DCPZP-2009-00703 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Page 1 of 2 Lane, Roger From: Town of Springfield [townhall @town.springfield.wi.us] Sent: Monday, February 01, 2010 2:41 PM To: Lane, Roger ZOo9 O Subject: FW: Hagstrom property adjoining Autumn Pond Hi Roger, Please see the email below as well as the attached photos. I have read through the conditions passed with Petition# 10015 and I don't believe anything has been violated here, but would appreciate your thoughts as soon as possible. Mr. Kuhn as you can see is very upset and would like answers from the town. Thank you,Sherri From: Joe Kuhn [mailto:joe @contrail.com] Sent: Monday, February 01, 2010 9:11 AM To: Sherri Endres Cc: Michael J. Lawton; Frank C. Sutherland Subject: Hagstrom property adjoining Autumn Pond Dear Sherri, I have some real concerns regarding the most recent structure to be start construction on the Hagstrom property (formerly Anderson), which borders Autumn Pond to the N.W. and I would like to see construction halted while my concerns are reviewed and addressed. Ideally, I would like to see the structure relocated. I must ask, were there not any restrictions put on the Anderson property before the CSM was approved, particularly because of it's location next to Autumn Pond? The structure I am referring to borders Lots 10, 11 and 12 in Autumn Pond but is visible from many of the lots in the first phase as well as many other locations near by. The structure is to be a two story outbuilding, steel sided (the wood frame is already erected), red in color. I don't know what the intended purpose of the structure is and frankly, I don't care. The property is already the highest in the immediate vicinity and due to it's location, size and height, it towers over the adjoining properties and will no doubt lower the value of my remaining lots. There was absolutely no consideration given to me, adjoining neighbors/land owners or the neighborhood as a whole. I spoke with Jim Hagstrom Sunday afternoon and he believes the structure compliments the neighborhood. The only person that could possibly take that point of view would be the himself. In fact I would argue that not only does the structure diminish the Autumn Pond and surrounding view sheds, it diminishes Mr. Hagstrom's own property as it relates to what has been constructed to date, which up until now, one might argue is tasteful. He seems blinded by his desire to build as many building as possible, as large as possible, regardless how it effects his neighbors or adjoining land owners. Certainly this out building could have been constructed on a more appropriate location on the Hagstrom property, perhaps the on west side behind their home but then then they would have to look at it. Mr. Hagstrom mentioned the fact that Autumn Pond is an equestrian community as a means to justify what he is building. Of course we all know Autumn Pond is not an equestrian community but a residential community with 3 lots that will allow for horses along enchanted valley road. These lots were created as a means to preserve the view shed, not detract from it. Additionally, I have full architectural review over every lot and every structure within Autumn Pond and would never approve what Mr. Hagstrom is building, which is better suited for a industrial or commercial zoning, not a residential community. It is not my intent to to dictate what Mr. Hagstrom does with his property, God knows I have been on the receiving end of that battle but I do ask for common decency and consideration as it relates to where on his property Mr. Hagstrom constructs this building. I can not conclude this email without stating the obvious, which is that access to the Anderson/Hagstrom property from Autumn Pond was a requirement put upon me by the town. The Andersons and the Hagstroms have benefited from this requirement, which came at my expense (in the form of millions of dollars spent on entitlements and improvements). I believe the Andersons are as disgusted as I am with the turn of events, but 2/1/2010