Laserfiche WebLink
Zoning Bulletin May 10, 2014 ( Volume 8 I Issue 9 <br />contrast, however, the court emphasized that "[n]on-legislative, or execu- <br />tive, deprivations of state -created rights, which would include land -use <br />rights, cannot support a substantive due process claim," even upon allega- <br />tions that the government acted arbitrarily and irrationally. <br />Here, noted the court, Flagship had asserted a state -created property <br />right; it had claimed that the City's arbitrary and capricious denial of its <br />request to rezone its property impinged on its property rights. The court <br />found that Flagship's substantive due process claim was thus: based on <br />the denial of its state -granted -and -defined land -use rights; and was a <br />"textbook executive act" (since it only affected Flagship or a "limited <br />number of people"), for which no substantive due process claim exists. <br />See also: Cotton v. Jackson, 216 F.3d 1328, 145 Ed. Law Rep. 648,.78 <br />Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) P 40194 (11 th Cir. 2000). <br />See also: Lewis v. Brown, 409 F.3d 1271 (11 th Cir. 2005). <br />Rezoning —County council is <br />erroneously told it is not entitled <br />to traffic information prior to <br />discretionary vote on rezoning <br />ordinance <br />Opponents to rezone argue lack of that <br />material information rendered vote a nullity <br />Citation: Barley Mill, LLC v. Save Our County, Inc., 2014 WL 1220394 <br />(Del. 2014) <br />DELAWARE (03/25/14)—This case addressed the issue of whether a <br />county council vote approving a zoning amendment was arbitrary and <br />capricious. <br />The Background/Facts: Barley Mill, LLC ("Barley Mill") owned 92 <br />acres of land (the "Property") in New Castle County (the "County"). <br />Barley Mill sought to redevelop the Property. In order for Barley Mill to <br />proceed with its plan, the approximately 37 acres of the Property needed <br />to be rezoned. <br />Barley Mill applied to the County for a rezone of the Property. Nota- <br />bly, the increase of traffic from the proposed new development was of <br />considerable concern both to the public and to the members of the County <br />Council. <br />While Barley Mill's application was pending, an amendment to the <br />County's Unified Development Code ("UDC") changed the review pro- <br />©2014 Thomson Reuters 7 <br />