Blog

REAL ESTATE 22: Court found denial of rezoning from multiple-family to commercial invalid.

This case arises out of plaintiff’s application to have a property rezoned from multiple-family residential to village commercial. The Property is located in a downtown commercial core district. A property directly north was rezoned from multiple-family residential to village commercial, the classification sought by plaintiff in this case.

In February 2015, plaintiff applied for the Property to be rezoned to “village commercial,” with the intent of operating it as a bar and restaurant. The Property contains five apartment units, all of which were occupied during this litigation.

At a March 9, 2015 meeting, the city council tabled plaintiff’s rezoning request and sent it back to the planning commission for it to address the option of “conditional rezoning” of the Property. Plaintiff submitted an amended application to rezone the Property specifically for use as a bar and restaurant.

At an August 3, 2015 planning commission meeting, after public comment, a motion to approve plaintiff’s request was defeated. Prior to the city council meeting, the person who had made the motion to zone the property as multiple-family residential in 1986, wanted to present to the council members the reasoning for his position that the Property’s zoning should not change.

He set forth three main reasons why plaintiff’s request should be denied.

  1. The request for rezoning is not consistent with the goals and objectives of our Master Plan.
  2. The request does not preserve the historic character of the City.
  3.  Protecting the viability of residential neighborhoods and having multiple family housing in the village center to contribute to the vitality of downtown businesses.

At an August 10, 2015 meeting, the city council upheld the planning commission’s recommendation to deny conditional rezoning for the Property with a vote of six to one.

In October 2015, plaintiff brought suit, alleging that the rezoning denial deprived it of its constitutional rights to equal protection and substantive due process. The parties filed competing motions for summary disposition. The briefs largely focused on whether defendant had treated the Property differently from other properties in the downtown area and whether it had legitimate reasons for doing so.

On January 4, 2017, the trial court agreed with plaintiff that the Property was being treated differently than similarly situated property and granted plaintiff summary disposition.

The court noted that a major reason for the rezoning denial was the need for a buffer between non-residential and residential districts. However, the court found that it was undisputed that several similar properties are zoned commercial without regard to proximity of residential zoning. In other words, the court determined, that it was undisputed that the city routinely does not impose the buffer or transition residential restrictions on similarly situated property, and therefore, the City’s decision to do so with Plaintiff’s Property is unreasonable and invalid.

Are you involved in a real estate dispute in Michigan? Are you seeking an efficient and effective resolution to a property litigation matter? If you are facing a residential or commercial real estate, seek the advice of an experienced and skilled real estate litigation attorney at Aldrich Legal Services in Plymouth.

Contact Aldrich Legal Services

Top 3 Misconceptions on Power of Attorney

Considering leaving the country for a long time while maintaining a business or selling a home in the US? Were you recently diagnosed with a terminal or degenerative disease? For these and many other issues, it may become necessary for someone...

FAMILY LAW 29: Quitclaim deed signed after prenuptial agreement prevails.

The court ruled that title to the land prevails and that once the deed was signed, the property became the undivided whole interest for both the decedent and appellee and became appellee’s property upon the decedent’s death. Consequently, the court concluded that the prenuptial agreement did not have any impact on the property rights of appellee in this case.

Know the Differences between Annulment and Divorce

  Marriage can end through two ways: divorce and annulment. Though both of these options have the same result, each has different requirements. There are many similarities and differences between a divorce and an annulment, so many...

Understanding Vaping Laws for Minors

  Vaping is a fad that is quickly solidifying into a stable industry of products around the world. Vaping and electronic cigarette (or e-cigarette) use have dramatically increased from roughly “seven million [users] in 2011 to 35...

Michigans New Marijuana Laws

The 2018 ballot initiative titled “the Michigan Regulation and Taxation of Marihuana Act (MRTMA) passed with 56% of the vote. Michigan joins nine states and D.C. in legalizing some form of recreational marijuana use.  Due to the...

Cyberbullying Is Now A Punishable Crime In Michigan

Beginning in March 2019, cyberbullying will now be illegal in the state of Michigan. The House Bill 5017 now makes cyberbullying a punishable crime by Michigan law, meaning that those who harass others online could face potential jail...

The Difference Between Theft, Robbery and Burglary

Often, burglary, robbery, and theft are used interchangeably even though there are distinct differences between all of them. Though, what all three do have in common is they may involve the unlawful taking of someone’s personal property by...

Do I Have To Go To Court If I Get A Divorce?

If you’re contemplating a divorce in Michigan, you probably have a lot of questions. One of the most intimidating aspects of getting a divorce in Michigan or anywhere else is the idea of having to appear in court. The laws for getting a...

Do I Need A Prenuptial Agreement?

A prenuptial agreement is not only for the wealthy people in society, like Hollywood celebrities and the like but also for any couple that brings personal assets, property, debts or children from a former relationship into the marriage. This...

PROBATE 19: Respondent argues she did not receive notice of hearing until five days before.

Respondent argues that she was denied her right to due process of law because she did not receive notice of the hearing until five days before it took place. Respondent argues that the five-day notice of hearing violated her right to due process. Due process generally requires that notice be reasonably calculated to apprise interested parties of the action and to provide them an opportunity to be heard.

WILLS/TRUSTS 11: Allegations that a trustee violated his fiduciary duties.

MCL 700.7803 states that a trustee shall act as would a prudent person in dealing with the property of another, including following the standards of the Michigan prudent investor rule. If the trustee has special skills or is named trustee on the basis of representation of special skills or expertise, the trustee is under a duty to use those skills. MCL 700.7810 states that a trustee shall take reasonable steps to take control of and protect the trust property.

How Is Probation Violated?

If you are on probation, it means you have the judge's trust and have been allowed some level of freedom. Now you must work on ensuring you don’t violate your probation. You will need to abide by every term that the criminal court judge...

Don't let a bad decision, unfair contract, or a messy divorce get in the way of a promising future!
Contact the experienced team at Aldrich Legal Services today to schedule your free initial
consultation
and secure reliable and trustworthy representation today!
Get the Help You Need From a Team You Can Truly Count On: (734) 404-3000