Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorSiemon, Charles L.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2020-06-19T20:54:07Z
dc.date.available2020-06-19T20:54:07Z
dc.date.issued1995-07
dc.identifier.citationCharles L. Siemon, Conditional Zoning in Illinois: Beast or Beauty?, 15 N. Ill. U. L. Rev. 585 (1995).en_US
dc.identifier.issn0734-1490
dc.identifier.urihttps://commons.lib.niu.edu/handle/10843/22566
dc.description.abstractAlthough courts have traditionally been skeptical of conditional zoning, the fundamental and well taken grounds for such skepticism have been eclipsed by the emergence of planning. Conditions which are imposed pursuant to a comprehensive plat and are directed at achieving the goals of the plan are likely to be upheld, particularly if they are designed to benefit the surrounding properties and to advance the public welfare. A bilateral agreement which expressly or impliedly commits a zoning authority to a legally binding promise is likely to be invalid. This article examines Goffinet v. Christian County, the leading Illinois case on both conditional zoning and the importance of a comprehensive plan as a predicate for zoning.en_US
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.publisherNorthern Illinois University Law Reviewen_US
dc.subjectlawen_US
dc.subjectland useen_US
dc.subjectconditional zoningen_US
dc.subjectplanningen_US
dc.titleConditional Zoning in Illinois: Beast or Beauty?en_US
dc.type.genreArticleen_US
dc.typeTexten_US
dc.contributor.departmentOtheren_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record