Agenda - Planning Commission - 03/05/2015

Home

Zoning Bulletin January 10, 2015 1 Volume 9 1 Issue 1 challenge" Talley's special use permit, Talley's intended use of his property was not in violation of the Village's zoning ordinance. The special use permit allowed Talley to use the property in a way that would otherwise have violated the underlying ordinance; it allowed him to establish an accessory structure that was 72 feet long, 42 feet wide, and 22 feet high as the primary structure on his property. Accordingly, the court concluded that summary judgment was properly granted to Talley. See also: Young v. City of Belleville, 115 Ill. App. 3d 960, 71 Ill. Dec. 759, 451 N.E.2d 913 (5th Dist. 1983). Case Note: Nord had brought other claims in her action, including claims against the Village, alleging violation of Illinois' Open Meetings Act. The appellate court concluded that those claims failed because Nord had failed to show how the alleged violation was a "step" leading to the issuance of Talley's special use permit, plus the Village had remedied any alleged prior viola- tion of the Open Meetings Act by holding a subsequent public meeting that was in compliance of the Act. Uses—Hospital seeks to construct helipad City and hospital dispute whether a helipad is a permitted accessory use in zoning district Citation: Cleveland Clinic Found. v. Cleveland Bd. of Zoning Ap- peals, 2014 -Ohio -4809, 2014 WL 5644149 (Ohio 2014) OHIO (11/05/14)—This case addressed the issue of whether a helipad was a permissible accessory use of a hospital under the zon- ing regulations of the City of Cleveland. The Background/Facts: The Cleveland Clinic Foundation (the "Clinic") owns the Fairview Hospital (the "Hospital") in Cleveland, Ohio (the "City"). The Hospital was constructed in 1952. The Hospital's parcels of land were rezoned in 1964 to "Local Retail Business District." Pursuant to the Cleveland Code of Ordinances ("C.C.O."), such a district allows uses that are "normally required 2015 Thomson Reuters 5