Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCorrespondence PWE 10/20/2011 • MEMORANDUM City of Springfield DATE: October 20, 2011 TO: Mark Metzger, Planner FROM: Kyle Greene, Civil Engineer SUBJECT: PRE11-00018 Prosper Park/Tarantola Development Issues Meeting Public Works Land Development Comments The Land Development Division has reviewed the subject application for the proposed light industrial space located at 945 28th Street. 1. What concerns will the city have if we replace the former 5,600 sq. ft. building that burned down in January 2009 with a similar design on the existing foundation? We think we can re-use the old foundation as long as the maximum prescriptive soil pressures are not exceeded. There is no documentation we are aware of that references the amount of reinforcing, and we will have to assume plain concrete. OSSC 3410 will allow this, as long as we are not placing bending forces on the foundation. What is the City's position? • Building 2. We are finding that there are a lot of small start-ups that are in need of industrial live-work spaces. These are artisans, inventors, craftsmen, and small service providers that are working in residential settings at the present time, or living in small industrial settings in non-compliant, substandard conditions. We wish to provide attached studio apartments to some of the small industrial spaces. Will staff support the modification of this parcel to an MUE zoned mixed industrial and residential? This area seems well suited as it is directly adjacent to an established residential neighborhood,within walking distance of a major retail center, and isolated from the adjacent LMI lands to the east by the Q-Street Channel. Is there any way to get some limited live-work (outside of a "night watchman" per SDC 4.7-185)without the zone change? • Planning 3. Can we adjust the vehicle trip generation to reflect the fact that the occupants of the live-work spaces do not commute? A traffic study may not be possible for industrial live-work, to establish a trip rate, but can a site-specific study be done after occupancy to make the determination? Note: As is stated in your Development Issues Application:The Development Issues Meeting is not a land use decision and does not confer any development rights,establish any conditions,or bind the applicant or the City to any course of action. The meeting conveys the status of known development opportunities and constraints. The status may change over time as development conditions or standards change. Date Received:. /0'941/ Planner ‘71Yl o-.A_ .14t- / 0 f 3pasea • Adjustment of vehicle trip generation to reflect the internal capture of commuting trips would be allowed for this type of development. With 40 single dwelling units it is reasonable to assume that a reduction of two trips per unit could be achieved(One in and one out)for this development. Resulting trip generation potential for this site would be as follows: Industrial Park(LU 130) @ 37,000 sq. ft. = 258 Daily Trips Residential (LU 220) @ 40 dwelling Units = 266 Daily Trips Office (LU 710) @ 2,000 sq. ft = 22 Daily Trips Commute Trip Reduction = - 80 Daily Trips Total = 466 Daily Trips Estimated daily trips associated with this development would be under the 500 daily trip threshold for performing a full traffic impact analysis, but does qualify for the 250 Daily trip threshold for a minor traffic impact analysis. This minor study would be a trip generation study and could be accomplished after substantial occupancy of the first phase of this development and then applied to subsequent phases for SDC purposes. 4. Can we use the mechanical storm water pretreatment system (Contech or AquaSwirl) and avoid a swale? • Per City of Springfield Engineering Design Standards and Procedures Manual section 3.03.6, "...50%of the non-building rooftop impervious area on a site shall be treated for storm water quality improvement using vegetative methods. " The City will uphold this requirement on this development unless soil conditions, infiltration rates or drinking well protection restrictions do not allow for vegetative methods to be used. 5. Are there setback and access issues related to the Q-St Channel that we should be made aware of? The site is adjacent to the Q Street Channel. Per SDC 4.3-115(A)(2), there is a required 50 foot development setback from the top of bank, or 35 foot setback if the requirements of SDC 4.3-115(A)(2)(a) can be met. 6. Can Phase 1 be done under MDS? • Planning 7. Can this concept work as MUE zoning? • Planning Other Comments: • The site is located in the 10 year time of travel zone for.wellhead protection. Per SDC 3.3-235 (D) "the storage, handling, treatment, use, production or keeping on premises of more than 20 gallons of hazardous materials that pose a risk to groundwater in aggregate quantities is allowed only upon compliance with containment and safety standards specified by the most recent Fire Code Note: As is stated in your Development Issues Application:The Development Issues Meeting is not a land use decision and does not confer any development rights,establish any conditions,or bind the applicant or the City to any course of action. The meeting conveys the status of known development opportunities and constraints. The status may change over time as development conditions or standards change. • • adopted by the City." Any additional requirements for wellhead protection from Springfield Utility Board will also have to be met. • There is an existing 24 inch storm drainage line that appears to be in the same vicinity as the conceptual swale location. This facility would not be allowed over public sewer systems. A 14 foot easement would be required to be dedicated over the storm drainage line. • All items encroaching onto the City Owned property to the east will be removed. • An access easement will be required to maintain future access to the City property. • • Any swale must be setback a minimum 10 feet from building foundations and 5 feet from any property line per the B.E.S. manual. • Note: As is stated in your Development Issues Application:The Development Issues Meeting is not a land use decision and does not confer any development rights,establish any conditions,or bind the applicant or the City to any course of action. The meeting conveys the status of known development opportunities and constraints. The status may change over time as development conditions or standards change.