Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/28/2013 Work SessionCity of Springfield Work Session Meeting MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION MEETING OF THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL HELD MONDAY, JANUARY 28. 2013 The City of Springfield Council met in a work session in the Jesse Maine Meeting Room, 225 Fifth Street, Springfield, Oregon, on Monday, January 28, 2013 at 530 p.m., with Mayor Lundberg presiding. ATTENDANCE Present were Mayor Lundberg and Councilors VanGordon, Moore, Ralston, Woodrow and Brew. Also present were City Manager Gino Grimaldi, Assistant City Manager Jeff Towery, City Attorney Joe Leahy, City Recorder Amy Sowa and members of the staff. Councilors Wylie was absent (excused)_ 1. Planning Commission Interviews. Planning Manager Greg Mott presented the staff report on this item. The City received five (5) applications for one (1) vacancy during an eight -week recruitment process. Mr., James E. Yarnell resides at 632 West "D" Street, Springfield 97477; and is retired. Ms. Diana Y. Alldredge resides at 822 N. 57th Street, Springfield 97478, and is an Office Assistant with Lane County HSD, Eugene. Mr. Nick J. Nelson resides at 225 12`s Street, Springfield 97477: and is a Realtor with Re -Max, Eugene, Mr. Michael G. Koivula resides at 723 Crest Lane, Springfield 97477:. and is a Land Surveyor with the City of Eugene. Mr. Ralph David (Dave) Jacobson resides at 4146 South "E" Street, Springfield 97478, and is retired. The Springfield Planning Commission was a seven member volunteer Commission appointed by the City Council. The members served four -year terms that were staggered to avoid more than two positions expiring at the same time. Of the seven members, two appointments may live outside the City limits and two appointments may be involved in the Real estate profession. Positions were "at- large", and did not represent specific geographic areas. Currently the Planning Commission had one member,. Commissioner Moe, who lived outside the City limits, and none that worked in Real Estate. The Council each chose the questions they would ask of the candidates: 1. How familiar are you with planning laws and policies and the purpose they serve in Springfield's land use decision making process? If your experience with these laws is limited, City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes January 28, 2013 Page 2 what actions would you take to become familiar with them so that you can participate fully as a Planning Commissioner? (Councilor Moore) 2. Many of the land use laws applied by the Planning Commission are state or federal mandates. During a Planning Commission hearing how would you reconcile your own personal opinions or support for the applicant's interests if those interests were inconsistent with the land use laws? (Mayor Lundberg) 3. What is your general understanding of the relationship between the Planning Commission and City Staff, and the Planning Commission and the City Council? (Councilor Ralston) 4. What do you think is the proper role for the Planning Commission regarding the revitalization of downtown? (Councilor Brew) 5. The economy has been stagnant for the past 3 -4 years thwarting the effectiveness of the Council's economic.development goals in general and in the redevelopment of Downtown and Glenwood in particular. Do you believe the planning commission has a role to play in the City's economic recovery? Please explain your thinking on this question. (Councilor Woodrow) 6. Growth, through development of vacant land and redevelopment of underutilized land, is the single largest source of revenue for the City's property tax supported General Fund. However, growth does have its share of costs, included new infrastructure and the maintenance in perpetuity of that infrastructure. As an official representative of the City, please describe your position on growth and development. (Councilor V anGordon) The Council introduced themselves to each applicant. The Council interviewed the candidates and asked if the candidates had any questions of them. Mr. Yamall said he felt this was a team effort. People had to be willing to express their opinions, but once a decision was made, all needed to accept the decision and move forward for the benefit of the City. He had worked with a lot of people on a lot of different projects and would like to participate on this commission as well. Ms. Alldredge had no questions of the Council. Mr. Nelson had no questions of the Council. He felt his questions had been answered prior to coming here by talking to others in the community. Mr. Koivula asked if there was just one position open. Yes. He said he was nearing retirement and was well versed in land use law and infrastructure. He had lived in the area for 20 years so knew the area well. Mr. Jacobson had no questions of the Council. The Council discussed the qualities of each of the candidates. City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes January 28, 2013 Page 3 All candidates were well qualified and could serve well. Council could not reach consensus on one applicant, so staff would let the candidates know that a decision would be made on February 4, 2013 and they would be notified of the outcome at that time. Formal appointment was scheduled for the Regular Meeting Tuesday, February 4, 2013. 2. 