Zoning Code Definitions

Residents in Lenox debate new Pop Warner field

“If a party wants to know how I interpret the code especially in the case of a term that isn’t clearly defined then they would formally request an interpretation from me,” he said. “I would then render that interpretation as a judgment. If they disagree then that’s where the zoning board of appeals comes into play. They would appeal that decision to the board which has the power to overturn my decision.” “Pop Warner has always been good for the community and we’re not looking to make any enemies,” he added. “We’re going to try to work with everybody we need to so that we can do what we feel is in the best interest of the community. I’ve got to believe that a nice park on a real quiet street that has good access to Route 5 to handle the traffic flow, near a canal path, is a good site.” “If a party wants to know how I interpret the code especially in the case of a term that isn’t clearly defined then they would formally request an interpretation from me,” he said. “I would then render that interpretation as a judgment. If they disagree then that’s where the zoning board of appeals comes into play. They would appeal that decision to the board which has the power to overturn my decision.” “Pop Warner has always been good for the community and we’re not looking to make any enemies,” he added. “We’re going to try to work with everybody we need to so that we can do what we feel is in the best interest of the community. I’ve got to believe that a nice park on a real quiet street that has good access to Route 5 to handle the traffic flow, near a canal path, is a good site.

No. 10–1937. - NEIGHBORHOOD ENTERPRISES INC v ... - Cases and Codes

NEIGHBORHOOD ENTERPRISES INC v. CITY OF ST LOUIS

NEIGHBORHOOD ENTERPRISES, INC.; Sanctuary in the Ordinary; Jim Roos, Plaintiffs–Appellants, v. CITY OF ST. LOUIS; St. Louis Board of Adjustment, Defendants–Appellees, Shari Cunningham; George Hitt; Joe Klitzing; Irene Soll; John Caruso; Mary Hart Burton; St. Louis City Department of Public Safety, Division of Building and Inspection, Defendants.

No. 10–1937.

-- July 13, 2011 Before SMITH, GRUENDER, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.

Neighborhood Enterprises, Inc. (“Neighborhood”), Sanctuary In The Ordinary (SITO), and Jim Roos (collectively, “Sanctuary”) filed suit against, inter alia, the City of St. Louis (“City”) and St. Louis Board of Adjustment (“Board”) challenging the Board's denial of a sign permit. Sanctuary further challenged the constitutionality of provisions of Chapter 26.68 of the Revised Code of the City of St. Louis (“zoning code”) upon which the permit denial was based. Sanctuary asserted federal and state constitutional claims pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the Missouri Declaratory Judgments Act, Missouri Revised Statute § 527.010. It also sought a writ of certiorari pursuant to Missouri Revised Statute § 89.110, which provides for judicial review of “illegal” Board decisions. The district court granted summary judgment to the City and the Board, finding, inter alia, that the zoning code's restrictions on signs withstood constitutional scrutiny with respect to the Board's denial of Sanctuary's sign permit. Because we conclude that the challenged provisions of Chapter 26.68 of the zoning code are impermissibly content based and fail strict scrutiny, we now reverse and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

I. Background

A. Factual Background 1

Neighborhood, a property-management company, manages the properties of SITO, a non-profit organization. Neighborhood describes itself as a “self-supporting housing ministry that manages rental housing mostly on the near south side of St. Louis.” Roos is the founder of SITO and Neighborhood, and he is also the coordinator and spokesperson for the Missouri Eminent Domain Abuse Coalition (MEDAC), a civic organization concerned about eminent-domain practices.

Roos describes himself as a critic of the City's use of eminent domain for private development. Roos and MEDAC, with tenant approval, commissioned a sign/mural for the south side of 1806–08 South 13th Street, a SITO-owned building in the Near Southside Redevelopment Area. Roos described the sign/mural as a “poignant way ․ to make a statement.” The sign/mural consists of the words “End Eminent Domain Abuse” inside a red circle and slash. The design of the sign/mural is similar to the design that MEDAC uses in its literature, buttons, and other materials. The sign/mural is approximately 363 or 369 square feet in area. It is visible from, among other areas, Interstates 44 and 55 and the Soulard neighborhood.

Handbook of Massachusetts land use and planning law, zoning, subdivision control, and nonzoning alternatives

The base code districts are listed and described in § 13.05[A]. • Original zoning definitions (Article 2). At present, the Zoning Code's definitions appear ...

Zoning news

... variances, and other amendments to the zoning code and use and area maps that ... The Renton, Washington, definition is simple but holistic: Zoning ...

Real estate law

Careful examination of local zoning code definitions and requirements is essential because they tend to be highly variable. One intrinsic problem with ...

The Complete Idiot's Guide to Urban Homesteading

Of course, some rules are relevant and beneficial, and others are outdated and needlessly restrictive. Zoning Regulations DEFINITION ...

Well grounded, using local land use authority to achieve smart growth

In order to sustain an amendment to a zoning law, there does not need to "be ... USE REGULATIONS DEFINITION When a municipality has codified its local laws, ...