Agenda - Planning Commission - 03/06/2000

Home

Z.B. JanUary 25; 2000 Page 3 DECISION: Reversed. Although Carver's appeal was correctly filed, he had no standing to make 'one. Ohio law specifically stated a towhship board of zoning appeals Could hear and decide appeals where.it was alleged there was error in any. order, ~equire- ment, decision,'or determination made by an administrative official in the en- forcement-of a zoning resolution;-Z~ning certificates.were. an :essential:tool used to enfoi:ce'zoning resolutions. 'The board would, be unable to fulfill its duty ff it was unable to'revieW the'de'cision'Of a zoning inspector. :.~ ~:: The ex/idence indicated that on the. 20th day after the zoning certificate was issued, Carver fried his appeal With the township clerk~'with-instructions to forward copies to the board and "' zomng inspector. The purpose of notifying the zoning inspector was to allOw, him t6 transmit his records to the board. The Purpose of notifying the board Wis to ~tllow it to sefl'd Out notices'and schedule hearings. It appeared all proper 'p _ax~i.'les were nOtified of-the hearing and the records Were transmitted to'the boa/'di~ ." ~/5.'..~:5 ~-?~..'..':;.:7 ~;:b-::"i~:: ~.- ' ...' .-.'" It would be unfair.to rule'th6 filin~ was insufficient' When Carver filed the appeal, along with a check, with.the tox~aship clerk. The'clerk held herself out as a person authorized to accept such a filing on the behalf of the zoning inspector. However, an "aggrieved party" was not defined under the' Deerfield code. According to the dictionary, an "aggrieved party" was "one whose legal right is invaded by an act complained of, o~ whose pecuni .~ary interest is directly'and adversely affected by a decree or judgment. One whose right of property may be established or divested. The word .'aggrieved' refers to a Substantial griev- ance, a denial of some personal, pecu,mary or property right, or the imposition upon a party of a burden or obligation." ·. : - .. " Carver only had Standing to: ~omplam of some harm different from that suffered by the community at.large~ Carver did not'demonstrate he would be aggrieved by the issuance of the zohifig certificate, There wa~ no' Showing thai allOwing Midwest to build Ofi.'~hmlbuilding °n.P~.oP~rty .'.already containing multiple buildings would affect Cai've?'s personal, pectmiary,' or property rights. It was not enough that he .was a neighbor whO could, see the buildings from his property. .' ';:.' :, :, ,:..:.-i · -.. ' ;':!~.', ','.~.~'~-".-.:.:. ," ,'; :: ~:.: . Citation: Midwest Firewor~.M/znufa. cturing compan~ Inc.'~,. Deerfield Township Board of Zoning Appeals, Court of Appeals of Ohio, llth App. Dist., Portage County, No. 98-P-0131 (1999). see also: Carver v. 'Buckeye Fi~3~k~ ~and Nobelty Co., 492 N.E.2d i257 (1985). see also: Freedom Township Board of Zoning Appeals v, Portage County Board of Mental Retardation, 476 N.E. 2d 360 (1984). Adult Entertainment -- Town relies on the experience of neighboring municipalities in limiting nude dancing MASSACHUSETTS (12/17/99) ~ In Tyngsborough, zoning ordinances were enacted by local voting. In 1987, Tyngsborough residents voted to establish ::!i:'.: i5 :ii.i: