HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 03 Council Minutes AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY Meeting Date: 7/6/2015
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. May 18, 2015 – Regular Meeting
b. May 26, 2015 – Work Session c. June 1, 2015 – Work Session
DISCUSSION/ FINANCIAL
IMPACT:
None.
City of Springfield
Regular Meeting
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF
THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL HELD MONDAY MAY 18, 2015
The City of Springfield Council met in regular session in the Council Chambers, 225 Fifth Street, Springfield, Oregon, on Monday, May 18, 2015 at 7:00 p.m., with Mayor Lundberg presiding.
ATTENDANCE Present were Mayor Lundberg and Councilors VanGordon, Wylie, Moore, Woodrow and Pishioneri.
Also present were City Manager Gino Grimaldi, Assistant City Manager Jeff Towery, City Attorney Mary Bridget Smith, Administrative Assistant AJ Ripka and members of the staff.
Councilor Ralston was absent (excused).
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Mayor Lundberg.
SPRINGFIELD UPBEAT
CONSENT CALENDAR
1. Claims
a. Approval of the April 2015, Disbursements for Approval
2. Minutes
a. April 13, 2015 – Council Goal Setting Session
3. Resolutions
a. RESOLUTION NO. 2015-13 – A RESOLUTION OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SPRINGFIELD AMENDING THE MASTER SCHEDULE OF
MISCELLANEOUS FEES AND CHARGES, RATES, PERMITS AND LICENSES IN
ORDER TO INCLUDE THE DOWNTOWN PARKING PROGRAM AND ALL ASSOCIATED CHARGES, RATES AND PERMITS.
4. Ordinances
a. ORDINANCE NO. 6337 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 6 VEHICLES IN
TRAFFIC SECTION 6.020 “RESTRICTED IN TIME” AND SECTION 6.060 “ENFORCEMENT” OF THE SPRINGFIELD MUNICIPAL CODE.
5. Other Routine Matters
a. Endorsement of Liquor License Application for McKenzie River Tap House, Located at 5818 Main Street, Springfield, OR.
b. Endorsement of Liquor License Application for Noodle N Thai Restaurant, Located at 553
Main Street, Springfield, OR.
City of Springfield
Council Regular Meeting Minutes
May 18, 2015 Page 2
c. Endorsement of Liquor License Application for Lee’s Mongolian Grill, Located at 1820
Olympic Street, Springfield, OR. d. Authorize City Manager to Sign a Contract Extension with Life Flight Network, LLC to
Provide Inter-facility Critical Care Ambulance Transport Services from the Springfield Ambulance Service Area (ASA#5) to Other Locations.
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR WOODROW WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR WYLIE TO APPROVE THE CONSENT CALENDAR. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 5 FOR AND 0 AGAINST (1 ABSENT – RALSTON).
ITEMS REMOVED
PUBLIC HEARINGS - Please limit comments to 3 minutes. Request to speak cards are available at both entrances. Please present cards to City Recorder. Speakers may not
yield their time to others.
1. Main-McVay Transit Study.
RESOLUTION NO. 2015-14 – A RESOLUTION OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF SPRINGFIELD ACCEPTING THE SPRINGFIELD MAIN-MCVAY
TRANSIT STUDY
Community Development Manager for Transportation, Tom Boyatt, presented the staff report on this
item. Council met in a work session on May 4 to review and discuss the Study recommendations as developed by the Stakeholder Advisory Committee and recommended to the Council and LTD Board by the Main Street Projects Governance Team.
The Study recommendation is to move a narrowed range of potential solutions into a Locally Preferred
Alternative (LPA) process for in depth detail and analysis. The purpose of the LPA process is to
select a single alternative that is locally supported and can move forward to NEPA approvals prior to competing for state and federal funding.
On the Main Street portion of the corridor the narrowed range of alternatives that are recommended for further detail and analysis are: no build, enhanced bus service, and bus rapid transit. On the
McVay Highway portion of the corridor the narrowed range of alternatives for deeper analysis are no build and enhanced bus service.
Council is asked to take public comments on the recommendations and consider whether or not to move the project forward to the LPA stage. Should Council choose to advance the project, a resolution endorsing the LPA process can be adopted.
The LPA work would be paid for by LTD and take about 3 – 6 months to complete and would result in a project level decision for the specific transit improvements to pursue in the Main – McVay Corridor.
Mr. Boyatt referred to two documents that had been provided to the Council. The first was a final
summary report of public comments received between the publishing of the final summary report and
the May 11, 2105 work session. The second is a final summary report of public comments received from May 11 through May 18, 2015. He also referred to Attachment 3 in the agenda packet which was
the list, as requested by Council on May 4th, of Frequent Transit Network projects LTD is beginning
the Level 1 screening process to assess and prioritize through the Moving Ahead project. He noted
City of Springfield
Council Regular Meeting Minutes
May 18, 2015 Page 3
that the Main – McVay Corridor has now completed Level 1 Screening. There was an article in the
Register Guard last week regarding the Moving Ahead study and looking at the seven corridors to come up with four corridors for further analysis. The Moving Ahead process is moving ahead on a
path somewhat parallel to Main-McVay Transit, but it will be a year or so before the four selected corridors reach the point that the Main-McVay study would if Council chose to go forward. Each time LTD comes to Springfield to do business with the City, they each learn from each other. LTD is taking
the process that was developed for Main-McVay and applying it to a broader number of corridors in the metro area.
Mayor Lundberg opened the public hearing.
1. George Grier, Springfield, OR. Mr. Grier serves as Chair of the Lane Area Commission on Transportation, but tonight he is speaking on behalf of himself as a participant in the Main Street Corridor Visioning process, the Commercial Industrial Buildable Lands Study, and the
Residential Lands Study, all of which have laid out a clear and exciting future for Main Street. Main Street is the heart of Springfield’s future. The Residential Lands Study envisions that most of Springfield’s high density residential growth will occur along the corridor. A
significant portion of the City’s commercial growth and redevelopment will happen on Main Street. The corridor vision has provided a community-backed template for how that might
occur, and the Main-McVay transit study maps out the framework that will provide the
foundation for all of it. This is truly an example of “if you build it, they will come”. The exciting transformation of Glenwood as transit-oriented redevelopment will provide a glimpse
of what a robust transit corridor along Main Street can mean for Springfield’s future. He
encouraged Council to adopt the Study enthusiastically. One thing that Springfield’s urban growth analysis has clearly shown is that regardless of the options, Springfield’s future
physical boundaries are constrained in all directions, and providing urban services in any
direction will be extraordinarily expensive, particularly compared to enhancements within the existing UGB. Investment in transit along Main Street will catalyze redevelopment and
provide significant return and increase in property values in proportion to the investment. 2. Bree Nicolella, UO Student, Eugene, OR Ms. Nicolella is a junior in the Department of
Public Policy Planning and Management at the University of Oregon (UO). She is also a
project coordinator with the Sustainable Cities initiative, whose Sustainable City Year (SCY) program engaged with Springfield in 2011-2012. Today she is here as a representative of
students of the UO. She had multiple students reach out to her when they found out about this project; students who have lived in Springfield, currently live in Springfield, or will soon work in Springfield. She read some of the students’ testimonies, all of which were in favor of the
transit study. She noted that the City of Springfield is expecting thousands of new residents by 2030. Young people and families are moving to Springfield, excited to live in a city with great
schools, wonderful people and strong neighborhoods. Having a great frequent transit network
in Springfield only further strengthens these wonderful qualities and provides a valuable amenity to residents, both old and new.
3. Bob Choquette, Springfield, OR. Mr. Choquette works for the UO and rides the EmX to and from work every day. He expressed his support for the Main-McVay study and the three
recommendations. The first recommendation is to advance as the most promising transit solution, the second is to further study the most promising transit solutions with the intent of identifying the locally preferred solutions, and the third is to study additional pedestrian
crossings. In addition, it’s important to improve traffic safety for all modes on the streets of
Springfield. He supports the idea of exploring EmX as a path to get Federal Transit
City of Springfield
Council Regular Meeting Minutes
May 18, 2015 Page 4
Administration funding that can be used to not only improve transit, but also safety along
Main Street in Springfield.
