Laserfiche WebLink
April 25, 2017 I Volume 11 I Issue 8 Zoning Bulletin <br />Validity of Zoning Ordinance/Non- <br />conforming Use —Zoning ordinance <br />required exercise of any vested <br />rights for non -conforming uses <br />within one year of adoption of the <br />zoning ordinance <br />Landowner with vested right for non -conforming <br />use challenged the ordinance as unconstitutional <br />as applied <br />Citation: Southern States -Bartow County, Inc. v. Riverwood Farm <br />Homeowners Association, 2017 WL 765890 (Ga. 2017) <br />GEORGIA (02/27/17)—This case addressed the issue of whether a <br />zoning ordinance that required exercise of anyvested rights for non- <br />conforming uses within one year of adoption of the zoning ordinance <br />was unconstitutional as applied to a particular landowner. <br />The Background/Facts: Southern State -Bartow County, Inc. <br />("SSBC") owned property in Bartow County (the "County"). In 1989, <br />SSBC filed an application with the Georgia Department of Natural Re- <br />sources, Environmental Protection Division ("EPD"), to develop and <br />operate a landfill on its property. In May 1990, SSBC requested from <br />the County a certificate of zoning compliance indicating that the zon- <br />ing district in which its property was located permitted the operation of <br />a landfill. That zoning approval had been provided to the previous own- <br />ers of SSBC's property. The County denied SSBC's request for a certif- <br />icate of land use approval on the ground that the then -controlling zon- <br />ing ordinance did not allow a landfill on the site. SSBC appealed (the <br />"zoning litigation"). <br />In the meantime, in 1991, the Supreme Court of Georgia declared <br />the County's zoning ordinance invalid because it had not been enacted <br />in accordance with the law. In September 1993, the County enacted a <br />new zoning ordinance (the "Ordinance"). A provision of the Ordi- <br />nance —Section 6.1.4—required exercise of any vested rights for non- <br />conforming uses within one year of Ordinance adoption. <br />SSBC's zoning litigation continued until 1994, when the superior <br />court concluded that, in the absence of a valid zoning ordinance in ex- <br />istence at the time of its application to the EPD (in 1989), SSBC <br />8 © 2017 Thomson Reuters <br />