Planning & Environmental Law

Volume 62 • 2010

Judicial Decisions: Subject Index

The case abstracts are listed by common subject names. Some cases may be found in multiple subject categories.


A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M |  N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | Y | Z


A

ACCESSORY USES

Barn and equestrian center for noncommercial use is an accessory use to residence (Wyo. 2009) 62 PEL 1

Indoor shooting range qualifies as a "recreation facility," a conditional use in rural agricultural district, and may have accessory uses including retail sales and classrooms (Pa. App. 2009) 62 PEL 48

Agricultural buildings are allowed on lot where agriculture is permitted; the presence of a residence on the lot does not require that the buildings qualify as residential accessory uses (Mich. App. 2009) 62 PEL 118

Storage of tractor trailer trucks is not accessory to residential use and is not part of normal agricultural operation (Pa. App. 2010) 62 PEL 279

Parking deck is not an accessory "use" but a structure requiring amendment of hotel's conditional use permit (N.C. App. 2010) 62 PEL 388

ADULT USES

Court applies intermediate scrutiny and holds that city did not justify restrictions on hours of operation for adult uses not including live shows or video booths (U.S. App., 7th Cir. 2009) 62 PEL 2

Regulation requiring dispersal of adult uses not offering on-site entertainment must be justified by reference to impact of that type of business (U.S. App., 7th Cir. 2009) 62 PEL 3

Whether special use ordinance constitutes an impermissible prior restraint on adult uses depends on extent to which it applies to such uses (U.S. Dist., N.D. Ill. 2009) 62 PEL 42

Developer of adult use has no vested right in erroneously issued permits (R.I. 2009) 62 PEL 73

Definition of adult-oriented store as having "a substantial or significant portion of its stock" in adult products is not unconstitutionally vague as applied to store selling 8,242 adult items (U.S. App., 2nd Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 119

Statute prohibiting sale of sexual aid devices is constitutional (Ala. 2010) 62 PEL 199

County has a reasonable basis for ordinance prohibiting sale or consumption of alcohol on adult entertainment premises (U.S. App., 11th Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 200

Adequacy of alternative locations must be evaluated at the time of challenge to adult use ordinance (U.S. App., 2nd Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 201

Assertion that city employees manipulated application filing dates for adult use and church must be resolved before determination of whether sensitive use ordinance applies (Cal. App. 2010) 62 PEL 322

Transmission of images of sexual conduct for sale on the Internet constitutes operation of a business (U.S. App., 11th Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 358

Law prohibiting sale of distilled alcoholic beverages in adult entertainment establishments, while allowing sale of beer and wine, is valid (U.S. App., 4th Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 399

AESTHETICS

Denial of permits for telecommunications facilities in public rights-of-way, based on aesthetics, does not violate Telecommunications Act (U.S. App., 9th Cir. 2009) 62 PEL 35

AGRICULTURE

Restriction on release from agricultural easement, prohibiting transfer of residential use of two acres for five years, is valid (Md. 2009) 62 PEL 78

Overlay district permitting recreational trail through orchard is not a rezoning subject to review by Growth Management Hearings Board and is not inconsistent with protection of agriculture (Wash. App. 2009) 62 PEL 79

Planned unit development designation may not be used to increase density in agricultural preservation area (S.C. 2009) 62 PEL 102

Ordinance intended to conform to Right to Farm Act does not violate rights of noncommercial farmer (N.J. App. 2010) 62 PEL 162

Approval of 8,000-animal feedlot within one mile of site for which a residential building permit had issued is not arbitrary (N.D. 2010) 62 PEL 163

After finding open agricultural use with a single-family dwelling occupied by the owner, county lacks discretion to find that principal use is not agricultural (Colo. App. 2010) 62 PEL 202

Nursery where container plants are maintained for sale does not qualify for agricultural exemption from zoning ordinance (Ohio App. 2010) 62 PEL 203

Storage of tractor trailer trucks is not accessory to residential use and is not part of normal agricultural operation (Pa. App. 2010) 62 PEL 279

Recently partitioned grazing land continues to be agricultural land as part of a "farm unit" although the land is not independently suitable for farming (Or. App. 2010) 62 PEL 280

Court must consider cost of removing trees in determining whether land is primary agricultural soil, so that development requires off-site mitigation (Vt. 2010) 62 PEL 281

Trial court lacks jurisdiction over claims of intentional nuisance in connection with farming operations (N.J. App. 2010) 62 PEL 359

AIRPORT/AIR RIGHTS

Determination that conditional use permit will not be renewed is not subject to California Environmental Quality Act review (Cal. 2009) 62 PEL 80

State Aeronautics Act does not preclude initiative enactment of zoning amendments permitting mixed use development near airport (Cal. App. 2010 2009) 62 PEL 292

Owners of land subject to airport safety zone restrictions suffer a burden and loss of value not shared by others, and are entitled to compensation for regulatory taking (Minn. App. 2010) 62 PEL 294

ANNEXATION

Neighbors have standing to challenge annexation based on allegations of reasonably ascertainable future harm (Nev. 2009) 62 PEL 4

Town's failure to comply with statutory procedures for disapproving annexation does not amount to deemed approval of annexation (N.Y. App. 2009) 62 PEL 5

Disconnection is not barred by village's retention of two small barrier parcels, if village cannot demonstrate any impairment that will result from disconnection (Ill. App 2009) 62 PEL 43

Owner is entitled to disconnect from village, but open space covenant imposed in exchange for special zoning remains valid (Ill. App. 2009) 62 PEL 44

Lessees do not have standing under the Private Real Property Rights Preservation Act; landowner's claims of tortuous interference with contract against city fall within immunity exception (Tex. App. 2009) 62 PEL 159

Failure to comply with statutory notice requirements on second attempt at annexation is inadvertent and not a basis for invalidating annexation (Colo. App. 2010) 62 PEL 317

Annexation, void for leaving an unincorporated island, is not revived by subsequent annexation of the island (Ga. App. 2010) 62 PEL 360

Petition for detachment of farmland requires analysis of benefits provided by city compared to tax burden (Ohio App. 2010) 62 PEL 361

Owners of land outside city lack common-law standing to challenge annexation for construction of ethanol plant (Neb. 2010) 62 PEL 433

APPEALS AND APPEAL PROCEDURES

Approval for removal of earth material without a special permit may not be collaterally attacked by means of cease-and-desist order (Conn. App. 2010) 62 PEL 120

Objector cannot attack reduction in parking as part of conditional use approval in subsequent proceedings concerning tax increment financing (N.D. 2010) 62 PEL 121

Ordinance allowing issuance of certificate of nonconformance without notice is valid because it allows objectors to appeal within 30 days of obtaining knowledge (Pa. App. 2010) 62 PEL 122

Decision revoking permit also revoked two-year limit on that permit, so appeal of revocation was not moot after two years (Wash. 2010) 62 PEL 123

Planning board's continuing jurisdiction over conditions of approval does not exempt developer from 30-day appeals period (N.H. 2010) 62 PEL 164

Service by court clerk is not the equivalent of filing notice of appeal with the agency from which appeal is taken and does not establish jurisdiction (Ohio App. 2010) 62 PEL 165

On review of zoning officer's determination that rehabilitation center constitutes a hospital, zoning hearing board lacks authority to consider whether use would constitute a prison (Pa. App. 2010) 62 PEL 204

Zoning board of appeals has jurisdiction to determine whether redesigned plans conform to stipulated judgment (Conn. 2010) 62 PEL 282

Clerk of department of planning and zoning files development order and triggers 30-day appeals period (Fla. App. 2010) 62 PEL 283

Denials of sewer facilities priority reclassification are legislative, not subject to review by the board of appeals or to administrative mandamus (Md. App. 2010) 62 PEL 362

Zoning administrator's letter, indicating that certificate of occupancy would be issued upon completion of house, constitutes a decision triggering the appeals period (N.C. App. 2010) 62 PEL 400

ATTORNEY FEES

Landlord is not entitled to attorney fees as prevailing party in rent control litigation against city (Cal. App. 2010) 62 PEL 166

Creation of slope within setback of sandpit constitutes prohibited excavation (N.H. 2010) 62 PEL 220

Award of attorney fees for defending appeal of judgment declaring comprehensive plan unconstitutional is proper (N.Y. App. 2010) 62 PEL 284

AUTOMATIC GRANT/DENIAL

Town's failure to comply with statutory procedures for disapproving annexation does not amount to deemed approval of annexation (N.Y. App. 2009) 62 PEL 5

Court may not order certification of environmental impact report based on delays (Cal. App. 2009) 62 PEL 90

Failure to state reasons for denial of rezoning does not result in automatic approval (Minn. 2010) 62 PEL 363

B

BUILDING CODES

Owner who commenced work without a permit is not denied due process by official's failure to advise him of the need for blueprints or of the appeals process (Pa. App. 2009) 62 PEL 124

Contract requiring seller to provide evidence that there are no "open code violations cases" is ambiguous (N.Y. App. 2010) 62 PEL 240

BUILDING PERMITS

Town lacks authority to deny building permit for pier approved by Department of Natural Resources (Wis. App. 2010) 62 PEL 346

Mistaken issuance of building permit for a duplex is a discretionary function, for which city is not liable (Minn. App. 2010) 62 PEL 417

C

CIVIL RIGHTS

Sex offender residency restrictions of Kentucky's "Megan's Law" are excessive and may not be applied to offenders who committed offenses prior to its enactment (Ky. 2009) 62 PEL 6

Trial court properly refused to dismiss equal protection and First Amendment claims alleging discriminatory code enforcement (N.Y. App. 2009) 62 PEL 7

Condominium owners may allege Fair Housing Act violations based on association's interpretation of rules with respect to hallway display of religious symbols (U.S. App., 7th Cir. 2009) 62 PEL 45

Developer fails to establish discriminatory impact, in violation of Fair Housing Act, resulting from denial of permit for apartment development (U.S. App., 5th Cir. 2009) 62 PEL 46

Developer must demonstrate compliance with statutory requirements for senior housing to obtain site plan approval (N.H. 2009) 62 PEL 125

Denial of wildlife permit does not violate due process rights of wildlife rehabilitator who previously refused to cooperate with department (Ohio App. 2010) 62 PEL 241

Owner sufficiently alleges certain claims with respect to delay of conditional use permit for a radio tower (U.S. Dist., S.D. Ohio 2010) 62 PEL 242

Delays in permit renewals for adult use do not violate constitutional protections (U.S. App., 10th Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 243

Developer, denied approval for multifamily development, does not establish that denial or prohibition on multifamily housing is unconstitutional or violates Fair Housing Act (U.S. App., 6th Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 318

Inadequate sidewalks, curbs, and parking lots are not a "service, program, or activity" covered by the Americans with Disabilities Act, but may effectively deny access to covered services (U.S. App., 5th Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 418

COASTAL AND WETLAND REGULATION

Drain and fill activities exceed farming exemption from wetlands permit requirement and are subject to cease-and-desist order (Conn App. 2009) 62 PEL 8

Evidence does not support determination that proposed joint-use pier is inconsistent with purposes of Shoreline Management Act (Wash. App. 2009) 62 PEL 9

Decisions by U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and Florida Department of Environmental Protection not to exercise jurisdiction over isolated wetlands does not exempt development from county regulations (Fla. App. 2009) 62 PEL 126

Purchasers have constructive notice of conservation easement prohibiting encroachment into wetlands transition area (N.J. App. 2010) 62 PEL 127

Trial court is within its discretion to reject proposal to create cranberry bog as restoration of wetlands destroyed by unpermitted activities (Conn. App. 2010) 62 PEL 167

City lacks authority to use designation of area as part of the federal Coastal Barrier Resources System as criterion for inclusion in resources protection area under state Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act (Va. 2010) 62 PEL 168

Town's stream buffer requirements are not preempted by less stringent state law (N.C. App. 2010) 62 PEL 205

Violation of riparian buffer is an encumbrance subject to deed warranties, and actionable despite purchaser's actual knowledge (N.C. App. 2010) 62 PEL 319

Restoration of beaches, so that private land no longer touches the water, does not constitute a taking (U.S. 2010) 62 PEL 334

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service designation of more than 850,000 acres as critical habitat for vernal pool species is upheld (U.S. App., 9th Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 401

Department of Ecology has authority to order compliance and impose a penalty on unpermitted filling of wetlands (Wash. App. 2010) 62 PEL 402

COMPREHENSIVE PLANS

Consistency with comprehensive plan designation for future residential use does not entitle developer to rezoning of agricultural land (Iowa App. 2009) 62 PEL 30

Township may rely on county comprehensive plan rather than prepare its own for purposes of enacting zoning measure (Ohio 2009) 62 PEL 47

Award of attorney fees for defending appeal of judgment declaring comprehensive plan unconstitutional is proper (N.Y. App. 2010) 62 PEL 284

Citizen group lacks standing to challenge comprehensive plan based on potential general harm (N.Y. App. 2010) 62 PEL 309

Growth Management Board may not employ "bright-line rules" concerning density in validating county comprehensive plan (Wash. App. 2010) 62 PEL 374

CONDITIONAL USES

Denial of permit for lighted palm trees outside casino is reasonable and within the planning board's jurisdiction (Mont. 2009) 62 PEL 10

