Mich. Comp. Laws » Michigan Compiled Laws / Chapter 560 / Act 288 of 1967
Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 560.120 (2026)

Final approval; proprietor's rights and duties; procedure; time period; extension.

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

LAND DIVISION ACT


Act 288 of 1967


560.120 Final approval; proprietor's rights and duties; procedure; time period; extension.

Sec. 120.

    

    (1) After the preliminary plat is approved or is approved subject to conditions pursuant to sections 113 to 119, the proprietor shall do all of the following:

    

    (a) Submit to the clerk of the governing body of the municipality a list of all authorities required by sections 113 to 119 to review the preliminary plat, certifying that the list shows all authorities as required by sections 113 to 119.

    (b) Submit all written approvals to the clerk of the governing body.

    (2) The governing body of the municipality, after receipt of the necessary approved copies of the preliminary plat, shall do all of the following:

    (a) Consider and review the preliminary plat at its next meeting, or within 20 days from the date of submission, and approve it if the proprietor has met all conditions laid down by the municipality for approval of the preliminary plat.

    (b) Instruct the clerk to promptly notify the proprietor of approval or rejection in writing and, if rejected, to give the reasons.

    (c) Instruct the clerk to note all proceedings in the minutes of the meeting which minutes shall be open for inspection.

    (3) Final approval of the preliminary plat under this section confers upon the proprietor for a period of 2 years from date of approval the conditional right that the general terms and conditions under which preliminary plat approval was granted will not be changed. The 2-year period may be extended if applied for by the proprietor and granted by the governing body in writing. Written notice of the extension shall be sent by the governing body to the other approving authorities.

History: 1967, Act 288, Eff. Jan. 1, 1968 ;-- Am. 1969, Act 308, Imd. Eff. Aug. 14, 1969 ;-- Am. 2004, Act 525, Eff. July 1, 2005

PopularName Notes:

Plat Act

PopularName Notes:

Subdivision Control
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 2004–2012 · leading case: Conlin v. SCIO TP., 686 N.W.2d 16 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Conlin v. SCIO TP., 686 N.W.2d 16 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 2× “§ 560.120(1)(a); see also M.C.L. § 560.166.”
Conlin v. Scio Twp., 262 Mich. App. 379 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 2× “See MCL 560.120(1)(a); see also MCL 560.166. To be approved, a plat must meet the requirements of §§ 131 to 151, which concern form, substance, and the certificates of approval necessary for recording a final plat.”
CK Dev., LLC v. Town of Nolensville (Tenn. Ct. App. 2012). “1984) (developer was protected by law against zoning change for three years from date of preliminary site approval); Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. §560.120 (developer has vested rights for two years in conditions set forth in approved preliminary site plan).”
Mich. Comp. Laws § 560.120(1)(a): 2 cases
Conlin v. SCIO TP., 686 N.W.2d 16 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004). “§ 560.120(1)(a); see also M.C.L. § 560.166.”
Conlin v. Scio Twp., 262 Mich. App. 379 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004). “See MCL 560.120(1)(a); see also MCL 560.166. To be approved, a plat must meet the requirements of §§ 131 to 151, which concern form, substance, and the certificates of approval necessary for recording a final plat.”
Mich. Comp. Laws § 560.120(2)(a): 2 cases
Conlin v. SCIO TP., 686 N.W.2d 16 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004). “§ 560.120(1)(a); see also M.C.L. § 560.166.”
Conlin v. Scio Twp., 262 Mich. App. 379 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004). “See MCL 560.120(1)(a); see also MCL 560.166. To be approved, a plat must meet the requirements of §§ 131 to 151, which concern form, substance, and the certificates of approval necessary for recording a final plat.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.