4. Brett Rowlett, Eugene, OR. Mr. Rowlett is Director of Governmental and Community Relations for Lane Community College (LCC) and also served on the Main-McVay Stakeholder Advisory Committee (SAC). He encouraged the Council to support the
recommendations before them. The Main-McVay SAC was a mix of citizens selected at large, and those representing education, business, and interest groups. The SAC met roughly ten
times over the past year, they read the materials and came to the meeting prepared, and did not
have a problem sharing their opinions. Members asked staff many questions in order to get information, and staff was great to work with. They did not enter this process with a
predetermined outcome. In the end, there was almost full group consensus on what is before
the Council. The SAC encourages more study and feels the City of Springfield could benefit from that study. They forwarded both the bus rapid transit (BRT) and enhanced bus options
for Main Street to Thurston, and an enhanced bus service for the McVay area to LCC. Both
also include the no-build option. They did not feel the ridership level justified BRT from McVay to LCC at this time, but encourage the Council to look at how transit services could be
used to serve the future residential and commercial needs as the UGB expands. Students at LCC are very excited about the idea of transit improvements, both in the City of Springfield and out to campus. The students like the convenience and reliability of the BRT. The average
age of student at LCC is 27, many of those young or single parents, and convenience is what they count on for transit.
5. Dani Wright, Springfield, OR. Ms. Wright is from McKenzie Feed and Pet Supply on Main Street. Her concern from the beginning was that her driveway would be blocked. The property she owns now is blocked by LTD so she had to get access on either side of her property to get
permanent access. They have semi-trucks that need to access the business every day of the week, supplying goods. If this moves forward, it needs to retain access for businesses to get
their products. Her customers need to be able to access her business to get the products they
need for their pets and properties. Many of her customers come from out of town, so they need to support those people and not block their access.
6. Doris Towery, Springfield, OR. Ms. Towery did serve for 6 years as a Board Member for LTD so has first-hand knowledge of this process. She thanked Mayor Lundberg and Councilor
Woodrow for leaving such a robust process in our community and engaging our community to make sure all views and perspectives were included, and to make sure we had the opportunity to see all sides before making a recommendation. She strongly encouraged Council to move
further study of this forward. She is a Springfield resident and lives and works on this
corridor. Each day as she drives or rides the bus to and from work, she sees the people who are utilizing the transit system on that line, as well as seeing the number of patients at the medical
facility where she works have access to quality healthcare because of the EmX system that runs in front of their organization. She was able to sit in on the listening sessions last summer to hear from business owners and residents. Overwhelmingly people were excited to hear the
City look for opportunities, not just to improve the bus system, but also the safety and access along the corridor. Her children are in middle school and high school, and speaking with
parents and students has heard support for this study, and to find options to improve the
service. The #11 LTD line is the most productive line on the system, so looking at options to improve that system along his corridor making it easier for people to access our community
and the Eugene community is critical. The study is recommending a more detailed analysis for
potential transit solutions. It is important that they continue that analysis and look at those
City of Springfield
Council Regular Meeting Minutes
May 18, 2015 Page 5
options. It is also important as they look at those options to consider going after federal
funding. She noted the advantage and benefit transit had in Gateway and the number of jobs affected. She asked Council to support this moving forward.
7. Emma Newman, Eugene, OR. Ms. Newman served on the Main-McVay SAC along with citizens, business and property owners, advocacy organizations representing both sides of the
spectrum, freight, bike/ped, school district representatives, LCC and ODOT. It was a very diverse body that went through this initial process to narrow down what is being presented
tonight. This process is not over. They have narrowed it down over the last year of work, but
they don’t have clear options that can be taken to the public to get more engaged and detailed. She encourages Council to adopt SAC’s recommendation for further study. The SAC process
was charged with addressing improving service along the corridor, meeting increased demand,
and accommodating the population growth that is projected. They looked at economic revitalization and redevelopment opportunities, land use along both corridors, increasing the
safety and security, a very important concern for this corridor, and enhance all modes of
travel. From personal experience, she has seen the large number of students who attend Thurston High School and ride the bus. Giving these students the ability to access their homes
and businesses along Main Street is important. She asked Council to consider further study and the potential investment and safety improvements along the corridor.
8. Steve Moe, Glenwood, OR. Mr. Moe said he supports BRT to Thurston and the enhanced
transit to LCC. He read from the resolution: “Whereas, stated objectives of the Main-McVay Transit Study include improving corridor transit service; meeting current and future transit
demand in a cost-effective and sustainable manner; supporting economic development, revitalization and land use redevelopment opportunities for the corridor; enhancing the safety and security of the corridor; and, enhancing other modes of travel”. He feels that’s what we
have to do.
9. Mike Eyster, Springfield, OR Mr. Eyster encouraged Council to support the proposal before
them, and to commend them on the process. He was President of the LTD Board for five years during the development of the West 11th line. The Springfield Council took a very pro-active,
engaging approach to ensure public process in this next development. They established a
Governance Committee, which he served for a while, and a Stakeholder Advisory Committee made up of a broadly represented group. That process can give the Council confidence that
when they vote, they will know that the recommendation that came from those groups was broadly representative of the community.
10. Rob Zako, Eugene, OR. Mr. Zako serves as Executive Director for Better Eugene-Springfield
Transit (BEST). He referred to the concerns expressed about access to businesses if something is done regarding transit improvements, both during construction and during operation. He
noted that in west Eugene where construction is currently occurring, all businesses have a prominent sign stating that they are open for business. LTD has been very good to maintain access to all businesses during construction. He feels after construction that will also be the
case. The recommendation before Council is not to construct, but to study and get more information to make an informed decision of what is right for Springfield. This makes sense
for Springfield for two reasons: the City’s future, and safety. Springfield is constrained on all
sides and there will be tens of thousands of people coming into our community. Many of those people will be living along Main Street where much of the infill development and
redevelopment is zoned. Many people drive cars, and many can’t drive cars for a variety of
reasons. The corridors in our community need to be used more efficiently and there is an
City of Springfield
Council Regular Meeting Minutes
May 18, 2015 Page 6
opportunity here to look at how to serve the needs of today and the future, and to make smart
decisions to continue to see Springfield thrive and grow. There are some easy, inexpensive things that can be done to make minor improvements in safety, but there are other things that
will cost money. There is an opportunity to partner with the federal government to explore the options for projects that might improve transit and other things as well. If they want access to federal dollars to improve safety along the Main Street corridor, pursuing this to see what
makes sense for Springfield could be a benefit.
11. Joseph Tokatly, Springfield, OR. Mr. Tokatly has been a business owner in this community
for over thirty years, and also owns multiple properties, some of which are on Main Street. He has seen signs going up on the street in opposition to this project. He contacted the City about
a month ago to find out who to talk with on this project. He was contacted and received
information. He was asking for specific drawings or plans so they could see the concepts being proposed. His understanding is that nothing has been developed or presented yet other
than the summary. What is alarming after hearing the testimony is that everyone that spoke,
except the one property owner with concerns, is supportive of this project. The report states that over 400 businesses were visited, and door-to-door studies were conducted in January and
February of this year. He is a business on Main Street and only received an email on Friday about this hearing. He contacted four different business people on Main Street to find out if they had received visits from LTD in January or February. Nobody visited his business, and
nobody notified him as a property owner of multiple parcels on Main Street of this project that will impact him a great deal. He is surprised there are no other business and property representations if 400 people were visited. The business owners and properties along Main
Street are going to be heavily impacted if this project moves forward, and they are not being notified. He is trying to attend to his business, and he knows the impact it will have on the
community and the business properties. He is not saying he is against the project, but he
would like to see what is being proposed. If property is being taken away or rendered useless, that would be a great detriment to the City of Springfield.
Mayor Lundberg closed the public hearing.
