Laserfiche WebLink
~' "i Z.B. December I 0, 2005-- Page 7 <br /> <br /> Rezoning-- Owner requests rezoning to make way for residences <br /> Claims current zoning is unconstitutional <br /> Citation: Legacy Investment Group, LLC ~ Kenn, Supreme Court of Georgia, <br /> No. S05A0989 (2005) <br /> GEORGL~, (10/24/05) -- Legacy Investment Group, LLC requested Fulton County <br /> to rezone certain property it owned in the county. The land was zoned a~m-icul- <br /> rural. Legacy wanted the property to be rezoned so it could build two resi- <br /> dences per acre on the land. <br /> Legacy had entered into an agreement to purchase 41 acres of land for <br /> $12,195 per acre. Legacy stated that it had paid that amount based on the <br /> property's suitability for two unit per acre development.. Aa expert stated the <br /> property would be worth $15,000 to $16,000 if it was zoned for such residential <br /> USe. <br /> After a hearing, the county voted to deny the request. <br /> Legacy sued, arguing the current zoning was unconstitutional. The court <br /> ruled in favor of the county. Specifically, it found Legacy had no case because <br /> it had not suffered a substantial hardship or proven the present zoning was not <br /> related to the public health, safety, or welfare: <br /> Legacy appealed, arguing there was a factual issue over whether it was <br /> suffering a substantial hardship. <br /> DECISION: Reversed. <br /> A factual issue existed regarding whether there was a viable economic use <br /> of the property under the currer~t zoning. Therefore, Legacy had a case because <br /> an_ issue existed regarding whether the existing zoning was significantly <br /> mental to Legacy. <br /> Legacy's exper~ testified ~hat the property as zoned was worth about $7,500 <br /> per acre, and one of the county's experts testified that properties similarly <br /> situated to Legacy's were worth between $5,000 to $9,000 per acre. <br /> Consequently, even if Legacy did riot pay a premium for the property, it <br />could have had to pay as much as $9,000 per acre for the property. In addi- <br />tion, hearing experts testified that the property could be developed as zoned <br />only if Legacy had purchased it for $5,838. The prevailing evidence showed <br />that it was possible Legacy could not develop the property for residential <br />use as zoned. Moreover, one of Legacy's experts testified that the property <br />had no value for any agricultural use, and only bad economic value for <br />residential uses. <br /> The court determined that there was an issue over whether there was any <br />viable economic use of the property under the cun'ent zoning. <br />see also: Town of Tyrone v. Tyrone, LLC, 565 S.E. 2d 806 (2002). <br />see also: Henry Cotmrv v. Tim Jones Properties, 539 S.E. 2d ~67 (2000). <br /> <br />@ 2005 Quinlan Put21ishing Group. Any ~eproduction is prot~ibited. For more rnlormation please call (817) 542-0048. <br /> <br />129 <br /> <br /> <br />