Agenda - Planning Commission - 02/07/1995

Home

January 1995 -- Page 7 ordinance was~improperly applied to prohibit the proposed church. Many sur- rounding properties were existing nonconforming uses, and Littlejohn's project should have b~en treated the same way. The court ~rdered the city to rezone the property to residential and grant Littlejohn a sp{cial use permit to operate a church. The city appealed. DECISION: R~versed, in favor of the city. The ordin~;nce requiring residential status and a special use permit for churches was ~alid. The lower Court was wrong to decide that just because nearby properties were nonconfoi~rming uses, the planned church should enjoy the same treat- ment. The zonf..~g ordinance's intent was to eventually eliminate all noncon- forming uses. Such uses were merely tolerated, not encouraged. Littlejohn's proposed use w'lts inconsistent with the city's overall land use plan for the area, which included!building an expressway. Littlejohn'slexpenditures did not entitle him to rezoning and a special use permit. He should have found out when he leased the building that a church was not a permitted use. Littlejohn himself caused whatever hardship he was forced to bear. Amalgamated Trust & Savings Bank v. County of Cook, 402 N.E. 2d 719 (1980). " Special Use --iCompany Wants to Operate Stone Quarry in Residential and Agricultural Area ~ Vulcan Materials Co. v. Guilford County Board of County Commissioners, 444 S.E.2d t~39 (North Carolina) 1994 Vulcan Materials Co. owned and had valid options to buy a combined 235 acres of land in [Guilford County, N.C. Vulcan applied for special use permits to begin a ston~ quarry on the properties. After a public hearing, the County Planning Boardr!voted to deny the permits. Vulcan appealed to the Board of County Commissioners. Vulcan presented evidence showing: the noise from the quarry would not be heard in mosi homes; the quarry would shut down after 20 years; and the quarry would on!y occupy 17 acres of land. Neighbors told the board 119 homes were located within 3,000 feet of the planned quarry, and the land was a water- shed for a prop~.sed drinking water source. They also told the board Vulcan had a poor environmental compliance record in other states. The board d{nied the permits and Vulcan appealed. The court reversed and ordered the boarO to issue the permits. The board al~pealed, arguing the quarry would not be in harmony with the surrounding lknd, which was zoned for agricultural use and contained many residences.