DCPREZ-0000-07037 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

COMPOSITE REPORT-Page 3 Application No. 7037 DANE COUNTY PLANNING DIVISION STAFF COMMENTS I. BACKGROUND A. The applicant is requesting rezoning of 37 acres from A-1 Exclusive to RH-3 and RH-4 to allow one additional residential building lot and achieve zoning compliance on another lot. B. The subject property is in the Town of Verona, approximately two miles west of the City of Madison. It is not within an urban service area. C. The subject property has been divided into two lots of separate ownership. The first lot, proposed for rezoning to RH-3, is 11 acres in area. The second lot, proposed for rezoning to RH-4, is 26 acres. Initial research suggests that this may not have been a legal land division. If this is in fact the case, rezoning would be required regardless of the applicant's development plans for the subject property. II. ANALYSIS A. The subject property is in an area characterized by some rural residential development, the University Ridge Golf Course, and agricultural and open space lands. B. The portion of the site proposed for RH-3 zoning is presently undeveloped and primarily wooded. This site is proposed as an additional residential building site. The majority of the site proposed for RH-4 zoning is also undeveloped. However, this second site contains an approximately two acre area along Mid-Town road which includes (1)three residential units in a farmhouse converted in the 1950s; (2) a separate four-unit apartment building; (3) an eight-stall garage constructed in the 1960s; (4) a laundry building in an old milkhouse converted in the 1960s;(5)storage use in a barn converted in 1983. C. The uses currently on the parcel proposed for RH-4 are inconsistent with RH-4 zoning. Therefore, this petition will have to be amended, or a new petition requesting appropriate zoning will be required. The applicant is aware of this situation. The most appropriate district(for the portion now proposed for RH-4) appears to be the R-4 district, which allows multiple family residences and multiple buildings on one lot. However, R-4 zoning is not a perfect fit for the property because: 1. The maximum height of accessory buildings in the R-4 district is 12 feet, and, within all residence districts, the total square footage of accessory buildings may not exceed 50% of the square footage of principal structures. Given the number and size of accessory buildings, it appears that these provisions cannot be met. 2. Existing spacing between structures may not in all cases be consistent with the minimum front and side yard requirements of the R-4 district. This is difficult to determine without a site plan. 3. The R-4 district would allow many more multiple family residences on the property than the seven units currently in place. Large-scale multiple family development would clearly be incompatible with the surrounding area.