Agenda - Planning Commission - 09/06/2018

Home

Zoning Bulletin July 25, 2018 I Volume 12 I Issue 14 Hearings and meetings in general — Planning Commission holds hearing on permit, but Board of Commissioners fails to provide for notice for hearing before approving same permit Neighbors contend board's failure to notice hearing violated Georgia's Zoning Procedures Law, but board says law only requires one noticed hearing per permit Citation: Hoechstetter v. Pickens County, 2018 WL 2465513 (Ga. 2018) GEORGIA (06/04/18)—This case addressed the issue of whether a hearing before a county planning commission afforded interested citizens a meaning- ful opportunity to be heard by the county board of commissioners on an ap- plication for a conditional use permit, and thus satisfied the notice -and -hearing requirements of the Zoning Procedures Law. The Background/Facts: In August 2015, Doug and Lynda Tatum (the "Tatums") applied for a conditional use permit for a 75-acre parcel in Pickens County (the "County"). Following publication of notice, in October 2015, the County Planning Commission held a hearing on the permit application. Sev- eral neighbors appeared at the hearing and objected to the application. Never- theless, the Planning Commission approved the permit application. At its January 2016 meeting, the County Board of Commissioners (the "Board") also approved the permit. Some of the neighbors (the "Neighbors") then filed a petition for judicial review. The Neighbors argued that they were denied a meaningful opportunity to be heard on the application. In particular, the Neighbors asserted that the Board failed to give notice as required by Georgia's Zoning Procedures Law ("ZPL") of the January 2016 Board meeting at which the Board approved the Tatums' permit. Pursuant to the ZPL, before a county or municipality makes a "zoning deci- sion," it must afford affected landowners and other interested citizens an op- portunity to be heard. To that end, it must "provide for a hearing" on the proposed zoning decision and publish notice of that hearing. (See OCGA § 36- 66-4 (a).) The Board maintained that the hearing for which notice was required under the ZPL was not its January 2016 meeting, but rather, the October 2015 hear- ing before the Planning Commission —for which proper notice had been given. The superior court agreed with the Board, holding that the notice of the October 2015 hearing was enough to satisfy the ZPL. The neighbors appealed, and the Court of Appeals affirmed. © 2018 Thomson Reuters 5