ZONING BOARD WORKSHOPS
Center for Land Use Education
Lynn Markham and Becky Roberts
Cooperative Extension and the College of Natural Resources
University of Wisconsin - Stevens Point
Workshop Outline
Part I
• Zoning board basics
• Organization and approach to keep your BOA
out of trouble
Part II - Variances
• 3-step test including new case law
• You be the judge
Workshop Outline
Part III:
•
•
•
Conditional uses including 2005 case law
Administrative appeals including 2005 case law
Open discussion
Why do communities have zoning?
•
It is one tool to achieve
community goals such as:
– Public health & safety
– Natural resource
protection
– Protection of investments
• Landscape scale:
Group/separate land uses on
the landscape to minimize
conflicts and encourage
cooperation
• Parcel scale:
Specify the size & location of
buildings on each parcel
Terminology
State statutes define:
– Counties have boards of adjustment
s. 59.694, stats. for counties, s. 60.65 for towns
– Cities & villages have boards of appeal
s. 62.23(7)(e), stats. for cities, 61.35 for
villages & 60.62 for towns with village powers
Both are commonly referred to as:
– Zoning Board
– BOA
– Different from the ‘zoning committee’
The zoning board acts
like a court…
1) It applies law to particular fact situations
(quasi-judicial decisions).
2) Policy development & adoption are
legislative functions reserved for the
planning commission & governing body.
The zoning board acts
like a court…
•
•
•
Like a court, zoning board decisions can
be appealed to higher courts.
If state statutes and case law are
followed, decisions will generally be
upheld.
A solid legal record minimizes legal costs
and zoning board reconsideration.
Discretion…
Discretion
Flexibility in decision-making
Legislative
policies
ordinances
Quasi-judicial
variances
conditional uses
adm. appeals
Administrative
permits
Keeping your zoning board
out of trouble…
Organization
Ethics for decision-makers
Open meetings law
On-site inspections
Standards on appeal
Organization of the board…
County: 3-5 members appointed by
county board chair or elected
executive.
Municipal: 5 members appointed by the
mayor, village president or town chair.
Appointments are subject to approval by
the governing body.
Alternates and Quorums
2005 legislation
New legislation
Appointing Alternates
• Counties, cities, villages and towns with
village powers shall appoint 2 alternate
members to the BOA
– 1st alternate shall act with full power when a
member cannot vote due to conflict of interest
or absence
– 2nd alternate only acts when 1st alternate or
multiple BOA members cannot vote
– 2005 Wisconsin Act 34
New legislation
Quorum Requirements
• If a quorum is present, the BOA may
take action by majority vote of the
members present.
– 2005 Wisconsin Act 34
Organization of the board…
• Members serve staggered 3-year terms.
• Vacancies are filled for the remainder of
a term.
• County members must reside in
unincorporated areas & no more than one
from each town may serve.
• Removal from the board is only for cause
after written charges & an opportunity
for a hearing.
• Members of the governing body should not
serve.
Selection of officers…
County: The zoning board chooses its own
chair.
Municipal: The mayor, village president
or town chair designates the chair of
the zoning board subject to approval
of the governing body.
Operating rules…
County: County board must adopt rules for
operation of the BOA. BOA may adopt
additional rules to implement county board
policies.
Municipal: BOA must adopt rules consistent with
any ordinance requirements.
Robert's Rules of Order may be adopted to apply
in absence of specific ordinances, rules or
statutory requirements.
Conflicts of Interest
• An official is prohibited from taking
advantage of public office for private gain
& from failing to perform duties of the
office.
• If an official or their family or associates
have a private financial interest in a public
contract, statutes limit involvement in the
contract.
Conflicts of interest…
• Factors likely to cause a member to prejudge
or unfairly judge a matter are reasons for
recusal.
• A board member's opinions about issues do
not necessarily disqualify the member.
• Consider any appearance of conflict of
interests in deciding whether to recuse.
New case law
Zoning board bias
• Payne & Dolan applied
for a conditional use
permit for a gravel pit
• Local officials deciding
on CUPs and zoning
board decisions must
not harbor bias, or an
impermissibly high risk
of bias, or prejudge
the application
Keen v. Dane County, 2004 WI App 26
New case law
Biased?
• Decision maker #1
In a letter submitted as part of the CUP application:
“Payne and Dolan has always stood out above the
rest in their efforts and success in being a good
corporate citizen and caretaker of the land.”
