Laserfiche WebLink
Zoning Bulletin July 10, 2014 Volume 8 1 Issue 13 <br />See also: Douglas v. Planning and Zoning Conr'n of Town of Watertown, <br />127 Conn. App. 87, 13 A.3d 669 (2011). <br />See also: Harris v. Zoning Com 'n of Town of New Milford, 259 Conn.. <br />402, 788 A.2d 1239 (2002). <br />Case Note: <br />ha its decision, the court noted that it was "mindful of the potentially chilling effect <br />that would result if [Allstar'sj interpretation of § 8-8(a) (1) was adopted. " The court <br />noted: `If owners whose property was not the subject of a zoning application and <br />on which the commission elected to take no action nevertheless possess standing to <br />appeal whenever their property is discussed in some manner, municipal zoning <br />cornmissions might become far more reticent to entertain any informal discussion <br />on requests such as that made by the plaintiff in the present case." <br />Variance —Property owners seek <br />two -foot variance to allow for <br />property use of RV to care for son <br />with medical conditions <br />Zoning Board denies variance, maintaining that a <br />medical condition is not a hardship warranting a <br />variance <br />Citation: Cronley v. Board of Zoning Adjustments, 13-789 La. App. 5 <br />Cir. 5/14/14, 2014 WL 1922930 (La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2014) <br />LOUISIANA (05/14/14) This case addressed the issue ofwhetherprop- <br />erty owners were entitled to a variance of two feet so that they could park <br />their recreational vehicle on the side of their home to assist their disabled <br />child's needs. <br />The Background/Facts: Gerald and Carolee Cronley (the "Cronleys") <br />owned a single-family residence in Jefferson Parish, Louisiana ("Jefferson"). <br />In April of 2012, the Cronleys received a notice from the Jefferson Parish <br />Department of Inspection and Code Enforcement. The notice infornued the <br />Cronleys that they were in violation of § 40-661(g)(2)(a) of Jefferson's <br />Code of Ordinances (the "Code") for parking their recreational vehicle <br />("RV") in front of their home. <br />The Code required the Cronleys to maintain a five-foot side yard setback <br />between the RV and the side property line. However, due to the width of the <br />RV, only 2.95 feet remained between the RV and the side property line. Ac- <br />cordingly, after receiving the zoning violation notice, the Cronleys <br />requested a variance of 2.05 feet. <br />©2014 Thomson Reuters 5 <br />