Laserfiche WebLink
Development Land <br />Rural Land & Farms <br />RAWSON REALTY <br />Certified General Appraiser #388 <br />7402 Century Ave., Middleton, WI 53562 <br />Phone: (608) 836-3770 <br />Fax: (608) 836-0737 <br />E-Mail: rawsonQchorus.net <br />On the Web at: www.rawsonrealty.com <br />Norbert Scribner <br />Dane County Planning & Development <br />Room 116 City -County Building <br />Madison, WI 53709 <br />Dear Norb: <br />DANE COUNTY PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT <br />I have been working with Rich Eberle regarding a 20 acre parcel located in the Town of Dane. <br />On 7 March 2005 you sent a letter to Gail Perry regarding this matter. A copy of that letter is <br />included with this letter. On 15 April 2005 Majid Allan from Dane County Planning and <br />Development Department sent me a letter based on a density study of the property. A copy of <br />that letter is also included with this letter. <br />The Town of Dane Comprehensive Plan states that the Town will allow one residential dwelling <br />unit or non -farm residence per 35 acres of contiguous ownership as of 28 June 1979. On 15 <br />March 1989 the Kelley's owned a 160 acre farm (which they also owned as of 28 June 1979) <br />and sold or gifted 20 acres to their sons. Later, Jeff Tallard purchased the remaining 139 acres <br />from Alice Kelley. Tallard sold a 35 acre parcel to the Kopp's and a 104 acre parcel to Rich <br />Eberle. Subsequently, on 28 February 2005, Eberle purchased the 20 acre site from Pat and <br />Dan Kelley. Thus, as can be seen from the density study from Dane County Planning and <br />Development, Mr. Eberle now owns approximately 124 acres of the 160 acres of the original <br />farm. <br />My questions are: Can Mr. Eberle now sell a 20 acre parcel? Can he sell a 35 acre parcel that <br />has all contiguous land? <br />Please call me at 695-7678 if you have questions. <br />Respectfully, <br />James D. Rawson <br />Jim: <br />If Richard Eberle intends # 090812495059 to be a separate parcel, a change in <br />zoning classification is required, regardless of who currently owns the parcel. That <br />is exactly what Zoning Petition # 9243 will accomplish. I am hopeful that this <br />answers your question. <br />Norb Scribner <br />