HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/14/2013 Work SessionCity of Springfield
Work Session Meeting
MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION MEETING OF
THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL HELD
MONDAY, OCTOBER 14, 2013
The City of Springfield Council met in a work session in the Library Meeting Room, 225 Fifth Street,
Springfield, Oregon, on Monday, October 14, 2013 at 5:30 p.m., with Mayor Lundberg presiding.
ATTENDANCE
Present were Mayor Lundberg and Councilors VanGordon, Wylie, Moore, Woodrow and Ralston.
Also present were City Manager Gino Grimaldi, Assistant City Manager Jeff Towery, City Attorneys
Mary Bridget Smith and Lauren King, City Recorder Amy Sowa and members of the staff.
Councilor Brew was absent (excused).
1. Main — McVay Transit Feasibility Study
Transportation Planner David Reesor presented this item. Mr. Reesor introduced Stan Biles, a
consultant working on the Main Street outreach plan. The purpose of the Transit Improvement
Feasibility Study was to analyze the need, technical viability, and public support for potential Main
Street transit improvements. There were four related projects occurring in the Main Street corridor
(Smart Trips, Downtown Demonstration, Main Street Vision, Pedestrian Crossings) that had been
closely coordinated with this initial public outreach for the potential Main McVay Transit Feasibility
Study. It was critical that all of these projects were coordinated and managed in a way that was
understandable to the community in terms of consistency and interrelationships. To date, these
projects had been coordinated through a three- tiered management structure that included project
direction provided by an ad hoc Governance Team that included Mayor Lundberg and Councilor
Woodrow, and staff project management coordination and project oversight.
A well- coordinated project team including City, LTD, and consultant staff had worked closely with
elected and appointed officials from City of Springfield and LTD to conduct initial stakeholder and
public outreach. This initial outreach included small group meetings called, "Community
Conversations," general public outreach at this summer's Summer Fair event, National Night Out, and
at the recent Nick Symmonds Springfield 800 Community Run adjacent to City Hall.
City and consultant staff presented the findings of these public and stakeholder events to the Main
Street Projects Governance Team on September 26b, 2013. After hearing the input received to -date,
the Governance Team unanimously recommended to Council to move forward with the Main McVay
Transit Feasibility Study. In addition, the Governance Team worked with staff to develop to draft
Main Street Project Goals that provided overarching guidance to all of the Main Street Projects.
Mr. Reesor reviewed the four different Main Street projects.
Mr. Biles introduced Chris Watchie, Cogito Partners, who was also a consultant on this project. Ms.
Watchie had provided the history of the corridor and some of the population projections for the City of
Springfield. She had also prepared the final report which was included in the agenda packet.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
October 14, 2013
Page 2
Mr. Biles started with the first of the questions he had asked during their outreach meetings, "What
was working well in the Main Street corridor ?" The specific answers helped show what was important
to the variety of attendees. The answers showed trend and agreement regarding the area along the
right -of -way from the outer edge of the sidewalks across the five lanes of traffic. People said they
really liked how the corridor functions for automobiles, trucks and buses, and that they could get from
one point to another point fairly easily without a lot of delays. Businesses said it was a good place to
do business because of visibility, easy access in and out for large trucks, vans, customers and
employees. There were good comments about public transit regarding the frequency, condition, size,
and the importance of the service provided. Several people commented that downtown was changing
in positive ways and gave credit to the City.
The next question was, "What short term improvements would you make on the corridor ?" One of the
initial comments was that the speed was too high in the middle portion of the corridor. This response
was heard not only from the bicycle and pedestrian interests and advocates, but also from the business
owners. Businesses thought if people drove by slower, they could focus more on the businesses along
Main Street making it easier to decide to stop. Regarding land use, comments were made that
development in the mid -town section of Main Street was not consistent and there was no theme.
When asked about improvements that could be made in this area, the most common answer was
aesthetic and streetscape improvements, such as street trees, bushes, water features, benches, nicer bus
stations, public art, pocket parks, public gathering spaces, etc. Several people felt if that was activated
by the public or a non - profit, it could serve as a catalyst for private capital to invest in redevelopment.
