HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/16/2001 Work Session
.
MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION
OF THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL
HELD ON MONDAY, APRIL 16,2001.
The Springfield City Council met in Work Session at Springfield City Hall, Jesse Maine Meeting
Room, 225 Fifth Street, Springfield, at 6:00 p.m., with Mayor Leiken presiding.
ATTENDANCE
Present were Mayor Leiken, Councilors Ballew, Fitch, Hatfield, Lundberg, Ralston and
Simmons. Also present were City Manager Mike Kelly, Assistant City Manager Gino Grimaldi,
City Recorder Kim Krebs, City Attorney Joe Leahy, Police Chief Jerry Smith, Public Works
Director Dan Brown, Development Services Director Cynthia Pappas, Finance Director Bob
Duey, Len Goodwin, Susanna Julber, Al Peroutka.
Guests: Ken Hamm, Graham Carry, from Lane Transit District (LTD).
1. Bus Rapid Transit (BRn Route Options.
.
Traffic Manager Nick Arnis and Greg Mort were present for the staff report. Mr. Arnis said the
requested action from this meeting is approving the BRT concept alignment and downtown
station locations, and discuss possible agenda items for the May 14th joint work session with the
L TD Board of Directors. He said the discussion points to cover in this work session are council's
various issues or objections with BRT, conditions for approval, and specifically the Henderson
Street location,
Mr. Arnis provided a brief history and background surrounding this issue. He said the city has
coordinated with L TD as it relates to BRT for the past two years. He said Councilor Fitch
represents the city at the BRT Steering Committee and staff serves on the Technical Advisory
Committee. Council met with L TD Board members during the fall and winter of 1999 to discuss
alignment issues in the downtown segment of the BRT project. He said during that council work
session council supported six requirements regarding BRT:
· Maintain or improve economic vitality of the BRT project area (e.g" no loss of parking
or access);
· Maintain or improve local street circulation for all modes (e.g., no new dead end
streets) ;
· Maintain or improve mobility and decrease delay for all modes;
· Be consistent with long-range transportation and land use visions for project area;
· Thoroughly address technical questions and issues; and
· Include the City as an equal partner in developing BRT, including sharing BRT funding
for involved City staff.
.
Mr. Arnis said in January the Environment Assessment (EA) was released and city staff
submitted extensive and detailed comments about coordination and mitigation. The primary staff
concerns were:
· Continue to coordinate with staff, Planning Commission and City Council;
· Address council direction from September 20, 1999 Council Memorandums and Minutes;
· Advance the Glenwood Alternative proposal by Councilor Fitch;
· Assess transportation deficiencies;
. Springfield City Council
Work Session - April 16, 2001
Page - 2
.
· Assess transportation deficiencies;
· Include mitigation at intersections that have transit stops or signal improvements;
· Expand Traffic section in the EA; and
· Include typical cross-sections in the EA.
Mr, Arnis said the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing and deliberated in work and
regular session in February and March. The public hearing was held on March 6, and a majority
of those testifying were Glenwood residents and property owners. He said they primarily spoke
in opposition to a fixed guide way BRT system on Franklin Boulevard. Their concerns centered
on the ability to use the median for turn moves, especially for trucks. He said on March 20, the
Planning Commission made and unanimously passed five intended as recommendations to the
City Council. They are:
· "The fast lane option" (mixed traffic option in Glenwood);
. "The Henderson Station location";
· "To take no position of the location of the Brooklyn Station";
· "That if L TD plans to go to the guide way in the Glenwood area, that L TD engages in a
public process or a MOD be established";
· ''That if Brooklyn A venue Station is chosen as the preferred site, that the proposed design
for Station B be the design "b", the eastbound left turn alternative".
.
Mr. Amis said at that point staff met with Mayor and Councilor's in two on two meeting sessions
where a number of points were discussed, He said those points are regarding how this gets
implemented; what is the coordination; what is the mitigation. He said council also raised a
question about what would happen in the future, and how does the city evaluate BRT, and where
we go from here.
