Meeting 4 Notes and Staff Comments

[vmo...@springfieldmo.gov]

I thought I already did this, but I guess not. Here they are;

Meeting Notes and Public Comment Summary
Public Meeting Number 4
College Street Corridor Plan
February 29, 2012


The presentation which may be viewed at www.springfieldmo.gov/collegestreet
contains the bulk of the discussion. Areas further discussed are below
in black with staff comments noted:
• Need to clarify the proposed phasing of the plan. It is not clear
which elements of our current discussion are Phase I and which are for
Phase 2.

Staff Comment: Agreed. For the most part, they are the same. Many
of the proposals made for Phase I represent the long-range plan.
Phase 2 generally applies to Sub-district 2 on Olive Street and the
north side of Sub-district 2, particularly at College and Broadway.
It is felt that the eventual reconfiguration of the railroad tracks
will create a seamless integration of the West Meadows and the area
defined above; and that market forces may allow for newer development,
oriented to take full advantage of this integration. Staff will
provide more discussion and graphics at the next meeting.

• Staff explained that this area would be a good candidate to apply a
home occupation district and went into detail about the opportunities
that would open up. Someone commented that activity on the street
would carry over into the dark hours and the future infrastructure
improvements would need to accommodate evening activity, most
specifically more lighting.

Staff Comment: Seemed to be consensus on this matter.

• Bringing in small-scale retail would still require more parking than
what’s existing. We then discussed the possibility of the roadside
park also containing some supportive parking. People would get out of
their vehicles to explore the roadside park, but they would have the
option of continuing down the street to visit some of the shops in the
mixed use area. Several options were discussed for the roadside park,
the use of pervious pavement, historical information posted both of
the local history and of Route 66. It can still function as a parking
area but look like a park.

Staff Comment: If the roadside park option is chosen, it should be
carefully designed to honor Route 66 and other historical elements of
the area, provide a relative “soft” vs. a “hardscape” environment,
while accommodating some supplemental parking for the businesses
proposed along the corridor, particularly at College and Broadway.
Surfacing materials are available that provide a green, pervious
surface that will still accommodate parking.

• There were concerns about the south side of College St backing up to
the neighborhood. It was suggested that maybe the north and south
side have different standards, more intense on the north half and less
intense on the south, encourage more residential uses on the south
side.

Staff Comment: Good point to make sure the south side of College is
treated different than the north side to the extent that uses allowed
don’t conflict with the residential on Walnut and they are of the
proper scale and density. A list of uses will be provided at the next
meeting for discussion and prioritizing. This way staff can get a
sense of what is desired, particularly on the south side of College,
east of New. Another option we can discuss is to allow only
residential with home-based business to include having a sign and
allowing customer sales on site.

• It was mentioned that it makes sense for the density to be higher on
the east side of the corridor, closest to downtown, but maybe step
down in density as you head west.

Staff Comment: This area has characteristics different than many
center city situations where the density is gradually less farther
from the downtown core. However, with Kansas Expressway as the
western border, College Street serving as a secondary arterial, and
Airgas on the west side of Fort Street, it may be appropriate to have
a higher density westward.

• Someone said that they liked the idea of the entire corridor being
mixed use. It’s important to be flexible because there hasn’t been
any new construction in this corridor for several decades, it would be
a shame to discourage anyone that was interested in investing. As
part of that conversation, it was mentioned that yes, it was possible
to make the whole corridor mixed use, with maybe subcategories, split
by north and south.

• The corner of Fort and College was a topic of conversation because
of its proposed multi-family housing land-use. It was historically a
fort because of its high position; it has a view of the whole valley.
It is a grand location and it requires a “grand” gesture. Someone
suggested the city property be used strictly for parking and the south
side of the street be the green space, but there were issues with the
wall possibly deterring a lot of visitors.

Staff Comment: Good point. We will develop some better descriptions
of housing options envisioned in the sub-district. The descriptions
will ensure the desired scale and density as well as provide
suggestions. This location and setting calls for special treatment.
We should describe a desired outcome that fits the proper scale,
density, and perhaps general design of residential use. We can have
something to look at for the next meeting.

• Work needs to be done to “finish” Fort Street to College, it may not
work topographically for traffic but it could have pedestrian
access.