HomeMy WebLinkAboutCorrespondence PWE 1/7/2010 (2)
.
..
.
MEMORANDUM
City of Springfield
DATE:
January 7, 2010
TO:
Andy Limbird, Planner II
FROM:
Jon Driscoll, Transportation Engineer in Training
SUBJECT:
ZON2009-00027 Springfield Utility Board Drive-up Kiosk
Development Issues Meeting Public Works Transportation Comments
The Transportat'ion Division has reviewed the subject application for the possible
development of the property at 250 "A" Street. The discussing will surround installing a
new drive~up kiosk at the main office where existing drive-through and customer
payment drop-box is currently located.
1. SUB believes there will be no measureable impact on circulation patterns
on "A" Street. Does the city agree or have concerns?
o The Transportation Section does have concerns, The present arrangement
has two one way lanes, nine feet each, which run along the south side of
the development. The reduction of the lane widths to eightJeet each, as
proposed would cause congestion and impede traffic circulation causing
traffic to back up onto A Street.
. The reasoning behind our concern can be seen when you examine
the following:
· The standard width of AASHTO's (American Association of
State Highway and Transportation Officials) passenger car
is sevenfeet, allowingfor only one foot on each side of the
vehicle to stay in the lane,
. The City's standards for parking drive aisles (24 feet for
two lanes), and
. The City's standards for parking stalls (nine feet wide for
standard parking).
2. Does the city have any concerns about the canopy structure or location that
SUB has not addressed?
. The Engineering Land Development Section will respond to this,
3. Does the City have any concerns about pedestrian safety that' SUB has not
addressed?
. No, the Transportation Section has no pedestrian safety concerns.
4. Does the city have any concerns about lighting and/or visibility that SUB
has not addressed?
. The Planning Department will respond to this question.
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. 14 J.
Dat,,~ r~eceived: / ~/6
Planner: AL /
.
.
.
5.. Is there any additional information SUB needs to provide as the process
moves forward?
. Upon examination in a site visit, it appears that there is room to take out
nearly two feet of the sidewalk just north of the lanes in question for the
westerly 25+/- from the building overhang. lfthis was done, and the curb
on the south side of the lanes was left in place except for a bulb-out just
for the kiosks, the traffic may be able to flow as smoothly as it does today.
Questions for SUB
. How much overhang over the curb does the new kiosk have?
.
.
Note: As is stated in your Development Issues Application: The Development Issues Meeting is n~t a land use
decision and does not confer any development rights, establish any conditions, or bind the applicant or the City to any
course afaction. The meeting conveys the status of known development opportunities and constraints. The status may
change over time as development conditions or standards change. 'Ch. ,.,i "'<':'"""II<:ld: /~ ~/t1
Planner: AL