DCPREZ-0000-06916 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

COMPOSITE REPORT- Petition No. 6916 ZNR Work Meeting 8/11/98 Town of Deerfield ' i I4 $ ,'. t-, dry, 1 i IL q r, Or h i S •The "sending"property has 315 additional acres in the Town of Cottage Grove. Those acres were not part of the original farm when the Town of Deerfield adopted its land use plan in 1978. Thus, they are not considered in determining allowable density in the Town of Deerfield. C. TDR"adhoc"agreements In terms of past TDR transactions in Dane County, there was a petition in the Town of Rutland a few months earlier(Petition 6396, Handleland). Petition 6396 was approved by the ZNR in October 95 based on an agreement between adjoining property owners (Handleland/Olson) as to who would get the splits on a former 120 acre farm that was later divided. Those types of arrangements have been made in the past when "original" farms are divided after the date of A-1EX adoption. The other similar case is petition 6557 by Olson. It was approved in Spring 1996 provided that a"transfer of splits" be executed through a deed restriction on another piece of Mr. Olson's land elsewhere in Deerfield. The transfer was approved and the deed restriction was recorded. The approval of Petition 6557 was widely supported by elected officials. At the time, there was a committee in place called the "Common Ground Committee"to develop a "transfer of splits"program. The Olson case was viewed as a pilot for a broader transfer of splits program. The Committee stopped meeting in Summer 1996, and the transfer of splits rules/policies were never put in place. To allow transfer of development rights without clear rules may lead to future problems. Here is an excerpt that Mark Roffers, Dane County Senior Planner at the time, wrote on this subject in May 1998: