The planning commission of any municipal corporation may frame and adopt a plan for dividing the municipal corporation or any portion thereof into zones or districts, representing the recommendations of the commission, in the interest of the public health, safety, convenience, comfort, prosperity, or general welfare, for the limitations and regulation of the height, bulk, and location, including percentage of lot occupancy, set back building lines, and area and dimensions of yards, courts, and other open spaces, and the uses of buildings and other structures and of premises in such zones or districts.
Columbia Oldsmobile, Inc. v. City of Montgomery, 564 N.E.2d 455 (Ohio 1990). · cites it 3ד” R.C. 713.06, entitled “Division of municipal corporations into zones,” permits Ohio municipalities such as Montgomery to “* * * frame and adopt a plan for dividing the municipal corporation or any portion thereof into zones or districts, representing the recommendations of the…”
Gerijo, Inc. v. City of Fairfield, 70 Ohio St. 3d 223 (1994). “R.C. 713.06 permits Ohio cities such as Fairfield to “frame and adopt a plan for dividing the municipal corporation or any portion thereof into zones or districts, representing the recommendations of the [municipality’s planning] commission, in the interest of the public health,…”
State ex rel. Phillips Supply Co. v. Cincinnati, 2012-Ohio-6096. · cites it 2ד{¶48} In October 2008, City Cincinnati Council passed an emergency ordinance which mandated that Continuum of Care “address the inadequacies of the current provision of services for single homeless individuals in the City of Cincinnati, and to put in place a comprehensive plan…”
Kinzel v. Ebner, 2023-Ohio-164, 205 N.E.3d 1225. · cites it 4דThe Ohio General Assembly has enacted legislation governing zoning procedure in R.C. 713.06, et seq. However, in this case, the City has adopted a charter controlling the manner in which ordinances may be enacted and enforced pursuant to its authority under Sections 3 and 7 of…”
Apple Grp., Ltd. v. Granger Twp. Bd. of Zoning Appeals, 41 N.E.3d 1185 (Ohio 2015). · cites it 2ד2d 455 (1990), this court held that “there is no statutory requirement that [a municipality] * * * enact a comprehensive community plan pursuant to its power to zone under R.C. 713.06 et seq." To reach that conclusion, the court compared the statutory language permitting…”
Garcia v. Siffrin Residential Ass'n, 407 N.E.2d 1369 (Ohio 1980). ““No person shall erect, construct, alter, repair, or maintain any building or structure or use any land in violation of any zoning ordinance or regulation enacted pursuant to sections 713.06 to 713.12, inclusive, of the Revised Code, or Section 3 of Article XVIII, Ohio…”
City of Wooster v. Ent. One, Inc., 814 N.E.2d 521 (Ohio Ct. App. 9th Dist. 2004). “This statute section provides: “No person shall erect, construct, alter, repair, or maintain any building or structure or use any land in violation of any zoning ordinance or regulation enacted pursuant to sections 713.06 to 713.12, inclusive, of the Revised Code, or Section 3…”
Gerijo, Inc. v. Fairfield, 1994 Ohio 432 (Ohio 1994). “R.C. 713.06 permits Ohio cities such as Fairfield to "frame and adopt a plan for dividing the municipal corporation or any portion thereof into zones or districts, representing the recommendations of the [municipality's planning] commission, in the interest of the public health,…”
Waltco Truck Equip. Co. v. City of Tallmadge Bd. of Zoning Appeals, 531 N.E.2d 685 (Ohio 1988). “11 provides: “The legislative authority of a municipal corporation may create an administrative board to administer the details of the application of the regulations under sections 713.06 to 713.12, inclusive, of the Revised Code, and may delegate to such board, in accordance…”
Penewit v. Spring Valley Bd. of Zoning Appeals, 2019-Ohio-3200. “01(A); R.C. 713.06. {¶ 24} Under R.C. 713.15: The lawful use of any dwelling, building, or structure and of any land or premises, as existing and lawful at the time of enacting a zoning ordinance or an amendment to the ordinance, may be continued, although such use does not…”
Ullmann v. Columbus, 2024-Ohio-5223. · cites it 3ד{¶ 26} The trial court reviewed R.C. 713.06 through 713.12 and found that R.”
Sun Oil Co. v. City of Upper Arlington, 379 N.E.2d 266 (Ohio Ct. App. 10th Dist. 1977). “This section provides: “No person shall erect, construct, alter, repair, or maintain any building or structure or use any land in violation of any zoning ordinance or regulation enacted pursuant to sections 713.06 to 713.12, inclusive, of the Revised Code, or Section 3 of…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.