Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 02 Council Minutes AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY Meeting Date: 10/6/2014 Meeting Type: Regular Meeting Staff Contact/Dept.: Amy Sowa Staff Phone No: 541-726-3700 Estimated Time: Consent Calendar S P R I N G F I E L D C I T Y C O U N C I L Council Goals: Mandate ITEM TITLE: COUNCIL MINUTES ACTION REQUESTED: By motion, approval of the attached minutes. ISSUE STATEMENT: The attached minutes are submitted for Council approval. ATTACHMENTS: Minutes: a) September 8, 2014 – Work Session b) September 15, 2014 – Work Session DISCUSSION/ FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. City of Springfield Work Session Meeting MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION MEETING OF THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL HELD MONDAY SEPTEMBER 8, 2014 The City of Springfield Council met in a work session in the Library Meeting Room, 225 Fifth Street, Springfield, Oregon, on Monday September 8, 2014 at 5:30 p.m., with Mayor Lundberg presiding. ATTENDANCE Present were Mayor Lundberg and Councilors VanGordon, Wylie, Moore, Ralston and Woodrow. 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. 1. Planning Commission Interviews Planning Manager, Greg Mott, presented the staff report on this item. Two applicants are participating in the review process to fill one vacant position. Mr. Sean R. Dunn resides in the city limits at 1216 Q Street # 2, Springfield 97477; and is in Marketing and Business Development with Alpine Mortgage Planning. Mr. Gregory A. James resides in the city limits at 457 Mountaingate Dr., Springfield 97478; and is a Purchasing Manager with the Springfield Public Schools. The Springfield Planning Commission is a seven member volunteer Commission appointed by the City Council. The members serve four-year terms that are staggered to avoid more than two positions expiring at the same time. Of the seven members, two appointments may live outside the City limits and two appointments may be involved in the Real Estate profession. At present Commissioner Moe lives in the urban transition area and Commissioner Nelson is in Real Estate. Positions are “at-large”, and do not represent specific geographic areas. Council appointment for this position is scheduled for the Council Regular Meeting, Monday September 15, 2014. The Mayor and Council introduced themselves to the applicants. They interviewed each candidate with the following questions: • Why do you want to serve on the Planning Commission? (Mayor Lundberg) • Springfield, Eugene and Lane County are phasing out the jointly adopted Metro Area Comprehensive Plan in favor of individual land use plans for each city; what, if anything, do you think the three governments should do to address regional land use and economic development issues when the Metro Plan is gone? (Councilor VanGordon) • The City is in the midst of evaluating several areas for possible inclusion in the City’s Urban Growth Boundary. What’s your opinion about how and where the City should grow? Do you think expansion is the answer, or do you prefer infill and redevelopment? (Councilor Woodrow) City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes September 8, 2014 Page 2 • Many of the land use laws applied by the Planning Commission are state or federal mandates. During a Planning Commission hearing how would you reconcile your personal opinions or support for the applicant’s interests if it seemed that those interests were not consistent with the land use laws? (Councilor Wylie) • What is your general understanding of the relationship between the Planning Commission and City Staff, and the Planning Commission and the City Council? (Councilor Ralston) • What’s your opinion or perception about the City’s reputation for reviewing and approving development proposals? Based on this opinion, do you believe the City should make changes to its approach to development review? (Councilor Moore) Mr. Dunn asked if they had any insights on what made good communication between the Planning Commission and the City Council. Some ideas and suggestions included the joint meeting between the two bodies, reading the Council minutes, attending the Council meetings as the Planning Commission liaison, and Council relaying input from citizens to the Planning Commission in cases where the commission should be involved in the process. It is the Planning Commission’s job to look at the laws, rules and codes when making recommendations. The Council has more ability to make policy and interpret in a way that is a little broader than what the Planning Commission is allowed. Mr. James said he understood the Operating Policies and Procedures and the decision the Council is faced with tonight. It is important, with all of the development issues going on that the Planning Commission will be dealing with in the near future, that they keep some seasoned commissioners on board. His intent when he first applied for the Planning Commission was to serve the full two terms. Council deliberated on the two candidates and the qualifications of each. Discussion was held regarding appointing those already serving on another board per the Council Operating Policies and Procedures. Councilor Moore said although Mr. Dunn was ready to serve, she feels re-appointing Mr. James is important to keep the skill and knowledge on the Commission. Councilor Ralston said Mr. Dunn answered the questions very well. He would like to see Mr. Dunn on the Planning Commission, but also feels Mr. James has the qualifications and skill to continue with the important projects. Councilor Wylie agreed. There are important issues the City is facing, but she is very excited about Mr. Dunn and how well he answered the questions. Councilor Woodrow said the policy was put in place for a reason and