HomeMy WebLinkAboutComments PLANNER 3/30/2009
~.
I
,
t
L1MBIRD Andrew
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
L1MBIRD Andrew
Monday, March 30, 2009 ,10:03 AM
'Cynthia Daniel'
RE: Case Number SUB2009-00006
Ms: Daniel: Thank you for submitting your comments and photos, Your comments and a staff response will be included
in the staff report and decision on this application. Additionally, you will receive a copy of the decision when it is issued.
One of the challenges that Planning staff face is that'the Springfield Development Code allows for dwellings in low
density residential districts to be either "stick-built" or manufactured homes, There are no specific Development Code
regulations pertaining to age or appearance of a manufactured home that is moved onto a site, For the manufactured
home to be habitable, it must adhere to state Building and Fire Code regulations, However, appearance of the
manufactured home is a secondary consideration in Building and Fire Codes,
Planning staff will look at measures that can be implemented to improve the appearance and livability of the site.
Additionally, we will speak directly with the applicant to convey your concerns about the impact of this proposal on the
neighborhood. If you have any questions, please contact me at 726-3784 or by email. Thanks
Andy Limbird
City of Springfield
From: Cynthia Daniel [mailto:montrose_ten13@msn.com]
Sent: Monday, March 23, 2009 5:22 PM
To: UMBIRD Andrew
Cc: c.daniel@pphsso,org
Subject: Case Number 5UB2009-00006
_0_nP.QI..::mCl.
I received a 300 foot public notice pending subdivision tentative plan for applicant Vern Benson, I have
reviewed the record of this application and would like to voice my strong concern -against this plan. I
moved to this neighborhood 3 1'12 years ago and have watched this applicant buy several lots in the area
and turn them into low cost, cramped subdivisions. The manufactured homes that are being puton
theses lots are at least 20 years old and do not appear to have been well maintained. They are then used
as low budget rental properties which in turn lowers the value of my property. Not only do they have very
little aesthetic appeal but the traffic these subdivisions bring to this area increases the litter and
congestion on A street. The thought of potentially 5 more families moving on to.an underdeveloped street
that is already cramped with Bar parking and delivery traffic seems like a bad plan. The Delivery traffic for
the strip mall already takes up the major portion of A street. The plan to put in another sidewalk and
narrow the road even more really doesn't seem like a good idea. I have included pictures of his current
projects as well as finished ones so you can see for yourself the quality of this applicants subdivisions. I
hope you ,can take some of this into consideration when making your decision.
Thank You
Cynthia Daniel and Robert Murphree
309 56th st
1
Date. V{eceived: YJ(';"PZ--
Planner: - AL
This is tl1e q'uality of house before it's covered with paint
view from A st.
Neighbors fence off to tl1e right A street to the left no yard
for kids to play.
.
If this is the front door then I can assume tl1e street
parking will start here on A street
1 st house placed in this lot several more to come?
2
Date Heceived' Yj'~/"""C'f
Planner: AL
r
Small narrow driveway to the right. lots of congestion for
subdivision
This is a finished lot notice there is no yard the kids play
in the street (A street) when cars in driveway or play
basketball in driveway with cars parked in street. This lot
has been what we would assume as firnshed for about a
year as you can see there has been little up keep and even
the finished product doesn't look much better than the '
projects he is currently working on.
This is the view from back yard with ~xisting house on
t'wt"" ~y involved 5 houses are planned for this space.
3
Date Received: J?i-'<'07
Planner: AL