Mayor Lundberg said this is an extra process that wouldn’t have been conducted except that the City
wanted to establish whether or not there was a level of support. If there was no support to begin with, they would not go forward at all. Having a stakeholder committee allowed time to look at whether or
not this was a good idea. There are no plans at this time. If approved by the Council, they would begin a study of what they want. This is the fourth variation of EmX that she has directly participated. She has high expectations from LTD that they own the project and help the City. When LTD met with
businesses, they did not use the term EmX. That needs to get straightened out. Seeing this process
several times, she sees the flaws that are repeated by LTD. She wants to see great transit in the community and LTD does a good job, but their planning process is lacking. We have a lot of planning
processes that occur and there is no reason business and property owners are not being contacted. It can be an open and inclusive process. If they vote to forward this study, she is counting on LTD to be a partner and conduct an open and inclusive process, communicating with those most affected in that
corridor. She wants the study done in such a way that everyone feels they have been heard. She doesn’t want to move forward unless she has assurance from LTD.
Councilor Pishioneri thanked those who spoke on this topic. He likes the project and is supportive, but he is concerned about the communication between LTD and the businesses. He wants to make sure
there is support from the citizenry as well. He agrees with the Mayor on the process. LTD is a great
organization and has a great transit system. The process can be done and done well in a way that
City of Springfield
Council Regular Meeting Minutes
May 18, 2015 Page 7
doesn’t negatively impact businesses, but would enhance them. We don’t need a process where people
don’t feel included.
Councilor Woodrow said they started this process about two years ago. She was very enthusiastic about it because they were looking at responding to what the community wanted. They didn’t have a preconceived idea, but wanted to find out what the community wanted. There are people that they
didn’t make contact with that they should have included. They should have been advised of how to be included. This is the beginning and sets us up to conduct a study and find out more details. The project
could help creates fluidity of people through town and out McVay, and also offers the opportunity to
slow down traffic so they can see the businesses along Main Street and increase safety. They want to respond to what the community wants. If they move forward with the study, her expectations are that
LTD will find out that information from the community.
Councilor VanGordon thanked all of those that provided testimony. It is highly valued by the Council
and the community. It is important to remember that this is the start to study this further. Many of the
details and questions will get answered as they go forward. They are looking for two goals: businesses on Main Street to be very successful; and a Main Street that works better for the community. This is
the start of the process to figure out both of those things. His challenge to the business owners is to bring their issues to the table and ask questions. He wants people to be able to access their businesses in a safe way, and for people to get down Main Street safely. His challenge to LTD is to meet with and
talk to the businesses more than once or even twice. That is how they will get to the right place for the community.
Councilor Moore agrees this is the beginning. She asked how there could be continued input from the businesses and who they would contact. She asked if LTD is taking it over from this point or if it
would be staff led.
Mr. Boyatt said the Locally Preferred Alternative process would have its own, developed public
process. The message from Council to LTD is being heard. This will be the more detailed process,
including plans. The goal of City staff would be to advise LTD and construct a process that is as inclusive as possible. The resources are there to do it that way.
Councilor Moore asked if the plans would be coming back to Council.
Mr. Boyatt said the purpose of the LPA process is to have the municipal authority locally choose the preference. It will come back to Council and they will have control over that decision.
Councilor Moore said they would encourage the public to continue to be included and involved in the process.
Councilor Wylie said she had been involved in the planning and visioning of this project for almost twenty years. This is about our community, Main Street and the businesses, including access both
during construction and increased after construction. She knows the Mayor and Council have deep
support for improving transportation needs in the community and serving the public, and will be responsive to the businesses along Main Street. Safety is number one on this corridor, but it also needs
to be economically successful and keeping our businesses connected to the community through
transportation systems. The final goal is to increase livability for all of our community in the future. As they go forward, they need to work together for this improvement. They want it to be successful for
everybody.
City of Springfield
Council Regular Meeting Minutes
May 18, 2015 Page 8
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR WOODROW WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR
WYLIE TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. 2015-14. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 5 FOR AND 0 AGAINST (1 ABSENT – RALSTON).
BUSINESS FROM THE AUDIENCE
1. Jacob Tom, Springfield, OR. Mr. Tom spoke regarding the closure of 16th Street. He is a resident in this neighborhood, a small business owner and a physician. His business is twelve
feet away from 16th Street, and it overlooks I Street. He has walked that street for ten years.
That street is very beautiful with flowering pear trees. He is in favor of the hospital expansion, but he wants it done smartly and considerately. He wants to see that street preserved because it
is a critical corridor for the community. During our lives, we see other things besides a
hospital. Unfortunately, there is convergence of institutions within the hospital corridor that actually closes off Springfield between the north and south. From 7th to 21st Streets, there are
only three streets that go all the way through north to south from Centennial to Main Streets:
10th Street, 16th Street, and Mohawk Boulevard. He asked Council to consider what would happen if they were to close 16th Street and Mohawk due to construction. He asked them to
think of preserving and maintaining the current infrastructure and livability in that area. They need that corridor preserved so they have access north and south to Main Street.
2. Jim Straub, Springfield, OR – Mr. Straub said he was representing Oak Management LLC and
Straub Family Trust in regards to the College View urban growth boundary (UGB) expansion. At the last Council meeting on May 4, he was not able to attend but sent some
correspondence. As this UGB expansion has been talked about, he has participated in all of the public working groups and visioning studies. As always, there are vocal minorities involved. He feels there is more to discuss on this subject. The land he and his sister own is the single,
largest contiguous parcel in that area, and would be desirable from a planning perspective to have it included. There might be ways a win-win could be achieved. Having participated in the
studies and listened to the concerned neighbors, there have been a lot of avenues that haven’t
been explored. He is not sure of the process, but wanted to let them know he is open to more communication with the planning department.
3. Leonard Tarantola, Eugene, OR. Mr. Tarantola spoke on traffic and low-income housing. He has noticed more and more congestions and gridlock in countries he has visited over the last
few years. The concept of nodal communities surrounded by the everyday necessities of life is a way to reduce some of that congestion. He visualized high density housing, in the middle of a nodal community with people that work and live in that area, and he feels the Mohawk
Shopping Center would be a good place for something like that. An ideal parcel is next to Bi-
Mart. The concept is to get cars off the road, eliminate the need for an automobile for one hundred people at a time living in this high density community, and they could reduce fossil
fuel consumption, clean up the air, reduce bumper to bumper traffic, etc. If he could build that 100-unit apartment complex mixed-use, with interest free money from philanthropists, he would have the flexibility to keep the rent at a rate that would attract tenants. The average
tenant would pay about $600/month in rent, half of which would go back to the philanthropist and half back to the tenant’s in an equity account. In a ten-year period, the tenants could
accumulate about $30,000, and would then move on to other housing. He thinks the
philanthropists are in the right frame of mind to help the public elevate and diminish the gap between the haves and the have-nots. He just needs to find the philanthropist and will then
need the city to modify the regulations for parking.
City of Springfield
Council Regular Meeting Minutes
May 18, 2015 Page 9
4. Pat Handy, Eugene, OR Mr. Handy serves as the Plant Operations Director at McKenzie
Willamette Hospital and has been employed there for twenty-four years. He was here to advocate for the vacation of 16th Street. Twenty-five years ago he was one of the residents of
H Street that butts up against 16th Street. He agrees the trees along the street are beautiful, but he knows there are other ways to get to the businesses and streets. Anyone who has visited McKenzie Willamette as a patient knows that parking is an issue. Growth is wonderful, but
the footprint of the property is not very large. This vacation is needed to assist in creating needed parking. It is also needed for ensuring continuity for growth for the businesses in the
area in partnership with the hospital. He appreciates the support of the City Council and the
Springfield residents who have been supportive of the hospital.
COUNCIL RESPONSE
CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS
1. Correspondence from the League of Oregon Cities (LOC) Regarding Funding the LOC Foundation.
2. Correspondence from Jacob Tom, Springfield, OR Regarding the 16th Street Vacation. IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR WOODROW WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR WYLIE TO ACCEPT THE CORRESPONDENCE FOR FILING. THE MOTION PASSED
WITH A VOTE OF 5 FOR AND 0 AGAINST (1 ABSENT – RALSTON).
