Martha Cares Olsen v. Chikaming Township
325 Mich. App. 170
| Mich. Ct. App. | 2018Background
- Lot 6 in the Merriweather Shores subdivision is a small, nonconforming lot (9,676 sq ft) in Chikaming Township; zoning ordinance requires 20,000 sq ft minimum for buildable lots.
- Appellant (purchaser at tax foreclosure) applied to the township Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) for dimensional (nonuse) variances to build; ZBA approved the variances after notice to owners within 300 feet and a public hearing where neighbors objected.
- Neighboring property owners (appellees) appealed the ZBA’s grant to the Berrien County Circuit Court; the township and appellant moved to dismiss, arguing appellees were not "aggrieved parties" under the Michigan Zoning Enabling Act (MZEA).
- The circuit court denied dismissal, found appellees aggrieved (in part relying on the MZEA notice provision and potential septic/setback impacts), then reversed the ZBA on the merits holding hardship was self-created.
- On appeal, the Court of Appeals reversed the circuit court’s denial of dismissal, holding appellees were not "parties aggrieved" under MCL 125.3605 because they failed to show special damages distinct from similarly situated property owners; the merits reversal was vacated as unnecessary and remanded.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (appellees) | Defendant's Argument (appellant/township) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether appellees are "parties aggrieved" under MCL 125.3605 and thus may appeal ZBA decision to circuit court | Appellees asserted aesthetic, ecological, practical harms, reliance on prior denial and entitlement to notice show they are aggrieved | Only parties suffering "special damages" distinct from similarly situated owners qualify as aggrieved; mere adjacency, notice, or generalized harms insufficient | Held: appellees are not aggrieved; they failed to show special damages, so they could not invoke circuit court review |
| Whether statutory notice to owners within 300 feet confers aggrieved-party status | Notice recipients argued the MZEA’s 300-foot notice implies legislative intent to permit them to appeal | Notice grants right to receive notice and appear at hearings, but does not expand who may appeal; aggrieved standard remains separate | Held: Notice under MCL 125.3103 does not confer aggrieved status |
| Whether appellant/township waived the right to challenge appellees’ ability to appeal by allowing them to appear at ZBA hearing | Appellees argued participation at the ZBA without objection waived later challenges | Defendants argued ZBA is not the proper forum to determine who may appeal to circuit court; availability of appeal is for the court to decide after a final decision | Held: No waiver; appellees’ right to appear at ZBA is distinct from right to appeal; challenge to appellate entitlement properly raised in circuit court |
| Whether Lansing Schools standing framework alters analysis | Appellees invoked Lansing Schools to argue broader standing based on statutory implication or substantial interest | Defendants: MZEA contains a specific "aggrieved party" appellate standard; general standing jurisprudence (Lansing Schools) is inapplicable | Held: Lansing Schools does not change MZEA’s aggrieved-party requirement; even under Lansing Schools appellees lack the requisite unique injury |
Key Cases Cited
- Federated Ins. Co. v. Oakland Co. Road Comm’n, 475 Mich 286 (Michigan 2006) (distinguishes standing from appellate "aggrieved" status; explains aggrieved requires pecuniary interest or concrete injury)
- Unger v. Forest Home Twp., 65 Mich App 614 (Michigan Ct. App. 1975) (party must allege special damages not common to other property owners to be aggrieved)
- Joseph v. Grand Blanc Twp., 5 Mich App 566 (Michigan Ct. App. 1966) (general harms insufficient to establish aggrieved status)
- Village of Franklin v. Southfield, 101 Mich App 554 (Michigan Ct. App. 1980) (mere ownership of adjoining land or residency is insufficient without special damages)
- Western Mich. Univ. Bd. of Trustees v. Brink, 81 Mich App 99 (Michigan Ct. App. 1978) (notice entitlement and right to appear do not broaden class of appellants entitled to seek review)
- Lansing Schools Educ. Ass’n v. Lansing Bd. of Educ., 487 Mich 349 (Michigan 2010) (reframed Michigan standing jurisprudence but does not override specific statutory appellate standards)
- Edward C. Levy Co. v. Marine City Zoning Bd. of Appeals, 293 Mich App 333 (Michigan Ct. App. 2011) (explains scope of circuit court review of ZBA decisions)