HomeMy WebLinkAboutComments APPLICANT 7/17/2008
Page 1 of2
L1MBIRD Andrew
From: Mark Young [mark@rowellbrokaw.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 3:44 PM
To: L1MBIRD Andrew
Subject: RE: L TD Gateway - ROWand Site Review Status
Thank you very much, Andy.
Mark Young
-Rowell Brokaw Architects
One East Broadway, Suite 300
Eugene, OR 97401
Ph: (541)485-1003
Fax: (541) 485-7344
mark(ij)rowellbrokaw.com
From: 11MBIRD Andrew [mailto:alimbird@ci,springfield,or.us]
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 20083:27 PM
To: Mark Young
Subject: RE: LTD Gateway'" ROWand Site Review Status
Mark: Thanks for providing a preview of the response letter, and I feel the responses to each condition are
appropriate. While it appears the modifications to the Final Site Plans are inconsequential, I did not have the
benefit of reviewing the actuai cul"sheets and revised plan sheets cited in the letter. However, I db not anticipate
any. concerns or delays in processing the Final Site Plan based on your preliminary response. We look forward to
timely review and approval of the Final Site Plan submittal as soon as the related agreements are executed.
Please keep me informed of any further changes or unanticipated delays. Thanks
Andy Limbird
City of Springfield
From: Mark Young [mailto:mark@rowellbrokaw,com]
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 3:00 PM
To: 11MBIRD Andrew
Subject: LTD Gateway - ROWand Site Review Status
Hi Andy,
I wanted to update you the ROW issue, and I also have a request.
The approval by General Growth for the ROW dedication has fallen into a black hole of lender approval, and we
are trying to get it released. This could happen anytime. In the meantime, the contractor wants to wait for the PIP
approval to get started, and we are close to final approval.
I'm getting a bit antsy about the length of time the final Site Review will take, and you've mentioned a quick
turnaround. The one thing that I'm uncertain about is the list of changes we made to the plans since the initial
review. I've mentioned these to you before, and I don't think that they are issues that will require additional review
time, but I'd like to have a bit more certainty. I've attached a draft of our review letter, and am wondering if you
can take a look at these items and determine if anything pops out as potentially requiring more review time or
more information from us. We can certainly add more clarification while we wait for General Growth.
Let me know - thanksl
Mark Young
Rowell Brokaw Architects
One East Broadway, Suite 300
Date; 1'(eceived: 7/17 / :h1J i
Planner: Al I' I.
7/17/2008
I
Case #:
Project:
Project No:
Date:
Written by:
To:
Subject:
Rowell Brokaw
Architects
DRAFT
.
ORC2007-00081
Type II Major Site Plan Modification
L TO/Gateway Mall Bus/EmX Stops
619
July 17, 2008
Mark Young
Andy Limbird
Response to Site Review Comments Dated 2f7108
RESPONSES TO CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL (DRAFT):
I) The Final Site Plan shall be revised as necessary 10 extend the electrical feeder conduit from the newly
installed electrical vault approximately 5 feet funher west before bending 90010 reach the existing
SUB Iran.ifonner.
Response: This has been revised on El.l.
2) Prior 10 approval of the Final Site Plan. (he applicant shall execute and record a wilily easemenl
centered on the underground elee/rica/line. The location and dimensions of the utility easement shall
be satisfaclory 10 SUB Eleclric and shown of Ihe Final Sile Plan.
Response: The proposed 10' easement, centered on the electrical line is shown
on Al.l. SUB would like the final easement boundaries to be
executed and recorded after installation of the utility lines, to reflect
as-built conditions. Therefore, the execution of the easement will
occur after installation of the trench and conduit.
3) Prior 10 approval of/he Final Sile Plan, a Public Access Easement shall be execUled and recordedfor
any areas where public sidewalks are /0 be located on private property.
Response: A 5 ft. wide public sidewalk is provided on the east (public) side of
the relocated Gateway Street right-of-way line. Therefore, all public
sidewalks will be in the public right-of way, and a Public Access
Easement will not be required.
4) Prior to approval of the Final Site Plan, access easemenls satisfactory to the City's Public Works
Director shall be executed and recordedfor all traffic signal equipment that is located on private
property. The easements shall grant the City of Springfield the right to access and maintain traffic
signal equipment on the Gateway Mall property.
Response: All traffic signal equipment has been moved into the public right-of-
way, so an easement is no longer required.
Rowell Brokaw Architects, P.L
One East Broadway,5u;t. 300 . Eugen., Oregon 97401 . Voice 1541) 485-1003 . Fax (541)485-7344 . www.row.llbrokaw.com
Page 1 of 3
Date Received: 7/1 Y /}dog
Planner. AL
-.
L TO/Gateway Mall Bus/EmX Stops - Site Plan Review Response Letter 6/13/08
DRAFT
5) Proposed additions and modifications to City-owned traffic signal systems are approved in concept
only. All such additions and modifications shall be subject to the City's Public Improvement Project
(PIP) pennilling, review and approval process. Final design details shall be resolved during PIP
review.
Response: Traffic signal plans have been submitted with the PIP application
and are in final review.
6) Nothing in this land use decision constitutes approval of a specific traffic signal aiming or operational
plan.