Mr. Arnis said what L TD would like is approval from the City of Springfield to move forward
with the project. He said this is a commitment that L TD made to the city is that they would
obtain approval from the council before going forward with the BRT alignment. LTD would like
the approval before June so they can get the "go ahead" with the Federal Transit Authority.
(FT A), to access the money and move ahead with the project, and performing final designs, and
actually implementing the project. He said tonight provides an opportunity to discuss what
council's issues are surrounding BRT and package those issues up so they can be presented to
L TD for the May 14 joint work session. Any conditions for approval that council may have, and
specifically if council wants to discuss the Henderson Street location
Mayor Leiken thanked city staff and members of L TD for their professionalism and the fact we
may not have agreed on every aspect, but appreciate the working together attitude.
Councilor Hatfield asked if any of the councilors had objections to BRT conceptually.
Councilor Simmons asked if we have received a response to the questions from the EA in
January.
Mr. Amis said they have received a response, however not a formal response,
.
Springfield City Council
Work Session - April 16, 2001
Page - 3
.
Graham Carry from L TO, said L TO has to respond to all the questions that have been raised to
the FT A, and that is who L TO responded to. He said the responses would be contained in the
final EA.
Councilor Hatfield asked if Councilor Simmons could receive a response to specific qu;estions,
Mr. Carry said yes.
Councilor Lundberg asked if council is only conceptually agreeing to, does that mean downtown
Eugene, to downtown Springfield.
Councilor Fitch said yes,
There was discussion regarding the City of Springfield's degree of interest ends at 1-5.
Councilor Ralston said he isn't exactly convinced the mixed traffic and having the stations in the
center are appropriate. He has concerns regarding pedestrian traffic, and attempting to cross
traffic. He said a better solution might be somewhere in the middle with a possible off-site pull
off that would be away from the main flow of traffic, especially the Henderson Street Station
.
Councilor Fitch said we have come a long way from the beginning with a pilot project. She said
we are looking ahead 20-50 years ahead and not just today, What would be the most efficient,
and what would encourage people from getting out of their cars and onto the BRT system, She
said there is a need to keep this as efficient as a vehicle would be, at least to keep it as close as we
are able to. To say it has been a give and take and an emerging of ideas has been true. She said
as far as the concept, we do have a plan; she doesn't want us to become a Seattle or Los Angeles.
She said her understanding of what the city would be agreeing to is that we continue to work
through the process.
, Mr, Arnis said the alignment will come down Franklin Boulevard and Glenwood, and will
proceed down to the South A Station. He said how that looks specifically and how it will look at
the intersections, and signal operations will work have yet to be determined. There have been
some ideas, and they are being evaluated currently, But an Intergovernmental Agreement, or
Cooperative Approval Agreement would have to be signed between the City of Springfield and
LTO.
Councilor Ralston asked if the city has to agree to the stations be placed in the middle.
Mr. Amis said he believes the city has a lot of discretion, and flexibility,
Councilor Hatfield asked if it would be possible to have for discussion at the May 14th work
session elevations as well as a street cross sections and how they may look, in order to be better
able to visualize how it might look. He asked for a very brief summary of how other cities have
put those types of stations in the middle of boulevards.
.
Greg Mort said it also fair to say that the ultimate test for safety and efficiency and operations of
the stations in the right-of-way has to be agreed to by the technical people who will be evaluating
that. He said if city staff says that we cannot support the station in this configuration or design, it
will be necessary to go back to the drawing board. He said staff would not recommend this if
there were design or safety flaws,
Springfield City Council
Work Session - April 16, 2001
Page - 4
.
Councilor Fitch said another Key partner is ODOT. She said they have agreed to the mixed use,
but she is not sure that they have not signed off on the stations in the middle.
Councilor Simmons said he strongly supports the concept, but not the detail. He said the
Henderson site is problematic because of safety and egress in the process. Those sites in
Glenwood may very well shift with staff influence as well as the technical reality. The rider ship
numbers are not in this area, he believes they are in other areas of the system. He said he would
like to see a more defined pattern around the Henderson Street Station. He said we need to
protect the interest of the property owners, facilitate the transportation in the most agreeable
fashion that we can.