was followed earlier with another candidate. When making the policy, it was to help ensure that we had public service from a larger group of individuals. She appreciates all Mr. James has done for the City. They do have an alternative candidate that has good knowledge and qualifications. If they want to go back and revisit the policy, she is fine with that, but feels they should stick to it now. Councilor VanGordon said he appreciated all that Mr. James has done for the community. He also considered the policy they set in place and the reasons for setting that policy. Elected officials have a lot of opportunity to serve in many capacities in the community, but other citizens do not have the City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes September 8, 2014 Page 3 same opportunity. The purpose of the policy was to broaden the involvement in the community. He feels that all of the new people they have appointed in the past with no prior experience have done very well. Councilor Wylie said the policy read ‘when possible the Council will not appoint people currently serving on another governing body’. Because Mr. James is already serving on the Planning Commission she feels he should be ‘grandfathered in’ regarding the policy. Councilor Ralston said he feels Mr. James and others currently serving when the policy was set should be grandfathered in, and the policy should be used on new people. Councilor Woodrow said several months ago they faced a similar situation, but did not have this same interpretation (regarding grandfathering in). She felt that since they had a qualified candidate, they should follow the policy. Mayor Lundberg said they talked a lot about getting younger people involved and Mr. Dunn had good experience at the state level. The Council did make a choice by setting that policy which caused someone to choose not to run for office. Some of the decisions coming in the future in Glenwood involved Willamalane and having someone from their board serving on the Planning Commission means two different perspectives. She feels Mr. Dunn is a great opportunity to get someone new involved. She didn’t feel they should change the policy mid-stream and suggested looking at it in the future to make it stronger. Councilor Moore said if the person had not withdrawn, she would likely have voted for that person. Mr. James is also aware of the policy, but did not withdraw. She hopes Mr. Dunn will apply in January. Mr. Grimaldi asked if Council wants staff to notify the candidates of the three/two vote and if they want to revisit the policy. Council agreed to both. Discussion was held regarding the current policy and clarifying it to address whether or not it is only for new candidates, or for those already serving. Councilor VanGordon said they need to move forward to gain clarity on the intention of the policy so it is applied fairly and evenly. Mayor Lundberg asked staff to schedule a work session on the policy topic before the next recruitment period. Mr. Grimaldi said staff would schedule something in December. 2. Springfield 2030 Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) Study (Metro Plan Amendment File No. LRP 2009-00014). Principal Planner, Linda Pauly, and Management Analyst, Courtney Griesel, presented the staff report on this item. City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes September 8, 2014 Page 4 Last time staff met with Council on this topic was during a July work session. At that time, Council asked staff to bring in Economic Development consultant Allison Larsen, of TadZo Consulting, to provide economic development site evaluations of two potential urban growth boundary (UGB) expansion areas: South 28th Millrace and College View. Ms. Larsen visited the two sites in August and is prepared to provide information to the Council based on those visits. Ms. Larsen said she has become familiar with Springfield through the Big Look project and appreciates the City Manager and Mayor’s work on that project. The information provided this evening will be in context with the overall regional economic development picture. She thanked Community Development Manager John Tamulonis, Senior Management Analyst Courtney Griesel and Ms. Pauly for helping her get to know the sites and the City. Ms. Larsen presented a power point presentation. Businesses and communities want essentially the same things: economic vitality; wealth creation; and quality place and environment. She described how businesses determine where they want to develop their business. It starts with a strategy, then a location investigation, due diligence and implementation of the project. At the same time, the community and region needs to make sure they can prove they are the location of choice, deliver on promises, and provide after care. Good things have happened in Springfield, and that should be reinforced. To be competitive, a community needs many things including talent, incentives, location, transportation, real estate offerings, utilities, sustainability, etc. The priority changes for different industries and different projects. Some of these factors can be controlled by the City such as permitting and regulating, and incentives. The optimal location balances competing interests such as minimizing operating costs, minimizing one-time costs and minimizing risks. She discussed the short- term and long-term actions the City can do to influence. Competitive communities provide high customer service, clarity and consistency. In the long term the City can look to provide available space and infrastructure, and also the vision for what the City wants to be. The vision sets the tone for where the City will go. Ms. Larsen referred to key development areas throughout the region. She spoke about the different development areas in Springfield and some of the strengths