Indoor shooting range qualifies as a "recreation facility," a conditional use in rural agricultural district, and may have accessory uses including retail sales and classrooms (Pa. App. 2009) 62 PEL 48

Determination that conditional use permit will not be renewed is not subject to California Environmental Quality Act review (Cal. 2009) 62 PEL 80

City cannot determine that deli is a permitted use and, at the same time, impose conditions (Miss. App. 2009) 62 PEL 81

Board does not lose authority to impose additional conditions after finding application complies with all requirements of land use code (N.C. App. 2009) 62 PEL 82

Substantial evidence supports decision to grant conditional use permit for nonprofit motor cross bike instruction in domestic-agricultural zone (Ohio App. 2010) 62 PEL 128

Minutes of meeting are adequate "writing" to justify denial of conditional use permit for telecommunications tower (U.S. App., 7th Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 194

Conditions imposed on concrete plant requiring off-site improvements and limiting operations are unreasonable (Pa. App. 2010) 62 PEL 206

Gravel pit does not qualify as a special use for "commercial businesses supplying products and services for agricultural and forestry activities" (Idaho 2010) 62 PEL 209

Request for variance from prohibition on active mining within 500 feet of any residential district or structure is a request for use variance (Wis. App. 2010) 62 PEL 221

Owner sufficiently alleges certain claims with respect to delay of conditional use permit for a radio tower (U.S. Dist., S.D. Ohio 2010) 62 PEL 242

Developer is not entitled to the requested density, inconsistent with average lot sizes in area, based on Land Evaluation and Site Assessment score and successful compatibility meeting (W.V. 2010) 62 PEL 244

Enactment of exception to billboard moratorium, allowing billboards on public arenas as a conditional use, and immediate approval of permits for city-owned arena, is valid (Md. App. 2010) 62 PEL 305

Grant of conditional use permit for 13-story building is supported by substantial evidence and does not constitute spot zoning (Miss. 2010) 62 PEL 320

Parking deck is not an accessory "use" but a structure requiring amendment of hotel's conditional use permit (N.C. App. 2010) 62 PEL 388

CONDITIONAL ZONING

Developer acquires no vested right in conditional use application that does not comply with applicable regulations (Wash. App. 2010) 62 PEL 438

CONDOMINIUMS AND COOPS

Condominium developments in areas without relevant zoning regulations are subject to review under Subdivision Act (Mont. 2009) 62 PEL 115

Declaration provision allowing developer to amend percentage of ownership interests is not altered by deeds limiting that power to 10 years (Vt. 2010) 62 PEL 364

CONSENT PROVISIONS

Approval of new planned unit developments carved out of existing one does not amount to a taking or spot zoning (Tex. App. 2010) 62 PEL 144

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW — DUE PROCESS

Statutory time limit on challenges to enactment of ordinances is valid (Pa. App. 2009) 62 PEL 11

Code enforcement ordinance providing for appeal only with respect to the initial notice of violation and first penalty and not for any penalties assessed thereafter violates due process (Wash. 2009) 62 PEL 12

Ordinance prohibiting sale of a house without an inspection to determine compliance with the building code does not violate due process protections (U.S. App., 7th Cir. 2009) 62 PEL 83

Owner who commenced work without a permit is not denied due process by official's failure to advise him of the need for blueprints or of the appeals process (Pa. App. 2009) 62 PEL 124

Code requirement that development "will not impair the future development of a comprehensive neighborhood circulation system" does not provide clear, objective standard (Or. App. 2009) 62 PEL 129

Nuisance law, aimed at unruly student gatherings, is constitutional (U.S. Dist., D.R.I. 2010) 62 PEL 143

Statute prohibiting sale of sexual aid devices is constitutional (Ala. 2010) 62 PEL 199

Denial of wildlife permit does not violate due process rights of wildlife rehabilitator who previously refused to cooperate with department (Ohio App. 2010) 62 PEL 241

Ordinance without specific standards for rejecting subdivision based on concerns about flooding and slopes is impermissibly vague (Ala. App. 2010) 62 PEL 245

City's extraterritorial enforcement of nuisance laws and warrantless inspection of property do not violate due process (U.S. App., 8th Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 285

Neighboring owners, participants in hearing on planned unit development amendment, are not entitled to cross-examine developer's witnesses (Fla. App. 2010) 62 PEL 365

Interpretation of planned unit development standards to prohibit proposed Wal-Mart constitutes amendment without notice and hearing, violating constitutional rights of developer (U.S. App., 6th Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 366

Board's refusal to allow witness testimony violates due process rights of individual appealing termination of contract with borough (Alaska 2010) 62 PEL 403

Official's order that temporary asphalt driveway be removed does not violate due process rights of owners (U.S. App., 6th Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 404

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW — EQUAL PROTECTION

Village's decision not to extend water system to subdivision is rational and does not violate equal protection requirements (U.S. App., 7th Cir. 2009) 62 PEL 84

Auto salvage shop owner fails to establish equal protection violations in city's enforcement actions (U.S. App., 7th Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 169

Denial of variance for religious primary school in district permitting preschools does not violate equal protection (Mich. 2010) 62 PEL 321

"Class of one" equal protection claim fails for lack of specific facts regarding similarly situated applicants (U.S. App., 2nd Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 367

Practice of billing only those with city water meters for stormwater management utility charges may violate equal protection rights (Ariz. App. 2010) 62 PEL 405

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW — FIRST AMENDMENT

Court applies intermediate scrutiny and holds that city did not justify restrictions on hours of operation for adult uses not including live shows or video booths (U.S. App., 7th Cir. 2009) 62 PEL 2

Regulation requiring dispersal of adult uses not offering on-site entertainment must be justified by reference to impact of that type of business (U.S. App., 7th Cir. 2009) 62 PEL 3

Ordinance prohibiting leafleting unoccupied vehicles is not justified by city's assertions concerning litter and protecting the rights of car owners who do not want leaflets (U.S. App., 9th Cir. 2009) 62 PEL 13

Whether special use ordinance constitutes an impermissible prior restraint on adult uses depends on extent to which it applies to such uses (U.S. Dist., N.D. Ill. 2009) 62 PEL 42

Colorado smoking ban, including theatrical smoking, does not violate First Amendment (Colo. 2009) 62 PEL 85

Officials' refusal to meet privately with developer who did not have pending business with the town, but had lawsuit pending against the town, is not unconstitutional (U.S. App., 2nd Cir. 2009) 62 PEL 130

Anti-SLAPP law is not a basis for dismissal of defamation claims against reporter who wrote about opposition to a developer (Mass 2010) 62 PEL 170

City's ordinance and enforcement are constitutional even if underinclusive to serve goals relating to aesthetics and traffic safety (U.S. App., 2nd Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 191

Adequacy of alternative locations must be evaluated at the time of challenge to adult use ordinance (U.S. App., 2nd Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 201

California upholds ban on solicitation and receipt of funds at Los Angeles International Airport (Cal. 2010) 62 PEL 207

First Amendment does not compel a "government to avoid any public acknowledgment of religion's role in society" (U.S. 2010) 62 PEL 246

Neighbor who initiated untimely appeal of nonconforming use status is entitled to anti-SLAPP immunity based on his subjective motive (R.I. 2010) 62 PEL 247

Exceptions to bans on certain signs do not undermine city's asserted interests; bans are valid despite exceptions (U.S. App., 9th Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 286

Decision to hold public school graduation at church, despite availability of comparable public facilities, constitutes impermissible endorsement of religion (U.S. Dist., D. Conn. 2010) 62 PEL 287

Assertion that city employees manipulated application filing dates for adult use and church must be resolved before determination of whether sensitive use ordinance applies (Cal. App. 2010) 62 PEL 322

Political message mural is a sign and regulations are constitutional (U.S. Dist., E.D. Mo. 2010) 62 PEL 323

Prohibition of painted wrecked car planter as a junked vehicle does not violate First Amendment (U.S. App., 5th Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 324

Prohibition on nonprofit's distribution of message T-shirts outside zoo is not narrowly tailored to serve legitimate governmental interest (U.S. Dist., W.D. Wash. 2010) 62 PEL 325

Ordinance requiring permit for large group feeding events is constitutional (U.S. App., 11th Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 368

COVENANTS

Owner is entitled to disconnect from village, but open space covenant imposed in exchange for special zoning remains valid (Ill. App. 2009) 62 PEL 44

Property is not subject to covenant prohibiting signs that appear in common owner's deed to turnpike authority but not in chain of title to property at issue (Ohio App. 2010) 62 PEL 248

Authority to impose special assessments for "unusual conditions" includes paving roads (Wyo. 2010) 62 PEL 249

Covenant limiting lots to residential use prohibits use for facilities to benefit residences on adjoining lot (Or. App. 2010) 62 PEL 406

D

DAMAGE

Federal court remands award of damages to owners around Rocky Flats Nuclear Weapons Plant (U.S. App., 10th Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 407

DEDICATIONS AND FEES

San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District's air pollution control rules and fees are valid (Cal. App. 2009) 62 PEL 24

County lacks statutory authority to enact adequate public facilities ordinance for schools (N.C. App. 2009) 62 PEL 50

Impact fees bear a reasonable relationship to the burden imposed by development despite city's failure to offset future tax revenues generated by development in calculating the fees (Ariz. App. 2009) 62 PEL 86

Colorado Regulatory Impairment of Property Rights Act does not apply to denial of exemption from uniform drainage fee imposed on broad class of owners (Colo. 2009) 62 PEL 87

Having obtained preliminary plat approval, developer adequately states constitutional claims against city based on its changes in position and delays (U.S. Dist., D. Or. 2010) 62 PEL 171

Inspection fee remanded for determination of how city calculated the maximum fee (Wis. App. 2010) 62 PEL 172

Shoreline master program setbacks and buildable area limitations do not constitute indirect charges on development, imposed by municipality in violation of statute (Wash. App. 2010) 62 PEL 288

Impact fees for intersection improvement may not be spent on improvements not related to subdivision development (N.H. 2010) 62 PEL 326

Challenge to impact fee requires exhaustion of administrative remedies (Wis. App. 2010) 62 PEL 327

Impact fees adequately identify public facilities and have a reasonable relationship to burden imposed by development (Cal. App. 2010) 62 PEL 369

Hamilton Township's enactment of impact fees does not violate statutory authority (Ohio App. 2010) 62 PEL 370

Practice of billing only those with city water meters for stormwater management utility charges may violate equal protection rights (Ariz. App. 2010) 62 PEL 405

Imposing fee for new school facilities as condition of approval is ultra vires (N.C. App. 2010) 62 PEL 408

Proper remedy for failure to make appropriate findings in imposing recreation fee is remand to planning board (N.Y. App. 2010) 62 PEL 414

DEFINITIONS

Definition of adult-oriented store as having "a substantial or significant portion of its stock" in adult products is not unconstitutionally vague as applied to store selling 8,242 adult items (U.S. App., 2nd Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 119

Area planning commission is a political subdivision of Kentucky and has governmental immunity from tort claims (Ky. App. 2010) 62 PEL 131

"Floor area" refers to the area on which a person can stand, not the footprint of the entire structure (Wis. App. 2010) 62 PEL 132

Ordinance's definition of "public sidewalk" satisfies due process requirements of fair warning and does not constitute an unlawful taking by regulation (Ga. 2010) 62 PEL 208

Gravel pit does not qualify as a special use for "commercial businesses supplying products and services for agricultural and forestry activities" (Idaho 2010) 62 PEL 209

Short-term rentals of lakefront house are not commercial use in violation of residential zoning classification (Ind. App. 2010) 62 PEL 210

Terms "minimum lot size" and "land area per dwelling unit" have different meanings (Me. 2010) 62 PEL 211

Automobile transportation business is not accessory to residential use or a customary home occupation (N.Y. 2010) 62 PEL 250

Group of seven college students is not a "functional and factual family equivalent" (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2010) 62 PEL 251

Proposed wellness center is properly rejected as more like a prohibited "spa" than a permitted "medical center" (Ohio App. 2010) 62 PEL 289

California Environmental Quality Act categorical exemption for "infill" applies only to areas within city limits, not to other urbanized areas (Cal. App. 2010) 62 PEL 329

Definition of single-family use as four or more persons "living together as a traditional family or the functional equivalent of a traditional family" is not impermissibly vague (N.Y. App. 2010) 62 PEL 409

E

EASEMENTS

Restriction on release from agricultural easement, prohibiting transfer of residential use of two acres for five years, is valid (Md. 2009) 62 PEL 78

Public easement over Hawk Springs reservoir property survives district's contract to sell land (Wyo. 2009) 62 PEL 88

Landlocked owners established prescriptive easement over state land, but are not entitled to place wooden pallets in wetlands without permit (Mich. App. 2010) 62 PEL 264

Abutting owners acquire prescriptive easement to use artificially created reservoir for recreation (Conn. 2010) 62 PEL 290

Violation of riparian buffer is an encumbrance subject to deed warranties, and actionable despite purchaser's actual knowledge (N.C. App. 2010) 62 PEL 319

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

Statute authorizing creation of self-help business improvement districts is valid (Ala. 2009) 62 PEL 49

EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS

County lacks statutory authority to enact adequate public facilities ordinance for schools (N.C. App. 2009) 62 PEL 50

