|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
DCPREZ-0000-06200
DaneCounty-Planning
>
Zoning
>
1 Rezones
>
DCPREZ-0000-06200
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/23/2016 9:16:27 AM
Creation date
2/23/2016 9:16:19 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Rezone/CUP
Rezone/CUP - Type
Rezone
Petition Number
06200
Town
Cross Plains Township
Section Numbers
11
AccelaLink
DCPREZ-0000-06200
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
68
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
February 13, 1995 <br /> Page 12 <br /> * It has soils not classified as prime farmland or <br /> farmland of statewide importance as shown on <br /> maps in town plans. <br /> Finally, prior to the effective date of A-1 Exclusive Agriculture <br /> zoning coverage, this parcel was not eligible or suitable for A-1 <br /> Exclusive Agricultural zoning under the applicable statutes and <br /> ordinances; it should have been excluded from A-1 Exclusive <br /> Agriculture zoning and rezoned to allow rural development. If this <br /> parcel should have excluded from blanket A-i Exclusive Agriculture <br /> zoning coverage, then the policies applicable to farmland <br /> preservation are inappropriate and irrelevant to rezoning this <br /> parcel . For all of these reasons, the Farmland Preservation Plan <br /> is no good basis for denying this petition. <br /> (c) Regional Development Guide. Opponents argue that <br /> rezoning the parcel violates the Dane County Regional Development <br /> Guide. This is not a good basis for denying the petition for <br /> several reasons. First, the Regional Development Guide is advisory <br /> only; it has not been adopted by the Town as a policy guide; it is <br /> not intended as a basis for making zoning amendments. The Regional <br /> Development Guide also incorporates the recommendations of the <br /> Farmland Preservation Plan and, therefore, its policies are <br /> intended to be flexible rather than rigid. Second, as stated <br /> above, because it was inappropriate to place the A-1 Exclusive <br /> Agriculture zoning blanket over this parcel, we believe that <br /> policies applicable to farmland preservation are inappropriate and <br /> irrelevant to rezoning this parcel . For these reasons, the <br /> Regional Development Plan must be disregarded and is no reason for <br /> denying this petition. <br /> (d) Town Land Use Plan. Opponents argue that rezoning <br /> the parcel violates or conflicts with the Town' s Land Use Plan. <br /> This argument is flawed for several reasons. First, it is <br /> contradicted by the Town' s prior approval and anticipated <br /> reaffirmation in the coming weeks of the proposed rezoning. <br /> Second, it ignores the plain language of the Town Land Use Plan. <br /> The Town Land Use Plan specifically allows rezoning for small <br /> family owned and operated businesses that provide a service to the <br /> community in designated agricultural preservation areas. The <br /> proposed rezoning would allow small family owned and operated <br /> landscape contracting and garden center businesses that provide a <br /> service to the agricultural and residential communities. <br /> In its report on rezone petition no. 5898, the Regional <br /> Planning Commission commented that the proposed rural development <br /> conflicts with the agricultural preservation policies of the Town. <br /> The Regional Planning Commission' s comments raise the interesting <br /> question of who has authority to interpret the Town Land Use Plan. <br /> Certainly, the Town must have the authority to interpret <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.