BIDS ORDINANCES
1. Utility Tax Code Update.
ORDINANCE NO. 2 – AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE SPRINGFIELD MUNICIPAL CODE, SECTIONS, 4.707 “TAX FOR PROVIDING UTILITY SERVICE,” 4.716
"AUDITS"ADOPTING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE. (FIRST READING)
Rhonda Rice, Management Analyst, presented the staff report on this item.
During the 2014 update of the Utility Tax ordinance, the 4.716 Audit section inadvertently omitted the inclusion of the new 4.707 section reference. Also, staff reviewed the 4.707 section and proposes
adding language to give revenue remittance detail for the tax amount and calculation of payment.
Staff have prepared a new ordinance to rectify the omission and to give clarity.
There is no financial impact as a result of this ordinance. The ordinance will add language that will include text that will give the City the ability to audit Utilities providing service under chapter 4.707 and will allow greater detail in the gross revenue remittance to the City from these Utility License
holders. The corrections include the following: 1. In the language of the title of Municipal Code 4.716, add “and Fee Review”.
2. In the language of Municipal Code 4.716, ‘and section 4.707’ language was omitted
following the words ‘section 4.706’. 3. Staff have also adjusted section 4.707 paragraph 5 to give detail to the revenue remittance
on the amount and calculation of the tax submitted.
City of Springfield
Council Regular Meeting Minutes
May 18, 2015 Page 10
Staff have rewritten these references to include the appropriate section and language. A second reading
on this ordinance is scheduled for June 1, 2015.
NO ACTION REQUESTED. FIRST READING ONLY. BUSINESS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL
1. Committee Appointments
2. Business from Council
1. Committee Reports
2. Other Business
a. Councilor VanGordon asked if staff would get back in touch with Mr. Straub regarding the UGB expansion discussion and continue to work with him.
Mr. Grimaldi said they would follow-up.
BUSINESS FROM THE CITY MANAGER
1. 16th Street Vacation.
ORDINANCE NO. 6336 - AN ORDINANCE VACATING A PORTION OF 16TH STREET BETWEEN G AND I STREETS.
Senior Planner Andy Limbird presented the staff report on this item.
McKenzie-Willamette Medical Center has initiated the vacation action in accordance with Section 3.200 of the Springfield Municipal Code and Section 5.2-120 of the City’s Development Code. The
two-block section of right-of-way proposed for vacation is a 36-foot wide paved street within a 60-
foot wide right-of-way. Sixteenth Street is classified as a local street and currently provides a continuous connection between Main Street and Centennial Boulevard.
The City Council conducted a public hearing for the vacation proposal on May 4, 2015 and 11 people provided verbal testimony: five in favor of the proposal and five against the proposal. The applicant’s
traffic engineer also provided supporting testimony to answer questions posed by the City Council.
Persons testifying in opposition to the proposed vacation expressed concerns about the public notification procedures, potential effects on neighborhood traffic circulation patterns, creation of
institutional “superblocks” generally located between 7th and 18th Streets and within the G Street to J Street latitude, and the potential changes to H Street upon closure of the two intersections at 16th Street. Staff’s response is added to the staff report for Council consideration.
Staff advises that vacation of the right-of-way also would require provision of a public utility
easement across the vacation area to allow for maintenance, repair, and replacement of existing utility
infrastructure and construction of a planned multi-use bicycle/pedestrian connection to replace the existing sidewalk that runs along the east edge of the subject right-of-way. The Vacation Ordinance
has been revised to provide for suitable public utility and access easements within the subject vacation
area.
City of Springfield
Council Regular Meeting Minutes
May 18, 2015 Page 11
Councilor Moore asked if there was going to be an expanded number of parking spaces when the hospital is expanded.
Mr. Limbird said there would be. He did not have that number, but it would be several hundred. The building is adding about 145,000 square feet of floor area in the expansion, and there is a
proportionate requirement of parking. The parking expansion is planned for the south side of G Street. The 16th Street right-of-way is proposed to be incorporated within the combined parking area
immediately adjacent to the building currently. There is also a parking lot on the east side of 16th Street
that will be blended with the others. The former direct travel lanes will be reconfigured to allow for parking and traffic circulation within that area.
Councilor VanGordon asked about the pear trees and if they would be maintained.
Mr. Limbird said there are two trees in the 16th Street right-of-way on the west side that are proposed
to be removed. There are also about 100 trees inside the hospital grounds that are proposed for removal due to the building expansion and parking lot configuration. The public street trees along 16th
Street are not to be removed or affected. Councilor Moore said she is very happy that McKenzie Willamette is expanding, but she is concerned
about closing 16th Street and will vote against it. This is a for-profit hospital. It would be great if they
could build a parking structure that was connected to the hospital with an overhead walk. She feels there are some better ways to go about providing safety for people to move back and forth for parking,
especially if a parking structure were built. Councilor Woodrow asked about the consent response.
Mr. Limbird said there was consent to the vacation action required by the abutting property owners.
Those were the properties that shared the right-of-way in the two-block segment, as well as the
property owners off either end. The hospital is also a property owner along that right-of-way.
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR WOODROW WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR
WYLIE TO ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 6336. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 4 FOR AND 1 AGAINST (MOORE) (1 ABSENT – RALSTON). 2. 16th Street Vacation Resolution.
RESOLUTION NO. 2015-15 - A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SPRINGFIELD TO WAIVE THE ASSESSMENT OF SPECIAL BENEFIT FOR VACATION OF A PORTION OF 16TH STREET BETWEEN G AND I STREETS
Senior Planner Andy Limbird presented the staff report on this item. He noted that he had forgotten to mention that there is a provision in the vacation ordinance for the vacation to revert to public
ownership should the expansion not proceed.
McKenzie-Willamette Medical Center is requesting vacation of a two-block segment of 16th Street
between G and I Street to facilitate a planned expansion of the hospital campus. In accordance with Section 3.204(3) of the Springfield Municipal Code, the City Council can choose to waive the
assessment of special benefit for a vacation of public right-of-way if it is deemed to be in the public
interest.
City of Springfield
Council Regular Meeting Minutes
May 18, 2015 Page 12
The City Council conducted a public hearing for the vacation proposal on May 4, 2015 and the Vacation Ordinance was presented and approved by Council earlier this evening. The staff report,
applicant’s submittal, and supporting information for the Vacation Ordinance are included in the May 18, 2015 City Council packet under separate cover.
If the City Council determines that the vacation action is in the public interest, staff recommends that the City Council adopts a Resolution commemorating the waiver of assessment of special benefit for
the public right-of-way.
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR WOODROW WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR WYLIE TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2015-15. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE
OF 4 FOR AND 1 AGAINST (MOORE) (1 ABSENT – RALSTON).
3. Franklin Boulevard TIGER 7 Match Pledge.
RESOLUTION NO. 2015-16 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SPRINGFIELD
AGREEING TO ASSIST IN FULFILLING THE MATCHING FUNDS REQUIRED FOR THE 2015 TRANSPORTATION INVESTMENT GENERATING ECONOMIC RECOVERY GRANT.
Community Development Manager for Transportation, Tom Boyatt, presented the staff report on this item.
The City of Springfield desires to apply to USDOT for $15,000,000 to complete the Franklin Boulevard project. The TIGER (Transportation Investments Generating Economic Recovery) grant
program is very competitive and projects with substantial local match are more likely to be awarded. The TIGER application process calls for evidence that the applicant jurisdiction will honor its match
pledge.
$500,000,000 is available nationally for TIGER discretionary grants through the seventh round of that
program, with applications due no later than June 5, 2015.
