View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Making Zoning Relevant for Business Students: An Interactive Exercise in Selecting a Business Location

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Making Zoning Relevant for Business Students: An Interactive Exercise in Selecting a Business Location
Language: English
Authors: Lara Grow
Source: Journal of Legal Studies Education. 2025 42(1):31-37.
Availability: Wiley. Available from: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030. Tel: 800-835-6770; e-mail: cs-journals@wiley.com; Web site: https://www.wiley.com/en-us
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 7
Publication Date: 2025
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Descriptive
Tests/Questionnaires
Education Level: Higher Education
Postsecondary Education
Descriptors: Business Schools, Undergraduate Students, Zoning, Real Estate, Site Selection, Business, Laws, Professional Education, Dining Facilities, Building Design, Design Requirements, Land Use, Learning Activities, Assignments, Decision Making, Planning, Class Activities
Geographic Terms: Utah
DOI: 10.1111/jlse.12156
ISSN: 0896-5811
1744-1722
Abstract: This article describes an in-class exercise that can be used when teaching zoning law to a Real Estate Law or Legal Environment of Business undergraduate course. The exercise requires students to utilize Salt Lake City's zoning code to locate the best site for a restaurant chain given certain locational and operational requirements, and to research the likelihood of a variance request. The exercise is an effective means for instructors to connect an increasingly relevant area of the law to a practical business objective.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2025
Accession Number: EJ1459655
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwGHs60_9otAcY6NGaMm-Q88AAAA4zCB4AYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHSMIHPAgEAMIHJBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDBIxE3gt9tqiR348KAIBEICBmzXqf01JU_nwjwNEF5mvg1nlLIfD_v7miH7Z7MWD8c0aqOO8DvFne7QKnDH3YSlOlge0KPTlUOhlvsPLI5PUnLyMq5gKBJL_R_DyH8zXgXreRPkY2Vk4vUzGIp9xscyHeofbbaYF7EOVaOsbeomDMls6C5Axf-vOIiRLB-GXLSTw7UP7mK6e4pVPerQTwT_ZR3lI80j07rqUwUdQ
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0183986047;[172d]01jan.25;2025Mar26.05:59;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0183986047-1">Making Zoning Relevant for Business Students: An Interactive Exercise in Selecting a Business Location </title> <sbt id="AN0183986047-2">INTRODUCTION</sbt> <p>This article describes an in‐class exercise that can be used when teaching zoning law to a Real Estate Law or Legal Environment of Business undergraduate course. The exercise requires students to utilize Salt Lake City's zoning code to locate the best site for a restaurant chain given certain locational and operational requirements, and to research the likelihood of a variance request. The exercise is an effective means for instructors to connect an increasingly relevant area of the law to a practical business objective.</p> <p>Zoning law has gained an unlikely resurgence of media and policy interest in recent years. Much of this attention has been paid to one of the mainstays of zoning, single‐family zoning, as it relates to the affordable housing crisis. Indeed, single‐family zoning is often referred to as exclusionary zoning or "the new redlining," as it typically prohibits multi‐unit housing and mandates large lot sizes, limiting the supply of housing and arguably resulting in socioeconomic and de facto racial segregation. Meanwhile some have looked to zoning law to remedy environmental problems relating to urban sprawl, while others have advocated that zoning codes should be revised to address racial inequality as it pertains to communities of color's access to well‐funded schools and good jobs. In hopes of alleviating these problems, a number of cities and states have recently taken steps to update their zoning laws, including measures enacted by several jurisdictions banning or relaxing single‐family zoning restrictions.</p> <p>Aside from its current policy relevance, zoning law also has a great deal of practical applicability for business students. Zoning is integral to real estate development and, more basically, to the decision of where to locate a business. While students are generally familiar with the concept of use restrictions in zoning—e.g., residential versus commercial zones—they often fail to realize the level of detail contained in most zoning ordinances.</p> <p>The exercise described in this article requires students to utilize Salt Lake City's zoning maps and ordinances to locate the best site for an In‐N‐Out Burger restaurant based on a set of locational and operational requirements. The exercise thus helps students achieve the ultimate learning objective of better understanding how to apply and analyze various zoning restrictions to achieve a concrete end‐goal. Specifically, depending on the extent to which the instructor elects to implement the various parts of the exercise, students will learn how to (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref1">1</reflink>) utilize zoning maps to determine the zoning designations of potential sites; (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref2">2</reflink>) research a zoning ordinance to identify use and dimensional zoning restrictions to select the most suitable site for the business; and (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref3">3</reflink>) apply for a variance and research the likelihood of success. After developing an understanding of Salt Lake City's zoning code, students will then apply the restrictions to In‐N‐Out Burger's location requirements, before analyzing and evaluating which proposed site will ultimately prove to be the most suitable location for the business. This problem‐solving exercise ultimately allows students to more actively engage with their learning and thereby ascend Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, moving from the acquisition of knowledge to the stages of application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation.</p> <p>Because this activity underscores the connection between business decisions and the law, it is one that can thus be utilized in a variety of classroom settings. Given that many business schools offer a real estate major, this exercise could be implemented in a real estate law course of the type often required in such a degree or certificate program. In addition, considering that many institutions include a general discussion of real property law within their Legal Environment of Business courses, an instructor could also utilize this activity in that setting as well. The exercise can take as little as 30 minutes of class time, but it can also be expanded to a full class period with an optional extension requiring students to research the likelihood of success of a potential variance request. Indeed, one benefit to utilizing in‐class exercises is the ability to break up the standard lecture format and create a more active learning environment to enhance student engagement. Research shows that interactive learning can heighten students' retention of information and improve learning outcomes.