HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/25/2013 Work SessionCity of Springfield
Work Session Meeting
MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION MEETING OF
THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL HELD
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 25; 2013
The City of Springfield Council met in a work session in the Jesse Maine Meeting Room, 225 Fifth
Street, Springfield, Oregon, on Monday, February 25, 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
Matt Cox, City Recorder Amv Sowa and members of the staff.
Councilor Wylie was absent (excused).
1. Budget Committee Interviews.
Finance Director Bob Duey presented the staff report on this item. The Budget Committee had two
vacancies due to term expiration on December 31, 2012. The City received one application for Ward
5 and three applications for the vacancy in Ward 6. The appointee for both Ward 5 and Ward 6 would
serve a three year term that would expire on December 31, 2015.
The Council was requested to interview four applicants.
The Mayor and Council chose the questions they would ask of each applicant
1. Why do you want to serve on the Budget Committee (Mayor Lundberg)
2. Local governments, such as Springfield, are seeing a much delayed economic recovery as
many revenue sources remain flat or continue to fall. If you were a member of the Budget
Committee, what would be some of the ways you would look to control costs and still be
responsive to the service expectations of our citizens? (Council V anGordon)
3. If you were on the Budget Committee and were looking at one of the City's services to
decide how much should be funded through general taxes and_ how much through specific
fees on customers, what questions would you want to have answered in order to make
your decision? (Councilor Woodrow)
4. The City has a very large financial investment in its infrastructure such as streets, sanitary
sewer and buildings that need to be maintained. In these economic times, do you think it
would be better for the citizens to defer the maintenance until a later time resulting in
more expensive repairs or ask citizens to approve a bond issue and perform the
maintenance now; pay less per year but over a longer period of time. (Councilor Ralston)
5. Often times the members of the Budget Committee have different opinions on how the
citizens' money should be spent. What is your experience with working as a member of a
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
February 25, 2013
Page 2
diverse group and helping to ensure that all opinions are heard and considered? (Councilor
Moore)
6. While all of Springfield services seem to have strong support from different areas of the
community, it is often necessary to prioritize services for budgetary reasons. How would
you go about the task of establishing priorities among services? (Councilor Brew)
7. Do you have any questions for us? (Mayor Lundberg)
The Mayor and Council interviewed each of the candidates:
• Diana Alldredge— Ward 5
• Paul Selby — Ward 6 (current Budget Committee member)
• Kimberly Thompson - Alvarado — Ward 6
• Joe Pishioneri — Ward 6
The Mayor and Council introduced themselves to each of the candidates
Questions from the candidates:
Ms. Alldredge said she understood some of the meetings were long, but she was available for those
longer meetings.
Mr. Selby asked how the budget was looking so far for the City; and if the decisions this year were
more difficult than in the past.
Ms. Thompson- Alvarado said she didn't have any questions of the Council as she had done a lot of
research and asked others questions. She asked what the Council wanted the position to be to
compliment the group.
Mayor Lundberg said they looked for representation from all of the wards. Having citizen members
brought a fresh look to the process.
Mr. Pishioneri said he had no questions. He realized that Paul Selby had represented Ward 6 well as
had all of the Budget Committee. He knew that Budget Committee members were normally chosen by
ward by practice, but he also knew that Council could make a decision based on candidates rather than
by ward.
Council discussed the qualifications of each of the candidates.
Council could not reach consensus on the candidates. so it was decided they would bring all four
candidates forward for the formal vote. They decided to wait until the March 18 Council meeting to
vote on the candidates, when Councilor Wylie was back
Council discussed the process for voting during the Regular Meeting.
2. Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan (SRP) Urbanization Element: Potential Employment
Opportunity Sites to Address 20 -Year Commercial and Industrial Land Needs (Metro Plan
Amendment File No. LRP 2009- 00014).
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
February 25, 2013
Page 3
Planning Supervisor Linda Pauly presented the staff report on this item. Adoption of the Springfield
2030 Refinement Plan (SRP) Urbanization Element would allow the City to identify areas where the
UGB would be expanded to include lands designated "Urban Holding Area - Employment
Opportunity Area," establishing future growth areas for economic development and infrastructure
planning purposes in accordance with Statewide Planning Goal 9, Economic Development, Goal 14
Urbanization, other applicable land use goals, rules and statutes and local community development,
livability and environmental quality goals. The UGB expansion proposal may also include public land,
parks, and open space.
