Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/27/2016 Work Session City of Springfield Work Session Meeting MINUTES OF THE JOINT ELECTED OFFICIALS WORK SESSION MEETING OF THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL LANE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS LANE COUNTY PLANNNING COMMISSION MONDAY JUNE 27, 2016 The City of Springfield Council met in a joint work session with the Lane County Board of Commissioners and Lane County Board of Commissioners in the Library Meeting Room, 225 Fifth Street, Springfield, Oregon, on Monday June 27,2016 at 5:32 p.m.,with Mayor Lundberg presiding. ATTENDANCE Present from the City of Springfield were Mayor Lundberg and Councilors VanGordon,Wylie, Moore, Ralston, Woodrow and Pishioneri. Also present were City Manager Gino Grimaldi,Assistant City Manager Jeff Towery, Principal Planner Linda Pauly, City Attorney Mary Bridget Smith, Assistant City Attorney Kristina Schmunk, City Recorder Amy Sowa and members of the staff. Present from the Lane County Board of Commissioners were Board Chair Stewart and Board Members Sid Leiken, Pete Sorenson, and Jay Bozievich. Also present were County Administrator Steve Mokrohisky and Senior Planner Keir Miller. Commissioner Farr was absent. Present from the Lane County Planning Commission were Commission Chair Charlie Conrad,and Commissioners Gary Rose,Randy Hledik, Ryan Sisson, Dwight Coon, Charlcie Kaylor,Jason Theisfeld, and Larry Thorp. Mayor Lundberg welcomed everyone and thanked them all for making the trip to Springfield for this important discussion. She said this joint meeting with the Lane County Planning Commission and Lane County Board of Commissioners was to allow them all to hear the information at the same time. 1. Springfield 2030 Plan Update: Economic Opportunities Analysis Final Report and Proposed Urban Growth Boundary(UGB)Amendment to Add Land to the UGB Designated for Employment;Natural Resources; Public Facilities; Parks and Open Space. (Metro Plan Amendment File No. LRP2009-00014). Linda Pauly, Principal Planner,presented the staff report on this item. Ms. Pauly introduced Keir Miller from Lane County. Ms. Pauly said Springfield is doing the employment land determination. Residential land designation was done in 2011 when the Springfield urban growth boundary(UGB)was adopted. This is about planning for the future and the jobs for future generations. Hearings were held on Springfield's Commercial and Industrial Lands Buildable Lands Inventory and Economic Opportunities Analysis (CIBL/EOA)in 2010, and the final report is now complete. This is part of what the two jurisdictions will be asked to adopt in September. Ms. Pauly said the analysis was dictated by State law and Oregon Administrative Rules(OARs) and included an inventory of how much land we have available, an economic opportunities analysis of City of Springfield/Lane County Board of Commissioners/Lane County Planning Commission Joint Elected Officials Work Session Minutes June 27,2016 Page 2 what types of jobs we will need in the future,what types of industries are needed to grow our economy, and what industries are a good fit with our community. Staff looked to see if the City had the right type, size and location of sites that would work with those types of industries. During the CIBL process,the committee identified a number of target industries for the community, and the size of site needed. They found the City does not currently have the size of sites for those industries. State law provides that the City can identify certain site characteristics for employment that will dictate where the UGB will expand. During that process, staff went back and revised the analysis to provide more detail about industries and site needs. Staff then went out and looked at how much land is already designated for the appropriate zoning within the City limits, and then determined if we had enough of that land to meet the needs. She referred to the final analysis that identified where those needs could be met. It was estimated that 10%of needed jobs would be filled through existing space, about 14%with home-based businesses,23%through the UGB expansion, and 31%through vacant land inside the UGB. The city has enough sites that are 5 acres or less, but we need sites larger than 5 acres. The target number of suitable acres they are looking to add to the UGB is 223. "Suitable acres" means not constrained by wetlands,riparian area setbacks, slopes 15% or greater, or floodway. She noted that floodplain is considered suitable for purposes of our inventory and analysis. State Planning Goal 14 outlines how cities need to grow. Before expanding,the City needs to show our needs cannot be accommodated by land already in the UGB. Ms. Pauly said the Council had asked for some examples of what development would look like in several different areas. She displayed a map showing existing employment areas and proposed areas. Councilor Ralston asked why Highway 126 was not outlined as a major transportation corridor. Ms. Pauly said they were only look at parcels of land that were developable for the inventory. She referred to a map of the proposed UGB expansion which would add 257 acres of suitable employment land, a bit more than the 223 which was identified as the land need. This