Response: Traffic signal plans have been submitted with the PIP application
and are in final review.
7) Prior 10 approval of the Final Sile Plan, the applicant shall execute and record a right-oJ.way
dedication agreement for additional Gateway Street right-afway as generally depicted on the
applicant's site plan.
Response: The dedication agreement for additional Gateway Street right-of-way
has been executed and is attached,
8) Prior /0 approval of the Final Site Plan, the applicant and City shall execute and record a Right-of-
Way Use Agreement orlntergovermnenta{ Agreement, as may be necessary, fOT LTD facililies
constructed and/or encroaching within the public right-oj-way, including but not limited to the transit
plat/onn and bus sheller canopies.
Response: L TO and the City will have an agreement for the entire Pioneer
Parkway EmX system that will cover all of the stops in the Right-of-
Way, including this one. A separate agreement for this facility will
not be required.
9) Prior 10 commencement oJ work in the public right-oj-way, the applicant shall obtain a Public
Improvement Pennitfrom the City's Public Worh Department.
Response: A PIP application for work in the public-righI-at way has been
submitted, and is in final review by the Public Works Department.
10) In accordance with the provisions ofSFC 508.5.5 and SFC 9/2.3, immediate access and at least three
(3) feet oj clear space in all directions shall be maimained Jor all Fire Department connections.
Response: There are no Fire Department connections in the project area.
/ /) The developer shall be responsible for ensuring special precautions are observed during site
construction to protect groundwater and to prevent spills or leakage of materials into the stonnwater
system. Wellhead protection signs shall be posted at con...picuous locations to alert contractors,
subcontractors, employees and other to the importance of reporting and cleaning up any spills.
Additionally, DNAPLK materials shall he prohibited on Ihe site during construction and operation.
Response: These requirements are noted in the PIP and Building Permit
documents.
12) Prior to approval of the Final Site Plan, the developer shall obtain a Tree Felling Permit approval
pursuant to Planning Case DRC2008-00004,
Page 2 of 3
tllita f<eceived: 1/ ~ / ,;.~u'r
Planner: AL
~
.
L TD/Gateway Mall Bus/EmX Stops - Site Plan Review Response Letter 6/13/08
DRAFT
Response: The Tree Felling Permit (Case # DRC2008-00004) has been approved
without conditions.
MODIFICA TIONS TO THE FINAL SITE REVIEW PLANS:
The following changes were made to the plans due to further design development and
coordination. The changes are not substantive and remain consistent with how the
previous plans address the development code. The changes are all shown in the plans
reviewed for the Building Permit and PIP permit,
A, 1/L2.1 - Planting Revisions: Due to further design considerations for Gateway Mall, the
type and quantity of plantings in the island near the existing bus shelter have been revised.
The types and quantities remain consistent with City Development Code requirements, and
this does not change the proposed and impacted landscaping area calculations.
B. 1/L2.2 - Tree Relocation: In order to coordinate locations with site lighting and traffic
equipment, trees have been relocated along Gateway Street, spaced more densely at the
north end. The number and species of trees have remained the same. The design will
improve the transition to the existing street trees along Gateway Street.
C, 1/L2.2 - Planting Boundary Revision: Due to further coordination and design, and to
accommodate the tree relocation noted above, the north boundary of the new landscaping
has been revised. The types and quantities of plants have been revised, but are still
consistent with City Development Code requirements. The proposed and impacted existing
landscape area calculations have not changed, The revised design will improve the transition
from the existing to new landscape beds along Gateway Street.
D, 3/A2,1 - Bus Lane width: The note for the southbound bus lane width on the east side of
the platform has been revised to 9'-6" to 11 '-0" to be consistent with the PIP traffic striping
plan.
E, 1/E1.1- Site Data Conduit added: Upon investigation of data service providers on the
Gateway Mall site, conduit has been extended from the L TD communication cabinet on the
platform to an existing Com cast vault near the Roadhouse Grill to allow for future service,
Service will not be provided as part of this project, so the conduit will remain empty. This is
an underground installation entirely on private property that should have no effect on the final
design and use of existing and new development.
F. EO.1 Luminaire Schedule, E2,O, and LIghting Cutsheels - Fixture "F" Revision: Due to
further design considerations, the Type "P' light pole fixtures have been relocated and
changed (see attached cut sheets). All of the "P' fixtures have been moved outside of the
public right-of-way to provide clearer paths and sightlines, while still providing adequate
lighting for the security of transit users. The"F" fixtures remain low-intensity, pedestrian-
scale fixtures. The original "F" fixture has been renamed the "F1" fixture (see attached cut
sheet), and two are now located at the south and north ends of the platform to balance light
levels.
G, T100, T101, T102, T200 - Traffic Sheets: The numbering of the sheets has changed to
reflect their inclusion in the Public Improvement Permit set, and a Signage and Striping plan
(T200) has been added at the request of Public Works. Traffic signals have been revised at
the north end of the site. These revisions have been shown on the PIP drawings and have
been reviewed by Public Works.
END OF RESPONSE LETTER
Page 3 of 3
Date ReC8iVed:-1/ r "w"f
Planner: AL