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 .