My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Planning Commission - 08/04/2011
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Planning Commission
>
2011
>
Agenda - Planning Commission - 08/04/2011
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/21/2025 10:08:36 AM
Creation date
10/31/2012 4:25:03 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Planning Commission
Document Date
08/04/2011
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
142
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Zoning Bulletin June 10, 2011 Volume 5 No. 11 <br />This rule —requiring compliance with both land use legislation <br />and with general legislation, explained the court, is consistent with <br />the purpose underlying the continuance of nonconforming uses: to <br />avoid constitutional due process concerns arising from interference <br />with a landowner's property rights. It is the property owner whose <br />property rights are affected by changes in zoning legislation, and, <br />thus, it is the property owner who is afforded constitutional due <br />process protection. Since such constitutional concerns do not arise <br />where a trespasser establishes the use, a trespasser onto land cannot <br />lawfully establish a nonconforming use, concluded the court. <br />See also: State ex rel. Miller v. Cain, 40 Wash. 2d 216, 242 P.2d <br />505 (1952). <br />See also: First Pioneer Trading Co., Inc. v. Pierce County, 146 <br />Wash. App. 606, 191 P.3d 928 (Div. 2 2008), review denied, 165 <br />Wash. 2d 1053, 208 P.3d 554 (2009). <br />Case Note: The court also found that the hearing examiner im- <br />properly presumed that the owner of the northern parcel who <br />used part of the southern parcel as a wrecking yard was tres- <br />passing. The court said that where the southern parcel was <br />"vacant, open, unenclosed, and unimproved," use by the owner <br />of the northern parcel was presumed to be permissive. There- <br />fore, said the court, if McMilian could establish that the south- <br />ern parcel was being used by the owners of the northern parcel <br />for a wrecking yard prior to 1958, then McMilian would be <br />entitled to the presumption that the operators of the wrecking <br />yard were using the southern parcel "with the true owner's per- <br />mission" —and thus were not trespassers. <br />Zoning News from Around the Nation <br />GEORGIA <br />Governor Nathan Deal recently signed legislation authorizing the <br />incorporation of Peachtree Corners, a community near Norcross in <br />Gwinnett County. Area residents will vote in November on whether <br />to incorporate. <br />Source: The Atlanta Journal Constitution; www.aic.com <br />© 2011 Thomson Reuters 11 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.