DCPREZ-0000-06090 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

60Pdp Size. This parcel is about 28 acres. That is notably smaller than the minimum parcel size of 35 acres required by ordinance ".... to establish or maintain a farm operation .... ." See 10.123(5)(a). So, by 10.123(5)(a), a parcel less than 35 acres should not be zoned as A-1 Exclusive Agriculture. Instead, for parcels under 35 acres, county ordinance 10.126 expressly stipulates A-2 Agriculture District (provided the parcel qualifies as agricultural at all). See 10.126, re that purpose, which I quote: "The purpose of the A-2 Agriculture District is to provide for....rural uses....on parcels of less than 35 acres." Provisions for"substandard"lot sizes in the A-1 Exclusive Agriculture District [10.123 (9) (b and c)1 cite no logic for zoning "substandard" lot sizes, and conflict with the aim and existence of 10.126. The availability of A-2 zoning precludes any need to perpetuate substandard lot sizes in the A-1 district. Note: Substandard lot sizes in A-1 Exclusive Ag could only be legally defended(if at all)for"lands in productive farm operations." Those quoted words are from 10.123(1)(b),and restrict the A-1 Exclusive Ag District to productive farmland. Nota Bene: ordinance 10.123 does not permit a substandard on productivity. Note:The county ordinance for rural parcels of under 35 acres(10.126)allows residential use,and moreover,does not restrict housing to one residence per 35 acres[see especially 10.126(5)]. Town Land Use Plan for Cross Plains. The town plan identifies two categories of farmland, and no others. As shown on the farmland map in the town plan, my parcel falls outside both types of farmland, clearly indicating that my parcel does not qualify for the A-1 Exclusive Agriculture District. The Town Plan re Parcels under 35 Acres. The town plan stipulates that parcels under 35 acres are not farms and, instead, represent areas of"current and potential urbanization" (Point 7 on page 4). Hence, the town plan clearly indicates the intent by the town to rezone such parcels for residential development. Consistent with the above, the town land use plan only uses the restriction of one building lot per 35 acres re land "within a farm unit." (Point 5, page 10). Parcels of under 35 acres do not qualify as farm units [see 10.123(6)(a)]. So, the town plan is exactly like the county ordinances: neither of them holds parcels under 35 acres to the restriction of only one residence per 35 acres. In emphasis of this, the town plan (Point 7, page 4) cites parcels of under 35 acres as representing areas for residential development. In Conclusion Thus, my rezoning petition does not conflict with the Town Land Use Plan of Cross Plains, nor with the county zoning ordinances,whereas my present zoning does so conflict. I presume you do not act to perpetuate zoning that conflicts with zoning standards, town plans, prior established use of the parcel, or the sheer physical nature of the parcel. Such would be bad public policy. The town board did not do it. It recognized that my parcel was not productive land, and so, unanimously approved my rezoning petition (Nov. 21, 1994). Note: my petition is to let my daughter build a residence next to mine. I would not part with any of this land, except for one of my children. Also, I presume you will respect the use and purpose I had established for this parcel as being a nonfarm, rural residential parcel, by my sole use of it as such since 1966. There are other ways I could rezone, including asking the town to do a comprehensive rezoning. But, I believe Regional Planning will act to support my petition, on the basis of these further facts. My petition goes to the Zoning Committee on Dec. 27, 1994. I would be grateful if you can act on reconsideration before then. Thank you. Sincerely yours, 771--e-e..2? Enclosure Robert E. vvman