Agenda - Planning Commission - 10/15/2015

Home

Zoning Bulletin August 25, 2015 1 Volume 9 1 Issue 16 Finally, in disagreeing with Schadt's contention that the presence of the nonconforming book shops on the property constituted a unique physical condition that, by definition, prevented the use of the property in conformance with the Zoning Ordinance, the court noted that Schadt did not seek to expand the existing nonconforming use of two small bookstores but, rather, to create an entirely new nonconforming use (i.e., an office). The court said that Schadt was not "entitled to make the prop- erty more nonconforming by virtue of the existing non-conformance." See also: Taliaferro v. Darby Tp. Zoning Hearing Bd., 873 A.2d 807 (Pa. Comm. Ct. 2005). Use—Property owners rent out residentially -zoned property for events County claims use violates zoning ordinance, while property owners contend it is a permissible accessory use Citation: Burton v. Glynn County, 2015 WL 4183018 (Ga. 2015) GEORGIA (07/13/15)—This case addressed the issue of whether property owners violated a zoning ordinance by operating their residen- tial property as an event venue. More specifically, it addresses the issue of whether the property owners use of their property to host weddings or social events constituted a permitted accessory use or was an impermis- sible primary use under the zoning ordinance. The Background/Facts: Thomas and Lee Burton (the "Burtons") owned oceanfront property (the "Property") on St. Simons Island in Glynn County (the "County"). The Property was situated in a single- family residential "R-6" zoning district under the County Zoning Ordinance. Beginning in 2008, the Burtons began offering the Property for short-term vacation rentals. The Property became increasingly popular as a venue for weddings and other large gatherings. From 2010 through May 2013, at least 79 events were held at the Property, with many of the events exceeding 100 guests in attendance. During that time period, the Property was advertised in print and online media as a wed- ding destination, and guests who booked the Property were furnished a list of wedding reception vendors. In 2010, residents in the area of the Property began filing complaints about the use of the Property. Those complaints included complaints re- lated to noise, traffic, and parking issues arising from events held at the Property. The County eventually determined that the Burtons were mak- © 2015 Thomson Reuters 9