Agenda - Planning Commission - 06/05/2003

Home

Page 4 -- April 25, 2003 434 also submitted that the township resolution was unconstitutional because it conflicted with provisions of the revised code that provided, "outdoor adver- tising shall be classified as a business use and be permitted in all districts zoned for industry, business, or trade." The board granted the vaifance, and the zoning inspector appealed, seeking a declaratory judgment and injunctive re~ef. Here, he alleged Genesis erected a sign that did not conform to the original request. Genesis responded by demanding that the court declare the township zon- Lng resolution prohibiting bit]boards and other off-premises advertising constitutional on its face and in conflict with the code. The lower court agreed with Genesis that the township resolution was un- consti'tutional, and the court ordered the township to create a constitutionally valid framework allowing outdoor advertising. The zoning inspector appealed, contending, since Genesis had been granted a variance, the company was still required to comply with the relevant zoning resolutions. DECISION: Affirmed. The board's decision was upheld. The township zoning resolution treated ground signs and billboards differ- ently. One was totally prohibited and the other was restricted as to size. The restrictions directed to ground signs could not be extended to billboards. The subject zoning resolution was determined to be unconstitutional. There was no reason to apply restrictions intended for ground signs to billboards. Citation: Hasman v. Genesis Outdoor Inc., Court of Appeals of Ohio, .Hth App. Dist., Geauga Co., No. 2002-G-2416 (2003). see also: BP Oil Co. v. Dayton Board ofZon, ing Appeals, 672 N..E. 2d 256 (1996). Conditional Use Permit ~ Quarry owner seeks new site for stone processing Ordinance considers stone quarry as agricultural or extractive activity TENNESSEE (3/!1/02) -- Hoover Inc. operated a stone processing qumzy near an airport expansion project. Due to the scope, of the airport expansion project, Hoover was forced to stop operations and look for another suitable site for a quarry operation. Hoover found ~mother site located in an agricultural ,and residential area. In attempting to start operations, Hoover became aware that the controlling zon- Lng ordLnance (COiVlZO)considered. the operation of a stone quari3/as a type of agricultural and extractive activity.' Such an activity was not permitted as a matter of right by the zoning administrator and was only allowed with a condi- tioner use pe:rmht. Hoover first applied for a .::onditionai use permit in 1.992, and '1,300 citizens permit ,,vas /enie:a., _o,-,-.'e, .~,pt:.,u,,!c,~ ~.,, m.... '.ower court. Tb.,e lower coul! reverse::-,.