Janssen v. Holland Charter Township Zoning Board of Appeals
Michigan Court of Appeals
252 Mich. App. 197, 651 N.W.2d 464 (2002)
- Written by Tanya Munson, JD
Facts
In 1996, Henry and Doris Pyle and Vistiana Properties, LLC (Vistiana) filed a use-variance request with the Holland Charter Township Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) (defendant) to change the density requirements for a 100-acre parcel of land located in the agricultural zoning district. Vistiana sought to have the density requirements changed to allow them to build a 250-unit residential development on the property. After holding public hearings, the ZBA granted the use-variance petition. The ZBA determined that Vistiana could not receive a reasonable economic return if the property was used for a purpose consistent with existing zoning. The ZBA based its determination on an analysis of rental income received and taxes assessed on the property as zoned. The ZBA also determined that the community was in a transitional state and was shifting from agricultural to residential. The township’s master plan anticipated such a transition and envisioned that Visitiana’s land would eventually be used for residential purposes. The township had approved approximately 50 other instances of residential use of land in areas zoned agricultural. John Janssen and others (plaintiffs) contested the ZBA’s decision in the circuit court. The circuit court upheld the ZBA’s decision. Janssen and the others appealed, arguing that the circuit court erred in not finding that the ZBA’s decision to grant the use variance constituted impermissible rezoning because the decision was not supported by competent, material, and substantial evidence.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Per curiam)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.