62.23 City planning.
(1) Commission.
(a) The council of any city may by ordinance create a “City Plan Commission," to consist of 7 members. The commission shall also include, as a nonvoting member, a representative from a military base or installation, with at least 200 assigned military personnel or that contains at least 2,000 acres, that is located in the city, if the base's or installation's commanding officer appoints such a representative. All members of the commission, other than the representative appointed by the commanding officer of a military base or installation, shall be appointed by the mayor, who shall also choose the presiding officer. The mayor may appoint himself or herself to the commission and may appoint other city elected or appointed officials, except that the commission shall always have at least 3 citizen members who are not city officials. Citizen members shall be persons of recognized experience and qualifications. The council may by ordinance provide that the membership of the commission shall be as provided thereunder.
(d) The members of the commission shall be appointed to hold office for a period of 3 years. Appointments shall be made by the mayor during the month of April for terms that expire in April or at any other time if a vacancy occurs during the middle of a term.
(e) The city plan commission shall have power and authority to employ experts and a staff, and to pay for their services and such other expenses as may be necessary and proper, not exceeding, in all, the appropriation that may be made for such commission by the legislative body, or placed at its disposal through gift, and subject to any ordinance or resolution enacted by the governing body.
(f) Any city may by ordinance increase the number of members of the city plan commission so as to provide that the building commissioner or building inspector shall serve as a member thereof.
(2) Functions. It shall be the function and duty of the commission to make and adopt a master plan for the physical development of the city, including any areas outside of its boundaries that in the commission's judgment bear relation to the development of the city provided, however, that in any county where a regional planning department has been established, areas outside the boundaries of a city may not be included in the master plan without the consent of the county board of supervisors. The master plan, with the accompanying maps, plats, charts, and descriptive and explanatory matter, shall show the commission's recommendations for such physical development, and shall, as described in sub. (3) (b), contain at least the elements described in s. 66.1001 (2). The commission may from time to time amend, extend, or add to the master plan or carry any part or subject matter into greater detail. The commission may adopt rules for the transaction of business and shall keep a record of its resolutions, transactions, findings, and determinations, which record shall be a public record.
(3) The master plan.
(a) The master plan shall be made with the general purpose of guiding and accomplishing a coordinated, adjusted and harmonious development of the municipality which will, in accordance with existing and future needs, best promote public health, safety, morals, order, convenience, prosperity or the general welfare, as well as efficiency and economy in the process of development.
(b) The commission may adopt the master plan as a whole by a single resolution, or, as the work of making the whole master plan progresses, may from time to time by resolution adopt a part or parts of a master plan. Beginning on January 1, 2010, or, if the city is exempt under s. 66.1001 (3m), the date under s. 66.1001 (3m) (b), if the city engages in any program or action described in s. 66.1001 (3), the master plan shall contain at least all of the elements specified in s. 66.1001 (2). The adoption of the plan or any part, amendment, or addition, shall be by resolution carried by the affirmative votes of not less than a majority of all the members of the city plan commission. The resolution shall refer expressly to the elements under s. 66.1001 and other matters intended by the commission to form the whole or any part of the plan, and the action taken shall be recorded on the adopted plan or part of the plan by the identifying signature of the secretary of the commission, and a copy of the plan or part of the plan shall be certified to the common council, and also to the commanding officer, or the officer's designee, of any military base or installation, with at least 200 assigned military personnel or that contains at least 2,000 acres, that is located in or near the city. The purpose and effect of the adoption and certifying of the master plan or part of the plan shall be solely to aid the city plan commission and the council in the performance of their duties.
(4) Miscellaneous powers of the commission. The commission may make reports and recommendations relating to the plan and development of the city to public officials and agencies, public utility companies, civic, educational, professional and other organizations, and citizens. It may recommend to the mayor or council, programs for public improvements and the financing thereof. All public officials shall, upon request, furnish to the commission, within a reasonable time, such available information as it may require for its work. The commission, its members and employees, in the performance of its functions, may enter upon any land, make examinations and surveys, and place and maintain necessary monuments and marks thereon. In general, the commission shall have such powers as may be necessary to enable it to perform its functions and promote municipal planning.
(5) Matters referred to city plan commission. The council, or other public body or officer of the city having final authority thereon, shall refer to the city plan commission, for its consideration and report before final action is taken by the council, public body or officer, the following matters: The location and architectural design of any public building; the location of any statue or other memorial; the location, acceptance, extension, alteration, vacation, abandonment, change of use, sale, acquisition of land for or lease of land for any street, alley or other public way, park, playground, airport, area for parking vehicles, or other memorial or public grounds; the location, extension, abandonment or authorization for any public utility whether publicly or privately owned; all plats of lands in the city or within the territory over which the city is given platting jurisdiction by ch. 236; the location, character and extent or acquisition, leasing or sale of lands for public or semipublic housing, slum clearance, relief of congestion, or vacation camps for children; and the amendment or repeal of any ordinance adopted pursuant to this section. Unless such report is made within 30 days, or such longer period as may be stipulated by the common council, the council or other public body or officer, may take final action without it.
(6) Official map.
(a) As used in this subsection, “waterways" includes rivers, streams, creeks, ditches, drainage channels, watercourses, lakes, bays, ponds, impoundment reservoirs, retention and detention basins, marshes and other surface water areas, regardless of whether the areas are natural or artificial.
(am)
1. In this paragraph:
a. “Airport" means an airport as defined under s. 114.002 (7) which is owned or operated by a county, city, village or town either singly or jointly with one or more counties, cities, villages or towns.
b. “Airport affected area" means the area established by an agreement under s. 66.1009. If a county, city, village or town has not established such an agreement, “airport affected area" in that county, city, village or town means the area located within 3 miles of the boundaries of an airport.
2. If the council of any city which is not located in whole or in part in a county with a population of 750,000 or more has established an official map under par. (b), the map shall show the location of any part of an airport located within the area subject to zoning by the city and any part of an airport affected area located within the area subject to zoning by the city.
(b) The council of any city may by ordinance or resolution establish an official map of the city or any part thereof showing the streets, highways, historic districts, parkways, parks and playgrounds laid out, adopted and established by law. The city may also include the location of railroad rights-of-way, waterways and public transit facilities on its map. A city may include a waterway on its map only if the waterway is included in a comprehensive surface water drainage plan. The map is conclusive with respect to the location and width of streets, highways, waterways and parkways, and the location and extent of railroad rights-of-way, public transit facilities, parks and playgrounds shown on the map. The official map is declared to be established to conserve and promote the public health, safety, convenience or general welfare. The ordinance or resolution shall require the city clerk at once to record with the register of deeds of the county or counties in which the city is situated a certificate showing that the city has established an official map. An ordinance or resolution establishing any part of an official map enacted prior to June 16, 1965, which would be valid under this paragraph is hereby validated.
(c) The city council may amend the official map of the city so as to establish the exterior lines of planned new streets, highways, historic districts, parkways, railroad rights-of-way, public transit facilities, waterways, parks or playgrounds, or to widen, narrow, extend or close existing streets, highways, historic districts, parkways, railroad rights-of-way, public transit facilities, waterways, parks or playgrounds. No such change may become effective until after a public hearing concerning the proposed change before the city council or a committee appointed by the city council from its members, at which parties in interest and citizens shall have an opportunity to be heard. Notice of the public hearing shall be published as a class 2 notice under ch. 985. Before amending the map, the council shall refer the matter to the city plan commission for report, but if the city plan commission does not make its report within 60 days of reference, it forfeits the right to further suspend action. When adopted, amendments become a part of the official map of the city, and are conclusive with respect to the location and width of the streets, highways, historic districts, waterways and parkways and the location and extent of railroad rights-of-way, public transit facilities, parks and playgrounds shown on the map. The placing of any street, highway, waterway, parkway, railroad right-of-way, public transit facility, park or playground line or lines upon the official map does not constitute the opening or establishment of any street, parkway, railroad right-of-way, public transit facility, park or playground or alteration of any waterway, or the taking or acceptance of any land for these purposes.
(d) The locating, widening or closing, or the approval of the locating, widening or closing of streets, highways, waterways, parkways, railroad rights-of-way, public transit facilities, parks or playgrounds by the city under provisions of law other than this section shall be deemed to amend the official map, and are subject to this section, except that changes or additions made by a subdivision plat approved by the city under ch. 236 do not require the public hearing specified in par. (c) if the changes or additions do not affect any land outside the platted area.
(e) No permit may be issued to construct or enlarge any building within the limits of any street, highway, waterway, railroad right-of-way, public transit facility or parkway, shown or laid out on the map except as provided in this section. The street, highway, waterway, railroad right-of-way, public transit facility or parkway system shown on the official map may be shown on the official map as extending beyond the boundaries of a city or village a distance equal to that within which the approval of land subdivision plats by the city council or village board is required as provided by s. 236.10 (1) (b) 2. Any person desiring to construct or enlarge a building within the limits of a street, highway, railroad right-of-way, public transit facility or parkway so shown as extended may apply to the authorized official of the city or village for a building permit. Any person desiring to construct or enlarge a building within the limits of a street, highway, waterway, railroad right-of-way, public transit facility or parkway shown on the official map within the incorporated limits of the municipality shall apply to the authorized official of the city or village for a building permit. Unless an application is made, and the building permit granted or not denied within 30 days, the person is not entitled to compensation for damage to the building in the course of construction of the street, highway, railroad right-of-way, public transit facility or parkway shown on the official map. Unless an application is made, and the building permit granted or not denied within 30 days, the person is not entitled to compensation for damage to the building in the course of construction or alteration of the waterway shown on the official map within the incorporated limits of the municipality. If the land within the mapped street, highway, waterway, railroad right-of-way, public transit facility or parkway is not yielding a fair return, the board of appeals in any municipality which has established such a board having power to make variances or exceptions in zoning regulations may, by the vote of a majority of its members, grant a permit for a building or addition in the path of the street, highway, waterway, railroad right-of-way, public transit facility or parkway, which will as little as practicable increase the cost of opening the street, highway, waterway, railroad right-of-way, public transit facility or parkway or tend to cause a change of the official map. The board may impose reasonable requirements as a condition of granting the permit to promote the health, convenience, safety or general welfare of the community. The board shall refuse a permit where the applicant will not be substantially affected by not constructing the addition or by placing the building outside the mapped street, highway, waterway, railroad right-of-way, public transit facility or parkway.
(f) In any city in which there is no such board of appeals, the city council shall have the same powers and shall be subject to the same restrictions. For this purpose such council is authorized to act as a discretionary administrative or quasi-judicial body. When so acting it shall not sit as a legislative body but in a separate meeting and with separate minutes kept.
(g) Before taking any action authorized in this subsection, the board of appeals or city council shall hold a hearing at which parties in interest and others shall have an opportunity to be heard. At least 15 days before the hearing notice of the time and place of the hearing shall be published as a class 1 notice, under ch. 985. Any such decision shall be subject to review by certiorari issued by a court of record in the same manner and pursuant to the same provisions as in appeals from the decisions of a board of appeals upon zoning regulations.
(h) In any city which has established an official map as herein authorized no public sewer or other municipal street utility or improvement shall be constructed in any street, highway or parkway until such street, highway or parkway is duly placed on the official map. No permit for the erection of any building shall be issued unless a street, highway or parkway giving access to such proposed structure has been duly placed on the official map. Where the enforcement of the provisions of this section would entail practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship, and where the circumstances of the case do not require the structure to be related to existing or proposed streets, highways or parkways, the applicant for such a permit may appeal from the decision of the administrative officer having charge of the issue of permits to the board of appeals in any city which has established a board having power to make variances or exceptions in zoning regulations, and the same provisions are applied to such appeals and to such boards as are provided in cases of appeals on zoning regulations. The board may in passing on such appeal make any reasonable exception, and issue the permit subject to conditions that will protect any future street, highway or parkway layout. Any such decision shall be subject to review by certiorari issued by a court of record in the same manner and pursuant to the same provisions as in appeals from the decision of such board upon zoning regulations. In any city in which there is no such board of appeals the city council shall have the same powers and be subject to the same restrictions, and the same method of court review shall be available. For such purpose such council is authorized to act as a discretionary administrative or quasi-judicial body. When so acting it shall not sit as a legislative body, but in a separate meeting and with separate minutes kept.
