Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/03/2014 RegularCity of Springfield Regular Meeting MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL HELD MONDAY, FEBRUARY 3, 2014 The City of Springfield Council met in regular session in the Council Chambers, 225 Fifth Street, Springfield, Oregon, on Monday, February 3, 2014 at 7:00 p.m., with Mayor Lundberg presiding. ATTENDANCE Present were Mayor Lundberg and Councilors Moore, Ralston, Woodrow and Brew. Also present were City Manager Gino Grimaldi, Assistant City Manager Jeff Towery, City Attorney Mary Bridget Smith, City Recorder Amy Sowa and members of the staff. Councilors Wylie and VanGordon were absent (excused). PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Mayor Lundberg. SPRINGFIELD UPBEAT 1. Mayor's Recognition a. Recognition of Mary Davidson with Springfield Shelter Rights Alliance (SSRA) Mayor Lundberg introduced Mary Davidson, one of the founding members of the Springfield Shelter Rights Alliances (SSRA) and presented her with a letter thanking her for her work and dedication in promoting housing options, including the Conestoga Huts, for the unhoused in the City of Springfield. Although, Ms. Davidson had moved to Portland, she still came back to Springfield, stayed involved and got others to participate in this important work. 2. Other a. Employee Recognition: Paula Guthrie, 30 Years of Service. City Manager Gino Grimaldi presented this item. He introduced Paula Guthrie and noted her many accomplishments in the Information Technology Department of the City over the past thirty years. Ms. Guthrie had been and continued to be an asset to the City and was well liked and respected by her colleagues. Ms. Guthrie had been instrumental in the changes and improvements in IT and had also served as the SEIU President for 10 years. Ms. Guthrie introduced her family members in the audience. l Ms. Guthrie thanked the Council for their support of the Information Technology (IT) Department. There had been a number of changes over the past 30 years. She said she loved working for the City of Springfield and also as a member of the Historic Commission. She had no plans of retiring soon. CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Claims City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes February 3, 2014 Page 2 2. Minutes a. January 13, 2014 — Work Session b. January 21, 2014 — Work Session c. January 21, 2014 — Regular Meeting 3. Resolutions 4. Ordinances a. ORDINANCE NO. 6309 —AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE SPRINGFIELD MUNICIPAL CODE "UTIL'ITIES" "GARBAGE AND REFUSE" TO CLARIFY AREA OF SERVICES PROVIDED BY EXCLUSIVE FRANCHISE SOLID WASTE HAULER, AMENDING ECTION 4.404 "HAULING" AND ADOPTING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE 5. Other Routine Matters a. Accept the Springfield 2013 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report. b. Authorize City Manager to Sign a Contract with Motorola Solutions, Inc. for Procurement of Portable Radio Equipment. c. Allow Construction Activities Outside of the Hours of 7 am and 6 pm with Conditions as Described in Attachments 2 and 3 (Permits PW2012 -00237 and PW2014- 0003), in Order to Complete Federally Mandated Pipeline Inspections on Existing Transmission Pipelines. IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR WOODROW WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR BREW TO APPROVE THE CONSENT CALENDAR. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 4 FOR AND 0 AGAINST (2 ABSENT — WYLIE AND VANGORDON). ITEMS REMOVED PUBLIC HEARINGS- Please limit comments to 3 minutes. Request to speak cards are available at both entrances. Please present cards to City Recorder. Speakers may not yield their time to others. _ 1. Annexation of Territory to the City of Springfield —Annex a 1.35 Acre Property Located at 249 North Brooklyn Street and 4224 Franklin Boulevard in Glenwood. ORDINANCE NO. 2 — AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN TERRITORY TO THE CITY OF SPRINGFIELD, AND WILLAMALANE PARK AND RECREATION DISTRICT: AND WITHDRAWING THE SAME TERRITORY FROM THE GLENWOOD WATER DISTRICT (FIRST READING). City Planner Andy Limbird presented the staff report on this item. He distributed the Memorandum of Understanding between the City and the applicant that was just finalized after the agenda packet was distributed. A request for annexation to the City of Springfield had been received from Dale Foster, FPS Investments LLC, owner of property on the north side of Franklin Boulevard just west of the intersection with McVay Highway in Glenwood. The 1.35 -acre site requested for annexation was inside the City's Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) and was contiguous with the City limits. The property owner was requesting annexation. City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes February 3, 2014 Page 3 The City Council was authorized by ORS Chapter 222 and SDC Article 5.7 -100 to act on annexation requests. In accordance with SDC 5.7 -155 and ORS 222.040, 222.180 and 222.465, if approved the annexation would become effective 30 days after signature by the Mayor or upon acknowledgement by the State — whichever date was later. The subject site was contiguous to the City limits along the south boundary. The site was currently developed and had an aggregate assessed value of $277,985. Public utility extensions and other infrastructure would be required in order to facilitate site redevelopment, a signed Memorandum of Understanding for Annexation was pending and was expected to be executed prior to the public hearing for