and weaknesses. Glenwood was a key place that could really be something special. She noted the area near International Way and the development there. This area would do well extended further north with additional tech campus development. Goshen is interesting for the County. It could be a world class industrial park, but she is concerned the County can’t get the infrastructure there. Regionally there is a lot of diversity, but not many existing buildings. There aren’t any certified sites which is a key to development and reduces risk to developers. There are very limited publicly controlled sites. It is often easier to negotiate with a public entity rather than a private developer. There also aren’t many large sites or world class industrial sites. International Way is a good tech industrial area, but not world class industrial. She noted that developers’ timelines are much shorter than planning timelines. Development can occur within 6 and 36 months. Certified sites and existing buildings are important to development as it provides certainty and clarity. If the community does not have a site that is ready, projects will pass them by. Currently, the two sites under consideration are not ready to go to market. Good planning contributes to development readiness and she can see Glenwood thriving in twenty years. The City needs to consider their best investments in order to be positioned for development. Ms. Larsen spoke regarding her observation of College View and South 28th Street. Location is looked at first and how to move input and finished goods out to the marketplace. College View has good access and having freeway frontage is an advantage. It is also an advantage to have supporting and complementary businesses in the same area. There is a strong draw for labor from as far south as Roseburg which adds to the value of the College View site. Competitive industrial parks have a City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes September 8, 2014 Page 5 training component inside or adjacent, and having Lane Community College so close by is a natural fit for that training and internships. Leveraging the campus should be considered. Another advantage is having access to the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) lines and the substation. The Emerald People’s Utility Board (EPUD) is also close. Being on an interstate is very important as well as having the rail in that area, and the potential of high rail service. This site is mainly a flat topography which is ideal. She likes how College View ties directly into Glenwood. The main issue she has with this site is that it is in the flood area. There needs to be a lot more data on the flood area to provide to developers. Ms. Larsen spoke regarding the South Mill Race area. The 40 acre space owned by SUB and another public entity makes this area a good choice in that it doesn’t have too many owners to work with. There are natural amenities and things being done to preserve the water quality, which is a benefit. She is concerned with the distance of this site from the highway, as well as accessibility and truck traffic that would be going down Main Street. This would not be a good tech site. Trucks have to go across the rail and seven miles to get to I-5. That is calculated in the cost of transportation. This would be an easier site to eliminate in this process. There is a secondary access, but it goes over the mountain. Councilor Ralston said if he had a business in that area he would take 28th Street to Highway 126. Ms. Laursen said it could impact residents and traffic flow in that area. Developing the area would increase truck traffic, so they will want to look at those impacts. If they chose this area, Goshen would beat them out in terms of getting development. If they maintained the area as recreational in addition to industrial, that could draw traffic that didn’t want to go in with industrial traffic. The greatest risk of this site is the property north of that area that is currently old industrial that might not change much over the next twenty years. That could be a detriment when trying to encourage high tech, state of the art manufacturing. In the College View area, being next to the freeway goes a long way. Councilor VanGordon asked if there are any positives for this site. Ms. Laursen said she didn’t feel it had many positive attributes. In looking at how to sell the site, there are many obstacles. It is too far from everything and goes through too much old heavy industrial to be a contender for a good high tech area. That area would need to be pretty light industry. It also seems very isolated. For transportation and amenities, College View had the ability to connect to Glenwood and Lane Community College. Councilor Ralston said there are other reasons they are bringing it in to the UGB. Ms. Laursen said she was looking through each area through the lens of a developer. She noted a world class Industrial Park in south central Virginia. This site preserved open space, which was great for many reasons such as attracting talent and providing a showy entrance. It is also close to the community college. There is a lot of open space, setting, fully ready sites, and rolling hills. There is a sense of quality. Another example is the Tri-Cities Research District in Washington. This site has 1700 acres which included the following owners: Battelle; US Department of Energy; Port of Benton; Washington State University (WSU); and a private developer. This district is a 501(c) 6 non-profit corporation managed by a 15-member board of directors that includes the cities of Kennewick, Pasco, Richland, Columbia Basin College, WSU Tri-Cities, PNNL, Lockheed Martin, US Department of Energy, and State of Washington Workforce Development. There are over 7,000 jobs in this area. What is happening