Agenda - Planning Commission - 06/07/2012

Home

Zoning Bulletin April 25, 2012 'Volume 6 I No. 8 Case Note: In its decision, the court also said that if a zoning board de- nies a permit "based on the reasonably -founded concerns of the commu- nity, then undoubtedly there is substantial evidence to support the [board's] decision." Preemption —Outdoor Advertising Company Argues it Does Not Need County Approval for Billboard It contends town ordinance governing billboards preempts county ordinance governing billboards Citation: Adams Outdoor Advertising, L.P. v. County of Dane, 2012 WL 375232 (Wis. Ct. App. 2012) WISCONSIN (02/02/12)—This case addressed the issue of whether, when a town has enacted an ordinance regulating outdoor advertising (billboards) pursuant to Wis. Stat. 5 60.23(29), a permit applicant that is subject to such a Town ordinance is also subject to a County zoning ordinance purporting to reg- ulate the same outdoor advertising sign. More specifically, the issues addressed were: (1) whether, in addition to its authority to regulate billboards under Wis. Stat. 5 59.70(22), a county has the authority to regulate billboards pursuant to its general zoning authority under Wis. Stat. C 59.69(4), and, if so, (2) wheth- er a town ordinance enacted pursuant to the town billboard statute (Wis. Stat. 60.23(29)) preempts a county's billboard ordinance enacted under the general zoning statute (Wis. Stat. § 59.69(4)). The Background/Facts: Adams Outdoor Advertising, L.P. ("Adams") con- structed an advertising billboard on a highway located in the Town of Madison (the "Town") in Dane County (the "County"). Prior to constructing the bill- board, Adams sought and obtained permits from the Town and from the Wis- consin Department of Transportation to construct the billboard. Adams did not seek a permit from the County. After the County apparently cited Adams for not obtaining a County permit for the billboard, Adams brought a declaratory judgment action in circuit court. Adams asked the court to clarify whether it was required to obtain a billboard construction permit from the County. Adams argued that it was not required to obtain a permit from the County to construct the billboard. Among other things, it argued that the County lacked legal authority to regulate advertising signs (billboards) that fell within the regu- latory jurisdiction of the Town. It contended that the Town's billboard ordinance preempted the County's billboard ordinance. In support of its position, Adams pointed. to Wisconsin statutory law, 59.70(22), which provides that County boards may regulate billboards by or- dinance, but that "[s]uch ordinances shall not apply within cities, villages and © 2012 Thomson Reuters 5