You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Helicopter Solutions, Inc. v. Hinde

Citations: 414 S.C. 1; 776 S.E.2d 753; 2015 S.C. App. LEXIS 212Docket: Appellate Case No. 2013-000971; No. 5350

Court: Court of Appeals of South Carolina; September 2, 2015; South Carolina; State Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

The case involves a dispute over the classification of a helicopter sightseeing business within the Amusement/Commercial (AC) zoning district under the Horry County Zoning Ordinance. The appellant, a nearby resident, contested the circuit court's decision allowing the business to operate, arguing that it expanded the permissible uses beyond the zoning ordinance's intent. Helicopter Adventures, facing rejection at local airports, established its business on AC-zoned land, receiving necessary approvals from county officials and the FAA. The Zoning Board of Appeals initially overturned the Zoning Administrator's approval, leading to a legal challenge. The circuit court found that the appellant had standing, but reversed the Board's legal interpretation, allowing the helicopter business to continue. The court highlighted the ordinance's purpose to support entertainment businesses and concluded that helicopter tours fit within the definition of 'sight-seeing depots.' The court's decision underscores the statutory construction principles, emphasizing legislative intent and the protection of property rights. Ultimately, the ruling permits Helicopter Adventures to maintain operations, affirming the AC district's role in enabling diverse entertainment uses.

Legal Issues Addressed

Deference to Zoning Board Findings

Application: The circuit court did not defer to the zoning board's findings as the issue was one of legal interpretation rather than factual determination.

Reasoning: Hinde argues that the circuit court incorrectly disregarded the zoning board's findings of fact, specifically regarding the classification of a helicopter tour facility.

Interpretation of Zoning Ordinances

Application: The court analyzed the Horry County Zoning Ordinance to determine if a helicopter tour facility qualifies as a permissible use within the Amusement/Commercial (AC) zoning district.

Reasoning: The court maintains that the primary objective of statutory construction is to discern the legislature's intent, which should prevail if reasonably ascertainable from the language.

Permitted Uses in Zoning Districts

Application: Helicopter sightseeing tours were deemed permissible in the AC district as 'sight-seeing depots' under the zoning ordinance.

Reasoning: The circuit court concluded that the County Ordinance permits helicopter sightseeing tours. Section 712 of the Ordinance indicates that the AC district's intent is to mix specified land uses.

Right to Use Property

Application: The court emphasized that zoning ordinances must be strictly construed to protect the right to use property to its fullest potential.

Reasoning: Legal principles dictate that statutes limiting property rights must be strictly construed, protecting the common law right to use private property to its fullest potential.

Statutory Construction and Ambiguity

Application: The court used customary dictionary definitions to interpret undefined terms, ruling that statutory language should be clear and unambiguous.

Reasoning: When interpreting an ordinance, if the language is clear and unambiguous, no additional interpretation is warranted.