Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/01/2007 Work Session City of Springfield Work Session Meeting MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION MEETING OF THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL HELD MONDAY, OCTOBER I, 2007 The City of Springfield Council met in a work session in the Jesse Maine Meeting Room, 225 Fifth Street, Springfield, Oregon, on Monday, October 1,2007 at 5:45 p.m., with Mayor Leiken presiding. . ATTENDANCE Present were Mayor Leiken and Councilors Wylie, Ballew, Woodrow and Pishioneri. Also present were City Manager Gino Grimaldi, Assis~ant City Manager Jeff Towery, City Attorney Joe Leahy, City Attorney Matt Cox, City Recorder Amy Sowa and members of the staff. Councilors Lundberg and Ralston were absent (excused). I. Community Imaging Proiect Update. Community Relations Coordinator Niel Laudati and Development Services Director Bill Grile presented the staff report on this item. This project was introduced and supported by Council during the January Council Goal Setting session. Every community has an image. By going through a process similar to corporate imaging, Springfield can determine if its image is consistent with Council' s bro~d goals; whether it is working for or against these goals and whether potential exists to improve the community's collective identity. In 2010 (Feb. 25), Springfield will celebrate its 125th anniversary. This milestone provides a . good reason for timely examination of the community's image and future goals. Over the next three years, short and long-term activities can be developed to make the most of this anniversary and use it as a launching pad for continued and even greater success. Not only does the anniversary give Springfield a specific reference point for conversations, it provides a sense of urgency that will help keep the project on track. In order for Springfield to do a quality imaging process, it must be an authentic reflection of how . the community feels about itself now and where the community wants to go. It means focusing on what is best, but also identifying and adQressing shortcomings. This process must include rrieaningful engagement of stakeholders and carinot be perceived as a city government exercise. The project is divided into separate and distinct phases, allowing Council to take stock of the information and adjust the project accordingly. These phases include: Assessment - Combines a communications review with a strength and weakness analysis. What do we know about how we view ourselves and how we are viewed? External research - Documents lessons from other community's experiences. (Much of this work is complete) Stakeholder interviews - Tests some of the assumptions made under the strength and weakness assessment. How do the people who are integral to Springfield's success view the community? What opportunities elicit the most enthusiasm and excitement? This process will include approximately 25 interviews with key business, community and government leaders. The results will be aggregated and compiled into a report; individual responses will City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes October 1, 2007 Page 2 be kept confidential. The survey may also be available on Springfield's website for responses from the general public. , Analysis - How does Springfield's vision of itself match its assets? Does the public embrace a common vision? Plan - Taking all that is learned - detailed recommendations for proceeding will be compiled in an effort to help Springfield reach its full potential. A budget of $10,000 has been approved for this project. Mr. Laudati said the Ulum Group had been hired to assist the City in this process. He discussed the 125th Anniversary and how that could be tied in to our community image. Mr. Grile discussed the stakeholder's group. He said they hoped that discussions with this group would result in a recommendation for an action plan after the first of the year. Councilor Wylie asked about TEAM Springfield and the work they had started on imaging. She asked if this effort would be coordinated with what they had already done. Mr. Grile said all of the information from TEAM Springfield had been given to the Ulum Group and was the starting point for this process. Councilor Wylie asked about graphics and if they would be included. Mr. Laudati said that would be determined as they went through this process. Councilor Wylie said there could be a graphic for the anniversary celebration. Councilor Woodrow discussed the stakeholders group and wanted to be sure it didn't involve the same people that always served on these types of committees. He wanted to make sure it was expanded to the citizenry. Mr. Grile said there would be an internet survey allowing all Springfield residents to participate. Mr. Laudati said the businesses on the list would include employees of the businesses, not just the owners. He had already received calls from citizens that had interest and wanted to be involved. Councilor Ballew said if the group was the same twenty-five people, you might not get a City VlSlon. Mayor Leiken said he liked linking it to our l25th Anniversary. He noted how the University of Oregon used their 125th anniversary to promote themselves. Councilor Pishioneri asked if City employees could provide outreach to the public to participate in this process as they had contact with them in their daily activities. He suggested having a contest with a prize for the employee with the most referrals. City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes October 1, 2007 Page 3 Mr. Grile said these were good ideas. He acknowledged