HomeMy WebLinkAbout516 DEINES COURT, EXTRA OCCUPANCY RENTAL HOUSE - PDP - PDP120005 - REPORTS - CORRESPONDENCE-HEARING (25)Page 3 of 4
Lj
Ladies and gentlemen of City Council.
I write you all today in reference to the proposed zoning change for the property at 516
Deines Ct. The proposed change would allow for the increase in occupancy of the current
single family residence to an extra occupancy rental. The proposal would allow for five
unrelated renters to live in this home as opposed to three unrelated if were to remain as is.
First let me say, I am not in opposition to idea of rental properties with this area. Currently
there are several within the area of Deines Ct. and those are single family units with either
families or low occupancy unrelated. They are part of the neighborhood and reflect that in how
they are cared for, the occupants who have some longevity within the neighborhood as
opposed to a transient renter population.
The points that I have in opposing this proposal, are basically of what aspects
associated that this multi party -unit will bring to a small residential neighborhood. The
immediate area within Deines Ct is a small court with five homes lining each the street. Each
home is a single level home with basement total sq feet of 1600 - 1800 sq feet single car
garage with small front yards. Vehicle access is the one entrance to the ct and access to that
from Smith St which itself has a narrowed single lane entrance off of Prospect St and entrance
on to Parker. The streets surrounding are of a narrower variety. Current residents are retired
couples, singles young couples, young couples with small children and singles.
First I disagree with the idea that only five unrelated people will be residing in this home. It
may initially start as such but as with other cases I have come across, this number usually
increases by at least 75%. And with that the traffic and parking needs also increase. My
conclusion on this point comes years of working in the emergency services field within this city
and having responded to dwellings throughout the city where it was quite evident there are
residences which were not observing limited occupancy rules. Within our neighborhood this
has occurred, and within in the past 3-4 years a residence at the entrance to Smith off
of Prospect on the west side, held up 5-6 occupants. Which created parking issues and
violations along that narrowed entrance. This however is no longer the case.
In light of the proposed increase, it would bring a detrimental impact to the traffic within the
court, the parking availability, (as it currently limited) and with the increase in the number
of vehicles (any where from an additional 5 - 8 vehicles) a safety issue for the residents. There
I sight, that the current residents are aware of the foot traffic, the bicycle traffic, and the
children that play within this area. Current residents are aware of this and observe
courtesies while driving within the area. I do not see this same awareness of the neighborhood
with the drivers of at least 5 more vehicles with transient ties only to the neighborhood.
The addition of this number of vehicle and drivers will decrease the relative safety within this
area.
With the current homes both family rented and owned, you see the pride in the care of the
home, the yards, etc. You place five or more occupants in a small residence you will not
see this same pride of residence where you see that the residence is being taken care of, kept
up, etc. What we will have with this, is a large cement pad with at least four vehicles if not
more parked, little or no front yard and the property itself will eventually show decline.
By introducing this type of residence within this residential neighborhood, there will be
effective decrease in surronding property values. Which can be documented.
Another concern, in some multi occupant dwellings where there are numerous unrelated
occupants in a small area, you do have potential for an increase in problems and with that, law
2s
3/23/2012