• Decision maker #2
Leased his land to Payne and Dolan for the operation
of a gravel pit.
Keen v. Dane County, 2004 WI App 26
Ex parte communication…
• "Ex parte" communication = discussion
regarding a pending matter not included in the
public record.
• Board members should…
– avoid it,
– disclose it &
– encourage citizens to make important information
part of the record.
Abstention vs. Recusal
Abstain = to refrain from voting
Recuse = to refrain from voting
and all official participation in
matter
Open Meetings Law
Wisconsin’s Open Meetings Law requires:
– meetings are open & accessible to the
public, including the disabled.
– the public is provided with advanced
notice of meetings.
– closed sessions are limited to specified
circumstances & procedures.
Hearing notice…
County
Class 2 notice required
Pop. of 250,000 or more Posting recommended
County
Pop. less than 250,000
Posting required (2 weeks prior)
Class 2 notice recommended
City
Class 1 notice required
Posting recommended
Posting one week prior required
Village or town
•
•
•
Class 1 notice – 1 newspaper publication at least one week prior
Class 2 notice – 1 newspaper publication per week for at least two weeks prior
Posting – Public notice posted in 3 public places
Content of notice…
Content of notice:
• meeting time, date, place & subject matter,
• may provide for a period of public comment,
• generally, only noticed agenda items may be
decided &
• notice of any planned closed sessions if the
meeting will be reopened within 12 hours.
Notice to other parties…
To media requesting it.
To the government’s official newspaper
To DNR 10-days prior to hearings for shoreland,
shoreland-wetland & floodplain zoning.
Mailed notice to parties in interest:
– the applicant/appellant/petitioner,
– adjacent property owners &
– town clerks
Open meetings…
1) Purpose test = discussion, information
gathering or decision-making on a matter
within the jurisdiction of the body.
2) Numbers test = enough members of a body
are present to determine the outcome of an
action.
9 By statute, if one-half of the members of a body
9
are present, there is a meeting unless the
purpose test is not met.
A lesser number of members may meet the
numbers test if they can block a decision.
Open meetings…
• Phone conferences, letters, e-mails or
faxes between board members may
constitute a meeting if the numbers &
purpose tests are met.
Open meetings…
• A series of phone calls or conversations to
“line up votes” or conduct other business,
known as a running quorum, violates the
law.
• Discussion of meeting scheduling &
logistics is OK.
Closed sessions
Closed sessions are limited to
those authorized by statute.
– Consideration of a case
(case = controversy between parties,
not decision about granting a permit).
– Conferring with legal counsel about
current or likely litigation.
Conduct of closed sessions…
• Record individual votes to convene in
closed session. Those who vote against
may participate without liability.
• Attendance limited to Zoning Board
members.
• Consider only matters for which the
session was closed.
• Motions & decisions must be recorded.
Conduct of closed sessions…
• A closed session may not be reopened
within 12 hours unless there was public
notice of reopening.
• Other options include:
– amending the agenda to place closed
sessions last or
– amending the meeting notice to include
reopening.
Open meeting violations…
• Members who vote against an improper closed
session can participate without liability.
• Members can be sued individually or as a group.
• Forfeitures for violation ($25-$300) are not
reimbursable.
A court may void a decision made at an illegal
meeting if the public interest in enforcement
of the Open Meetings Law outweighs public
interests in sustaining the decision.
The zoning board climbs in the county van &
spends 4 hours driving all over the county
conducting on-site inspections for upcoming
hearings. Not a word is spoken by anyone
during the 4 hours.
Must they comply with
Open Meetings Law
requirements…
?
• Yes.
Open meetings…
• Both the numbers and purpose test
(info gathering) have been met.
• They must comply with the notice and
public accessibility requirements of the
open meetings law.
Site inspections…
What are your options??
Site inspections…
• Do BOA members view the site as
individuals? As a group?
Either. Must have inspection authorization, which
may be included on application. Group visits must
be noticed as an open meeting.
• Can the public go on-site?
If the board goes on-site as a group, the inspection
is an open meeting and must include the public.
Otherwise members of the public must obtain
owner’s permission.
Site inspections…
• Can the members question the property
owner on-site? How about the zoning staff?
You can ask technical questions or clarifications. All
other questioning and discussion should be saved
for the hearing.
• Who can members talk with during the ride
from the site to the meeting?
They can talk to anyone, just not about zoning
board issues.