Denial of variance for religious primary school in district permitting preschools does not violate equal protection (Mich. 2010) 62 PEL 321

Imposing fee for new school facilities as condition of approval is ultra vires (N.C. App. 2010) 62 PEL 408

EMINENT DOMAIN

County has authority to condemn land within city for expansion of jail without consent of city (Ga. App. 2009) 62 PEL 51

Eminent Domain Procedure Law provides for reimbursement of fees and costs in successful challenge of proposed condemnation (N.Y. 2009) 62 PEL 52

Finding of blight for redevelopment project to expand Columbia University campus is unconstitutional (N.Y. App. 2009) 62 PEL 53

New York's highest court upholds condemnations for Brooklyn Atlantic Terminal Urban Renewal Area (N.Y. 2009) 62 PEL 54

Taking of land proposed for affordable housing is in bad faith, and owner is entitled to just compensation and damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Conn. 2010) 62 PEL 173

Requirement that strip be dedicated for road widening as part of development approval is a factor in its valuation in condemnation proceedings (Colo. 2010) 62 PEL 212

Condemnation of construction easements under Seawall Act is constitutional and does not conflict with Real Property Acquisition Policies Act (Miss. 2010) 62 PEL 328

New York's highest court upholds findings in support of condemnation for expansion of Columbia University in West Harlem (N.Y. App. 2010) 62 PEL 349

ENERGY

Ordinance prohibiting commercial wind farms throughout county, while allowing small wind energy operations, is valid (Kan. 2009) 62 PEL 55

Zoning amendment to permit wind energy facility is valid and applicant submitted adequate information for issuance of zoning permit (Pa. App. 2009) 62 PEL 89

ENFORCEMENT

Trial court properly refused to dismiss equal protection and First Amendment claims alleging discriminatory code enforcement (N.Y. App. 2009) 62 PEL 7

Drain and fill activities exceed farming exemption from wetlands permit requirement and are subject to cease-and-desist order (Conn. App. 2009) 62 PEL 8

Approval of permitted use may not be denied on the basis of owner's past conduct, which was never the subject of enforcement action (Ohio App. 2010) 62 PEL 161

Auto salvage shop owner fails to establish equal protection violations in city's enforcement actions (United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit 2010) 62 PEL 169

City's ordinance and enforcement are constitutional even if underinclusive to serve goals relating to aesthetics and traffic safety (U.S. App., 2nd Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 191

Creation of slope within setback of sandpit constitutes prohibited excavation (N.H. 2010) 62 PEL 220

Township's enforcement of zoning ordinance against violations visible from two highways, before pursuing less-visible violations, is not unreasonable (Minn. App. 2010) 62 PEL 252

City's extraterritorial enforcement of nuisance laws and warrantless inspection of property do not violate due process (U.S. App., 8th Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 285

Temporary restraining order prohibiting construction, excavation, and deposit of materials is not ambiguous (N.Y. App. 2010) 62 PEL 291

Enforcement of zoning is discretionary, not subject to mandamus (Conn. App. 2010) 62 PEL 371

Amendment to Critical Area Act, requiring mitigation and abatement of violations prior to receipt of a variance, is intended to apply prospectively (Md. App. 2010) 62 PEL 372

Official's order that temporary asphalt driveway be removed does not violate due process rights of owners (U.S. App., 6th Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 404

ENVIRONMENT

States and land trusts may pursue federal common-law public nuisance claims against fossil-fuel electric power plants based on their contributions to global warming (U.S. App., 2nd Cir. 2009) 62 PEL 14

San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District's air pollution control rules and fees are valid (Cal. App. 2009) 62 PEL 24

Environmental group is not entitled to mandamus to require promulgation of a rule regulating carbon dioxide emissions (Mich. App. 2010) 62 PEL 174

Wildlife plan that fails to identify whether off-site mitigation would be restoration of public land or funding of mitigation elsewhere does not comply with ordinance requiring "no net loss" (Or. App. 2010) 62 PEL 175

Resource Management Plan Amendment for Tongass National Forest adequately addresses market demand for timber (U.S. Dist., D.C. 2010) 62 PEL 177

Tree protection ordinance applies to parcel larger than 10 acres, regardless of whether owner has submitted a development plan (Mich. App. 2010) 62 PEL 213

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service designation of more than 850,000 acres as critical habitat for vernal pool species is upheld (U.S. App., 9th Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 401

Department of Ecology has authority to order compliance and impose a penalty on unpermitted filling of wetlands (Wash. App. 2010) 62 PEL 402

Federal court remands award of damages to owners around Rocky Flats Nuclear Weapons Plant (U.S. App., 10th Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 407

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENTS

Environmental impact statement for landfill near Joshua Tree National Park is deficient in not considering goals and alternatives beyond those of the developer (U.S. App., 9th Cir. 2009) 62 PEL 56

City took required "hard look" at environmental issues in approving Saratoga Springs indoor recreation facility (N.Y. App. 2009) 62 PEL 57

Determination that conditional use permit will not be renewed is not subject to California Environmental Quality Act review (Cal. 2009) 62 PEL 80

Court may not order certification of environmental impact report based on delays (Cal. App. 2009) 62 PEL 90

Ordinance prohibiting retailers from supplying customers with plastic bags requires preparation of environmental impact report (Cal. App. 2010) 62 PEL 133

Statutory provision that request for California Environmental Quality Act hearing be made within 90 days of filing requires a written request and cannot be waived by stipulation (Cal. App. 2009) 62 PEL 134

Limitation period for challenging certification under Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act runs from issuance of first permit, regardless of notice or publication (Mass. 2010) 62 PEL 135

Approval of municipal services agreement for casino proposed for tribal land adjacent to city is not a "project" requiring review under California Environmental Quality Act (Cal. App. 2010) 62 PEL 176

Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement is required for resort expansion project first approved in 1985 (Haw. 2010) 62 PEL 253

California Environmental Quality Act categorical exemption for "infill" applies only to areas within city limits, not to other urbanized areas (Cal. App. 2010) 62 PEL 329

Strategies for reducing logging in Blanchard Forest without total elimination of harvest do not require preparation of environmental impact statement (Wash. App. 2010) 62 PEL 330

Supplemental environmental impact report to consider impact on climate change is not required where there have been no substantial changes in project and agency's discretion is limited to aesthetics (Cal. App. 2010) 62 PEL 373

Court upholds approval of construction projects for University of California at Berkeley against California Environmental Quality Act and Earthquake Fault Zoning Act challenges (Cal. App. 2010) 62 PEL 410

ESTOPPEL

Denial of permit for 18-dog kennel on half-acre residential lot is supported by substantial evidence (Alaska 2009) 62 PEL 20

Homestead Housing Preservation Act prohibits transfer of large residential building to a for-profit entity for rehabilitation (D.C. App. 2010) 62 PEL 153

EXCLUSIONARY PRACTICE

Denial of variance for telecommunications tower does not violate Telecommunications Act or amount to exclusionary zoning (U.S. Dist. E.D. Pa. 2009) 62 PEL 71

F

FLOODPLAIN ZONING

City is not liable to owners of homes built in floodplain (Neb. 2010) 62 PEL 300

FOREST LANDS

Resource Management Plan Amendment for Tongass National Forest adequately addresses market demand for timber (U.S. Dist., D.C. 2010) 62 PEL 177

G

GASOLINE STATIONS

Owner's failure to build planned gasoline station before rezoning prohibited the use does not constitute a condition peculiar to the property and justify a variance (Ind. App. 2010) 62 PEL 331

GROWTH MANAGEMENT

County's failure to amend its plan to conform to Growth Management Act amendments is subject to challenge, but may not be evaluated by "bright- line rule" (Wash. 2009) 62 PEL 91

Board must address numeric growth objective in general plan, incorporated into master plan, in approving subdivision (Md. 2009) 62 PEL 114

City's immunity for performance of governmental functions does not extend to constitutional or breach of contract claims (Ohio App. 2010) 62 PEL 187

City may not violate obligation under state allocation of regional housing need based on housing cap enacted by initiative (Cal. Sup. Ct. 2010) 62 PEL 214

Growth Management Board may not employ "bright-line rules" concerning density in validating county comprehensive plan (Wash. App. 2010) 62 PEL 374

H

HIGHWAYS AND STREETS

Absent proof of intent to dedicate for public use for at least 20 years, road in existence since 1897 remains private (Ind. App. 2009) 62 PEL 113

Town lacks authority to close road at town line, blocking sole access to subdivision approved by adjoining municipality over town's protests (Conn. 2010) 62 PEL 273

Notice of amendment of plan with vacation of easements under Subdivision Map Act is an adequate alternative to process described in Streets and Highway Code (Cal. App. 2010) 62 PEL 310

Connection of new 1,100-foot dead-end road to existing loop road violates prohibition on dead-end streets longer than 1,200 feet (Conn. App. 2010) 62 PEL 356

Moratorium on work in rights-of-way during road improvement project does not constitute a taking with respect to business relocating as a result of the project (Kan. 2010) 62 PEL 379

HISTORIC PRESERVATION

Denial of approval to develop three contemporary houses on site of historic home is reasonable (Wash. App. 2009) 62 PEL 92

Approval of parking lot on historic grounds is supported by evidence of no feasible, prudent alternatives and that all possible planning has been done to minimize harm (Kan. App. 2010) 62 PEL 136

Historic Preservation Commission must review proposed demolition of property listed in national or state register of historic places, regardless of whether property has been designated by local ordinance (S.D. 2010) 62 PEL 137

Historic preservation ordinance, referring to an "area" rather than structures, is valid (Va. 2010) 62 PEL 332

Whether expansion of gaming resort will "encroach upon, damage, or destroy any historic property" must be determined under ordinance standards (S.D. 2010) 62 PEL 375

Transfer of development rights ordinance, intended to protect historic resources and allowing transfer of rights not possessed by sending site, violates statutory scheme (Idaho 2010) 62 PEL 377

HOME OCCUPATIONS

Automobile transportation business is not accessory to residential use or a customary home occupation (N.Y. 2010) 62 PEL 250

Zoning board does not have authority to waive conditions for special use as a home business in a residential zone (N.Y. App. 2010) 62 PEL 271

Transmission of images of sexual conduct for sale on the Internet constitutes operation of a business (U.S. App., 11th Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 358

HOUSING

Condominium owners may allege Fair Housing Act violations based on association's interpretation of rules with respect to hallway display of religious symbols (U.S. App., 7th Cir. 2009) 62 PEL 45

Developer fails to establish discriminatory impact, in violation of Fair Housing Act, resulting from denial of permit for apartment development (U.S. App., 5th Cir. 2009) 62 PEL 46

Award of density bonus units and variances is supported by substantial evidence that approvals were necessary to allow construction of low-income residential units in mixed use development (Cal. App. 2009) 62 PEL 58

City's findings are inadequate to support extension of interim ordinance restricting development of multifamily housing (Cal. App. 2009) 62 PEL 60

Evidence that owner has people living with her to help pay bills is insufficient to show violation of single-family residence restrictions (N.J. App. 2009) 62 PEL 93

City's denial of permit for single-room-occupancy rentals in community center violates Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (U.S. App., 7th Cir. 2009) 62 PEL 107

Developer must demonstrate compliance with statutory requirements for senior housing to obtain site plan approval (N.H. 2009) 62 PEL 125

Taking of land proposed for affordable housing is in bad faith, and owner is entitled to just compensation and damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Conn. 2010) 62 PEL 173

City may not violate obligation under state allocation of regional housing need based on housing cap enacted by initiative (Cal. Sup. Ct. 2010) 62 PEL 214

Argument that issuance of comprehensive permit will result in "unreasonable overage" of affordable housing rejected because town did not show that concerns about traffic outweighed housing need (Mass. App. 2010) 62 PEL 215

Redevelopment agency's relocation of school district offices to obtain land for affordable housing complies with Community Redevelopment Law (Cal. App. 2010) 62 PEL 265

Challenges to city's agreement to allow temporary homeless encampment in residential area are barred by failure to challenge the agreement under Land Use Petition Act (Wash. App. 2010) 62 PEL 299

Developer, denied approval for multifamily development, does not establish that denial or prohibition on multifamily housing is unconstitutional or violates Fair Housing Act (U.S. App., 6th Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 318

Small city that has identified single-family housing as "needed" is required to review applications under statutory "clear and objective" standards (Or. App. 2010) 62 PEL 376

Zoning board lacks authority to impose certain conditions on comprehensive permit for affordable housing, and conditions are subject to review by state Housing Appeals Committee (Mass. 2010) 62 PEL 411

Approval of planned unit development and concept plan for 743-unit Habitat for Humanity development affirmed (Tenn. App. 2010) 62 PEL 412

I

IMMUNITY

Area planning commission is a political subdivision of Kentucky and has governmental immunity from tort claims (Ky. App. 2010) 62 PEL 131

Lessees do not have standing under the Private Real Property Rights Preservation Act; landowner's claims of tortuous interference with contract against city fall within immunity exception (Tex. App. 2009) 62 PEL 159

City's immunity for performance of governmental functions does not extend to constitutional or breach of contract claims (Ohio App. 2010) 62 PEL 187

State and county are not immune from liability for flooding caused by interference with natural watercourse (Wash. 2010) 62 PEL 413

