DCPREZ-0000-06460 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

`wkzak Dane County Regional Planning ��, ,It Y 9► ng Commission �I 217 S. Hamilton St., Suite 403, Madison, Wisconsin 53703-3238 Tel. 608/266-4137 ECE ' , ...-' D ,&,,, , „....., K February 7, 199 Lull la a D.C.PLANNING&DEVELOPMENT PROPERTY RECORDS Harold Krantz, Chairman Town of Cross Plains 3419 CTH P Mt. Horeb, Wisconsin 53572 RE: Interpretation of the Town of Cross Plains Land Use Plan Dear Mr. Krantz: I have read the Town Board's interpretation of your plan which is to apply the 35-acre density policy only to farms, but not to non-farm parcels. I infer from your statements that you are defining "non-farm parcels" as those of less than 35 acres as of the adoption of the A-1 Agricultural Exclusive zoning district in the Town of Cross Plains. This interpretation is helpful, except that it does not address what policy is intended for these non-farm parcels. If the density policy does not apply to the non-farm parcels, will they be allowed one division, multiple divisions, or unlimited division; will there be other criteria for determining how much development will be permitted by your interpretation? A number of towns have policies and criteria allowing for one division of such parcels if they meet certain criteria. In conversation with Bob Bowman, he indicated that he thought these parcels should be allowed to develop with 20,000-square-foot lots as provided in the plan for unsewered development. If the interpretation is to allow this type of development on the non-farm parcels, this would have farmland preservation implications since these parcels are scattered throughout the Town, most of them surrounded by farmland. A ten-acre parcel could be viewed to permit over 15 lots if an interpretation of 20,000-square-foot lots is used. Such an interpretation appears to conflict with adopted county policies. While I understand your reluctance to amend your plan, your interpretation raises more questions than it resolves. The implementation section of your plan does speak only to farms, but if the density policy is 1 per 35 acres in agricultural preservation areas, there is no need to further address division of parcels that are already less than 35 acres. If you propose to divide them, then we need policy and implementation provisions for a clear understanding of what is intended. At one of the meetings you attended, a statement was made that there were between 15 and 20 of these non-farm parcels in the Town. We need to reach some agreement on a definition since I have reviewed the number of "substandard parcels" in the Town and estimate approximately 75 such parcels in consultation with the Zoning staff. When other towns have prepared policies on dividing such parcels, they have used a minimum parcel size such as 8 or 10 acres before a division will be considered. RPC