this annexation. Upon annexation, utility extensions and street improvements required to serve the proposed development site would be subject to the Site Plan Review process. The property requested for annexation was zoned Residential Mixed -Use with an Urbanizable Fringe Overlay (UF -10) in accordance with the Springfield Zoning Map and the recently adopted Glenwood Refinement Plan. Upon annexation, the OF -10 overlay would be removed. As outlined in the staff report, the annexation area could be served with the minimum level of key urban facilities and services as required in the Eugene - Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan. The staff report also confirmed the annexation request met the criteria established in Section 5.7 -100 of the Springfield Development Code. Staff recommended the City Council approve the annexation of territory to the City of Springfield and Willamalane Park and Recreation District, and withdraw the same territory from the Glenwood Water District. Mayor Lundberg opened the public hearing. Richard Herman, Executive Director of Metro Affordable Housing. Mr. Herman said he was representing Housing and Community Services Agency (HACSA) of Lane County. He was pleased to be at this stage in a long process. This was a time to celebrate. He expressed deep appreciation for City staff and the Council for their support in making this possible. Staff had been extraordinary in working together between departments and other agencies including Willamalane Parks and Recreation. They had a deadline with the State and staff worked hard to make this happen. Staff was also working on two other developers that had plans in this area so an agreement and master plan were put together. They looked forward to moving forward. He said he appreciated Councilor Moore for her service on the Housing Policy Board and Mayor Lundberg for her support and making this a regional priority. 2. Colin McArthur, Cameron McCarthy Landscape Architecture and Planning, Eugene, OR. Mr. McArthur said he was here representing the applicant. The annexation request involved six tax lots under the same ownership and the property was contiguous to the City of Springfield along the south boundary. During the last eighteen months, he had worked closely with HACSA and Metro in preparation of the annexation request. HACSA and Metro were partnering to plan, design and construct the first major new residential development in Glenwood. Consistent with HACSA and Metro's shared vision, mission and core values, the project was planned to provide for workforce housing. Annexation was the first step in the planning process. Springfield shared a similar vision for this type of development in Glenwood. The subject property was designated Mixed -Use Nodal Development by the Metro Plan, Residential Mixed -Use by the Glenwood Refinement Plan, and would be designated City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes February 3, 2014 Page 4 Residential Mixed -Use by the Springfield Development Code upon annexation. The need for high - quality, affordable housing for working families, seniors and those with disabilities persisted throughout Lane County. A strong link existed between this request, the existing and projected population needs in the area and comprehensive goals at the Statewide, local and regional levels. The request implemented the vision of the Glenwood Refinement Plan, Springfield's 2030 Refinement Plan, TransPlan and several Oregon Statewide planning goals by way of the proposed future use. Springfield Ordinance 46268 stated that to meet Springfield's identified density multi - family housing needs, the City shall redesignate at least 28 additional gross buildable acres in Glenwood Refinement Plan Subarea 8 to Residential Mixed -Use by December 31, 2012. This property was within Subarea 8 of the Glenwood Refinement Plan and would be rezoned upon annexation. As documented in the staff report, there was'sufficient evidence in the record to support the request. The application and staff report detailed compliance with all applicable approval criteria. The applicant concurred with staff s recommendation and urged the Council to approve this request. Mayor Lundberg closed the public hearing Councilor Brew said that under the agreement that was just distributed, the Springfield Economic Development Agency (SEDA) would be paying the system development charges (SDCs) on behalf of Glenwood Place. He asked if they would be paying the City SDCs as well as those to the Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC) and Willamalane. He asked if they knew the total amount. Mr. Towery said the SEDA Board and City Council had put in place a program for SEDA to pay the cost of local SDCs only, not those assessed by MWMC or Willamalane. Mr. Limbird said the SDCs would be based on certain aspects of the development and detailed design. The local SDCs would include transportation and the City's share of sanitary sewer and stormwater. There were different ways these could be addressed before the final costs were calculated. Planning Supervisor Jim Donovan said he and Mr. Tamulonis had worked on the Memorandum of Understanding that was distributed. Based on 2012 calculations, the SDCs would be approximately $475,000. Because it would be another funding cycle before the design was ready, staff chose to leave those figures out of the agreement. NO ACTION REQUESTED. FIRST READING ONLY. BUSINESS FROM THE AUDIENCE Julie Daniel. BRING. Glenwood. - Ms. Daniels said she was here on behalf of BRING Recycling to express their concerns about the impact of the McVay