INCENTIVES

Transfer of development rights ordinance, intended to protect historic resources and allowing transfer of rights not possessed by sending site, violates statutory scheme (Idaho 2010) 62 PEL 377

INITIATIVES AND REFERENDA

Initiative calling for automatic expiration of all land use ordinances is properly rejected as not enforceable (Alaska 2009) 62 PEL 15

Adoption of a new zoning classification is legislative and subject to referendum (Utah 2010) 62 PEL 178

Sale of water utility, pursuant to Municipal Utilities Law, is subject to referendum under the Faulkner Act (N.J. 2010) 62 PEL 254

State Aeronautics Act does not preclude initiative enactment of zoning amendments permitting mixed use development near airport (Cal. App. 2009) 62 PEL 292

INJUNCTIONS

Injunction prohibiting operation of medical marijuana dispensary based on city's refusal to permit the use is valid (Cal. App. 2009) 62 PEL 23

Injunction upheld because church is unlikely to succeed on its RLUIPA "equal terms" challenge (U.S. App., 7th Cir. 2009) 62 PEL 28

Owner's failure to apply for certificate of nonconforming use as required by ordinance precludes challenge to injunction (Ohio App. 2010) 62 PEL 389

Exclusion of churches from commercial district does not violate Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act because secular assembly uses are treated similarly (U.S. App., 7th Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 391

INTERGOVERNMENTAL CONFLICT

County has standing to challenge issuance of radioactive waste permit by Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment if county does not issue permit (Colo. 2009) 62 PEL 16

County's role administering shoreland management regulations does not preclude township administration of state building code in shoreland areas (Minn. App. 2010) 62 PEL 378

INTERGOVERNMENTAL COOPERATION

Town's agreement to cooperate with solid waste district is not an impermissible delegation of police power (Vt. 2009) 62 PEL 59

INTERIM ZONING

Enactment of interim zoning ordinance requires only notice and a hearing, not additional procedures mandated for enactment of permanent zoning (Mont. 2009) 62 PEL 17

City's findings are inadequate to support extension of interim ordinance restricting development of multifamily housing (Cal. App. 2009) 62 PEL 60

Possibility that state agencies would not review proposed mining operation justified interim zoning to allow county to address environmental and traffic issues (Mont. 2009) 62 PEL 61

Moratorium enacted while application for pawnbroker license is pending is valid (Minn. 2010) 62 PEL 436

INVERSE CONDEMNATION

Seller of land denied license for mining has standing to sue for inverse condemnation based on town's actions prior to and after sale (Ala. 2009) 62 PEL 18

Mobile home park rent control ordinance constitutes a regulatory taking on its face (U.S. App., 9th Cir. 2009) 62 PEL 19

Colorado Regulatory Impairment of Property Rights Act does not apply to denial of exemption from uniform drainage fee imposed on broad class of owners (Colo. 2009) 62 PEL 87

Florida's Bert J. Harris, Jr. Private Property Rights Protection Act does not create a cause of action to challenge the adoption of an ordinance of general application (Fla. App. 2009) 62 PEL 94

Approval of development, conditioned on removal of billboard, does not amount to a taking where lease allows property owner to require removal of tenant billboard (Ind. App. 2009) 62 PEL 95

Law prohibiting oceanfront owners from obtaining title to accreted land does not effectuate a taking with respect to future accretions (Haw. App. 2009) 62 PEL 138

Approval of new planned unit developments carved out of existing one does not amount to a taking or spot zoning (Tex. App. 2010) 62 PEL 144

Having obtained preliminary plat approval, developer adequately states constitutional claims against city based on its changes in position and delays (U.S. Dist., D. Or. 2010) 62 PEL 171

Flooding in part of the yard for 15 months does not amount to substantial deprivation of all beneficial use of property (Fla. App. 2010) 62 PEL 179

Trial court properly applies res judicata to reject inverse condemnation claim filed after appeal of variance denial was final (N.H. 2010) 62 PEL 181

Ordinance's definition of "public sidewalk" satisfies due process requirements of fair warning and does not constitute an unlawful taking by regulation (Ga. 2010) 62 PEL 208

Inverse condemnation claim, based on argument that homeless shelter is not a public purpose, is not ripe (U.S. App., 8th Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 216

Rezoning of 4,748-acre Boy Scout camp to classification limited to camps is not arbitrary and does not amount to a taking (Mich. App. 2010) 62 PEL 217

Owner may not revive an inverse condemnation claim subject to a four-year limitations period by pursuing beneficial use determination process 14 years after permit denial (Fla. App. 2010) 62 PEL 255

Inverse condemnation is exclusive remedy available to owners claiming that city assumed control of their land (Ind. App. 2010) 62 PEL 256

Repeated overflow of sewage to creek caused by inadequate pumping station results in physical taking (Ohio 2010) 62 PEL 257

Federal takings claim is barred by state court determination that owners were not entitled to compensation for wrongful wetlands delineation (U.S. App., 9th Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 293

Owners of land subject to airport safety zone restrictions suffer a burden and loss of value not shared by others, and are entitled to compensation for regulatory taking (Minn. App. 2010) 62 PEL 294

Mere enactment of a plan designating private island as a bird rookery does not take all economic use; limitations period begins to run with denial of beneficial use designation (Fla. App. 2010) 62 PEL 333

Restoration of beaches, so that private land no longer touches the water, does not constitute a taking (U.S. 2010) 62 PEL 334

Six-year limitations period applies to physical takings that occurred as a result of dunes restoration, but claim based on work done in 1960s is not barred because government failed to notify owners (N.J. 2010) 62 PEL 335

Remedy of damages for inverse condemnation is not available against municipality that had no condemnation authority with respect to property allegedly taken (Ohio App. 2010) 62 PEL 336

State agencies' actions in discouraging U.S. Army Corps of Engineers from issuing permit for mitigation bank on land planned for reservoir do not constitute a taking (Tex. App. 2010) 62 PEL 337

Tort claims relating to sewer backup are time-barred and do not amount to inverse condemnation because the property retains economic value (Conn. App. 2010) 62 PEL 343

Moratorium on work in rights-of-way during road improvement project does not constitute a taking with respect to business relocating as a result of the project (Kan. 2010) 62 PEL 379

Measure 37 waivers are not contracts and do not evidence contracts (U.S. App., 9th Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 380

State and county are not immune from liability for flooding caused by interference with natural watercourse (Wash. 2010) 62 PEL 413

J

JUDICIAL REVIEW

Denial of permit for 18-dog kennel on half-acre residential lot is supported by substantial evidence (Alaska 2009) 62 PEL 20

Code provision limiting developers to a single extension for obtaining plat approval is reasonable (Idaho 2009) 62 PEL 21

Court lacks authority under Land Use Petition Act to review county commissioners' decision that did not revoke building permit or reinstate stop-work order (Wash. App. 2009) 62 PEL 22

Suit challenging zoning officer's preliminary determination that operation of overnight shelter in church would violate code was not ripe (U.S. Dist., E.D. Pa. 2009) 62 PEL 62

Court has no jurisdiction over appeal filed 32 days after denial, regardless of the fact that 30th day fell on a Saturday (N.H. 2009) 62 PEL 96

Issuance of conditional use permit is a final decision and, under Land Use Petition Act, motion for reconsideration does not toll 21-day period for appeal (Wash. App. 2009) 62 PEL 97

Challenge based on prohibition of off-site billboards is not justiciable because proposed billboards would not have met size requirements, which were not challenged (U.S. Dist., D.N.J. 2009) 62 PEL 155

Trial court is within its discretion to reject proposal to create cranberry bog as restoration of wetlands destroyed by unpermitted activities (Conn. App. 2010) 62 PEL 167

Trial court lacks jurisdiction to award damages for breach of settlement agreement between Department of Environmental Management and landfill permit applicant (Ind. App. 2010) 62 PEL 180

Trial court properly applies res judicata to reject inverse condemnation claim filed after appeal of variance denial was final (N.H. 2010) 62 PEL 181

After finding improper ex parte communications and bias in hearings, the trial court should have remanded to the Coastal Resources Management Council (R.I. 2010) 62 PEL 182

Trial court lacks jurisdiction to reconsider final order affirming denial of variances (Ohio App. 2010) 62 PEL 218

Court lacks authority to approve settlement agreement with respect to land not affected by the decision under appeal (Pa. App. 2010) 62 PEL 219

Minutes of board meeting may not be challenged by extrinsic evidence (U.S. App., 5th Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 228

Denial of application for amendment of site development plan is administrative in nature (Ohio App. 2010) 62 PEL 229

Conclusory statement that developer's substantive rights were prejudiced is inadequate basis to appeal denial of planned unit development approval (Idaho 2010) 62 PEL 295

Application for approval of additional commercial parking in residential zone is barred by res judicata (Md. App. 2010) 62 PEL 296

Challenge alleging that adoption of zoning ordinance was void ab initio fails for lack of evidence that amendment on the night of adoption was substantial (Pa. App. 2010) 62 PEL 297

Appeals court lacks jurisdiction to review trial court's vacation of consent decree, dissolving an injunction in a case alleging unconstitutional zoning (U.S. App., 9th Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 298

Challenges to city's agreement to allow temporary homeless encampment in residential area are barred by failure to challenge the agreement under Land Use Petition Act (Wash. App. 2010) 62 PEL 299

Six-year limitations period applies to physical takings that occurred as a result of dunes restoration, but claim based on work done in 1960s is not barred because government failed to notify owners (N.J. 2010) 62 PEL 335

Challenge to final environmental impact statement is not ripe before any permits have issued (N.Y. App. 2010) 62 PEL 338

Entry of judgment of compensation under Measure 37 does not give county the option of waiving regulations that reduced value (Or. 2010) 62 PEL 339

Pending Measure 37 claim became moot at effective date of Measure 49 (Or. App. 2010) 62 PEL 340

Allegations of tainted testimony before the board are insufficient to justify exception to exhaustion of administrative remedies requirement and allow collateral attack on zoning decisions (Conn. App. 2010) 62 PEL 381

Previous state court challenges to county's efforts to ban vacation rentals do not involve current ordinance and do not exhaust remedies as required for federal takings claims (U.S. App., 11th Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 382

Ordinance providing that developer would build pump station and could recoup costs from future developments creates duties subject to mandamus action (Ga. 2010) 62 PEL 383

Neighbors have private right of action to enforce statute concerning special permits in agricultural districts (Haw. 2010) 62 PEL 384

Trial court, noting a question concerning validity of ordinance, may not order approval under that ordinance (N.J. App. 2010) 62 PEL 385

Michigan rejects rule that zoning is unreasonable if there are natural resources on the property and "no very serious consequences" would result from extraction (Mich. 2010) 62 PEL 387

Proper remedy for failure to make appropriate findings in imposing recreation fee is remand to planning board (N.Y. App. 2010) 62 PEL 414

Claims relating to wall-wrap sign are barred by res judicata (Pa. App. 2010) 62 PEL 415

JUNKYARDS

Rule limiting used car dealers' outdoor storage of vehicles to industrial districts does not constitute zoning (D.C. App. 2010) 62 PEL 416

Rezoning from agricultural to industrial classification for junkyard use is not arbitrary and does not constitute spot zoning (Miss. 2010) 62 PEL 425

JURISDICTION

Owner's application for coastal area plan approval does not vest commission with jurisdiction it would not have had based on property location (Conn. App. 2009) 62 PEL 63

Shorelines Hearings Board lacks jurisdiction to consider individual permit decision based on county's critical area ordinance (Wash. App. 2009) 62 PEL 64

Municipal court lacks jurisdiction over matter relating to statewide permitting of billboards (Ohio App. 2009) 62 PEL 98

Decisions by U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and Florida Department of Environmental Protection not to exercise jurisdiction over isolated wetlands does not exempt development from county regulations (Fla. App. 2009) 62 PEL 126

Trial court does not have jurisdiction to review city council's legislative approval of overlay zone (Ohio App. 2010) 62 PEL 183

Court lacks jurisdiction to review Texas Commission on Environmental Quality order releasing area from water corporation certificate of convenience and necessity (Tex. App. 2010) 62 PEL 184

10th Circuit rejects U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's definition of "Indian lands" for purposes of Safe Drinking Water Act permitting (U.S. App., 10th Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 341

Trial court lacks jurisdiction over claims of intentional nuisance in connection with farming operations (N.J. App. 2010) 62 PEL 359

Trial court, noting a question concerning validity of ordinance, may not order approval under that ordinance (N.J. App. 2010) 62 PEL 385

Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Commission does not exceed its jurisdiction in considering the impact of activities more than 100 feet upland on wetlands or watercourses (Conn. App. 2010) 62 PEL 386

K

L

LANDFILLS

State authority over landfill permits does not preempt county's authority to amend zoning with respect to land for which permit is pending (Md. App. 2010) 62 PEL 227

Operation of construction and demolition landfill on three acres of 50-acre parcel establishes vested right with respect to entire parcel (N.Y. App. 2010) 62 PEL 342

LOT REGULATION

Adjoining owner overcame presumption that 1947 plat was correct and is not barred from suit to require removal of improvements made to disputed land in 1996 (Miss. App. 2010) 62 PEL 258

