DCPREZ-0000-06461 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

• Solheim Billing & Grimmer, S.C. Mr. Thomas Smiley October 24, 1995 Page 2 owners will purchase the home site subject to condominium management of the common areas. One of the principal reasons for requesting this increase to the R-4 parcel is the topography of the land makes it difficult4o d velop the property. To illustrate the topography, I am also enclosing with this letter a map printed on white paper. This map shows only the south three-fourths of the total R-4;pro . I do not have a topographical map available at the present time which shows the northern portion. In support of the proposed request for rezoning, we would like to point out the following: 1. Historically the Gaukel family has operated a mobile home park on this property. Over one hundred mobile homes have been located on the property for many years. The property was rezoned to R-4 earlier this year for the purpose of being the Gaukels' current usage into conformity with current Dane County zoning ordinances. The area rezoned to R-4 earlier this year was determined simply on the basis of where Mr. Gaukel had initially operated the mobile home park, and did not necessarily consider the set-back requirements and other aspects of the park operation. 2. To bring the property into conformity with Dane County ordinances, mobile homes which had been located relatively close to the lake were required to be removed at least seventy-five feet back from the high water mark of the lake. Mr. Kearney, of course, intends to comply with this and other setback requirements in Dane County ordinances for the mobile homes. The approximate location of mobile home sites on the map printed on the white paper shows a configuration for the use of the land which would accommodate one hundred mobile homes -on relatively slim lakeshote lots. Side yard requirements and setback requirements between mobile homes could be accomplished through the use of a staggered placement of the mobile homes. Nevertheless, the topography of the land would make the placement of the mobile homes on those areas of the property which slopes difficult and the staggered placement of the mobile homes would not be aesthetically pleasing. 3. The proposed increase to the R-4 parcel would permit a wider spacing of the mobile homes and would better accommodate service drives to the mobile home sites. It also better takes into consideration the topography of the land. Mr. Kearney would not increase the number of mobile homes which could be located on the property. Even though you will note that there are one hundred six sites indicated on the proposed development which is printed on the