(i) In those counties where the county maintains and operates parks, parkways, playgrounds, bathing beaches and other recreational facilities within the limits of any city, such city shall not include said facilities in the master plan without the approval of the county board of supervisors.
(7) Zoning.
(ab) Definition. In this subsection “nonconforming use" means a use of land, a dwelling, or a building that existed lawfully before the current zoning ordinance was enacted or amended, but that does not conform with the use restrictions in the current ordinance.
(am) Grant of power. For the purpose of promoting health, safety, morals or the general welfare of the community, the council may regulate and restrict by ordinance, subject to par. (hm), the height, number of stories and size of buildings and other structures, the percentage of lot that may be occupied, the size of yards, courts and other open spaces, subject to s. 66.10015 (3) the density of population, and the location and use of buildings, structures and land for trade, industry, mining, residence or other purposes if there is no discrimination against temporary structures. This subsection and any ordinance, resolution or regulation enacted or adopted under this section, shall be liberally construed in favor of the city and as minimum requirements adopted for the purposes stated. This subsection may not be deemed a limitation of any power granted elsewhere.
(b) Districts. For any and all of said purposes the council may divide the city into districts of such number, shape, and area as may be deemed best suited to carry out the purposes of this section; and within such districts it may regulate and restrict the erection, construction, reconstruction, alteration or use of buildings, structures or land. All such regulations shall be uniform for each class or kind of buildings and for the use of land throughout each district, but the regulations in one district may differ from those in other districts. No ordinance enacted or regulation adopted under this subsection may prohibit forestry operations that are in accordance with generally accepted forestry management practices, as defined under s. 823.075 (1) (d). The council may establish mixed-use districts that contain any combination of uses, such as industrial, commercial, public, or residential uses, in a compact urban form. The council may with the consent of the owners establish special districts, to be called planned development districts, with regulations in each, which in addition to those provided in par. (c), will over a period of time tend to promote the maximum benefit from coordinated area site planning, diversified location of structures and mixed compatible uses. Such regulations shall provide for a safe and efficient system for pedestrian and vehicular traffic, attractive recreation and landscaped open spaces, economic design and location of public and private utilities and community facilities and insure adequate standards of construction and planning. Such regulations may also provide for the development of the land in such districts with one or more principal structures and related accessory uses, and in planned development districts and mixed-use districts the regulations need not be uniform.
(c) Purposes in view. Such regulations shall be made in accordance with a comprehensive plan and designed to lessen congestion in the streets; to secure safety from fire, panic and other dangers; to promote health and the general welfare; to provide adequate light and air, including access to sunlight for solar collectors and to wind for wind energy systems; to encourage the protection of groundwater resources; to prevent the overcrowding of land; to avoid undue concentration of population; to facilitate the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks and other public requirements; and to preserve burial sites, as defined in s. 157.70 (1) (b). Such regulations shall be made with reasonable consideration, among other things, of the character of the district and its peculiar suitability for particular uses, and with a view to conserving the value of buildings and encouraging the most appropriate use of land throughout such city.
(d) Method of procedure.
1.
a. Upon the request of the city council, the city plan commission, the board of public land commissioners, or if the city has neither, the city plan committee of the city council shall prepare and recommend a district plan and regulations for the city. Following the formulation of tentative recommendations a public hearing shall be held by, at the council's option, the council, the plan commission, the board of public land commissioners or the plan committee. The entity holding the hearing shall consider any comments made, or submitted, by the commanding officer, or the officer's designee, of a military base or installation, with at least 200 assigned military personnel or that contains at least 2,000 acres, that is located in or near the city. At least 10 days' prior written notice of any such hearings shall be given to the clerk of any municipality whose boundaries are within 1,000 feet of any lands included in the proposed plan and regulations, and to the commanding officer, or the officer's designee, of any military base or installation, with at least 200 assigned military personnel or that contains at least 2,000 acres, that is located in or near the city, but failure to give such notice shall not invalidate such district plan or regulations. Publication of a class 2 notice, under ch. 985, of the tentative recommendations and hearings thereon must be made once during each of the 2 weeks prior to such hearing. If the proposed district plan and regulations have the effect of changing the allowable use of any property within the city, the notice shall include either a map showing the property affected by the plan and regulations or a description of the property affected by the plan and regulations and a statement that a map may be obtained from the city council.
b. The council may make changes in the tentative recommendations after first submitting the proposed changes to the plan commission, board of public land commissioners or plan committee for recommendation and report and after publishing a class 2 notice, under ch. 985, of the proposed changes and hearings thereon as well as the notice to the clerk of any contiguous municipality and to the commanding officer, or the officer's designee, of any military base or installation, with at least 200 assigned military personnel or that contains at least 2,000 acres, that is located in or near the city, as required in subd. 1. a. Hearings on the proposed changes may be held by, at the council's option, the council, the plan commission, the board of public land commissioners or the plan committee. The entity holding the hearing shall consider any comments made, or submitted, by the commanding officer, or the officer's designee, of a military base or installation, with at least 200 assigned military personnel or that contains at least 2,000 acres, that is located in or near the city. If the proposed changes to the proposed district plan and regulations have the effect of changing the allowable use of any property within the city, the notice shall include either a map showing the property affected by the changes or a description of the property affected by the changes and a statement that a map may be obtained from the city council.
2. The council may adopt amendments to an existing zoning ordinance after first submitting the proposed amendments to the city plan commission, board of public land commissioners or plan committee for recommendation and report and after providing the notices as required in subd. 1. b. of the proposed amendments and hearings thereon. In any city which is not located in whole or in part in a county with a population of 750,000 or more, if the proposed amendments would make any change in an airport affected area, as defined in sub. (6) (am) 1. b., the council shall mail a copy of such notice to the owner or operator of the airport bordered by the airport affected area. A hearing shall be held on the proposed amendments by, at the council's option, the council, the plan commission, the board of public land commissioners or the plan committee. The entity holding the hearing shall consider any comments made, or submitted, by the commanding officer, or the officer's designee, of a military base or installation, with at least 200 assigned military personnel or that contains at least 2,000 acres, that is located in or near the city. If the proposed amendments have the effect of changing the allowable use of any property within the city, the notice shall include either a map showing the property affected by the amendments or a description of the property affected by the amendments and a statement that a map may be obtained from the city council. If the council does not receive recommendations and a report from the plan commission, board of public land commissioners or plan committee within 60 days of submitting the proposed amendments, the council may hold hearings without first receiving the recommendations and report.
2m. In any city which is not located in whole or in part in a county with a population of 750,000 or more, if a proposed amendment under subd. 2. would make any change in an airport affected area, as defined under sub. (6) (am) 1. b. and the owner or operator of the airport bordered by the airport affected area protests against the amendment, the amendment shall not become effective except by the favorable vote of two-thirds of the members of the council voting on the proposed change.
3. The council may repeal or repeal and reenact the entire district plan and all zoning regulations in accordance with subd. 1. The council may repeal or repeal and reenact a part or parts of the district plan and regulations in accordance with subds. 2. and 2m.
4. The city council shall maintain a list of persons who submit a written or electronic request to receive notice of any proposed zoning action that may be taken under subd. 1. a. or b. or 2. that affects the allowable use of the person's property. Annually, the city council shall inform residents of the city that they may add their names to the list. The city council may satisfy this requirement to provide such information by any of the following means: publishing a 1st class notice under ch. 985; publishing on the city's Internet site; 1st class mail; or including the information in a mailing that is sent to all property owners. If the plan commission, the board of public land commissioners, or city plan committee of the city council completes action on any tentative recommendations that are noticed under subd. 1. a., proposed changes to a proposed district plan and regulations that are submitted under subd. 1. b., or proposed amendments that are submitted under subd. 2., and the city council is prepared to vote on the tentative recommendations, proposed changes to a proposed district plan, and regulations or proposed amendments, the city council shall send a notice, which contains a copy or summary of the tentative recommendations, proposed changes to a proposed district plan, and regulations or proposed amendments, to each person on the list whose property, the allowable use of which, may be affected by the tentative recommendations or proposed changes or amendments. The notice shall be by mail or in any reasonable form that is agreed to by the person and the city council, including electronic mail, voice mail, or text message. The city council may charge each person on the list who receives a notice by 1st class mail a fee that does not exceed the approximate cost of providing the notice to the person. An ordinance or amendment that is subject to this subdivision may take effect even if the city council fails to send the notice that is required by this subdivision.
(da) Interim zoning. The common council of any city which has not adopted a zoning ordinance may, without referring the matter to the plan commission, enact an interim zoning ordinance to preserve existing uses while the comprehensive zoning plan is being prepared. Such ordinance may be enacted as is an ordinary ordinance but shall be effective for no longer than 2 years after its enactment.
(de) Conditional use permits.
1. In this paragraph:
a. “Conditional use” means a use allowed under a conditional use permit, special exception, or other special zoning permission issued by a city, but does not include a variance.
b. “Substantial evidence” means facts and information, other than merely personal preferences or speculation, directly pertaining to the requirements and conditions an applicant must meet to obtain a conditional use permit and that reasonable persons would accept in support of a conclusion.
2.
a. If an applicant for a conditional use permit meets or agrees to meet all of the requirements and conditions specified in the city ordinance or those imposed by the city zoning board, the city shall grant the conditional use permit. Any condition imposed must be related to the purpose of the ordinance and be based on substantial evidence.
b. The requirements and conditions described under subd. 2. a. must be reasonable and, to the extent practicable, measurable and may include conditions such as the permit's duration, transfer, or renewal. The applicant must demonstrate that the application and all requirements and conditions established by the city relating to the conditional use are or shall be satisfied, both of which must be supported by substantial evidence. The city's decision to approve or deny the permit must be supported by substantial evidence.
3. Upon receipt of a conditional use permit application, and following publication in the city of a class 2 notice under ch. 985, the city shall hold a public hearing on the application.
4. Once granted, a conditional use permit shall remain in effect as long as the conditions upon which the permit was issued are followed, but the city may impose conditions such as the permit's duration, transfer, or renewal, in addition to any other conditions specified in the zoning ordinance or by the city zoning board.
5. If a city denies a person's conditional use permit application, the person may appeal the decision to the circuit court under the procedures contained in par. (e) 10.
(e) Board of appeals.
1. The council which enacts zoning regulations pursuant to this section shall by ordinance provide for the appointment of a board of appeals, and shall provide in such regulations that said board of appeals may, in appropriate cases and subject to appropriate conditions and safeguards, make special exceptions to the terms of the ordinance in harmony with its general purpose and intent and in accordance with general or specific rules therein contained. Nothing in this subdivision shall preclude the granting of special exceptions by the city plan commission or the common council in accordance with the zoning regulations adopted pursuant to this section which were in effect on July 7, 1973 or adopted after that date.