Site inspections…
1) Comply with notice & public accessibility
requirements of open meeting law.
2) Information gathered during a site
inspection must be included in the hearing
record to be considered.
3) Consider limitations on public discussion
(observation only).
Making BOA decisions
(we’ll talk about this in a few minutes)
Recording decisions
2005 case law
New case law
Recording Decisions
• Payne & Dolan applied
for a conditional use
permit for a gravel pit
• Local ordinance listed
10 factors to consider
when deciding a CUP
Keen v. Dane County, 2004 WI App 26
New case law
Recording Decisions
• Zoning committee
granted the CUP,
including 61 conditions,
but did not refer to
the 10 factors
• A record without any
reference to the
factors is not
sufficient
Keen v. Dane County, 2004 WI App 26
New case law
Recording Decisions
• Lamar applied for a
variance to raise a
billboard above the
City’s max sign height
• BOA denied variance
• Supreme Court found
BOA record
inadequate because it
did not explain reasons
for denying variance
Lamar Central Outdoor v. Board of
Zoning Appeals of the City of Milwaukee,
2005 WI Supreme Ct.
New case law
Recording Decisions
• BOA must express, on the record:
– the statutory criteria under which the
application is rejected and
– the reasons the criteria are not satisfied
• Not necessary to include in written
decision
• Courts will review the record on appeal
Lamar Central Outdoor v. Board of
Zoning Appeals of the City of Milwaukee,
2005 WI Supreme Ct.
Recording Decisions
• Tips:
– BOA has to decide on each statutory and
ordinance standard
– BOA members wishing to deny permit should
articulate their rationale to other members
– Distribute and fill out decision forms before
voting
– Consider requiring applicants to submit
proposed decisions or findings of fact as part
of application process or presentation
Recording decisions
Fact situation. The fact situation is
described based on the record (proposal,
site conditions, project impacts, language
appealed, etc.).
Standards & rationale. Ordinance or
legal standards are applied to the fact
situation (e.g., conditional use standards
or 3-step test for variances).
Decision & associated conditions. A
decision is rendered & any conditions on
approval or administrative action to be
taken are described (e.g., issuance of a
permit).
Appeals of
zoning
decisions
Planning & zoning committee
Governing body
Board of adjustment/appeals
Circuit court
Court of appeals
Wisconsin supreme court
Standards on judicial review…
Courts defer to local decision makers when these tests are met:
1) Subject matter jurisdiction
Did the body decide a matter that it is empowered by statute or
ordinance to act on?
2) Proper procedures
Did the body follow proper procedures (open meeting law, public
notice, hearing, record of decision, etc.)?
3) Proper standards
Did the body apply proper standards in making the decision (e.g.
3-step test for a variance)?
4) Rational basis for the decision
Could a reasonable person have reached this conclusion?
5) Evidence in the record
Do facts in the record of the proceedings support the decision?
Take a break!
BOA Decisions
Who does zoning?
Elected
Appointed
County Board
Elect
County Board Chair
Policy
Recommendations
Planning & Zoning
Committee
Supervise
Zoning
Administrator
Appoint
Appoint
Other
Committees
Zoning Board of Adjustment
Appeal
Remand
Circuit Court
Who does zoning?
Veto*
County Executive
(optional)
County Board
County Administrator
Elect
(optional)
County Board Chair
Policy
Recommendations
Planning & Zoning
Committee
OR
Appoint
Appoint
Appoint
Appoint
Other
committees
Supervise
Zoning
Administrator**
** Appointed by county exec or administrator with
confirmation from board, or by county board
Zoning Board of Adjustment
Appeal
Remand
Circuit Court
* If the exec vetoes a resolution or ordinance,
the board can override the veto by a 2/3 vote
Who does zoning?
Conditional
use permit
County Board
Elected
New
ordinances &
amendments
with rec’s
from P&Z
Appointed
Elect
County Board Chair
Policy
Conditional
Appoint
Recommendations use permit
Planning & Zoning
Committee
Supervise
Zoning
Administrator
Other
Committees
Regular permits
(permitted uses)
Conditional
Appoint
use permit
Variances &
adm appeals
Zoning Board of Adjustment
Appeal
Remand
Circuit Court
Zoning Board Decisions
1. Administrative appeals – contested
decisions & interpretations of
administrative officials.
2. Special exceptions/conditional uses –
uses which must be tailored to a site.
3. Variances – relaxations of ordinance
standards.
