HomeMy WebLinkAboutComments Miscellaneous 9/24/2008
,
. "
D A d F ,.,(1
ave & n rene L verson .
583 33rd Street
Springfield, OR 97478-5843
(541) 736-1133
September 2),2008
City of Springfield
Urban Planning Division
Attn, Lissa Davis
225 Fifth Street
Springfield, OR 97477
Re.: Case number SUB2008-00041
300 foot public notice pending partition tentative plan application
(dated September 11, 2008) for 603 33rd Street, Springfield
,
. ~."
,_ ',~ I.,.. ~~d
Dear Ms, Davis:
.
Per the notice referenced above, we would like to submit the following written comments, as the
owners of the lot located immediately to the south of the property in question.
First, we are concerned that the partitioned lot as tentatively planned will not fit in with the rest
of the developed lots on our street (the segment of 33rd Street from "B" St. on the south end of
the neighborhood to where 33rd St. joins 32nd St. at the north end of the neighborhood),
especially if a house is built on what is now the back portion of the lot. All of the other lots along
this street-as well as the lots on the E Street cul-de-sac on which the proposed new structure
would front-are quite large lots with single homes on them. If the lot at 603 33rd St. is
partitioned, the two resulting lots will be much smaller and the homes on them will be much
more crowded than any others in the neighborhood,
. -Second,.thkhigherdensity at 603 33rd will.also'likely have the effect of reducing the value of
both our property and the lot immediately to the north relative to the rest of the neighborhobd, as
these will be the only two properties bordering on a lot with "extra" neighbors,
Third, as we were warned by neighbors when we bought our home three years ago, the existing
house on the property is already notorious for having disruptive tenants. We found this also to be
true of the one tenant (family) that briefly lived in the house after we arrived. We are concerned
that if both of the proposed houses are intended as rentals, we will then have to deal With twice
the disruption.
Finally, the survey enclosed with the notice appears to show that the fence along the north side of
our property/south side of 603 33rd is several feet to the north of the property line, and well
inside the ten-foot public utility easement proposed on the tentative plan application, We npte,
._,_._..._.__:~,~V{./)""'l .""~:, .' Uate keceiveri' q I Jl{ 108
:':8:)01'3.'1 '. Planner: LD
(over) llQJolhM ~J
<;{'i1J Bi d. ~
~
Everson, comments reo CasJilU. SUB2008-00041
'-. ._,. , "
<
page 2
however, that the fence has been in that location for many years, and that an existing structure
(tool shed) and landscaping on our side of the fence have also been located for many years-with
no objections raised, as far as we can determine--in the area that appears to be between the
property line and the fence. Please be advised that we are consulting an attorney to determme
how to proceed in light of this situation,
We appreciate the opportunity to commeI;lt on this proposal and thank you for your consideration
of our remarks. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us at the address and
phone number above.
jJ~J 13ret
David G, Everson
~.r~ -."'J /? t l::'J.'
-":ii
,.
':....
~
-------
rl~ C. ~
Andrene C. Everson
'. .
ucue f\~ceIVed: q b~\6B
Planner: LD Vl\.i{
r --
i
1
ANDRENE C EVERSON
DAVID (J EVERSON
58333RDST
SPRINGFIELD, OR 97478
C:t~ C>~ Sf~,~fidd. .
LlybD-Y'\ t>("'-V\nl~ j)l'\JISIGn
MtY\. LiS>"'- 1),,\1 is,
2..:2...S h -tfu S 1Tcc..t
S~ri~eld. I DR ql~77
09-24-08A08:29 RCVD