that there was concern that we didn't have the same twenty-five people on the committee and the idea to leverage citizen contact by the employees. Councilor Pishioneri suggested having the employee outreach contest as a standing policy for other issues as well. Mayor Leiken said there were a number of people out in Thurston that had interest, but were very busy with their jobs and families. These people would appreciate a chance to weigh in, and the internet survey would be a great way to let them do so. It would also be a way to engage the youth, either through an internet survey, myspace.com, or texting. Mr. Laudati said from the comments he had received from citizens, there was a lot of interest in participating. Councilor Pishioneri said he recently talked with a citizen that wanted to see the Broiler Festival back in Springfield. He said that could be something to bring back for the anniversary. Councilor Ballew suggested setting up several events that were reflective of past times during the anniversary celebration. 2. 14th Street/E Street Traffic Signal Recommendation. Traffic Engineer Brian Barnett introduced Greg Kwock, Civil Engineer, who had recently joined City staff. Mr. K wock presented the staff report on this item. The previous Communications Packet Memo, dated May 23,2007, which contained background information and back-up analysis data, was included as an attachment to the AlS. The memo referenced an open house that was subsequently held on June 12, 2007 at City Hall. The AlS offered information resulting from the open house, additional traffic information received after initial analysis, Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) Signal Warrant & Stop Sign summaries, cost estimates, and Transportation Division's final recommendation concerning the traffic signal systt<m at 14th Street / 'E' Street. Open House - Information conveyed included: background on the signal's absence, staffs findings and analysis, and staffs preliminary recommendation at that time. Staff also sought out public input and comment to determine if issues were overlooked or needed to be readdressed prior to making a final recommendation. Twenty-four (24) participants signed in, and approximately 40-50 people were present. . Public Comment - Comments were received from the open house, phone, email, and personal on-site communication. Comments were separated according to those in favor of, against, and neutral to reinstallation of the traffic signal. Comments were then grouped by type (Circulation & Mobility, Crossing Difficulty & Safety, and Other comments). Attachment B contains the breakdown of these comments. Public opinion regarding the traffic signal is as follows: · In favor of reinstalling the traffic signal: 71 % · In favor of not reinstalling the traffic signal: 16%. City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes October 1, 2007 Page 4 . Neutral: 13% Additional Traffic Information Received - One additional crash report at the site was received since the initial analysis. The crash was non-injury related and the report implied that the crash occurred due to driver inattention. Incorporation of this additional data did not result in changes to the traffic warrant analysis. MUTCD Signal Warrants - Of the 8 MUTCD Signal Warrants, 5 failed to meet warrant requirements, and 3 were not applicable. A sensitivity analysis to account for future growth was done for the 5 applicable warrants and was still found to be insufficient to meet warrant requirements. Warrant analyses are included as part of Attachment A. Estimated Cost . Reinstallation: . Removal of remaining system: $50,000 - $70,000 $10,000 - $15,000 Recommendation - Staff recommended removal of the remaining signal system. This entailed removal of the signal mast arms, 2 traffic signal poles/foundations, and the controller cabinet and pedestal. Additionally, the crosswalk and other miscellaneous markings would be obliterated and replaced with stop bars along the minor street ('E' Street). Mr. Kwock reviewed some of the background on the damage to the signal at this intersection. He discussed the different. studies that were considered when making a recommendation for this intersection. He noted that he had received several calls since the open house and there may be some people attending the public hearing on this item. Councilor Pishioneri asked if there would be a change to the power lines in that area if the lights were reinstalled that might prevent this from happening again. Mr. Kwock said he hadn't taken that into consideration, but could talk with Springfield Utility Board (SUB) about the possibility of this happening again. Councilor Pishioneri asked about the history on speeds prior to the damage of the signal compared to after it was destroyed. Mr. Kwock said he compared some of the traffic data prior to this event. The speed through that area was 25 miles per hour, although traffic did usually go a little bit faster than that. That had remained consistent with speeds prior to the damage to the signal. Neighbors had reported that traffic was starting to speed up a little more, but when Captain Lewis patrolled the area, he didn't note a large speeding increase. Councilor Pishioneri asked about the cost of a roundabout for that intersection. Mr. Kwocksaid he didn't do any cost estimates, but it would require additional property acquisition. . Councilor Pishioneri said his opinion was to reinstall the traffic lightthere. He explained why, including slowing traffic down and noting that the cost difference was not that substantial. City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes October 