Agenda - Planning Commission - 03/02/2006

Home

Page 8--January 10,2006 Ordinance -- Property owner claims business license gives her right to operate home business Location of business was never specified in application Citation: Squires v. City of Saraland, Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama, No. 2030874 (2005) ALABAMA (11/23105) -- Squires lived within a residential district in the city of Saraland. Under the city's zoning ordinance, she had to obtain a special excep- tion from the city before she could operate certain home businesses, including a daycare center. Squires wanted to operate a daycare center in her home. Consequently, she applied for a business license. Her application gave the name of the business, the type of the business, and the principal business activity. However, there was no entry in the field provided for identifying the business's location. The sole address listed was the address of Squires' home. Squires eventually was issued the hcense. Squires began operating the daycare center in her home. After complaints regarding traffic increase in the neighborhood, Squires was informed that she could not operate her business without a special exception permit. Squires applied for a special exception permit. After a-hearing, the city denied her request. Squires sued, and the court ruled in favor of the city. Squires appealed, arguing that the business license entitled, her to operate the daycare business out of her house. DECISION: A ~rmed. Squires was not entitled to operate her business on the property. The city's issuance of a business license to Squires on the basis of the representations in her application would not reasonably constitute a represen- tation that a daycare business could be operated in her house. All citizens of the city were deemed to know the provisions of the zoning ordinance. As such, reliance upon a particular grant of municipal permission was unreasonable to the extent that such permission was interpreted by the recipient as carte blanche to ignore other legal requirements that may eMst. Under the facts of the case, the business license issued to Squires con- noted, at most,' general permission to operate a business within the geographic boundaries of the city, not specific perrrfission to operate a business at a par- ticular location. Ultimately, the mere issuance of a daycare business license by the city was an insufficient express or implied representation concerning the propriety of operating a business within the residential district without a special exception. see also: CiU of Foley v. McLeod, 709 So.2d 471 (1997). see also: Even v. Ci~ of Parker, 597 N. W. 2d 670 (1999). 130 © 2006 Quinian Pui31is~ing Group. Any reproduction is prohibited. For more inlormation please ca~l (617) 5424048.