The final question pertaining to non - transit was also the toughest question. This question was, "What
is your vision of the corridor looking out twenty years ?" That question usually prompted conversation
back and forth. Some of the aspects gleaned from those conversations included aesthetics, increase of
density, mixture of uses on properties, and improved infrastructure such as wider sidewalks. There
was also an emphasis on the transit and the value of public transit in the redevelopment of the corridor
given population projections and likely congestion. Participants wanted to maintain, expand or
improve public transit in the corridor.
The final question was, "Should the City of Springfield and the Lane Transit District (LTD) move
forward with a feasibility analysis of various strategies to enhance public transportation in the
corridor ?" About 85 -90% of the respondents answered yes. There were about 10 -15% that didn't feel
that way, were not positive about public transit and were critical of the service and funding. The
majority felt they should move forward with the study and share the information with the public to use
for decision making. Some of the obvious reasons for conducting the study were to address the
projected increase in population to minimize any issues, and due to costs being less now than in the
future. Another response was that if they waited to do the study, decision makers could see some of
the options physically unavailable as properties redeveloped. Those that were critical of the study felt
they weren't sure if a problem was coming or what the problem might be. They felt they should wait
until they had a problem and then develop strategies more tailored to the problem. Both views were
heard, but most agreed to move forward.
Mr. Biles said the population of Springfield was about 60,000. Although they only received direct
input from 26 people, those 26 were very diverse and included people of different age groups, new and
old residents, women and men, educational interests, bicycle /pedestrian interests, small and large
businesses, and representatives from long -time businesses and new businesses. He felt that diversity
was important. There were two additional procedural steps. David Reesor and Chris Watchie engaged
members of the public at several city events that occurred after the community conversations: National
Night Out, 2 "d Friday Art Walk, Summer Fair, and Nick Symmonds 800M. During those events,
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
October 14, 2013
Page 3
information was provided to people they spoke with. Those sessions confirmed what they had heard
by the 26 participants of the community conversations. He noted that Mayor Lundberg and Councilor
Woodrow attended most all of the sessions.
Councilor Woodrow noted that in the agenda packet, Attachment 1, page 10 under Land Use was
listed `more mixed use, higher density housing'. They had not received substantial input for that and it
should be removed.
Mr. Reesor said better wording for that section could be 'more mixed use' rather than high density
housing. The comment was referring to the Royal Building. That item would be removed from the list.
He noted that as well as the community conversations, the Mayor and Councilor Woodrow attended
the National Night Out and Summer Fair and also heard comments from the general public.
Councilor Ralston said he liked the first question and felt the resounding answer was that it was
working well. He found it contradictory that they liked the fact that traffic flowed, yet thought the
speed was too high. He disagreed and felt 40 mph was not too fast, people just sped. He would expect
bicycle groups would want the speed reduced, but he found it interesting that businesses also wanted
the speed reduced. The vast majority of people using the corridor were not business owners and
wanted to get from point A to point B. Aesthetics included costs to the City for sidewalks and
regulations to be imposed. Regulations added costs to businesses and somebody had to pay. He noted
that safety was not discussed. He didn't understand what crime in mid - Springfield had to do with
traffic. Main Street was divided into neighborhoods, but that's what streets did. He didn't feel that
was a defensible argument. Regarding the comment about inconsistency, he said they couldn't require
all businesses to build the same and it put too much government into the mix. It would have been great
if it could have been planned out, but that wasn't how it worked. He saw both sides of the argument of
going forward with the study. Currently, he didn't feel it was broken. Doing the study wouldn't hurt,
but was not necessary.
Councilor Woodrow said the comments regarding things that were not working well were not things
that needed immediate attention, but were part of the conversation. Most of the comments regarding
aesthetics were in context of downtown Springfield and Mohawk and the OPEN Banner signs, etc.
They would like to have something that would unite and make the corridor look better, not necessarily
making universal store fronts. They just wanted something that would make businesses more
attractive. The comments regarding safety weren't necessarily related to the corridor, but were related
to safety. During the discussion about speed of traffic, the businesses were looking at a business
friendly corridor. They understood that people generally went about 5 miles per hour higher than the
posted limit. Posting a slower speed limit could help make it easier and safer for pedestrians, and
allow better visualization for the businesses.
Councilor Moore said many of the people she spoke to at the Summer Fair were not from Springfield.
She referred to Councilor Ralston's comment that two comments contradicted each other and noted
that the comments came from different people. Regarding safety, some people spoke about pedestrian
accidents along the corridor, but others mentioned the lighting.
