powered help
header-left header-center header-right
File #: 050072    Version: 0
Type: Ordinance Status: Placed On File
File created: 5/3/2005 In control: ZONING, NEIGHBORHOODS & DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
On agenda: Final action: 9/27/2005
Effective date:    
Title: An ordinance relating to the imposition of negative use restrictions upon real property.
Sponsors: ALD. ZIELINSKI
Indexes: LAND USE PLANNING, PLANNING, ZONING
Attachments: 1. City Attorney's Opinion.PDF
Number
050072
Version
ORIGINAL
Reference

Sponsor
ALD. ZIELINSKI
Title
An ordinance relating to the imposition of negative use restrictions upon real property.
Sections
295-122 cr
Analysis
This ordinance prohibits the imposition of certain private “negative use restrictions” upon real property in the city. Specifically, it prohibits any private agreement that forbids or materially limits the use of real property for a particular type of general retail establishment (e.g., grocery store or drug store) after an operator of the same type of general retail establishment has terminated operations at the site, when such establishment would otherwise be a permitted use, limited use or special use under the zoning code. Such an agreement is declared to be against public policy, shall be void and unenforceable and shall be subject to the penalty provisions of the zoning code.
Body
Whereas, The purposes of the city's zoning code, as specified in s. 295-103 of the code of ordinances, include:

1. Promoting land uses and development that are consistent with the city's comprehensive plan.

2. Promoting and protecting the public health, safety and general welfare of the city.

3. Encouraging compatibility of adjacent land uses.

4. Promoting sound, attractive development within the city.

5. Encouraging reinvestment in established urban neighborhoods while protecting their unique characteristics.

; and

Whereas, The Common Council finds that the designation of permitted, limited and special uses allowed in various zoning districts furthers such purposes; and

Whereas, The Common Council finds that achievement of these purposes is thwarted, the public health, safety and general welfare of residents of the city are compromised, and the benefits of competition in the marketplace are lost when private parties impose use restrictions upon real property in the city which prohibit or materially limit the use of such property for gen...

Click here for full text