2012 Annual Financial Report. Accounting Supervisor Nathan Bell presented the staff report on this item. In accordance with Oregon Statues and the City's charter, the City was required to complete an annual audit and financial statement. The report would be presented to the City Council at the February 4, 2013 regular meeting on the consent calendar. Grove Mueller & Swank; the City's independent auditors, had completed their audit of the City's 2011 /2012 CAFR and had issued their opinion thereon. Mr. Swank, of Grove, Mueller & Swank, would review the audit process, the Independent Auditor's Report, and the City`s CAFR during the work session. As a preliminary summary for the Council's information, the auditor's found no material weaknesses in the Citys internal financial controls and issued an "unqualified opinion" on the City's financial statements. This meant that the City was properly accounting for its resources and using adequate financial controls to help prevent the improper use of those resources. Mr. Bell acknowledged staff who had worked hard on this audit: Meg Allocco, Sally McKay and Andrew Bemiller. He introduced Tom Glogau from Grove, Mueller & Swank who would be presenting tonight. Mr. Glogau distributed some information comparing Springfield with other jurisdictions. He explained the symbols on the document. He spoke regarding the Rainy Day funds and explained why those funds were needed to carry the City through from July 1 until property taxes came in during November of each year. Councilor Brew asked if the benchmark was based on the fact that some of those were designated funds. Mr. Glogau said yes and no. The benchmark was used for all types of governments, as large as counties to as small as special districts. Some entities had more designations than others and Springfield had a higher number of designated funds than the average. The purpose of this exercise was to get them to think and ask questions. He then spoke regarding net worth. He discussed the need to have an increase in net worth over time to replace things that wore out on an ongoing basis. Mr. Grimaldi said net worth was different than cash balance. The City did balance their budget. Councilor Moore asked about the useful life and capital assets. She asked what was included in capital assets. Mr. Glogau said this particular figure did not include land, but did include infrastructure. Infrastructure was important and expensive. As long as the percentage wasn't fluctuating or going City of Springfield - Council Work Session Minutes January 28, 2013 Page 4 down continually, it was nothing to be concerned about. If the funds continued to go down for years, then it became a concern and they would need to look at the Capital Improvement Program (CIP). Councilor Moore spoke regarding the City Hall building. She asked about long term planning to replace major buildings. Mr. Grimaldi said the major expenses for this building included making it seismically safe and replacement of the air conditioning system. Mr. Glogau said there was a conflict between spending funds on current operations and saving funds for future use. There needed to be a balance. Councilor Moore said she was pleased to see the bond investors were pleased with Springfield. Mayor Lundberg asked about being an anomaly for having restrictive funds. Mr. Glogau said Springfield was higher than most governments in the United States. Springfield had set aside a higher percentage than most governments for long -term planning projects. Mr. Grimaldi said that was a policy issue. They would need to look at reducing services in order to increase that ratio. 3. Springfield Transportation System Plan Update — Review of Draft Projects Lists Transportation Planner David Reesor presented the staff report on this item. The Transportation System Plan (TSP) update was intended to serve as a blueprint to guide future multi -modal transportation system improvements and investment decisions for the City of Springfield. As such, the TSP would include project lists that further defined locations of specific transportation projects for the next 20 years. The TSP Core Team, Project Management Team, Stakeholder Advisory Committee. Technical Advisory Committee; and general public provided input to develop a range of projects to evaluate. Project evaluation criteria, developed with input from these committees, were developed to help select projects. Criteria included considerations for property owner impacts, mobility, safety, and connectivity. Technical model outputs helped evaluate future congestion and mobility levels based on land use inputs. Transportation infrastructure projects had been organized into seven different lists, or categories, in the draft TSP. Rather than ranking projects, staff recommended that the project lists be grouped into short, medium and long term time frames, and include an additional Opportunity Projects list, Study Area list, As Development Occurs project list, and a Transit Projects list. The time frames were not rigid and may overlap (i.e. 0- 8yrs.: 5- 15yrs.; and 10- 20yrs). This project categorization structure would provide the City the most flexibility in adjusting to infrastructure needs over the life of the Plan. Mr. Reesor spoke regarding the different categories of projects outlined in Attachment I of the agenda packet: Opportunity Projects; Short-Term Projects; Medium - Term Projects; Long -Term Projects; Study Projects; and Transit Projects. He discussed the transit projects and noted that they had not identified EmX as they wanted to leave it as general transit until they had talked with the public. City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes January 28, 2013 Page 5 Mr. Brew asked if it precluded the City from getting public funds if a certain project was not on this list. Mr. Reeser said the TSP was a 20 -year list and it was important to have projects on the list if they wanted to get federal funding as it did help. There were some instances where a project may come up that was not on the list, but