</p> <p>The article proceeds in two parts. Part 2 presents a brief overview of the legal landscape surrounding zoning and variances. Part 3 then introduces the exercise, including an optional extension that instructors can elect to implement in their courses.</p> <hd id="AN0183986047-3">AN OVERVIEW OF THE LAW OF ZONING AND VARIANCES</hd> <p>Zoning laws typically take the form of local government ordinances that divide a municipality into various areas, or "zones," and regulate the types of activities or uses that can be conducted in each of these respective zones. Typical zoning uses include residential, mixed‐use, industrial, commercial, and agricultural. These restrictions will often then be further subdivided into more specific uses, e.g., single‐family residential neighborhoods or a commercial corridor business district. Zoning laws may also go beyond restricting uses and regulate lot sizes, building heights and setbacks, and other dimensional requirements.</p> <p>In 1926, the U.S. Supreme Court in <emph>Euclid v. Ambler Realty Company</emph> ruled that zoning was a constitutional exercise of a state's police power. Cities and towns in all 50 states enact zoning regulations under the authority of state enabling statutes, through which states delegate their police power to local governments, who are believed to be in the best position to understand the development needs of their communities. These enabling statutes are typically modeled after the Standard State Zoning Enabling Act, which was drafted by the U.S. Department of Commerce in the 1920s. This act authorizes local governments to regulate the use of land to "lessen congestion ... secure safety ... promote health and the general welfare ... prevent the overcrowding of land ... [and] avoid undue concentration of population ..." Municipalities are given substantial leeway in determining what they deem to best promote the general welfare.</p> <p>These zoning ordinances help to ensure that development proceeds in logical patterns and that compatible uses are grouped together within the town. Indeed, fostering development by grouping compatible uses together reduces the likelihood of nuisance complaints. Another effect of congregating similar uses into zones is the preservation of property values, a general welfare purpose that was upheld as a constitutional use of police powers in <emph>Belle Terre v. Boraas</emph>. In fact, Salt Lake City, the location of the in‐class exercise, provides that the purpose and intent of its zoning regulations is to "lessen congestion in streets and roads, protect the tax base, provide adequate light and air, protect the environment, classify land uses and <emph>distribute development and utilization, [thereby] foster[ing] industrial, business, and residential development</emph>."</p> <p>If a property owner is dissatisfied with the authorized uses for their property under the applicable local zoning code, procedures exist through which the owner can seek an exception. Section 7 of the Standard State Zoning Enabling Act authorizes the creation of a board of adjustments to rule on applications for these exceptions – typically styled "variances" – to the local zoning ordinance. This board is a local administrative body, usually comprised of community members appointed by the mayor. The discretion to grant variances has been referred to as a "safety valve against overly intrusive land use regulations."</p> <p>Variance requests typically fall into two main categories: (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref4">1</reflink>) use variances, which request permission to use the property in a manner currently prohibited under the applicable zoning code; or (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref5">2</reflink>) dimensional variances, which request a deviation from dimensional restrictions within an allowed use (e.g., a setback modification or height deviation). Boards of adjustments are more likely to grant dimensional variances, as these requests are generally viewed as being less likely to disrupt the surrounding neighborhood, and may even impose a lesser burden of proof on an applicant requesting such a variance. In fact, some jurisdictions may even go so far as to outrightly prohibit use variances, instead explicitly only issuing dimensional variances.</p> <p>In most jurisdictions, the board of adjustments will consider one or more of the following factors when deciding whether to grant a variance: (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref6">1</reflink>) whether the variance would be contrary to the public interest; (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref7">2</reflink>) whether the variance is justified due to special conditions relating to the land in question; and (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref8">3</reflink>) whether unnecessary hardship would result absent the granting of the variance. While states differ in their definitions of "unnecessary hardship," the mere desire for a more profitable land use—such as commercial in a residential zone—will not suffice. Similarly, conditions that affect the entire zone (as opposed to unique hardships related to the parcel in question) will also not constitute an unnecessary hardship.</p> <p>Applicants may seek judicial review of an adverse variance decision. Courts will typically be quite deferential to the board's decision, however, and will generally only overturn the decision if it was either arbitrary and capricious or contrary to law.</p> <hd id="AN0183986047-4">THE EXERCISE: USING ZONING AND BUSINESS PARAMETERS TO FIND AN IDEAL RESTAURANT LOCATION</hd> <p>In brief, the exercise asks students to identify the best location for a new In‐N‐Out Burger restaurant in Salt Lake City, Utah, given certain structural and locational parameters along with the restrictions established by the city's zoning code. A fast‐food chain was chosen to ease the students' visualization of the needs required for the business. Meanwhile, Salt Lake City was selected due to its accessible yet detailed zoning code, while also serving as a city that my predominantly midwestern students would be less familiar, thereby ensuring that they would be required to research the issue without relying on prior knowledge of the community and its local zoning ordinance. Alternatively, however, an instructor could modify the assignment to be set in a more familiar city for his/her students to help simplify the project or make it more relatable.