DCPCUP-0000-00643 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

-7- N ( 1) Whether the Board kept within its jurisdiction; (2 ) Whether it proceeded on a correct theory of law; ( 3 ) Whether its action was arbitrary, oppressive or unreasonable and represented its will and not its judgment ; and ( 4 ) Whether the evidence was such that it might reasonably make the order or determination in question. Brookside v. Jefferson Bd. of Adjustment , 131 Wis. 2d 101, 120 , 388 N.W. 2d 593 ( 1986 ) . ( 149 Wis. 2d at 843 ) . There is no argument before the Court that the Board did not act within its jurisdiction. The Board is empowered, pursuant to sec. 59 .99( 7 ) (a) , Stats. , to "hear and decide appeals where it is alleged there is error in any. . .decision . . .made by an administrative official. . . . " ( See also Dane County Ordinance, Section 10 .26( 5 ) and ( 6 ) . ) The plaintiffs have made no showing that the Board acted contrary to law. Although they have alleged that the Board did not allow them an opportunity to present their evidence, the plaintiffs presented substantially the same witnesses and testimony that were already before the Board. In addition, the Court finds that the decision of the Board was not arbitrary, oppressive, or unreasonable. Substantial evidence introduced before the Board supports the Board ' s decision. Plaintiffs have not made such a showing, and in light of the modifications that had been placed on the conditional use permit , authorized by Dane County Or- dinance, Section 10 .255( 2 ) ( i) , the Board ' s decision should not be con- sidered arbitrary, nor the exercise of its will rather than its judgment . ( See Board of Adjustment Minutes, 6/23/88 , Appeal #1670 ) . Finally, the Court finds the the evidence reasonably supports the Board ' s decision . The evidence presented before the zoning author- ities is sufficient to form a reasonable basis for making their determin- ation . The findings of the Board may not be disturbed by the Circuit Court if any reasonable view of the evidence sustains them. Snyder v. Waukesha Co. Zoning Bd . , 74 Wis . 2d 468 , 476 , 247 N.W. 2d 89 ( 1976 ) .