Comments on: Dispute over Superior Township Settlement

By: John Q.

John Q. — Wed, 27 Jan 2010 20:22:16 +0000

The other problem is that the DEQ (now DNRE) will greenlight private sewage treatment plants even when they are contrary to the township’s master plan. That allows developers to develop land that would otherwise be undevelopable. It also gives them leverage in court to pursue a takings claim against the township for exclusionary zoning. Even if the township wins the court case, they likely won’t be awarded court costs and the attorney fees pile up quickly. The township likely saw this as the best alternative.

By: Vivienne Armentrout

Vivienne Armentrout — Wed, 27 Jan 2010 00:29:04 +0000

I’ve known Bill McFarlane for some years and I’m guessing that if he says this settlement is the best the township can do, he is right. Unfortunately, suits over unfavorable zoning are quite common in Michigan and large-lot, agricultural zoning has often been viewed as a “holding” zoning. Michigan law is not very helpful to municipalities trying to impose use restrictions. You’ll note that Ann Arbor has settled a number of lawsuits on land use and regulations, including the infamous Glen Ann case. Superior Township has been one of the most (or the most) successful townships at enforcing a low-growth strategy in the county. Don’t forget that they are our bulwark against the spread of sprawl from Canton Township.

I’d like to add that I am a member of the SEMLC and they have done a sterling job of giving us a “green zone”, again between us and the sprawl. We are fortunate in having this area as a retreat now and in the future.

By: Tom Whitaker

Tom Whitaker — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 20:21:03 +0000

Amen.

By: cmadler

cmadler — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 19:40:45 +0000

Ridiculous. What is the point of having zoning if you’re just going to let people ignore it?