
Duties of city planning board, see section 14-407.
Provisions of this section do not apply where a city of the metropolitan class seeks to adopt an ordinance annexing lands adjacent to the city's boundaries. S.I.D. No. 95 v. City of Omaha, 221 Neb. 272, 376 N.W.2d 767 (1985).
Efficacy of city plan depends on its being adopted by the city council. Van Patten v. City of Omaha, 167 Neb. 741, 94 N.W.2d 664 (1959).
City planning commission has power to carry out and maintain city plan after its adoption by city council. Ash v. City of Omaha, 152 Neb. 393, 41 N.W.2d 386 (1950); Reid v. City of Omaha, 150 Neb. 286, 34 N.W.2d 375 (1948).
Zoning ordinance, drafted in general terms and providing reasonable margin to secure effective enforcement, is within police power of state and constitutional. Pettis v. Alpha Alpha Chapter of Phi Beta Pi, 115 Neb. 525, 213 N.W. 835 (1927).
Metropolitan city is not permitted to impose unreasonable regulations upon the owners of property with respect to the area sought to be covered by a proposed building. State ex rel. Westminster Presbyterian Church v. Edgecomb, 108 Neb. 859, 189 N.W. 617 (1922), 27 A.L.R. 437 (1922).