Laserfiche WebLink
Zoning Bulletin February 10, 2017 I Volume 11 I Issue 3 <br />limitation on zoning authority under the AMMA, the court concluded <br />that the superior court properly struck that portion of the MMD <br />Amendment as it applied to MMDs. <br />See also: Reed-Kaliher v. Hoggatt, 237 Ariz. 119, 347 P.3d 136 <br />(2015). <br />See also: Ter Beek v. City of Wyoming, 495 Mich. 1, 846 N.W.2d <br />531 (2014). <br />See also: County of San Diego v. San Diego NORML, 165 Cal. App. <br />4th 798, 81 Cal. Rptr. 3d 461 (4th Dist. 2008). <br />Case Note: <br />The Superior Court had issued a $5,000 sanction against the County, which <br />the appellate court reversed. The appellate court found the sanction unwar- <br />ranted upon finding that the County had not acted in bad faith. <br />Church and Religious Uses — <br />City finds homeless housing is <br />a permitted "house of worship" <br />use <br />Adjacent property owner challenges that <br />determination <br />Citation: Sullivan v. Board of Zoning Appeals of City of Albany, <br />144 A.D.3d 1480, 2016 WL 6883676 (3d Dep't 2016) <br />NEW YORK (11/23/16)—This case addressed the issue of whether <br />the proposed use of a church parsonage to house 14 homeless <br />individuals was consistent with the permitted "house of worship" use <br />under the city's zoning code. <br />The Background/Facts: Bethany Reformed Church (the <br />"Church") owned property in the City of Albany (the "City"). The <br />Church's property was located in an "R-1B single-family medium - <br />density residential" zoning district. In that zoning district, the <br />principal permitted uses were single-family detached dwellings and <br />houses of worship. Houses of worship were defined under the City's. <br />zoning code (the "Code") as: "[a] structure or part of a structure used <br />for worship or religious ceremonies." The Code did not define the <br />terms "worship" and "religious." <br />© 2017 Thomson Reuters 7 <br />