1,2007 Page 5 Councilor Ballew said staff did a good job of evaluating the intersection. She felt, however, that when seventy-one percent of the people in the area wanted the signal back, the Council should listen. The Mohawk area would be developing more and there would be more north/south traffic. She would like to see the signal reinstated. Councilor Woodrow said he would like to see the signal reinstated. He appreciated the work staff had done, but the majority ofthe people in the area wanted it back. Hewould also prefer to err on the side of safety. Councilor Wylie agreed. Mayor Leiken asked if the seventy-one percent in favor of putting back the signal were passionate. Mr. Kwock said the majority of the seventy-one percent were at the open house and were passionate about the issue. There were a handful of people that were passionate on the other side as well. Mayor Leiken agreed that seventy-~ne percent in favor was substantial. Councilor Ballew said having forty to fifty people at a neighborhood meeting was significant. Mayor Leiken agreed with Council to reinstate the light. He thanked staff for their work and welcomed Mr. Kwock to the staff. 3. Graffiti Abatement. Assistant City Manager Jeff Towery presented the staff report on this item. A cross-departmental work group has been convened to review the impacts of graffiti on public and private property and to make recommendations on a program that addresses abatement, documentation, communication & education, enforcement and prevention. The presentation will provide an overview of a program of services that would address a wide range of issues. A partial inventory of sites has been completed. Documentation and reporting occurs through a variety of means. Points of contact and standard procedures have been catalogued for the City and other Team Springfield members. A number of resources have also been identified. New educational information has been prepared and posted to the City's web site and several graffiti sites have been repaired. Council discussion and ultimately direction will help guide the work group's effort to present a recommended program to the Council (and perhaps other Team Springfield members) in the future and to help set priorities for this and other work items. Mr. Towery presented a power point presentation on this item. Hard copies ofthe presentation were distributed to the Mayor and Council. He noted that staff would be sharing this information with those councilors not in attendance tonight. City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes October 1, 2007 Page 6 Mr. Towery reviewed a comprehensive program to deal with graffiti in Springfield, including abatement, documentation, communication and education, enforcement and prevention. He noted the team members involved in this project, and said the Executive Team considered this a high priority. He said graffiti was not a Springfield issue alone. There were hundreds of cities, counties and jurisdictions that were involved in some sort of graffiti abatement. The graffiti was widespread throughout the community. Some ofthe graffiti had been identified as being gang related and there was also a lot of non-gang related graffiti. Both public and private properties had been impacted. Mr. Towery noted that at this time, Public Works and Development Services staff made field observations, the Police Department responded to complaint driven information, other staff or partnering agencies also made field observations, and citizens provided information through phone calls or complaints. The TEAM Springfield partners had been interested in the abatement of graffiti and it was one of their goals for the year. He discussed the many ways used to abate graffiti and some of the resources to deal with this issue. Staff had reviewed several options for graffiti documentation ranging from a basic, internal City program to a TEAM Springfield shared solution. The question of who was responsible for clean-up of graffiti was another question for Council. Currently, on public property, the City tried to abate the graffiti within 24 hours of identification. Documentation was with photos before and after the repair. Mr. Towery discussed graffiti on other public buildings not owned by the City and how the City was coordinating with those agencies to assist with cleanup. He discussed private property and said that data and resources could be made available to those property owners. It was not currently required for a private property owner to cleanup the graffiti, but it was encouraged. Mr. Towery discussed what the City had accomplished so far. TEAM Springfield dollars were being used for abatement. Public Works Department would evaluate using our own staff as well as external contractors and the possible use of the Lane County Sheriffs Office Work Crew. Staff was also researching what other cities were doing. Mr. Towery said the next steps were up to the Council: · Implement a graffiti nuisance code on private property? · Identify an acceptable window to expect clean up and abatement (24 hours)? .. Invest in an internal or shared network data program? Mayor Leiken asked if Public Works (PW) had staff available on call that could go out with generic paint and paint businesses that had been tagged. Mr. Towery said the City hadn't yet contemplated our ability to keep up with the graffiti that occurred on private property. Staff had talked with local vendors about their ability to match paint colors and their willingness to provide discounted or pro bona services for graffiti abatement. Those resources had been documented and included in the resource guide available