Agenda - Planning Commission - 11/07/1996

Home

Page 2 -- September 15, 1996 Z.B. Spot Zoning -- It takes a traditional village to expand a hotel Vella v. Town of Camden, 677A.2d 1052 (Maine)1996 The Norumbega Inn occupied 3.95 acres Ln the town of Camden, Maine. It had no restaurant or bar, and had authorization to rent out seven rooms. In 1990, the town enacted a comprehensive plan, which was to become effective in November 1992. The plan designated a traditional village dis- trict, which was the area where most people traditionally lived, worked and socialized. The district included medium-density neighborhoods, the central business district, and several other uses that were a short walk or drive away from most village residents. According to the plan, the traditional village district was a "growth area." Most growth would come from infill develop- ment, some conversions to affordable apartments, and modified uses of exist- ing buildings. The plan also stated tourism was important to the town's eco- nomic health, and the increased traffic and demands for services that would come with it were an acceptable price to pay. The plan contemplated most of the tourism-service sector being located in the "traditional downtown and harbor area." As did 15 other lodging businesses (of a total of 31 in the entire town), the Norumbega Inn lay in the traditional village district. In June 1992, the town cited the Norumbega Inn for operating six rooms more than allowed. Norumbega sued the town, but the case was settled in June 1993. Just before the settlement, the town amended its zoning ordi- nance. The amendments expanded permissible commercial lodging uses in the traditional village district, but required that hotel restaurants serve only their guests. Under the expansion of permissible uses, hotels 'or motels that sat on more than 3.5 acres could rent out more than 10, but less than 15, rooms. However, those rooms had to exist and be in use as of June 8, ~[993. (Apparently, this benefited only the Norumbega Inn.) Vella owned an inn that sat on one acre in the traditional village district. It had existed since 1976. The inn was a legal nonconforming use with 22 rooms to rent, a bar, and a 96-seat restaurant. Vella sued the town, asking the court to declare the ordinance amend- ments invalid. According to Vella, the amendments were illegal spot zoning that benefited only the Norumbega Inn. Also, said Vella, the amendments conflicted with the comprehensive plan. The town asked for judgment without a trial, which the court granted. Vella appealed. DECISION: Affirmed. The lower court properly granted the town judgment. The amendments were not illegal spot zoning just because they benefited only the Norumbega Inn. The Norumbega Inn's use was not totally different from the surrounding area, and the comprehensive plan designated the traditional village district as