</p> <hd id="AN0183986047-5">Stage one: Determining the zoning designation for four potential sites</hd> <p>Following a brief lecture during which the class is introduced to zoning law and variance procedures, students are asked to break into small groups of 2 or 3 people each before being provided with a handout outlining the assignment (Appendix). Specifically, the handout identifies four locations within Salt Lake City to potentially locate an In‐N‐Out Burger restaurant. Utilizing Salt Lake City's online zoning maps, students are asked to first locate the zoning designation for each site within the city's eight commercial districts. The four selected sites are located in the Community Business, Corridor Commercial, General Commercial, and Neighborhood Commercial districts. The purpose of this portion of the exercise is two‐fold: (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref9">1</reflink>) it contextualizes the assignment by giving students the ability to visualize the zoning map for the city, including how adjacent structures may be subject to different designations; and (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref10">2</reflink>) it shows students where potential sites are located within the city, helping to determine whether the sites are located near a major freeway (an important factor for site selection due to ease of access for the greatest number of customers under the hypothetical parameters in this exercise).</p> <hd id="AN0183986047-6">Stage two: Select the best site given certain parameters</hd> <p>For the second phase of the exercise, students are given parameters to determine the best, and second‐best, locations for the restaurant. They are instructed to explain their reasoning citing the relevant zoning code provisions. With some slight modifications relating to signage and landscaping, current In‐N‐Out Burger building requirements were utilized to establish the following parameters: (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref11">1</reflink>) a lot size of 45,000+ square feet; (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref12">2</reflink>) a building area of approximately 3,800 square feet with a building height of 30 feet; (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref13">3</reflink>) a building designed in accordance with the overall look of the sample photo (see Appendix A showing a photograph of an In‐N‐Out Burger restaurant); (<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref14">4</reflink>) minimum drive‐through stacking of 10 cars (2 bays with 5 cars each); (<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref15">5</reflink>) hours of operation from 10:30 a.m. to 1:30 a.m., seven days a week; (<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref16">6</reflink>) an on‐site, animated "In‐N‐Out" sign with flashing lights; (<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref17">7</reflink>) minimal landscaping and yard maintenance; and (<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref18">8</reflink>) a site located in close proximity to a major freeway.</p> <p>One approach to this portion of the exercise is for students to create a chart comparing the In‐N‐Out Burger parameters against the zoning districts' requirements before selecting the location whose zoning meets the greatest number of parameters. There are deliberately some parameters (hours of operation) that are not addressed in the zoning code to keep students looking and thus reading more of the ordinances. Moreover, none of the sites allow animated signs with flashing lights. Students will initially eliminate the proposed location residing in the Neighborhood Commercial district because drive‐throughs are prohibited in this area, a critical factor given the importance of that requirement for the business. The three potential remaining sites each allow drive‐throughs with multiple bays and a minimum of five cars per stacking lane. Furthermore, the requisite building area and height restrictions are also accommodated under the zoning for each of these three potential sites.</p> <p>The remaining In‐N‐Out Burger parameters allow students to differentiate among the three remaining potential location sites (residing in Community Business, Corridor Commercial, and General Commercial zones, respectively). Concerning the restriction to minimize landscaping, the Community Business district would be most ideal given that it does not have any yard requirements. In contrast, both the General Commercial and Corridor Commercial zones require the site to have front, corner, and rear yards, with the General Commercial zoning requiring trees planted every 30 feet.</p> <p>With regard to the design specifications of the restaurant, however, the Community Business district would require the building's roofline to be the same as other buildings on the block within the zone. Neither the General Commercial nor Corridor Commercial sites have this design limitation. At this point, the students must determine whether the yard/landscaping parameter (the lack thereof pointing in favor of the Community Business site) should outweigh the roof design restrictions (limiting the choices to General Commercial or Corridor Commercial) for the In‐N‐Out Burger restaurant. Given the parameter requiring a location that would accommodate the building design of the sample photo in Appendix A, this should lead students to favor the General Commercial or Corridor Commercial locations.</p> <p>The remaining requirement to evaluate is the commercial traffic parameter stating that the business owner would ideally like the restaurant to be situated near a freeway. This parameter requires the student to step away from the ordinances and utilize the zoning maps to see each site's location within the broader context of the development patterns of Salt Lake City. There will inevitably be some variability in responses reflecting the reality that there is often not a definitive answer to a business problem. Students, however, are likely to note that if proximity to a freeway is the decisive factor, the calculus would tip in favor of the Corridor Commercial site given that it is the closest to a major highway (I‐270). Meanwhile, the General Commercial site is the next best location as it is two blocks from I‐15, with the Community Business location falling six blocks from a major highway (I‐270).</p> <p>Ultimately, students are most likely to recommend the location within the Corridor Commercial zoning district given that it best aligns with the site requirements with the exception of the landscaping and yard maintenance requirement. Meanwhile, the General Commercial site would be the second‐best choice, as it also meets all of the same parameters, but falls slightly farther away from a major freeway. Finally, although the Community Business site does not have any landscaping requirements, it is located the farthest of these three options from a major highway and requires a roofline consistent with other buildings in that zone, both likely disqualifying factors given the parameters.