Agenda - Planning Commission - 04/04/1995

Home

Page 2- February 15, 1995 Z.B. Ordinance -- Citizens Say Ordinance Adoption Violates Their Civil Rights Snohomish Country v. Anderson, 881 R2d 240 (Washi~gto~O 1994 The state of Washington passed a law requiring various counties to adopt county-wide planning policies that would apply to all cities within each County. Snohomish County was one of these counties and in 1993, it adopted a county- wide planning ordinance. Several county citizens filed a petition with the Snohomish County Auditor, asking the auditor to require a referendum on the ordinance. The county sued the citizens, asking the court to declare the ordinance could not be challenged by referendum. The citizens then sued the county. One of their claims was that the county violated their federal civil rights. These rights included their federal and state constitutional rights to petition government. This claim was based on the county charter's guarantee of the right to petition for a referendum. The court granted the county's declaration, and gave the county judgment without a trial on all but one of the citizens' claims. The citizens appealed. The Washington Supreme Court agreed to decide the referendum decision quickly, and affirmed the holding that the ordinance was not subject to referendum. The state supreme court then heard the rest of the citizens' claims, includ- ing the federal civil rights claim. DECISION: Affirmed, in favor of the county. The county did not violate the citizens' civil rights because no federal law gave them the right to a referendum. The county charter gave them a right to petition for a referendum, but state and local laws did not give the citizens a federal civil rights claim. The citizens could not cite any federal law that gave them a right to petition government through a referendum at the local level. Ruano v. Spellman, 505 P. 2d 447 (1973). Accessory Use -- Borough Says Hospital in Neighboring City Can't Use Laud for Parking Lot St. Margaret Memorial Hospital v. Borough Council of the Borough of Aspinwall, 641 A.2d 1270 (Pennsylvania) 1994 St. Margaret Memorial Hospital was i'n the city of Pittsburgh, Pa. The hos- pital owned a vacant lot across the street from it, which was once a used car dealership. The street that separated the hospital from this lot was the munici- pal boundary line between' Pittsburgh and the borough of Aspinwall. There- fore, the lot was in the borough, in a general commercial zone. Under the borough's zoning ordinance, public parking lots were permitted in general commercial zones. However, private parking lots were only allowed as accessory users. The ordinance also had restrictions on parking spaces that served specific buildings. The Zoning Hearing Board denied the hospital's request to use the lot for parking. The hospital then applied for a variance, and asked the board to make one of two findings regarding the proposed parking lot if it denied the variance