Case Date:

2/23/2020

College Pods sign in the grass on the right hand side in front of 525 Patterson, before the intersection with Propect

Case Date:

6/2/2021

Can’t use sidewalk

Case Date:

10/15/2021

This drain is below grade and is an issue for bicyclist's and for pedestrians and for cars.

Case Date:

10/15/2021

This is the second picture of the drain behind the von lee building. This is a danger for bicycling

Case Date:

12/2/2021

The address for this issue is at 302 E. 7th st. The picture that I’m including shows the tenants at this house are coming North on 200 N Lincoln st driving over the curb/Sidewalk and driving through their yard and sometimes parking in the back yard.

Case Date:

1/21/2022

Following up on UReport #178307 Residents are still driving over the curb and on the sidewalk and through the yard on 200 N. Lincoln as the picture shows and parking in the yard.

Case Date:

3/14/2023

Along the north edge of property where the alley intersects Grant and under the junipers, there is an old, metal fence with a single stretch of barbed wire at the top. This is alongside a public alley, so the barbed wire should not be there, as per City Code 14.36.030 - "Barbed wire fences". It would suffice if the offending wire were removed.

Case Date:

6/26/2023

Could the City install a sidewalk along the west side of Dunn between Cottage Grove and 12th Street? There are also a couple sections in that stretch where there isn't even a sidewalk on the east side of the street, and a lot of people walk down that street even though it is only one-way.

Case Date:

7/7/2023

This building has an extremely bright on the west side of the building that not only illuminates their property at night but also shines across Grant street and floods the houses across the street with sharp, glaring light. It is so blindingly bright that it is hazardous to walk down the steps of those houses at night. Can the city require that property owners face lights downward and/or ask them to install some sort of shielding so that the lights are not so offensive to the adjacent neighbors and neighborhood in general? It's bad enough that the building is so generic and tacky, but can the city prevent them from ruining the lives of people in other properties, all the while causing a hazardous situation to exist?

Case Date:

10/25/2022

After reading about the variance denied to the property owner, Randy Lloyd, I couldn’t help but think about the current use of the site at or about 113 E Kirkwood. This property sits in an overlay that does not permit surface parking. I can’t find any use in the UDO where parking is allowed when not attached to a structure, and I specifically remember a number of discussions regarding this issue. In particular the Methodist Church’s desire to convert the footprint of the old post office to surface parking. I believe that had to turn it into green space. I also have concerns that this lot is 100% impervious. 20.4.20 I just don’t see how this use satisfies the spirit of the Comprehensive Plan, the existing UDO, or is consistent w previous use determinations. Further, the owner expanded the parking from what was there pre-demolition of the 4th street garage without any public review. Finally, I doubt this parcel meets the requirements of 18.12.10. How would BFD access or service a car fire on this parcel? It’s too narrow to get truck in there and difficult to service from the alley. This use may have been over looked during the demolition and reconstruction of the 4th street garage, even though parking was not really needed downtown during the pandemic, however, it’s time for enforcement against this parcel and other nonconforming uses.