2. The board of appeals shall consist of 5 members appointed by the mayor subject to confirmation of the common council for terms of 3 years, except that of those first appointed one shall serve for one year, 2 for 2 years and 2 for 3 years. The members of the board shall serve at such compensation to be fixed by ordinance, and shall be removable by the mayor for cause upon written charges and after public hearing. The mayor shall designate one of the members as chairperson. The board may employ a secretary and other employees. Vacancies shall be filled for the unexpired terms of members whose terms become vacant. The mayor shall appoint, for staggered terms of 3 years, 2 alternate members of such board, in addition to the 5 members above provided for. Annually, the mayor shall designate one of the alternate members as 1st alternate and the other as 2nd alternate. The 1st alternate shall act, with full power, only when a member of the board refuses to vote because of interest or when a member is absent. The 2nd alternate shall so act only when the 1st alternate so refuses or is absent or when more than one member of the board so refuses or is absent. The above provisions, with regard to removal and the filling of vacancies, shall apply to such alternates.
3. The board shall adopt rules in accordance with the provisions of any ordinance adopted pursuant to this section. Meetings of the board shall be held at the call of the chairperson and at such other times as the board may determine. The chairperson, or in the chairperson's absence, the acting chairperson, may administer oaths and compel the attendance of witnesses. All meetings of the board shall be open to the public. The board shall keep minutes of its proceedings, showing the vote of each member upon each question, or, if absent or failing to vote, indicating such fact, and shall keep records of its examinations and other official actions, all of which shall be immediately filed in the office of the board and shall be a public record.
3m. If a quorum is present, the board of appeals may take action under this subsection by a majority vote of the members present.
4. Appeals to the board of appeals may be taken by any person aggrieved or by any officer, department, board or bureau of the city affected by any decision of the administrative officer. Such appeal shall be taken within a reasonable time, as provided by the rules of the board, by filing with the officer from whom the appeal is taken and with the board of appeals a notice of appeal specifying the grounds thereof. The officer from whom the appeal is taken shall forthwith transmit to the board all the papers constituting the record upon which the action appealed from was taken.
5. An appeal shall stay all legal proceedings in furtherance of the action appealed from, unless the officer from whom the appeal is taken certifies to the board of appeals after the notice of appeal shall have been filed with the officer, that by reason of facts stated in the certificate a stay would, in the officer's opinion, cause imminent peril to life or property. In such case proceedings shall not be stayed otherwise than by a restraining order which may be granted by the board of appeals or by a court of record on application, on notice to the officer from whom the appeal is taken, and on due cause shown.
6. The board of appeals shall fix a reasonable time for the hearing of the appeal or other matter referred to it, and give public notice thereof, as well as due notice to the parties in interest, and decide the same within a reasonable time. Upon the hearing any party may appear in person or by agent or by attorney. In any action involving a listed property, as defined in s. 44.31 (4), the board shall consider any suggested alternatives or recommended decision submitted by the landmarks commission or the planning commission.
7.
a. In this subdivision, “ area variance” means a modification to a dimensional, physical, or locational requirement such as a setback, frontage, height, bulk, or density restriction for a structure that is granted by the board of appeals under this paragraph. In this subdivision, “use variance” means an authorization by the board of appeals under this paragraph for the use of land for a purpose that is otherwise not allowed or is prohibited by the applicable zoning ordinance.
b. The board of appeals shall have the following powers: To hear and decide appeals where it is alleged there is error in any order, requirement, decision, or determination made by an administrative official in the enforcement of this section or of any ordinance adopted pursuant thereto; to hear and decide special exception to the terms of the ordinance upon which such board is required to pass under such ordinance; to authorize upon appeal in specific cases such variance from the terms of the ordinance as will not be contrary to the public interest, where, owing to special conditions, a literal enforcement of the provisions of the ordinance will result in practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship, so that the spirit of the ordinance shall be observed, public safety and welfare secured, and substantial justice done.
c. The board may permit in appropriate cases, and subject to appropriate conditions and safeguards in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the ordinance, a building or premises to be erected or used for such public utility purposes in any location which is reasonably necessary for the public convenience and welfare.
d. A property owner bears the burden of proving “unnecessary hardship," as that term is used in this subdivision, for an area variance, by demonstrating that strict compliance with a zoning ordinance would unreasonably prevent the property owner from using the property owner's property for a permitted purpose or would render conformity with the zoning ordinance unnecessarily burdensome or, for a use variance, by demonstrating that strict compliance with a zoning ordinance would leave the property owner with no reasonable use of the property in the absence of a variance. In all circumstances, a property owner bears the burden of proving that the unnecessary hardship is based on conditions unique to the property, rather than considerations personal to the property owner, and that the unnecessary hardship was not created by the property owner.
e. The council of a city may enact an ordinance specifying an expiration date for a variance granted under this subdivision if that date relates to a specific date by which the action authorized by the variance must be commenced or completed. If no such ordinance is in effect at the time a variance is granted, or if the board of appeals does not specify an expiration date for the variance, a variance granted under this subdivision does not expire unless, at the time it is granted, the board of appeals specifies in the variance a specific date by which the action authorized by the variance must be commenced or completed. An ordinance enacted after April 5, 2012, may not specify an expiration date for a variance that was granted before April 5, 2012.
f. A variance granted under this subdivision runs with the land.
8. In exercising the above mentioned powers such board may, in conformity with the provisions of such section, reverse or affirm, wholly or partly, or may modify the order, requirement, decision or determination appealed from, and may make such order, requirement, decision or determination as ought to be made, and to that end shall have all the powers of the officer from whom the appeal is taken, and may issue or direct the issue of a permit.
10. Any person or persons, jointly or severally aggrieved by any decision of the board of appeals, or any taxpayer, or any officer, department, board or bureau of the municipality, may, within 30 days after the filing of the decision in the office of the board of appeals, commence an action seeking the remedy available by certiorari. The court shall not stay proceedings upon the decision appealed from, but may, on application, on notice to the board of appeals and on due cause shown, grant a restraining order. The board of appeals shall not be required to return the original papers acted upon by it, but it shall be sufficient to return certified or sworn copies thereof. If necessary for the proper disposition of the matter, the court may take evidence, or appoint a referee to take evidence and report findings of fact and conclusions of law as it directs, which shall constitute a part of the proceedings upon which the determination of the court shall be made. The court may reverse or affirm, wholly or partly, or may modify, the decision brought up for review.
14. Costs shall not be allowed against the board unless it shall appear to the court that the board acted with gross negligence or in bad faith, or with malice, in making the decision appealed from.
15. All issues in any proceedings under this section shall have preference over all other civil actions and proceedings.
(ea) Filing fees. The common council may by ordinance or resolution establish reasonable fees for the filing of a petition for amendment of the zoning ordinance or official map, or for filing an appeal to the board of appeals.
(em) Historic preservation.
1. Subject to subds. 2. and 2m., a city, as an exercise of its zoning and police powers for the purpose of promoting the health, safety and general welfare of the community and of the state, may regulate by ordinance, or if a city contains any property that is listed on the national register of historic places in Wisconsin or the state register of historic places shall, not later than 1995, enact an ordinance to regulate, any place, structure or object with a special character, historic, archaeological or aesthetic interest, or other significant value, for the purpose of preserving the place, structure or object and its significant characteristics. Subject to subds. 2., 2m., and 3., a city may create a landmarks commission to designate historic or archaeological landmarks and establish historic districts. Subject to subds. 2. and 2m., the city may regulate, or if the city contains any property that is listed on the national register of historic places in Wisconsin or the state register of historic places shall regulate, all historic or archaeological landmarks and all property within each historic district to preserve the historic or archaeological landmarks and property within the district and the character of the district.
2. Before the city designates a historic landmark or establishes a historic district, the city shall hold a public hearing. If the city proposes to designate a place, structure, or object as a historic landmark or establish a historic district that includes a place, structure, or object, the city shall, by 1st class mail, notify the owner of the place, structure, or object of the determination and of the time and place of the public hearing on the determination.
2m. In the repair or replacement of a property that is designated as a historic landmark or included within a historic district or neighborhood conservation district under this paragraph, a city shall allow an owner to use materials that are similar in design, color, scale, architectural appearance, and other visual qualities.
3. An owner of property that is affected by a decision of a city landmarks commission may appeal the decision to the common council. The common council may overturn a decision of the commission by a majority vote of the common council.
(f) Enforcement and remedies.
1. The council may provide by ordinance for the enforcement of this section and of any ordinance or regulation made thereunder. In case of a violation of this section or of such ordinance or regulation such council may provide for the punishment by fine and by imprisonment for failure to pay such fine. It is also empowered to provide civil penalties for such violation.
2. In case any building or structure is or is proposed to be erected, constructed, reconstructed, altered, converted or maintained, or any building, structure or land is or is proposed to be used in violation of this section or of any ordinance or other regulation made under authority conferred hereby, the proper authorities of the city, or any adjacent or neighboring property owner who would be specially damaged by such violation may, in addition to other remedies, institute appropriate action or proceedings to prevent such unlawful erection, construction, reconstruction, alteration, conversion, maintenance or use; to restrain, correct or abate such violation; to prevent the occupancy of said building, structure or land; or to prevent any illegal act, conduct, business or use in or about such premises.
(g) Conflict with other laws. Wherever the regulations made under authority of this section require a greater width or size of yards, courts or other open spaces, or require a lower height of building or less number of stories, or require a greater percentage of lot to be left unoccupied, or impose other higher standards than are required in any other statute or local ordinance or regulation, the provisions of the regulations made under authority of this section shall govern. Wherever the provisions of any other statute or local ordinance or regulation require a greater width or size of yards, courts or other open spaces, or require a lower height of building or a less number of stories, or require a greater percentage of lot to be left unoccupied, or impose other higher standards than are required by the regulations made under authority of this section, the provisions of such statute or local ordinance or regulation shall govern.
(gm) Permits. Neither the city council, nor the city plan commission, nor the city plan committee of the city council, nor the board of appeals may condition or withhold approval of a permit under this section based upon the property owner entering into a contract, or discontinuing, modifying, extending, or renewing any contract, with a 3rd party under which the 3rd party is engaging in a lawful use of the property.
(h) Nonconforming uses. The continued lawful use of a building, premises, structure, or fixture existing at the time of the adoption or amendment of a zoning ordinance may not be prohibited although the use does not conform with the provisions of the ordinance. The nonconforming use may not be extended. The total structural repairs or alterations in such a nonconforming building, premises, structure, or fixture shall not during its life exceed 50 percent of the assessed value of the building, premises, structure, or fixture unless permanently changed to a conforming use. If the nonconforming use is discontinued for a period of 12 months, any future use of the building, premises, structure, or fixture shall conform to the ordinance.
(ham) Manufactured home communities. Notwithstanding par. (h), a manufactured home community licensed under s. 101.935 that is a legal nonconforming use continues to be a legal nonconforming use notwithstanding the occurrence of any of the following activities within the community:
1. Repair or replacement of homes.
2. Repair or replacement of infrastructure.
(hb) Repair, rebuilding, and maintenance of certain nonconforming structures.
1. In this paragraph:
a. “Development regulations" means the part of a zoning ordinance that applies to elements including setback, height, lot coverage, and side yard.
b. “Nonconforming structure" means a dwelling or other building that existed lawfully before the current zoning ordinance was enacted or amended, but that does not conform with one or more of the development regulations in the current zoning ordinance.
2. An ordinance may not prohibit, or limit based on cost, the repair, maintenance, renovation, or remodeling of a nonconforming structure.
(hc) Restoration or replacement of certain nonconforming structures.
1. Restrictions that are applicable to damaged or destroyed nonconforming structures and that are contained in an ordinance enacted under this subsection may not prohibit the restoration or replacement of a nonconforming structure if the structure will be restored to, or replaced at, the size, subject to subd. 2., location, and use that it had immediately before the damage or destruction occurred, or impose any limits on the costs of the repair, reconstruction, or improvement if all of the following apply:
a. The nonconforming structure was damaged or destroyed on or after March 2, 2006.
b. The damage or destruction was caused by violent wind, vandalism, fire, flood, ice, snow, mold, or infestation.
