Source: https://www.jbwpc.com/Articles/Zoning-and-Land-Use-The-Basics/ZONING-LAND-MINES.shtml
Timestamp: 2019-04-23 02:06:28+00:00

Document:
1. Jackson County v. Earth Resources, Inc., 280 Ga. 389, 627 S.E.2d 569 (2006).
3. C & H Development, LLC v. Franklin County, 294 Ga.App. 792, 670 S.E.2d 491 (2008).
Notice of public hearing on property owner's request for a conditional use permit was published 46 days before the scheduled hearing. The Zoning Procedures Law requires that such notice must be published "[a]t least 15 but not more than 45 days prior to the date of the hearing." O.C.G.A. § 36-66-4(a). Thus, the county's approval of the permit following the hearing is invalid, since the county failed to strictly comply with the Zoning Procedures Law's publication of notice requirements.
An example of the types of signs exempt from the regulations and thus not requiring a permit are 1) flags and insignia of any government, religious, charitable, fraternal or other organizations; 2) signs on private premises directing and guiding traffic and parking on private property; 3) and holiday lights and decorations. Thus, the city's sign code discriminates against certain types of speech (signs) based on content. It exempts from regulation some categories of signs based on content, but does not exempt others based on content. Generally, laws that distinguish favored speech from unfavored speech on the basis of the ideas or views expressed are content based. A content-neutral ordinance applies equally to all and not just those with a particular message or subject matter in mind. But where the city exempts certain signs based upon the content or message within, the sign is not content neutral.
1. The Ansley House, Inc. v. City of Atlanta, 260 Ga. 540, 397 S.E.2d 419 (1990).
An ordinance that specifies termination of a nonconforming use by cessation of the use for a specific time should further state that the use terminates regardless of whether there is an intent to abandon.
2. Flippen Alliance for Community Empowerment, Inc. v. Brannan, 267 Ga.App. 134, 601 S.E.2d 106 (2004).
Prior nonconforming uses are not absolutely protected from subsequent zoning regulations. A governing opportunity can require a nonconforming use to be terminated in a reasonable time.
3. Henry v. Cherokee County, 290 Ga. App. 355, 659 S.E.2d 393 (2008).
Expanding a nonconforming use on the same lot may be prohibited if the ordinance specifically provides that a nonconforming use may not be extended on either the same or adjoining property.

References: v. 
 v. 
 § 36
 v. 
 v. 
 v.