Councilor Ralston said a lot of improvements were being made along Main Street
Mr. Biles said public safety came out at different times in different places covering different subjects.
A couple of business owners noted that they were having to install greater security around their
buildings because of vandalism and break -ins. Safety concerns from bicyclists focused more on speed
of the vehicles since there was no barrier between the bike riders and vehicles. There were also safety
City of Springfield
Council Work. Session Minutes
October 14, 2013
Page 4
concerns expressed on behalf of pedestrians crossing the street, but participants did note the many
positive things that had been done.
Mayor Lundberg said the reason this was being done was because she wanted a process since the City
was studying long -term visioning for the Main Street corridor, which included Main Street and the
neighborhoods on each side. Development needed to occur and there was vacant and underutilized
land along this corridor. The visioning process gave the City an opportunity to talk to the citizens
about what they wanted to see happen in twenty years. Some of the safety issues were in surrounding
neighborhoods and businesses, and some were regarding traffic. Visioning was the land use piece of
the process, the crossing lights and medians were part of the pedestrian safety piece, and consideration
of transit improvements which included components of an EmX line was another piece. They wanted
to go out and ask the public first what they would want to see so that when the elected officials made
decisions it was with knowledge of what the community would support. She and Councilor Woodrow
attended most of these meetings, as well as LTD Board Chair Doris Towery and Board Member Mike
Dubick. The comments were brought back to Council so they could make a good assumption of what
the community would support. There would be difficult decisions to be made. This was the model that
worked for the Beltline /1 -5 project which won awards when it was done because everyone was
satisfied with the process. She was involved in that process and was confident in what was done with
the public and the responses received that was a good blend of what the community was thinking. She
was confident in the process being used. As they moved forward, they would keep grounded in that
process and get an end product they could all feel good about.
Councilor Ralston asked how much the study would cost and who would pay.
Mr. Reeser said LTD had received a grant from the Federal Transit Administration in the amount of
approximately $750,000 which would be used towards the Transit Feasibility Study. That grant was
awarded some time ago, and since that time new Federal Transportation legislation had passed which
gave more flexibility in terms of what they could do with the study. The Governance Team would be
writing a full scope. Some of that money had been used to date for this public outreach.
Councilor VanGordon asked what the end product would be from the study.
Mr. Reeser said the overall goal was to look at an option for transit improvements along the Main
Street corridor and was a precursor to NEPA Work. The general goal of the study was to analyze the
feasibility of different types of transit. The study would look at all options, talk to citizens and narrow
the options down. It provided an opportunity to look at the public transit piece at the same time as the
land use piece.
Councilor VanGordon asked if all four studies were tied together.
Mr. Reesor said they did tie together, some more than others. There were different funding sources
and we were fortunate to have all four come together at one time. The way this had been set up and
modeled, they were able to coordinate the projects through the process.
Councilor VanGordon referred to the transportation study which would be the basis for determining
the EmX line along that corridor. After the study and the community outreach, he would like to see
that the proposed solution would show improved capacity on Main Street with the projected increase
in population over the next twenty years. He wanted to know if we would get better transportation for
bikes and pedestrians without decreasing our freight or vehicle capacity. The corridor was very
complex and this should provide as many different options as possible. As they worked through the
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
October 14, 2013
Page 5
decision points, he wanted to be careful not to close down any options. This was a huge corridor and
it could be easy to paint it with one brush, but to make it successful they needed to look at individual
problems, individual businesses and infrastructure.
Councilor Wylie said an important reason to have the study was because of the complexity and length
of the corridor. She hoped the study would help find solutions or point us in the direction to best
modify or handle various modes of traffic, population, and transportation. The decision points would
come later, but they would have information to make those decisions. This corridor needed attention
and needed a lot of things citizens wanted to see. The corridor and how it was addressed would be key
to the community. This was a great opportunity.
Councilor Moore asked how this project might tie in to the Scenario Planning and Lane Livability
Consortium which included reducing pollutants.
Mr. Reesor said that Scenario Planning did look at ways to reduce pollution, but it was regional and
metro wide. This corridor was substantial and would be one piece of the greater study.
Councilor Moore asked if they could use some of the study that had been done by the Lane Livability
Consortium for the corridor.