Highway sanitary sewer scheduled for construction later this summer. She provided her testimony to the City Recorder (attached to these minutes). They recognized that the project was very necessary and they were supportive; however, they were deeply concerned about vehicle access and traffic diversion. BRING's business was completely dependent on vehicle access and they only had one access point on Franklin Boulevard. The road in front of and adjacent to their facility and under the railroad trestle past 19" Street was the most constricted section of the chosen route for the sewer. They didn't believe construction could be done without a loss of beneficial use to BRING. She explained why vehicle access was important to their business and that strong summer sales helped them to build reserves to carry them through the winter. If this project City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes February 3, 2014 Page 5 was done in the summer, it would severely affect their summer business and their ability to remain solvent. As one of Springfield's loyal community partners, they were asking the City to work with them to find a winning solution to a very challenging situation. They valued their relationship with the City and the hard working staff and were committed to a successful outcome for all. 2. Carole Knapel, 1201 Oak St, Eugene. Ms. Knapel said she formerly worked for the City of Springfield as project manager for the RiverBend project, the Springfield Justice Center and Fire Station #16. She had been a member of the Board for BRING for about six years and had served as Chair of the Site Committee, responsible for moving BRING to its current site in Glenwood and for the renovations. As a former city employee she understood the importance of the project. As a member of the BRING board, she would ask them to look at their Council Goal of `Encouraging Economic Development and Revitalization through our Partnerships'. BRING was concerned about the impact construction would have to their revenues if access to the site was restricted or stopped. They were currently completing a construction project which they had scheduled during the winter months to have the least amount of impact. Having this project go forward in summer would mean they would be impacted twice in one year. In the past few months, they had met with staff to go over the project and had received some information on the construction schedule, but they needed to continue those discussions. She was here to ask the Council for two things: the first was for the city to explore all possible options to minimize the impact to BRING during the construction so they could continue to work as the project was formalized and bid; and for the city to take on a robust public information role in helping BRING get word out to the public when they would be open or closed during construction. COUNCIL RESPONSE Mayor Lundberg said they were scheduled to talk about this during a work session next week, but she asked staff to continue to work together with BRING before bringing this to the Council. She made a recommendation to ask staff to work with BRING to find options and/or solutions. Mr. Grimaldi said it would take some work to clarify the options available. Because it was a State highway, staff was talking to the State about doing a jurisdictional transfer. They would fine tune some options and bring them back to Council if that was acceptable. Yes. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS BIDS ORDINANCES 1. Amendments to Springfield Municipal Code Chapter 5 "Public Protections" to Match Oregon Revised Statutes. ORDINANCE NO. 3 — AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 5 "PUBLIC PROTECTION" SECTION 5.104 "MISDEMEANORS AND VIOLATIONS — STATE STATUTES ADOPTED" OF THE SPRINGFIELD MUNICIPAL CODE (SMC) TO ADOPT BY REFERENCE, OREGON REVISED STATUTES (ORS) CHAPTER 161. 162 163 164 165 166, 167, 181, 471, 475 AND ORS 480.110 TO 480.160 THEREBY ADOPTING STATE ORS CRIMINAL STATUTES (FIRST READING) City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes February 3, 2014 Page 6 City Attorney Mary Bridget Smith presented the staff report on this item. Section 5.104 of the Springfield Municipal Code incorporated a number of state criminal offenses into the City's municipal code. This ordinance would update this section of the Code to be consistent with any legislative changes that had occurred in the state criminal offenses listed in Section 5.104. A periodic update of this code section would enable the City to better prosecute criminal offenses that occurred in the . community by ensuring the crimes charged were consistent with the current state of the law. Ms. Smith noted this was a housekeeping measure to adjust to match State laws. This would likely be an annual update. NO ACTION REQUESTED. FIRST READING ONLY. BUSINESS FROM TIM CITY COUNCIL 1. Committee Appointments a. Historic Commission Appointment. Managing Civil Engineer Jeff Paschall presented the staff report on this item. The Springfield Historic Commission had one vacancy as a result of Commissioner Judy Williams' first term expiring. Ms. Williams elected not to seek a second term. It was necessary to fill the vacancy at this time. The City received one application for the one vacancy. The Council interviewed Vincent Martorello at the January 27, 2014 Work Session. At the Work Session, the Council decided to appoint Mr. Martorello to fill the vacancy. Appointments to the Historic Commission must be confirmed during a Regular Session. IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR WOODROW WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR RALSTON TO APPOINT VINCENT MARTORELLO TO THE HISTORIC COMMISSION WITH A TERM EXPIRING FEBRUARY 2, 2018. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 4 FOR AND 0 AGAINST (2 ABSENT — WYLIE AND VANGORDON). 2. Business from Council a. Committee Reports Councilor Moore reported that she met with Catholic Community Services (CCS) during a community neighborhood meeting last week. Soaring Hope had been providing meals for the homeless at their facility on G Street, but had discontinued that service due to some concerns. Soaring Hope was looking for other places in Springfield to provide meals to the homeless on a regular basis since it was not working well in that neighborhood. The neighbors were pleased that CCS had been open to holding neighborhood meetings to hear their thoughts about the services. There was a meeting tomorrow afternoon related to this topic. Mayor Lundberg said she didn't want the City to get in the business of locating meal services. She understood that City staff member Kevin Ko was working to get everyone together that City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes February 3, 2014 Page 7 provided meals to make it more efficient. Mr. Ko would likely be contacted at some point. The City had done it in the past, but it was a huge amount of work. Councilor Moore thanked Soaring Hope for what they had done as they had met a need. b. Other Business BUSINESS FROM THE CITY MANAGER 1. Supplemental Budget Resolution. RESOLUTION NO. 2014 -05 — A RESOLUTION ADJUSTING RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS IN THE FOLLOWING FUNDS: GENERAL, STREET, SPECIAL REVENUE, REGIONAL WASTEWATER REVENUE BOND CAPITAL PROJECT REGIONAL WASTEWATER CAPITAL, STREET CAPITAL, SANITARY SEWER OPERATIONS, REGIONAL WASTEWATER, AMBULANCE. STORM DRAINAGE OPERATIONS, INSURANCE, AND VEHICLE & EQUIPMENT FUNDS. Finance Director Bob Duey presented the staff report on this item. At various times during the fiscal year the Council was requested to make adjustments to the annual budget to reflect needed changes in planned activities, to recognize new revenues, or to make other required changes. These adjustments to resources and requirements changed the current budget and were processed through supplemental budget requests scheduled by the Finance Department on an annual basis. This was the third of four scheduled FY 14 supplemental budget requests to come before Council. The supplemental budget being presented included adjusting resources and requirements in: General, Street, Special Revenue, Regional Wastewater Revenue Bond Capital Project, Regional Wastewater Capital, Street Capital, Sanitary Sewer Operations, Regional Wastewater, Ambulance, Storm Drainage Operations, Insurance, and Vehicle & Equipment Funds. He reviewed the changes in the Fire overtime which was not a surprise, but they were not sure at the time how much it would affect the budget. He also discussed the $135,000 for retirement payouts. The City wasn't usually prepared for large payouts for retirements of long -time employees, but would normally hold positions open to absorb the costs. They were not able to hold positions open due to other factors, so they were requesting funds instead. The City Council was asked to approve the attached Supplemental Budget Resolution. The overall financial impact of the Supplemental Budget Resolution was to increase Operating Expenditures of $799,467, increase in Capital Projects $390,420 and an increase in inter -fund transfers of $320,000. These were offset by decrease in reserves $722,755 and new revenue $787,132. IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR WOODROW WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR MOORE TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2014-05. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 4 FOR AND 0 AGAINST (2 ABSENT — WYLIE AND VANGORDON). 2. Other Business Mr. Grimaldi reminded the Council of the Joint Elected Officials meeting on Tuesday, February 4 at 6:00pm with the Lane County Board of Commissioners. City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes February 3, 2014 Page 8 Mr. Towery noted that staff had received a number of comments from the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD). In an attempt to incorporate those comments and to draft supplemental findings, staff would ask that the record of that proceeding remain open. BUSINESS FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned 7:38 p.m. Minutes Recorder Amy Sowa fJ Christine L. Lundberg Mayor Attest: 4 City Recor er To: Springfield City Council From: BRING Recycling, 4446 Franklin Blvd, Eugene, OR 97403 Re: McVay sewer extension Jan 31 ", 2013. My name is Julie Daniel and I'm BRING's Executive Director. I'm speaking on behalf of the board and staff to voice our concerns about the impact of the McVay sanitary sewer extension scheduled for construction this summer. We recognize the project is necessary, and we support it. However, we are deeply concerned about vehicle access and traffic diversions. BRING is in a unique situation —our business is completely dependent on vehicle access and we have only one possible access point, our narrow entry on Franklin. The road in front of and adjacent to our facility and under the railroad trestle past 191" Street is the most constricted section of the chosen route for the sewer. We don't believe construction can be done without a loss of beneficial use to BRING. I'd like to explain why vehicle access is so important to us Eighty four percent of our $1M annual operating budget is derived from the sale of used materials brought in by the general public, businesses and institutions. People drive here to donate and shop seven days a week. Our records confirm that over 6.000 vehicles, from all over Lane County, enter and exit the property each month between June 1 and October 1. That's 12,000 vehicles going in and out each month, 400 a day. Our sales are strongly cyclical. We depend on robust summer sales, averaging $85,000 a month, to build reserves to carry us through the winter when we operate at a loss. Donations of materialsventory for future salespre also heaviest in the summer months. We run a fixed cost operation with a narrow margin. We employ twenty people who depend on our paychecks to support families. 