2. An ordinance enacted under this subsection to which subd. 1. applies shall allow for the size of a structure to be larger than the size it was immediately before the damage or destruction if necessary for the structure to comply with applicable state or federal requirements.
(he) Antenna facilities. The governing body of a city may not enact an ordinance or adopt a resolution on or after May 6, 1994, or continue to enforce an ordinance or resolution on or after May 6, 1994, that affects satellite antennas with a diameter of 2 feet or less unless one of the following applies:
1. The ordinance or resolution has a reasonable and clearly defined aesthetic or public health or safety objective.
2. The ordinance or resolution does not impose an unreasonable limitation on, or prevent, the reception of satellite-delivered signals by a satellite antenna with a diameter of 2 feet or less.
3. The ordinance or resolution does not impose costs on a user of a satellite antenna with a diameter of 2 feet or less that exceed 10 percent of the purchase price and installation fee of the antenna and associated equipment.
(hf) Amateur radio antennas. The governing body of a city may not enact an ordinance or adopt a resolution on or after April 17, 2002, or continue to enforce an ordinance or resolution on or after April 17, 2002, that affects the placement, screening, or height of antennas, or antenna support structures, that are used for amateur radio communications unless all of the following apply:
1. The ordinance or resolution has a reasonable and clearly defined aesthetic, public health, or safety objective, and represents the minimum practical regulation that is necessary to accomplish the objectives.
2. The ordinance or resolution reasonably accommodates amateur radio communications.
(hg) Amortization prohibited.
1. In this paragraph, “ amortization ordinance" means an ordinance that allows the continuance of the lawful use of a nonconforming building, premises, structure, or fixture that may be lawfully used as described under par. (h), but only for a specified period of time, after which the lawful use of such building, premises, structure, or fixture must be discontinued without the payment of just compensation.
2. Subject to par. (h), an ordinance enacted under this subsection may not require the removal of a nonconforming building, premises, structure, or fixture by an amortization ordinance.
(hi) Payday lenders.
1. In this paragraph:
a. “Licensee" has the meaning given in s. 138.14 (1) (i).
b. “Payday lender" means a business, owned by a licensee, that makes payday loans.
c. “Payday loan" has the meaning given in s. 138.14 (1) (k).
2. Except as provided in subds. 3., 4., and 5., no payday lender may operate in a city unless it receives a permit to do so from the city council, and the city council may not issue a permit to a payday lender if any of the following applies:
a. The payday lender would be located within 1,500 feet of another payday lender.
b. The payday lender would be located within 150 feet of a single-family or 2-family residential zoning district.
3. A city may regulate payday lenders by enacting a zoning ordinance that contains provisions that are more strict than those specified in subd. 2.
4. If a city has enacted an ordinance regulating payday lenders that is in effect on January 1, 2011, the ordinance may continue to apply and the city may continue to enforce the ordinance, but only if the ordinance is at least as restrictive as the provisions of subd. 2.
5. Notwithstanding the provisions of subd. 4., if a payday lender that is doing business on January 1, 2011, from a location that does not comply with the provisions of subd. 2., the payday lender may continue to operate from that location notwithstanding the provisions of subd. 2.
(hm) Migrant labor camps. The council of a city may not enact an ordinance or adopt a resolution that interferes with any repair or expansion of migrant labor camps, as defined in s. 103.90 (3), that are in existence on May 12, 1992, if the repair or expansion is required by an administrative rule promulgated by the department of workforce development under ss. 103.90 to 103.97. An ordinance or resolution of a city that is in effect on May 12, 1992, and that interferes with any repair or expansion of existing migrant labor camps that is required by such an administrative rule is void.
(i) Community and other living arrangements. For purposes of this section, the location of a community living arrangement for adults, as defined in s. 46.03 (22), a community living arrangement for children, as defined in s. 48.743 (1), a foster home, as defined in s. 48.02 (6), or an adult family home, as defined in s. 50.01 (1), in any city shall be subject to the following criteria:
1. No community living arrangement may be established after March 28, 1978 within 2,500 feet, or any lesser distance established by an ordinance of the city, of any other such facility. Agents of a facility may apply for an exception to this requirement, and such exceptions may be granted at the discretion of the city. Two community living arrangements may be adjacent if the city authorizes that arrangement and if both facilities comprise essential components of a single program.
2. Community living arrangements shall be permitted in each city without restriction as to the number of facilities, so long as the total capacity of such community living arrangements does not exceed 25 or one percent of the city's population, whichever is greater. When the capacity of the community living arrangements in the city reaches that total, the city may prohibit additional community living arrangements from locating in the city. In any city of the 1st, 2nd, 3rd or 4th class, when the capacity of community living arrangements in an aldermanic district reaches 25 or one percent of the population, whichever is greater, of the district, the city may prohibit additional community living arrangements from being located within the district. Agents of a facility may apply for an exception to the requirements of this subdivision, and such exceptions may be granted at the discretion of the city.
2m. A foster home that is the primary domicile of a foster parent and that is licensed under s. 48.62 or an adult family home certified under s. 50.032 (1m) (b) shall be a permitted use in all residential areas and is not subject to subds. 1. and 2. except that foster homes operated by corporations, child welfare agencies, churches, associations, or public agencies shall be subject to subds. 1. and 2.
2r.
a. No adult family home described in s. 50.01 (1) (b) may be established within 2,500 feet, or any lesser distance established by an ordinance of the city, of any other adult family home described in s. 50.01 (1) (b) or any community living arrangement. An agent of an adult family home described in s. 50.01 (1) (b) may apply for an exception to this requirement, and the exception may be granted at the discretion of the city.
b. An adult family home described in s. 50.01 (1) (b) that meets the criteria specified in subd. 2r. a. and that is licensed under s. 50.033 (1m) (b) is permitted in the city without restriction as to the number of adult family homes and may locate in any residential zone, without being required to obtain special zoning permission except as provided in subd. 9.
3. In all cases where the community living arrangement has capacity for 8 or fewer persons being served by the program, meets the criteria listed in subds. 1. and 2., and is licensed, operated, or permitted under the authority of the department of health services or the department of children and families, that facility is entitled to locate in any residential zone, without being required to obtain special zoning permission except as provided in subd. 9.
4. In all cases where the community living arrangement has capacity for 9 to 15 persons being served by the program, meets the criteria listed in subds. 1. and 2., and is licensed, operated, or permitted under the authority of the department of health services or the department of children and families, that facility is entitled to locate in any residential area except areas zoned exclusively for single-family or 2-family residences except as provided in subd. 9., but is entitled to apply for special zoning permission to locate in those areas. The city may grant such special zoning permission at its discretion and shall make a procedure available to enable such facilities to request such permission.
5. In all cases where the community living arrangement has capacity for serving 16 or more persons, meets the criteria listed in subds. 1. and 2., and is licensed, operated, or permitted under the authority of the department of health services or the department of children and families, that facility is entitled to apply for special zoning permission to locate in areas zoned for residential use. The city may grant such special zoning permission at its discretion and shall make a procedure available to enable such facilities to request such permission.
6. The department of health services shall designate a single subunit within that department to maintain appropriate records indicating the location and number of persons served by each community living arrangement for adults, and such information shall be available to the public. The department of children and families shall designate a single subunit within that department to maintain appropriate records indicating the location and number of persons served by each community living arrangement for children, and such information shall be available to the public.
7. In this paragraph, “ special zoning permission" includes but is not limited to the following: special exception, special permit, conditional use, zoning variance, conditional permit and words of similar intent.
8. The attorney general shall take all necessary action, upon the request of the department of health services or the department of children and families, to enforce compliance with this paragraph.
9. Not less than 11 months nor more than 13 months after the first licensure of an adult family home under s. 50.033 or of a community living arrangement and every year thereafter, the common council of a city in which a licensed adult family home or a community living arrangement is located may make a determination as to the effect of the adult family home or community living arrangement on the health, safety or welfare of the residents of the city. The determination shall be made according to the procedures provided under subd. 10. If the common council determines that the existence in the city of a licensed adult family home or a community living arrangement poses a threat to the health, safety or welfare of the residents of the city, the common council may order the adult family home or community living arrangement to cease operation unless special zoning permission is obtained. The order is subject to judicial review under s. 68.13, except that a free copy of the transcript may not be provided to the adult family home or community living arrangement. The adult family home or community living arrangement must cease operation within 90 days after the date of the order, or the date of final judicial review of the order, or the date of the denial of special zoning permission, whichever is later.
9m. The fact that an individual with acquired immunodeficiency syndrome or a positive HIV test, as defined in s. 252.01 (2m), resides in a community living arrangement with a capacity for 8 or fewer persons may not be used under subd. 9. to assert or prove that the existence of the community living arrangement in the city poses a threat to the health, safety or welfare of the residents of the city.
10. A determination made under subd. 9. shall be made after a hearing before the common council. The city shall provide at least 30 days' notice to the licensed adult family home or the community living arrangement that such a hearing will be held. At the hearing, the licensed adult family home or the community living arrangement may be represented by counsel and may present evidence and call and examine witnesses and cross-examine other witnesses called. The common council may call witnesses and may issue subpoenas. All witnesses shall be sworn by the common council. The common council shall take notes of the testimony and shall mark and preserve all exhibits. The common council may, and upon request of the licensed adult family home or the community living arrangement shall, cause the proceedings to be taken by a stenographer or by a recording device, the expense thereof to be paid by the city. Within 20 days after the hearing, the common council shall mail or deliver to the licensed adult family home or the community living arrangement its written determination stating the reasons therefor. The determination shall be a final determination.
(7a) Extraterritorial zoning. The governing body of any city which has created a city plan commission under sub. (1) and has adopted a zoning ordinance under sub. (7) may exercise extraterritorial zoning power as set forth in this subsection. Insofar as applicable sub. (7) (am), (b), (c), (ea), (h) and (i) shall apply to extraterritorial zoning ordinances enacted under this subsection. This subsection shall also apply to the governing body of any village.
(a) Extraterritorial zoning jurisdiction means the unincorporated area within 3 miles of the corporate limits of a first, second or third class city, or 1 1/2 miles of a fourth class city or a village. Wherever extraterritorial zoning jurisdictions overlap, the provisions of s. 66.0105 shall apply and any subsequent alteration of the corporate limits of the city by annexation, detachment or consolidation proceedings shall not affect the dividing line as initially determined under s. 66.0105. The governing body of the city shall specify by resolution the description of the area to be zoned within its extraterritorial zoning jurisdiction sufficiently accurate to determine its location and such area shall be contiguous to the city. The boundary line of such area shall follow government lot or survey section or fractional section lines or public roads, but need not extend to the limits of the extraterritorial zoning jurisdiction. Within 15 days of the adoption of the resolution the governing body shall declare its intention to prepare a comprehensive zoning ordinance for all or part of its extraterritorial zoning jurisdiction by the publication of the resolution in a newspaper having general circulation in the area proposed to be zoned, as a class 1 notice, under ch. 985. The city clerk shall mail a certified copy of the resolution and a scale map reasonably showing the boundaries of the extraterritorial jurisdiction to the clerk of the county in which the extraterritorial jurisdiction area is located and to the town clerk of each town, any part of which is included in such area.