could be tied in with one of the goals. The project list was important for developing system development charges (SDCs) and needs for the next 20 years. Mayor Lundberg said a project needed to be on the list at some point in order to give the public an opportunity to review and provide input. Mr. Reesor said that was true. They were having public involvement through the TSP process. It was important to have the citizens provide that input. Councilor VanGordon asked how these projects ended up on the list. Mr. Reesor said they had gone through a process that included a technical advisory committee made up of staff from the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT), City of Springfield; City of Eugene, Willamalane Parks and Recreation and others. Those committee members helped weigh in on the project list. They also worked with the general public through workshops. The consultant team and Lane Council of Governments (LCOG) staff worked on producing an output from the Regional Transportation Model. He explained the technical aspects of the projects on the list. There was other criteria based on draft goals and policies which the Council provided input. Councilor VanGordon asked what type of transportation system they would have if all of the projects on the list were built. He asked if the projects were adding capacity, more bike lanes, etc. Mr. Reesor said it was a balanced approach and included many different types of projects. Mr. Grimaldi asked if the scenario planning work would address Councilor VanGordon's question. Mr. Reesor said it would help test policies. Although the TSP was a 20 -year plan, it was updated every five to seven years. As they worked through scenario planning they could test the policies in the draft TSP and make adjustments as needed. Mayor Lundberg said all plans had to be vetted through regional processes, which evaluated them on a lot of criteria. Getting them on our plan early and keeping them there provided us with the best Options. Mr. Reesor said the TSP also had to fit with the Transportation Planning Rule which outlined requirements of what the TSP should include. It did offer some flexibility. Councilor Woodrow said she liked the categories and didn't feel more needed to be added. She asked about Project PB -33 from Table 1: Bike route on Virginia and Daisy Streets from South 32nd to Bob Straub Parkway. She wondered why they chose those streets rather than Jasper Road. Mr. Reesor said about % of that project was outlined in the TransPlan, with the additional piece added to Willamalane. The goal was to have an alternate route to Main Street. Virginia and Daisy were close enough to Main Street to make it viable for cyclists and pedestrians. It was also a good place to tie City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes January 28, 2013 Page 6 directly into the Willamalane Sports Facility and was a lower volume street. There was another project that included bike lanes along Jasper Road, but they wouldn't add things like traffic calming measures. Councilor Woodrow said it could make a connection to Clearwater, but did present challenges along the curves. She asked about Project R -59 on Table 3 (Short-Term Projects): Interchange Improvements — OR126/Main Street (needs further study). Mr. Reesor said it was for additional study of that intersection, and perhaps some small adjustments to traffic lights, etc. Councilor Woodrow asked about Project R -58 on Table 4 (Medium -Term Projects): Interchange Improvements — OR 126/52nd Street. Mr. Reesor said that was also for an additional study of that interchange. Mayor Lundberg said everything in transportation was very lone -term and involved otherjurisdictions and communities and State projects. Councilor Woodrow said one of the interchange improvements at Highway 126 could be better signage. Mr. Reesor said additional description was available on each project. He reviewed each map and asked for comments or questions. Opportunity Projects, Figure 1: Councilor Moore asked about the project at Marcola and 19th. She asked if that was listed on this map showing that the project would go forward if an opportunity such as a large medical clinic, were built on Marcola Road. Mr. Reesor said something like a clinic would go through a transportation analysis as part of the site plan. Councilor Moore asked where she could get the additional information on each project. Councilor Ralston said a lot of work had been done on that project years ago when Lowe's was going to develop at that site. Councilor Moore said she was specifically interested in looking at the details of the intersection. Mr. Grimaldi asked if her question was whether or not the intersection would be improved as part of the project if the Veteran's Administration (VA) Clinic went in on that site. Mr. Boyan said the VA Clinic was part of a previous master plan and improvements to support site development covered mostly Marcola Road, 28'" Street and the internal transportation; but did not cover the intersection. That intersection was a challenge location. Over time, as the city became more successful, there would be more congestion. Staff was looking for operational solutions that provided better capacity. He provided some examples. Councilor Moore said there was a lot of truck traffic that was not supposed to be there City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes January 28, 2013 Page 7 Mr. Reesor said the project website was located at A- Aw.sprmgfieldtsp.org The resource page provided additional information on existing conditions and analysis done on some of the intersections. If she wanted more information; he could provide it to her. As Development Occurs