Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/17/2007 Work Session City of Springfield Work Session Meeting MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION MEETING OF THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL HELD MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 17,2007 The City of Springfield Council met in a work session in the Jesse Maine Meeting Room, 225 Fifth Street, Springfield, Oregon, on Monday, September 17, 2007 at 6:00 p.m., with Mayor Leiken presiding. ATTENDANCE Present were Mayor Leiken and Councilors Lundberg (6:07pm), Wylie, Ballew, Ralston, Woodrow and Pishioneri. Also present were City Manager Gino Grimaldi, City Attorney Joe Leahy, City Attorney Matt Cox, City Recorder Amy Sowa and members of the staff. 1. Downtown Urban Renewal: Progress Report. Community Development Manager John Tamulonis presented the staff report on this item. On July 23rd, Council approved a ballot title and description for the November 6 ballot that would authorize the Council to allocate taxes to a downtown urban renewal district. Council directed staff to develop the initial draft of the urban renewal plan and report based on a boundary that would extend east to 23rd street along the Main Street/South A corridor. The DRAFT Downtown Urban Renewal Plan and Plan Report provide the information and analysis required by ORS 457 to establish an urban renewal district. The DRAFT plan seeks to balance the cost of potential projects that are envisioned for the urban renewal district with the potential revenues that would be generated to pay for those projects over the life of the renewal district. Staff is working on various tasks that must be completed to establish an urban renewal district for downtown Springfield. Attachment 2 summarizes milestones and key events related to the public presentation/discussion of DRAFT Downtown Urban Renewal Plan and its formal review by the Planning Commission and Council, as required by state law. A ''town hall" event kicking off the public discussion of renewal district formation was held on August 7th and was well attended. An additional town hall event is scheduled for September 20. That meeting has been advertised as an event open to the general public, but a mailed notice of the event was also sent to residents and property owners within the DRAFT plan's renewal district boundary. Staff has also scheduled presentations to community organizations such as the Chamber of Commerce and civic groups. Additional media releases/events are planned. Presentations and discussion with the elected officials for affected taxing bodies including Lane County, School District 19, Lane ESD, Willamalane and Lane Community College are also being scheduled. These agencies have been contacted at the staff level and Lane County and Willamalane have already submitted comments. ' Attachment 3 includes tables showing urban renewal project costs and anticipated revenues that would accrue to the district from increased property values and new development over the duration ofthe DRAFT plan. These tables are based on the work of Charles Kupper, a ~ City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes September 17, 2007 Page 2 consultant hired to complete the complex calculations related to projections of cost, inflation of costs and the reasonable estimate of new development/redevelopment in the district. The tables compare three different levels of project cost and the projected district duration required to pay for the projects. Please keep in mind that these computations are largely a planning exercise. Ultimately SEDA selects the projects and would not appropriate funds to proceed if a project could not be supported by tangible revenues. Staff will seek direction on final figures and time frames for the district when the DRAFT plan and report are brought before the Council for formal approval in November. Attachment 4 is the Citizen Involvement Plan that was reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission in its role as the Committee for Citizen Involvement. Mr. Tamulonis reviewed the plan report. He acknowledged the number of staff that had worked on this plan. He reminded Council that the Downtown plan and the Glenwood plan would remain separate, although there would be just one urban renewal agency. A number of people had been involved in providing input on this plan, including stakeholders from downtown, civic leaders, citizens and others. The plan related directly to other plans for the downtown area, such as the Downtown Refinement Plan and Metro Plan. Most of the development projects envisioned were projects that came from earlier studies and categorized. He discussed the investment contemplated in the plan. Mr. Tamulonis said the City did not anticipate acquiring any properties through eminent domain, but if that changed, there would need to be approval by the City Council. Any change up to one percent in the boundary of the urban renewal district plan would be a minor adjustment and would not require voter approval. The plan going forward at this time did require voter approval and was scheduled to be on the November 6, 2007 ballot. He said relocation was not anticipated. He referred to Table 6 in the plan which showed the different projects in the plan and Table 7 showing the cash flow. (Mr. Tamulonis distributed Table 7 to the Mayor, Council and other interested parties in the audience.) Mr. Tamulonis noted a reference in the report that listed the wrong table. He explained the correction. He referred to page 21, which showed the funds that other agencies would give up if redevelopment did occur in the downtown urban renewal district. Mr. Tamulonis discussed the