Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/21/2006 Work Session . City of Springfield Work Session Meeting MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION MEETING OF THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL HELD TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 21,2006 The City of Springfield Council met in a work session in the Jesse Maine Meeting Room, 225 Fifth Street, Springfield, Oregon, on Tuesday, February 21,2006 at 5:30 p.m., with Mayor Leiken presiding. ATIENDANCE Present were Mayor Leiken (5:47 p.m.) and Councilors Woodrow, Lundberg, Ralston, and Pishioneri. Also present were Interim City Manager Cynthia Pappas, City Attorney Joe Leahy, Administrative Assistant Julie Wilson and members of the staff. Councilors Ballew and Fitch were absent (excused). 1. Library Board Application Review. Library Director Bob Duey presented the staff report on this item. The Library Board has one vacancy, due to the expiration ofthe term of Dorothy Velasco. Ms. Velasco's term expired December 31, 2005, and she was not eligible for reappointment. . To be eligible for appointment to the Library Board, applicants must be registered voters and live within the city limits. (One member of the board may live outside the city ifhe or she owns property within the city.) Both applicants are registered voters living within the city limits. There were two applicants for this position. The Library Board interviewed both applicants at its February 9 meeting. The Board felt that both candidates were well-qualified, but after lengthy discussion voted to recommend Trevor Lian for appointment. The Board asked staff to encourage Mr. Bunde to apply for the next Board opening, and/or to become involved with the Library Foundation or Friends. This topic is scheduled for council action during the regular meeting this evening. 2. Justice Center Site Design Selection - P50434. Project Manager Carole Knapel presented the staff report on this item. When the City selected the architect for the Justice Center project, the selection criteria addressed the importance of this project and the impact that this facility would have in the downtown area. The architect has developed four site options based on the approved Functional and Space Program. The site options were developed to combine the functionality required for a cost-effective operation and to allow for a facility design which would reflect and enhance the downtown area. . The four options have been reviewed by City staff and by the Community Advisory Committee (CAe). In addition, the CAC has hosted two Public Forum/Open House events. The first of these was conducted on January 18,2006. On that date, the architect did a brief presentation of the four options. Following the presentation, participants had the opportunity to discuss the options with the architect and with members of the CAC. The second event occurred on February 9, 2006. Notices of this event were mailed to all property owners and residents of the . City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes February 21,2006 Page 2 Washburne District and to all property owners and residents within 300 feet of the perimeter of the project. At this event, participants were able to review the options and discuss the advantages and disadvantages of each option. Participants were asked to provide written comments and to rank the options. Based on their own review of the options and the input received in these forums, the CAC has developed a recommendation regarding the selection of a preferred site option. (Attachment C). Because some of the options involve the vacation of streets, a traffic study has been conducted. The study concludes that the street closure scenarios are feasible from a traffic operations standpoint without major mitigation. A summary ofthe impacts is provided in Attachment A. The project schedule has been developed to allow for construction to commence in early 2007. In order to meet this goal, the architect must be given direction regarding which option should be used for development of the schematic design. Ms. Knapel reviewed the various options noted in attachment A of the agenda item summary document as well as reviewed information about traffic and destination counts. Ms. Knapel provided two handouts. . Community Development Manager John Tamulonis provided information regarding a potential Option 2AX regarding First Christian Church Relocation. He discussed the option. He said this provided an additional idea for Council consideration. Mr. Tamulonis recognized church representatives in attendance this evening. Mayor Leiken stated for the record that he was a member of Northwest Christian College Board of Trustees. Councilor Lundberg stated she did not want to go outside the parameters of the budget. We should stay within the budget. Ms. Knapel said staff would need to go back to the architects and the design to determine what we would need to reduce from the existing planlbudget to stay within budget parameters. Councilor Ralston said we need to stay within the budget. Councilor Woodrow asked how and where we would identify an additional $2 million if needed. Ms. Pappas said the city does have healthy reserves that we could consider using as well as an Economic Development (ED), Bancroft or Booth Kelly reserve. We could also look at shrinking the justice center or jail to fit the budget to allow for staying within provisions and not purchase other property. Ms. Knapel said the square footage cost for each program area (police, court and jail) does not have consistent square footage cost associated with it. For example, if a specific amount of square footage were reduced from each area, it will not necessarily reduce the same amount of cost for each program area. The program areas are independent of each other. . Mr. Tamulonis answered questions from Council. City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes February 21,2006 Page 3 . Councilor Lundberg asked about the difference in functionality between 2 and 2 A. The consultant replied that they are different and referenced the area of ancillary building and parking area. Securing access at specific locations is important. Mayor Leiken asked where the Council is on the purchase of additional property. Ms. Pappas said Council has not yet indicated an opinion