additional land is to accommodate public facilities to serve the areas. They are looking to add 455 acres of public land, parks and open space. Some areas are already publicly owned park land, and include SUB wellfields. Willamalane requested those lands be brought in to the UGB as it is more efficient to manage current park lands if they are brought into the UGB. Currently,those properties are outside the Metro Plan so are subject to three plans. Ms. Pauly reviewed the UGB Alternatives Analysis. The City is using ORS 197.298 to establish priority of lands to study when expanding the UGB. The first priority under the law for expansion is urban reserves,the second priority is exception areas, and the third priority is marginal lands. The staff report goes through every parcel and explains why each is not suitable. Springfield's 2nd and 3rd priority lands are quite distant from our current UGB. Many cities have exception areas close to their UGB. The fourth priority is resource land. Once they reach resources land,they must go through criteria to evaluate every potential site. Each area has been explained in detail in the staff report. Staff looked at soil capability classification and prioritized land based on capability class which is established by the Natural Resource Conservation Service. Some Class 2 areas are in the proposed expansion area as most of Springfield's surrounding land has some Class 2 soil. She noted the north Gateway area and how it was broken up. She discussed all of the areas considered and how those were analyzed and evaluated. Ms. Pauly noted that expansion would add large sites in north Gateway and near the Mill Race site. She referred to maps of each area. Several members of the Board had asked that land between the current UGB to the river be included so it is not in County control, so that has been done. Having I-5 visibility is important for the industrial lands. She also noted that the proposal does not include land City of Springfield/Lane County Board of Commissioners/Lane County Planning Commission Joint Elected Officials Work Session Minutes June 27,2016 Page 3 west of I-5. She referred to the North Gateway area and the land that is in the floodway which is being proposed for natural resource. She also noted the industrial sites. Commissioner Stewart asked about new proposed Federal Emergency Management Agency(FEMA) report and possible impacts. Ms. Pauly said staff has done what they can to address that report. It was decided that could be discussed in further detail after her presentation. Ms. Pauly said the proposed zoning for this area is new and is called the Agriculture Urban Holding Area. This allows the City to bring it into the UGB, do additional planning work, allow existing uses, and hold it for future urbanization to meet the employment land needs. In the Mill Race site, SUB had purchased some property from Knife River for wellfields. She noted where industrial and public land is located in this area, as well as urban holding and public space. Ms. Pauly referred to a final UGB map with proposed expansions. The Lane County Board will have a first reading on the ordinance on July 26. She reviewed the elements of the adopting ordinance. Our area is in transition with comprehensive planning because of HB3337. Springfield and Eugene are both developing comprehensive plans separately from one another, but coordinated. The two cities will still be planning public facilities and regional transportation facilities, and would still be coordinating planning efforts. The City will also be establishing the zoning code to address the new zone, as well as the zoning map. They will also be looking at the Lane County Rural Comprehensive Plan. Open houses are scheduled for August 3 and September 8,with further outreach occurring prior to and between those dates.A joint public hearing is scheduled for September 12,2016. Mr. Miller said this is a City initiated proposal, although Lane County would be required to co-adopt some plans to enable it to be initiated. The County reviews UGB expansion processes frequently, and he commends Springfield's staff. This is one of the most thorough and complete packets he had seen with comprehensive analysis. He feels confident about the proposed expansion areas and analysis. The City of Springfield is proposing to expand their UGB,which would then go into areas currently governed by the Rural Comprehensive Plan. The County would be required to implement a Rural Comprehensive Zoning Plan change. He noted a link to this document. Lane County also co-adopts the City of Springfield Code within the UGB and with the amendments to the Springfield zoning code, Lane County would need to co-adopt those changes. The Rural Comp Plan Maps will also be amended. In 2010,there was a recommendation by the Lane County Planning Commission following a public hearing to forward an affirmative recommendation on the Metro Plan Economic and Urbanization components of this proposal.A lot of this work had already been vetted by the Planning Commission. LC Planning Commissioner Conrad asked about a small tip of land on the map showing the wellfield that was not proposed to be inside the UGB. Ms. Pauly said there are places where staff had to make a decision about extending the UGB to a parcel line, river