Due Process. In 1994, the Board of County Commissioners of Yellowstone County,Montana,created Zoning District 17 in a rural area of the county and a plan ning and zoning commission for the district. The com mission adopted zoning regulations, which provided, among other things, that “dwelling units” could be built only through “on-site construction.”Later,county officials were unable to identify any health or safety concerns that were addressed by requiring on-site construction.

There was no evidence that homes built off-site would negatively affect property values or cause harm to any other general welfare interest of the community. In December 1999, Francis and Anita Yurczyk bought two forty-acre tracts in District 17.The Yurczyks also bought a modular home and moved it onto the property the fol lowing spring. Within days, the county advised the Yurczyks that the home violated the on-site construction regulation and would have to be removed.The Yurczyks filed a suit in a Montana state court against the county, alleging, among other things, that the zoning regulation violated their due process rights.Does the Yurczyks’claim relate to procedural or substantive due process rights?
What standard would the court apply to determine whether the regulation is constitutional? How should the court rule? Explain. [Yurczyk v.Yellowstone County, 2004 MT 3,319 Mont.169,83 P.3d 266 (2004)]