My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Planning Commission - 01/04/2007
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Planning Commission
>
2007
>
Agenda - Planning Commission - 01/04/2007
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/21/2025 9:41:12 AM
Creation date
12/29/2006 3:47:24 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Planning Commission
Document Date
01/04/2007
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
231
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />Township ordinance requires mobile homes to meet HUD stand~d$ <br />Older home moved to new location within township <br />Citation: Bunker Hill Township v. Allen, Court of Appeals of Michigan, No. '( <br />249353 -. ." <br /> <br />MICmGAN - Bailey owned a mobile home that was built in 1984 anq complied <br />with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)stan- <br />dards at that time. However, due to amendments made to thelIUI) construction <br />and safety standards in 1994, Bailey's mobile home was no longedn compli- <br />ance. <br />Bailey moved the home to a lot located within Bunker Hill 1fownship. The <br />move violated the tow~ship's zoning ordinances, which requiIted all-mobile <br />homes moved within the township to comply withHUD require~etlts.Conse~ <br />quently, Bailey could not obtain building and occupancy. permits. <br />The township sued to remove the mobile home, and the coUrt lruledHn its <br />favor. Bailey appealed, arguing his due.prbcess rights were being violated by <br />the ordinance. <br />DEGSION:Af6nned. <br />There was no violation of Bailey's -due process rights. <br />. Substantive due process protects an individual from the arbitrary depri- <br />vation of property or liberty interests. In general, when a court ~~lyzed a due <br />process claim, it presumed all local ordinances to be valid.ij:owever, if an <br />ordinance totally excluded a particular land use; either expressly oreffec- <br />tively, then the township had the burden to show that the <;>rdinance waS <br />reasonable. <br /> <br />Page 2 - Special Issue: Biweekly Edition <br /> <br />Z.B. <br /> <br />Dear Subscriber: <br /> <br />We are pleased to offer you this Special Issue ~ Biweekly Edition, and <br />we want to take the time to thank you for choosing our publication. . Our <br />newsletters are meant to keep you on the cutting edge of new developments <br />and help ~ou implement the best practices that will save you money and time. <br />Peruse our website for information about all of our products and services <br />at www.quinlan.com or call us at (800) 229-2084. <br /> <br /> <br />~y~ <br /> <br />Dennis Hofmazer <br />Publisher <br /> <br />Due Process <br /> <br />@2006 West, a Thomson business. Quinlan™ is a Thomson West brand. Any reproduction is prohibited. <br /> <br />158 <br /> <br />(: <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />( <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.