M

MINING

Possibility that state agencies would not review proposed mining operation justified interim zoning to allow county to address environmental and traffic issues (Mont. 2009) 62 PEL 61

Testimony by objectors is sufficient to support denial of special exception for expansion of quarry (Pa. App. 2009) 62 PEL 99

Company has a vested right to mine based on substantial expenditures and obtaining a state permit prior to enactment of zoning ordinance (N.Y. App. 2010) 62 PEL 185

Creation of slope within setback of sandpit constitutes prohibited excavation (N.H. 2010) 62 PEL 220

Request for variance from prohibition on active mining within 500 feet of any residential district or structure is a request for use variance (Wis. App. 2010) 62 PEL 221

Michigan rejects rule that zoning is unreasonable if there are natural resources on the property and "no very serious consequences" would result from extraction (Mich. 2010) 62 PEL 387

MOBILE/MANUFACTURED HOMES

Mobile home park rent control ordinance constitutes a regulatory taking on its face (U.S. App., 9th Cir. 2009) 62 PEL 19

Ordinance requiring mobile home park closure permit and relocation assistance is valid although state law regulates same issues (Or. App. 2010) 62 PEL 222

MUNICIPAL LIABILITY

Sign company has no property right in nonconforming signs on leased sites after lease is validly terminated (Neb. 2009) 62 PEL 32

Finding that a new house would be almost on the footprint of an existing nonconforming house is insufficient to support variances for the new house (Conn. App. 2009) 62 PEL 37

Purchaser of city property established issues of fact with respect to misrepresentation by city concerning zoning (Tex. App. 2009) 62 PEL 100

Flooding in part of the yard for 15 months does not amount to substantial deprivation of all beneficial use of property (Fla. App. 2010) 62 PEL 179

City may have breached a ministerial duty in failing to assure that sewer lines, in existence when annexed, met requirements for municipal system (Miss. App. 2010) 62 PEL 186

City's immunity for performance of governmental functions does not extend to constitutional or breach of contract claims (Ohio App. 2010) 62 PEL 187

County subdivision coordinator's mistake in telling developer's broker that zoning permitted manufactured housing subdivision is not actionable (S.C. 2010) 62 PEL 223

City is not liable to owners of homes built in floodplain (Neb. 2010) 62 PEL 300

Tort claims relating to sewer backup are time-barred and do not amount to inverse condemnation because the property retains economic value (Conn. App. 2010) 62 PEL 343

Mistaken issuance of building permit for a duplex is a discretionary function, for which city is not liable (Minn. App. 2010) 62 PEL 417

Inadequate sidewalks, curbs, and parking lots are not a "service, program, or activity" covered by the Americans with Disabilities Act, but may effectively deny access to covered services (U.S. App., 5th Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 418

N

NONCONFORMING USES

Statute requires proof of intent to abandon apartment building, vacant for several years, not merely physical abandonment (N.J. App. 2009) 62 PEL 65

City's denial of permit for single-room-occupancy rentals in community center violates Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (U.S. App., 7th Cir. 2009) 62 PEL 107

Agricultural buildings are allowed on lot where agriculture is permitted; the presence of a residence on the lot does not require that the buildings qualify as residential accessory uses (Mich. App. 2009) 62 PEL 118

Ordinance allowing issuance of certificate of nonconformance without notice is valid because it allows objectors to appeal within 30 days of obtaining knowledge (Pa. App. 2010) 62 PEL 122

Multifamily dwelling is not a nonconforming "use" in a multifamily district although it does not conform to setback and floor area requirements (La. App. 2010) 62 PEL 139

Neighbors may seek declaration that property damaged by Hurricane Katrina lost nonconforming use status (La. App. 2010) 62 PEL 140

Agreement concerning nonconforming junkyard use, based on ordinance later declared to be invalid, is not invalid for mutual mistake (Wyo. 2010) 62 PEL 141

Company has a vested right to mine based on substantial expenditures and obtaining a state permit prior to enactment of zoning ordinance (N.Y. App. 2010) 62 PEL 185

Building permit issued in error before law prohibited billboards does not create a vested right for company to relocate lawful nonconforming billboard (N.C. App. 2010) 62 PEL 192

Board does not exceed its authority in allowing substitution of nonconforming restaurant with drive-through for nonconforming bank with drive-through (Ohio App. 2010) 62 PEL 224

Statute protecting lawful uses from changes in zoning does not exempt existing billboard from redevelopment plan prohibiting billboards (Court of Appeals of Tennessee 2010) 62 PEL 225

Neighbor who initiated untimely appeal of nonconforming use status is entitled to anti-SLAPP immunity based on his subjective motive (R.I. 2010) 62 PEL 247

Acquisition of lots, with knowledge of nonconformity with respect to requirement of 23,800 square feet of contiguous dry area, does not preclude variance (Mass. App. 2010) 62 PEL 259

Attempt to combine partially nonconforming convenience store and separate nonconforming gas station, and to expand onto third property, does not constitute expansion of nonconforming use (N.J. App. 2010) 62 PEL 260

Zoning board of appeals has jurisdiction to determine whether redesigned plans conform to stipulated judgment (Conn. 2010) 62 PEL 282

Renovations to nonconforming parking lot do not amount to reconstruction (Wis. App. 2010) 62 PEL 344

Parking deck is not an accessory "use" but a structure requiring amendment of hotel's conditional use permit (N.C. App. 2010) 62 PEL 388

Owner's failure to apply for certificate of nonconforming use as required by ordinance precludes challenge to injunction (Ohio App. 2010) 62 PEL 389

Lot does not lose nonconforming use protection as a result of variance that decreased nonconformity (Mass. App. 2010) 62 PEL 419

Private shooting range, not specifically prohibited by ordinance when the land was annexed, is a nonconforming use (N.C. App. 2010) 62 PEL 420

Alleged agreement to swap nonconforming signs for permit for LED sign does not entitle company to variances (Pa. App. 2010) 62 PEL 431

NOTICES

Enactment of interim zoning ordinance requires only notice and a hearing, not additional procedures mandated for enactment of permanent zoning (Mont. 2009) 62 PEL 17

Published notice of hearings on rezoning, in compliance with statute, is insufficient to satisfy due process requirements (Ill. 2009) 62 PEL 101

Town violates Freedom of Information Act in calling "emergency" meeting, without public notice, to discuss employee issue (Conn. 2010) 62 PEL 142

Notice of amendment of plan with vacation of easements under Subdivision Map Act is an adequate alternative to process described in Streets and Highway Code (Cal. App. 2010) 62 PEL 310

Failure to comply with statutory notice requirements on second attempt at annexation is inadvertent and not a basis for invalidating annexation (Colo. App. 2010) 62 PEL 317

Adjoining owners, who did not participate in hearing on antenna permit and did not raise issue of improper notice as required by court rule, lack standing to challenge permit (Vt. 2010) 62 PEL 394

NUISANCES

States and land trusts may pursue federal common-law public nuisance claims against fossil-fuel electric power plants based on their contributions to global warming (U.S. App., 2nd Cir. 2009) 62 PEL 14

Denial of permit for 18-dog kennel on half-acre residential lot is supported by substantial evidence (Alaska 2009) 62 PEL 20

Injunction prohibiting operation of medical marijuana dispensary based on city's refusal to permit the use is valid (Cal. App. 2009) 62 PEL 23

Nuisance law, aimed at unruly student gatherings, is constitutional (U.S. Dist., D.R.I. 2010) 62 PEL 143

Owner whose pond was damaged by neighbor's reckless disregard when implementing erosion controls is not entitled to punitive damages (Vt. 2010) 62 PEL 261

Trial court lacks jurisdiction over claims of intentional nuisance in connection with farming operations (N.J. App. 2010) 62 PEL 359

Federal court remands award of damages to owners around Rocky Flats Nuclear Weapons Plant (U.S. App., 10th Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 407

O

OPEN SPACE

Owner is entitled to disconnect from village, but open space covenant imposed in exchange for special zoning remains valid (Ill. App. 2009) 62 PEL 44

Unambiguous density ordinance requires no interpretation (Ala. App. 2009) 62 PEL 77

P

PARKING

Board errs in considering detrimental effects of methadone clinic in denying a special exception to allow parking on adjacent lots (Pa. App. 2009) 62 PEL 66

Objector cannot attack reduction in parking as part of conditional use approval in subsequent proceedings concerning tax increment financing (N.D. 2010) 62 PEL 121

Approval of parking lot on historic grounds is supported by evidence of no feasible, prudent alternatives and that all possible planning has been done to minimize harm (Kan. App. 2010) 62 PEL 136

In changing its position about whether off-site parking would be adequate, city may have breached agreement to work reasonably with owner who built without permits (Tex. App. 2010) 62 PEL 226

Application for approval of additional commercial parking in residential zone is barred by res judicata (Md. App. 2010) 62 PEL 296

Variance from landscaping requirement, necessary to allow parking required for conversion to minimart, was not arbitrary (La. App. 2010) 62 PEL 314

Renovations to nonconforming parking lot do not amount to reconstruction (Wis. App. 2010) 62 PEL 344

Parking deck is not an accessory "use" but a structure requiring amendment of hotel's conditional use permit (N.C. App. 2010) 62 PEL 388

Ban on street parking of trucks does not violate constitutional rights of pickup truck owner wanting to park in front of his home (Fla. App. 2010) 62 PEL 421

Bulk variances and exceptions to parking standards to allow expansion of existing Wal-Mart are within board's authority (N.J. App. 2010) 62 PEL 435

PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT

Planned unit development designation may not be used to increase density in agricultural preservation area (S.C. 2009) 62 PEL 102

Fire protection district is not required to seek approval for planned unit development (PUD) amendment before constructing a fire station within the PUD boundaries (Colo. 2009) 62 PEL 111

Approval of new planned unit developments carved out of existing one does not amount to a taking or spot zoning (Tex. App. 2010) 62 PEL 144

Conclusory statement that developer's substantive rights were prejudiced is inadequate basis to appeal denial of planned unit development approval (Idaho 2010) 62 PEL 295

Neighboring owners, participants in hearing on planned unit development amendment, are not entitled to cross-examine developer's witnesses (Fla. App. 2010) 62 PEL 365

Interpretation of planned unit development standards to prohibit proposed Wal-Mart constitutes amendment without notice and hearing, violating constitutional rights of developer (U.S. App., 6th Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 366

Approval of planned unit development and concept plan for 743-unit Habitat for Humanity development affirmed (Tenn. App. 2010) 62 PEL 412

PLANNING

County's failure to amend its plan to conform to Growth Management Act amendments is subject to challenge, but may not be evaluated by "bright- line rule" (Wash. 2009) 62 PEL 91

Board must address numeric growth objective in general plan, incorporated into master plan, in approving subdivision (Md. 2009) 62 PEL 114

PLANNING COMMISSIONS

Planning board lacks authority to approve shopping center use not permitted in residential district (N.J. App. 2009) 62 PEL 103

Planning commission does not wrongfully reject zoning administrator's opinion that proposed consolidation of lots complied with ordinance (Va. 2010) 62 PEL 348

POLLUTION

San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District's air pollution control rules and fees are valid (Cal. App. 2009) 62 PEL 24

PREEMPTION

Injunction prohibiting operation of medical marijuana dispensary based on city's refusal to permit the use is valid (Cal. App. 2009) 62 PEL 23

Federal Land Policy Management Act does not preempt local minimum lot size requirement (U.S. App., 10th Cir. 2009) 62 PEL 25

Ordinance prohibiting commercial wind farms throughout county, while allowing small wind energy operations, is valid (Kan. 2009) 62 PEL 55

Testimony by objectors is sufficient to support denial of special exception for expansion of quarry (Pa. App. 2009) 62 PEL 99

City may not impose franchise fee on natural gas pipeline serving an electrical power plant (Minn. App. 2010) 62 PEL 151

Town's stream buffer requirements are not preempted by less stringent state law (N.C. App. 2010) 62 PEL 205

City may not violate obligation under state allocation of regional housing need based on housing cap enacted by initiative (Cal. Sup. Ct. 2010) 62 PEL 214

Ordinance requiring mobile home park closure permit and relocation assistance is valid although state law regulates same issues (Or. App. 2010) 62 PEL 222

State authority over landfill permits does not preempt county's authority to amend zoning with respect to land for which permit is pending (Md. App. 2010) 62 PEL 227

Federal Pipeline Safety Act does not preempt local setback requirements for natural gas facilities (U.S. App., 5th Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 301

Interstate Commerce Commission Termination Act preempts municipal regulation of operation involving transfer of ethanol from rail cars to trucks and transportation over city streets (U.S. App., 4th Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 345

Town lacks authority to deny building permit for pier approved by Department of Natural Resources (Wis. App. 2010) 62 PEL 346

Ordinance granting preference to providers using certain technology is preempted by federal law (U.S. App., 2nd Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 396

City may not argue federal preemption of Compassionate Use Act and Medical Marijuana Program Act as justification of ordinance prohibiting medical marijuana dispensaries (Cal. App. 2010) 62 PEL 422

Town lacks authority to create Accessory Apartment Bureau to review determinations of hearing officer (N.Y. App. 2010) 62 PEL 423

