In Reaume v Township of Spring Lake, to be published Court of Appeals case number 341654 (Decided May, 21, 2019), the plaintiff owned a property that she used as her primary residence for approximately 11 years. In 2015, the plaintiff hired a property management company and sought to rent her home as a short-term vacation rental. Before undertaking substantial improvements to the property, a representative of the property management company spoke with a township official regarding restrictions on short term rentals. According to the property management employee, she was told there were no restrictions on short term rentals in the township. The plaintiff completed the improvements to her property and rented it out seasonally as a short term rental in 2015 and 2016. In late 2016 the township adopted an ordinance that limited the use of short term rentals in certain districts and required all short term rentals to be registered and licensed before any rental activity could occur. The plaintiff applied for a short term rental license, which was denied by the township. The plaintiff’s appeals were subsequently denied by the Township Zoning Board of Appeals and the trial court. Following the trial court’s denial of her appeal, the plaintiff sought leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals, which was granted.
The Court of Appeals rejected the Plaintiff’s “grandfathered use” argument finding that short term rentals have not been permitted in the district where Plaintiff’s property is located at any time and that her “argument turns on making untenable extrapolations from statements made by individuals who had no authority to bind” the Township. Therefore, even though Plaintiff had previously rented her property as a short term rental, she was “not entitled to continue doing so as a prior nonconforming use, notwithstanding [defendant’s] failure to enforce its zoning requirements.”
Read more about our expertise in real property law.
Real Property LawAbout the Author