The City intends to apply for $15,000,000 matched by an additional $6,000,000 in local funds. The
sources of the City’s match are: $3,000,000 ODOT jurisdictional transfer revenue; $1,000,000 storm water capital funds; and, $2,000,000 in a combination of room tax revenue and urban renewal capital investment funds. The purpose of the attached Resolution is to demonstrate to the USDOT that the
City is prepared to honor its match pledge to secure a TIGER 7 grant. Both the Oregon Department of Transportation and Lane Transit District will be official Partner Agencies for the TIGER request, and the Project also enjoys strong support from the Central Lane MPO, the Lane ACT, the City of Eugene,
Lane County and a host of other private, public and non-profit organizations. The City is now in the process of preparing final design and right of way for the first phase of Franklin
construction using $6,000,000 in Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) funds, $3,600,000 in local matching funds, and almost $1,000,000 in Connect Oregon 5 funds. ODOT has
committed to ‘de-federalizing’ the Phase 1 STIP dollars in order to leverage the state and local match
share of the project should the City receive a TIGER grant.
The TIGER 7 request, supported by additional local match, will construct the balance of the Franklin
Boulevard upgrade not already funded. There is a low probability that there will be much, if anything,
City of Springfield
Council Regular Meeting Minutes
May 18, 2015 Page 13
in the way of STIP funds for any enhanced projects out to 2021 at the earliest, and the Franklin Project
has already seen its share of STIP dollars within the Lane ACT. In combination, this means that it will be very difficult to complete Franklin Boulevard through normal funding processes, outside of
programs like TIGER bringing new, flexible dollars to the table. Should this TIGER 7 request be successful, SEDA funding in Glenwood for other major projects
would be substantially curtailed until revenues increase from new property investments or other funds emerge from property sales, for example.
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR WOODROW WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR WYLIE TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2015-16. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 5 FOR AND 0 AGAINST (1 ABSENT – RALSTON).
BUSINESS FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned 8:10 p.m. Minutes Recorder Amy Sowa
______________________ Christine L. Lundberg
Mayor Attest:
____________________
City Recorder
City of Springfield
Work Session Meeting
MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION MEETING OF
THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL HELD
TUESDAY MAY 26, 2015
The City of Springfield Council met in a work session in the Jesse Maine Meeting Room, 225 Fifth Street, Springfield, Oregon, on Tuesday May 26, 2015 at 5:30 p.m., with Mayor Lundberg presiding. ATTENDANCE Present were Mayor Lundberg and Councilors VanGordon, Wylie, Ralston, Woodrow and Pishioneri.
Also present were Assistant City Manager Jeff Towery, City Attorney Mary Bridget Smith, Administrative Assistant AJ Ripka and members of the staff.
Councilor Moore was absent (excused).
1. Fire Special Operating Levy Renewal.
Bob Duey, Finance Director, presented the staff report on this item.
The current Fire Special Operating Levy passed by voters in November of 2010 provides for the staffing of an engine crew at Springfield’s Station #3 and will expire on June 30, 2016. After
discussion in work session on May 11th, Council directed staff to prepare a ballot title and explanation
that provided options for considering a renewal rate that ranges from the current rate of $0.36 per thousand to a new rate of $0.40 per thousand. Included with these options should be summary of the
fiscal or potential service impacts of the renewal of the levy at a rate that is less than the amount required to fully finance for the entire five year levy period a three person engine crew at Station # 3. A recommended rate by the Council is necessary for the preparation of the ballot title and explanation.
Mr. Duey noted that the ballot title would be similar to the ballot title for the previous levies, but a sentence may need to be added if they choose an amount less than .44/$1000 to acknowledge that the
levy would not fully fund the station. After this evening’s discussion, a public hearing will be held on June 15, 2015 to review and consider adoption of a resolution and ballot title. Following adoption of the ballot title, the City Recorder would publish it in the paper for citizen review and possible appeal.
At the end of the appeal period, the ballot title will be filed with the County Elections Officer, 61 days prior to the election or September 3, 2015.
Mr. Duey said the levy has always been for full staffing of Fire Station #3. The first levy was at .36/$1000, the first renewal was at .40/$1000, and the second renewal was at .36/$1000. This last
amount has not generated the necessary funding, and funds have been withdrawn from the reserve and
are nearly depleted.
Mr. Duey said this is a highly valued service by the Council and the community at this Fire Station. Reduction of service does not seem to be a consideration at this time, but would be addressed in another way with other funding. The levy has been successful in the past, passing by a wide margin.
At the last work session, the new rate would be .44/$1000 in order to fully fund the station over the five year period. That would be an .08 increase over the last levy. There was also discussion at the last work session about compression. Both the Fire Levy and Police Levy lost about 4 ½ % of its funding
due to compression last year. If they were to increase the levy, it would likely increase the
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
May 26, 2015 Page 2
compression factor for the City and other jurisdictions with levies. They won’t know the real impact
until the real market value comes out from the County. It could improve based on growth. Approximately .04/$1000 would equal one firefighter/paramedic, so a reduction in that amount would
mean that a firefighter paramedic could be moved off of the levy fund and into the General Fund. Lowering the levy to .36/$1000 would mean moving two firefighters/paramedics to the General Fund. Each position would be about a $150,000 increase to the General Fund annually. If that were to occur,
discussions would need to be held during the budget season about service levels citywide to absorb that cost. If the levy amount is less than .44/$1000, the ballot title should include a sentence explaining
that the funds from the levy may not cover funding for a full station.
Councilor Pishioneri said he is not in support of increasing taxes so prefers the .36/$1000 which would
not be an increase. He doesn’t like the thought of reducing services, but would like to move towards
not having to rely on the levies. This is a great opportunity to look at our General Fund and make decisions about how to fund the firefighters. They may also need to look at how to reduce resources
during low call-for-service times.
Councilor Woodrow said she is open to setting the amount at .40/$1000 and moving the $150,000 to
the General Fund. She would like to start the process of getting the City away from the levy if possible and this could be a good first step. She is not opposed to going with .36/$1000.
Councilor Ralston said he wants to move away from the levy and this is a great opportunity to start on that path. He would like to keep the amount at .36/$1000 and move two positions to the General Fund if possible. He could also support .40/$1000 and moving one position to the General Fund if that was
the choice of the Council.
Councilor VanGordon said he originally was in favor of .36/$1000, but in looking at the annual
deficits, he feels that is too much to tackle at once. He would like to start at .40/$1000, moving one position to the General Fund, and committing themselves to tackle another position next time the levy
comes up for renewal.
Councilor Wylie said she agrees that they should start at .40/$1000 and take the movement of
positions to the General Fund in increments. She likes the idea of reducing the levy and moving the positions to the General Fund. During budget time, they need to look at a line item that identifies reducing levies. The City funds other positions and projects, and those funds could be used to fund the
levy positions. Councilor Pishioneri said his other concern is compression with both the fire and police levies.
Councilor Ralston asked if the 4 ½% loss due to compression last year was Police and Fire together.
Mr. Duey said both lost 4 ½%. For the fire levy, that amounted to about $68,000.
Councilor Ralston asked if the reduction in the levy would reduce the effect on compression.
Mr. Duey said there were a number of factors that would affect compression, including real market
value. If the economy does well, the effect would lessen.
Councilor Ralston said they will be revisiting this each year during the budget process, and looking at
adding firefighters into the General Fund. He would be inclined to go with the .36/$1000 and plan on
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
May 26, 2015 Page 3
doing something in the future to keep the rates down. He asked if changes could be made during the
levy period.
Mr. Duey said they could change the levy every year, as long as they didn’t go higher. If they had a .40/$1000 levy, they have a choice every year during the Council process to levy the full amount or partial amount.
Mayor Lundberg asked what would happen if the levy did not pass. The fire departments have merged,
yet the funding piece is still separated. If the levy fails, it will affect Eugene as well. The same would
be true if Eugene didn’t have adequate funding one year.
Chief Groves said if they don’t have the resources to pay for five stations, they will lose one. It would
be the same on the Eugene side if they didn’t have adequate funding. In service deployment, they work in a fluid station, backfilling gaps and responding as they can. Between the two cities, it is a very
free flowing of the units back and forth to deploy the right number of resources to answer a call.
