Agenda - Planning Commission - 06/05/2008

Home

" -~"~ C"~ c:'........\. J c. ". .. May 10, 20081 Volume 21 No.9 ['\ ". RezoneNa ria nce- Town denies landownersr requests for rezone and variance to develop their property Landowners allege denials were a taking of their property and violations of due process and equal protection Citation: Braun v. Ann Arbor Charter Tp., 2008 WL 656630 (6th Cir. 2008) The 6th U.S. Circuit has jurisdiction over Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, and Tennessee. . MICHIGAN (03/13/08)-The Brauns and the Pardons (herein- after, collectively the Brauns) together owned 363 acres of land (the Property) in the township. Over 357 acres of that was zoned A1 (Ag- ricultural, District). The Brauns contracted to sell the Property to a real-estate developer. They asked the township to rezone approxi- mately 215 acres of the Property to R-6 (Mobile Home Park Resi- dential District) and 149 acres to R-3 (Single Family Home Urban Residential District). In support of their application, the Brauns in- cluded an appraiser's opinion that only high-density residential hous- ing would be economically viable for the Property. The township Planning Commission and the county Planning Commission both recommended that the township Board deny the Braun's rezone application. The township Board denied the rezone application based on its conclusion that the proposedrezoningwould have a significant and detrimental impact On the community. The Brauns sued the township in state court, arguing the rezone denial together with the district' zoning restrictions on the Property amoUnted to a taking of their prOperty by the town. After the lower and appeliate state courts determined that the claim could not yet be teviewed because the Brauns had not sought and been denied a vari- ance from the township's zoning board .of appeals (ZBA), the Brauns sought a use variance from the ZBA. The ZBA deriiedthe request, saying it did not have jurisdiction to change a zoning classification or grant a uSe variance. Instead of returning to state court, the Brauns sued the township in federal court. The Brauns alleged that the township's denials of the rezone and variance requests were: a taking of their property in viola- tion of the Takings Clause of the United States Constitution; a depri- vation of procedural and substantive due process; a violation of their equal protection rights; and a deprivation of their rights in violation of federal law. .' . ,. \ : .. ~ --. ." ,. t ,.;':0 5 85