Marina Limited Partners applied for a zoning variance to relocate ...

[melina_rosy]

Marina Limited Partners applied for a zoning variance to relocate part of their 700-slip marina to a new marina to be constructed at another location on the Geist Reservoir in Hamilton County, Indiana. Marina would move 300 of its slips to the new marina. The construction of the new marina required approval of a variance by the Board of Zoning Appeals for the city of Noblesville. At the hearing, John Allen and others who owned property in the area appeared and objected to the marina's construction. They presented evidence that construction of the marina would lower their property values. There was additional evidence regarding noise, traffic, smoke, fumes, and odors. The board's staff recommended approval, but the board denied the variance. Marina Partners filed suit alleging the finding was arbitrary. Are they correct?

Question 2

In contract states, an implied contract can be used to establish the contract requirement.
  Indicate whether the statement is true or false

[dpost18]

Answer to Question 1

The court went with the staff's findings and held that the city had disregarded the evidence - the report reviewed all of the issues raised by the property owners and concluded that the conditional approval (for a time to see how it worked) reflected the report's findings. Courts grant discretion to the cities and towns on these decisions as long as they conduct factual findings and establish a foundation for their decisions. Allen v. Board of Zoning Appeals for the City of Noblesville, 594 N.E.2d 480 (Ind. 1992).

Answer to Question 2

TRUE

[melina_rosy]

Correct answers!

[dpost18]

Great! Please up vote