(b) The governing body may enact, without referring the matter to the plan commission, an interim zoning ordinance to preserve existing zoning or uses in all or part of the extraterritorial zoning jurisdiction while the comprehensive zoning plan is being prepared. Such ordinance may be enacted as is an ordinary ordinance but shall be effective for no longer than 2 years after its enactment, unless extended as provided in this paragraph. Within 15 days of its passage, the governing body of the city shall publish the ordinance in a newspaper having general circulation in the area proposed to be zoned as a class 1 notice, under ch. 985, or as a notice, as described under s. 62.11 (4) (c) 2., and the city clerk shall mail a certified copy of the ordinance to the clerk of the county in which the extraterritorial jurisdiction is located and to the clerk of each town affected by the interim zoning ordinance and shall file a copy of the ordinance with the city plan commission. The governing body of the city may extend the interim zoning ordinance for no longer than one year, upon the recommendation of the joint extraterritorial zoning committee established under par. (c). No other interim zoning ordinance shall be enacted affecting the same area or part thereof until 2 years after the date of the expiration of the interim zoning ordinance or the one year extension thereof. While the interim zoning ordinance is in effect, the governing body of the city may amend the districts and regulations of the ordinance according to the procedure set forth in par. (f).
(c) If the governing body of the city adopts a resolution under par. (a), it shall direct the plan commission to formulate tentative recommendations for the district plan and regulations within all or a part of the extraterritorial zoning jurisdiction as described in the resolution adopted under par. (a). When the plan commission is engaged in the preparation of such district plan and regulations, or amendments thereto, a joint extraterritorial zoning committee shall be established. Such joint committee shall consist of 3 citizen members of the plan commission, or 3 members of the plan commission designated by the mayor if there are no citizen members of the commission, and 3 town members from each town affected by the proposed plan and regulations, or amendments thereto. The 3 town members shall be appointed by the town board for 3 year terms and shall be residents of the town and persons of recognized experience and qualifications. Town board members are eligible to serve. If the town board fails to appoint the 3 members within 30 days following receipt of the certified resolution under par. (a), the board shall be subject to a mandamus proceeding which may be instituted by any resident of the area to be zoned or by the city adopting such resolution. The entire plan commission shall participate with the joint committee in the preparation of the plan and regulations, or amendments thereto. Only the members of the joint committee shall vote on matters relating to the extraterritorial plan and regulations, or amendments thereto. A separate vote shall be taken on the plan and regulations for each town and the town members of the joint committee shall vote only on matters affecting the particular town which they represent. The governing body shall not adopt the proposed plan and regulations, or amendments thereto, unless the proposed plan and regulations, or amendments thereto, receive a favorable vote of a majority of the 6 members of the joint committee. Such vote shall be deemed action taken by the entire plan commission.
(d) The joint committee shall formulate tentative recommendations for the district plan and regulations and shall hold a public hearing thereon. Notice of a hearing shall be given by publication in a newspaper having general circulation in the area to be zoned, as a class 2 notice, under ch. 985, during the preceding 30 days, and by mailing the notice to the town clerk of the town for which the plan and regulations are proposed. The notice shall contain the layout of tentative districts either by maps or words of description, and may contain the street names and house lot numbers for purposes of identification if the joint committee or the governing body so determines. At a public hearing an opportunity to be heard shall be afforded to representatives of the town board of the town and to any person in the town for which the plan and regulations are proposed.
(e) The governing body of the city may adopt by ordinance the proposed district plan and regulations recommended by the joint committee after giving notice and holding a hearing as provided in par. (d), or the governing body may change the proposed districts and regulations after first submitting the proposed changes to the joint committee for recommendation and report. The joint committee and the governing body may hold a hearing on the proposed changes after giving notice as provided in par. (d). The joint committee recommendation on the proposed changes shall be submitted to the governing body in accordance with the voting requirements set forth in par. (c).
(f) The governing body of the city may amend the districts and regulations of the extraterritorial zoning ordinance after first submitting the proposed amendment to the joint committee for recommendation and report. The procedure set forth in pars. (c), (d) and (e) shall apply to amendments to the extraterritorial zoning ordinance. In the case of a protest against an amendment the applicable provisions under sub. (7) (d) shall be followed.
(g) Insofar as applicable the provisions of subs. (7) (e), (f), (8) and (9) shall apply. The governing body of a city which adopts an extraterritorial zoning ordinance under this subsection may specifically provide in the ordinance for the enforcement and administration of this subsection. A town which has been issuing building permits may continue to do so, but the city building inspector shall approve such permits as to zoning prior to their issuance.
(8) Other measures of enforcement and remedies; penalty. Any building erected, constructed or reconstructed in violation of this section or regulations adopted pursuant thereto shall be deemed an unlawful structure, and the building inspector or city attorney or other official designated by the council may bring action to enjoin such erection, construction or reconstruction, or cause such structure to be vacated or removed. It shall be unlawful to erect, construct or reconstruct any building or structure in violation of this section or regulations adopted pursuant thereto. Any person, firm or corporation violating such provisions shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction thereof shall be fined not more than $500. Each and every day during which said illegal erection, construction or reconstruction continues shall be deemed a separate offense. In case any building or structure is or is proposed to be erected, constructed or reconstructed, or any land is or is proposed to be used in violation of this section or regulations adopted pursuant thereto, the building inspector or the city attorney or any adjacent or neighboring property owner who would be specially damaged by such violation, may, in addition to other remedies provided by law, institute injunction, mandamus, abatement or any other appropriate action or proceeding to prevent or enjoin or abate or remove such unlawful erection, construction or reconstruction.
(9) Building inspection.
(a) The city council may provide for the enforcement of this section and all other laws and ordinances relating to buildings by means of the withholding of building permits, imposition of forfeitures and injunctive action, and for such purposes may establish and fill the position of building inspector. From and after the establishment of such position and the filling of the same, it shall be unlawful to erect, construct or reconstruct any building or other structure without obtaining a building permit from such building inspector; and such building inspector shall not issue any permit unless the requirements of this section are complied with.
(b) The council may by ordinance designate general fire limits and regulate for safety and fire prevention the construction, alteration, enlargement and repair of buildings and structures within such limits, and may designate special fire limits within the general limits, and prescribe additional regulations therein. Any such proposed ordinance or amendment thereto shall be referred to the city plan commission, if such commission exists, for consideration and report, before final action is taken thereon by the council. However, no such ordinance or amendment thereto shall be adopted or become effective until after a public hearing in relation thereto, which may be held by the city plan commission or council, at which parties in interest and citizens shall have an opportunity to be heard. Notice of the time and place of the hearing shall be published as a class 2 notice, under ch. 985.
(9a) May exercise powers of board of public land commissioners. In cities of the first class, said city plan commission may exercise all of the powers conferred on board of public land commissioners under s. 27.11.
(10) Widening streets.
(a) When the council by resolution declares it necessary for the public use to widen any street or a part thereof, it may proceed as prescribed in ch. 32, except as herein modified. The determination of necessity by the council shall not be a taking, but shall be an establishment of new future boundary lines.
(b) After such establishment no one shall erect any new structure within the new lines, nor rebuild or alter the front or add to the height of any existing structure without receding the structure to conform to the new lines. No damages shall be received for any construction in violation hereof.
(c) The council may at any time after the establishment of new lines provide compensation for any of the lands to be taken, whereupon such lands shall be deemed taken, and the required further proceedings shall be commenced.
(d) If a structure on lands taken under this subsection is not removed after 3 months' written notice served in the manner directed by the council, the city may cause it to be removed, and may dispose of it and apply the proceeds to the expense of removal. Excess proceeds shall be paid to the owner. Excess expenses shall be a lien on the rest of the owner's land abutting on the street to be widened under this subsection. If the excess expenses are not paid, they shall be assessed against the owner's land abutting on the street and collected as are other real estate taxes. If the owner does not own the adjoining piece of land abutting on the new line, the owner shall be personally liable to the city for the expense of removal.
(e) Until the city has taken all of the lands within the new lines, it may lease any taken lands, to the person owning the taken lands at the time of the taking, at an annual rental of not more than 5 percent of the amount paid for the taken lands by the city or of the market value, if the lands were donated. Improvements may be maintained on the leased lands until all lands within the new lines are taken, whereupon the improvements shall be removed as provided in par. (d). No damages shall be had for improvements made under a lease entered into under this paragraph.
(11) Building lines.
(a) The council may by ordinance, in districts consisting of one side of a block or more, establish the distance from the street that structures may be erected. The city engineer shall thereupon make a survey and plat, and report the same, with description of any structure then situated contrary to such ordinance, to the council.
(b) The council may by ordinance make such regulation or prohibition of construction on any parts of lots or parcels of land or on any specified part of any particular realty, as shall be for the public health, safety or welfare.
(c) Whenever to carry out any ordinance under this subsection it is necessary to take property for public use, the procedure of ch. 32 shall be followed.
(13) Funds. Funds to carry out the purposes of this section may be raised by taxation or by bonds issued as provided in ss. 67.05, 67.06, 67.07, 67.08 and 67.10.
(14) Assessments. The expense of acquiring, establishing, laying out, widening, enlarging, extending, paving, repaving and improving streets, arterial highways, parkways, boulevards, memorial grounds, squares, parks and playgrounds, and erecting bridges under any plan adopted by the common council pursuant to this section or s. 27.11, including the cost of all lands and improvements thereon which it is necessary to acquire to carry out such plan, whether acquired by direct purchase or lease, or through condemnation, and also including the cost of constructing any bridge, viaduct or other improvement which is a part of the plan adopted by the common council, may be assessed, in whole or in part, to the real estate benefited thereby, in the same manner in which under existing law in such city benefits and damages are assessable for improvements of streets. Whenever plans are adopted which are supplementary to each other the common council may by ordinance combine such plans into a single plan within the meaning of this section. Section 66.0713 shall apply to all assessments made under this subsection.
(15) Excess condemnation. Whenever any of the purposes of sub. (14) are planned to be carried out by excess condemnation, benefits may be assessed in the manner provided in said subsection.
(16) Benefits from public buildings. Any benefits of public buildings and groups thereof may be assessed in the manner provided in s. 62.23 (14).
(17) Acquiring land.
(a) Except as provided in par. (am), cities may acquire by gift, lease, purchase, or condemnation any lands within its corporate limits for establishing, laying out, widening, enlarging, extending, and maintaining memorial grounds, streets, squares, parkways, boulevards, parks, playgrounds, sites for public buildings, and reservations in and about and along and leading to any or all of the same or any lands adjoining or near to such city for use, sublease, or sale for any of the following purposes:
1. To relieve congested sections by providing housing facilities suitable to the needs of such city;
2. To provide garden suburbs at reasonable cost to the residents of such city;
3. To establish city owned vacation camps for school children and minors up to 20 years of age, such camps to be equipped to give academic and vocational opportunities, including physical training.
(am) Cities may not use the power of condemnation to acquire property for the purpose of establishing or extending a recreational trail; a bicycle way, as defined in s. 340.01 (5s); a bicycle lane, as defined in s. 340.01 (5e); or a pedestrian way, as defined in s. 346.02 (8) (a).
(b) After the establishment, layout and completion of such improvements, such city may convey or lease any such real estate thus acquired and not necessary for such improvements, with reservations concerning the future use and occupation of such real estate, so as to protect such public works and improvements, and their environs, and to preserve the view, appearance, light, air and usefulness of such public works, and to promote the public health and welfare.
(c) The acquisition and conveyance of lands for such purpose is a public purpose and is for public health and welfare.
(18) Lakes and rivers. The city may improve lakes and rivers within the city and establish the shorelines thereof so far as existing shores are marsh, and where a navigable stream traverses or runs along the border of a city, such city may make improvements therein throughout the county in which such city shall be located in aid of navigation, and for the protection and welfare of public health and wildlife.