Mr. Reesor said some pieces from that work could be pulled into this study
Mr. Goodwin said there was a clear linkage between the Scenario Planning work and this study. They
speculated that one of the outcomes of the Scenario Planning study was that the community was doing
well. This study would also provide a basis for any additional work that might need to be done and
provide ideas of how to move forward. The Scenario Planning Data Model was not refined down to
the corridors, but would allow an exchange of data.
Mayor Lundberg noted that Main Street was part of Highway 126 which went from the mountains to
coast, from Glenwood to Thurston. It was the place people saw first when coming from the mountains,
yet the middle section hadn't received much attention. The visioning process allowed them to decide
what type of development they wanted to see in that area. They were fortunate to be doing all this at
the same time. She was excited to take a look at this area.
Councilor Moore commented on the foresight to build the expressway and that it was a great asset
Councilor Woodrow said it had been exciting working on this since February and collaborating with
other agencies. It was exciting to see from the community what a connector the corridor was and to
know that there were so many possibilities beyond what existed today. She was also excited to get the
pedestrian crossings installed. Once people started to talk during the meetings, they really became
engaged and involved in the conversation.
Mr. Reesor thanked those that had helped by talking to the public. The list of Main Street themes was
taken to the Governance Team and the Governance Team made a formal recommendation to the
Council to move forward with the study. He asked if Council was supportive of moving forward.
Mayor Lundberg thanked Stan Biles for stepping in and working with everyone. She also thanked
Chris Watchie for her work in getting to this point. There was still a lot of work. The Governance
Team would meet regularly and report to the respective boards.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
October 14, 2013
Page 6
Councilor Moore asked how McVay would be included
Mr. Reesor said the McVay corridor was a vital connection in regards to transit. It connected the
Thurston area with Lane Community College (LCC). Also, the Glenwood Refinement Plan update
involved that corridor. There were plans for that corridor to redevelop over time and this was an
important transportation component to support land use decision.
Councilor Woodrow thanked LTD staff and board members for the number of meetings they attended.
Mr. Reeser said they would move forward with the study. The Governance Team would decide when
to report back to the Council and LTD Board. He noted the project goals on the last page of
Attachment 2 of the agenda packet. To draft these goals, they looked at the Council goals and Main
Street themes, then brought this to the Governance Team and Project Leaders Team for review. The.
purpose of the project goals was to provide guidance as to which projects to move forward, and to
communicate with the public and project leaders of the city's intentions for each project. There would
be more specific goals and purpose statements with each individual project, but these more general
goals would keep them on track as they went through the process. The Governance Team provided
input and several changes were made. He referred to the goal #5 "Create Main Street Identities" and
felt it may need to be reworded to `refine' or `strengthen'.
Councilor Wylie suggested adding the word `connective' making it "Create Connective Main Street
Identities ".
Councilor Ralston said he wasn't sure why 45 had to be there. He noted the goals regarding
improving safety for pedestrians and bicyclists, but he wanted to know that they would maintain traffic
flow for cars and trucks. This corridor was made for transportation.
Discussion was held regarding where to add that to the goals. It would be added to the end of #3 —
"while maintaining or improving current traffic flow for cars or trucks".
Councilor Moore said representatives from the freight industry should be included. She asked if they
had been part of the public input. Yes. There were also railroad crossings that should be mentioned.
She read recently that identities for neighborhoods were important. It would be nice if the City could
put flags all the way down Main Street instead of just specific areas to make it more inviting and
attractive. She was supportive of 45.
Mr. Reesor said staff could add the suggestions from Council to the goals and present it back to the
Governance Team.
Councilor Wylie said currently they had freight and cars going through town, but they would like to
see if there were options for another way for them to travel through the community.
Mayor Lundberg said that was why they were doing the study
Councilor Woodrow said the Main Street Identities goal was a response from those participating. It
would not be up to the City to decide on the identity for each area.
Mayor Lundberg said participants noted the different areas identified in Springfield and that it would
be nice to identify the mid -part of Springfield and Main Street. As they went through the study, it
would become clear what people wanted to see.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
October 14, 2013
Page 7
Mr. Reesor said he appreciated their thoughts and ideas. Staff would take their comments to the
Governance Team.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 6:49 p.m.
Minutes Recorder —Amy Soma
Christine L. Lundberg
Mayor
Attest:
Amy Sowa
City Recor er