now is that the university is growing well; there is a high school nearby, more residential high rises, and a trail system throughout the tri-cities area. Springfield has the opportunity City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes September 8, 2014 Page 6 and vision that doesn’t take away with the quality of these spaces. They can honor what exists there and build around it with a vision that encompasses open space and amenities. The City of Springfield has a reputation of a positive business climate because of the solutions created. Now they need to look at what they are doing in their planning to be prepared to accommodate that future. There is a lot of competition and businesses have a lot more options in their strategy development. Having a vision that aligns with business strategies will put the city ahead of the competition. Important decisions today contribute to Springfield’s future to sustain economic growth and a quality community. Mayor Lundberg said this has been very helpful. She is not the first person who has said they need a vision to get people on board. Ms. Laursen said for the success of economic development they didn’t currently have the space needed. That is the reason for expansion. She said Ms. Griesel will send out the power point. She said she is always available. Mayor Lundberg said there is a transition going on with the new economic development corporation for the region. Councilor VanGordon will attend that meeting in the Mayor’s absence. Mr. Grimaldi said when staff and elected officials met with the neighbors in Seavey Loop, several people asked what the City’s vision was for that area. He asked if Council wanted a process in order to come up with a vision for these areas. Councilor Ralston said there are enough examples out in the area that gave them a place to start. Councilor Moore said it felt as though it was the Council’s responsibility to come up with that vision. To have a vision doesn’t mean it will happen, but is a possibility of what could happen. Councilor Ralston said it is easier to say what it’s not going to be, such as smoke stacks and dirty industrial. Mayor Lundberg said they need to agree whether or not they want a vision. If they do, they need to come up with something between now and the first of year. Mr. Grimaldi said that seemed like an appropriate timeline. Mayor Lundberg said at the end of the process, they would have a sense of a vision including things such as a partnership with LCC, transportation system, farms and Mt. Pisgah. She would like a small committee that could include the neighborhood in some way. Councilor Woodrow said they could use one lens initially to create the vision and bring everyone to the same place. Mayor Lundberg said it is similar to Main Street and Glenwood. They want input from the neighborhood and community members. Principal Planner Linda Pauly asked if they wanted to do this before going forward with the 2030 Plan adoption. City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes September 8, 2014 Page 7 Mr. Grimaldi said that was correct. The schedule will be moved out a little further. Ms. Pauly said it could be a couple of meetings with a focused group to pull together some high level visions and goals for the area. Mayor Lundberg said Ms. Larsen gave them good points to begin. 3. Glenwood Priority Discussion Assistant City Manager, Jeff Towery, presented the staff report on this item. During their May 27th Work Session, staff presented Council with a list of possible projects to be pursued which might further stimulate the redevelopment of Glenwood, specifically the Phase I Riverfront Area. Council identified several key projects which were further discussed during a July 21st Council meeting. These projects included the development of the Riverfront Linear Park and Path, the establishment of the Greenway Setback line, implementation of a Vertical Housing Zone, and the update of City engineering specifications and design standards. During the July 21st meeting, staff was directed to further refine the proposed projects for a future work session discussion. Mr. Towery said Council asked staff to separate the linear path and park into two projects. The Riverfront Path would help private development to set firm anchors for future development, alleviate the burden of developers having to go through the environmental process for a path, and ensure connected riverfront access. Staff recommends selecting a consultant to scope out the project, including a timeline for implementation, and strategies for coordinating public processes, property acquisition, annexation, design and environmental processes. Staff estimates it would cost about $20,000 and would take about 45 days to complete that work. One of the downsides of doing the path first is that once the linear park plans are fully designed and implemented, it could require the potential reconstruction and relocation of part of the path. The design and construction of the Riverfront Path from the I-5 Bridge to downtown Springfield would be approximately $2.5M; extending it south along McVay riverfront would be another $2.9M. Those estimates were generated as part of the creation of the City’s Transportation System Plan adopted March 2014. There is the opportunity to potentially access funds through Willamalane’s recently passed bond measure to assist. A decision by the Council to move forward will allow the Willamalane Board engage in the conversation and help set priorities for the use of those funds. Mr. Towery said companion to that work, staff identified the greenway setback as a second project. All of the properties in Glenwood along the river will be required to establish a greenway setback prior to development. Staff is recommending the City initiate that process for the entire Glenwood riverfront