Agenda - Planning Commission - 04/02/1996

Home

Z.B. February 15, 1996 -- Page 5 Kempf applied to the Board of Zoning Appeals for a variance, seeking elimination of the green space requirement. At a hearing, he admitted he violated the code and his permit by paving over the green space, but said market conditions and the land's contour made it necessary for him to elimi- nate it. He said nearby commercial properties did'not have 10 feet of green space, and the requirement would cause him an economic and competitive disadvantage in using his property. The city engineer said Kempf would show anything on the plan just to get approval, and that his intentions were to "construct it how he [saw] fit and then get a variance to cover it." The board denied Kempf's permit. It found he failed to show his need for a variance was not self-created. Kempf appealed to court. The court reversed, finding he presented enough evidence that there was no legitimate government purpose for the' require- ment that related to the protection, welfare, and safety of the general public and nearby property owners. The court found similar commercial properties in the area did not have 10 feet of green space, and the board did not support its denial of the variance. The board appealed. DECISION: Reversed and returned to the trial court. The lower court improperly reversed the board's decision. Kempf expressly agreed to /LO feet of green space, then violated the requirement. He should not have gotten a variance. The case was sent back to the trial court with instruc- tions to reinstate the board's decision. The ordinance required the green space, and the Plan Commission condi- tioned plat approval on maintenance of the space. Kempf understood the requirement and expressly accept, ed it without reservation. After he got the permit, he violated the requirement. He requested a variance only after get- ting notice of the violation. Kempf created the need for a variance himself by paving over the green space. Requiring applicants to show their hardship was not self-created advanced the legitimate government interest of preventing people from dodg- ing ordinance requirements. Zoning Chang~ -- Neighborhood Association Challenges Rezoning for Shopping Center Maco~-Bibb Country Pla~i~g & Zoni~g Commission v. Vineville Neighborhood Asso~iatio~, 462 S.E. 2d 764 (Georgia) 1995 The Ramsbottom Co. and the Kroger Co. asked the Macon-Bibb County (Ga.) Planning & Zoning Commission to rezone a piece of property so they could build a shopping center. Kroger also asked for conditional use approval and a certificate of appropriateness to build a supermarket. A residential area called Vineville bordered the property to the north.