80% of our expenses are payroll related. A single day with no access results in a $5,000 business loss. A month of difficult access could easily have a $50,000.4 - impact since the public, as you all know, avoid driving in areas with delays and diversions. Strong summer sales are especially important this year because we are currently drawing down reserves more aggressively than usual. We are working on the final phase of our site infrastructure as we complete our development agreement with Springfield —a project we have planned for and raised funds to finance for three years. The work entails closing off our extensive outdoor sales area, thus reducing revenues, so we scheduled construction during the winter when sales are slowest. Rebuilding our depleted reserves this summer will be vital if we are to keep afloat next winter. We are seriously concerned about our ability to remain solvent and in business if summer revenues do not reach the levels we expect and budget for. Non - profit agencies need long timelines to plan for unusual circumstances. We only learned of the sewer extension last fall, far too late for us to either adjust our own construction schedule or build up reserves to help us weather the impact. It would be a great loss if after successfully completing a 12 year, $3.2Million capital campaign to develop this regional facility in Glenwood, an effort supported by over 1,000 foundations, businesses, government agencies and individuals, our ability to operate it was put in jeopardy. As one of Springfield's loyal community partners, we are asking you to work with us to find a winning solution to a very challenging situation. We value our relationship with the City and its hardworking staff and are committed to a successful outcome for all. Good Evening Mayor and Council - - - -- My name is Carole Knapel, and I'm here to speak to you this evening regarding the extension of the sanitary sewer along McVay Highway. By way of introduction - I formerly worked for the City of Springfield and had the privilege of working with some of you. I was the City's Project Manager for the RiverBend Project, the Justice Center and Fire Station 16. 1 have been a member of the Board of BRING for 6 years during which I have served as Chair of the Board's Site Committee - responsible for overseeing the move from BRING's former location to our current home and for the renovations and improvements to our ne'w`site. As a former City employee I understand that the extension component of the City's planning efforts- and I support th projects - the City requires the project be comple possible. Maintenance and improvement of infra: of the City Council's stated Goals. I'd like to addre Development and Revitalization through Commur partner with BRING in a way which will address all As our Executive Director, Julie Daniel, has f \M1' construction will have on our revenues if a( such restriction of our access will result in ii currently completing the improvements on construction would notJrm-a- t our.sales duri know our revenues for this fiscal yearwill be .a -zi.. � %. , earlier perhaps we would'have been able to this option we are faced with reduct onof,re impact unplanned for. =E f 4 3 iu f \i; In the past few months we have me' some general information regarding determined construction schedule Because we know that the City of S° Council support in developing a plan ofthesanitary sewer is an important project I am also aware that - as with all most efficient and cost effective manner and financially responsible services are two goal -that of Encouraging Economic erships - and I'd lil e,'tosuggest that the City Is. I, BRING'is concerned about the very real impact site is restricted or totally blocked. We believe eficial use ofqur site. As Julie has said, we are occur in the winter so that with.this plan, however, we aware of the City's project r work to be concurrent with yours. Without e in a single year - with the more significant staff to discuss our concerns. They have been able to share roject and schedule for work, but as of this date we there is no nor specific contract provisions. pringfield must move forward with this project we are here to ask to minimize the impacts to BRING. We'd like to request your support in the following-ways- 1) Given the financial mpactthat this project will have on BRING, We request that the City explore all options for a construction schedule that will help mitigate the loss, and we request that staff continue to work with us as the construction schedule is developed. 2) We request that the City undertake a robust public information campaign both before and during construction - to include radio, TV, print and social media to alert the public to access issues and to help BRING rebuild business once construction is over. We would be happy to continue our discussions with staff regarding these requests.