HomeMy WebLinkAboutCorrespondence PWE 9/25/2013 • •
MEMORANDUM City of Springfield
DATE: September 26, 2013
TO: Andy Limbird, Planner
FROM: Clayton McEachern, Civil Engineer
,SUBJECT: PRE13-00028— Rouse Properties (Gateway Mall)
The subject application involves tax lot 17-03-22-00 (2109,2200,2218,2219,2300,2305,2307)
Applicant's Questions:
1. Transportation and Circulation
Context: Based on preliminary discussion with City Staff. we understand the City would like to
see improvements to several intersections at the site. The project team would like to receive
input from City staff on what pedestrian, bicycle, or vehicle circulation improvements will be
required or recommended, and whether or not the City has concerns with the proposed site plan
form a circulation or access standpoint. Question: Will the city require or recommended
modifications to the existing or proposed pedestrian, bicycle, or vehicular access and circulation
routes?
To be answered by transportation.
2. Development and Disposition Agreement:
The gateway mall development was originally approved under a 1988 disposition and
development agreement which was amended in 1998 and 1999. The currently proposed
redevelopment plan includes modifications to the size and configuration of the retail space and
movie theatre spaces originally described in the current development agreement. The project
team would like to have a discussion with city staff about whether or not the development
agreement needs to be amended. The team would also like to discuss the process for
undertaking an amendment and solicit concerns and recommendations from the city about that
process. Question: How does the City recommend reconciling the proposed redevelopment
project with the existing Gateway Mall Development Agreement?
There have been substantial changes in the development code and the Engineering standards
since 1999 and substantial changes in the retail environment as well. Due to the agreements age
and the already developed nature of the mall public works does not feel this agreement would
apply to the current redevelopment proposal.
3. Phased Development
Figure 1 depicts the proposed redevelopment plan at full build-out. The phasing plan for the
proposed improvements is still in progress. However, the first phc �e willeenerally include
date FF celved:
Planner AL 7/ir/oi.3
• •
demolition and renovation of the existing mall building and construction of the majority of the
proposed site improvements. The three proposed building pads located adjacent to the ring road
will not be constructed as part of the first phase. However the first phase will include site
improvements to support those building pads, such as parking and pedestrian access. Utilities
may not be fully extended to the building pads as part of the first phase, but the first phase will
make an allowance for fidure extension of utilities. The project team is seeking feedback from
city staff on project phasing requirements and how to represent this information in the site plan
review modification application. Question: In the context of Site plan review modification,
please provide feedback on the available options for phasing construction of the proposed
redevelopment and how that phasing needs to be represented with the site plan review
modification application. Feedback on building elevations for future phases would be
appreciated.
For public works requirements it would be best to extend all site utility requirements at once and
leave the pads bare awaiting future tenants, while addressing all relevant tenant requirements at
this stage of the plan modification (parking, stormwater, etc). If the tenant changes from the
current plan than a new application can be made for those needs but if the tenant comes in as
planned, then no additional modification to systems would be required (In the 3 year period
before the site plan expires). That would allow the buildings to come in as building permit only
without any required site review.
4. Parking requirements
Based on preliminary discussion with city staff, we understand the city has found the existing
parking facilities for the mall to be compliant with city code. This was documented as part of the
2007 site plan review—major modification associated with the special event parking. Based on
SDC 4.6-110a1 we understand a net increase in building area would trigger added parking.
proportional to the increase in building area. If the overall building area is reduced, we assume
a decrease in parking area proportional to the decrease in building area would be allowable.
We would like to verify this assumption with city staff. We would also seek input from city staff
on what level ofparking analysis/assessment will be required as part of the sit plan review
modification for the redevelopment project. Question: Please verify that the city has
determined that the off street parking existing parking, bicycle parking, accessible parking for
the mall currently complies with current SDC requirements. Please also verify that the number
of existing parking spaces can be reduced proportional to the decrease in overall building area
and provide guidance on what level ofparking analysis/assessment will be required to support
the redevelopment project.
To be answered by planning and transportion.
5. Approval Timelines
Construction of the project is scheduled to begin in January 2013,following Springfield site plan
review modifications and building permit approval. The applicant intends to submit
construction documents for building permit review prior to completion of the site plan review
modification review. Question: Please provide suggestions and recommendations for
expediting the site plan review modification and building permit review process.
Date: Received: f frs/aoij
Planner: AL
•
• •
A full drainage report will not be required, as there does not appear to be a meaningful difference
in impervious areas or drainage direction. Hydraulic calculations for the existing swale along i-5
and remediation of this area to bring it up to current stormwater treatment swale standards will
be required. In addition, any additional landscaping islands in the parking lots will be required to
be used for additional stormwater treatment (with hydraulic calculation for sizing).
Date Received:4/tS/ 0/3
Planner: AL