Agenda - Planning Commission - 05/07/2009

Home

April 10, 20091 Volume 31 No.7 Zoning Bulletin there was "sufficient specificity to provide fair notice of the nature of the () challenge so that the zoning authority ha[ d] an opportunity to consider and address the issue." Here, the Association had contended that the issue of appropriate clas- sification of the proposal was properly raised in that "the public fairly raised concerns about density and lot size before the [Commission] acted." The court disagreed. It found that the "doubts" expressed by the neighboring property owner apout whether BLPwas "actually on Big Lake to run a re- sort," "did not give the [Commission] fair notice of a challenge regarding the . appropriate classification of the proposal as submitted." Ii: also found that "generalized complaints regarding the density of the proposal, which are often raised by local property owners," did not give the Commission fair notice of the classification issue. In fact, the court found that: "No argument was made that the [Commission] was erroneously evaluating the proposal as a commercial [POO], that the proposal should have been considered as a residential [POO], or that the proposal exceeded the density allowed under the ordinance for a residential [PUDl" Accordingly, the Association's argu- ment regarding the classification of BLP'g proposal was waived. See also: In re Stadsvold, 754 N. W2d 323 (Minn. 2008). . Case-Note: The court further concluded that even if the issue of classlli- /) cation had not been waived, it would have rejected the Association's ar- (/ gument regarding the propose classification of BLP's proposal. The pro- posal fit under the zoning ordinance's definitions for commercial POOs. Validity of Zoning Regulation-Zoning bylaw requires issuance of a special permit prior to any construction Landowner contends bylaw is invalid because it gives ZBA discretionary authority . Citation: Harper v. Door, 2009 WL 433217 (Mass. Land Ct. 2009), judgment entered, 2009 WL 426203 (Mass. Land Ct. 2009) MASSACHUSETTS (02/20/09)-Eric Harper owned property in the town. In April 2003, Harper filed an application with the town's zoning board of appeals (the "ZBA") requesting a special permit and variances for . proposed construction on his property. In June 2003, the ZBA approved Harper's applications. Thereafter, Harper failed to build within the-time al- lowed. In November 2005, Harper again filed an application for special per- mit and variances for the same proposed construction on his property. In February 2006, the ZBA denied Harper's application. 6 @ 2009 Thomson Reuters 48 , ) -j