Laserfiche WebLink
October 15 , 1989 <br /> .. <br /> Bill Fleck <br /> Zoning Administrator r= <br /> 4CTI 16 1989 <br /> Dane __u m- y Zoning Department <br /> .�'1 r- - r-• <br /> Room 115 , City-County Building <br /> r7 <br /> Madison WI c_'7n <br /> RE : Conditional Use Permit ,#747 I. <br /> Dear e <br /> 1.- ar Mr . Fleck : <br /> Regarding Section 10 . 255 2) ( i) of the Dane County Code of <br /> Ordinances , this letter represents an appeal of the Agriculture, <br /> Environment & Land Records Committee decision on September 26 , <br /> 1989 on conditional use permit #747 presented by James J . Keleny . <br /> it is our understanding this appeal must be filed by Monday, <br /> October 16 , 1989 in order to be valid and a hearing of the appeal <br /> by the County Board will be arranged . <br /> • <br /> This appeal is being filed on the following grounds : <br /> 1 ) We feel the Agriculture , Environment & Land Records <br /> Committee based their decision on incomplete information . <br /> 2) We feel the Agriculture , Environment & Land Records <br /> Committee disregarded d_d the multiple denials by the Board of • <br /> the Town of Middleton and the concerns raised by those <br /> citizens directly affected by Mr . Keleny ' s proposed <br /> operation . There is record of only the first denial by the <br /> Town Board in the file maintained by the Zoning • <br /> Administration. <br /> 3) On June 13 , 1929 , a request by the Agriculture, Environment & <br /> Land Records Committee was made for a land conservationist to <br /> investigate the impact of Mr . Keleny ' s operation on water <br /> drainage in the area . However , at that meeting, this request <br /> was referred back to the Town Board and apparently this <br /> feel an impact assessment <br /> stipulation 'vJn" forgotten. 'rte feel <br /> should be made by the DNR prior to further consideration of <br /> this conditional use permit . <br /> 4) While Mr . Keleny has filed conditions he will abide by <br /> regarding his use of the property in question , there is no <br /> provision ensuring his compliance. <br /> We are aggrieved for the following reasons : <br /> Residential Property - The property in question is on the corner <br /> of Valley View Road and Sugar Maple Lane . Sugar Maple Lane is a <br /> dead-end road approximately 1/2 mile long . On this road , there <br /> are nine residents , one parcel of farm land belonging to the <br />