area. That should take about nine months and could include some consulting and staff time. In addition to being a requirement for any new development projects in the riverfront area, it also would be required for the Riverfront Path. Mr. Towery said a work session is scheduled for October to discuss the Vertical Housing Zone project. Staff would bring their analysis of this project to that meeting. The other project identified was updating the City’s specification and design guidelines. There are a number of documents that govern development and redevelopment standards and those should align with the Glenwood Refinement Plan. That work includes a comprehensive review of the City’s standards in alignment with the GRP and will take about one year for one full-time employee. Staff recommends starting that work at the end of the current construction season. He summarized the staff recommendations for each project. City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes September 8, 2014 Page 8 Councilor Ralston said establishing the greenway setback was most important to give certainty to development. It would be to the City’s advantage for the aesthetics of the area. Councilor Wylie said it would be important to coordinate with Willamalane to try to use some of their funds. She asked how the greenway setbacks would affect existing businesses. Mr. Towery said if they redeveloped their property, they would have to establish a greenway setback. If they just stayed as is, they would not need to do anything. Councilor Wylie asked how big of a setback. Mr. Towery said it varied depending on conditions of each property. Councilor Wylie asked if Council could get the criteria and the factors for determining the setback. She asked if the path would be subject to the setback. Mr. Towery said the setback influences how the path is designed and constructed. Councilor VanGordon said the setback and path are both important to development. He would like to see if we could use some of the Willamalane funds. Councilor Woodrow asked if the two projects could be separated. Mr. Towery said the greenway setback had to be set before the park could be fully designed and constructed. They would start on the greenway setback and coming up with a project plan for the path with the consultant. Before the path could be designed and constructed, the greenway setback would be completed. Councilor Woodrow said she is concerned that it could be over five years to get that path. Mr. Towery said the timeline was based on the full scoping and design of the linear park. There is a possibility it could move along more quickly. The design and construction of the path would require property acquisition which could take some time. Councilor Woodrow recalled past discussions of a 75-foot setback. Planning Manager Greg Mott said there is an existing setback from the Willamette and McKenzie Rivers that is based on the Clean Water Act and Endangered Species Act, of approximately 75 feet. The greenway setback has nothing to do with either of those two laws and is based solely on complying with the greenway qualities. The setback has been established on about five or six properties in Glenwood and a similar number of properties across the river. Those typically captured the top of the bank, or native vegetation. The setback along the river is about 35-40 feet, but the greenway boundary is at least 150 feet. Development can occur between the setback and boundary. City Attorney Mary Bridget Smith said the Glenwood Refinement Plan had originally had a setback of 75 feet. But once they went through the GRP and the settlement, they changed it to be variable depending on each property. Councilor Woodrow asked what would be the determining factors. City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes September 8, 2014 Page 9 Mr. Mott said the two most recent were based on the quality of the riverbank, as well as the presence of wildlife habitat. Councilor Moore asked if the path would be constructed within the greenway. Mr. Towery said it would primarily be between the greenway setback and the boundary. There are limited redevelopment opportunities in that area. Councilor Moore said staff had done a great job outlining the projects and how they would affect other city projects. She asked if they could get Willamalane to help offset the costs of the consultant. Mr. Towery said there are adequate urban renewal funds for the consultant work. He acknowledged the many staff members show had worked on this information. Mayor Lundberg said the direction from the Council is that the setback is important, and also design of the path. She heard from people that they wanted something that was off of Franklin Boulevard and would give people a chance to see Glenwood along the river. The City needs to take the initiative to get that going. She thanked staff for the work done and the level of detail. Staff would go forward with the greenway setbacks and hiring a consultant to look at the path. Mr. Towery said staff would report back periodically on these projects. Mayor Lundberg noted that she will be gone for the next two Council meetings. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 7:46 p.m. Minutes Recorder – Amy Sowa ______________________ Christine L. Lundberg Mayor Attest: ____________________ Amy Sowa City Recorder City of Springfield Work Session Meeting MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION MEETING OF THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL HELD MONDAY SEPTEMBER 15, 2014 The City of Springfield Council met in a work session in the Jesse Maine Meeting Room, 225 Fifth Street, Springfield, Oregon, on Monday September 15, 2014 at 6:00 p.m., with Mayor Lundberg presiding. ATTENDANCE Present were Mayor Lundberg and Councilors VanGordon, Wylie, Moore, Ralston, and Woodrow. 