to citizens. Staff could research that more. Mayor Leiken asked if the City could outsource for the service. He said there was a similar program when he had a business in Eugene. He thought outsourcing to a company would be beneficial. He didn't want to implement a graffiti nuisance code. If there was something in the code, he didn't want it to include fining the bus~ess or property owner. There was, however, the City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes October 1, 2007 Page 7 issue of the graffiti remaining on a property for too long because the property owner was not required to clean it up. He was not ready to punish someone for not being able to clean up. . Councilor Pishioneri said he wasn't ready to put that penalty on the property owner. He suggested looking at other resources, such as through our cOllrts, having minor offenders sent to work in an abatement program. r . Mr. Towery said they had looked into working with Lane County Youth Services on a similar program. Councilor Pishioneri said he was interested in determining which graffiti was determined to be tagging and what was not tagging. Having a single database on that information was a good way to go, perhaps through the Computer Aided Design (CAD) system. Councilor Wylie asked if the current code allowed City staff to go onto private property to paint over graffiti. She also talked about enforcement and punishment of those doing the graffiti. She would like to see th~ offenders cleaning up the graffiti. Councilor Woodrow thanked staff for bringing this to Council. He agreed that we needed to go forward, but it was not right to punish the citizen that got hit on their property. He would like the. City to assist in whatever way would be best. He felt the twenty-four hour timeline for cleanup was not realistic in some cases, but would be the most beneficial. Mayor Leiken said School District Board Chair Webber was very passionate about this subject during their last TEAM Springfield meeting. Mr. Webber had suggested including graffiti abatement during the Day of Caring, and involving both high schools. Councilor Ballew said a shared data system would be worthwhile. It would also be beneficial to have an internal database specific to the City. She would like to see an information referral for citizens that got tagged to access for resources and possible ways to clean the graffiti. There would be some people that were low income that could possibly get the paint at no or low cost. The faster it could be removed the better. It really runs down the visual community. Mayor Leiken asked Mr. Leahy to comment on the legality of the City going on to private property to clean up graffiti. Mr. Leahy said in Eugene, businesses signed on and allowed the Cityto come on their property to clean up graffiti. He said he drove to work and there was graffiti on the wall next to his building that he would like cleaned up. Graffiti degraded the area. Councilor Woodrow asked about the use of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds for graffiti abatement and how that would be awarded. Mr. Grile said it was an acceptable activity, but he was not sure of the process for getting those funds. Councilor Pishioneri asked if the Lane County Sheriff s Office could put in for CDBG funds as part of their program to run their work crew to abate graffiti. . City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes October!, 2007 Page 8 Mr. Grile said he would follow-up on the process and who would qualify. Councilor Wylie said there could bea volunteer core that would be willing to do cleanup if the paint was provided. Mayor Leiken said there were a lot of resources. Councilor Ballew asked about selling spray paint to people below a certain age. She asked if we had something like that in place in the City or the State. Mr. Towery said they would research that. Mayor Leiken asked Mr. Towery to thank Planner Courtney Griesel for putting tog~ther the power point presentation. 4. Strategies for Street Improvement. Public Works Director Dan Brown presented the staff report on this item. The City has 200+ miles of City streets. The vast majority are improved or City standard streets whose improvements were funded primarily by abutting property owners, either through City assessment districts or when property buyers reimbursed the developer who fronted the improvement costs. On the other hand, about 34 miles are unimproved or substandard streets, meaning that they lack all or most of the standard features such as pavement structure, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, street lights, trees, and underground drainage. To improve the 34 miles would cost perhaps $70M in today's dollars and would require decades to complete. Property owners on these unimproved streets typically oppose improving their streets if they have to pay for the improvements. While some property owners already signed Improvement Agreements, which are legal commitments to not oppose an improvement of their street in exchange for land use approvals or building permits they already obtained from the City, some property owners might be legitimate low- or moderate-income owners who might support the project if a subsidy program were provided. To help manage the significant challenges the City faces in funding capital improvements while Springfield continues to grow, City staff is preparing a 20- Years Capital Financing Plan. And, since City Councils have occasionally attempted to reduce the unimproved street mileage, this is, an opportune time to ask the Council whether we should incorporate such an effort into the Capital Financing Plan and, if so, what time frame and other guidelines should be used? Of specific interest to City staff is whether to incorporate into the City's 20- Years Capital Financing Plan now being prepared one or both of the following: I. Financing necessary to initiate, at a moderate pace, improvements on streets on which recorded Improvement Agreements already exist in a quantity sufficient to block legal remonstrance of the projects. 