|
Aerial Photos and Topo of site.
http://www.terraserver.microsoft.com/image.aspx?T=4&S=11&Z=17&X=753&Y=11813&W=3
-Tim-
Timothy Carpenter, P.E., Pres.,
-----Original Message-----
Here is the link to the full text opinion:
------------------------------------------------------------------------- Enviro-Mich message from "Anne Woiwode" <Anne.Woiwode@sierraclub.org> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
While memory is a dangerous thing to rely on, I recall the particulars of this case actually had to do with the owner subdividing and developing pieces of a single piece of land until the final parcel that remained had such a large proportion of wetland that the proposed development of that piece would have required significant wetland filling. The challenge raised by the applicant was the claim that the state was "taking" the land by denying the wetland permit application. The claims by the state, led at the time, as I recall, by then Assistant AG and now Deputy DEQ Director Skip Pruss, and bolstered by amicus from all over the country, were that the decisions to subdivide had led to a self-created "hardship" and that a takings claim was entirely bogus.
Others with better filing systems and access to the current decision are welcome to correct my memory!
Anne Woiwode
-----Original Message-----
Enviro-Mich message from JBull51264@aol.com -------------------------------------------------------------------------
It was a pretty blatant case too. The owners knew full well that they were purchasing a parcel of land that had large areas of wetlands that could not be developed. They claim the state diminished the value of the land. The land never had the value they claimed. If a developer buys a parcel with a lake on it would that developer be able to assume he could fill it in to put up a shopping mall, and charge the state for not letting him do so. Just crazy.
There is a latin phrase that should cover this situation: "caveat emptor," or "Let the buyer beware." This case has been going on for 15 years I think. As I recall it had to do with the owner wanting to fill in wetlands to build a restaurant in Oakland County.
============================================================== ENVIRO-MICH: Internet List and Forum for Michigan Environmental and Conservation Issues and Michigan-based Citizen Action. Archives at http://www.great-lakes.net/lists/enviro-mich/
Postings to: enviro-mich@great-lakes.net For info, send email to majordomo@great-lakes.net with a one-line message body of "info enviro-mich" ==============================================================
============================================================== ENVIRO-MICH: Internet List and Forum for Michigan Environmental and Conservation Issues and Michigan-based Citizen Action. Archives at http://www.great-lakes.net/lists/enviro-mich/
Postings to: enviro-mich@great-lakes.net For info, send email to majordomo@great-lakes.net with a one-line message body of "info enviro-mich" ============================================================== |