channel lines, etc. City Surveyor Chris Moorhead said that is one section that is a remnant of an old channel of the river. There is a portion at south tip that is part of the tax lot to the south. Staff had decided to go with tax lot boundaries. City of Springfield/Lane County Board of Commissioners/Lane County Planning Commission Joint Elected Officials Work Session Minutes June 27,2016 Page 4 Ms.Pauly said part of the ordinance provides an explanation for each split tax lot. LC Planning Commissioner Hledik asked if the urban holding designation was a Springfield innovation or modeled after another jurisdiction. Ms.Pauly said it was something other cities such as the City of Redmond had used. The way we are doing it is different. LC Planning Commissioner Hledik asked if it was essentially an urban reserve area. Ms. Pauly said it is somewhat different and not to be confused with urban reserves under State law. These are lands they assume can be served in the planning period. Mr. Miller said urban reserves are land outside the UGB held for future urban needs. LC Planning Commissioner Hledik said he knows there are State criteria for expanding into urban reserves. He asked if there would be additional requirements with this land in the UGB. Ms. Pauly said these would be in the UGB and could be easy to annex. If someone would like to develop,there is a path for them to take through the City's process. That process is spelled out in the policy document. LC Planning Commissioner Kaylor asked about the floodplain. Ms. Pauly said the North Gateway site is entirely in the 100-year flood plain. The Mill Race had some parcels that are not in the floodplain. Commissioner Stewart said during a brief presentation about setbacks in floodplains, discussion was held regarding setbacks. He asked about distances and how they would address it if the new rules go through. Ms.Pauly said they are following this very closely and have thought of ways to buffer our waterways. She noted the width in some of the areas which provide ample buffer. The City has an agreement with the Army Corps of Engineers that already requires a 100 foot buffer on any city-owned property so there would be at least a 100-foot buffer on the Mill Race site. Staff looked at the other areas using 200-foot buffers as a guide and they would still have developable land. Assistant City Attorney Kristina Kraaz said they don't yet know what the ultimate regulations will be. There was a reasonable alternative suggested by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration(NOAA),but FEMA doesn't have to go with that. There will be interim measures that will take effect within the next two years which includes a proposal that in a 175-foot buffer area, development would be limited. In the flood plain outside of the buffer,they are looking at some ratios for mitigation so development could be possible. The City can't stop all planning efforts while waiting to see what is implemented. Commissioner Stewart said he has been working with some constituents in the County that were trying to get a loan on property in the floodplain. The application has changed regarding whether or not the development would have an impact on species, and no one was willing to sign off on that. He asked how that can be addressed. City of Springfield/Lane County Board of Commissioners/Lane County Planning Commission Joint Elected Officials Work Session Minutes June 27,2016 Page 5 Ms.Pauly said the City gives developers wanting to build in the floodplain,a letter with information on what is going on at the State and Federal level. Ms.Kraaz said it sounds like the County was being conservative in that regard. Mr. Miller said this situation comes up more in the County. FEMA told the County that they need to sign an agreement,which is a requirement. The 175-foot setback is from the ordinary high-water mark,not the edge of the floodplain. There would not be a prohibition on development in the entire area. Ms. Kaylor asked if floodway was in the buffer zone. Ms. Pauly said currently,the buffer is 75 feet per our existing regulations. If this property was in our UGB today,the City would require a 75-foot setback. This proposal designates land in the land use plan as a natural resource, so not developable. People could develop beyond that buffer. The buffer follows the floodway as mapped by FEMA. Ms. Kraaz said the proposal is that development would be limited in the larger of 175-foot buffer, or the floodway. Where the floodway is larger than 175 feet, it would include the whole floodway. Commissioner Leiken asked if the new zoning of Agricultural Urban Holding had been adopted in the City of Redmond. Ms.Pauly responded that it had. Commissioner Leiken said that means the Department of Land Conservation and Development(DLCD) staff has experience working with this. ' Ms. Pauly said the DLCD has posted the City of Redmond's UGB expansion as a model on their website. Commissioner Leiken said having a precedence set is good news. Councilor Moore said she appreciates the work being done. She asked Ms. Pauly to explain how the legislature had a part in making this such a lengthy process. Ms. Pauly said the 2014 legislature passed a law that required the State to update the Oregon Administrative Rules(OAR)that governs