A party may feel that a decision made by their Zoning Commission or Zoning Board of Appeals has harmed or aggrieved them. In order to prevent that harm, that party may appeal that decision to the Circuit Court where that property is located. However, the Michigan courts have ruled that in order to appeal, a party must prove that they are an aggrieved party for purposes of MCL125.3605.
In the Michigan Court of Appeals’ April 30, 2020 unpublished opinion, Baker v. Township of Bainbridge, (No. 347362), the Court reaffirmed that in order to prove that a party is an aggrieved party, that party must prove that they have “suffered special damages not common to other property owners similarly situated.”
Plaintiff appealed the Bainbridge Township Zoning Board of Appeals’ (ZBA) decision to grant a special land permit to Plaintiff’s neighbor that allowed him to operate an automotive repair shop and used car business on his property to the circuit court. Plaintiff’s appeal was initially denied stating that plaintiff was not an “aggrieved party” and unable to appeal. Plaintiff appealed that decision to the Court of Appeals who found that Plaintiff was an “aggrieved party.”
The Court of Appeals noted that aesthetic, ecological, and practical harms are insufficient to show special damages, however, in this case, the impact of a car dealership on a zoned, agricultural environment is more extreme. The Court also found that there was no other property similarly situated as Plaintiff’s and that Plaintiff’s affidavit set forth specific, unique claims that would invade the use of Plaintiff’s specific property.
The key takeaway from this case is that, in Michigan, the law requires special damages not common to other property owners when bringing forth an appeal of a zoning decision as an “aggrieved party.”
A link to the opinion can be found here:
https://law.justia.com/cases/michigan/court-of-appeals-unpublished/2020/347362.html
