Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
~earc~ - tt it~suus - &oecla,E nse Hermit w/a cour-ty <br />Sw,os~ flicsor~u>>~lomii~r,m~~mec <br />,~ •a•a+ ~. pMeat ate weir ~t <br />C$.wetior Poais~ orDelp~srp <br />IVY lV.C. LEa1'LS 4Q3, ~' <br />' Ps¢C i ttf iR'Q" <br />tits <br />s^se-arlrnr....laMal~geD <br />~ o~i~i~ <br />THE C OF LAI~I(`AfiTER- SOUfH CARALD4A; THE COliN1Y pF UNTONi NORTH CARbfINA; ROr3A POTYS OSBQIWE; ROBERi <br />8r4RR; SAIi ARDRi~ anA wlfe- JAN1E N. ARDREY; l.AllA1iA A, ICEf.I; MARrC,IE K. BdYLSfQid; Ti)CiCER X. )tIHN5061 anr! wpie- ANGE[uS <br />R, 7OEdtSGN Y. Mi~Kl.BISURG aDtJ1iTY, NORTH CAROLINA; THE BWIRD OF OOllN'TY C~ OFD C70UW?1-- <br />NORTH CAROLINA- TO VY2T: !;AREA pt~UY, ROD AU'fREY, BAitB,ARA IAQCYYOOD- ROBERT 4 WAtIUit, PETER !. JOHN G. <br />gtACiQ~ION, and I~tEfH 4 ANDREWS: and RQBBtT L BRANDON, ZAr-ifg ~~ d ~ CaunLY, North Cata~ <br />No. z93PA92 <br />suPite~ oouRT ai: NoRTH cAROwu <br />334 N.G d96; d34 5.E.2d 644; 1993 N.C. Ll:XLS 403 <br />7arwary i3, 1993, Heard Is1 the b'yuatne Court . <br />' ' . : Sepbernber 14,1993, F11M .. <br />P[tiOR HIS'fOR1fs [**ela Otf dtsa'stiarary rtivlevr of a decigon of the N <br />f 19921, teV~~ stR enOered b1/ ~on,1• .h~ tfte SuQafor Caust, m'p Cotn~y, ors 7 Jeswery 1991 and remeRdinp <br />tllfiPb~CYOt~ AFFittMEts, <br />CJtliE StiMWARY <br />PROf.'LDt?ttAL Ptl<S7tIREs Defendarsks, stelghbarkfg toutrty snd ks xuMrs9 amC- appealed a derision of fife Court of <br />Appaais (North Catvlinej, fvhieh reversed a dacislon granting wmtnary jadgrrfertt m ~var of pisinttff ootcdy and deciarkrg a iertcNpl <br />zotfing arri<ttartce wfaorfsttdttiottai. <br />t)YBiCVIE+,W: A county arxi fndhdduals fUed an aCttOrt for declaratory relief, seeWnp to.heve a nelgAborin9 7:ortkfg <br />ardr>artce declared tafa~ttstRs#ortal. The court of appeals t the judgment tUtding tfie ost$nanoe tmoonsgdsiianal and. on <br />' appeal, the Coiat atArtrteti. The court held that lire dettslon of whether tb perltrk a sat>ltary leridAU was art administretlve zonng <br />dec!>:torf. The esxs-rkYs grant of a app3catlort that p lire ardinartoa eounh- was an adrahfistretive g deci~asf.tfiat <br />ffie °~ zanin9 adm~trator aoui6 properly metoe. Tt was Trot er- ps~nrmismlbk aa'dlkt ~` Fnterest beCatsBe lire appifmnt for fife <br />pemdt was tfre county it9df. The same logic that vans>lttied the counq ~ to dehsgaba auttforiGy to the inning <br />adnfiNstral»r pa issue spacial iliac perturbs also atspported tits dedsJon that the oommFesiotfors had autifority to agow tht zoning <br />adrnintstramr to issue pernrRS for uses by rlplrt subject to spndat seQukemerKs. ' <br />OUTCOa14tre The jttdgrnert nsvesshsg the An~trg the c~railty lendl111 ardMfar{ce u~ was stOrtned because K <br />' was a valid tegisistive pretagatlve bd dtanpe the swtHary TarrdflU use from a "apeefai awe asrsrrir' catagory~ tb a'uoe by~right <br />' under ps'esa'>>xd cortdidoits" CetegwY• The ot+dtnarraa- whidr aitarod the zortirfg ~ to apprtnre the ~permR appiketton for <br />siii~ of a Isifr~- was ooaxstltutioiral end iawNl on Its coca. <br />CARE TERi7~ landfi>E, zoning admirrSs4atGr, s>oMuII ordi~nat;, zonirtg- ordharfca- use per:rdt- sanitary, zordrtg dedsWry ouaei- <br />judlclal, aPoe- preecr~ed- kstPtTSni~bf0. cortdttiortat, psrmit appitcegon- wnxrrary jtrdginm+t, apedAed eonditlorts- dekgatlon, <br />issuance, tat'tdfNi pet~rt>C, soJld waste, prvmutgatsd- zordn9 disMcts- eMecttve feckS, de rfavo. pr'eVertY ownenr. pubpe hearing, <br />per>~ tree, P9 agency, evidesrUsrY, declaratory . <br />