Mayor Lundberg she asked how it would affect the system if they chose .36/$1000, but moved only
one firefighter/paramedic to the General Fund. Chief Groves said they currently have a minimum staffing level of three people per company, which is
in line with the National Standard and average for our size of jurisdiction. If they closed a whole company or closed a station, that threatens our insurance rating which effects fire insurance. Risk to the community would also increase. They will adjust to whatever they need to give the best
deployment they can.
Mr. Duey said if they chose .36/$1000, he would not recommend eliminating two positions the first
year, but rather start with one and gradually move up to three positions off the levy. There are different strategies depending on the figure Council chooses.
Councilor VanGordon said it makes sense to him to have the same strategy conversation whether they choose .36/$1000 or .40/$1000. He prefers .40/$1000 because it offers more flexibility up front. They
can levy less during the levy period. Mayor Lundberg asked for Council’s position on the two rates.
Council discussed why they wanted each rate and the risk of raising the rate and losing the election. The difference in the yes votes for the .36/$1000 and the .40/$1000 was discussed.
Mr. Towery said there are a lot of factors that go into the voter’s decisions at each election. He pointed out that there was also a 10% difference for the two levies that were both at .36/$1000. It is difficult to
forecast trends.
Councilor Ralston noted that the first .36/$1000 was for the initial levy, which would make it harder to
pass. Once the levy was in place, voters were more in favor of continuing the service.
Councilor Pishioneri said he was looking at the how much they would be taxing the citizens. He felt it
was their responsibility to look out for the best interests of the citizens in terms of what they are paying and their safety.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
May 26, 2015 Page 4
Mayor Lundberg said it is $300,000 that they will have to address. They also have the Police Levy
coming up next year, which is a much larger amount. She noted that it was now one department with Eugene and Springfield so there may be some confusion to the citizens. They need to make sure they
have the best chance for the levy to pass. Councilor VanGordon said he could support .36/$1000.
2. Main Street Corridor Vision Plan Implementation Priorities.
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner, presented the staff report on this item.
Council is asked to prioritize short term (2015-2020) and long term (2020-2035) strategies and actions
to revitalize and improve Springfield’s Main Street Corridor between Downtown and Thurston.
Extensive public input received through the Main Street Corridor Vision Plan land use and
transportation visioning process has confirmed the importance of and community support for implementing measures to improve safety, livability, appearance and economic vitality in the corridor.
The adopted Vision Plan identifies short and long term actions and partnerships the City could initiate to implement the vision. Recommended actions range from land use policy/zoning updates to the design and construction of physical changes to or within the public right of way. The Plan also
identifies potential programs to support and incentivize business development and job creation in the corridor.
The Main Street Corridor Vision Plan (adopted by Council on February 17, 2015) identifies a new broad, achievable vision: the transition of Main Street to a “complete community street” that will
provide enhanced opportunities for successful commerce and corridor redevelopment as Springfield
grows. The Plan identifies specific vision statements, goals, activity nodes, redevelopment opportunity sites, and potential implementation strategies for three distinct “segments” along 7 miles
of Main Street between Downtown and Thurston, based on what we’ve heard through the visioning
process, and in response to existing and expected future conditions in the corridor.
On March 9, Council conducted a Work Session focused on “Main Street Corridor Vision Plan and Traffic Safety”, and directed DPW and PD staff to pursue a set of short and long term actions and collaborations with ODOT to address immediate traffic safety concerns in the corridor. Council will
note that many of the Implementation Strategies identified in the Vision Plan dovetail with actions to address traffic safety concerns — including but not limited to installation of street illumination, revisiting the Main Street Safety Study, installing Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons (PHB) east of Hwy
126/Bob Straub Parkway in the higher speed area – ODOT, and redesign of Main Street consistent with the Main Street Corridor Vision Plan and other relevant resources. Other strategies dovetail with multimodal mobility improvements identified in the Main-McVay Transit Study.
Ms. Pauly displayed a map showing the study area. Staff is looking for direction from Council about
what they want staff to work on over the next several years that is related to Main Street. They are
already doing the transit study, and gathering more information on traffic safety. Last year, Council had talked about improving pedestrian crossings and connectivity, updating land uses and zoning,
designing and constructing parallel bike routes to Main Street (funding from ODOT is available),
initiating implementation of the Wayfinding Plan, initiating a Springfield Public Art Program, initiating an expanded Façade Improvement Program, and identifying and implementing options to
reduce traffic speed, which is currently being studied by ODOT. She asked if those were still things of
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
May 26, 2015 Page 5
interest to the Council. She referred to the list of projects in the Council Briefing Memorandum and
explained how she organized those items.
Staff recommends that Council go forward with the transit study, which they have already decided to do, and to direct staff to look for as many opportunities as possible through that coordinating with planning work to make sure they get the best possible outcomes that relate to the broader vision for
Main Street. The second thing they recommend is for Council to consider initiating the update of the plan and zoning. Staff feels they have a chance to get another grant from ODOT Transportation and
Growth Management (TGM) grant for a consultant to do that work with the City. This is a very
opportune time to do this work. Staff has met with a number of property owners who are very interested in that as they look ahead to redeveloping their property. The third thing is to coordinate
any public realm enhancements in terms of transit stations and planning for the future, and potential
incentives for transit-supportive development working with property owners that have interest. These three things could likely be done within our budget and timeframes.
Councilor Pishioneri said he is a proponent with moving forward and facilitating discussions between the property owners and the City. Development will help benefit the community as a whole. If the City
can be a catalyst in helping to get development and redevelopment going, it is a win-win. It can also help to gain the trust of the business community along Main Street. He referred to the business owner who spoke last week and said he had not been contacted about the transit study. The City shouldn’t
depend on Lane Transit District (LTD) to do that, although he hopes they do, but the City can also partner with them in that outreach.
Ms. Pauly said she got the contact information for that business owner and would be contacting him.
Councilor Ralston asked about parallel bike routes.
Ms. Pauly said the idea is to get bicyclists off the street into a safer environment, such as some of the
side streets that run parallel to Main Street.
Community Development Manager for Transportation, Tom Boyatt responded. He said there are a
number of people who are not comfortable biking on the busy arterial. The City is always looking for a connected street system that doesn’t depend on the arterials, giving people a safer place to bike and get to their destination. There aren’t a lot of options east/west and Daisy is a good option.
Councilor Ralston said he knows there aren’t many parallel streets. Putting bike paths on those streets would affect the residents’ ability to park. He wants to keep the street widths the same, and not narrow
them to allow for bike lanes. Mr. Boyatt said they would be sharing the local street, not adding another lane.
Mayor Lundberg said she is fine with the three items presented. They need to be very conscious of the
process moving forward with LTD. She likes the idea of getting another TGM grant to assist in fixing
the patchwork of zoning so it makes more sense and encourages development that limits the amount of pedestrian crossing needed on Main Street. She hopes they shorten the area between 10th and 42nd
Street into smaller segments so they create a sense of a neighborhood. She would like to have the
lights on 54th Street changed from a cable to a pole so they are more visible. That is priority to her.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
May 26, 2015 Page 6
Councilor Wylie said a lot of the problems on the West 11th EmX project came from misinformation
and misunderstanding over and over again. They need to have a clear message in many formats to the community as they move forward in working with LTD.
Councilor VanGordon agreed with all of the proposed projects. The zoning has a lot of value and he is very interested in that piece. As they move forward, they need to be able to show the public what the
public outreach has looked like, and who they have contacted and met.
Mayor Lundberg said another piece of the communication is the wording used. The consultants that
did the outreach for the transit study did not use the term EmX which would have been something the businesses would have remembered. Miscommunication occurs in these situations. The message needs
to be clear and in everyday language. They not only need to reach out to a large number of people, but
they need to make sure those people understood the discussion.
Councilor Wylie said during the EmX Steering Committee several years ago, a business owner came
in with concerns because he had not been given accurate and clear information.
Councilor Ralston referred to a statement about ‘attractive sidewalk corridor’. He asked what section they are talking about. That could be very expensive to the property owners.