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. 1. Review Proposed Draft Basic Plan of the Eugene-Springfield Multi-Jurisdictional Emergency Operations Plan. Ken Vogeney, City Engineer, presented the staff report on this item. Eugene and Springfield Emergency Management, Fire, Police, and Public Works staff have been working on a new Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) for the two cities. The new EOP provides a framework for the cities to improve their coordination, collaboration and support for each other during larger community-scale emergencies, as well as aligns with current practice at the federal, state, and county levels for providing Emergency Management coordination and support. The proposed EOP is comprised of the Basic Plan and numerous annexes. The draft Basic Plan is now ready for Council review prior to formal adoption. During the May 20, 2013 work session, Council was introduced to the idea of preparing a new EOP for the two cities that will provide the framework for improved coordination, collaboration and support for each other during larger scale emergencies. At that meeting, Council expressed their support for this approach and directed staff to develop the proposed EOP. In the past, staff has requested formal Council adoption of the full EOP whenever changes were made to the document. Staff has found that this is not a very effective approach for keeping the document current. In addition, the new structure of the EOP will lend itself to more frequent changes to the numerous annexes, with only occasional changes to the Basic Plan. Therefore, staff requests Council’s direction on staff’s recommendation that only the Basic Plan be formally adopted by Council, with authority to approve annexes being delegated to the City Manager. Consultant services were used to prepare the new EOP by assisting staff with developing the EOP content, as well as the overall structure, formatting and editing of the document. These services were primarily provided by the Oregon Office of Emergency Management using a grant from the Office of Grants and Training, United States Department of Homeland Security. Additional consultant services were procured by Eugene to help manage the plan development process, with Springfield contributing $4,950 (25%) toward the cost of these services. The EOC plan as proposed is compiled of five elements that can function as stand-alone pieces. The first piece is the Basic Plan which includes the overall information needed to make the other annexes City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes September 15, 2014 Page 2 and appendices work. Another section is Emergency Support Functions which is a different approach for delivering emergency services. The ESF were adopted by FEMA, the State of Oregon, Lane County, and Eugene and Springfield. Support annexes, incident annexes and operational annexes are checklists for staff to use for delivering emergency response services. Mr. Vogeney reviewed the Basic Plan. It was becoming more of a common practice for government agencies to only publish their Basic Plans for the public because it includes information that community would need. Many of the annexes were checklists on how staff personnel did the work, including phone numbers and contact information. Making those available on the public side may provide information to those that might want to disrupt services. Those annexes will be available on the internal website for staff to view. The purpose of the Basic Plan is to describe our legal authorities and why we are doing emergency response work. It also includes the context of how Springfield and Eugene will work together. The Basic Plan describes roles and responsibilities from the Council throughout the City organization. It includes how each agency activates the emergency operations centers (EOC), and how those centers can work together. Mr. Vogeney said the Basic Plan included six chapters: Introduction; Situation and Planning Assumptions; Roles and Responsibilities; Concept of Operations; Command and Control; and Plan Development, Maintenance, and Implementation. He gave a brief description of each. He acknowledged and praised the City of Eugene staff for their work on this plan. They have done the majority of the background work on this, and have volunteered their Emergency Manager to keep track of all of the changes, incorporate those changes, and distribute them out to the rest of the group. Mr. Vogeney said there is a method for how the response services are delivered. The standard functions provided under FEMA’s guidance are the first 15 listed in the chart. Staff at Eugene and Springfield felt the last four items were important to add. The chart served several purposed: 1) to list all of the emergency support functions (ESF); and 2) which department will be assigned a primary responsibility, and which department will be assigned a support role for delivering those services. He provided an example. The support annexes are currently under development. City of Eugene staff is taking the lead on a debris management annex. Staff is building a new damage assessment annex, and will begin work on an employee services annex. He described what each of the annexes would include. Several annexes (Hazardous Materials, Terrorism, and Infectious Disease) are in the current emergency management plan, but are being re-written into more of a checklist format. There are five operational annexes: EOC Activation/Operations; EOC Position Roles and Responsibilities; Disaster Declaration Process; Leadership Communication Plan; and Incident Command System. Mr. Vogeney said a plan was prepared under contract by the State of Oregon with Ecology and Environment. Using this plan as a starting point, the cities put in a lot of work and coordination to bring the