DCPREZ-2014-10839 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

>> provided in the 1981 documents and site map would have been properly » researched and validated Bonnie in the wake of her husbands death »would have had accurate information to base her 1990 actions on >The fact remains due diligence was not performed in recording (1969) or researching this 1.4ac parcel in 1981 or in 1990. Having the pleasure of knowing Bonnie Olson, I respectfully disagree with your summation. Had due diligence been executed via a parcel search in addition to and in comparison of either the "building site/split map" (1981) or Bonnie's rezoning request (1990) the 1959 building site conveyance of this parcel would not be in question today. > Based on our original conversation on April 30, 2015, we are happy to "move" our RH-1 parcel request directly on top of the 1.4ac parcel. Please see attached "RH-1, Proposal option 2" draft legal and CSM. >Would it be possible for us to come to the Dane County Zoning office to discuss this all in person prior to the May 26 DCZ Board meeting? Our oldest daughter is having surgery shortly so our schedules are a little hectic as I'm sure yours are as well. Is there a day/time that would work for you the week of May 18th? The only day that week I could not make work would be Tuesday, May 19th. > Again, thank you all for your time and efforts on our request! > Kind regards, >Jean and Michael Mitchell > 206-4240-Jean's cell > [cid:image001.jpg @01D08BCE.4D146350] > [cid:image002.jpg @01D08BCE.4D146350] > [cid:image003.jpg @01D08BCE.4D146350] >Sent from my iPad > On May 4, 2015, at 10:36 AM, Allan, Majid <Allan@ countyofdane.com<mailto:Allan @countyofdane.com>> wrote: > Hi Jean, > In the 1959 deed transferring 1.4 acres to Erna Hermann, there is reference to the deed also including rights to "all the stone" on the Reeve property for the apparent purpose of constructing a "nursing home" on the 1.4 acres. The stone was to be removed within 2 years (by 1961). Obviously, the nursing home was never constructed, and the 1.4 acres was reattached to the surrounding ^'70 acre "parent parcel" in 1969. >To be clear, I do not know if the intended use of a nursing home would've been permitted by right under the 1959 zoning code, or if such a use would've required a zoning change and/or CUP. I suspect the latter, since such a use would require a zoning change and CUP under the current ordinance. >As for the older map showing the 1.4 acre parcel... I assume you're referring to the map associated with rezone petition#4672. As you know, the 1.4 acres—perhaps unfortunately— is still shown as a tax parcel on current maps, despite the fact that prior deeds (1990, 2013) formally re-consolidated the 1.4 acres with the current 31.3 acre ownership parcel. It is the ownership parcel that determines allowable uses and density. The rezone petition submitted 3