Agenda - Planning Commission - 08/05/2010

Home

Zoning Bulletin June 25, 2010 l Volume 4 i No. 12 of the statutory prohibition was to: stop general social costs from be- ing imposed on developers, while at the same time allowing costs di- rectly attributable to the development to be imposed on the developer. The court emphasized that "by its plain terms" RCW 82.02.020 did not apply to actions taken by the state government; it only applied to local political subdivisions of the state. Looking at the SMP and SMA, the court found that the SMA re- quired significant state involvement in the development of SMPs. Among other requirements, and most significantly, the SMA provides that a SMP becomes effective only upon approval by the DOE. Also, the DOE can only approve an SMP if it determines the SMP is con- sistent with both the SMA and DOE guidelines. Given this "perva- sive level of state control over and involvement in the development of SMPs," the court concluded that SMPs do not constitute regulations subject to RCW 82.02.020. See also: Biggers v. City of Bainbridge Island, 162 Wash. 2d 683, 169 P.3d 14 (2007). See also: Orion Corp. v. State, 109 Wash. 2d 621, 747 P.2d 1062, 18 Envtl. L. Rep. 20697 (1987)). Special Exception —Zoning ordinance allows religious use by special exception permit Zoning board denies in its entirety church's application for such a permit Citation: Capriola v. Wright, 2010 WL 2000320 (N.Y.A.D. 2 Dept., May 18, 2010) NEW YORK (05/18/10)—This case addressed the circumstances in which a zoning board might deny a special exception permit in its en- tirety as opposed to approving such a permit subject to mitigating mea- sures. It also addressed the degree of "flexibility" that must be given to religious uses compared to other uses. The Background/Facts: Walk in Love for Jesus Church, Inc. (the "Church") owned premises in a residential zoning district in the town. Since 2004, the Church had held religious services on those premises. The town's Building Zone Ordinance (the `BZO") expressly permit- ted religious uses in residential districts. However, in 2007, the BZO was amended to require "a special exception permit" for the establish- ment or expansion of a religious use in any zoning district (the "2007 Amendment"). The BZO expressly provided that the town's Board of Appeals (the "Board") could grant a special exception permit if the proposed use "would not cause `significant negative impacts' on the © 2010 Thomson Reuters 7 179