Abutter Notification - Owners vs. Renters

[Seabishop]

Our enabling legislation states that we must notify property owners within a certain number of feet from a proposed development. In the worst case scenario an absentee landlord gets the notice and the elderly tenant who's been in the neighborhood for 50 years doesn't know about the proposed strip mall next door.

Are most states/countries like this? Do other states require that the notice goes to abutting property owners AND the residents of these properties if they are different? I suppose the opposite worst case scenario is that the city has to notify tons of different residents in large apt. buildings.

 

[NHPlanner]

Same thing here Seabishop. We try in these cases to at least find out who the property manager is to get a notice to them, though not required by the statutes.

 

[Gedunker]

We only notify abutting owners in writing.
We notify neighborhood associations (if any) in writing.
We have the applicant post signs on the property, in sufficient number to alert interested persons.
We advertise in the legal section of the newspaper of record.

 

[Richmond Jake]

For coastal zone development applications in California we noticed both owners and occupants. Outside coastal, just owners.

 

[Tranplanner]

I think our legislation requires that all owners/residents within x metres be notified. I don't deal with that stuff - and Donk probably knows the Act better in my province than I do...

 

[Planderella]

The same here. Abutting property owners as well as the neighborhood associations get the notification. If there are renters in the area, they may see the posted signs or see the ads in the newspaper.

 

[donk]

I think our legislation requires that all owners/residents within x metres be notified. I don't deal with that stuff - and Donk probably knows the Act better in my province than I do...

If I did I'd have a job there by now.

Our Act dominantly speaks of notifying adjacent property owners. It is not a necessity, if other actions are taken.

 

[ludes98]

We only notify abutting owners in writing.
We notify neighborhood associations (if any) in writing.
We have the applicant post signs on the property, in sufficient number to alert interested persons.
We advertise in the legal section of the newspaper of record.

Same here. Interestingly enough there is a case testing what reasonable notification is in the AZ courts right now. City and applicant are defendants. It concerns how the notification is done. Most municipalities do the notification through county assessor records, but they are sometimes 1-6 months behind current ownership. The state court is trying to take the hard line that reasonable means you have to notify the owner regardless of public records. It is under appeal, but if it were to hold up, the only method for that kind of accuracy would be a title agency. Problem is they will only guarantee its accuracy for the day that it is printed.....

 

[Lee Nellis]

I don't have access to my library right now, as it is in storage, but I believe those in the US will find that there is federal case law that makes it highly advisable to notify occupants, not just owners.

 

[Zoning Goddess]

Our jurisdiction only notifies owners. God forbid we should have any consideration for those "transient" renters, the root of all evil...

 

[Rem]

We notifier occupiers as well as owners. Unfortunately we often have to address such letters to "The Occupier" as our records do not have names for occupiers. I'm cerain this means many such notifications get treated as junk mail and are not read closely or ignored completely.

We require the on-site signage described by others for only some categories of development. These signs are definitely an effective attention getter.

 

[BWharrie]

The Environmental Planning & Asessment Act 1979 (NSW, Australia - http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/epaaa1979389/) does not, I believe, require notification of normal proposed development. However, in our neck of the woods, normal proposals are advertised in the local newspaper, as well as "in practice" the adjoining owners as required in chapter P of our Development Control Plan. (Sorry, not on web)
In accordance with same chapter it does state "...Council shall notify the owner or occupier of adjoining land or any other land whose use may or enjoyment of that land in the opinion of the Council, may suffer detrimentally in the event of a development consent being granted."
The practical attnedance to notifying the occupier are unresourced so it is not undertaken. Council does not need to register renters et.al. of a property but I guess we could use the voting roles!

 

[nerudite]

We send legal notices to the owners of a property and also post signs for legislative actions (redistricting, Area Structure Plan, etc.), but not for subdivisions/development permits. We also put all legislative actions in the paper both before it goes to planning commission, and twice upon reading the bylaw.

 

[SlaveToTheGrind]

We send to owners and occupants. We also post the property for rezones, general plan amendments, deep lots, and text amendments if it's in a special zone.

 

[plannerkat]

Property owners within 350 feet are notified, and signs are posted on the property that serve to notify others, such as tenants.