My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
COM 0370.004 2002-2004
ClerkCouncil
>
Council Records
>
Communications
>
2002-2004
>
COM 0370.004 2002-2004
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/13/2008 9:06:50 AM
Creation date
5/10/2008 12:28:44 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Communications
Communications - Type
COM
Communications - Council Term
2002-2004
Communication
0370
Point
004
Author
Christopher J. Yuen, Planning Director
Communications - Referred To
N/A
Document Relationships
BIL 159 Draft 02 2002-2004
(Related)
Path:
\Council Records\Bills\2002-2004
BIL 160 Draft 03 2002-2004
(Related)
Path:
\Council Records\Bills\2002-2004
COM 0370.000 2002-2004
(Related)
Path:
\Council Records\Communications\2002-2004
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
STAFF <br /> Page 4 <br /> May 20, 2003 <br /> expect the buyer of a residential homesite to review the ordinance that rezoned the <br /> property. We should probably also put the same clause in other ordinances that restrict <br /> specific uses, such as on commercial or industrial property, although in those cases I <br /> would expect a purchaser to review the rezoning ordinance as a matter of "due <br /> diligence", at least for undeveloped property. In these cases, though, the intent is not that <br /> the covenant be a permanent private covenant, merely something that gives notice to <br /> subsequent purchasers of the terms of the rezoning ordinance. For that reason, the <br /> rezoning ordinance can subsequently be amended by the council, to remove the <br /> restrictions, and in that case, the "covenant" does not restrict the property anymore, <br /> unless the landowners have chosen to also make it a private covenant enforceable by the <br /> lot owners. <br /> By the way, "contract zoning" is a label, like "spot zoning", that is used by different <br /> people in different ways. These labels sometimes suggest too much. Some situations <br /> that the term "contract zoning" is sometimes used to cover are clearly illegal It is illegal <br /> for the government to actually make a contract promising to rezone property if the private <br /> landowner does certain things. This is illegal because the government's power to zone is <br /> part of its "police power", which cannot be bargained away by contract. It is also illegal <br /> for the government to rezone property based upon the landowner's agreement to do <br /> things that are in no way rationally related to the impacts of the rezoning. One example <br /> is a developer promising to make substantial cash payment to the government for the <br /> privilege to rezone, when the payment is not based upon impacts from the project in <br /> question. But the modem trend has been to call imposing site-specific conditions of the <br /> type discussed earlier in this memo "conditional zoning", and legally permitted, rather <br /> than "contract zoning." <br /> CJY:pak <br /> Wpwin60/Chris/Conditional Zoning.doc <br /> <br /> cc: Honorable Bobby-Jean Leithead-Todd <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.