Agenda - Planning Commission - 04/04/2013

Home

Zoning Bulletin February 25, 2013 1 Volume 7 1 Issue 4 ) Rezoning —Town rezones golf course property, limiting permitted uses Property owner argues rezone violates several of its constitutional rights Citation: Dunes West Golf Club, LLC v. Town of Mount Pleasant, 2013 WL 90419 (S. C. 2013) SOUTH CAROLINA (01/09/13) —This case addressed the issues of: whether the denial of a rezoning request violated a property owner's equal protection rights; whether the town's criteria for determining the boundaries of a new zoning designation were arbitrary and capricious, thus violating a property owner's substantive due process rights; and whether the rezoning of a property amounted to an unconstitutional tak- ing of the property. The Background /Facts: The Dunes West Development (the "Devel- opment") was located on 4,518 acres of and within the Town of Mount Pleasant (the "Town "). Within the Development, was the Dunes West golf course, which consisted of 256 acres (the "Golf Course Property"). >� In 2002, Dunes West Golf Club, LLC (the "Golf Club ") purchased the undeveloped residential lots and the master developer rights to the Development. The Golf Club acquired the Golf Club Property in 2005. At that time, the Golf Course Property was subject to the zoning require- ments of the Dunes West Planned Development ( "DWPD "), which peunitted flexible land use at the developer's discretion. In 2006, the Town adopted an ordinance which created a new Conser- vation Recreation Open Space ( "CRO ") zoning district. The CRO zon- ing designation permitted only recreation and conservation uses. By way of either direct rezoning or an amendment to the relevant planned development, each of the parcels in the Town comprising part of any one of the Town's five golf courses was designated a CRO district, including the Golf Club Property. In 2009, the Golf Club submitted a rezoning petition to the Town. It sought residential development of 16.48 acres of the Golf Course Property. Ultimately, the Town Council denied the Golf Club's rezoning petition. Thereafter, the Golf Club brought a lawsuit. Among other things, it claimed that the Town's actions in designating the entirety of the Golf Course Property as a CRO district had violated the Golf Club's equal j protection rights. It contended that the Town had granted another substantially similar rezoning petition for another golf course in town. © 2013 Thomson Reuters 9