Agenda - Planning Commission - 01/03/2019

Home

December 10, 2018 I Volume 12 I Issue 23 Zoning Bulletin ue rocessNagueness—Property contends city approval of access road on public right-of-way outside of his business violates his substantive and procedural due process rights Property owner argues that access road will lead to congestion and traffic, destroying his business and posing a public safety hazard Citation: Wayne Watson Enterprises, LLC v. City of Cambridge, 2018 WL 5099629 (6th Gil: 2018) The Sixth Circuit has jurisdiction. over Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, and Tennessee. SIXTH CIRCUIT (OHIO) (10/19/18)—This case addressed the issue of whether a business/property owner's procedural and due process rights were violated when a city authorized an access road on the public right-of-way, which would potentially increase traffic in front of the property owner's business. More specifically, the case addressed whether the business/property owner had a "property interest" that was deprived by the approval of the ac- cess road. The Background/Facts: Wayne Watson was the owner and sole member of Wayne Watson Enterprises, LLC (collectively, "Watson"). Watson owned two parcels of land along Route 209 in the City of Cambridge (the "City"). On his land, Watson operated a car wash business. Next to Watson's business was a Wendy's Restaurant. Relevant here, prior to the fall of 2014, at the head of Watson's parcel, situated nearest to the Wendy's Restaurant was a traffic light, which permitted Watson's customers to make a protected left turn onto Route 209. In the fall of 2014, Wendy's operators submitted to the City a site plan for a proposed demolition and reconstruction of the restaurant. The plan included a proposed connection of the right-of-way, which would allow Wendy's custom- ers to make the protected left turn onto Route 209. This proposed construction was referred to as the "access road." This proposed access road was to be lo- cated entirely in the public way, in the vicinity of the Wendy's Restaurant. In October 2014, the City approved an ordinance (the "Ordinance") which authorized construction of Wendy's proposed access road. Watson received no individual notice of the meeting at which the Ordinance was approved. Later, Watson brought a legal action challenging the constitutionality of the approval of the access road. Specifically, Watson argued that his constitutionally protected procedural and due process rights were violated. The Fourteenth 10 © 2018 Thomson Reuters