Adding suitable large -site industrial land to the UGB would expand Springfield's land base and create
future options for employment growth. Without sites planned and available for economic
development, Springfield could not be considered by firms seeking large sites. The options for
expanding the UGB to add the large flat sites required by employment uses were finite given
Springfield's location between rivers and hills.
To determine how and where the UGB might be expanded to designate suitable employment sites,
staff conducted a UGB Alternatives Analysis, applying the required step -by -step method of the
applicable statewide planning goals, administrative rules and statutes to all lands surrounding
Springfield's UGB to identify suitable "Employment Opportunity" sites adjacent to Springfield's
UGB. This work was a refinement and more in -depth look at preliminary growth concepts previously
identified and subject to public review in 2009 -2010 and at other sites that met the statutory criteria
equally well.
The future cost to plan and build infrastructure to serve the new sites would be significant. Staff
would provide infrastructure serviceability and cost comparison information at the April 1" work
session.
Ms. Pauly said staff had completed the by adding 640 acres of suitable land to meet those needs. Staff
provided maps of the suitable areas to the Council for their review. The concepts before the Council
had incorporated all of the input received to date during this process which began with public hearings
in 2009. The areas shown on the maps included more than 640 acres, but staff believed they could
write findings to support expansion of the UGB into any of the areas. They also looked into
opportunities to bring in adjacent public lands such as the Mill Race South 28" area. Council may
want to consider bringing those areas in as public land and open space if they expanded into that area.
Councilor Ralston asked if the land for open space was available for development. No.
Ms. Pauly said Springfield Utility Board (SUB) had ideas about future facilities constructed on one of
the parcels for water quality treatment.
Councilor Ralston said the reason they were looking to expand the UGB was to provide developable
land.
Ms. Pauly said this land would not be counted in the 640 acres for development, but would be in
addition. Staff was asking for Councils comments on any of the sites. Another work session was
scheduled for March 18 and would be followed by joint meetings with the Lane County Board.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
February 25, 2013
Page 4
Councilor Woodrow referred to the area by Mahogany Lane and the chart with the floodplain, which
showed the largest amount of developable land. She asked if that area had not already been considered
for development and a new school.
Ms. Pauly said this area was added to the study later following input and discussion. The area called
Clearwater was part of the original study for residential purposes. The sites being shown were all that
were available for development.
Councilor Brew asked about South Mill Race site. He asked if the publicly owned area would only be
brought into the UGB if the South Mill Race area was brought into the UGB.
Ms. Pauly said they could still add it to the UGB, but it would create an island which could be
awkward. Both the Willamalane and SUB Board were very interested in having their lands brought
into the UGB if possible. This was an opportunity because of contiguous acreage.
i
Councilor Brew said he liked this site, but asked about access to the site.
Ms. Pauly said the access to all of the sites was problematic and would require a lot of future work and
expense. This site was probably the closest and shortest distance.
Mayor Lundberg said this site was being considered because the City was doing an expansion anyway.
The City was also looking at the additional 640 acres for commercial and industrial development.
Each section shown could be taken as one whole or part.
Ms. Pauly said that was correct. If they looked at taking part of the site, they would need to look at
access and connection for annexation purposes.
Councilor VanGordon said he liked the Gateway site because it was next to the transportation corridor.
He also liked the Seavey Loop site for the same reason, but it seemed that access would be too
difficult. He was fine with the South Mill Race site, but asked how that would affect Knife River's
plans for future development.
Ms. Pauly said if that area was brought into the City's UGB, a quarry mine overlay district would
automatically apply to that land. if they pursued quarry mining, the site would need to be on the
statewide inventory first. The City would have some authority over refinements for that site.
Councilor VanGordon said the Mahogany and Hwy 126 sites were the lowest on his list from a
commercial point of view. Both were away from 1 -5 and would be less feasible economically. He felt
it was best to focus on the I -5 side of things.
Ms. Pauly said staff wanted to get this, information out to Council to allow them plenty of time to think
about this before it came forward for adoption. They had focused a lot on the numbers — number of
jobs, number of sites, number of acres, cost, etc. Now was the time to give ample consideration to
envision how developing the study areas would or would not contribute gracefully to the growing
community fabric. She referred to Attachment 4 of the agenda packet which was the list of items
called "Growing Springfield". This was a two -page list that would help staff hone in on the
community quality and livability issues Council felt were important when looking at expansion. Their
response would help when drafting the policy for urbanization element.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
February 25, 2013
Page 5
Councilor Ralston spoke regarding the Seavey Loop area. He recalled there was an issue with that
area.
