We have a law in our jurisdiction that allows a person to operate a small farm on two acres of land. Our client's deed calculates to be 1.999985 acres by the math wizards of the city he applied to for a permit. It amounts to a denial of permission.
I plan to write to the city and ask them to reconsider before sending the client's money for a survey. Can you offer any zingers that will make them feel foolish enough to concede?
It is about 0.6 square feet. How ridiculous. He just wants to grow flowers.
Ask them to measure it to that many decimal places, the obvious intent was for a 2 acre lot. What is the noted area on the tax map?
More or less is your friend.
He needs a permit to farm? It's not likely that this agency is capable of reasoning.
See previous discussion here:
Norman_Oklahoma
It's called the "Right to Farm" law. It's a state law (Chapter 40A Section 3 of Massachusetts) allows farms on land two acres or more. I seem to think the old minimum parcel sixe was five acres. The client made an application to the city where he lives, but the land he wants to farm is vacant.
Rounds to 2.0000
That should do it in anyone's big book of regulations.
However, there is another principle involved. If the parcel was established as 2 acres legally, especially if it was approved by the county/city then it's legally 2 acres and no amount of math can change it. If the city or county signed the plat and accepted the parcel as a 2 acre parcel it's a 2 acre parcel for legal/regulation purposes. If it wasn't approved by the city/county but it was filed with that acreage it's still legally a 2 acre parcel and should be recognized as such.
I've actually won that argument using patented acreages to overcome zoning regulations. 80 acres patented remain 80 acres even if the parcel measures 79.85 acres.
The law is written to zero decimal places. If the legislature intended the cutoff to be to 6 decimal places, they would have written it as such. Tell Math Whiz to round his calculation to zero decimals to match the legislative intent. Or get your client's attorney to do so.
"It’s called the “Right to Farm” law. It’s a state law ...."
For the record, I never doubted you that the permit was necessary. I was merely expressing my astonishment.
Just locate to the outside center of all pins a hair. What’s a hundredth here or there . It is sad that we have to go through so much red tape to do anything on the land we have purchased for sure. Here we have to meet certain requirements as well for Land Use and to state it’s a farm. Paperwork paperwork.
Point out the significant digits in the city's result. Then claim that they're discriminating against the client because he's (insert best category here.)
For the record, I never doubted you that the permit was necessary. I was merely expressing my astonishment.
The permit is only required in zoning districts where farming is not allowed unconditionally, such as Business or Commercial districts - one can get a permit to farm the land as long as they meet the statute's requirements. The law also says that the towns cannot require a Special Permit for farming in those districts. A Special Permit would be subject to discretionary approval by the Planning Board or other authority.
Is a permit also required to just let the property lay open, undeveloped, and disused? Which would you prefer in your neighborhood, a feild that is kept up with a planted crop or a vacant, overgrown lot?
If the property is not zoned agricultural (at least in NJ) farming it would require a change of use variance under the zoning laws. It would also affect the property taxes as farmlands are taxed at lower rates than other uses.
I can understand ordinances against keeping livestock in a non-agricultural area, and noise ordinances, etc., and I understand that property is taxed in accordance with its zoning and not its actual use. But needing a permit to put in a crop - of flowers no less - seems over the top. To me.
