Thread: A Self-Storage Legal Disaster

Hey everyone- recently published an article about this heartbreaking couple in Ohio whose self-storage dreams are being crushed by some bewildering zoning restrions:

http://blog.selfstorage.com/storage-...neighbors-2263


It sounds to me like a mistake on the county's end, but the lawsuit is reflecting something different. Is there a lesson to be learned from this? What could the Grays have done differently to ensure their building a.)Didn't receive residential complaints and b.)Followed the zoning laws in the first place? Also, do you see any legal ways out of this nightmare, despite the rejection of multiple appeals?

I'm sure there are two sides to this story but from what I read they have been screwed. It's a shame they didn't donate enough money to the right political campaign to prevent this and I'm sure they have exhausted all legal recourse. Seems the only thing left is to disappear over the horizon and start over, lighting has a strange way of striking empty buildings you know. I wish them luck.

What makes me concerned and tensed is thinking about the other people who were using this storage facility. What about them? Have they got their compensation money? Were the articles insured?

Originally Posted by kynagrace

What makes me concerned and tensed is thinking about the other people who were using this storage facility. What about them? Have they got their compensation money? Were the articles insured?

The other people using the storage? Well they will go get their stuff and stop paying rent. They are fine. It's the owner that is getting the raw deal here.

If there's anything to learn from it, it might be to work with your neighbors rather than get into a legal battle with them. It is a real shame that there could not have been some compromise such as installing fencing, buffering landscaping, paving the gravel drive, or something that could have allowed the business to stay open while appeasing the neighbors.

That said, I am still appalled and sickened that a city or judge can change zoning with this effect. Ranks right up there with the wrong ness of that place in NY taken away by eminent domain for the reason of being "blighted" when it was guilty of nothing other than being in a place that a private university wished to build.

Steve

Since the City made a mistake, and the owner of the business has more to lose than a neighbor that can move if upset enough, he should be allowed to continue to operate, or the city should purchase the business and cut their loss, it was their mistake.

At this point packing up and movin on is probably their only choice. It does point up the value of approaching a problem unemotionally with a win-win attitude from the very beginning.
It may not have helped but if the owner had of gone to the neighbor in the very beginning and asked what could be done to make it better he may have been able to just pave or oil the road and put in speed bumps and perhaps a nice basketball court while the equipment was there. Perhaps bought a strip of the land from the neighbor for the road? Who knows what it may have taken................

My thought was he did talk to the neighbors, since that is what I would have done? Did I miss the part in article that say he did not try to work with the neighbors, or is there other info somewhere?

This seems like Govt consider itself not even accountable for their grievance. There should be a procedure to deal with such nightmares, one might have spent his whole life establishing such business.