</p> <p>I utilize this assignment as an in‐class graded exercise with points assigned for (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref19">1</reflink>) active participation within the group, (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref20">2</reflink>) correct identification of the zoning designation of each potential site, and (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref21">3</reflink>) proper site selection of the best and second‐best site for the restaurant with supporting explanations citing the relevant ordinance provisions. However, instructors could instead either simply award students with credit for merely completing the exercise to simplify the grading or, alternatively, assign a written reflection prompting students to discuss what the exercise taught them about the zoning process to make the project more involved.</p> <hd id="AN0183986047-7">Stage three: Extension exercise—Requesting a variance</hd> <p>If the instructor wishes to expand the scope of the exercise, a third stage can be added to the project requiring students to research the process for obtaining a variance. Specifically, Appendix B contains instructions specifying that the business owner would like students to research the process of obtaining a variance and the likelihood a variance request will be granted allowing the installation of an animated sign despite the prohibition against such signage in all commercial zones. These instructions should be provided to students in a second handout once the groups have finished Stage One and Two of the exercise.</p> <p>Salt Lake City's zoning code clearly lays out the fee and application materials required for a variance request to be submitted to the zoning administrator. The application consists of a site plan drawn to scale, including an elevation drawing identifying property lines, structures, and rights of way. The applicant must also note the specific code provision from which the variance is sought and describe the features of the proposed use that necessitate a variance. In addition, the applicant must explain the unnecessary hardship that would result without the variance and the minimum variation necessary to permit the proposed use. Upon receipt of a complete application, public notices will be sent to nearby property owners and community organizations, public comments will be solicited, and a public hearing will be scheduled. An appeals hearing officer, who is appointed by the mayor subject to the advice and consent of the city council, will then issue a written decision on the variance application.</p> <p>Salt Lake City's zoning ordinances provide that a variance will only be granted if enforcement of the current zoning would cause "unreasonable hardship" to the applicant. Furthermore, the alleged hardship must be related to the size, shape, or topography of the property for which the variance is sought, and relate to circumstances peculiar to the property and that do not generally apply to other properties in the same zoning district. Here, an animated sign is not related to the property's shape or size, and the prohibition against animated signs is of general applicability to all commercial districts most likely due to driving safety concerns. Indeed, the sign ordinance states the standards were created to "eliminate potential hazards to motorists and pedestrians by requiring that signs are designed ... in a manner that promotes the public health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of Salt Lake City." The animation prohibition serves the public interest of safety, and thus the granting of a variance would also arguably negatively affect the public interest contrary to Salt Lake City's zoning requirements in section 21A.18.060(A)(<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref22">4</reflink>). In addition, there is nothing unique about the property in question that makes the enforcement of this sign prohibition on In‐N‐Out Burger unduly burdensome as compared to neighboring properties, as the property owner would still be able to advertise the restaurant with signs, just not animated signs. Thus, the student should note that the business owner would not be suffering an unreasonable hardship in advertising their property and therefore conclude that the variance application would not be worth pursuing.</p> <p>This portion of the exercise helps reinforce the standards for obtaining a variance and enables students to understand the function of local government more clearly. At the same time, the animated sign feature was selected for the variance request because it was clearly unlikely to be approved, thus simplifying the ultimate analysis for students, as opposed to a more borderline request that would entail greater knowledge of the topographical features of the property in question compared to neighboring properties. Instructors could alter this component of the exercise, however, if they wished to make the analysis more challenging (perhaps focusing on the landscaping requirement present in the General Commercial or Corridor Commercial zones).</p> <p>Ultimately, when grading this portion of the in‐class assignment listed in Appendix B, I assign points for correctly detailing the procedure for obtaining a variance and accurately explaining why the request is unlikely to be granted as detailed above.</p> <p>Appendix C provides additional discussion questions instructors may wish to utilize as a debriefing exercise after students submit the assignment. These discussion prompts help reinforce the material, provide opportunities to clarify any student questions, and allow students to hear perspectives from other groups. Furthermore, some of the questions require students to think beyond the specifics of this exercise, ultimately extending their understanding of the zoning process.</p> <hd id="AN0183986047-8">Student response and tips for using exercise</hd> <p>The student response to both components of the exercise has been overwhelmingly positive, with students informally reporting that they enjoy the real‐world applicability of the project and the fact that there can be definitive answers within the law (for example, some zones explicitly prohibit drive‐through restaurants), as opposed to some of the murkier issues we often discuss in class. In terms of hurdles with implementing the exercise, students typically need assurance in class that they have utilized the map correctly to locate the sites, as that would set them on the wrong path for the subsequent components of the exercise. They also express some frustration that one parameter (hours of operation) is not mentioned in the ordinances and have suggested that that aspect should be cut to save time. I have thus far kept that parameter as it requires students to read more of the code than they might otherwise. Overall, though, students are able to deftly navigate the code provisions and report a deeper understanding of the variance process.