Discussion was held regarding several issues in that area including fire service; sewer connection,
transportation and access.
Councilor Ralston noted that of the 362 total acres on the Seavey Loop site, only 152 acres were
suitable. He asked about the remaining acreage.
Ms. Pauly said it was floodway and wetlands. This area was also not in the Metro Plan. She said
during the next work session, matrixes would be available that showed comparative factors about
serviceability and cost. Tonight, they wanted to hear from Council about the community values, what
would be the best growth areas considering Springfield's local visions and values, how and where they
could get the most community benefits out of this investment, and what trade -offs were acceptable or
unacceptable. This was a twenty year plan so required long -term vision. Staff had heard that Council
wanted the ability to take advantage of opportunities that came our way.
Councilor Brew said although the North Highway 126 site was a distance from 1 -5, it was right off of
52 "d Street and Highway 126, nearly opposite from Weyerhaeuser. That interchange was a study area
and he felt there was great potential for that industrial land and it had a lot of transportation
opportunities. Out of all of the sites, this was probably the closest to being shovel ready for
development.
Councilor Moore asked about South Mill Race and if there were a number of well heads in that area.
Yes. By moving our UGB to those areas, the City would be providing more protection of the
wellheads, so she was pleased with that area. The Gateway area was obvious to her as a suitable site.
Councilor Ralston asked if they were looking for 640 acres of suitable land. Yes. He felt that all sites
had good opportunities. Seavey Loop was the most problematic due to transportation, but it would
eventually develop and he would like Springfield to be there and ready. This was exciting for
Springfield.
Ms. Pauly said the City could have policies in the Urbanization Element for tiers of development.
Councilor Moore asked what was meant by study areas.
Ms. Pauly said it meant staff had studied everything out there and these five areas rose to the top. She
noted the areas on the map that were not suitable.
Councilor Ralston said they could just choose part of each site.
Ms. Pauly said during the hearings staff heard that they should take the UGB right to the river.
Portions that were not suitable would not be counted in the 640 acres.
Mayor Lundberg said her preference was that we had a good mix of industrial. She liked Gateway and
Seavey Loop because they were along 1 -5. and she would like them to be shovel ready. She considered
Gateway the storefront of Springfield and preferred it to be the professional headquarters. She liked
the other sites also for more industrial uses. She would like to keep our industry options open and be
ready to manufacture parts and bring in technology. Those types of business provided good living
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
February 25;2013
Page 6
wage jobs. We also needed to pick up all the public space for citizens because it was important for
people to get to our waterways.
Ms. Pauly said Council would have a lot of time to react to draft policies in future meetings.
3. Mobile/Manufactured Home Park Information
Senior Management Analyst Courtney Griesel presented the staff report on this item. In the fall of
2012, staff spoke with Council about potential mobile home park closure concerns and impacts. At the
direction of Council, staff had worked to gather data specific to the individual parks located in
Springfield, including the Glenwood area. This data provided a beginning foundation to inform next
steps for staff and City leaders.
While no park closures in Springfield were currently identified, City staff remained concerned about
future relocation options and the limited City resources available to assist residents should park
closures occur. The included park demographic summary sheets were a snapshot of a greater database
containing detailed information specific to each mobile home park in the Springfield and Glenwood
areas. While the data collection was not yet 100% complete, enough was known to provide Council
with an update on different structure, value, and ownership demographics. This data had been provided
as Glenwood Area and Springfield Area parks in an effort to generate snapshots specific to different
areas of Springfield, affected by different economic development influences.
Staff would continue to refine the park data and begin to meet with area housing advocates and
community partners to identify areas of trends and possible areas of concern or risk. This exercise
should allow staff to begin understanding the potential displacement impacts to specific parks. Staff
would then work to develop an outreach plan for engaging park residents in conversations related to
park closure concerns. This plan would be brought back to Council for review prior to engaging with
park residents.
Ms. Griesel presented a power point presentation on the data collected. She reviewed the data gathered
on the mobile home parks to date. She noted the number of mobile homes that were dated pre -1976.
Those homes did not meet current City code. She spoke regarding the mobile home parks in
Springfield, not including Glenwood. The age of the structures was important when looking at
relocation programs.