two cities together to create this Emergency Management Plan. Eugene hired a consultant and Springfield paid 25% of the contract in the amount of $4925 plus staff time. The document is set up electronically with links imbedded, and will be updated electronically. Councilor Wylie asked for an explanation of whole community planning, and access and functional needs population. Mr. Vogeney said the whole community planning is a concept that FEMA requires in all of the emergency planning work for the cities. That is to include input from throughout the community. That is part of the reason staff is bringing this to Council. During this process, they have invited other partner agencies to participate in numerous meetings and provide input. The access and functional needs is to recognize that there are people in the Springfield community with access and functional City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes September 15, 2014 Page 3 needs that must be addressed as part of the planning work. As they continue to move forward, the goal is to reach out to those citizens and bring them into the planning efforts. Councilor Moore asked about Lane County’s role in a disaster. Mr. Vogeney said Lane County has its own Emergency Operations Plan with many of the same pieces as that of the two cities. The city plan has things specific to the two cities. They spend a lot of time with Lane County’s emergency manager on coordination of different activities. Next week there is an exercise at the Eugene Airport and Lane County will be involved in that training. This plan is focused on the two cities, but is very much connected to Lane County’s plan. Staff from Lane County participated in the planning meetings for this plan. Councilor Moore asked if it would be a seamless operation between all jurisdictions. Mr. Vogeney said the goal is to be more seamless, and they are working on ways to improve that, including training exercises. This Plan is new and the majority of staff from both cities has not yet received training on this plan. Councilor VanGordon said he was pleased to see that a printed version of the plan would be on hand. He asked who was responsible to declare an emergency for property outside the City limits, but inside the urban grown boundary (UGB) - Lane County or the City. Mr. Vogeney said Lane County is legally responsible for that area. Because the County does not have the resources for much of the response work, they contact the cities for support per the intergovernmental agreement. Councilor VanGordon asked where the Fire Chief would report. Mr. Vogeney said if an emergency occurs, he will report to the EOC in whichever city he is in at the time. One of his other command staff will staff the other EOC. Councilor VanGordon asked if the fire department would act together or separately. Mr. Vogeney said they would respond as one. The Swanson Mill fire was an excellent exercise in regard to the emergency response and communications work. All of the coordination for the Fire Department was occurring in Eugene at the 9-1-1 center even though the event happened in Springfield. They brought in rural agencies to backfill the Eugene stations. It worked well. Councilor VanGordon asked about adoption of the Plan. Mr. Vogeney said his recommendation would be for Council to adopt a resolution that would approve the Basic Plan and delegate authority to the City Manager to approve and execute the annexes that go with the Plan. Those portions of the Plan would be changing more regularly than the Basic Plan. Councilor Woodrow said she is comfortable with that approach. Councilor Ralston said the State and local plans must all work together. Local jurisdictions do take precedent over the State, but can ask for help. City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes September 15, 2014 Page 4 Councilor Wylie noted Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans and how unprepared they were for that disaster. She asked if the cities’ emergency plan went into the detail of evacuating people and providing food and water. Mr. Vogeney said there was a lot of discussion about those details, but they were not yet in writing. There are a number of things that had been identified as part of updating the multi-jurisdiction natural hazard mitigation plan for Eugene and Springfield. He will bring that to Council for approval near the end of the year. Many community groups were brought together to talk about vulnerability by area, how they would address food supplies, etc. They need to look at how city government can influence the private sector in order to support the community. Similar discussions will be held with partners regarding fuel, water, and electricity. Councilor Wylie said she was in San Diego when they had the fires and had to evacuate and take care of the needs of over a million people. Because of their experience, they did very well. It is very important to have answers because citizens will come to Police, Fire and the front offices looking for help. The role of the city is to encourage those answers. Councilor Moore said educating the general public to be prepared is also important. She asked if that was part of this plan and who had that responsibility. Mr. Vogeney said that is part of the Emergency Management Program and September is National Preparedness Month. Springfield has an emergency management website that has a lot of information for people to prepare themselves. Springfield and Eugene host public gatherings and inviting the public to hear preparedness talks. They also have Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) trainings at no costs. Neither Springfield nor Eugene has addressed the evacuation planning issue other than to say something needs to be done. Lane County has started that work for a large scale mass evacuation for the central Lane County area. That work will be added to the city’s emergency plan once completed. Councilor Wylie said this was especially important to her. When she ran Willamette Family Treatment Center, they often had about 100 people staying with them and she needed to know how to get them to safety and provide for them in an emergency. There are many levels to consider. She appreciated the work they were doing and encouraged him to push for answers to these questions. 