</p> <hd id="AN0183986047-9">CONCLUSION</hd> <p>The foregoing zoning exercise provides students with first‐hand experience applying zoning laws to the real‐world business decision of where to locate a business. Students report a deeper understanding of the zoning and variance process by actively engaging with the material through this exercise. Given that the teaching of law can sometimes be bogged down with complicated judicial opinions involving narrow fact patterns, this practical activity underscores the relevancy of law to business decisions while reinforcing students' understanding of the law of zoning, a relevant topic in a variety of business law classes and a current source of policy interest in the news.</p> <hd id="AN0183986047-10">ACKNOWLEDGMENTS</hd> <p>I would like to thank Victor Bongard for sparking the idea for this exercise.</p> <hd id="AN0183986047-11">A APPENDIX ZONING EXERCISE</hd> <p>Photo Credit: Jetcityimage (https://stock.adobe.com/contributor/202305627/jetcityimage)</p> <hd id="AN0183986047-12">Learning Objective</hd> <p>This exercise supports the learning objective of understanding how to apply and analyze various zoning restrictions to determine the best location for a business. Specifically, you will learn how to (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref23">1</reflink>) utilize zoning maps to determine the zoning designations of potential business sites; and (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref24">2</reflink>) research a zoning ordinance to identify use and dimensional zoning restrictions to select the most suitable site for the business given certain locational and business parameters.</p> <hd id="AN0183986047-13">Background</hd> <p>In‐N‐Out Burger (a fast‐food, drive‐through restaurant with indoor dining) wants to open a new site in Salt Lake City. The following location sites (assume all lot sizes are the required 45,000 square feet) are being considered:</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> 844 S. 200 St.</item> <p></p> <item> 1000 S. Main St.</item> <p></p> <item> 416 E. 900 St.</item> <p></p> <item> 135 W. 1300 St.</item> <p></p> <item> Using https://slcgov.maps.arcgis.com/apps/instant/sidebar/index.html?appid=fa801b661ce14222a6c1f7d42ce21636, identify (next to the sites listed above) each location's zoning district.</item> <p></p> <item> Using Salt Lake City's zoning ordinances, available at https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/saltlakecityut/latest/saltlakecity%5fut, identify (and explain, citing the relevant code provisions) the best (and second‐best) site for the restaurant given the following parameters:</item> <p></p> <item> Lot size 45,000+ square feet</item> <p></p> <item> Building area approximately 3,800 square feet, building height 30 ft.</item> <p></p> <item> Building must be designed in accordance with the overall look of the above picture</item> <p></p> <item> Hours of operation: 10:30 a.m. to 1:30 a.m., seven days a week</item> <p></p> <item> On‐site, animated "In‐N‐Out" sign with flashing lights</item> <p></p> <item> Minimal landscaping and yard maintenance</item> <p></p> <item> Ideal site is in close proximity to a major freeway https://realestate.in-n-out.com/ (detailing minimum standards for all In‐N‐Out Burger sites).</item> </ulist> <hd id="AN0183986047-14">B APPENDIX</hd> <p>Given that all sites prohibit animated signs, In‐N‐Out Burger would like you to research whether a variance request would likely be granted to allow animated signs. Utilizing Salt Lake City's Zoning Code, Chapter 21A.18, available at https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/saltlakecityut/latest/saltlakecity_ut/0-0-0-63794</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> Explain the procedure for obtaining a variance, citing the relevant provisions of the code; and</item> <p></p> <item> Provide your best guess on the likelihood of success in obtaining the variance for animated signs, noting the relevant provisions of the code relating to prohibited variances and standards for granting variances.</item> </ulist> <hd id="AN0183986047-15">C APPENDIX Discussion Questions</hd> <p></p> <ulist> <item> When having to prioritize the various site selection criteria, which factor did you consider the most important? Least important? Why?</item> <p></p> <item> Why would cities have landscaping requirements or roof design restrictions in their zoning ordinances? Do you think these are appropriate requirements for the government to impose on private landowners?</item> <p></p> <item> Was there any language in the relevant zoning ordinances that you found confusing? What suggestions do you have to make the zoning ordinances more user‐friendly?</item> <p></p> <item> Did any of the zoning restrictions surprise you? Why?</item> <p></p> <item> What would be a type of variance request that would likely to be granted? Why?</item> </ulist> <ref id="AN0183986047-16"> <title> Footnotes </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref1" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Emily Badger & Quoctrung Bui, <emph>Cities Start to Question an American Ideal: A House with a Yard on Every Lot</emph>, N.Y. Times (June 18, 2019), https://<ulink href="http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/06/18/upshot/cities‐across‐america‐question‐single‐family‐zoning.html">www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/06/18/upshot/cities‐across‐america‐question‐single‐family‐zoning.html</ulink> (detailing how major U.S. cities are grappling with single‐family zoning restrictions); Alex Horowitz & Chase Hatchett, <emph>How Restrictive Zoning in Virginia Has Hurt Housing Affordability</emph>, Pew Research Trust (Jan. 22, 2024), https://<ulink href="http://www.wpr.org/economy/milwaukee‐zoning‐code‐housing‐growing‐mke;">www.wpr.org/economy/milwaukee‐zoning‐code‐housing‐growing‐mke;</ulink> Laurel Wamsley, <emph>The Hottest Trend in U.S. Cities? Changing Zoning Rules to Allow More Housing</emph>, NPR (Feb. 17, 2024), https://<ulink href="http://www.npr.org/2024/02/17/1229867031/housing‐shortage‐zoning‐reform‐cities">www.npr.org/2024/02/17/1229867031/housing‐shortage‐zoning‐reform‐cities</ulink>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref2" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Bureau of Plan. & Sustainability, City of Portland, OR., Historical Context of Racist Planning: A History of How Planning Segregated Portland 19 (2019), https://<ulink href="http://www.portland.gov/bps/documents/historical‐context‐racist‐planning/download">www.portland.gov/bps/documents/historical‐context‐racist‐planning/download</ulink> [https://perma.cc/49ME‐26Q5]; Richard D. Kahlenberg, <emph>The 'New Redlining' Is Deciding Who Lives in Your Neighborhood</emph>, N.Y. Times (Apr. 19, 2021), https://<ulink href="http://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/19/opinion/biden‐zoning‐social‐justice.html">www.nytimes.com/2021/04/19/opinion/biden‐zoning‐social‐justice.html</ulink>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref3" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> John Infranca, <emph>Singling Out Single‐Family Zoning</emph>, 111 Geo. L.J. 659, 670 (2023) (discussing how single‐family zoning contributes to urban sprawl); Tooba Naveed, <emph>The End of Single‐Family Zoning in California: How Chapter 162's Impact Is More Symbolic Than Transformative</emph>, 54 U. Pac. L. Rev. 168, 169 (2023) (detailing how restrictive zoning practices negatively impact communities of colors' access to available jobs and high‐performing schools while exposing them to environmental hazards).