PROCEDURE, ADMINISTRATIVE

Injunction prohibiting operation of medical marijuana dispensary based on city's refusal to permit the use is valid (Cal. App. 2009) 62 PEL 23

Open Meetings Act is not violated by informal meeting of commissioners to discuss court ruling without taking action (Ga. App. 2009) 62 PEL 26

Approval of Act 250 permit for retirement community on Middlebury College property was supported by substantial evidence (Vt. 2009) 62 PEL 27

Land Use Board of Appeals errs in rejecting city's plausible interpretation of its code as not requiring traffic impact assessment for approval of WalMart (Or. App. 2009) 62 PEL 67

Opponent has right to cross-examine witnesses before board of appeals (Md. App. 2009) 62 PEL 104

Appeal from historic preservation board's denial of permits is subject to Public Meetings Act, but decision made at a public meeting, following closed deliberations, is not void (Wyo. 2010) 62 PEL 145

District council acted illegally in first assuming jurisdiction over special exception application, then withdrawing its decision without holding a hearing (Md. App. 2010) 62 PEL 188

Minutes of meeting are adequate "writing" to justify denial of conditional use permit for telecommunications tower (U.S. App., 7th Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 194

Department of Natural Resources does not have authority to refuse to certify bluff setback variance (Minn. 2010) 62 PEL 195

City traffic engineer lacks authority to waive setback requirement for triplex dwelling on a street that does not meet width requirement (Or. App. 2010) 62 PEL 196

State engineer may not use 2003 statutory amendment as a basis for delaying action on water appropriation applications filed in 1989 (Nev. 2010) 62 PEL 198

Minutes of board meeting may not be challenged by extrinsic evidence (U.S. App., 5th Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 228

Denial of application for amendment of site development plan is administrative in nature (Ohio App. 2010) 62 PEL 229

Bids for long-term lease of dormitory building are subject to public bidding statute (Mass. 2010) 62 PEL 302

Requirement that zoning commission give wetland commission's report "due consideration" before deciding on site plan application does not make the decisions interdependent (Conn. App. 2010) 62 PEL 347

Planning commission does not wrongfully reject zoning administrator's opinion that proposed consolidation of lots complied with ordinance (Va. 2010) 62 PEL 348

Whether expansion of gaming resort will "encroach upon, damage, or destroy any historic property" must be determined under ordinance standards (S.D. 2010) 62 PEL 375

Rescission of constructive approval requires sound reasons (Mass. App. 2010) 62 PEL 390

PROCEDURE, JUDICIAL

No error in certifying class of all who paid allegedly excessive building permit fee (Conn. 2010) 62 PEL 146

In accepting copy of zoning ordinance, where original was lost for many years, court does not enact or amend legislation (Ga. 2010) 62 PEL 147

Litigant is entitled to notice and hearing prior to court's order prohibiting acceptance of his pleadings absent leave of court (Md. App. 2010) 62 PEL 148

Trial court is required to determine whether subpoena requesting billboard company to provide specific lease details is reasonable (Tenn. App. 2009) 62 PEL 149

After finding improper ex parte communications and bias in hearings, the trial court should have remanded to the Coastal Resources Management Council (R.I. 2010) 62 PEL 182

Inverse condemnation claim, based on argument that homeless shelter is not a public purpose, is not ripe (U.S. App., 8th Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 216

Materials prepared in reasonable anticipation of litigation, before commencement of litigation, are not public records and are protected from disclosure (N.C. App. 2010) 62 PEL 230

City council members and planning commissioners may not be deposed in challenge to zoning amendments (U.S. Dist., W.D. Wash. 2010) 62 PEL 262

Federal takings claim is barred by state court determination that owners were not entitled to compensation for wrongful wetlands delineation (U.S. App., 9th Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 293

PROCEDURE, LEGISLATIVE

Enactment of interim zoning ordinance requires only notice and a hearing, not additional procedures mandated for enactment of permanent zoning (Mont. 2009) 62 PEL 17

Statute authorizing creation of self-help business improvement districts is valid (Ala. 2009) 62 PEL 49

County lacks statutory authority to enact adequate public facilities ordinance for schools (N.C. App. 2009) 62 PEL 50

Although e-mails discussing historic overlay ordinance violate Open Meetings Act, enactment is not void because there was new and substantial deliberation at public meeting (Tenn. App. 2009) 62 PEL 105

Filing photocopy of resolution of extension is effective because county had notice of that filing and of town's disapproval of rezoning within statutory time limit (Wis. App. 2010) 62 PEL 150

In avoiding public participation while visiting proposed subdivision site, board of county commissioners violates open meetings law, but violation does not prejudice substantial rights (Idaho 2010) 62 PEL 263

PUBLIC LAND

Landlocked owners established prescriptive easement over state land, but are not entitled to place wooden pallets in wetlands without permit (Mich. App. 2010) 62 PEL 264

PUBLIC UTILITIES

Board of Public Utilities lacks authority to base decisions concerning extension of services on whether area is designated for "smart growth" (N.J. App. 2009) 62 PEL 106

City may not impose franchise fee on natural gas pipeline serving an electrical power plant (Minn. App. 2010) 62 PEL 151

Owner sufficiently alleges certain claims with respect to delay of conditional use permit for a radio tower (U.S. Dist., S.D. Ohio 2010) 62 PEL 242

Sale of water utility, pursuant to Municipal Utilities Law, is subject to referendum under the Faulkner Act (N.J. 2010) 62 PEL 254

Practice of billing only those with city water meters for stormwater management utility charges may violate equal protection rights (Ariz. App. 2010) 62 PEL 405

R

RECREATION

Indoor shooting range qualifies as a "recreation facility," a conditional use in rural agricultural district, and may have accessory uses including retail sales and classrooms (Pa. App. 2009) 62 PEL 48

Overlay district permitting recreational trail through orchard is not a rezoning subject to review by Growth Management Hearings Board and is not inconsistent with protection of agriculture (Wash. App. 2009) 62 PEL 79

REDEVELOPMENT

Redevelopment design guidelines need not comply with statutory notice and procedural requirements for zoning (Cal. App. 2009) 62 PEL 152

Homestead Housing Preservation Act prohibits transfer of large residential building to a for-profit entity for rehabilitation (D.C. App. 2010) 62 PEL 153

Redevelopment agency's relocation of school district offices to obtain land for affordable housing complies with Community Redevelopment Law (Cal. App. 2010) 62 PEL 265

Land disposition agreement is not subject to competitive bidding, and city's use of a nonprofit corporation to evaluate and negotiate proposals is not unlawful delegation (Md. App. 2010) 62 PEL 266

Declaration of blight, based on statutory factors, does not withstand scrutiny under New Jersey Constitution absent finding that conditions contribute to problems outside the area (N.J. App. 2010) 62 PEL 267

Amendment of redevelopment plan to allow high-rise development where plan originally intended to provide artists with affordable live/work space is not arbitrary (N.J. App. 2010) 62 PEL 303

New York's highest court upholds findings in support of condemnation for expansion of Columbia University in West Harlem (N.Y. App. 2010) 62 PEL 349

RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS

Injunction upheld because church is unlikely to succeed on its RLUIPA "equal terms" challenge (U.S. App., 7th Cir. 2009) 62 PEL 28

Religious order is not entitled to operate temporary housing facility for convicts in single-family residential district (N.Y. App. 2009) 62 PEL 29

Suit challenging zoning officer's preliminary determination that operation of overnight shelter in church would violate code was not ripe (U.S. Dist., E.D. Pa. 2009) 62 PEL 62

City's denial of permit for single-room-occupancy rentals in community center violates Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (U.S. App., 7th Cir. 2009) 62 PEL 107

Failure to use site plan approval process, available to religious institutions as an alternative to special use permit process, does not discriminate against church seeking approval for expansion (Ill. App. 2009) 62 PEL 154

Evidence of antichurch animus, supporting award of $3,714,622 under Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, is "very strong" (U.S. App., 4th Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 189

Church is entitled to damages, based on ordinance violation of RLUIPA preventing its use of property as a church (U.S. Dist., N.J. 2010) 62 PEL 268

Decision to hold public school graduation at church, despite availability of comparable public facilities, constitutes impermissible endorsement of religion (U.S. Dist., D. Conn. 2010) 62 PEL 287

County's treatment of existing church's application for special permit to expand is not neutral and violates Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (U.S. App., 10th Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 304

Denial of variance for religious primary school in district permitting preschools does not violate equal protection (Mich. 2010) 62 PEL 321

Ordinance requiring permit for large group feeding events is constitutional (U.S. App., 11th Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 368

Exclusion of churches from commercial district does not violate Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act because secular assembly uses are treated similarly (U.S. App., 7th Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 391

Denial of approval for church, permitted in the district, violates Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (U.S. Dist., S.D.N.Y. 2010) 62 PEL 424

RENT CONTROL

Landlord is not entitled to attorney fees as prevailing party in rent control litigation against city (Cal. App. 2010) 62 PEL 166

Contract waiver of right to withdraw units from rental market, as part of settlement of tax claim, is unenforceable under Ellis Act (Cal. App. 2010) 62 PEL 350

REZONING

Open Meetings Act is not violated by informal meeting of commissioners to discuss court ruling without taking action (Ga. App. 2009) 62 PEL 26

Consistency with comprehensive plan designation for future residential use does not entitle developer to rezoning of agricultural land (Iowa App. 2009) 62 PEL 30

Neighboring owners have standing to challenge rezoning (N.C. App. 2009) 62 PEL 33

Overlay district permitting recreational trail through orchard is not a rezoning subject to review by Growth Management Hearings Board and is not inconsistent with protection of agriculture (Wash. App. 2009) 62 PEL 79

Published notice of hearings on rezoning, in compliance with statute, is insufficient to satisfy due process requirements (Ill. 2009) 62 PEL 101

Denial of rezoning is a legislative act and not arbitrary when based on safety concerns (Ark. 2009) 62 PEL 108

Denial of rezoning from single-family to high-density classification is not arbitrary (Miss. App. 2009) 62 PEL 109

Filing photocopy of resolution of extension is effective because county had notice of that filing and of town's disapproval of rezoning within statutory time limit (Wis. App. 2010) 62 PEL 150

Auto salvage shop owner fails to establish equal protection violations in city's enforcement actions (U.S. App., 7th Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 169

Refusal to rezone residential property to limited commercial classification indicated on comprehensive plan is not arbitrary (Mo. App. 2010) 62 PEL 190

Owner who fails to file adequate foundation plans before publication of notice of zoning change does not have a vested right (Mass. App. 2010) 62 PEL 197

Home rule city's failure to comply with its own regulations is not sufficient to invalidate the legislative act of rezoning (Ill. App. 2010) 62 PEL 231

Developer, who filed a challenge to ordinance after it had been invalidated in another challenge but before township had reasonable time to amend, is not entitled to automatic relief (Pa. App. 2010) 62 PEL 232

Rezoning from agricultural to planned development classification, changing only minimum lot size, violates enabling statute requirements for planned development (S.C. 2010) 62 PEL 233

Neighboring owners fail to show pecuniary injury sufficient to establish standing to challenge rezoning of recycling business (Ind. App. 2010) 62 PEL 308

Owner's failure to build planned gasoline station before rezoning prohibited the use does not constitute a condition peculiar to the property and justify a variance (Ind. App. 2010) 62 PEL 331

Failure to state reasons for denial of rezoning does not result in automatic approval (Minn. 2010) 62 PEL 363

Development of multifamily uses, on land zoned for single-family use, does not constitute a change in neighborhood character supporting rezoning (Miss. App. 2010) 62 PEL 392

Rezoning from agricultural to industrial classification for junkyard use is not arbitrary and does not constitute spot zoning (Miss. 2010) 62 PEL 425

Inconsistency with comprehensive plan is inadequate basis for challenge to zoning classification (Pa. App. 2010) 62 PEL 426

Growth Management Hearings Board has jurisdiction to review rezoning involving amendment of comprehensive plan and find it inconsistent with county planning policies, in violation of Growth Management Act (Wash. App. 2010) 62 PEL 427

Rezoning from "office" to "office retail" is a change in underlying use and inconsistent with the plan, which contemplates low intensity in office district (Wash. App. 2010) 62 PEL 428

S

SIGNS AND BILLBOARDS

Entire area may be considered "predominantly used for residential purposes" and not qualified for billboard placement, based on presence of residential uses (Ark. 2009) 62 PEL 31

Sign company has no property right in nonconforming signs on leased sites after lease is validly terminated (Neb. 2009) 62 PEL 32

Ordinance requiring abatement of off-premise commercial signs and not regulating noncommercial speech is valid (U.S. App., 5th Cir. 2009) 62 PEL 68

Approval of development, conditioned on removal of billboard, does not amount to a taking where lease allows property owner to require removal of tenant billboard (Ind. App. 2009) 62 PEL 95

Municipal court lacks jurisdiction over matter relating to statewide permitting of billboards (Ohio App. 2009) 62 PEL 98

Sign ordinance with exemption for temporary directional signs relating to a qualifying event is a content-neutral, narrowly tailored regulation that leaves open ample alternatives for communication (U.S. App., 9th Cir. 2009) 62 PEL 110

Challenge based on prohibition of off-site billboards is not justiciable because proposed billboards would not have met size requirements, which were not challenged (U.S. Dist., D.N.J. 2009) 62 PEL 155

