DCPREZ-0000-07598 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Helen Jo inson October ' 9, 1999 Page 2 has not surrendered or contracted away any of its governmental functions or powers. The function of the council and the powers conferred upon it by statute are not impaired. We conclude this ordinance was properly adopted by the common council in the exercise of its statutory functions to determine to rezone property at such time as the conditions, set by the council, were met. * * * It provided that the rezoning would take place when the conditions were met. I I inderstand that there has been some criticism of the board's practice of requirinc deed restrictions on land other than that being rezoned on the ground that the prac ice is not authorized by the ordinance. See August 25, 1999 letter from Town of Cross Plains Town Supervisor Bob Bowman. This starts from an erroneous premise (that the ordinance alone can authorize conditional zoning) and proceeds unmindf ii of the fact that each time the county imposes deed restrictions as a part of a rezonE grant, it does so by adopting an ordinance. As Konkel points out, conditional zoning is authorized by statute. Section 59.69(4), Saats., states that a county r lay only exercise its zoning powers through an ordinance. When the county imposes conditional zoning it does so by an ordinance amendment. An ordinance amendn ent enacting zi rezone changes the ordinance and does not execute or implement its existing provisions. Quinn v. Town of Dodgeville, 120 Wis.2d 304, 317 (Ct. App 1984). Prior authorization in the zoning ordinance to impose a srecific type of c onditional zoning is simply not necessary. To say otherwise would be to impose pn a legislative body the absurd requirement that before enacting an amendn gent to its zoning ordinance, it must first enact an amendment stating that it gives its alf the power to enact a future amendment. Y our second question is whether the county may lawfully amend or repeal a deed re,triction without the consent of property owners within 300 feet of the restricte 1 property. It is my opinion that the county can amend or repeal a deed restrictic n without the consent of landowners within 300 feet. C nce a deed restriction is recorded pursuant to conditional zoning, D.C. Ord. sec. 10.2.55(3)(b) states that "The covenant controls shall be amenable or repealable upon pe tition of the owner of the lands subject to the controls and approval by the county 1,oard after a hearing similar to a rezoning hearing." It is my opinion that the consent of any persor or entity with a property right in the deed restriction would be requires to amend or repeal the restriction. But, the express language of the ordinan :e does not grant owners of property within 300 feet a property right. Rather,