Laserfiche WebLink
• <br /> DATE: December 2, 1998 <br /> TO: Dane County Zoning and Natural Resources Committe <br /> Chairwoman Helen Johnson and Committee Members <br /> FROM: J. Robert Burull <br /> RE: Response to Objection by Rodney and Kathy Dahlen to Zoning <br /> Petition Request # 7389 <br /> Thank you for allowing me to appear at the November 24th County Public <br /> Hearing regarding my above petition. <br /> I have read the undated Dahlen objection circulated November 24, 1998, by <br /> Ms. Kathy Dahlen and signed by her husband, Rodney. <br /> My response to the Dahlen document is that the content fairly well <br /> reflects Mr. Dahlen's representations to both the Town of Pleasant <br /> Springs Planning Commission and later the Town Board. The Planning <br /> Commission after hearing Mr. Dahlen's objection voted 5 to 2 to give a <br /> preliminary approval to my request. The following week, the Pleasant <br /> Springs Town Board, after listening to objections from Dahlen and the two <br /> dissenting members of the Planning Commission, tabled the matter until <br /> the following meeting to allow the Town Board members to visit the site. <br /> At the following Town Board meeting, members again listened to Mr. <br /> Dahlen's objections as they are contained within his written document <br /> presented to the County. The Town Board, all of whom had visited the site, <br /> had studied the mix of tillable and untillable land, had considered Mr. <br /> Dahlen's objections including the site's distance from a creek waterway to <br /> the east (there is no waterway on the site), and then voted to give the <br /> Burull's preliminary approval on a four to one basis. <br /> Mr. Dahlen's objections seem to center around a perceived injustice based <br /> on the Town not giving him the right to build on a small clearing <br /> ("approximately 0.75 acre field" as stated in his letter) -- mistakenly <br /> using that example as a precedent to support his objections. Dahlen's <br /> objections and representations, however, as noted in his document, para <br /> #3, are in fact, misrepresentations as the following historical record will <br /> clarify: (see attached documents for the next 3 items.) <br /> 1 . Pleasant Springs Planning Commission minutes dated 2/12/92, <br /> Para #1 : "Burull asked by Commission...to rework the survey to include <br /> only wooded acres in the rezoning." <br /> 2. Pleasant Springs Planning Commission minutes dated 2/27/92, <br /> Para # 1 : "Motion made by R. Green to recommend division of land and <br /> zoning as follows: Lot #1 --3 acres RH1 plus 2 acres AZ with deed <br /> restriction prohibiting any building structures on the AZ parcel. Lot <br /> # 2--approx. 4 acres RH2." Motion passed. <br />