process for adoption of this plan. He referred to a chart on the wall with a schedule of meetings and projects for this process. Until it was adopted, the plan could be changed according to Council's desire. The plan would go to the SEDA Board in late October. Councilor Ralston referred to page 21. He asked about the money the City would be foregoing if this district was in place. He asked if Willamalane and the School District were o.k. with this as it would also affect them. Mr. Tamulonis said City staff would be meeting with folks from Willamalane, Lane Community College (LCC) and the School District. Mr. Metzger explained the process used to disburse taxes to the school district, and noted that the urban renewal district would not have a significant impact on the school district. Councilor Ralston referred to Table 9 on page 23. He asked for clarification on the figures. Mr. Tamulonis explained. He discussed other sources of funding. City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes September 17, 2007 Page 3 Mr. Metzger said another funding source for some of the projects could be Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds. Councilor Ballew said she didn't see blight in a public park and she felt it was inappropriate to include it in the urban renewal district. She noted that good information was included on the census tract, but she would like to see a map showing the location of the census tracts. Mr. Metzger said he could provide that map. Councilor Ballew discussed debt financing referred to in the report in Attachment 3. She said it was confusing and there was no total. Mr. Tamulonis said in July staff brought forward different boundaries for the district. The chart in Attachment 3 showed other ways to address the project list for different boundaries. He explained the different project lists for the different boundaries. Councilor Ballew asked about SEDA's project cost share and maximum debt. Mr. Tamulonis explained. Councilor Ballew again referred to blighted areas in parks and open space. Mr. Tamulonis explained how open space and parks could be part of the urban renewal plan to make the area better and safer. Mr. Metzger added that some of the projects included in the proposed plan included downtown amenities, such as pedestrian level lighting, etc. The purpose of including parks was for upgrades and other improvements that could make the parks better. Councilor Ballew said she felt improvements to the parks should be the park district's job. Mr. Tamulonis noted that a consideration when creating an urban renewal plan was the amount of revenue the other agencies were foregoing and including projects to offset some of that loss and leverage their investments. Councilor Wylie said the park on Willamette Heights had no amenities. She asked if the urban renewal district would affect the resale value of her home because she lived in the area. Mr. Grimaldi said if improvements were made to the surrounding streets, it could improve the resale value. Mr. Tamulonis further explained how additional improvements in the area would benefit the existing homes and businesses. Councilor Wylie said her neighbors were her constituents and would have questions. Mayor Leiken suggested Councilor Wylie ask a long time Springfield realtor for information on the affect of the district on home values. Councilor Ralston asked if Meadow Park was included in the proposed plan. City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes September 17,2007 Page 4 Mr. Metzger said it was not included inthis boundary. Councilor Ralston asked if that park would be considered in the future. Mr. Grimaldi said it could be considered in the future. Mr. Tamulonis said if it were not included in the area, the SEDA Board would not be able to use, tax increment funds to make improvements in that park. If Council wanted staff to include it, they could. Councilor Ralston said going all the way out to 23rd Street was too far in his opinion. He considered downtown only went out to about 16th Street. Council had to balance public interest with benefit and losing that tax revenue was too much. He agreed with the urban renewal district concept. Councilor Ballew said the urban renewal district was not a cure all. She asked if SEDA would continue to include the two County Commissioners as SEDA board members. Mr. Tamulonis said they would still be on the board and would ~e making decisions. There could only be one urban renewal agency for Springfield and one urban renewal agency board. Council could decide whether or not to change the board members. ' Councilor Ballew asked if another board could be formed. She didn't understand why the County would be interested in downtown. Mr. Leahy said this had been discussed with Harvey Rogers, counsel in Portland. The City had one urban renewal agency, and couldn't have multiple boards. The County representatives may be interested in downtown because of the interconnection between downtown and Glenwood. Mayor Leiken noted that all decisions were by a majority vote. Councilor Lundberg referred to the chart showing the advisory committee members. She would like to see someone from the Police Planning Task Force (PPTF)on this list and also a representative from one of the Hispanic businesses downtown. She said downtown had been made a priority and the urban renewal district would set aside funds to help make investments. All of the taxing agencies had properties and interests in the downtown. She said the plan was very useful and included practical information. Councilor Pishioneri asked about including Lane Council of Governments (LCOG) representation to communicate how the district was working to surrounding