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref14" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> <emph>See</emph>, <emph>e.g</emph>., S.B. 9, 2021 Leg., Reg. Sess. (Cal. 2021) (changing single‐family zoning in California to allow duplexes and triplexes in single‐family zones); City of Redondo Beach v. Rob Bonta, No. 22STCP01143 (Los Angeles Superior Ct., Apr. 22, 2024) (ruling S.B. 9 invalid in charter cities because it was not sufficiently tailored to achieve the goal of affordable housing as it does not mandate below‐market‐rate housing in violation of the authority granted to charter cities to govern their own affairs under the California Constitution); H.B. 2001, 80th Legis. Assemb., Reg. Sess., 2019 Or. Laws 639 (requiring Oregon cities to allow duplexes, triplexes, and sometime fourplexes in former single‐family zones); Dep't of Cmty. Plan. & Econ. Dev., City of Minneapolis, Minneapolis 2040—The City's Comprehensive Plan 1–2 (2019), https://minneapolis2040.com/media/1488/pdf%5fminneapolis2040.pdf [https://perma.cc/A8E8‐BXFF] (Minneapolis adopts a new comprehensive plan allowing three dwelling units on land previously zoned exclusively for single‐family homes); Evan Casey, <emph>Milwaukee Wants to Change Its Zoning Code to Allow for More Housing Options</emph>, WPR (Nov. 16, 2023), https://<ulink href="http://www.wpr.org/economy/milwaukee‐zoning‐code‐housing‐growing‐mke">www.wpr.org/economy/milwaukee‐zoning‐code‐housing‐growing‐mke</ulink> (discussing updating Milwaukee's zoning code to allow more developments throughout the city); Sarah Mervosh, <emph>Minneapolis, Tackling Housing Crisis and Inequality, Votes to End Single‐Family Zoning</emph>, N.Y. Times (Dec. 13, 2018), https://<ulink href="http://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/13/us/minneapolis‐single‐family‐zoning.html">www.nytimes.com/2018/12/13/us/minneapolis‐single‐family‐zoning.html</ulink>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref15" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Moreover, zoning is an area of the law that directly touches citizens more concretely than many federal laws or judicial opinions. <emph>See, e.g</emph>., Lea S. VanderVelde, <emph>Local Knowledge, Legal Knowledge, and Zoning Law</emph>, 75 Iowa L. Rev. 1057, 1059 (1990) (noting that "local law is of particular relevance because many Americans are affected more directly by local zoning law than by more remote federal laws" and "if one wishes to learn how law really works, it is hard to find a better method than close observation of small communities and neighborhoods as they govern themselves").</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref16" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> In‐N‐Out Burger is a popular restaurant chain headquartered in California, which still maintains private ownership without franchises. <emph>See In‐N‐Out Burger Media Kit</emph>, In‐N‐Out (July 31, 2024), https://www.in‐n‐out.com/mediakit (containing, in the July 31, 2024, edition of this Media Kit, a press release about In‐N‐Out Burger's most recent opening in Redlands, CA, and a history of In‐N‐Out noting its private ownership and lack of franchises). The company was chosen for this exercise due to its popularity in the western United States and frequent calls for its expansion across the United States, as well as the fact that its operational requirements were well aligned with relevant differences in Salt Lake City's zoning ordinance. <emph>See</emph> Sam Stone, <emph>In‐N‐Out Is Finally Expanding Eastward After Years of Denial</emph>, Bon Appetit (Jan. 11, 2023), https://<ulink href="http://www.bonappetit.com/story/in‐n‐out‐eastern‐expansion">www.bonappetit.com/story/in‐n‐out‐eastern‐expansion</ulink> (describing In‐N‐Out's "cult following").</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref17" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Catherine Jones‐Rikkers & Constance Jones, <emph>Active Learning in the Legal Environment of Business Classroom</emph>, 16 J. Legal Stud. Educ. 173, 174 (1998) ("One important way of providing students with 'real life' experiences in the classroom is active learning."); Anne Tucker Nees, et al., <emph>Enhancing the Educational Value of Experiential Learning: The Business Court Project</emph>, 27 J. Legal Stud. Educ. 171 (2010) (explaining learning theories that support the value of experiential and interactive learning).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref18" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> <emph>See</emph>A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives 4–5 (Lorin W. Anderson et al. eds., 2001) (Bloom's taxonomy includes the following stages (1) knowledge, (2) comprehension, (3) application, (4) analysis, (5) synthesis, and (6) evaluation). <emph>See also</emph> Susan J. Marsnik & Dale B. Thompson, <emph>Using Contract Negotiation Exercises to Develop Higher Order Thinking and Strategic Business Skills</emph>, 30 J. Legal Stud. Educ. 201, 203 n.5 (2013) (discussing the subsequent revision of the categories of Bloom's Taxonomy).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> <emph>See Colleges Offering a Real Estate Major</emph>, U.S. News & World Report, https://<ulink href="http://www.usnews.com/best‐colleges/real‐estate‐major‐5215">www.usnews.com/best‐colleges/real‐estate‐major‐5215</ulink> (last accessed Aug. 19, 2024).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <emph>See</emph>, <emph>e.g</emph>., Jeffrey F. Beatty, et al., Business Law and the Legal Environment (Cengage 9th ed. 2021) (a business law textbook containing a "Real Property and Landlord Tenant Law" chapter); Arlen W. Langvardt, et al., Business Law: The Ethical, Global, and E‐Commerce Environment (McGraw Hill 17th ed. 2018) (a business law textbook with a "Real Property Law" chapter); Marisa Pagnattaro, et al., The Legal and Regulatory Environment of Business (McGraw Hill 19th ed. 2021) (a Legal Environment of Business textbook containing a chapter on the "property system").</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <emph>See</emph>, <emph>e.g</emph>., Carolyn Hotchkiss, <emph>Web Site Creation as an Active Learning Strategy in Business Law Classes</emph>, 20 J. Legal Stud. Educ. 235, 235 (2022) ("For many years, business law faculties have used a variety of active learning strategies to engage students in learning law and to improve critical thinking skills."); Konrad S. Lee & Laura Kent‐Jensen, <emph>Teaching Legal Elements of Commercial Real Estate Leases to Business Undergraduate Students Through an Interactive Experiential Learning Exercise</emph>, 38 J. Legal Stud. Educ. 75, 87 (2021) ("Research shows that, when combined with active learning pedagogy, interactive methods increase learning outcomes.").</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Jamie D. Prenkert, et al., Business Law: The Ethical, Global, and Digital Environment 24–31 (18th ed. 2022).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <emph>Id</emph>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <emph>See, e.g</emph>., Salt Lake City, Utah, Zoning Code § 21A.22.010 (2024) (listing a variety of zoning districts in Salt Lake City, Utah).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Prenkert, et al.,<emph>supra</emph> note 12 at 24–31.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Village of Euclid, Ohio v. Ambler Realty Co., 272 U.S. 365, 395 (1926).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Norman Williams Jr. & John M. Taylor, American Land Planning Law § 19:1 (2003).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Standard State Zoning Enabling Act (1926), reprinted <emph>in</emph>David L. Callies et al., Cases and Materials on Land Use 36–39 (3d ed. 1999).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <emph>Id</emph>. at § 3.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Village of Belle Terre v. Boraas, 416 U.S. 1, 6 (1974) ("The concept of the public welfare is broad and inclusive....") (quoting Berman v. Parker, 348 U.S. 26, 33 (1954)).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Terrence J. Centner, <emph>Creating an 'Undeveloped Lands Protection Act' for Farmlands, Forests, and Natural Areas</emph>, 17 1, Duke Envtl. L. & Pol'y F. 9 (2006) ("[Z]oning, land use regulations, and environmental regulations already supplement nuisance law to provide resolution for many land use conflicts."); Robert C. Ellickson, <emph>Alternatives to Zoning: Covenants, Nuisance Rules, and Fines as Land Use Controls</emph>, 40 U. Chi. L. Rev. 681, 691–99 (1973) (discussing zoning as a mechanism for controlling nuisances).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> 46 U.S. 1 (1974).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Salt Lake City, Utah, Zoning Code § 21A.02.30 (2024) (emphasis added).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Standard State Zoning Enabling Act § 7 (1926); <emph>see also</emph> Todd W. Prall, <emph>Dysfunctional Distinctions in Land Use: The Failure of Legislative/Adjudicative Distinctions in Utah and the Case for a Uniform Standard of Review</emph>, 2004 B.Y.U. L. Rev. 1049, 1055 (2004) ("The special exceptions a board of adjustments may grant include variances, special use permits, conditional use permits, or nonconformities, all of which have slightly different purposes but are generally granted under similar adjudicative processes.").</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> 131 Am. Jur. Proof of Facts 3d 253 § 4 (2013).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <emph>Id</emph>. at § 1.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Patricia E. Salkin, American Law of Zoning § 13.9 (5th ed. 2024) (discussing the distinction between variances involving dimensional and usage restrictions).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> 131 Am. Jur. Proof of Facts 3d 253 § 6 (2013) ("In many jurisdictions, the hardship standards used to determine a landowner's entitlement to a variance depend on whether the variance sought is a use variance or a dimensional variance. When applying for a use variance, the landowner must always make a showing of 'unnecessary hardship.' When applying for a dimensional variance, however, it may be sufficient for the landowner to make the lesser showing of 'practical difficulty.'").</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <emph>Id</emph>. at § 19.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <emph>Id</emph>. at § 4.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <emph>See, e.g</emph>., Bd. of Zoning Appeals of City of Va. Beach v. Nowak, 315 S.E.2d 221, 223 (1984) (burden met in Virginia only when the hardship approached a confiscation of property); Evans v. Zoning Hearing Bd. of Borough of Spring City, 732 A.2d 686 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1999) (burden met in Pennsylvania only where it is shown that compliance with the zoning ordinance could render the property practically useless).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <emph>See</emph> Trinity Assembly of God of Baltimore City, Inc. v. People's Counsel for Baltimore County, 407 Md. 53, 962 A.2d 404 (2008) (where a property's physical anomalies do not cause the landowner to suffer disproportionately due to application of the zoning ordinance in question, the property is not "unique" in the law of variances).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> 131 Am. Jur. Proof of Facts 3d 253 § 5 (2013).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Furthermore, instructors could also alter the assignment to utilize a more familiar fast‐food restaurant (McDonald's or Chick‐fil‐A), although that would likely require modifications to the design parameters for site selection.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Esri, <emph>Salt Lake City Zoning Map</emph>, https://slcgov.maps.arcgis.com/apps/instant/sidebar/index.html?appid=fa801b661ce14222a6c1f7d42ce21636 (last accessed Aug. 19, 2024).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Salt Lake City is divided into eight zoning districts: residential, commercial, form‐based, manufacturing, downtown, special purpose, overlay, and character conservation. There is further differentiation among these districts. For instance, there are eight types of commercial districts: neighborhood, small neighborhood, community business, community shopping, corridor, sugar house business, TSA transit area, and general. Salt Lake City, Utah, Zoning Code § 21A.22.010 (2024).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> In‐and‐Out Burger, <emph>Real Estate & Development</emph>, https://realestate.in‐n‐out.com (last accessed Aug. 19, 2024).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Salt Lake City, Utah, Zoning Code § 21A.46.060 (2024).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <emph>Id</emph>. at § 21A.33.030.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <emph>Id</emph>. at §§ 21A.40.060, 21A.44.080(A)(1).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <emph>Id</emph>. at § 21A.26.020.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <emph>Id</emph>. at § 21A.26.70(D)(1)(2)(3).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <emph>Id</emph>. at § 21A.26.050(D)(1), (3).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <emph>Id</emph>. at § 21A.26.070(E)(3).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <emph>Id</emph>. at § 21A.26.030(E)(2).