Court of Appeals of Michigan, No. 285691
March 18, 2010
The Michigan Court of Appeals upheld a trial court decision that a down-zoning of 9,000 acres “to preserve the unique camp-like characteristics of the Township,” including the Boy Scouts’ 4,748 acres property, did not constitute a taking. The court upheld the trial court’s ruling on summary disposition on the Boy Scouts’ claims of facial Substantive Due Process, Equal Protection, Procedural Due Process, inverse condemnation categorical taking, as applied Substantive Due Process and inverse condemnation claim under the Penn Central balancing test. The Scouts had proposed an alternative rezoning to allow construction of approximately 1,278 residential houses on the site. In the context of the various claims, the court repeatedly found that the property retained economically beneficial use and upheld the municipality’s interest in the rezoning as legitimate and reasonable. “The zoning ordinance allows [the Boy Scouts] to pursue campground development on the land, although not necessarily the type of residential development that the Boy Scouts would prefer to pursue.” Also: “[T]he Boy Scouts have no investment-backed expectations in residential development”; “mere negotiation for a potential sale does not equate to evidence of actual investments.”
“This is an unpublished opinion. In accordance with Michigan court of appeals rules, unpublished opinions are not precedentially binding under the rules of stare decisis.”
Decision available at http://coa.courts.mi.gov/documents/OPINIONS/FINAL/COA/20100318_C285691_57_285691.OPN.PDF.