Agenda - Planning Commission - 03/06/2003

Home

Z.B. February-I0, 2003 -- Page 7 A housing development resident then testified he was not bothered by traf- fic or airplanes. The city mayor said the city's master plan had the goal 'of preserving "the country character of the community" and only allowed.commercial uses at the freeway interchange areas and one intersection. . The court.ruled in favor.of the city. Heritage appealed, arguing the zoning classification was arbitrary and unreasonable. DECISION: Affirmed. The zoning classification was reasonable. The parcel was large, laid out in orderly lots, and used for shagle-family residences. The high-tension line easement impacted only a few of the parcel's .lots and was on 'the extreme western edge. Finally, the parcel was elevated 50 feet above the interstate. Citation: Heritage Development Company LLC v. City of lgqlloughby Hills, Court of Appeals of Ohio, 1Jth App.. Dist., Lake County, No. 2001-L-221 (2002). Certificate of Occupancy -- Court rules certificate language allows any type of processing. Landowner operates trash transfer facility DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA (12/31/02) -- Perkins apphed for a certificate of occupancy to operate a business. The certificate listed the business's purpose as "light manufacturing, Processing, fabricating, and warehousing of steel prod- ucts and office and retail construction industrial supplies; all material nonhaz- ardous; not sexually oriented," After receiving the certificate, Perkins commenced operating a waste transfer facility. At the time Perkins applied for his certificate of occupancy, there was no zoning category 'for trash transfer facilities and no regulations addressed specifically to these kinds of facilities. The district issued a notice alleging Perkins's use of the premises w. as not in conformity with the certificate. The district claimed the certificate only al- lowed activities, involving steel products. ' Perkins sued, and the court ruled in favor' of the district. The court found that the phrase "of steel products and office and retail construction industrial supplies" modified manufacturing, processing, fabricating; and warehousing. Consequently, each of these activities had'to be related to steel products and office and retail construction industrial supplies. Perkins appealed, arguing the district's reading of the certificate was erro- neous. Perkins argued"steel products" only modified "warehousing," not "pro- cessing'' or the other more remote words. He claimed the other enumerated activities, including processing, were not limited to steel products. 133