how UGB amendments are studied and processed. The City of Springfield, City of Eugene and about 7 or 8 other cities were using the old rules. These cities were told the rules had changed completely. Because of the years of work using the old rules,the cities asked the legislature to pass a bill to allow them to use the rules that were in effect when they started the process in 2009. The effort was successful and in March 2016,the City learned they would be able to move forward with the existing rules. Commissioner Bozievich said the recommendation to revise the mapping of floodways with the 90% rather than the 50% is also in the Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPA). He is surprised Maple Island Slough is not considered part of the floodway. There is more to come from FEMA. The majority of the area in South 28th is in the floodplain,and in those cases there is discussion about having to mitigate any historic volume lost, including displaced water. If they move forward with this RPA, it will affect the ability to develop. He asked about the College View property. There is a considerable amount of exception land parallel to I-5, and the land sits on low value soils. The fact that land is no longer being considered may come up when going forward so they need to make sure their findings are strong. City of Springfield/Lane County Board of Commissioners/Lane County Planning Commission Joint Elected Officials Work Session Minutes June 27,2016 Page 6 Mayor Lundberg said much of what we do now is controlled by litigation. They have weighed out what we most need,what we most want, and what would work the best. The amount of acreage has already been reduced significantly in order to present the best case. Gateway has always been a prime area to expand. She agrees with the flood plain issues. When in Washington DC earlier this year, she visited with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration(NOAA)who said their goal was to restrict development. With that in mind,they all have to be aware. Ms. Kraaz said interim measures must be taken, but we don't know what those are at this time. The new mapping requirements and other implementations could take years. Mayor Lundberg said it affects all of our riverfront properties, so the City needs to remain on top of this situation. Congressman DeFazio has also taken a personal interest in this and is working on it as much as he can. They can't wait or they would never get this done. Mr. Bozievich said the biological opinion doesn't take into account Oregon land use laws. Because our UGB's may have an impact on floodplain close to cities,we are providing huge amounts of preservation and resource land east of Springfield and north on the Willamette River. Commissioner Sorenson asked about the public comment opportunities. Ms. Pauly noted the open houses and public hearing dates that are scheduled. The public hearing will be held at Springfield City Hall. Commissioner Sorenson said the Commissioners had a briefing on the NOAA fisheries work. He asked if there might be interest from the Planning Commission members of Eugene, Lane County and Springfield, and the elected officials to hear that briefing and invite NOAA officials to attend. Perhaps they can also learn from other communities that have had NOAA or Oregon Fish and Wildlife buyoff on their land use. That information may be helpful as they move forward. This has happened in other parts of the country such as Arizona where the desert tortoise lives. LC Planning Commissioner Hledik said he is looking forward to the staff report for Planning Commission work session. He asked where the employment projections came from, how the number of large parcels was determined, and how the acreage was derived. Ms. Pauly said Attachment 1 of tonight's agenda packet is a briefing memo with a high level summary of how those things were done. Attachment 2 was the graphic summary document.Attachment 5 is the very long staff report that the elected officials would be adopting. LC Planning Commissioner Sisson asked if the GIS staff used to develop the maps is based on the same GIS flood insurance maps that have not yet been released. If so, he asked if this data can be used if the other maps have not been released. Ms. Pauly said staff is using the currently adopted FEMA data. They have looked at the proposed maps to get a sense of the changes. Until those maps are official,the City can't use them. Mr.Miller said studies regarding Seavey Loop have been ongoing for several years. LC Planning Commissioner Sisson asked if staff was monitoring that so they overlay what is being proposed. Ms. Pauly responded that they were monitoring those studies. City of Springfield/Lane County Board of Commissioners/Lane County Planning Commission Joint Elected Officials Work Session Minutes June 27,2016 Page 7 Councilor Ralston said the City did detailed studies of each area, including Seavey Loop. Mayor Lundberg thanked everyone for coming out for this meeting. The next JEO is scheduled for September 12,2016. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 6:37 p.m. by Lane County Planning Commission, Lane County Board of Directors and Springfield City Council. Minutes Recorder—Amy Sowa (I/ Christine L. Lundberg/ Mayor Attest: am Amy Sow," City Recorder