History: 1973 c. 60; 1975 c. 281; 1977 c. 205; 1979 c. 221, 355; 1981 c. 289, 341, 354, 374; 1983 a. 49, 410; 1985 a. 136 ss. 7 to 9, 10; 1985 a. 187, 225, 281, 316; 1987 a. 161, 395; 1989 a. 201; 1991 a. 255, 316; 1993 a. 27, 184, 301, 327, 400, 446, 471, 490, 491; 1995 a. 27 ss. 9126 (19), 9130 (4); 1995 a. 225; 1997 a. 3, 35, 246; 1999 a. 9, 148; 1999 a. 150 s. 672; 2001 a. 30 ss. 16, 17, 108; 2001 a. 50; 2005 a. 26, 34, 79, 81, 112, 171, 208; 2007 a. 20 ss. 1868 to 1873, 9121 (6) (a); 2007 a. 72; 2009 a. 28, 209, 276, 351, 372, 405; 2011 a. 32, 135, 170; 2013 a. 347; 2015 a. 176, 223, 391; 2017 a. 59, 67; 2017 a. 207 s. 5; 2017 a. 243, 317, 364.
A contract made by a zoning authority to zone, rezone, or not to zone is illegal. An ordinance made pursuant to the contract is void as a municipality may not surrender its governmental powers and functions or thus inhibit the exercise of its police or legislative powers. When a zoning authority does not make an agreement to zone but is motivated to zone by agreements as to use of the land made by others or by voluntary restrictions running with the land, although suggested by the authority, the zoning ordinance is valid and not considered to be contract or conditional zoning. State ex rel. Zupancic v. Schimenz, 46 Wis. 2d 22, 174 N.W.2d 533 (1970).
The rezoning of one parcel in a neighborhood shopping area for local business was not a violation of s. 62.23 (7) (b) because there was no minimum size requirement and “local business" was not substantially different from “neighborhood shopping." State ex rel. Zupancic v. Schimenz, 46 Wis. 2d 22, 174 N.W.2d 533 (1970).
Spot rezoning from residential to industrial is arbitrary and unreasonable when the result would be detrimental to the surrounding residential area, had no substantial relation to the public health, safety, morals, or general welfare of the community, and the reasons advanced therefor were neither material nor substantial enough to justify the amendment. Heaney v. Oshkosh, 47 Wis. 2d 303, 177 N.W.2d 74 (1970).
A nonconforming use may be continued even though it violated an earlier regulatory ordinance, so long as the earlier use was not prohibited. Franklin v. Gerovac, 55 Wis. 2d 51, 197 N.W.2d 772 (1972).
The owner of a tract of land may, by leaving a 100 foot strip along one side unchanged, eliminate the right of property owners adjacent to the strip to legally protest. Rezoning a 42 acre parcel cannot be considered spot zoning. Rodgers v. Menomonee Falls, 55 Wis. 2d 563, 201 N.W.2d 29 (1972).
A zoning ordinance adopted by a new city that changed the zoning of the former town did not expire in 2 years under sub. (7) (da), even though labeled an interim ordinance. New Berlin v. Stein, 58 Wis. 2d 417, 206 N.W.2d 207 (1973).
A long-standing interpretation of a zoning ordinance by zoning officials is to be given great weight by the court. State ex rel. B'nai B'rith Foundation v. Walworth County, 59 Wis. 2d 296, 208 N.W.2d 113 (1973).
A challenge to a refusal by the board of appeals to hear an appeal on the grounds of an alleged constitutional lack of due process in the proceedings can only be heard in a statutory certiorari proceeding, not in an action for declaratory judgment. Master Disposal v. Village of Menomonee Falls, 60 Wis. 2d 653, 211 N.W.2d 477 (1973).
Sub. (9) (a) is not a direct grant of power to the building inspector. Racine v. J-T Enterprises of America, Inc. 64 Wis. 2d 691, 221 N.W.2d 869 (1973).
A municipal ordinance rezoning property upon the occurrence of specified conditions and providing that “the property shall revert back to its present zoning" if the conditions are not met is valid as effecting a rezoning of the realty immediately upon the failure to satisfy the conditions because the rezoning, rather than becoming effective immediately and reverting to the previous classification upon noncompliance with the conditions, never becomes effective until the conditions are met. Konkel v. Delafield Common Council, 68 Wis. 2d 574, 229 N.W.2d 606 (1975).
The minimum requirements of sub. (7) (a) [now sub. (7) (am)] do not include publication of a map. City of Lake Geneva v. Smuda, 75 Wis. 2d 532, 249 N.W.2d 783 (1977).
A nonconforming use is an active and actual use of land and buildings that existed prior to the commencement of the zoning ordinance and continued in the same or related use until the present. The owner must prove that the use of the property prior to the effective date of the ordinance was so active and actual that it can be said he has acquired a vested interest in its continuance. If the specific use was but casual and occasional or merely accessory or incidental to the principal use, then it cannot be said that the owner had acquired a vested interest. City of Lake Geneva v. Smuda, 75 Wis. 2d 532, 249 N.W.2d 783 (1977).
When the zoning board of appeals had power under sub. (7) (e) 1. and 7. to invalidate conditions imposed by the plan commission and to afford relief to affected property owners without invalidating a disputed ordinance, the owners' failure to challenge the conditions before the board precluded the owners from challenging in court the constitutionality of the commission's implementation of the ordinance. Nodell Investment Corp. v. Glendale, 78 Wis. 2d 416, 254 N.W.2d 310 (1977).
Sub. (7a) (b) allows interim freezes of existing zoning or, if none exists, interim freezing of existing uses. It does not allow a city to freeze the more restrictive of zoning or uses. Town of Grand Chute v. City of Appleton, 91 Wis. 2d 293, 282 N.W.2d 629 (Ct. App. 1979).
A zoning board acted in excess of its power by reopening a proceeding that had once been terminated. Goldberg v. Milwaukee Zoning Appeals Board, 115 Wis. 2d 517, 340 N.W.2d 558 (Ct. App. 1983).
A variance runs with the land. Goldberg v. Milwaukee Zoning Appeals Board, 115 Wis. 2d 517, 340 N.W.2d 558 (Ct. App. 1983).
Notice under sub. (7) (d) 1. b. is required when a proposed amendment makes a substantial change. Herdeman v. City of Muskego, 116 Wis. 2d 687, 343 N.W.2d 814 (Ct. App. 1983).
A zoning ordinance that denied an owner the entire use value of its property was unconstitutional. State ex rel. Nagawicka Is. Corp. v. Delafield, 117 Wis. 2d 23, 343 N.W.2d 816 (Ct. App. 1983).
A zoning ordinance itself can be the “comprehensive plan" required by sub. (7) (c). No separate comprehensive plan need be adopted by a city as a condition precedent to enacting a zoning ordinance. Bell v. City of Elkhorn, 122 Wis. 2d 558, 364 N.W.2d 144 (1985).
A city had no authority to elect against the notice provisions of sub. (7) (d). Gloudeman v. City of St. Francis, 143 Wis. 2d 780, 422 N.W.2d 864 (Ct. App. 1988).
Under sub. (7) (e) 7., the board does not have authority to invalidate a zoning ordinance and must accept the ordinance as written. Ledger v. Waupaca Board of Appeals, 146 Wis. 2d 256, 430 N.W.2d 370 (Ct. App. 1988).
Under sub. (7) (i) 1., “adjacent" means contiguous. Brazeau v. DHSS, 154 Wis. 2d 752, 454 N.W.2d 32 (Ct. App. 1990).
Sub. (7) (e) 1. allows a municipality to provide by ordinance that the municipal governing body has exclusive authority to consider special exception permit applications; the board of appeals retains exclusive authority absent such ordinance. Town of Hudson v. Hudson Town Board of Adjustment, 158 Wis. 2d 263, 461 N.W.2d 827 (Ct. App. 1990).
Impermissible prejudice of an appeals board member is discussed. Marris v. City of Cedarburg, 176 Wis. 2d 14, 498 N.W.2d 843 (1993).
Sub. (7) (i) 1. does not excuse a municipality for failing to make reasonable accommodation of a group home as required by federal law. Tellurian Ucan, Inc. v. Goodrich, 178 Wis. 2d 205, 504 N.W.2d 342 (Ct. App. 1993).
The federal fair housing act controls sub. (7) (i) 1. to the extent that its spacing requirements may not be used for a discriminatory purpose. “K" Care, Inc. v. Town of Lac du Flambeau, 181 Wis. 2d 59, 510 N.W.2d 697 (Ct. App. 1993).
General, rather than explicit, standards regarding the granting of special exceptions may be adopted and applied by the governing body. The applicant has the burden of formulating conditions showing that the proposed use will meet the standards. Upon approval, additional conditions may be imposed by the governing body. Kraemer & Sons v. Sauk County Adjustment Bd. 183 Wis. 2d 1, 515 N.W.2d 256 (1994).
Casual, occasional, accessory, or incidental use after the primary nonconforming use is terminated cannot serve to perpetuate a nonconforming use. Village of Menomonee Falls v. Veirstahler, 183 Wis. 2d 96, 515 N.W.2d 290 (Ct. App. 1994).
The power to regulate nonconforming uses includes the power to limit the extension or expansion of the use if it results in a change in the character of the use. Waukesha County v. Pewaukee Marina, Inc. 187 Wis. 2d 18, 522 N.W.2d 536 (Ct. App. 1994).
Sub. (7) (f) 1. allowing “civil penalties" for zoning violations does not authorize imposing a lien against the subject property retroactive to the date of the violation. Waukesha State Bank v. Village of Wales, 188 Wis. 2d 374, 525 N.W.2d 110 (Ct. App. 1994).
Though a conditional use permit was improperly issued by a town board, rather than a board of appeals, the permit was not void when the subject property owner acquiesced to the error for many years. Brooks v. Hartland Sportsman's Club, 192 Wis. 2d 606, 531 N.W.2d 445 (Ct. App. 1995).
When a zoning ordinance is changed, a builder may have a vested right, enforceable by mandamus, to build under the previously existing ordinance if the builder has submitted, prior to the change, an application for a permit in strict and complete conformance with the ordinance then in effect. Lake Bluff Housing Partners v. South Milwaukee, 197 Wis. 2d 157, 540 N.W.2d 189 (1995), 94-1155.
Unless the zoning ordinance provides otherwise, a court should measure the sufficiency of a conditional use application at the time that notice of the final public hearing is first given. Weber v. Town of Saukville, 209 Wis. 2d 214, 562 N.W.2d 412 (1997), 94-2336.
A permit issued for a use prohibited by a zoning ordinance is illegal per se. A conditional use permit only allows a property owner to put the property to a use that is expressly permitted, as long as conditions have been met. A use begun under an illegal permit cannot be a prior nonconforming use. Foresight, Inc. v. Babl, 211 Wis. 2d 599, 565 N.W.2d 279 (Ct. App. 1997), 96-1964.
A municipal attorney may not serve as both prosecutor and advisor to the tribunal in a hearing under sub. (7) (i). Nova Services, Inc. v. Village of Saukville, 211 Wis. 2d 691, 565 N.W.2d 283 (Ct. App. 1997), 96-2198.
Sub. (7a) authorizes transfer of zoning administration and enforcement to cities and villages upon enactment of an interim extraterritorial ordinance. Filing an application for a conditional use permit prior to adoption of the interim ordinance did not prevent the transfer of decision making; the applicant had no vested right by virtue of having requested a permit whose issuance was discretionary. Village of DeForest v. County of Dane, 211 Wis. 2d 804, 565 N.W.2d 296 (Ct. App. 1997), 96-1574.
An area variance and a use variance each require unnecessary hardship, but there is an “unnecessarily burdensome" test for an area variance while the test for a use variance is “no feasible use." State v. Kenosha County Board of Adjustment, 212 Wis. 2d 310, 569 N.W.2d 54 (Ct. App. 1997), 96-1235.
A nonconforming use, regardless of its duration, may be prohibited or restricted if it also constitutes a public nuisance or is harmful to public health, safety, or welfare. Town of Delafield v. Sharpley, 212 Wis. 2d 332, 568 N.W.2d 779 (Ct. App. 1997), 96-2458.