Variances
Variances…
Purpose: to preserve local
regulatory standards,
prevent regulatory takings
and avoid unnecessary
burdens on property owners.
Variances are not meant to provide
general flexibility in ordinances.
Ordinances should provide a level
of flexibility that preserves
regulatory objectives and
maintains community support.
Variances…
Use variances “permit a landowner to put
property to an otherwise prohibited
use.”
Area variances “provide an increment of
relief (normally small) from a physical
dimensional restriction such as a
building height, setback, and so
forth.”
Ziervogel v. Washington County Board
of Adjustment, 2004 WI Supreme Ct.
Use variances
Use variances are not specifically prohibited
by statutes but this approach presents
problems:
– Requests seldom qualify under the
unnecessary hardship test.
– Many are actually administrative appeals
seeking to clarify what uses are permitted
in a district.
Variances…
•
Multiple or extreme
area variances may
produce the same
effect as a use
variance
•
Example: significantly
reducing setbacks or lot
sizes in a low density
residential zoning
district has the same
effect as granting a use
variance to convert a
property from lowdensity to high-density
residential.
Variances…
An applicant has burden of proof to show
that all three statutory tests are met:
1. unnecessary hardship*
2. due to unique property limitations &
3. no harm to public interests
Variances…
Unique property limitations test
Unique physical limitations of the property,
such as steep slopes or wetlands must
prevent compliance with the ordinance.
Variances…
Unique property limitations test
• Circumstances of an applicant such as a
growing family or need for a larger garage,
are not a factor in deciding variances.
• Limitations that prevent ordinance
compliance & are common to a number of
properties should be addressed by
ordinance amendment.
Variances…
Public interest test
• A variance granted may not harm public interests
but is not required to advance them.
• Look to the purpose statement for guidance
regarding public interests.
• The effect of a variance on community interests
must be considered, not public patrons or clientele.
• Short-term, long-term and cumulative impacts of
variance requests must be considered. Zoning staff
should provide an impact analysis.
Variances…
Unnecessary hardship
for use variances
• Unnecessary hardship = no reasonable use of
property without a variance.
• If a parcel as a whole provides some
reasonable use, then the test is not met.
Redefining unnecessary
hardship for area variances
2004 case law
New case law
Ziervogel & area variances…
• House located 26 feet
from the OHWM of Big
Cedar Lake in Washington
County
• Owners wanted a 10-foot
vertical expansion of their
house to add two bedrooms,
two bathrooms, and an
office to the house
• Washington County's
Ordinance prohibited
expanding any structure
within 50 feet of the
OHWM of a lake
• Washington County BOA
denied variance request
• Circuit Court & Court of
Appeals affirmed
• Supreme Court changed
standard
New case law
Use variance
Area variance
Consider project design & other alternatives
Determine that all 3 statutory variance criteria are met:
1) Unnecessary hardship
1) Unnecessary hardship
= no reasonable
alternative use
= unnecessarily burdensome
in view of ordinance
purpose
2) Unique physical property limitations
3) No harm to public interests
New case law
Unnecessary hardship
for area variances…
• Unnecessary hardship = when compliance with
the ordinance would:
– unreasonably prevent the owner from using the
property for a permitted purpose, or
– be unnecessarily burdensome in view of ordinance
purposes
Ziervogel v. Washington County Board
of Adjustment, 2004 WI Supreme Ct.
New case law
Unnecessary hardship
for area variances…
Is the regulation unnecessarily burdensome considering:
1. the purposes of the regulation
2. the fact situation (project design, location, etc.)
3. the impact of the requested variance on
ordinance objectives/purposes
4. whether impacts can be adequately mitigated by
conditions on the variance, and
5. the extent of the burden on the property owner
Is the burden on the property owner of living without
the variance necessary in order to achieve the
purpose of the ordinance?
What does “unnecessarily
burdensome” mean??
Old case law
• Should an after-the-fact
variance be granted for the red
porch because its removal would
be “unnecessarily burdensome”?
13 ft.
• The BOA denied the variance
and the WI Supreme Court
affirmed stating the hardship
was self-created and the porch
no more than a personal
convenience”.
Snyder v. Waukesha County Zoning Board, 1976
Unnecessary hardship…
For all variances
• Determined on a case-by-case basis
• Consider the sum of related facts
• Hardship cannot be self-imposed or created by
a prior owner
• Loss of profit or financial difficulty do not
constitute hardship
Variances…
• A variance runs with the property.
