HomeMy WebLinkAboutNotes, Meeting PLANNER 5/21/2007
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY MeetIDgDate: May21,2007
Meetmg Type Regular Session
Department Development ~vlces
Staff Contact Mark Metzger ::1'\A..
S P R I N G FIE L D Staff Phone No 726-3775
C I T Y C 0 U N C I L EstImated Time 20 mmutes
ITEM TITLE MCKAY INVESTMENT COMPANY BALLOT MEASURE 37 CLAIM
REGARDING PROPERTY AT THE INTERSECTION OF MOHAWK AND
CENTENNIAL BOULEVARDS (MOHAWK CENTER)
Conduct a publIc heanng concemmg a Ballot Measure 37 claim by McKay Investment
Company and act on the demand m one of the followmg ways 1) deny the demand, or 2)
declare the demand to be a valId demand and pay the amount of compensatIOn due to the
owner of the property, or 3) declare the demand to be a valId demand and modify, remove
or choose not to apply the land use regulatlOn(s) which are the baSIS for the claim
McKay Investment Company has filed a "demand for compensation" claim, assertmg that
the rezonmg of ItS property near the mtersectlon of Mohawk and Centenmal Boulevards
caused a reductIOn m the value of that property At Issue IS whether the claim IS a valId
demand under Spnngfield Mumclpal Code Sections 2 900-2 995 whIch Implements state
statutes pertamlng to Ballot Measure 37
Attachment I Staff Report
Attachment 2 ResolutIOn m the Matter of McKay Investment Company's Demand for Real
Property Compensation
Attachment 3 McKay Investment Demand for Compensation ApplIcatIOn (1211/06)
Attachment 4 McKay Investment Supplemental ApplIcatIOn Matenals (3/23/07)
In November 2005, property owned by McKay Investments was rezoned from Major Retail
Commercial to Mixed-Use CommerCIal as part of a formal deSignatIOn of the area for nodal
development McKay asserts that the new plan deSignatIOn and zomng Imposes restnctlOns
on the use of the property that has caused a loss m value estimated to be $2,523,000 ThiS
loss IS attnbuted to standards found m Articles 40 (Mixed Use Zonmg Dlstncts) and 41
(Nodal Development Overlay Dlstnct) of the Development Code that comb me to prohibit
large format retat! uses (larger than 50,000 sq ft) and that Impose deSign standards that
would be more expensive to bUIld than other development under the prevIous zonmg
Letters from RIchard Duncan (Duncan & Brown), and Alan Evans (Evans Elder and
Brown), proVIde opInIons ot the estimated financIal Impact of the rezoning These opinIons
form the baSIS of the applIcant's claim and are Included In Attachment 3
ACTION
REQUESTED
ISSUE
STATEMENT
ATTACHMENTS
DISCUSSION/
FINANCIAL
IMP ACT:
Based on the findings proVided In the staff report, the City Manager recommends that the
City Counct! declare the McKay Investment demand to be valId and that the CounCil choose
not to apply the standards found m Articles 40 and 41 of the Sprmgfield Development Code
that prohibit buildmgs With footpnnts larger than 50,000 square feet and reqUIre other
deSign elements that might lImIt a large format retail use on the subject site It IS further
recommended that the effective date of thiS action COinCIde With the slgnmg of a
development agreement by McKay Investment Company and the City specifying those
development standards m Articles 40 and 41 that Will be retained or modified, and those not
to be enforced on the subject site This agreement Will be brought back to the counC/:~f<
approval Date Received _,nz. 6
Planner MM (
Article 31 (Site Plan ReView) and all other applIcable elements ofthe Development Code
shall be applIed to any future development on the site These are not subject to waIvers
under Measure 37 Pertammg to traffic Issue" SectIons 31 070 and 32 020 2 (e) of the
Code requITes the Improvement of eXisting transportatIOn faCIlIties or the installation of new
faCIlItIes to mitIgate the Impact of new development, when a need IS demonstrated by a
transportation Impact analYSIS Similar provIsions Will apply to the Impact of development
on other Infrastructure
.