2. Financing necessary to begin and carry for some duration a program to subsidize street assessments on low- and moderate-income properties. Mr. Brown said the City had not improved very many miles of unimproved streets over the last few years. Staff had made attempts at looking at ways to get the work done, but had not been City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes October 1,2007 Page 9 successful. Through the years, as streets had been brought up to City standards, the improvements on private property followed suit. In the 34 miles of unimproved streets, there were two groups that offered the most promise for moving forward with improvements. The fIrst groupwas where improvement agreements had already been signed. Council could legally ignore or override any remonstrance attempt in those areas. The other group would be low and moderate income people. There was a subsidy program in the past, promoted by former Lane County Commissioner Steve Cornacchia, that was modeled after the CDBG program. The third option would be to' wait to see if citizens initiated improvements. Mayor Leiken discussed a couple of proj ects that included street improvements as part of a public/private partnership. The fIrst was the 32nd Street improvement due to funds from the Regional Sports Center. The other was the improvements on 42nd Street following the jurisdictional transfer of the street from ODOT. This topic tied in with our imaging discussion held earlier this evening. People weren't going to initiate an improvement district. The streets belonged to the City of Springfield and all of the Springfield citizens. As representatives, Council needed to work with staff to come up with a strategy to improve these streets over a period of time. Looking at the broad picture, it was not a lot of roadway. The other issue was how the improvements would be funded. He said that Mr. Cornacchia was always willing to work with the cities, but the County was no longer in a position to help. Developing a strategy was important and he was hoping staff would have a good answer. We needed'to learn from communities in the area not to force things on the citizens. The community needed to be engaged in this process and the City needed to find out what they wanted the community to look like. The more the streets were improved, the better for the overall community. Developing a strategy now for future Councils and staff made sense. It would be important to communicate and engage the community. Councilor Ballew said the key was how to pay for it. Historically, property owners in the City paid a percentage and the City paid a percentage. For those that didn't have the funds, other options needed to be explored within the law. Perhaps the lien on the property could be extended to thirty years rather than twenty years, or could be offset with CDBG or other funds. Make the cost benefit ratio better. Mr. Brown said the most recent Bancroft bonds were for ten years, but they used to go out twenty years and they could look at that again and also at the City's historical assessment policy. Property owners through the traditional Council policies had paid almost all the cost for the streets - nearly ninety percent of the costs. Councilor Ballew said it was a definite benefit to the property owner. She suggested finding more attractive terms for the property owner while protecting the City by putting liens on the property. Councilor Wylie said it was important to talk to the people. There were a: lot of low-income people that couldn't afford to pay for the improvement. It could be a hardship for many people. She understood that the City did need to keep growing. Councilor Ballew said there was a benefit to the property owner. Councilor Wylie said it could be harsh on someone's reality if they couldn't afford it. . City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes October 1, 2007 Page 10 Councilor Pishionerisaid he was very supportive. Council's Goal 6 was redevelopment, and he considered improving streets redevelopment. He concurred with the Mayor that the streets belonged to the whole City. There needed to be many ideas of how to get there, but the public must be included and involved. It would be important to talk with the neighbors and see what ideas they may have. Improving streets was important for public safety, drainage, etc. Councilor Ballew said the streets that were improved were paid for by someone that lived there at one time. Councilor Pishioneri said the value of the home would likely go up more than the cost of the improvement. Councilor Woodrow said he appreciated staff bringing this to Council. He would like staff to include groups one and two. Mayor Leiken asked if urban renewal funds could assist in improving streets. Yes. He would also like to see that considered. He would like to incorporate both groups. He liked the idea of developing a long-term strategy over the next few years. Councilor Wylie said there should be criteria and priority on which streets got addressed first. Mr. Brown said they would work with Council on the priorities. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 6:59 pm. Minutes Recorder - AmySowa Attest: .~~ Amy So City Rec der .