• A variance does not create a nonconforming
structure.
• Lack of objections from neighbors does not
justify a variance.
• Nor do nearby ordinance violations.
Would you grant the
variance??
Pie
r
35’
House
1000 sq. ft.
Proposed
addition
15’x30’
Septic Field
W
Lake Emily
N
Considerations for variance
applications on shoreland
properties
Purposes of shoreland zoning include…
• Prevent and control
water pollution
• Protect spawning
grounds, fish and
aquatic life
• Reserve shore
cover and natural
beauty
Runoff Volume
Phosphorus Inputs
Sediment Inputs
4x
Adapted From: Wisconsin DNR
5x
6x
18x
•
•
•
•
Effects of Increased Impervious Surfaces
More runoff carrying more sediment and
nutrients into the lake or stream
Erosion
Increased algae growth
Fewer fish & insect species
8-12%
Greater than 12%
Less than 8%
Increasing
impervious surface in the watershed
Decreasing number of fish & fish species
Fish found in streams when impervious surface in the watershed was:
Less than 8%
8 - 12%
Greater than 12%
Iowa darter
Black crappie
Channel catfish
Yellow perch
Rock bass
Hornyhead chub
Sand shiner
Southern redbelly dace
Golden shiner
Northern pike
Largemouth bass
Bluntnose minnow
Johnny darter
Common shiner
Golden shiner
Northern pike
Largemouth bass
Bluntnose minnow
Johnny darter
Common shiner
Creek chub
Fathead minnow
Green sunfish
White sucker
Brook stickleback
Creek chub
Fathead minnow
Green sunfish
White sucker
Brook stickleback
Creek chub
Fathead minnow
Green sunfish
White sucker
Brook stickleback
Wang et al. 2000
The Buffer Zone
How do buffers work?
Deep-rooted
native shoreline &
upland plants are
more effective
than lawn grasses
at stabilizing
shorelines &
halting erosion.
Buffer zone functions:
„Reduce runoff, erosion &
sedimentation to preserve
water quality/clarity
„Take up nutrients that
feed algae
„Wildlife food, shelter
and critical habitat
„Combat invasive species
„Preserve natural beauty
Pie
r
35’
House
1000 sq. ft.
150 feet
Proposed
addition
15’x30’
Septic Field
50 feet
W
Lake Emily
N
Variance proposal
– Property owner proposes to build a 15’x30’ addition to
be used for a family room which he says is necessary
for year-round living upon his retirement.
– Existing house was built in 1936 and the center of the
building is located 35 feet from the ordinary high water
mark .
– Lot is 50 feet wide and 150 feet deep.
– Lot is flat (<3% slope) with loamy soil.
– 13 of the 62 lots around Lake Emily are smaller than the
lot in question.
– Currently the lot is 21% impervious. With the addition,
it would be 27% impervious.
– Approx. 15 feet of shoreline has been lost due to
erosion in the last 20 years .
Part II
by Dean Richards
Attorney with Weiss Berzowski Brady LLP
Delafield, Wisconsin
• Conditional uses including 2005 case
law
• Administrative appeals including 2005
case law
• Open discussion
Conditional Uses
Conditional uses…
Permitted uses
Where
allowed
Who
decides
Discretion
Added
conditions
Appeal
Everywhere in
district
Administrator
Must be granted if
standards are met
None permitted
BOA
Conditional uses
(special exceptions)
Tailored to site &
neighboring uses
Commission/committee,
BOA, governing body
May be granted or
denied
Added conditions OK
(design & performance)
Court - BOA if decided
by P&Z committee
Who decides conditional use permits
and appeals of these decisions?
CUP
decision
Planning & Zoning
Committee
CUP
decision
Appeal
Appeal
BOA
Remand
Circuit Court
Appeal
CUP
decision
County Board
Remand
Conditional uses…
1) Must be listed for the zoning district
2) OK to require compliance reporting by
owner
3) Later modification of conditions is
limited
Conditional uses…
Development restrictions such as permit
conditions & exactions must meet 2
tests:
1) address expected harmful project
impacts (essential nexus)
2) be proportional to the extent of
those impacts (rough proportionality).
New case law
Can a town board of adjustment
issue a conditional use permit?
– If a town (or county) board provides in
its zoning ordinance that its BOA may
grant CUPs, then – and not otherwise –
does the BOA have the power to do so.
– This avoids arbitrary or politically driven
assignment of CUPs to different
decision-making bodies.