Councilor Lundberg said she is supportive of the 6 requirements as listed in the packet. She has
concerns surrounding safety around stations; that is reduces congestion, increasing rider ship, and
routes that go where people live and where they want to go. She also said she has concerns about
the impact on local neighborhood.
Councilor Fitch as a policy making body what we are asked to do to agree with the concept, and
allow staff to do their work. We are giving the direction to proceed, and let staff do their expert
work.
.
Councilor Simmons said he has faith in the staff of the City of Springfield and L TD to agree and
build a system that will accommodate all of the issues that council has concerns about. He said
develop an agreement, and stick to the terms of the agreement.
Mayor Leiken reminded council there would be a joint work session with L TO to discuss the
BRT Route Options on May 14th.
2, I-5/Beltline Interchange Update.
Transportation Manager Nick Amis was present for the staffreport. He said tonight members of
Gateway Owners for Positive Change (GOPC), and members of the Game Farm neighborhood
association. He said Brian Barnett would be joining in this discussion, as well as Karl Wieseke,
from OOOT.
Mr. Amis said the requested action for this work session is to provide direction to Councilor
Lundberg who represents council on the 1-5 Beltline Oecision Team (BOT) to advance the
couplet alternative into the draft Environmental Assessment (EA), He said the process to date is
months ago the BOT met and provided information to Councilor Lundberg, and at that meeting
they provided direction to go forward with one alternative for the interchange, He provided maps
for reference and highlighted the different alternatives that are referenced in the Council Briefmg
Memorandum (CBM), Attachment A.
.
Mr. Arnis said the BOT would be meeting on April 19, to review the couplet alternative for the
GatewayIBeltline intersection, He said at that meeting OOOT will brief the BDT about the most
recent alternative for that intersection, and will present their findings as it relates to this
alternative, They will also request the BDT to include it in the draft EA with the other
alternatives selected by the BOT at its last meeting on December 15, 2000.
. "
. Springfield City Council
Work Session - April 16, 2001
Page - 5
.
Mr. Arnis said the preliminary analysis by staff of the new couplet alternative for the
Gateway/Beltline intersection is positive. He said the couplet reduces property impacts and
improves traffic operations and safety. He said this alternative also provides better access and
connectivity to all parcels around the intersection than the other intersection alternatives.
Mr, Amis said with this alternative, there would be impact to two of the businesses, however the
coup let alternative appears to have the least negative impact on the businesses, and appears to
work well for the traffic operation.
Mr. Arnis explained the process that would take place; the BDT will meet on April 19th, and will
then move forward to the draft EA. At that point there would be a more in-depth study, which
includes technical analysis for traffic, social economic issues, etc. It would then come back to the
City Council and to the Planning Commission as the draft EA is produced, He said he predicts
mid summer for an actual document. He said staff recommends that the city assume more
involvement and ownership of the interchange project during this EA process. He said staffwill
be working closely with ODOT during the EA review and proposing to council at a later time
ideas for holding open houses, and public hearings, concerning the draft EA. He said FHW A
Federal Highway Administration would be placing final closure possibly in January of 2002.
Councilor Hatfield said there are four basic issues:
.
· Cannot eliminate two out of three gas stations. He said the mix of businesses,
restaurants, and hotels are necessary to generate the business that is needed. He said as a
traveler on 1-5 observing signs for gas stations are a necessary tool, otherwise travelers
will not exit. It is important to try and maintain at least two, ifnot three of those stations.
· The left hand tumgoing north is important for the easy on and easy off access. He said
this is his favorite of the alternatives. He said without that left turn you miss all of that
northern business. He said easy off easy on access from 1-5 is important.
· The signal at Hutton and Beltline shows a 3-way intersection. He questioned why ODOT
was allowing a 3-way intersection, and thought the standard was a 4-way intersection,
He would like to see a 4-way intersection to provide access into the shopping center at
the north.
· Possibly move the couplet north, and try to save Spencer's Restaurant, and maybe a gas
station.
