228 results for 'cat:"Zoning"'.
J. Wilkin finds the trial court properly upheld the zoning board's denial of the property owner's request for a variance. The frontage requirement for residential properties did not devalue the property, while the variance would have substantially altered the surrounding area by reducing the amount of agricultural ground. Meanwhile, the owner's failure to raise his due process and constitutional claims before the zoning board requires dismissal of that portion of his appeal. Affirmed.
Court: Ohio Court Of Appeals, Judge: Wilkin, Filed On: November 16, 2023, Case #: 2023-Ohio-4234, Categories: Constitution, zoning, Due Process
J. Gilbert finds that the trial court properly denied petitions seeking to vacate a zoning ordinance intended to protect wildlife migration corridors. The ordinance, which will create new zoning overlays in rural areas, does not violate the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act because it does not permit a new use. "We are confident that wildlife is loath to seek permission from the County. It pretty much goes where it will. The Project sets standards for future developments that might interfere with the movement of wildlife. That is not permitting a use." Also, the ordinance clearly meets the "common sense" exemption of the Environmental Quality Act, as well as two categorical exemptions. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Gilbert, Filed On: November 13, 2023, Case #: B320153, Categories: Environment, zoning
J. Sandefur holds that the trial court properly interpreted an agreement that settled a dispute between a town and developers over zoning requirements for a geotechnical investigation and analysis related to two residential subdivisions. However, on remand, the trial court must determine whether the town's council voted to approve the settlement agreement. Reversed in part.
Court: Montana Supreme Court, Judge: Sandefur, Filed On: November 7, 2023, Case #: DA 22-0312, Categories: Construction, Settlements, zoning
J. McShan finds that the lower court properly dismissed a challenge to the decision to grant easements to facilitate construction of a pedestrian bridge and a public plaza for lack of standing because plaintiff did not suffer an "injury in fact" beyond that of any commercial neighbor from increased traffic and added competition. Affirmed.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: McShan, Filed On: November 2, 2023, Case #: 535239, Categories: Municipal Law, Property, zoning
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Frierson finds that the lower court properly granted a property owner’s motion to dismiss. A property owner advertised and rented a home as a vacation rental. A neighbor and fellow property owner asked the property owner to discontinue renting out the property as it violated neighborhood restricted covenants, but the property owner refused, resulting in the instant litigation. The lower court dismissed the matter and declined to consider its merits, correctly finding that the neighbor failed to join all of the real property owners in the subdivision per the requirements of the Tennessee Declaratory Judgments Act. Affirmed.
Court: Tennessee Court of Appeals, Judge: Frierson, Filed On: October 27, 2023, Case #: E2023-00021-COA-R3-CV, Categories: Property, Real Estate, zoning
J. Suarez finds the lower court properly dismissed the property owner's appeals of the zoning commissions decisions to approve a subdivision development and several wetlands management areas. All environmental impacts were properly assessed by the commission and the proposed right-of-way meets zoning requirements. Although the 50-foot wide right-of-way will include some wetlands, the road is not intended for traffic and, therefore, complies with environmental regulations, while evidence from several consultants was sufficient for the developer to prove minimal impact on the environment. Affirmed.
Court: Connecticut Court Of Appeals, Judge: Suarez, Filed On: October 27, 2023, Case #: AC45082, Categories: Environment, Property, zoning
Per curiam, the Alabama Supreme Court finds that the trial court properly ruled in favor of a city's ban on short-term rentals. The city did not violate due process and was not precluded by estoppel from enforcing the ordinance, as claimed by a city council member and homeowner who used his basement as a short-term rental. Affirmed.
Court: Alabama Supreme Court, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: October 27, 2023, Case #: SC-2022-0741, Categories: Property, zoning, Due Process
J. Doyle finds that the trial court improperly ruled in favor of the city in a declaratory judgment action brought by the hospital authority arising after the city refused to allow the hospital authority to sell a property to a buyer wishing to operate a drug and alcohol treatment facility. Although the trial court correctly found that the hospital authority is immune from the city's zoning ordinances, the trial court incorrectly found that a third-party purchaser intending to operate a treatment facility at the property could not do so without first obtaining a conditional use permit. The city failed to show that the proposed facility would provide substantially different services than the previous uses at the property under the hospital authority. Reversed in part.