Projects, Figure 2: Mr. Reesor referred to Project R46, north of Main Street between 42nd and 48'" Street. He and Traffic Engineer Brian Barnett met with Ken Hill from International Paper (IP) who was also part of the stakeholder committee. Mr. Hill explained IP's long -range plans for that mill site. If that property was to be developed at some point, this project showed some connectivity. The projects were conceptual in nature and not definite. Councilor Brew referred to Project R34. He had served on the TSP and had expressed concern with investing City funds in unincorporated areas. His understanding was that this project would only occur if there was significant incorporation in that area. Mr. Reesor said that was correct. The City was required by the State to plan for that growth. Short-Term Projects, Figure 3: Councilor VanGordon asked if Project PB7 was a bike path. He was not sure there was a need for a bike path in that area as the sidewalks were good and there was low traffic. It was along a channel. He asked them to take another look at that project. Discussion was held regarding this project and that it went across Pioneer Park -way, Mayor Lundberg said EmX went along Pioneer Parkway and it would be too much to put a bike lane crossing Pioneer Parkway in that same area. Mr. Reesor flagged that project to look at further. Medium -Term Projects. Figure 4: Councilor Brew asked if bike and multi -modal paths were under Willamalane's jurisdiction unless they were along the street. Mr. Reesor said there were a few that the City owned, but generally Willalamalane managed those types of paths. The City had worked closely with Willamalane on their recent Work Plan Update. Councilor VanGordon asked about Project PB2 off Gateway. Mr. Reesor said they were looking for better bike /ped connectivity from the neighborhood to the PeaceHealth facitity. This was one of the Sustainable City Year (SCY) projects done with the City last year. It would connect through to a small park, into the existing street network of low- volume /low- speed streets and then to the hospital. Mayor Lundberg said she would like to look for connectivity to the path behind RiverBend, coming off of Harlow Road and staying off the Martin Luther King (MLK) Jr. Parkway. Mr. Reesor said there was a link on Wayside Loop on one of the maps under Project PB4 City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes January 28, 2013 Pate 8 Mayor Lundberg said she wanted a connection that did not include riding on MLK Jr. Parkway. Mr. Reesor said at the last stakeholder committee, Phil Farrington was advocating for putting an urban standards project on that section of MLK Jr. Parkway. When going through the development process for that street, decisions were made based on lack of right -of -way among other things. Staff was recommending Wayside Loop. Long -Term Projects, Figure 5: There were no comments. Study Projects, Figure 6: Councilor Ralston asked what the next phase was for Beltline /Gateway. Mr. Boyatt said when the Environmental Assessment (EA) was done in 2003; the City committed to making the complete improvement at GatewayBeltline, which included turning Gateway into one - way southbound from Beltline past McDonalds, and turning Hutton into one -way northbound which would remove a gas station, brewery, and hotel. The couplet was a better solution at that time. Phase I of the project provided most of the benefit and had been completed. That improvement would carry us through 2018, plus or minus a few years. The analysis said that when traffic backed up westbound and started interfering with the 1 -5 operation, the City needed to build what was in the EA. The City was still studying this to find the best solution. All Projects, Figure 7: Mr. Reesor identified the transit projects on the map. Councilor Ralston said he liked the categories and maps, and felt it was easy to go through and see the projects. It was much better than what we previously had and Springfield was far ahead of others. Mr. Reesor said they were hoping to make this TSP for Springfield user friendly. Councilor Moore asked about the study area project for Main Street and if it was the study regarding making it two -way. Yes. She asked about Q Street and the east/west study area and if it was all one study. Yes. Project S2 was Highway 126 and S5 was looking at a bike /pedestrian crossing. It was a study for all transportation types. Councilor Ralston noted the extra lane on Highway 126 when coming off 1 -5 and that it should have been left as an extra lane to the Springfield City Center. Mr. Boyatt said that was on Springfield's priority list but didn't get funding. It would be put on the list as a Fix -It project. Mayor Lundberg said there was not enough money for all of the projects between Eugene, Springfield and the other communities. Mr. Boyatt said he would be advocating ODOT to fix that and extend that extra lane. Mayor Lundberg said they made lists, but they had to ask people (citizens) to pay for them. They needed to look to see if the need should be on the short -term list. They needed to be realistic. The lists all represented what we asked the community to do,, but also generated rates. City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes January 28, 2013 Page 9 Mr. Reesor said the next steps with the consultant included coming up with cost estimates and financial plans. Councilor Moore asked about the repaving of Highway 126. Mr. Grimaldi said it was scheduled to be repaved this Spring. The earlier paving was a temporary repair. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 7:42 p.m. Minutes Recorder — Amy Sowa Christine L. Lundber Mayor Attest: Amy Sow City Recorder