Friday, December 21, 2012

Summary 2012 WY 163

Summary of Decision December 21, 2012

Justice Davis delivered the opinion for the Court. Affirmed in part. Remanded in part.

Case Name: WILSON ADVISORY COMMITTEE, a Wyoming Nonprofit Corporation v. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, TETON COUNTY, WYOMING and C&J, LLC, a Wyoming Limited Liability Corporation.

Docket Numbers: S-12-0095


Appeal from the District Court of Teton County, Honorable Timothy C. Day, Judge.

Representing Appellant: Peter F. Moyer, Esq., Jackson, Wyoming.

Representing Appellee Board of County Commissioners, Teton County, Wyoming: Nicole G. Krieger, Deputy County Attorney, Teton County Attorney’s Office, Jackson, Wyoming.

Representing Appellee C&J, LLC: No appearance.

Date of Decision: December 21, 2012

Facts: The Teton County Board of Commissioners (the Board) approved a Final Development Plan Application by C&J, LLC (C&J). C&J owns 2.04 acres of property in Wilson, Wyoming. The northern portion of the property is zoned for commercial use, while the southern portion is zoned for a single-family residence. The plan approved by the Board allowed C&J to construct five residential units and one affordable housing unit in the single-family residential zone. It also allowed commercial parking and other commercial uses. The number of residential units permitted has since been reduced to four. Appellant Wilson Advisory Committee, a non-profit corporation representing citizens concerned about the development of Wilson, petitioned the district court for review. The district court affirmed the Board’s decision, and the Wilson Advisory Committee appealed.

Issues: 1. Did the approved plan’s increase of the overall residential density of the southern tract violate Teton County’s Land Development Regulations?

2. Did the Board make the findings required by its Land Development Regulations as a predicate to allowing more intense use of the single-family residential portion of a dual-zoned property?

3. If so, were the Board’s findings arbitrary and capricious or contrary to law?

Holdings: The Court remanded the matter to the district court with instructions to further remand to the Board to decide whether or not the proposed location and density improves scenic views and lessens adverse environmental impacts and if the record before the Board supports findings required by LDR § 2560.A.1.f. The Court affirmed the district court as to all other issues presented by the appeal.

Summaries are prepared by Law Librarians and are not official statements of the Wyoming Supreme Court

[SPECIAL NOTE: This opinion uses the "Universal Citation." It was given an "official" citation when it was issued. You should use this citation whenever you cite the opinion, with a P.3d parallel citation. You will also note when you look at the opinion that all of the paragraphs are numbered. When you need to provide a pinpoint citation to a quote the universal portion of the citation will use that paragraph number. The pinpoint citation in the P.3d portion will need to have the reporter page number. If you need assistance in putting together a citation from this, or any future opinion using the Universal Citation form, please contact the Wyoming State Law Library and we will provide any needed assistance]

No comments:

Check out our tags in a cloud (from Wordle)!