|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
DCPREZ-0000-05134
DaneCounty-Planning
>
Zoning
>
1 Rezones
>
0000 YR
>
DCPREZ-0000-05134
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/21/2016 9:11:55 AM
Creation date
7/21/2016 9:11:54 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Rezone/CUP
Rezone/CUP - Type
Rezone
Petition Number
05134
Town
Dunn Township
Section Numbers
10
AccelaLink
DCPREZ-0000-05134
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
13
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
DANE COUNTY APPLICATION FOR REZONE <br /> Item No. : 26. <br /> Zoning Petition # 5134 An Badger Surveying, agent for Donald and Lois Marsh <br /> to change the zoning from the A-1 Exclusive Agriculture district to the RH-2 <br /> Rural Homes district. <br /> Location: At and North of 2660 USH 51 Section 10, SW SW Town Dunn Lull <br /> 15 more or less Acres <br /> Provosed use: Create (3) residential lots - 1 residence exists. D.E.D. Yes. <br /> ANALYSIS; Allowing the creation of only one parcel provides compliance with land use <br /> plans. <br /> STAFF COMMENTS: <br /> R.P.C. - Petition 5134. These proposed lots are In the agricultural preservation <br /> area of the Town of Dunn where the relevant policy is: "Restrict new <br /> residential development to areas with soils not classified as prime <br /> farmland providing the lot Is at least one acre or more In size at a <br /> ratio of 1 lot per 35 acre tract." <br /> The north and south proposed parcels are vacant farmland, while the <br /> remaining parcel has the existing farm buildings. The division of the <br /> existing buildings appears reasonably consistent with plan policies. <br /> The entire area of the three parcels, plus the intervening soils are all <br /> defined as prime farmland by USDA definition. <br /> The farm Is 80 acres; therefore, two lots would be allowable by the <br /> density policy, not three. <br /> A strict reading of the policy would say only the division of the <br /> existing buildings Is consistent with the plan. <br /> A second lot could be rationalized since it Is for the applicant to <br /> build a new home. Such bending of the policies has often been done. <br /> However, there does not appear to be any rationale to approve the third <br /> lot. <br /> E.H.D. - <br /> Co. Hwy. - <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.