smaller communities. Mr. Tamulonis said they could do outreachJo the smaller outlying communities. He distributed a draft letter that would be sent to the different taxing bodies for the Mayor's signature regarding the urban renewal district. Staff would be gathering input from those agencies regarding the impact to them. City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes September 17, 2007 Page 5 Mayor Leiken said in 2011 or 2012, Enterprise Zone businesses such as Symantec, Royal Caribbean and Franz Bakery would be back on the tax roles. That could provide additional revenue to the City at that time. Mr. Tamulonis said Mr. Duey had already calculated those figures. He noted that Councilor Hatfield had envisioned this when the first companies were allowed under the Enterprise Zone. 2. Proposed Amendment and Reformat of the Springfield Development Code. City Planner Gary Karp presented the staff report on this item. The SDC was adopted in May, 1986. In the 21 years since its adoption, the City has made piecemeal amendments to the SDC to implement both State and local planning mandates and local planning priorities. Over time, these SDC amendments have resulted in a document that has become cumbersome and difficult to understand for both staff and potential developers. In order to address these issues, the City contracted with Eaton Planning Services to perform an audit of the SDC in early 2005. That project was funded by the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) with a Technical Assistance Grant. The results of the audit were reviewed by the Planning Commission and Council in Spring 2005. Staff was authorized to proceed with the SDC Edit and Reformat Project in order to make the SDC more contemporary and user-friendly. Staff established a technical advisory committee to assist with the project. The proposed reformatted SDC is generally based on a layout used for the "Model Development Code for Small Cities" and converts the current 44 articles into 6 chapters. The proposed reformatted SDC also places current text describing various standards into tables, combines . Subdivision and Partition regulations into one Section and reduces redundant language, for example, "consistency with the Metro Plan" is placed in one location and deleted from each individual zoning district description. The proposed reformatted SDC does hot include any "policy" changes, such as additions to use lists or new development standards. These issues will be addressed later this year or early next year, in work sessions with the Planning Commission and Council. On June 5, 2007, the Planning Commission held a work session and public hearing on this matter. There was no public testimony. The Planning CQmmission voted 5-0, with 2 absent to advise the Council to approve the proposed SDC amended and reformatted Ordinance. In July, due to the size of the document, staff provided the Council an opportunity to become familiar with the reformatted SDC in advance of this scheduled public hearing. Staff is requesting the adopting Ordinance include an emergency clause for this reason and in order to . meet the time line for Lane County adoption, which is scheduled in October. Lane County must adopt amendments to the SDC as specified in the Intergovernmental Agreement which gives the City zoning authority between the city limits and"the urban growth boundary. Mr. Karp noted one additional item that was added. There was an issue raised recently of a development proposal where someone wanted to put apartments above an existing commercial use. Currently, that change would require a site plan review process which was very expensive. City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes September 17, 2007 Page 6 Staff wanted to add another exception in the Code under the site plan review process to address this issue. He read the new exception that should have been on page 370 of the Development Code. He explained the change and how it would make the process for this case more efficient. There was also a legislative action that would affect the Code. With the dissolution of the Lane County Boundary Commission (LCBC), there would need to be amendments to the SDC for the annexation process. Councilor Ballew said it would be nice to have headers or footers for each page listing the appropriate section. Mr. Karp said they would include those in the final version. Mayor Leiken asked about the hillside development issue. He said it was good to insure safety, but he was hopeful that it wouldn't carry over into the extreme on areas already developed. He referred to Ambleside Development and issues he had been made aware of in that development. The City would continue to do hillside development until the urban growth boundary (UGB) was able to be expanded. He said he hoped the issues in Mountaingate wouldn't carry over into areas that were seasoned. Safety was certainly important and needed to be a priority. He thanked staff for all their work on this revision. Staff should be commended for keeping up with the new regulations that come from the Federal and State government. Councilor Wylie referred to restaurants being oriented to a view. She suggested that consideration be made to have parking areas face a view. She noted the number of disabled or elderly people that often just wanted to park their cars and watch the view. Councilor Ballew recalled the SDC getting rewritten during her tenure as Councilor. Mr. Karp said updates had often been made. He explained how the SDC had been previously set up and why it had reached a point that needed total reformatting. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 6:56 pm. Minutes Recorder - Amy Sowa Attest: ~