Michaels v. Village of Franklin

230 N.W.2d 273, 58 Mich. App. 665, 1975 Mich. App. LEXIS 1744
CourtMichigan Court of Appeals
DecidedFebruary 13, 1975
DocketDocket 20198
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 230 N.W.2d 273 (Michaels v. Village of Franklin) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Michigan Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Michaels v. Village of Franklin, 230 N.W.2d 273, 58 Mich. App. 665, 1975 Mich. App. LEXIS 1744 (Mich. Ct. App. 1975).

Opinion

Allen, J.

This case presents a single issue of the constitutionality of a zoning ordinance classifying plaintiffs’ land residential rather than commercial as requested by plaintiffs and as approved by the village planning commission. Following denial of their request by the village council, plaintiffs filed suit in circuit court. April 24, 1974, the court rendered judgment for plaintiffs, holding the single residence zoning of plaintiffs’ property invalid and unconstitutional as to plaintiffs’ property. Defendant village appeals as of right.

The village of Franklin, "the town that time forgot”, is a small community with historical significance. Its area is about 2.6 square miles and its population approximately 3500. Within its boundaries lies the Village Center Area containing the original historic establishment and most of the *667 single commercial and office development. This old and historic area is bounded on the north by 14 Mile Eoad and is roughly bisected by Franklin Road, a street which runs north and south between 13 and 14 Mile Roads. Its architecture is basically historic colonial and the area has been designated an historic district pursuant to MCLA 399.201; MSA 5.3407(1), and by the Department of Interior.

Plaintiffs’ land, a quadrilateral-shaped parcel, is situated within the Village Center Area at the southeast corner of 14 Mile Road and Franklin Road. 1 The southerly portion of the quadrilateral is now zoned commercial. On it stands a 2-1/2-story colonial-type furniture store with a separate building at the rear used as a candy shop. Both buildings are owned by plaintiffs. The balance of plaintiffs’ parcel contains 2.63 acres of vacant land, all zoned for single residential use. 2 The vacant area is surrounded by several different zoning classifications. Directly across 14 Mile Road at the northeast corner of the intersection, the property is zoned for office use and is vacant. Likewise, at the northwest corner of the intersection, the property is zoned for office use and is presently being used by the Franklin Cider Mill.

On the east, plaintiffs’ property is bordered by a stream which flows in a deep ravine and acts as a natural barrier between plaintiffs’ land and the residential homes east of the stream. On the west side of the stream and on plaintiffs’ property is a *668 small pond. The pond is 27 feet below the ground on which stands the furniture store. On the south is a strip zoned for commercial use extending south approximately 1-1/2 blocks. This strip constitutes the central business district of the village. At the rear of the commercially zoned strip is an area zoned for single residential use.

The quadrilateral parcel is not topographically uniform. That portion of the parcel which fronts on 14 Mile Road consists of a flood plain when the river to the east overflows and makes it unsuitable for dwelling sites. The land slopes significantly from its high point at the furniture store to the pond and to the intersection at Franklin Road and 14 Mile Road. The drop over the 437 feet of Franklin Road is 19 feet.

On March 23, 1972, the village planning commission unanimously approved changing the zoning from its present R-4 Single Residential to C-l Local Business. 3 On June 12, 1972, the village council considered the request and adopted the following substitute motion on a vote of 4-2.

"Whereas it is the judgment of the council of the Village of Franklin that it is not in the best interests of the village to permit commercial development of the property located at the southeast corner of Fourteen and Franklin Roads owned by Mr. Michael Michaels and,
"Whereas it is further the judgment of the Council that this land should be retained in its present state and,
"Whereas it is the further judgment of the Council that *669 Mr. Michael Michaels is entitled to reasonable compensation for his property and,
"Now therefore be it resolved that the application of Mr. Michaels for rezoning of lot 26 and part of lot 25, supervisors plat #8 from R-4 to Commercial Zoning be denied and a committee be appointed by the chairman to enter into negotiations with Mr. Michael Michaels for the eventual purchase of this property by the village subject to the approval of its electorate.”

On November 2, 1972, the village council sought to clarify its earlier resolution by adopting the following:

"[B]e it resolved that the resolution of June 12, 1972, relating to lot 26 and part of lot 25, supervisors plat #8 be clarified and that council’s purpose and intent in passing such resolution was:
1. To deny the petition for rezoning as not being in the best interests of the village.
2. To express the council’s belief that the property in question should be public land and left in an undeveloped condition.
3. To require the appointment of a committee to negotiate with the property owner for the purchase of his property by the village, such purchase to be subject to approval by the village electors because of a village charter provision.
"Be it further resolved that by the resolution of June 12, 1972, this council did not intend to suggest that the present zoning of the property is confiscatory or that the owner would be entitled to any compensation for it except if a purchase thereof was negotiated.”

The. trial judge viewed the parcel in question and, following the conclusion of trial, made specific findings of fact:

" * * * the popular Cider Mill has been located at the Franklin-Fourteen Mile intersection for many, many *670 years and during the fall of each year is the focal point of very heavy, commercial vehicular traffic. This Court accepts as substantially accurate the testimony indicating the heavy volume of autumn traffic generated by the Cider Mill. This commercial use is inconsistent with a single residence use of the subject real property.
" * * * plaintiffs’ subject real property is not part of a residential neighborhood. The Franklin River and its flood plain separate plaintiffs’ property from the residences to the east.
" * * * single residence zoning of plaintiffs’ property is a kind of spot zoning. The property immediately south on the east side of Franklin is commercial and this commercial use extends south, including the retail stores that comprise most of defendant’s business district.
" * * * neither the master plan nor the recommendation of the planning commission, nor even the resolutions of defendant council, assert that single residence use of plaintiffs’ real property is either reasonable or desirable.
♦ * *

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

City of Essexville v. Carrollton Concrete Mix, Inc
673 N.W.2d 815 (Michigan Court of Appeals, 2004)
Equitable Building Co. v. City of Royal Oak
240 N.W.2d 489 (Michigan Court of Appeals, 1976)
Ettinger v. Avon Township
236 N.W.2d 129 (Michigan Court of Appeals, 1975)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
230 N.W.2d 273, 58 Mich. App. 665, 1975 Mich. App. LEXIS 1744, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/michaels-v-village-of-franklin-michctapp-1975.