Magnolia Township and Western Rock
County Citizens Against Factory Farming
v. Town of Magnolia. 2005 Ct. App.
New case law
– A CUP was granted for
a resort in 1981
– A fire destroyed a
substantial portion of
the hotel in 2002
– Owners failed to
comply with raze or
repair orders
– Both town and county
pursued termination of
CUP following public
hearings
Rainbow Springs Golf Company, Inc. v.
Town of Mukwonago. 2005 Ct. App.
New case law
Can revoking a CUP be considered an
unconstitutional taking without just
compensation?
– Rainbow Springs argued a CUP is a property
right so revoking a CUP is a taking
– Holding:
• A conditional use permit (CUP) is a type of
zoning designation
• Zoning does not provide property rights
• So revoking a CUP is not a taking of property
rights
Rainbow Springs Golf Company, Inc. v.
Town of Mukwonago. 2005 Ct. App.
Administrative appeals
Administrative Appeals
• Legal process to resolve disputes
regarding:
– Ordinance interpretation (text, maps,
jurisdiction, measurements, etc.)
– Reasonableness of zoning decision
(zoning permit, CUP)
Administrative Appeals
Who can file an appeal?
• Any aggrieved person:
– appellant/applicant given unfavorable decision
– Neighbors/property owners affected by decision
– state program oversight agencies (DNR, DATCP)
• Any officer, department, board or bureau
of the municipality affected by a decision
of an administrative officer
Administrative Appeals
When can an appeal be filed?
• Whenever there is an alleged error
(procedural, substantive or equitable)
Administrative Appeals
Time limits on appeal:
• State statutes do not specify time limit
• Limits can be set by local ordinance or rule
(e.g., within 30 days of notice of
administrative decision)
• If there is no time limit, clock begins
ticking when aggrieved parties find out
about decision
In some cases courts have decided that an appeal period
began when construction commenced
Administrative Appeals
Procedure for appeal:
• Notice of appeal filed with
administrative officer and BOA
• Action stayed
• BOA provided with record of decision
• Public notice
Administrative Appeals
• Role of BOA:
– The board functions like a court
– Its job is to apply the zoning ordinance
and appropriate legal standards to the
facts of each case
– The board does not have authority to
amend or repeal any provision of the
zoning ordinance
New case law
– Washburn County
applied for a CUP to
operate a gravel pit
– County zoning
committee granted
the permit over the
opposition of
neighbors
– Osterhues appealed
to BOA
Osterhues v. Board of Adjustment for
Washburn County, 2005 WI Supreme Ct.
New case law
How should the BOA proceed?
Fact finding hearing?
(de novo)
Error finding hearing?
Osterhues v. Board of Adjustment for
Washburn County, 2005 WI Supreme Ct.
New case law
When BOAs hear appeals, they have
the authority to:
– Conduct a de novo hearing,
– Take new evidence, and
– Substitute their judgment for the zoning
committee or zoning administrator’s
judgment
Osterhues v. Board of Adjustment for
Washburn County, 2005 WI Supreme Ct.
From WI Statutes…
Section 59.694(8)
ORDER ON APPEAL. In exercising the powers under this
section, the board of adjustment may, in conformity with
the provisions of this section, reverse or affirm, wholly or
partly, or may modify the order, requirement, decision or
determination appealed from, and may make the 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.
•
•
The BOA has all the powers of the zoning administrator and
zoning committee & may reverse, affirm or modify decision.
The BOA does not have authority to remand a decision to
the zoning committee.
Decision standards when BOAs
hear appeals
1.
Was the decision made by the correct
person/body according to the zoning ordinance?
Does the ordinance allow for the decision made?
2. Were proper procedures followed?
3. Were the proper standards from the ordinance
used?
4. Is there evidence in the record supporting the
decision the zoning committee reached? The BOA
may take additional evidence. Is there evidence
that is new and relevant to ordinance standards?
Decision standards when BOAs
hear appeals
It is up to the BOA to
decide whether it will:
•
review the decision
based on the record at
hand OR
•
hold a de novo hearing
WARNING
BOA may have
to defend its
action on an
incomplete
record if
challenged
Questions or comments??
715-346-3783
http://www.uwsp.edu/cnr/landcenter/
Center for Land Use Education
Lynn Markham and Becky Roberts
Cooperative Extension and the College of Natural Resources
University of Wisconsin - Stevens Point