Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutComments PWE 11/13/2008 MEMORANDUM City of Snringfield .DATE: November 13,2008 TO: Lissa Davis, Urban Planner FROM: Clayton McEachern, Civil Engineer SUBJECT: ZON2008-00040, Hyland-Wright Development Issucs Meeting . Public Works Engineering Comments The subject application involves a proposed development of a 7000 to 8525 sq ft multiple tenant commercial building including retail sales and eating/drinking establishment with associated parking and landscaping. The applicant has submitted preliminary documentation for staff review. Applicant's Questions: 1. How mu~h of the total acreage within this LMI/CC Zoning District is developed with Community Commercial- or how much Of the allowed possible 14 acres of Community Commercial remains? Planning Department will respond to this question. 2. There. is currently undeveloped property located between the subject parcel and West Q Street. Who owns this property? What are the existing public facilities/utilities located on this property? If this property is owned by the City of Springfield or ODOT, is there a willingness to vacate this unused right-of-way while maintaining an easement as needed for any existing public facilities/utilities so that the developer can purchase and develop as part of the larger proposed development (with the understanding that vision clearance requirements will be met)? Planning Department will respond to this question. It appears that this property is owned by ODOT and it is unknown what, if any, plans exist for this area. Currently the City of Springfield has both a sewer line and storm water line that are located in this area and any change in status of this parcel would require public utility easements for future. access to these facilities. . 3. The site is currently served via a full access to West Q Street at the southeastern corner of the site. It is probable that a future tenant on the site would want / need access to Q Street as well as Laura Street. We have reviewed site distance requirements for the Laura Street access and have found the needed sight distance could be obtained by restricting obstructions on the southwest part of the site. Assuming safe sight distance requirements can be obtained, is it likely that two full accesses to the site could be granted? If so, does ODOT need to be involved with access permitting? . Transportation will respond. Date Received' 1111 , I 0" Planner: lb P1.0 u...~~ ~ .:i-~d- 4. The City of Springfield has just recently completed Stormwater and wastewater master plans. Is there water, Stormwater and wastewater infrastructure to the site with adequate capacity to accommodate full build out ofthe site? There is an existing 8" sewer line that runs in Laura and Q Street (see sheet I for layout). The buildings at 1863 Laura and 120 Q street have existing stubs from this main. It appears that the sewer would have adequate capacity for most uses (including the uses listed on the conceptual site plan). The existing stub that serves the building at 1863 Laura would appear to be suitable to serve the proposed building and trash enclosure. The existing Stormwater system in this area drains to the west across Laura. The proposed development will be required to follow the guidelines for Stormwater quality in the Springfield Engineering and Design Manual. Currently the system is overloaded and backs up along the entire length of proposed development. Any new development for the site would require detention or some other mitigation under current conditions. The system is constrained by an 18" pipe for the entire frontage of the proposed development along Q St and across Laura. If this pipe is replaced with a larger pipe that matches the upstream pipe (30") this constraint goes away and no additional flow rate mitigation would be required(see the including schematic for pipe locations and sizes). Currently the northern portion of the site drains to a separate system and if that condition is maintained the portion that drains to the north would need to have detention or some other method for reducing the increased flow from the proposed development. However if the site is graded to drain to the south into the new, larger pipe then that area would not require mitigation either. This pipe also appears to be within the ODOT ROW for n05 and is unknown at this time if they would impose any conditions or restrictions on this construction. 5. Referencing the two prospective Conceptual Plans and the relevant code requirements, does the planning, fire and/or building department have any concerns or helpful information regarding the proposed design? Will a Site Plan Review application be required for this proposed development? Planning will address this question. .:. Additional City Comments or Requirements: \\/ I Date Received:. I Z, Dr Planner: U) p (,0 ~r~ ~ 0:~d.