DCPREZ-0000-05710 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

SENT BY 9-23-93 ; 1 :32PM ; JENSWOLD, STUDT, . . . -DANE CO TREASURER ;# 2/ 6 JENSWOLD, STUDT, HANSON, CLAM & KAUFMANN ATTORNEYS AT LAW JOHN F. JENSWOLD" ROBERT R. STUDT SUITE ROO LARRY I. t-IANSON 15 NORTH CARROLL STREET EIRUCE K, KAUrMANN MADISON, WISCONSIN 53703.2752 PETER M. GENNRICH OF COUNSEL LAWRENCE E. BECHLER (g¢5)257•s2r51 eagNE3 A_ CLARK JOSANN M. REYNOLDS WILLIAM D. DYKE VAX (608)237.8699 BRIONY JEAN FOY LAW OFFICES MINERAL POINT, WI J. TIMOTHY LOVETT LAURA L.SALERNO 27 August 1993 "CCRTIFIEO CIVIL TRIAL SPCCIALI$T OY NATIONAL BOARD co'TRIAL APVOCACY Mr. Jim Bricker Town of Windsor 4104 Mueller Road DeForest, Wisconsin 53532 RE: McCallen Rezoning Restrictive Covenants Dear Jim: As you can see, I have revised your proposed restrictions. I was not sure exactly what you were trying to accomplish, since what you have proposed is a substantial revision of the format normally used by Dane County in matters of this kind. I do think that it is inappropriate for the town to be a party to the restrictive covenants. Obviously, since the zoning amendment cannot take effect without the recording of the restrictive covenants, and the covenants cannot be amended without the express prior consent of the Town and the County, I see no value to becoming a party to the covenants. Certainly it is not at all customary in my experience for towns to actually be parties to restrictive covenants. I was also particularly concerned about your language regarding the termination of the covenants. The notion of having an automatic change to the zoning upon termination of the restrictive covenants with no district set forth strikes me as completely unenforceable, and probably too close to contract zoning to ever pass muster before the Wisconsin courts. As you will see, I have tried to change the focus to simply require the Town to pay attention to the Comprehensive Plan if someone comes in and seeks to terminate the restriction. Obviously, the same kind of language could be incorporated in the amendment paragraph as well, although I did not do so since you did not do so. Your draft also does not provide for enforcement of the restrictive covenants by any parties other than governments. It is quite common to permit certain classes of property owners in the vicinity of the property to also have enforcement rights, although it is not universal to do so. Sometimes it is only the neighboring property owners that care about deviation from the restrictions enough to invest the time and effort in enforcement. That is a policy matter, however, and I will do no more than bring this to your attention at this time.