X hits on this document

174 views

0 shares

0 downloads

0 comments

29 / 52

No.

2006AP450

area as a natural habitat for birds and other wildlife."

Id.

However, affecting

the

justifications

the

plaintiff's

for "the premises

severe restrictions were demolished by

plaintiff's expert witnesses and the admissions of the township

¶42 The

Sheerr

court

"conditional

uses"

led it

officials."

Id.

stated that to conclude

an

examination of the that it represented

arbitrary

conditional

legislation.

uses

there

Id.

at

63.

included

private

For example, possible recreational areas such

as camps, golf courses, and athletic fields, but "[a]ll of these

uses require frustrating a

the removal of a substantial number of central purpose of the EP-1 designation."

trees, Id. at

64. The

ordinance

commercial

uses but

also only

conditionally

on

a

five

acre

permitted

lot.

Id.

a

number of The court

concluded that a commercial use represented the "only realistic

possibility

65.

In

so

for the finding,

use the

of the plaintiff's property." Id. at court considered the twelve significant

requirements that a landowner a conditional use permit, characterized the likelihood

would have to and as a of being able

meet in order to get result, the court to use the property

for the

any purpose as "very court concluded that

remote."

Id.

at 64-65.

Accordingly,

the

legislation

was

arbitrary

and

the

27

Document info
Document views174
Page views174
Page last viewedSat Jan 21 09:29:25 UTC 2017
Pages52
Paragraphs3975
Words12857

Comments