The legal standard of unnecessary hardship requires that the property owner demonstrate that without a variance there is no reasonable use for the property. When the property owner has a reasonable use for the property, the statute takes precedence and the variance should be denied. State v. Kenosha County Board of Adjustment, 218 Wis. 2d 396, 577 N.W.2d 813 (1998), 96-1235. See also State v. Outagamie, 2001 WI 78, 244 Wis. 2d 613, 628 N.W.2d 376, 98-1046.
A certiorari action exists only to test the validity of judicial or quasi-judicial determinations. It does not allow for answers, denials, or defenses by the respondent. Merkel v. Village of Germantown, 218 Wis. 2d 572, 581 N.W.2d 552 (Ct. App. 1998), 97-3347.
It is within the power of the court to deny a municipality's request for injunctive relief when a zoning ordinance violation is proven. The court should take evidence and weigh equitable interests including those of the state's citizens. Forest County v. Goode, 219 Wis. 2d 654, 579 N.W.2d 715 (1998), 96-3592.
Sub. (7) (e) 6. does not mandate a hearing for each variance application-only those that satisfy the legal requirements for applications. A city rule that a variance request would not be reheard unless accompanied by evidence of a substantial change of circumstances did not violate due process or equal protection guarantees. Denial of a variance based on the rule was not arbitrary and capricious. Tateoka v. City of Waukesha Board of Zoning Appeals, 220 Wis. 2d 656, 583 N.W.2d 871 (Ct. App. 1998), 97-1802.
Construction in violation of zoning, even when authorized by a voluntarily issued permit, is unlawful. Those who build in violation of zoning rules are not shielded from razing under sub. (8) because construction was completed before the lawfulness of the zoning was determined. However, in rare cases, there may be compelling equitable reasons when a requested order of abatement should not be issued. Lake Bluff Housing v. City of South Milwaukee, 222 Wis. 2d 222, 588 N.W.2d 45 (Ct. App. 1998), 97-1339.
The burden is on the applicant for a variance to demonstrate through evidence that without the variance he or she is prevented from enjoying any reasonable use of the property. State ex rel. Spinner v. Kenosha County Board of Adjustment, 223 Wis. 2d 99, 588 N.W.2d 662 (Ct. App. 1998), 97-2094.
A conditional use permit did not impose a condition that the conditional use not be conducted outside the permitted area. It was improper to revoke the permit based on that use. An enforcement action in relation to the parcel where the use was not permitted is an appropriate remedy. Bettendorf v. St. Croix County Board of Adjustment, 224 Wis. 2d 735, 591 N.W.2d 916 (Ct. App.1999), 98-2327.
Once a municipality has shown an illegal change in use to a nonconforming use, the municipality is entitled to terminate the entire nonconforming use. The decision is not within the discretion of the court reviewing the order. Village of Menomonee Falls v. Preuss, 225 Wis. 2d 746, 593 N.W.2d 496 (Ct. App. 1999), 98-0384.
To violate substantive due process guarantees, a zoning decision must involve more than simple errors in law or an improper exercise of discretion; it must shock the conscience. The city's violation of a purported agreement regarding zoning was not a violation. A court cannot compel a political body to adhere to an agreement regrading zoning if it has legitimate reasons for breaching. Eternalist Foundation v. City of Platteville, 225 Wis. 2d 759, 593 N.W.2d 84 (Ct. App. 1999), 98-1944.
Review of a certiorari action is limited to determining: 1) whether the board kept within its jurisdiction; 2) whether the board proceeded on a correct theory of law; 3) whether the board's action was arbitrary, oppressive, or unreasonable; and 4) whether the evidence was such that the board might reasonably make its order. Kapischke v. County of Walworth, 226 Wis. 2d 320, 595 N.W.2d 42 (Ct. App. 1999), 98-0796.
Zoning may not be legislated or modified by initiative under s. 9.20. An ordinance constituting a pervasive regulation of, or prohibition on, the use of land is zoning. Heitman v. City of Mauston, 226 Wis. 2d 542, 595 N.W.2d 450 (Ct. App. 1999), 98-3133.
A town with village powers has the authority to adopt ordinances authorizing its plan commission to review and approve industrial site plans before issuing a building permit. An ordinance regulating development need not be created with a particular degree of specificity other than is necessary to give developers reasonable notice of the areas of inquiry that the town will examine in approving or disapproving proposed sites. Town of Grand Chute v. U.S. Paper Converters, Inc. 229 Wis. 2d 674, 600 N.W.2d 33 (Ct. App. 1999), 98-2797.
The state, in administering the Fair Housing Act, may not order a zoning board to issue a variance based on characteristics unique to the landowner rather than the land. County of Sawyer Zoning Board v. Department of Workforce Development, 231 Wis. 2d 534, 605 N.W.2d 627 (Ct. App. 1999), 99-0707.
While the DNR has the authority to regulate the operation of game farms, its authority does not negate the power to enforce zoning ordinances against game farms. Both are applicable. Willow Creek Ranch v. Town of Shelby, 2000 WI 56, 235 Wis. 2d 409, 611 N.W.2d 693, 97-2075.
Statutory certiorari review exists to test the validity of agency decisions by reviewing the record, and the court has jurisdiction only for that limited purpose. An action to enforce a variance is an entirely different matter. It is coercive, and personal jurisdiction must be established by serving a summons and complaint or original writ separate from any related certiorari action. Winkelman v. Town of Delafield, 2000 WI App 254, 239 Wis. 2d 542, 620 N.W.2d 438, 99-3158.
The consideration by a separate city council committee, without notice, of a duplicate file of matters then under consideration by the city's zoning committee was not void. Oliveira v. City of Milwaukee, 2001 WI 27, 242 Wis. 2d 1, 624 N.W.2d 117, 98-2474.
Financial investment is a factor to consider when determining whether a zoning violation must be abated, but it does not outweigh all other equitable factors to be considered. Lake Bluff Housing Partners v. City of South Milwaukee, 2001 WI App 150, 246 Wis. 2d 785, 632 N.W.2d 485, 00-1958.
A variance authorizes a landowner to establish or maintain a use prohibited by zoning regulations. A special exception allows the landowner to put the property to a use expressly permitted but that conflicts with some requirement of the ordinance. The grant of a special exception does not require the showing of hardship required for a variance. Fabyan v. Waukesha County Board of Adjustment, 2001 WI App 162, 246 Wis. 2d 851, 632 N.W.2d 116, 00-3103.
If residents would not be living in a proposed community living arrangement because of disabilities, although some may have disabilities, a municipality is not required by the federal American with Disabilities Act or Fair Housing Amendments Act to make reasonable accommodations in the application of the sub. (7) (i) 1. 2500 foot requirement. State ex rel. Bruskewitz v. City of Madison, 2001 WI App 233, 248 Wis. 2d 297, 635 N.W.2d 797, 00-2563.
A change in method or quantity of production of a nonconforming use is not a new use when the original character of the use remains the same. The incorporation of modern technology into the business of the operator of a nonconforming use is allowed. Racine County v. Cape, 2002 WI App 19, 250 Wis. 2d 44, 639 N.W.2d 782, 01-0740.
The public policy of promoting confidence in impartial tribunals may justify expansion of the certiorari record when evidence outside of the record demonstrates procedural unfairness. However, before a circuit court may authorize expansion, the party alleging bias must make a prima facie showing of wrongdoing. Sills v. Walworth Cty Land, 2002 WI App 111, 254 Wis. 2d 538, 648 N.W.2d 878, 01-0901.
While an increase in the volume, intensity, or frequency of a nonconforming use is not sufficient to invalidate it, if the increase is coupled with some element of identifiable change or extension, the enlargement will invalidate a legal nonconforming use. A proposed elimination of cabins and the expansion from 21 to 44 RV sites was an identifiable change in a campground and extension of the use for which it had been licensed. Lessard v. Burnett County Board of Adjustment, 2002 WI App 186, 256 Wis. 2d 821, 649 N.W.2d 728, 01-2986.
To find discontinuance of a nonconforming use, proof of intent to abandon the nonconforming use is not required. Lessard v. Burnett County Board of Adjustment, 2002 WI App 186, 256 Wis. 2d 821, 649 N.W.2d 728, 01-2986.
A purpose of sub. (5) is that a plan commission have the opportunity to review and make a recommendation on a final plat before the governing body makes a final decision, but not to require that body to wait more than 30 days for the plan commission's report. KW Holdings, LLC v. Town of Windsor, 2003 WI App 9, 259 Wis. 2d 357, 656 N.W.2d 752, 02-0706.
A conditional use permit (CUP) is not a contract. A CUP is issued under an ordinance. A municipality has discretion to issue a permit and the right to seek enforcement of it. Noncompliance with the terms of a CUP is tantamount to noncompliance with the ordinance. Town of Cedarburg v. Shewczyk, 2003 WI App 10, 259 Wis. 2d 818, 656 N.W.2d 491, 02-0902.
An ordinance requirement that no special use permit will be granted unless it is “necessary for the public convenience" meant that the petitioner had to present sufficient evidence that the proposed use was essential to the community as a whole. Hearst-Argyle Stations v. Board of Zoning Appeals of the City of Milwaukee, 2003 WI App 48, 260 Wis. 2d 494, 659 N.W.2d 424, 02-0596.
Spot zoning grants privileges to a single lot or area that are not granted or extended to other land in the same use district. Spot zoning is not per se illegal but, absent any showing that a refusal to rezone will in effect confiscate the property by depriving all beneficial use thereof should only be indulged in when it is in the public interest and not solely for the benefit of the property owner who requests the rezoning. Step Now Citizens Group v. Town of Utica, 2003 WI App 109, 264 Wis. 2d 662, 663 N.W.2d 833, 02-2760.
The failure to comply with an ordinance's notice requirements, when all statutory notice requirements were met, did not defeat the purpose of the ordinance's notice provision. Step Now Citizens Group v. Town of Utica, 2003 WI App 109, 264 Wis. 2d 662, 663 N.W.2d 833, 02-2760.
Under Goode a landowner may contest whether he or she is in violation of the zoning ordinance and, if so, can further contest on equitable grounds the enforcement of a sanction for the violation. Town of Delafield v. Winkelman, 2004 WI 17, 269 Wis. 2d 109, 675 N.W.2d 470, 02-0979.
Area variance applicants need not meet the no reasonable use of the property standard that is applicable to use variance applications. The standard for unnecessary hardship required in area variance cases is whether compliance with the strict letter of the restrictions governing area, set backs, frontage, height, bulk, or density would unreasonably prevent the owner from using the property for a permitted purpose or would render conformity with those restrictions unnecessarily burdensome. Ziervogel v. Washington County Board of Adjustment, 2004 WI 23, 269 Wis. 2d 549, 676 N.W.2d 401, 02-1618.
In evaluating whether to grant an area variance to a zoning ordinance, a board of adjustment should focus on the purpose of the zoning law at issue in determining whether an unnecessary hardship exists for the property owner seeking the variance. The facts of the case should be analyzed in light of that purpose, and boards of adjustment must be afforded flexibility so that they may appropriately exercise their discretion. State v. Waushara County Board of Adjustment, 2004 WI 56, 271 Wis. 2d 547, 679 N.W.2d 514, 02-2400.
A municipality cannot be estopped from seeking to enforce a zoning ordinance, but a circuit court has authority to exercise its discretion in deciding whether to grant enforcement. Upon the determination of an ordinance violation, the proper procedure for a circuit court is to grant an injunction enforcing the ordinance, except when it is presented with compelling equitable reasons to deny it. Village of Hobart v. Brown County, 2005 WI 78, 281 Wis. 2d 628, 698 N.W.2d 83, 03-1907.