Councilor Fitch said the gas stations to the north is a real concern. Make sure this isn't so refmed
that they believe that this design is final. She hoped who ever is looking at this alternative knows
that this can be modified and shifted to possibly allow saving some of the businesses. She asked
about the numbers listed on PPE estimates, and are they considered into the mix of information
that is being provided for the meeting.
Mr. Amis said what is being looked at for this intersection is a phased approach. And confirmed
the numbers are based on the PPE that will be built
.
Councilor Ballew asked if all of the options rely on splitting the north and south traffic off of
Gateway?
4 t I, 1.
Springfield City Council
Work Session - April 16, 2001
Page - 6
.
Mr. Amis said the jug handles do not, there will still be an option of traveling north.
There was discussion regarding how the traffic would flow in each of the options.
Councilor Simmons said all three of the alternatives are half stepping, He said he wished it
would have been developed correctly in the beginning approximately 20 years ago, and was
disappointed to see where we are today. He questions whether this alternative would work at
peak hours, but said staffwill have to live with the results. He said he has not seen a better
alternative to choose from and said this alternative was marginally ok.
Councilor Fitch said the design appears in the alternative before them tonight is that there is a
right-of-way that would be vacated with the couplet, She said she hoped that the Development
Services Department is working the owner of the gas station to determine a new location. She
said if one of the concerns is to keep the mix of restaurants and gas stations, it will be important
to find a new location that would keep them in key areas.
There was discussion regarding the different ideas that would be fmalized in the EA.
There was discussion why the fly-over was not recommended nor advanced by the BDT.
.
Councilor Lundberg said the bottom line is we are stuck what the design happens to be, but trying
to make it work traffic wise actually eliminates much of the businesses, that it appears you are
doing the complete opposite of what you were originally trying to accomplish. She said what the
BDT has been struggling with is how to keep integrity throughout the process, and the couplet
alternative seems to be the closest, She said she wanted to summarize what she heard from her
fellow councilors, is that they support the idea, and the general direction for her is to carry this
idea forward, and do what she is able to make it work as much as possible with as much integrity
as they are able to.
Councilor Simmons thanked Councilor Lundberg for her time and energy, as well as staffs'
efforts.
3, Pioneer Parkway Extension (PPE) Northern Link.
Transportation Manager Nick Amis and Transportation Planning Engineer Masood Mirza were
present for the staff report. Mr. Amis began by saying there would be a public hearing on this
issue later in the regular session.
Mr. Arnis said the process to date is that on February 21, council adopted the PPE alignment to
the Lane County Board of Commissioners for their approval for the Gateway Refmement Plan.
He said at that time Commissioner Dwyer and the Board asked that we explore and investigate
and possibly amend the PPE alignment to include a northern link before the Board approved the
alignment, He said the Board's objective is to mitigate traffic impacts at the Patrician Mobile
Home Park driveway, and to provide better connectivity to the Special Light Industrial Area. He
said Council authorized staff to create planning level options, to evaluate them based on cost,
natural and social constraints, connectivity and traffic operations, and then to present them to the
public.
.
Mr. Amis highlighted the six different options that were presented to the public at an open house
on April 4th. He said approximately fifty-five property owners and residents attended and offered
~ .' .. .
.
.
.
Springfield City Council
Work Session - April 16, 2001
Page - 7
comments and questions about the options. He said 34 people responded on an option preference
survey form. Twenty-three chose Option #3, six chose Option #2, four chose Option #1 and one
chose Option #5,
Mr. Arnis provided information regarding the impacts to the property owners and homes; he
spoke about the advantages and disadvantages of the different options, and highlighted the
information that was provided in Attachment A, Council Briefmg Memorandum,
Mr. Arnissaid staff recommends Option #3 because it was favored at the open house, it improves
traffic operations, safety and connectivity in the area at a reasonable cost of $730,000.
There was discussion regarding the different options.
Councilor Lundberg said she would prefer to look at both Options#2 and #3, and asked council to
please consider both of those options,
There was discussion regarding those two options.
Council consensus to save their comments until after the public hearing later in the regular
meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 6:58 p.m.
'"
Minutes Recorder - Kim Krebs
~~
Kim Krebs, City Recorder