Ms. Pauly said the sidewalks are already in place, but there are parts with holes and other things that impede walkability. Improvements could be made as new developments are built, or through larger projects over time. They had some discussion about the City adding a decorative light fixture at some
of the intersections. Small things could add up over time.
Councilor Ralston said he wanted to make sure they kept the costs down for the property owners.
Mayor Lundberg said it was one of the business developers that brought it to the City’s attention to
make the intersection at 21st and Main Street more attractive.
3. Downtown District Design Standards Project Update and Consultant Scope of Work.
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner, presented the staff report on this item.
This is the second phase of a public planning process that will produce a set of coherent and consistent design standards to improve Downtown’s overall image, attractiveness and economic vitality. Council has directed staff to prepare Downtown District Design Standards to ensure that development projects,
new uses and new public improvements will make positive contributions to improve the look, feel and
functionality of Downtown.
At two previous work sessions (May 12 and June 23, 2014) Council reviewed the overall scope of work for a project that will amend the Downtown Refinement Plan and update all of the design standards applicable in the Downtown District. Council provided early input and direction to staff on
Phase One: Building Façade and Property Maintenance Standards.
Subsequently, staff applied for and was successful in receiving a Code Assistance grant from the
State’s Transportation and Growth Management (TGM) program to provide consultant resources to complete Phase Two of the project. A consultant has been selected and will begin work this month.
The consultant is tasked with preparing new form-based design standards that will be applicable to
new Downtown development and public improvements in the right-of-way. Careful consideration of
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
May 26, 2015 Page 7
the interface between Downtown development and the adjacent residential neighborhoods including
the Washburne Historic District and East Kelly Butte is an important aspect of the design standards to be addressed.
Ms. Pauly noted on a map the lands in the Downtown Refinement Plan. This is the area that would have Downtown Design Standards apply. She included excerpts from the scope of work in the agenda
packet for Council reference. The consultant will work with the City project team, the Downtown Citizen Advisory Committee, and a Technical Advisory group to propose a set of coherent and
consistent design standards to improve Downtown’s image, attractiveness and economic vitality. A
series of work sessions with the Planning Commission and Council will be scheduled in the months ahead to review and provide input on the Phase Two draft design standards and code amendments and
a coordinated strategy to implement the Phase One Building Façade and Property Maintenance
Standards. Public involvement activities will be conducted to highlight the importance of good design and property maintenance standards and to solicit input on the proposals.
These actions support the outcomes envisioned in the Council’s adopted Downtown Urban Design Plan and Implementation Strategy consistent with Council Goals.
The goal would be to have adoption and ready products back to the Council before the 2016 summer recess.
Councilor Ralston asked what the current standard was for building heights.
Ms. Pauly said the most recent building that went in under current standards in Downtown was the Royal Building. It would be up to the Council to decide if the new standard would be less or more than
current standards. They may also divide downtown into several subareas with separate height
standards.
Mayor Lundberg said the things listed will be included in the process and what will be discussed.
Ms. Pauly said staff would bring current standards and proposals each step of the way. She has a work
session scheduled for the July 13 for staff to bring the first round of standards for their review. The Downtown Advisory Committee has been in place since 2008. Some served on the original Urban Renewal Advisory Committee so have continuity about their knowledge and understanding.
Councilor Pishioneri said through this plan he wants to make sure they don’t lose some of the historic buildings that are Downtown. He doesn’t want to lose the historic feel of our Main Street and the
Washburne and adjoining neighborhood. Ms. Pauly said part of the scope of work includes determining the interface between the
neighborhoods and Downtown. There may need to be special standards in some of those areas.
Councilor Pishioneri said he thinks some of the historic look was lost with the construction of the
Royal Building. He doesn’t want too much of a modern look in new development Downtown.
Mayor Lundberg said cohesiveness may be a theme they would like to see between the neighborhoods,
especially the Washburne who considers downtown as part of their neighborhood.
Ms. Pauly said they have a member on the DAC who is a resident and representative of the Washburne neighborhood.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
May 26, 2015 Page 8
4. Building Safety Fee Review.
Matthew Ruettgers, Building and Land Development Manager presented the staff report on this item. Springfield’s Building Safety program is facing a number of challenges including increasing demand
for customer service and financial stability of the program.
The State of Oregon has delegated the authority to provide a full service building program to the City
of Springfield. One of the requirements of this delegated authority is that the City provides adequate funds, equipment and resources necessary to administer and enforce the program. In support of this
mandate, state statute specifies that all revenues collected for building activity, i.e. plan review,
inspections, be spent only on functions and services that directly support the building safety program.
Springfield has enjoyed a healthy level of building activity and associated revenues due to a large
amount of high value construction in the community. Historically, the permit fee revenue generated by these projects resulted in a fairly stable Building Fund reserve even though the City’s fees are
among the lowest of comparable jurisdictions. Past practice for managing the Building Fund has been to preserve these surpluses during times of high activity to supplement the fund during periods of low activity. Since the downturn in the economy in 2009 program expenditures have exceeded revenues
each of these 6 years; as a result, the fund reserves are nearly completely depleted and program staff has been reduced from 15.56 FTE to 5.85 FTE. This current 5.85 FTE represent the minimum level of staff needed to maintain the authority delegated by the State to operate the program.
Staff analyzed the Revenues, Expenses and Reserves to determine the potential impact a building
permit fee increase would have on these items given the current and projected development activity.
Fee options are presented at 6%, 8%, 10% and 12%, respectively, on several different types of projects. As part of this analysis, staff also met with the Home Builders Association of Lane County,
who indicated they would be agreeable to a 6% fee increase.
Councilor Pishioneri said the cost for the program is listed at $985,000, which would come to
$168,400 per person at 5.85 FTE. He knows they are not paid that much so asked where the rest of the funds were going.
Mr. Ruettgers said the program also has to pay into the internal charges for the City. Senior Management Analyst Rhonda Rice said it was about 30% -33% for all internal charges,
including insurance. Councilor Pishioneri asked if that cost was included in the cost of wages and benefits.
Ms. Rice said that amount was separate from the staff’s wages and benefits. The internal charges come
from the materials and services budget item.
Councilor Pishioneri said it seems strange that the HBA would agree to a 6% increase.
Mr. Ruettgers noted that during the Master Fee Schedule increases of 2% CPI in May 2015, the building fees were not increased. The 6% increase is actually a 4% increase plus the 2% that was
applied to all other fees in May.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
May 26, 2015 Page 9
Councilor Pishioneri asked if Willamalane had permit fees, or if they are all done through the City.
Mr. Ruettgers said the comparisons in Attachment 3 of the agenda packet are only representative of
the building permit fees, and does not include the 12% state surcharge which every jurisdiction has. The system development charges (SDC) are not included in the comparison; only the building permit fees.
Councilor VanGordon said he was trying to match up the revenue shown on the chart and in the
agenda item summary (AIS).
Mr. Ruettgers said the chart shows the estimated actuals, and the figures in the AIS are based on his
actual data. The chart is older than the data.
Councilor VanGordon asked if they were still scheduled to add .75 FTE.
Mr. Ruettgers said there was a request as part of the recent budget cycle to add additional FTE.
Councilor VanGordon asked if the adjustment to the fund was driven by the addition of the FTE due to a higher volume of work.
Development and Public Works Director Anette Spickard said the portion put into the Building Fund relates to Code Enforcement staff that can no longer be paid for with the Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds so had to be put back into
their department budget. Code Enforcement staff enforces in part building violations. The funds are not to add Building Inspectors, but to resolve the funding issue.
Councilor VanGordon asked if they are asking the HBA to pay for that increase.
Mr. Ruettgers said a considerable portion of what Code Enforcement does is related to the Building
Code. They do investigations on buildings without permits which ties it back to the Building Department. If it is determined no building permits were in place, it goes to Building staff.
Councilor VanGordon asked if the City was passing on those costs to the users. He asked if the Building fund would be stable if it were just funding the 5.85 FTE, or if the increase is to help pay for
the additional Code Enforcement costs. Mr. Ruettgers said it is not. The transferring of FTE to the appropriate fund, is not affecting the bigger
issue of needing to build up a stable reserve and stable program that is sustainable. They are adding to the program.
