Agenda - Planning Commission - 01/05/1999

Home

Z.B. December 10, 1998 Page 3 Variance -- Owner starts building church replica on edge of his property Citation: Crist v. City of Jacksonvil. le, Court of Appeals of North Carolina, No. COA98-326. (1998) Crist owned and lived on property in Jacksonville, N.C. His property was in a residential zone and was subject to various restrictions. The applicable zoning ordinance stated: "no accessory building shall be built or placed within five (5) feet of the rear or side property line." In May 1994, Crist commissioned several craftsmen to build a replica of the Church of Saint Irene near the eastern .boundary of. his property. The rep- lica, which didn't have plumbing or electricity, was located within 5:feet of the property line. In June, the city's building administrator issued a stop work order. Nine months later, the administrator sent Crist a letter stating Crist had violated the setback provision and inviting him to "apply. to the Board of Adjustment for a variance to move the structure to a legal location." Orist applied to the board, which held a hearing on his request. The min- utes' of the meeting showed that "after some discussion" the board held a vote to deny the variance. The board made no specific findings of fact, and the record didn't show how the board arrived at its decision. Cris~ appealed to court. The reviewing court could only review the legality of the board's decision; it couldn't make its own findings of fact. The court had to ensure the board's decision was based on substantial evidence. The court affirmed the. board's decision, and Crist appealed again. DECISION: Reversed'; case returned to the board. The lower cour~ shouldn't have affirmed the board's' decision because the board made no findings of fact. The trial coui:t yeas charged with. protecting Crist from an arbitrary deci- siom The board didn't explain hoWit arrived at its decision, so the court couldn't determine if the board's decision was arbitrary. Though the state statutes and city" code didn't require the board to make findings of fact, the court had the power to require Such .findings. The appeals court th'erefore returned the case to'the lower court, which'had to return the case to the board to make findings of fact. see also: Rentals Inc. v. City of.Burlington, 219 S.E. 2d 223 (7_975).. Zoning Change -- Company can't open plant after spending $650,000 on renovations Citation: Quality Refrigerated Services b~c. v. City of Spencer, Supreme Cour) of Iowa, No. 7_41/96-1857 (1998) Quality Refrigerated Services Inc. bought an abandoned meatpacking plant from the city of Spencer, Iowa. The city had been trying for years to find some-