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <emph>Id</emph>. at § 21A.18.040.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <emph>Id</emph>. at § 21A.18.040(2)(a), (b).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <emph>Id</emph>. at § 21A.18.040(3)(b).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <emph>Id</emph>. at § 21.A.18.040(3)(a).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <emph>Id</emph>. at § 21A.18.040(3)(c), (d).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <emph>Id</emph>. at § 21A.10.15(B)(1).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <emph>Id</emph>. at § 21A.10.30.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Salt Lake City Boards and Commissions, <emph>Appeals Hearing Officer</emph>, https://<ulink href="http://www.slc.gov/boards/boards‐commissions/appeals‐hearing‐officer">www.slc.gov/boards/boards‐commissions/appeals‐hearing‐officer</ulink> (last accessed Aug. 19, 2024).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Salt Lake City, Utah, Zoning Code § 21A.18.060 (2024).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <emph>Id</emph>. at § 21A.18.060(B)(1), (2).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <emph>Id</emph>. at § 21A.46.010.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Lara Grow</p> <p>Reported by Author</p> </aug>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1459655
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Making Zoning Relevant for Business Students: An Interactive Exercise in Selecting a Business Location
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Lara+Grow%22">Lara Grow</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Journal+of+Legal+Studies+Education%22"><i>Journal of Legal Studies Education</i></searchLink>. 2025 42(1):31-37.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Wiley. Available from: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030. Tel: 800-835-6770; e-mail: cs-journals@wiley.com; Web site: https://www.wiley.com/en-us
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 7
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2025
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Descriptive<br />Tests/Questionnaires
– Name: Audience
  Label: Education Level
  Group: Audnce
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Higher+Education%22">Higher Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Postsecondary+Education%22">Postsecondary Education</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Business+Schools%22">Business Schools</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Undergraduate+Students%22">Undergraduate Students</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Zoning%22">Zoning</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Real+Estate%22">Real Estate</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Site+Selection%22">Site Selection</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Business%22">Business</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Laws%22">Laws</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Professional+Education%22">Professional Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Dining+Facilities%22">Dining Facilities</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Building+Design%22">Building Design</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Design+Requirements%22">Design Requirements</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Land+Use%22">Land Use</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Learning+Activities%22">Learning Activities</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Assignments%22">Assignments</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Decision+Making%22">Decision Making</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Planning%22">Planning</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Class+Activities%22">Class Activities</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Geographic Terms
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Utah%22">Utah</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1111/jlse.12156
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 0896-5811<br />1744-1722
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: This article describes an in-class exercise that can be used when teaching zoning law to a Real Estate Law or Legal Environment of Business undergraduate course. The exercise requires students to utilize Salt Lake City's zoning code to locate the best site for a restaurant chain given certain locational and operational requirements, and to research the likelihood of a variance request. The exercise is an effective means for instructors to connect an increasingly relevant area of the law to a practical business objective.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2025
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1459655
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1459655
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1111/jlse.12156
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 7
        StartPage: 31
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Business Schools
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Undergraduate Students
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Zoning
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Real Estate
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Site Selection
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Business
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Laws
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Professional Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Dining Facilities
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Building Design
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Design Requirements
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Land Use
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Learning Activities
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Assignments
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Decision Making
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Planning
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Class Activities
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Utah
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Making Zoning Relevant for Business Students: An Interactive Exercise in Selecting a Business Location
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Lara Grow
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 12
              Type: published
              Y: 2025
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 0896-5811
            – Type: issn-electronic
              Value: 1744-1722
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 42
            – Type: issue
              Value: 1
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Journal of Legal Studies Education
              Type: main
ResultId 1