2. Enabling Amendments to the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan (“Metro Plan”). Len Goodwin, Department of Public Works Director, presented the staff report on this item. He introduced Emily Jarome, special counsel to the City of Springfield and one of the main authors of the document. HB 3337, adopted by the 2007 Legislative Assembly, requires the City of Springfield and the City of Eugene each adopt separate urban growth boundaries. The City of Springfield adopted such a separate boundary in 2011. The City of Eugene is planning to adopt such a boundary as part of its Envision Eugene process, now underway. Oregon Revised Statutes Chapter 197 requires, among other things, that a city adopt a comprehensive plan applicable to its Urban Growth Boundary. Current provisions of the Metro Plan are inconsistent with that requirement in that they subordinate local land use plans to the Metro Plan. Accordingly, it is necessary that the Metro Plan be amended so that each city has the ability to independently replace provisions of the Metro Plan with separately adopted local Comprehensive Plans over the next several years. This will not affect the ability to retain those provisions of the Metro Plan which the cities agree are regional in nature, particularly those elements City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes September 15, 2014 Page 5 which do not regulate land use within a UGB. Staff of each city and of Lane County have jointly prepared amendments to accomplish that purpose. This has been done with the assistance of Special Counsel Emily N. Jerome. These amendments will allow each city to proceed to adopt elements of local Comprehensive Plans on their own schedules and have those elements take precedence over the similar Metro Plan provisions as they are adopted by each city (and co-adopted by Lane County as appropriate). Mr. Goodwin said Springfield is not prepared to adopt a Comprehensive Plan today. That project will take several years. The residential element has been adopted, and the Council is in the process of adopting the Urbanization and Economic Elements and the possibility of an urban growth boundary expansion. Those are only two elements of a full plan. To make it possible for both cities to proceed in an orderly fashion, staff feels that a change in the precedence role is needed. As each city moves ahead to adopt part of its new Comprehensive Plan, that plan takes precedence over the equivalent in the Metro Plan. That allows both cities to continue to rely on the Metro Plan for those things they haven’t dealt with yet, but allows each city the independence to make their own long term planning decisions. Council will have a number of opportunities to look at this and discuss it in more detail. A joint Planning Commission meeting of Springfield, Eugene and Lane County is tentatively scheduled for October 23, and a joint elected officials meeting with the same jurisdictions is tentatively scheduled for November 10. Tonight is an opportunity for Council to see the document, review it and ask any questions now or during the joint meeting. The first step in this process is for the Council to initiate the change in the Metro Plan during their regular meeting. This is an exciting opportunity to make a major change in how this region thinks about how the cities relate to each other, and is very important for Springfield. Councilor VanGordon asked if text would be removed from the Metro Plan as each jurisdiction adopted those sections separately. Mr. Goodwin said part of the adoption process for the City would be to include a section stating that ‘these sections in the Metro Plan no longer apply to Springfield’. Once both cities adopt the same sections independently, action will be taken to delete those sections from the Metro Plan. Ms. Jerome said it is specified in the Plan. The jurisdiction taking action after the other jurisdiction on a particular section has the authority to delete that section on their own based on provisions in Chapter IV. Councilor Moore said it sounds like there is more involved in the separation of the UGB’s than originally thought. Mr. Goodwin said it was a change in a relationship. It is very unlikely they will ever eliminate a regional plan, but are working out a process where the Metro Plan will become something that does not constitute a land use regulation. It will regulate things like emergency management, or economic development as an example. It is true that there are a lot of things that followed separating the UGB. Councilor Moore said there has been an immense amount of work on this, and it sounds like that will continue for several years. Mr. Duey provided next steps for both items discussed. Mr. Vogeney will bring forward the Basic Plan (Emergency Management), separate from the annexes, for adoption sometime this fall. For the Metro Plan amendments, Mr. Goodwin will bring forward a motion during the regular meeting to City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes September 15, 2014 Page 6 initiate those changes. That will allow him to notify the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD). ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 6:43 p.m. Minutes Recorder – Amy Sowa ______________________ Christine L. Lundberg Mayor Attest: ____________________ Amy Sowa City Recorder