Court: Georgia Court of Appeals, Judge: Doyle, Filed On: October 27, 2023, Case #: A23A0795, Categories: Municipal Law, Property, zoning
[Consolidated.] J. Mori finds the county court properly granted the housing advocate’s request for a writ of mandate challenging the city’s amending of zoning code changing development standards in its single-family residential zones to reduce the square footage of houses that can be built. The amended code violates California code prohibiting the enacting of policies changing zoning in certain places to a “less intensive use.” The city does not show that the amendment allows for greater density or reduces costs. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Mori, Filed On: October 27, 2023, Case #: B321477, Categories: Construction, Municipal Law, zoning
J. Collins finds that the superior court properly denied the property developer’s request for a writ of mandate challenging Los Angeles’ denial of its request for a zoning change to comply with standards involving construction of a housing subdivision in a high wildfire hazard area. Though specific zones are not expressly listed in the general plan, they are incorporated by reference because the general plan allows all zones, even those that are “more restrictive” than those listed. A rezoning exemption cited by the developer does not apply. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Collins, Filed On: October 26, 2023, Case #: B314750, Categories: Construction, Environment, zoning
J. Rivera finds that the appellate division improperly dismissed long-running claims property owners brought against a neighboring manufacturer which sought to expand a nonconforming use because the action had not been rendered time-barred by the addition of an inadvertently omitted necessary party, as the addition related to the initial, timely filing and the party was not surprised by the addition. Reversed.
Court: New York Court Of Appeals, Judge: Rivera, Filed On: October 24, 2023, Case #: 48, Categories: Civil Procedure, zoning
J. Sands partially grants the developer's motion and severs two state law claims from its mandamus action against the county challenging a re-zoning decision. The two claims appealing the zoning decision and seeking mandamus against the board members are remanded to Lowndes County superior court. The claims do not raise a substantial federal issue.
Court: USDC Middle District of Georgia, Judge: Sands, Filed On: October 20, 2023, Case #: 7:23cv39, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: zoning
J. Talwani grants in part a mayor’s motion for judgment on the pleadings of a couple unhappy with their parking variance being revoked and with the placement of parking meters in front of their home. The couple’s claims related to the variance being revoked are barred by the doctrine of sovereign immunity but their claims related to the placement of the meters are not barred by the fact that a city official placed them as part of their official duty, because there is a question of whether they could have been and should have been placed elsewhere by the city official.
Court: USDC Massachusetts, Judge: Talwani, Filed On: October 20, 2023, Case #: 1:22cv11462, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Administrative Law, Government, zoning
J. Sannes denies a motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction that seeks to prevent the closure of a family group home located in the city of Kingston, New York. The operator claims the city zoning board’s denial of its special use permit was motivated by discriminatory animus against residents suffering from substance abuse and mental health disorders. However, the court finds their claims will most likely not succeed on the merits because the city proffered enough evidence to show their denial was based on a list of safety hazards that the boarding house ultimately failed to address.
Court: USDC Northern District of New York, Judge: Sannes, Filed On: October 13, 2023, Case #: 1:23cv1024, NOS: Housing/Accommodations - Civil Rights, Categories: Civil Rights, Evidence, zoning
J. Hicks affirms the reapproval of a developer’s plan to construct three multi-family apartment buildings with 152 dwelling units in total after its previous approval was undone by a prior appeal. A conditional use permit does not require the unnecessary hardship standard of a variance and what the opponents of the plan propose as an alternative is not the same project in a different area, but a smaller project. The developer’s plan meets the criteria necessary to be granted a conditional use permit to build in a wetland zone.
Court: New Hampshire Supreme Court, Judge: Hicks, Filed On: October 12, 2023, Case #: 2022-0182, Categories: Environment, zoning
Per curiam, the Supreme Court of Ohio finds the individuals are entitled to a writ of mandamus to place the annexation referendum on the November 2023 ballot. Even if circulators conflated zoning and annexation issues in flyers distributed among voters, these misrepresentations do not allow removal of the issue from the ballot, but can only result in fines against the circulators.
Court: Ohio Supreme Court, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: October 7, 2023, Case #: 2023-Ohio-3664, Categories: Elections, Government, zoning
J. Graham finds the circuit court properly granted summary judgment to the city in a lawsuit from trade associations seeking to enjoin enforcement of a zoning ordinance requiring the use of bird-safe glass for constructing or expanding certain types of buildings to reduce the risk of bird collisions. The city's valid zoning ordinance does not fall under the scope of a statewide administrative code barring local governments from enacting or enforcing minimum building code standards that are stricter than the statewide code in terms of altering, constructing or adding to some public and commercial buildings, so it is not technically a building code standard and is not preempted. Affirmed.