A board of appeals may not simply grant or deny an application with conclusory statements that the application does or does not satisfy the statutory criteria, but shall express, on the record, its reasoning why an application does or does not meet the statutory criteria. Even when a board's decision is dictated by a minority, these controlling members of the board ought to be able to articulate why an applicant has not satisfied its burden of proof on unnecessary hardship or why the facts of record cannot be reconciled with some requirement of the ordinance or statute. A written decision is not required as long as a board's reasoning is clear from the transcript of its proceedings. Lamar Central Outdoor, Inc. v. Board of Zoning Appeals of the City of Milwaukee, 2005 WI 117, 284 Wis. 2d 1, 700 N.W.2d 87, 01-3105.
Sub. (7) (h) relates to the use to which the building was put, not to the physical structure of the building itself. It limits the repairs and improvements that can be made on a structure that is used in a manner that does not conform to uses permitted by applicable zoning codes. Hillis v. Village of Fox Point Board of Appeals, 2005 WI App 106, 281 Wis. 2d 147, 699 N.W.2d 636, 04-1787.
An existing conditional use permit (CUP) is not a vested property right and the revocation of the permit is not an unconstitutional taking. A CUP merely represents a species of zoning designations. Because landowners have no property interest in zoning designations applicable to their properties, a CUP is not property and no taking occurs by virtue of a revocation. Rainbow Springs Golf Company, Inc. v. Town of Mukwonago, 2005 WI App 163, 284 Wis. 2d 519, 702 N.W.2d 40, 04-1771.
Neither the desire for a different remedy nor a resort to alternative legal theories was sufficient to insulate a party filing an action under sub. (8) from the impact of claim preclusion when that party had adequate opportunity to litigate its claims before the zoning board. Barber v. Weber, 2006 WI App 88, 292 Wis. 2d 426, 715 N.W.2d 683, 05-1196.
In deciding whether to grant a variance under sub. (7) (e) 7., a zoning board of appeals may consider the role municipal officials played in a zoning violation when determining whether a hardship was self-created and whether strict enforcement of the ordinance would result in an unnecessary hardship. Accent Developers, LLC v. City of Menomonie Board of Zoning Appeals, 2007 WI App 48, 300 Wis. 2d 561, 730 N.W.2d 194, 06-1268.
The court's opinion that a deck was optimally located in its current position was not the relevant inquiry in regard to the granting of an area variance. The board of adjustment was justified in determining that the property owner's desire for the variance to retain their nonconforming deck was based on a personal inconvenience rather than an unnecessary hardship. Block v. Waupaca County Board of Zoning Adjustment, 2007 WI App 199, 305 Wis. 2d 325, 738 N.W.2d 132, 06-3067.
A municipality may not effect a zoning change by simply printing a new map marked “official map." Village of Hobart v. Brown County, 2007 WI App 250, 306 Wis. 2d 263, 742 N.W.2d 907, 07-0891.
Zoning that restricts land so that the landowner has no permitted use as of right must bear a substantial relation to the health, safety, morals, or general welfare of the public in order to withstand constitutional scrutiny. Town of Rhine v. Bizzell, 2008 WI 76, 311 Wis. 2d 1, 751 N.W.2d 780, 06-0450.
Ziervogel did not state that use cannot be a factor in an area variance analysis. It stated that use cannot overwhelm all other considerations in the analysis, rendering irrelevant any inquiry into the uniqueness of the property, the purpose of the ordinance, and the effect of a variance on the public interest. Here, the board properly considered the purpose of the zoning code, the effect on neighboring properties, and the hardship alleged. Driehaus v. Walworth County, 2009 WI App 63, 317 Wis. 2d 734, 767 N.W.2d 343, 08-0947.
Condominiums are not a form of land use. A condominium unit set aside for commercial use runs afoul of a zoning ordinance prohibiting commercial use. When an intended commercial use did not comport with a town's zoning restrictions, approval of the condominium by the town was de facto rezoning. A town could not seek to avoid the restrictions of applicable extraterritorial zoning by aiming to define its action as something other than a zoning change. Village of Newburg v. Town of Trenton, 2009 WI App 139, 321 Wis. 2d 424, 773 N.W.2d 500, 08-2997.
Having a vested interest in the continuance of a use is fundamental to protection of a nonconforming use. There can be no vested interest if the use is not actually and actively occurring at the time the ordinance amendment takes effect. However, it does not follow that any use that is actually occurring on the effective date of the amendment is sufficient to give the owner a vested interest in its continued use. To have a vested interest in the continuation of a use requires that if the continuance of the use were to be prohibited, substantial rights would be adversely affected, which will ordinarily mean that there has been a substantial investment in the use. The longevity of a use and the degree of development of a use are subsumed in an analysis of what investments an owner has made, rather than separate factors to be considered. Town of Cross Plains v. Kitt's “Field of Dreams" Korner, Inc. 2009 WI App 142, 321 Wis. 2d 671, 775 N.W.2d 283, 08-0546.
There must be reasonable reliance on the existing law in order to acquire a vested interest in a nonconforming use. Reasonable reliance on the existing law was not present when the owners knew the existing law was soon to change at the time the use was begun. Town of Cross Plains v. Kitt's “Field of Dreams" Korner, Inc. 2009 WI App 142, 321 Wis. 2d 671, 775 N.W.2d 283, 08-0546.
The language of this section clearly and unambiguously conveys that the mechanism for an appeal of a board of appeals decision is an action in certiorari for review of the board's decision. The action is against the board of appeals, not against the city. Acevedo v. City of Kenosha, 2011 WI App 10, 331 Wis. 2d 218, 793 N.W.2d 500, 10-0070.
When a village eliminated the selling of cars as a conditional use in general business districts a previously granted conditional use permit (CUP) was voided, the property owner was left with a legal nonconforming use to sell cars, and the village could not enforce the strictures of the CUP against the property owner. Therefore, the owner could continue to sell cars in accordance with the historical use of the property, but if the use were to go beyond the historical use of the property, the village could seek to eliminate the property's status as a legal nonconforming use. Hussein v. Village of Germantown Board of Zoning Appeals, 2011 WI App 96, 334 Wis. 2d 764, 800 N.W.2d 551, 10-2178.
The line distinguishing general police power regulation from zoning ordinances is far from clear. The question of whether a particular enactment constitutes a zoning ordinance is often a matter of degree. Broad statements of the purposes of zoning and the purposes of an ordinance are not helpful in distinguishing a zoning ordinance from an ordinance enacted pursuant to non-zoning police power. The statutorily enumerated purposes of zoning are not the exclusive domain of zoning regulation. A more specific and analytically helpful formulation of the purpose of zoning, at least in the present case, is to separate incompatible land uses. Multiple factors are considered and discussed. Zwiefelhofer v. Town of Cooks Valley, 2012 WI 7, 338 Wis. 2d 488, 809 N.W.2d 362, 10-2398.
Nothing in s. 59.694 (10) prevented an applicant whose conditional use permit (CUP) was denied from filing a second CUP application rather than seeking certiorari review. A municipality may enact a rule prohibiting a party whose application to the zoning board has been denied from filing a new application absent a substantial change in circumstances, but that was not done in this case. O'Connor v. Buffalo County Board of Adjustment, 2014 WI App 60, 354 Wis. 2d 231, 847 N.W.2d 881, 13-2097.
Zoning ordinances are in derogation of the common law and are to be construed in favor of the free use of private property. To operate in derogation of the common law, the provisions of a zoning ordinance must be clear and unambiguous. HEEF Realty and Investments, LLP v. City of Cedarburg Board of Appeals, 2015 WI App 23, 361 Wis. 2d 185, 861 N.W.2d 797, 14-0062.
Short-term rental was a permitted use for property in a single-family residential district under the City of Cedarburg's zoning code. A zoning board cannot arbitrarily impose time or occupancy restrictions in a residential zone where there are none adopted democratically by the city. There is nothing inherent in the concept of residence or dwelling that includes time. HEEF Realty and Investments, LLP v. City of Cedarburg Board of Appeals, 2015 WI App 23, 361 Wis. 2d 185, 861 N.W.2d 797, 14-0062.
A municipality has the flexibility to regulate land use through zoning up until the point when a developer obtains a building permit. Once a building permit has been obtained, a developer may make expenditures in reliance on a zoning classification. Wisconsin follows the bright-line building permit rule that a property owner's rights do not vest until the developer has submitted an application for a building permit that conforms to the zoning or building code requirements in effect at the time of application. McKee Family I, LLC v. City of Fitchburg, 2017 WI 34, 374 Wis. 2d 487, 893 N.W.2d 12, 14-1914.
The building permit rule is a bright-line rule vesting the right to use property consistent with current zoning at the time a building permit application that strictly conforms to all applicable zoning regulations is filed. The rule extends to all land specifically identified in a building permit application as part of the project. Golden Sands Dairy LLC v. Town of Saratoga, 2018 WI 61, 381 Wis. 2d 704, 913 N.W.2d 118, 15-1258.
Zoning ordinances may be applied to land held by the U.S. for an Indian tribe so long as they do not conflict with a federal treaty, agreement, or statute and so long as the land use proscribed is not a federal governmental function. 58 Atty. Gen. 91.
Zoning ordinances utilizing definitions of “family" to restrict the number of unrelated persons who may live in a single family dwelling are of questionable constitutionality. 63 Atty. Gen. 34.
County shoreland zoning of unincorporated areas adopted under s. 59.971 [now s. 59.692] is not superseded by municipal extraterritorial zoning under s. 62.23 (7a). Sections 59.971, 62.23 (7), (7a) and 144.26 [now s. 281.31] discussed. Municipal extraterritorial zoning within shorelands is effective insofar as it is consistent with, or more restrictive than, the county shoreland zoning regulations. 63 Atty. Gen. 69.
Extraterritorial zoning under sub. (7a) is discussed. 67 Atty. Gen. 238.
A city's ban on almost all residential signs violated the right of free speech. City of LaDue v. Gilleo, 512 U.S. 43, 129 L. Ed. 2d 22 (1994).
There is no property interest in a position on a zoning board of appeals and none was created by a common council member's assertion that the council would not approve a board member's successor. Generally, the 1st amendment protects a person from being removed from public employment for purely political reasons, but a board member is an exempt policymaker. Pleva v. Norquist, 195 F.3d 905 (1999).
Plaintiffs were not required to exhaust administrative remedies under sub. (7) (e) before bringing a civil rights act suit challenging the definition of “family" as used in that portion of a village zoning ordinance creating single-family residential zones since plaintiffs' claim was based on federal law. Timberlake v. Kenkel, 369 F. Supp. 456 (1974).
The denial of a permit for a 2nd residential facility within a 2,500 foot radius pursuant to sub. (7) (i) 1., which had the effect of precluding handicapped individuals, absent evidence of adverse impact on the legislative goals of the statute or of a burden upon the village constituted a failure to make reasonable accommodations in violation of federal law. U.S. v. Village of Marshall, 787 F. Supp. 872 (1992).
Sub. (2) (i) 1. and 2r. are preempted by the Federal Fair Housing Amendment Act and the Americans With Disabilities Act. Sub. (2) (i) 1. and 2r. impermissibly classify people on the basis of disability by imposing a 2,500 foot spacing requirement on community living arrangements for the disabled. Oconomowoc Residential Programs v. City of Greenfield, 23 F. Supp. 2d 941 (1998).
The necessity of a zoning variance or amendments notice to the Wisconsin department of natural resources under the shoreland zoning and navigable waters protection acts. Whipple, 57 MLR 25.
Architectural Appearances Ordinances and the 1st Amendment. Rice. 76 MLR 439 (1992).
Conditional Use Permits: Strategies for Local Zoning Procedures. Peranteau. Wis. Law. Sept. 2015.