Councilor VanGordon asked if the annual costs have increased.
Mr. Ruettgers said our insurance charges and other costs have increased.
Councilor VanGordon said he is comfortable with the 6% increase. It is more important that we
control this process rather than send it back to the State.
Mr. Ruettgers said the last significant increase was in 2013.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
May 26, 2015 Page 10
Councilor VanGordon said this is important for the development community. He would like to have
staff meet with the developers to get this back to a sustainable place which may include making it more consistent with CPI, so they are more consistent.
Mr. Ruettgers said the City of Eugene recently decided to go to the Consumer Price Index (CPI) rather than the Construction Index, which is actually less than the Construction index.
Councilor Ralston said he is comfortable with the 6% increase. He wants to control costs as much as
possible. None of the City’s programs have 100% cost recovery so he’s not interested in getting it to a
sustainable level, as long as it is somewhat sustainable. He is not interested in increasing the FTE.
Councilor Pishioneri said he is still stuck on the Code Enforcement piece. Historically, they are
responding to many other enforcements issues.
Ms. Spickard noted that they are not fully funded through the Building fund.
Councilor Pishioneri asked for clarification and said it would then appear that about 25% of their calls
relate to Building Code. He does not support having the builders underwriting staff for code violations that are not directly related to the industry. He doesn’t think we should expect the program to be fully sustainable. The increases over the last few years add up to a lot for builders. He asked about the
actual costs for permits. Mr. Ruettgers said figures for a single family dwelling were noted on page 5 of Attachment 3 of the
agenda packet.
Councilor Pishioneri said he can’t support anything more than 6%.
Mayor Lundberg said she would not support anything over 6%. She referred to the CDBG funding and
the changes that have occurred. She asked why there was not a reduction in administrative costs in the
current CDBG process if Code Enforcement costs were removed. Although these are only the building fees, it is important to remember that we do have a second taxing entity (Willamalane) that charges a
separate SDC charge which adds to the building costs. Mr. Ruettgers said permit fees for the average single family home in Springfield with SDCs is in the
$14,000 to $15,000 range, with about $3800 of that as Willamalane SDCs. Mayor Lundberg said it is something they must keep in mind when looking at the fees.
Councilor Pishioneri said when adding both the City and Willamalane SDCs together, Springfield may be one of the highest in the state.
Mr. Ruettgers said there was a study through Lane Council of Governments (LCOG) regarding SDCs
and building permit charges. Springfield was not in that study, but it did include Eugene and Lane
County. He said he could send it to the Council. If Council is supportive of the 6% increase, he will skip the second work session and bring it to the Council for adoption on July 20.
Mayor Lundberg said an additional work session was not needed and they could just bring it to the Council during the July 20 regular meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
May 26, 2015 Page 11
The meeting was adjourned at 7:00 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 JUNE 1, 2015
The City of Springfield Council met in a work session in the Jesse Maine Meeting Room, 225 Fifth Street, Springfield, Oregon, on Monday June 1, 2015 at 6:00 p.m., with Mayor Lundberg presiding. ATTENDANCE Present were Mayor Lundberg and Councilors VanGordon, Wylie, Moore, Ralston, Woodrow and
Pishioneri. Also present were Assistant City Manager Jeff Towery, City Attorney Mary Bridget Smith, City Recorder Amy Sowa and members of the staff.
1. Willamalane Presentation – Mill Race/Mill Pond/Paths/Etc.
Bob Keefer, Superintendent of Willamalane Parks and Recreation District acknowledged that it has
been through collaboration and teamwork with the City and other partner agencies, that Willamalane has been able to accomplish so much for our community. He thanked Mayor Lundberg for the
recognition at Travel Lane County when she received an award for leading tourism in our community.
Mr. Keefer presented a power point on Connecting our Community with Paths and Trails. He referred
to a map of the path and trail system throughout Springfield. The map shows the vision of the east
west connection from Downtown to the Thurston area. He discussed the Middle Fork Path and how it came to fruition through its relationship with the Mill Race, Mill Pond, South 2nd Street and Booth
Kelly. He noted the Virginia/Daisy bike path that would be constructed in the future creating a full east/west connection.
Mr. Keefer discussed the trails and paths from Island Park, Dorris Ranch, and Middle Fork Path, and the future Jasper Road Trailhead and path. Clearwater Park is a special use park and the western terminus of the Middle Fork Path and features direct access to the Willamette River, two boat ramps,
hiking trails and picnicking. These parks and paths have seen a lot of growth in use over the last few years due to the improvements made. Partnerships have made possible the purchase of approximately 700 acres on the Thurston Hills Ridgeline, fulfilling the vision of Willamalane residents who value
their natural environment and outdoor recreation. Willamalane is in the process of their management plan to look at how to make the trail system. The Mayor and Willamalane have talked with the people
from Disciples of Dirt about making this a mountain bike haven. They have good flexibility on the
Jaqua property in Thurston.
Councilor Pishioneri confirmed the land owned by Willamalane in the Thurston area and noted that it
would be isolated from future expansion of infrastructure, etc.
Mr. Keefer explained spaces for utilities already identified. If there was a bigger community need, they could look at that to determine if and where infrastructure is needed. There are a lot of wetland issues in some areas.
Councilor Pishioneri said he is concerned that residential development could not be built in that area.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
June 1, 2015 Page 2
Mr. Keefer said they would always work with the City to address needs. They had heard from the
citizens that preserving this area was important.
Mr. Keefer spoke further regarding the Mill Race Path and areas in which Willamalane was working with the City, SUB and the School District. This path will serve as a link between Downtown and the Middle Fork Path. Once completed, the loop will be 8 miles. They hope to get the initial piece done
late fall into early spring, and finish the balance next summer. He referred to an old map of the Mill Pond Site that gave a picture of the beauty they could have close to downtown. There is a lot of
potential on this site for the TEAM Springfield members. Access is the biggest issue.
Councilor Wylie asked about Middle Fork Path.
Mr. Keefer said it starts at Clearwater Park and ends at Dorris Ranch. There is parking at either end.
Councilor Moore asked about the path along 42nd Street where the lights had been stolen.
Mr. Keefer said it is the McKenzie Oxbow site and Willamalane now manages that site.
Councilor Moore asked if there were more plans for access to the river on that site.
Mr. Keefer said they hope to make it accessible for everyone. They will also do restoration in that area. The path connects into the Marcola Road bike path and 42nd Street. The property includes a wellfield. The McKenzie River Trust owns the property across the river. They would like to have
access from Marcola Road and behind the old railroad/Weyerhaeuser Haul Road. They are trying to work with Breeden Brothers on an agreement. The railroad is not being used and Weyerhaeuser is looking at removing the bridge. Willamalane is looking at ways they might be able to use that bridge
because of its historic value. There is a place across the Willamette River that could accommodate the bridge.
Mayor Lundberg said there is pretty good connection on the west side of the City, and then there is an area with a lot of industrial development and bikes on Main Street. The Daisy Street connector would
be a good answer to that situation, and would give bicyclists a safe place to ride off of Main Street.
They are always looking at ways to make safe connectivity for bikes.
Mr. Keefer said that is a major piece, infrastructure is in place and they need to figure out how to make it work. The north end of town is more difficult to make those connections so they will continue to look for those opportunities.
Mayor Lundberg thanked Mr. Keefer for his presentation.
Mr. Keefer said as Willamalane develops the Thurston Hills Natural Area master plan, his staff could provide a staff report to City staff to share with the Council. There is a lot of potential in that area. He noted further connections that could be possible further east of town.
Councilor Moore asked if it would be beneficial to add the southern section of the Thurston area into
the urban growth boundary (UGB).
Mr. Keefer said that would be something for the City to determine. It would not have too much of an
effect on Willamalane.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
June 1, 2015 Page 3
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 6:37 p.m.
Minutes Recorder – Amy Sowa
______________________ Christine L. Lundberg
Mayor
Attest:
____________________ Amy Sowa
City Recorder