Both the posted notice and the published notice shall include a prominent statement that the proposed zoning decision relates to or will allow the location or relocation of a halfway house, drug rehabilitation center, or other facility for treatment of drug dependency. The published notice shall be at least six column inches in size and shall not be located in the classified advertising section of the newspaper.
(Code 1981, §36-66-4, enacted by Ga. L. 1985, p. 1139, § 1; Ga. L. 1996, p. 1009, § 2; Ga. L. 1998, p. 856, § 3; Ga. L. 1998, p. 1392, § 1; Ga. L. 2004, p. 69, § 19; Ga. L. 2012, p. 775, § 36/HB 942.)
Editor's notes.- Ga. L. 2004, p. 69, § 1, not codified by the General Assembly, provides that: "This Act shall be known and may be cited as the 'State and Local Taxation, Financing, and Service Delivery Revision Act of 2004.'"
Law reviews.- For article surveying real property law in 1984-1985, see 37 Mercer L. Rev. 343 (1985). For article on 2004 amendment of this Code section, see 21 Ga. St. U. L. Rev. 226 (2004). For annual survey on zoning and land use law, see 61 Mercer L. Rev. 427 (2009). For annual survey on real property, see 69 Mercer L. Rev. 251 (2017). For annual survey on zoning and land use law, see 69 Mercer L. Rev. 371 (2017).
JUDICIAL DECISIONS
Subsection (b) mandatory for text amendment of general application.
- Procedures described in subsection (b) of O.C.G.A. § 36-66-4 must be followed when passing or rescinding a text amendment of general application. Atlanta Bio-Med, Inc. v. DeKalb County, 261 Ga. 594, 408 S.E.2d 100 (1991).
What constitutes "rezoning decision."
- Text amendment having general application is not a "rezoning decision" for purposes of the procedures required under subsection (b) of O.C.G.A. § 36-66-4. Atlanta Bio-Med, Inc. v. DeKalb County, 261 Ga. 594, 408 S.E.2d 100 (1991).
Although O.C.G.A. § 36-66-4 requires only one hearing during the continuous course of a zoning matter before the local government, when a court found a first zoning decision unconstitutional and remanded the matter with direction to rezone, the zoning authority was required to hold a hearing. City of Cumming v. Realty Dev. Corp., 268 Ga. 461, 491 S.E.2d 60 (1997).
Adult ordinance was not a "zoning ordinance" even though the ordinance placed certain limitations on locations available to an adult business and established certain minimum lot sizes and road frontages; rather than regulating general uses of land, the adult ordinance regulated a particular type of activity - adult entertainment; as such, it was not a zoning ordinance and was not subject to the hearing requirements established under the Zoning Procedures Law, O.C.G.A. § 36-66-1 et seq. Artistic Entm't, Inc. v. City of Warner Robins, 331 F.3d 1196 (11th Cir. 2003), cert. denied, 541 U.S. 988, 124 S. Ct. 2017, 158 L. Ed. 2d 491 (2004).
Notice.
- County's failure to comply with the notice provisions of subsection (a) of O.C.G.A. § 36-66-4 invalidated the subject zoning action. McClure v. Davidson, 258 Ga. 706, 373 S.E.2d 617 (1988).
Since a real estate developer had neither concluded the purchase of property or made substantial expenditures in reliance upon the probable issuance of a building permit until after the county amended the county's zoning ordinance to the detriment of the developer, the developer did not acquire a vested right to develop the property in question in conformity with the old ordinance; the county board of commissioner's letter to the developer amounted to an agreement to amend the ordinance and, thus, invoked the notice and hearing requirements under Georgia's Zoning Procedures Law, O.C.G.A. § 36-66-1 et seq. Buckner v. Douglas County, 273 Ga. App. 765, 615 S.E.2d 850 (2005).
As a county's notice of the public hearing on a neighbor's request for a conditional use permit failed to comply with O.C.G.A. § 36-66-4(a) because the notice was published 46, not 45, days before the hearing, the county's approval of the neighbor's request was invalid. C & H Dev., LLC v. Franklin County, 294 Ga. App. 792, 670 S.E.2d 491 (2008).
Hearing requirement not met.
- Hearing before the Planning Commission did not satisfy the requirements of the Zoning Procedures Law, O.C.G.A. § 36-66-1 et seq., because the only record of the hearing was a one-page memorandum disclosing that the Commission heard testimony from the applicant and considerable objections from the surrounding neighborhood, but the memorandum did not disclose the nature of the objections and, thus, did not inform the County Board of Commissioners in a meaningful way of what happened at the hearing. Hoechstetter v. Pickens County, 303 Ga. 786, 815 S.E.2d 50 (2018).
Annexation voided when procedures not followed.
- Defendants attempt to annex certain properties into the corporate limits of the city and establish a new zoning district was voided because the procedural requirements of O.C.G.A § 36-36-21 and subsections (a) and (b) of O.C.G.A. § 36-66-4 were not met. City of Byron v. Betancourt, 242 Ga. App. 71, 528 S.E.2d 841 (2000).
Applicability to new permitted use.
- Procedures described in subsection (b) of O.C.G.A. § 36-66-4 and former O.C.G.A. § 36-67-5 did not apply to the enactment of a zoning ordinance text amendment that allowed a new permitted use. Atlanta Bio-Med, Inc. v. DeKalb County, 261 Ga. 594, 408 S.E.2d 100 (1991).
Zoning map properly incorporated by reference.
- County zoning ordinance properly incorporated by reference an official zoning map as the board of commissioners had a zoning map before the commissioners when the commissioners considered the ordinance, the zoning map was in existence when a limited liability limited partnership (LLLP) bought the property and that map was kept in the zoning administrator's office, the new zoning administrator's uncertainty about which of two maps was the official map did not render the entire zoning ordinance invalid, and it was clear that the LLLP's land was not zoned for a landfill. Mid-Georgia Envtl. Mgmt. Group, L.L.L.P. v. Meriwether County, 277 Ga. 670, 594 S.E.2d 344 (2004).
Adequate state remedy for procedural irregularities in adoption of new zoning ordinances.
- Trial court did not err in granting the city's motion for judgment on the pleadings on the plaintiffs' procedural due process claims as Georgia's Zoning Procedures Law (ZPL), O.C.G.A. § 36-66-1 et seq., provided the plaintiffs with an adequate state remedy for alleged procedural irregularities committed by the city in the adoption of a new zoning ordinance because the ZPL required local governments to provide property owners with a meaningful opportunity to be heard before enacting a zoning ordinance, not simply mere notice of a hearing, as the ZPL required that a local government conduct a public hearing on a proposed zoning ordinance before its adoption; and, if no public hearing was held, aggrieved property owners could sue to have the ordinance declared invalid. Schumacher v. City of Roswell, 344 Ga. App. 135, 809 S.E.2d 262 (2017).
Cited in City of Roswell v. Outdoor Sys., Inc., 274 Ga. 130, 549 S.E.2d 90 (2001); Edwards v. City of Warner Robins, 302 Ga. 381, 807 S.E.2d 438 (2017).
OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
Reconsideration after tie vote.
- Tie vote on consideration of a zoning proposal by a county board was not a "defeat" of the proposal so as to bar the proposal's reconsideration within six months. 1996 Op. Att'y Gen. No. U96-16.