City's ordinance and enforcement are constitutional even if underinclusive to serve goals relating to aesthetics and traffic safety (U.S. App., 2nd Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 191

Building permit issued in error before law prohibited billboards does not create a vested right for company to relocate lawful nonconforming billboard (N.C. App. 2010) 62 PEL 192

Statute protecting lawful uses from changes in zoning does not exempt existing billboard from redevelopment plan prohibiting billboards (Tenn. App. 2010) 62 PEL 225

Setback between sign and "park" is properly measured to the curb, not to right-of-way setback within park (Mo. App. 2010) 62 PEL 234

Authority to impose special assessments for "unusual conditions" includes paving roads (Wyo. 2010) 62 PEL 249

Township's enforcement of zoning ordinance against violations visible from two highways, before pursuing less-visible violations, is not unreasonable (Minn. App. 2010) 62 PEL 252

Holding that specific provisions of municipal code and planning code are invalid cannot be read as striking down city's entire scheme of sign regulation (U.S. App., 9th Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 269

Exceptions to bans on certain signs do not undermine city's asserted interests; bans are valid despite exceptions (U.S. App., 9th Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 286

Enactment of exception to billboard moratorium, allowing billboards on public arenas as a conditional use, and immediate approval of permits for city-owned arena, is valid (Md. App. 2010) 62 PEL 305

Failure to disclose intent to construct a digital display sign face renders permit for reconstruction of nonconforming sign invalid (Tenn. App. 2010) 62 PEL 306

Political message mural is a sign and regulations are constitutional (U.S. Dist., E.D. Mo. 2010) 62 PEL 323

Denied a permit based on valid billboard size restrictions, applicant lacks standing to challenge other provisions of sign code (U.S. Dist., N.D. Cal. 2010) 62 PEL 351

Challenges to Cincinnati's ban on bench billboards are rejected for lack of standing (U.S. Dist., S.D. Ohio 2010) 62 PEL 352

Limits on advertising signs in windows do not violate First Amendment (U.S. Dist., S.D. Tex. 2010) 62 PEL 353

Claims relating to wall-wrap sign are barred by res judicata (Pa. App. 2010) 62 PEL 415

Size restriction on temporary signs does not violate First Amendment (U.S. Dist., D. Md. 2010) 62 PEL 429

Ordinance prohibiting billboard extensions is invalid because city council failed to articulate any rational basis for the enactment (U.S. App., 8th Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 430

Alleged agreement to swap nonconforming signs for permit for LED sign does not entitle company to variances (Pa. App. 2010) 62 PEL 431

SITE PLANS

Developer must demonstrate compliance with statutory requirements for senior housing to obtain site plan approval (N.H. 2009) 62 PEL 125

Failure to use site plan approval process, available to religious institutions as an alternative to special use permit process, does not discriminate against church seeking approval for expansion (Ill. App. 2009) 62 PEL 154

Developer is not entitled to the requested density, inconsistent with average lot sizes in area, based on Land Evaluation and Site Assessment score and successful compatibility meeting (W.V. 2010) 62 PEL 244

Requirement that zoning commission give wetland commission's report "due consideration" before deciding on site plan application does not make the decisions interdependent (Conn. App. 2010) 62 PEL 347

SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS

Board errs in considering detrimental effects of methadone clinic in denying a special exception to allow parking on adjacent lots (Pa. App. 2009) 62 PEL 66

Zoning amendment to permit wind energy facility is valid and applicant submitted adequate information for issuance of zoning permit (Pa. App. 2009) 62 PEL 89

Testimony by objectors is sufficient to support denial of special exception for expansion of quarry (Pa. App. 2009) 62 PEL 99

District council acted illegally in first assuming jurisdiction over special exception application, then withdrawing its decision without holding a hearing (Md. App. 2010) 62 PEL 188

Denial of special exception for liquor store in commercial area, based on unsubstantiated fears about traffic and crime, is arbitrary (La. App. 2010) 62 PEL 307

SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICTS

Fire protection district is not required to seek approval for planned unit development (PUD) amendment before constructing a fire station within the PUD boundaries (Colo. 2009) 62 PEL 111

Regardless of whether timing of road upgrade requirement put school district at a disadvantage with respect to its budget, the law unambiguously requires upgrade (Alaska 2010) 62 PEL 270

Irrigation District has authority to enact connection fee and establish reserves, but must calculate fee according to use (Idaho 2010) 62 PEL 354

SPECIAL USE PERMITS

Whether special use ordinance constitutes an impermissible prior restraint on adult uses depends on extent to which it applies to such uses (U.S. Dist., N.D. Ill. 2009) 62 PEL 42

Substantial evidence supports denial of special permit for weekly summer rental of student apartments (N.Y. App. 2010) 62 PEL 156

District council acted illegally in first assuming jurisdiction over special exception application, then withdrawing its decision without holding a hearing (Md. App. 2010) 62 PEL 188

Zoning board does not have authority to waive conditions for special use as a home business in a residential zone (N.Y. App. 2010) 62 PEL 271

Amendment of redevelopment plan to allow high-rise development where plan originally intended to provide artists with affordable live/work space is not arbitrary (N.J. App. 2010) 62 PEL 303

County's treatment of existing church's application for special permit to expand is not neutral and violates Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (U.S. App., 10th Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 304

Denial of special exception for liquor store in commercial area, based on unsubstantiated fears about traffic and crime, is arbitrary (La. App. 2010) 62 PEL 307

SPOT ZONING

Possibility that state agencies would not review proposed mining operation justified interim zoning to allow county to address environmental and traffic issues (Mont. 2009) 62 PEL 61

Approval of new planned unit developments carved out of existing one does not amount to a taking or spot zoning (Tex. App. 2010) 62 PEL 144

Denial of rezoning, based on owner's intended use, constitutes impermissible reverse spot zoning (Fla. App. 2010) 62 PEL 235

Grant of conditional use permit for 13-story building is supported by substantial evidence and does not constitute spot zoning (Miss. 2010) 62 PEL 320

Development of multifamily uses, on land zoned for single-family use, does not constitute a change in neighborhood character supporting rezoning (Miss. App. 2010) 62 PEL 392

Rezoning from agricultural to industrial classification for junkyard use is not arbitrary and does not constitute spot zoning (Miss. 2010) 62 PEL 425

STANDING

Neighbors have standing to challenge annexation based on allegations of reasonably ascertainable future harm (Nev. 2009) 62 PEL 4

States and land trusts may pursue federal common-law public nuisance claims against fossil-fuel electric power plants based on their contributions to global warming (U.S. App., 2nd Cir. 2009) 62 PEL 14

County has standing to challenge issuance of radioactive waste permit by Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment if county does not issue permit (Colo. 2009) 62 PEL 16

Seller of land denied license for mining has standing to sue for inverse condemnation based on town's actions prior to and after sale (Ala. 2009) 62 PEL 18

Code provision limiting developers to a single extension for obtaining plat approval is reasonable (Idaho 2009) 62 PEL 21

Neighboring owners have standing to challenge rezoning (N.C. App. 2009) 62 PEL 33

Association of owners fails to establish standing to challenge approval of land management plan for Tims Ford Reservoir (U.S. App., 6th Cir. 2009) 62 PEL 69

Association lacks standing to challenge denial of its proposed amendment to zoning regulations (Conn. App. 2009) 62 PEL 112

Competitor lacks standing to challenge issuance of permit for quarter horse racing (Fla. App. 2010) 62 PEL 157

Neighbors allege harm to special interests sufficient to establish standing to challenge variance (Tenn. App. 2010) 62 PEL 158

Lessees do not have standing under the Private Real Property Rights Preservation Act; landowner's claims of tortuous interference with contract against city fall within immunity exception (Tex. App. 2009) 62 PEL 159

Approval of 8,000-animal feedlot within one mile of site for which a residential building permit had issued is not arbitrary (N.D. 2010) 62 PEL 163

Company lacks standing to appeal denial of special use permit absent proof that conditional contract to purchase premises remained in effect (Conn. App. 2010) 62 PEL 193

First Amendment does not compel a "government to avoid any public acknowledgment of religion's role in society" (U.S. 2010) 62 PEL 246

County wrongfully denied objecting neighbors' intervention in contested case hearing on conditions of subdivision approval (Wyo. 2010) 62 PEL 272

Neighboring owners fail to show pecuniary injury sufficient to establish standing to challenge rezoning of recycling business (Ind. App. 2010) 62 PEL 308

Citizen group lacks standing to challenge comprehensive plan based on potential general harm (N.Y. App. 2010) 62 PEL 309

Grant of conditional use permit for 13-story building is supported by substantial evidence and does not constitute spot zoning (Miss. 2010) 62 PEL 320

Remedy of damages for inverse condemnation is not available against municipality that had no condemnation authority with respect to property allegedly taken (Ohio App. 2010) 62 PEL 336

Denied a permit based on valid billboard size restrictions, applicant lacks standing to challenge other provisions of sign code (U.S. Dist., N.D. Cal. 2010) 62 PEL 351

Challenges to Cincinnati's ban on bench billboards are rejected for lack of standing (U.S. Dist., S.D. Ohio 2010) 62 PEL 352

Owner has standing to appeal board's denial of contract purchaser's application for variances (N.J. App. 2010) 62 PEL 355

Owners of land in New York State within 100 feet of site approved for church in Connecticut have standing to challenge approvals (Conn. 2010) 62 PEL 393

Adjoining owners, who did not participate in hearing on antenna permit and did not raise issue of improper notice as required by court rule, lack standing to challenge permit (Vt. 2010) 62 PEL 394

Imposing fee for new school facilities as condition of approval is ultra vires (N.C. App. 2010) 62 PEL 408

Proper remedy for failure to make appropriate findings in imposing recreation fee is remand to planning board (N.Y. App. 2010) 62 PEL 414

Association, incorporated after appeal was filed, lacks standing absent proof of particularized interest or participation in administrative proceedings (Me. 2010) 62 PEL 432

Owners of land outside city lack common-law standing to challenge annexation for construction of ethanol plant (Neb. 2010) 62 PEL 433

SUBDIVISION

Federal Land Policy Management Act does not preempt local minimum lot size requirement (U.S. App., 10th Cir. 2009) 62 PEL 25

Denial of partition, based on finding that the division would ultimately result in subdivision, is properly reversed in the absence of evidence to support that finding (Or. App. 2009) 62 PEL 34

Owner who subdivided after town published proposed amendment to minimum lot width is not entitled to variance (N.Y. App. 2009) 62 PEL 39

Finding that character of the land is unsuitable for development is supported by evidence and provides an adequate basis for denial of subdivision that otherwise complies with regulations (Conn. App. 2009) 62 PEL 70

Board must address numeric growth objective in general plan, incorporated into master plan, in approving subdivision (Md. 2009) 62 PEL 114

Condominium developments in areas without relevant zoning regulations are subject to review under Subdivision Act (Mont. 2009) 62 PEL 115

Denial of permits for construction in subdivision based on noncompliance with infrastructure regulations does not amount to unlawful moratorium (Ariz. App. 2009) 62 PEL 116

Developer of land in Compatible Growth Area of the Central Pine Barrens is required to obtain exemption from clearing limitations to subdivide land previously cleared for agriculture (N.Y. App. 2010) 62 PEL 160

Planning board's continuing jurisdiction over conditions of approval does not exempt developer from 30-day appeals period (N.H. 2010) 62 PEL 164

Having obtained preliminary plat approval, developer adequately states constitutional claims against city based on its changes in position and delays (U.S. Dist., D. Or. 2010) 62 PEL 171

County subdivision coordinator's mistake in telling developer's broker that zoning permitted manufactured housing subdivision is not actionable (S.C. 2010) 62 PEL 223

Conveyance of land for road extension, bisecting remaining property, does not result in creation of separate lots because owner did not record new legal description or plat (Va. 2010) 62 PEL 236

County lacks authority to define "subdivision" as referring to residential district, effectively prohibiting permitted one-acre use in agricultural district (Va. 2010) 62 PEL 237

Ordinance without specific standards for rejecting subdivision based on concerns about flooding and slopes is impermissibly vague (Ala. App. 2010) 62 PEL 245

Adjoining owner overcame presumption that 1947 plat was correct and is not barred from suit to require removal of improvements made to disputed land in 1996 (Miss. App. 2010) 62 PEL 258

Subdivision applicant has burden to identify impacts, provide information, and propose mitigation (Mont. 2010) 62 PEL 311

Approval of subdivision with "unusual" lot configuration to use environmentally critical area to meet minimum lot size is not error (Wash. App. 2010) 62 PEL 312

Small city that has identified single-family housing as "needed" is required to review applications under statutory "clear and objective" standards (Or. App. 2010) 62 PEL 376

Owners of land in New York State within 100 feet of site approved for church in Connecticut have standing to challenge approvals (Conn. 2010) 62 PEL 393

Subdivision proposal, otherwise compliant with ordinance, may not be denied based on vague "interconnectivity" requirement or inconsistency with comprehensive plan (Minn. App. 2010) 62 PEL 395

Variance allowing commercial use of barn remains in effect despite subdivision of land because it was not conditioned on size or configuration of site (Mass. App. 2010) 62 PEL 397

