Block · one region of the page, as the scanner read it. It may hold a whole story, part of one, several, or an advertisement; stitching blocks into articles is the next step. Text is supplied OCR.
Page 11 · column 4 of 9 · from the scan, no model involved
ngnx in conservation zones set up guidelines for evaluating proposed uses. He proposed that it might be better to also include guidelines, rather than a list of permitted uses, for the agricultural district as well.
When work on the zoning ordinance first began, the Planners and Supervisors were more concerned about "protecting the heights," mailed Luke.
"I think it’s easier to^ defend our regulations in* conservation districts than in any other district we have,” interjected Miller.
Luke agreed and asked the rest of the Planners how they felt on whether uses allowed should be general or specific.
“I don’t know,” answered Walter Masterson. He noted that Rappahannock ordinances have stood up well since adoption but added that they had not been challenged in court to any great degree.
George Muth replied that he didn’t see any conflict between the generalities governing permitted uses in conservation districts and clearly defined lists of permitted uses in agriculture districts since the county had decided to be more protective of environmentally sensitive conservation zones.
Miller added that Commonwealth Attorney Davis had been particularly concerned with “horizonal land” and had paid special attention to the conservation sectiop when the zoning ordinance was first drawn up.
Frontage Regulations
Deleted
After some discussion, the Planners agreed to strike the frontage regulations on lots in conservation districts.
By eliminating frontage requirements, the county would, in effect, encourage clustering of houses along state roads and so preserve additional conservation land, maintained Baumgardner. “You’re not requiring that conservation areas be all cut up just to get read frontage...! like it. It eliminates building roads.” He added that the subdivision ordinance’s restriction against oddly shaped lots would prevent developers from using the elimination of frontage requirements to subvert the zoning ordinance.
Miller maintained that frontage regulations cause more problems than they solve.
“What’s wrong with that?” asked Luke. “If people can’t meet them (frontage regulations), then they won’t build there,” he commented but went along with the majority in recommending that frontage requirements be deleted from conservation districts.
Masterson questioned whether the county wouldn’t eventually be faced with a trade-off between allowing clustered development in conservation areas in order to protect agricultural land.
This may happen, agreed Miller, but not any time soon.
The Planners broke off their ordinance review at 10 p.m. and will continue at the next Planning Commission meeting, scheduled for November 16 at 7=30 p.m. in the courthouse.
++++
At its greatest extent 15,000 years ago, an ice sheet reached a thickness of one mile over northern Wisconsin.
84.1%