Court: Wisconsin Court of Appeals, Judge: Graham, Filed On: October 5, 2023, Case #: 2022AP001468, Categories: Administrative Law, zoning
J. Gruber dismisses this appeal of the circuit court’s dismissal of the owner’s appeal of a “final administrative decision” of the city council denying his request to rezone his real property. The property had been used as residential apartments, and the owner had been issued occupation licenses yearly even though the property was zoned as a highway commercial district. After his request was denied, he was allowed to continue nonconforming use of the property. The record demonstrates that the owner failed to exhaust administrative remedies, which leaves the circuit court and the court of appeals without subject matter jurisdiction. Dismissed.
Court: Arkansas Court Of Appeals, Judge: Gruber, Filed On: October 4, 2023, Case #: CV-21-549, Categories: Municipal Law, Property, zoning
J. Wilson finds the district partially court erred in its summary judgment decision on remanded claims in a property dispute between the city and a Buddhist religious organization seeking to re-zone its property away from residential use to operate a meditation center. The district court should not have granted summary judgment to either party on the organization's claim under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, as there are too many disputed facts remaining with the organization's substantial burden claim under the Act, so that portion of the district court's order in favor of the city is vacated. The district court properly granted summary judgment to the city on the organization's First Amendment free exercise claim because the city's zoning review process is neutral and generally applicable, so that is upheld, but the summary judgment order for the city on the organization's claim under the Alabama Constitution's Religious Freedom Amendment is overturned because the city has proven no compelling government interest to deny the organization's re-zoning application. Affirmed in part.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Wilson, Filed On: October 2, 2023, Case #: 22-11674, Categories: Property, zoning, First Amendment
J. Gonzalez enters summary judgment in favor of the town of Oyster Bay on claims that alleged several town officials engaged in a racially discriminatory scheme to prevent two residents from using their property as a two-family home on the basis that the owners are both people of color. Evidence produced during discovery shows the town had enforced its zoning regulations against 27 residential properties within only three-tenths of a mile from the litigants’ own property, some of which were cited for the same violations, undercutting the core of the litigants’ allegations that their actions were racially motivated.
Court: USDC Eastern District of New York, Judge: Gonzalez, Filed On: September 29, 2023, Case #: 2:11cv6084, NOS: Housing/Accommodations - Civil Rights, Categories: Civil Rights, Property, zoning
J. Grimberg rules in favor of the city in a civil rights action brought by a company alleging that the city improperly enforced a constitutionally deficient signage ordinance in rejecting the company's sign permit applications. There is no evidence that the city's staff made a final denial of the company's applications. The record in the case has insufficient information for a proper evaluation of the city's reasons for allegedly denying the applications. The ordinance has also been repealed and replaced.
Court: USDC Northern District of Georgia, Judge: Grimberg, Filed On: September 28, 2023, Case #: 1:22cv897, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Civil Rights, zoning
J. Slaughter finds that the trial court properly ruled for a company accused of violating an ordinance against moving billboards because repairing a billboard that had sustained storm damage did not constitute relocating the billboard. Affirmed.
Court: Indiana Supreme Court, Judge: Slaughter, Filed On: September 25, 2023, Case #: 3S-PL-114, Categories: zoning
J. Myren finds that the circuit court improperly determined that the Day County Board of Adjustment could reconsider and modify a previously granted variance. The variance issue arises from a violation by property owners who altered the grading and added rocks to the property. The Board of Adjustment no longer had the authority to reconsider the variance. Reversed.
Court: South Dakota Supreme Court, Judge: Myren, Filed On: September 20, 2023, Case #: 2023SD50, Categories: Property, zoning
J. Bevan finds that the trial court properly dismissed most of a property owner's claims over a rejected plan to build a gas station. The owner was not required to exhaust his administrative remedies before challenging the rejection in court because of the demonstrated bias against the plan shown by city administrators, so his tort claim for interference with economic expectancy may proceed. Reversed in part.
Court: Idaho Supreme Court, Judge: Bevan, Filed On: September 15, 2023, Case #: 48721, Categories: zoning, Interference With Contract