T

TELECOMMUNICATIONS

Denial of permits for telecommunications facilities in public rights-of-way, based on aesthetics, does not violate Telecommunications Act (U.S. App., 9th Cir. 2009) 62 PEL 35

Denial of permit for telecommunications tower on small lot does not violate Telecommunications Act (U.S. App., 8th Cir. 2009) 62 PEL 36

Denial of variance for telecommunications tower does not violate Telecommunications Act or amount to exclusionary zoning (U.S. Dist. E.D. Pa. 2009) 62 PEL 71

Minutes of meeting are adequate "writing" to justify denial of conditional use permit for telecommunications tower (U.S. App., 7th Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 194

Owner sufficiently alleges certain claims with respect to delay of conditional use permit for a radio tower (U.S. Dist., S.D. Ohio 2010) 62 PEL 242

Council not authorized to consider impact of emissions in permitting tower and not required to make finding of public need (U.S. Dist., D. Conn. 2010) 62 PEL 274

Variances of about 75 percent from setbacks required for telecommunications towers do not meet statutory standards for hardship (Pa. App. 2010) 62 PEL 313

Adjoining owners, who did not participate in hearing on antenna permit and did not raise issue of improper notice as required by court rule, lack standing to challenge permit (Vt. 2010) 62 PEL 394

Ordinance granting preference to providers using certain technology is preempted by federal law (U.S. App., 2nd Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 396

TRANSPORTATION

Oregon Transportation Planning Rule requires consideration of impacts on transportation prior to zoning amendment (Or. App. 2009) 62 PEL 72

Interstate Commerce Commission Termination Act preempts municipal regulation of operation involving transfer of ethanol from rail cars to trucks and transportation over city streets (U.S. App., 4th Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 345

U

V

VARIANCES

Finding that a new house would be almost on the footprint of an existing nonconforming house is insufficient to support variances for the new house (Conn. App. 2009) 62 PEL 37

Parcel never approved as a buildable lot in 1977 subdivision is not entitled to variance from current bulk requirements (Conn. App. 2009) 62 PEL 38

Owner who subdivided after town published proposed amendment to minimum lot width is not entitled to variance (N.Y. App. 2009) 62 PEL 39

Owner's deception in describing use is not alone a basis for denying variances, but can be considered in weighing statutory factors (N.Y. App. 2009) 62 PEL 40

Award of density bonus units and variances is supported by substantial evidence that approvals were necessary to allow construction of low-income residential units in mixed use development (Cal. App. 2009) 62 PEL 58

Denial of variance for telecommunications tower does not violate Telecommunications Act or amount to exclusionary zoning (U.S. Dist., E.D. Pa. 2009) 62 PEL 71

Neighbors allege harm to special interests sufficient to establish standing to challenge variance (Tenn. App. 2010) 62 PEL 158

Trial court properly applies res judicata to reject inverse condemnation claim filed after appeal of variance denial was final (N.H. 2010) 62 PEL 181

Department of Natural Resources does not have authority to refuse to certify bluff setback variance (Minn. 2010) 62 PEL 195

City traffic engineer lacks authority to waive setback requirement for triplex dwelling on a street that does not meet width requirement (Or. App. 2010) 62 PEL 196

Town's stream buffer requirements are not preempted by less stringent state law (N.C. App. 2010) 62 PEL 205

Trial court lacks jurisdiction to reconsider final order affirming denial of variances (Ohio App. 2010) 62 PEL 218

Request for variance from prohibition on active mining within 500 feet of any residential district or structure is a request for use variance (Wis. App. 2010) 62 PEL 221

Acquisition of lots, with knowledge of nonconformity with respect to requirement of 23,800 square feet of contiguous dry area, does not preclude variance (Mass App. 2010) 62 PEL 259

Board does not err in granting variances for drive-through lanes at retail businesses (Ind. App. 2010) 62 PEL 275

Purchaser of residential property, previously used as furniture store pursuant to a variance, does not have reasonable expectation that use as a motorcycle sales business would be allowed (N.Y. App. 2010) 62 PEL 276

Zoning board of appeals has jurisdiction to determine whether redesigned plans conform to stipulated judgment (Conn. 2010) 62 PEL 282

Federal Pipeline Safety Act does not preempt local setback requirements for natural gas facilities (U.S. App., 5th Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 301

Variances of about 75 percent from setbacks required for telecommunications towers do not meet statutory standards for hardship (Pa. App. 2010) 62 PEL 313

Variance from landscaping requirement, necessary to allow parking required for conversion to minimart, was not arbitrary (La. App. 2010) 62 PEL 314

Because variance is not a legal right, owner is not entitled to a contested case hearing regardless of adversarial nature of proceedings (Wyo. 2010) 62 PEL 315

Grant of conditional use permit for 13-story building is supported by substantial evidence and does not constitute spot zoning (Miss. 2010) 62 PEL 320

Owner's failure to build planned gasoline station before rezoning prohibited the use does not constitute a condition peculiar to the property and justify a variance (Ind. App. 2010) 62 PEL 331

Owner has standing to appeal board's denial of contract purchaser's application for variances (N.J. App. 2010) 62 PEL 355

Amendment to Critical Area Act, requiring mitigation and abatement of violations prior to receipt of a variance, is intended to apply prospectively (Md. App. 2010) 62 PEL 372

Variance allowing commercial use of barn remains in effect despite subdivision of land because it was not conditioned on size or configuration of site (Mass. App. 2010) 62 PEL 397

Failure to prosecute fences not conforming to height restriction does not make denial of a variance for a fence unreasonable (Ohio App. 2010) 62 PEL 398

Lot does not lose nonconforming use protection as a result of variance that decreased nonconformity (Mass. App. 2010) 62 PEL 419

Alleged agreement to swap nonconforming signs for permit for LED sign does not entitle company to variances (Pa. App. 2010) 62 PEL 431

Difficulty in marketing property does not constitute unusual hardship (Conn. App. 2010) 62 PEL 434

Bulk variances and exceptions to parking standards to allow expansion of existing Wal-Mart are within board's authority (N.J. App. 2010) 62 PEL 435

VESTED RIGHTS

Sign company has no property right in nonconforming signs on leased sites after lease is validly terminated (Neb. 2009) 62 PEL 32

Owner who subdivided after town published proposed amendment to minimum lot width is not entitled to variance (N.Y. App. 2009) 62 PEL 39

Developer does not have vested rights although it spent $96,500 on the process and applied for site plan approval (Wash. 2009) 62 PEL 41

Developer of adult use has no vested right in erroneously issued permits (R.I. 2009) 62 PEL 73

Management district has authority to enact rules restricting amount of underground water that may be pumped from Denver Basin wells (Colo. App. 2009) 62 PEL 75

Denial of permits for construction in subdivision based on noncompliance with infrastructure regulations does not amount to unlawful moratorium (Ariz. App. 2009) 62 PEL 116

Vacant lot in subdivision approved in 1965 is exempt from subsequently enacted coastal area, floodplain, and lot coverage regulations (Conn. App. 2009) 62 PEL 117

Planning board's continuing jurisdiction over conditions of approval does not exempt developer from 30-day appeals period (N.H. 2010) 62 PEL 164

Company has a vested right to mine based on substantial expenditures and obtaining a state permit prior to enactment of zoning ordinance (N.Y. App. 2010) 62 PEL 185

Building permit issued in error before law prohibited billboards does not create a vested right for company to relocate lawful nonconforming billboard (N.C. App. 2010) 62 PEL 192

Owner who fails to file adequate foundation plans before publication of notice of zoning change does not have a vested right (Mass. App. 2010) 62 PEL 197

Developer, having complied with ordinance timetable for submission of preliminary application, is not subject to new code provisions (Del. 2010) 62 PEL 238

Expenditure of $272,022 is not sufficiently "substantial" to create vested right in existing zoning to build 196-unit building (Ill. App. 2010) 62 PEL 277

Operation of construction and demolition landfill on three acres of 50-acre parcel establishes vested right with respect to entire parcel (N.Y. App. 2010) 62 PEL 342

Having obtained permits and begun construction on Phase I, including infrastructure for Phase II, developer does not have a vested right to construct Phase II (Wash. App. 2010) 62 PEL 357

Alleged agreement to swap nonconforming signs for permit for LED sign does not entitle company to variances (Pa. App. 2010) 62 PEL 431

Moratorium enacted while application for pawnbroker license is pending is valid (Minn. 2010) 62 PEL 436

Uses authorized at the time the land was acquired, and the ratio of expenditures to cost of completion, should have been considered in determining vested rights under Measure 37 waivers (Or. App. 2010) 62 PEL 437

Developer acquires no vested right in conditional use application that does not comply with applicable regulations (Wash. App. 2010) 62 PEL 438

W

WASTE DISPOSAL

Environmental impact statement for landfill near Joshua Tree National Park is deficient in not considering goals and alternatives beyond those of the developer (U.S. App., 9th Cir. 2009) 62 PEL 56

Town's agreement to cooperate with solid waste district is not an impermissible delegation of police power (Vt. 2009) 62 PEL 59

Developer is required to show that it would use an "approved means" of on-site sewage treatment, but is not required to specify a particular design (Pa. App. 2009) 62 PEL 74

Michigan Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act does not impose automatic liability on a municipality for any sewage discharge that occurs within its jurisdiction (Mich. App. 2010) 62 PEL 439

WATER AND WATERCOURSES

Management district has authority to enact rules restricting amount of underground water that may be pumped from Denver Basin wells (Colo. App. 2009) 62 PEL 75

Trial judge abuses discretion in refusing to order restoration of wetland based on his opinion that site is "beautiful" and that state definition of navigable water ought to be changed (Wis. App. 2009) 62 PEL 76

State engineer may not use 2003 statutory amendment as a basis for delaying action on water appropriation applications filed in 1989 (Nev. 2010) 62 PEL 198

In denying special permit, board is required to identify how each of at least 16 wetlands did not meet seven ordinance criteria (N.H. 2010) 62 PEL 278

Shoreline master program setbacks and buildable area limitations do not constitute indirect charges on development, imposed by municipality in violation of statute (Wash. App. 2010) 62 PEL 288

Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Commission does not exceed its jurisdiction in considering the impact of activities more than 100 feet upland on wetlands or watercourses (Conn. App. 2010) 62 PEL 386

Z

ZONING

Township may rely on county comprehensive plan rather than prepare its own for purposes of enacting zoning measure (Ohio 2009) 62 PEL 47

Oregon Transportation Planning Rule requires consideration of impacts on transportation prior to zoning amendment (Or. App. 2009) 62 PEL 72

Zoning amendment to permit wind energy facility is valid and applicant submitted adequate information for issuance of zoning permit (Pa. App. 2009) 62 PEL 89

Approval of permitted use may not be denied on the basis of owner's past conduct, which was never the subject of enforcement action (Ohio App. 2010) 62 PEL 161

Adoption of a new zoning classification is legislative and subject to referendum (Utah 2010) 62 PEL 178

Gravel pit does not qualify as a special use for "commercial businesses supplying products and services for agricultural and forestry activities" (Idaho 2010) 62 PEL 209

Short-term rentals of lakefront house are not commercial use in violation of residential zoning classification (Ind. App. 2010) 62 PEL 210

Terms "minimum lot size" and "land area per dwelling unit" have different meanings (Me. 2010) 62 PEL 211

State authority over landfill permits does not preempt county's authority to amend zoning with respect to land for which permit is pending (Md. App. 2010) 62 PEL 227

Code provision requiring developer to prove that project will not impair the future development of a comprehensive neighborhood circulation system is impermissibly vague (Or. App. 2010) 62 PEL 239

Proposed wellness center is properly rejected as more like a prohibited "spa" than a permitted "medical center" (Ohio App. 2010) 62 PEL 289

State Aeronautics Act does not preclude initiative enactment of zoning amendments permitting mixed use development near airport (Cal. App. 2010 2009) 62 PEL 292

Appeals court lacks jurisdiction to review trial court's vacation of consent decree, dissolving an injunction in a case alleging unconstitutional zoning (U.S. App., 9th Cir. 2010) 62 PEL 298

Because variance is not a legal right, owner is not entitled to a contested case hearing regardless of adversarial nature of proceedings (Wyo. 2010) 62 PEL 315

Having obtained constructive approval, developer is protected from zoning changes from date of application (Mass. App. 2010) 62 PEL 316

Michigan rejects rule that zoning is unreasonable if there are natural resources on the property and "no very serious consequences" would result from extraction (Mich. 2010) 62 PEL 387

ZONING BOARDS

Requirement that zoning commission give wetland commission's report "due consideration" before deciding on site plan application does not make the decisions interdependent (Conn. App. 2010) 62 PEL 347

ZONING ORDINANCES

Unambiguous density ordinance requires no interpretation (Ala. App. 2009) 62 PEL 77

Association lacks standing to challenge denial of its proposed amendment to zoning regulations (Conn. App. 2009) 62 PEL 112

Nursery where container plants are maintained for sale does not qualify for agricultural exemption from zoning ordinance (Ohio App. 2010) 62 PEL 203

Challenge alleging that adoption of zoning ordinance was void ab initio fails for lack of evidence that amendment on the night of adoption was substantial (Pa. App. 2010) 62 PEL 297