Agenda - Planning Commission - 10/05/2006

Home

Page 2 - August 25, 2006 Z.B r-' . " \ Ordinance - Auto repair shop claims it has grandfather status Curren/owner bought property four years after ordinance became effective Citation: City of Lakewood v. Calanni, Court o/Appeals of Ohio, 8th App. Dist., Cuyahoga Co., No. 87009 (2006) OHIO (06/08/06) -"- Building department officials saw Calanni and his employ- ees servicing cars outside of the principle structure of Calanni's automotive repair shop. Doing so violated a city ordinance. Consequently, the city issued citations to Calanni. Even after receiviIig the citations, Calanni continued to service vehicles outside of his shop. The city sued and the court ruled in its favor, ordering Calanni to stop violating the ordinance. Calanni appealed, claiming that he was a victim of retroactive zoning. Calanni argued that his service station had grandfather status since it had operated in the same capacity since 1922 - before the ordinance was established. DECISION:Afl:inned. Calanni was not a victim of retroactive zoning. Calanni bought the property in 1980. Automotive repair work conducted outside of an automotive repair shop's principle structure was prohibited in the city since 1976 and remained a prohibition in every recodification thereafter. Although Calanni's property had operated as a gas and automotive repair ( station since 1922, at the time that he purchased the property in 1980, the 1976 restriction was already in place. Thus, the purchase of the property was subject to the 1976 restriction. In addition, Calanni failed to provide any evidence that the previous owner of the property had been permittedto perform automotive repairs outside of the building's principle structure. Ultimately, it was clear from the purchase date that Calanni did not have grandfather status and could not service cars outside of his shop. . . Special Permit - Zoning prohibition found unconstitutional Court awards charter school special permit after lawsuit Citation: Albany Preparatory Charter School v. City of Albany, Supreme Court of New York, App. Div., 3rd Dept., No. 99656 (2006) NEW YORK (07/06/06) - Albany Preparatory Charter School wanted to change a commercial office space over to a school facility. The property was located in two commercial zones that did not list a school as an allowable principle, acces- sory, or special permit use in either district. The school sued, asking the court to declare that the provisions of the citY's zoning ordinance, which excluded schools from commercial zones, were unconsti- tutional. The court found that the exclusion was unconstitutional and directed the city to issue Albany Prep a special permit for the use of the property as a school. 70 . @ 2006 Quinlan Publishing Group. Any reproduction is prohibited. For more information please call (617) 542-0048.