## Facts

- Kendall and Mildred Dawe owned property platted as the Palo Verde Terrace subdivision.
- Before 1959, the land lay in unincorporated Maricopa County, which purported to require minimum 35,000-square-foot lots.
- In 1959, the Arizona Supreme Court invalidated the county zoning ordinances for failure to comply with statutory notice-and-hearing requirements, leaving a temporary period with no valid county zoning.
- During this zoning gap (between late 1959 and February 27, 1960), the Dawes’ predecessors recorded a subdivision plat creating 120 lots of up to 10,000 square feet.
- The property remained vacant and unimproved for approximately 15 years after the plat was recorded; no substantial expenditures or improvements were made.
- In 1963, the City of Scottsdale annexed the area and applied zoning requiring minimum 35,000-square-foot lots.
- In 1975, the Dawes sued seeking declarations that the subdivision remained valid as platted and that the City had to issue permits consistent with the 10,000-square-foot lots.
- The trial court ruled for Scottsdale; the court of appeals reversed; the Arizona Supreme Court granted review.

## Issues

1. Whether recording a subdivision plat during a period when no valid county zoning existed created a vested right to develop the property as platted, preventing Scottsdale from enforcing its later minimum-lot zoning after annexation.

## Decision

- The Arizona Supreme Court vacated the court of appeals decision and affirmed the trial court’s judgment for Scottsdale.
- The court held that recording the plat, without subsequent development or substantial reliance, did not create vested rights in the lot configuration.
- Scottsdale could apply and enforce its minimum-lot zoning on the annexed property and was not required to issue permits based on the 10,000-square-foot-lot plat.

## Legal Principles

- Vested land-use rights generally require more than preliminary administrative steps; they require good-faith, substantial reliance and tangible action (such as significant expenditures, improvements, or permitted construction).
- Recording a subdivision plat, standing alone, does not freeze lot sizes against later valid zoning changes.
- A temporary absence of zoning regulation does not create permanent immunity from later, valid land-use regulation.
- Upon annexation, a municipality may apply its zoning ordinances to annexed territory unless doing so unlawfully impairs vested rights.

## Conclusion

The court held that the owners had no vested right to develop 10,000-square-foot lots because they only recorded a plat and made no substantial reliance-based improvements; therefore, Scottsdale’s 35,000-square-foot minimum-lot zoning governed the property after annexation.


Dawe v. City of Scottsdale, 119 Ariz. 486, 581 P.2d 1136 (Ariz. 1978)