Councilor Ralston noted that the assessed value was much different than the actual value of the home.
Ms. Griesel said staff had also logged information on sale prices.
Councilor Woodrow asked if the assessed value shown on the chart included the value of the land. It
did not.
Ms. Griesel noted the percentages of owner occupied homes compared to renters and that those renting
did not receive the state payout when a park closed. She also showed a chart of where the owners of
the parks resided; less than half in Oregon. Staff continued to gather data and had been working with
Housing and Community Services Agency (HACSA) of Lane County, Metro Housing, St. Vincent
DePaul, as well as the State to discuss this data and ask about any trends, risks or concerns they might
have. They had talked with other staff about assessing crime calls for service to try to determine the
interest or involvement of the park owners and the quality of the park.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
February 25, 2013
Page 7
Ms. Griesel said once they gathered all of the information, staff would put together an outreach plan to
talk about how to get into the parks and talk with tenants to get their input on what was important to
them and what type of support might interest them. Staff would be back to Council just before or after
summer recess with that outreach plan.
Councilor Brew asked if the City looked at buying mobile homes in our development area when they
came on the market. He felt it might be less expensive to buy them than to wait until someone else
bought them and then pay them to move out.
Councilor Moore asked if staff had information on how many other rental spaces such as single family
homes, duplexes, etc. were owned by those who lived out of state.
Ms. Griesel said she could ask Mr. Ko, but she did not know. She could look into it and see what she
could find.
Councilor Ralston said he had spent a lot of time at the Patrician Mobile Home Park and saw many
homes selling at very low prices. It would be a great opportunity for someone to buy them and use
them for affordable housing.
Ms. Griesel said about three years ago, the tax rats dropped considerably for a majority of mobile
homes. She had a call into the County Assessor's office to find out why that drop occurred.
Councilor Ralston said he had been considering buying some of the mobile homes and renting them
out. The problem was that someone else owned the land. Ultimately the value of the land would be
worth more than the home. He felt it would be good to develop a strategy for a non -profit to provide
low- income housing.
Councilor VanGordon liked how they were pacing the project. If they got too far ahead, people would
get excited and concerned. He would like information on the rest of the affordable housing in
Springfield and if we had space where people had options of a place to move. That would be important
to know when having policy discussions about options. Good information would be how many people
were in each unit (mobile home) and other basic demographic information.
Ms. Griesel said staff had started doing some of that and would get more detailed information later.
Councilor Brew said it would be an interesting discussion to have regarding buying homes from
willing sellers. It would be better than displacing someone out of their home. They could look at
NEDCO to rent them out for the short-term.
Mayor Lundberg said the City never intended to be the ones that displaced the homeowners. There
were owners who had the properties. She noted that Terry McDonald, Executive Director of St.
Vincent DePaul, was buying mobile homes so he could put them somewhere so that could be a
possibility. The owner of the property was to pay $5000, $7000 and $9000 for people to move and the
State provided a retroactive tax rate. The discussion about how to assist with mobile home park
closures had been started a long time ago. Once staff started talking with the residents, people became
fearful and values dropped. How we went out and talked with people was very important. Each
individual park was unique with their own inherent issues, such as septic and health issues. She
agreed that information about who owned the properties and the demographics of each park would be
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
February 25, 2013
Page 8
key. The census tracks would show a lot of that information. With that information, they may find
they use different approaches per park. She was interested in the non - profits' role in assisting the City
with relocation of tenants. The information from staff so far was very good.
Ms. Griesel said that was the path staff was taking.
Councilor Ralston said it would be good to know how many parks were adult only.
Ms. Griesel said that would be helpful information which they were gathering.
Councilor Moore said she appreciated the data gathering because it helped them when making
decisions. During one of the Housing Policy Board meetings she had asked when the last mobile
home park was developed and no one could remember. It had been years ago in the State of Oregon.
Looking at possible solutions for affordable housing was very important. At any given time when
people were ready to move in to affordable housing, there were not enough vacancies. This was a
community -wide issue. She was excited about potential solutions and that they were looking.
Councilor Woodrow said they didn't want to create more homelessness
Mayor Lundberg thanked staff for their hard work.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 7:21 p.m.
Minutes Recorder —Amy Sowa
Christine L. Lundberg
Mayor �J
Attest:
Amy Sowal /
City Recor er