HomeMy WebLinkAboutNotes, Meeting CMO 6/12/2008
Date RecelVed.~1 D-r
Development Issues Meeting Planner. MM I ~ ~
ZON2008-00025, KDlrt LLC
June 12, 2008
The subject applIcatIOn mvolves tax lots 2200, located at 3402 Mam Street The applIcant has
requested a response to several Issues related to a partial rezone of 2 acres of a 5 acre parcel
Apphcant's QuestIOns:
1. Though the apphcant finds support for the proposalm the Metro Plan and
refinement plan prehmmary discussions have not been favorable, Does staffbeheve
the refinement plan or metro plan policies prohibit or discourage the proposal? If
so, which pohcles? Are there siting requirements the apphcant has failed to Identify
that prohibit the proposal?
As stated m the Metro Plan (Il-G-2), refinement plans prOVide parcel speCific
designatIOns for lots Wlthm the plan boundanes The proposed zone change IS wltlnn the
Mld-Mam Street Refinement Plan boundary The designatIOn for the subject property IS
splIt between commercial and low denSity reSidential
The Mld-Spnngfield Refinement Plan proVides cntena for deslgnatmg MedIUm DenSity
ReSidential Land These cntena are shown on page 12 of the refinement plan and
mclude
. Areas that are currently developed as Jugh quality mu1tl-fanuly,
. Large underdeveloped areas Immediately adjacent to commercially deSIgnated
land along Mam Street,
. On the west SIde of 42nd street,
Where deSIgnated exclUSively MedIUm DenSity ReSidential (as opposed to Mlxed-
Use) on the Metro Plan Diagram,
. To serve as a buffer between smgle-famIly and commercial uses along Mam
Street
2. Should the apphcant decide to proceed with the proposal would a partitIOn be
requIred prior to / concurrent with the other apphcatlOns or Dot reqUIred at all?
A partitIon would be requued to establIsh the speCIfic locatIOn ofthe dIVISIOn between
the commercial and reSIdentIal portIOns of the property A partItIOn would be reqUIred to
further develop the property m the future
Date Received' 1; ~I ~ -Df
Planner MM Z a'V
3, Are there any other large undeveloped parcels fittIng the sIting reqUIrements for D
MDR In the mid-SprIngfield area?
See maps
4 The only Metro Plan language cIted by staff In our prelimmary investIgatIon as
prohlbltmg the proposed actIOn IS the language on page II-G-2 that provIdes... Does
Sprmgfield staff belIeve that thIs language prohIbIts the proposed zone change..,?
It IS not clear whIch language on pg I1-G-2 IS bemg referenced There IS language that
speaks of certam land uses not bemg slgruficant because of the If sIze as not showmg up
on the Metro Plan Iftlus IS the subject of the questIOn, the paragraph followmg clanfies
that refinement plans a consIdered a more specIfic versIOn of the Metro Plan Refinement
Plans, mcludmg the Mld,Mam Refinement Plan, are adopted as amendments to the Metro
Plan DIagram
5, What land use applicatIon would be reqUIred should the applIcant deSIre to
proceed?
To proceed, an applIcatIOn for a Metro PlanlRefmement Plan DIagram Amendment and a
zone change would be needed A partItIOn would also be needed to separate the
propertIes for future development and to specIfically demark the boundanes of the
amended plan/zone
heVi~C7: stst.l
Ml.~ lbfl!"'i:I';
~~~J~r==:---~ 1J
!ll I .
-~~
-
L
-
, UI
_ Redevelopable
_ Underutilized
_ Vacant.
Mid-Main Refinement Plan
Cl)
400 0 400 BOO Feet
-__.0;;;;;;;;;;;;;
--
~~~ \~
I
,IJ
I ~ I I
I
il _~
j!~'
~~
mmm=
I~ ',.
~II~II I :
I "
,.
f=1W I tij n crt I'~'
I . r I ~. ,
,
r
-~
1F-1
~IL- (
Refinement Plan Designations
_ Commercial
_ Heavy Industrial
Light Medium Industrial
Low Density Residential
_ Medium Density Residential
~ Public Land & Open Space
Mid-Main Refinement Plan
(l)
400 0 400 800 Feet
~----
Date Receiver"
Planner: MM
~/n) r/!
Subject Aerial
(l)
90
o
90
180 Feet