on this option. Ms. Pappas provided additional information about the possibility of purchasing the Carter property over a period of time, as well as the City leasing space out for a duration of time. Ms. Pappas said the property owner has indicated interest in working with the City. Councilor Woodrow said Option 2 A is a good alternative but we need to consider how the church will feel about being located in the center of the proposed development. Ms. Pappas said should Council wish to consider use of reserve funds, two options might include funding ($1.4 m) from the Booth Kelly or Bancroft Fund. Finance Director Bob Duey did confirm that the Bancroft fund supports capital improvements and Booth Kelly continues to subsidize the General Fund. Councilor Woodrow discussed purchase of the Carter property. At this time we could lease out the facility but at some point it could be used for expansion. . Mr. Tamulonis shared information about tenants of the Carter building, including Justice Center, Heery, Water Master and Lane County Sheriffs Office. Building improvements have been made to the building. Ms. Pappas and City Attorney Joe Leahy conferred. Ms. Pappas advised Council that should they continue to discuss potential purchase price of property we may consider doing so during an executive session. In response to a question from Councilor Ralston, Ms. Knapel said there would be cost associated with closure of B Street. Planning Manager Greg Mott said a possible estimate might be $15,000, again only an estimate. Mr. Mott said other ancillary costs would need to be considered as well as subsequent vacation or other related fees. Councilor Lundberg discussed Option 2 and the possibility of future consideration for property purchase, within budget. She said we do not need to be in a hurry to make a decision if Option 2 were selected. In response to a question from Councilor Woodrow the consultant said there would be an impact and difference between option 2 and 2A - the plans are different. . Mayor Leiken recognized jail bed space, as well as public safety needs of the Springfield community. We could consider option 2 or 2A as well as recognize the potential need for purchase of Carter property. He said the decisions made are critical, not only for the City of Springfield but the region. The Carter building is an important element we need to keep on the table and consider. . -City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes February 21, 2006 Page 4 Councilor Lundberg noted that Lane County does have first right of refusal for property purchase. Staying with Option 2 does allow the possibility of considering the purchase of the Carter property, although Option 2 A may not include that option. City Attorney Joe Leahy provided information regarding first right of refusal and timelines associated with first right of refusal related to property sale/purchase. Mayor Leiken recognized the community and county wide impacts and the importance of this issue. During the regular meeting Council is scheduled to discuss justice center site design selection. Mr. Leahy introduced Christy Monson. She is a new attorney in the City Attorney's Office. Mr. Leahy shared information about Ms. Monson's work history, background and expertise. Mayor Leiken acknowledged her background in Homeland Security and thanked her for her assistance in the past. 3. Lane Transit District (LID) Pioneer Parkway EmX Environmental Assessment (EA). . Transportation Manager Nick Amis presented the staff report on this item. He introduced LID representatives, Debbie Davis, Mark Pangborn, Linda Lynch and other LTD staff members present in the audience. The last meeting between LID and Council occurred on April 4, 2005 to discuss the upcoming EA process. Since that time, LID has created nineteen technical reports for the EA which are being reviewed by City staff, and they have been coordinating with the Federal Transit Authority (FTA) about the timing of the EA in relation to applying for FTA funds for the project. The reports range from transportation studies to ecosystems and water quality in order to fulfill the federal requirements and are listed in Attachment A. The important issues for the City Council at this stage in the EA process concerns how the public and Council are involved in reviewing and commenting on the alternatives, and for the Council to select a Locally Preferred Alternative (LP A) which is then placed in the draft EA for public review. Before the Council selects a LP A, LID will conduct extensive public outreach about the alternatives for Council review and comment. LID is proposing an accelerated timeline for public review and Council action on a LP A by April 2006 in order to apply for FT A funding by August 2006 (See Attachment B: Project Schedule). If an EA is approved by July 2006, then LID is eligible to apply for the first round ofFTA funding for the Pioneer Parkway EmX project. There will likely be many controversial issues about access (driveways), right of way, parking and travel patterns when the alternatives are reviewed by the public. Therefore, City and LID staffs are concerned about whether there is adequate time to address public comments by April on the alternatives when Council considers approving a LP A which is the first major milestone in the schedule. Mike Eyster, LID Board Member, shared information about this project. He said they will review the four alternatives this evening but decision making will be at a later date. He provided a project status report. The four alternatives that were outlined in the agenda item summary report were reviewed. Alternatives that were shared with the Springfield Council on April 4, 2005 were also listed in the report. . Mark Pangborn reviewed the Pioneer Parkway EmX project schedule and aerial map. Everyone with a half mile ofthe corridor area will be notified of the project and open house and other schedule information. He shared information about the Pioneer Parkway Stakeholder Membership group. . . . ~ City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes February 21, 2006 Page 5 Mr. Pangborn said the process allows some flexibility and a "mix and match" of various options, it is not required that anyone single option be selected. There is flexibility in design of the corridors. Local Preferred Alternative (LP A) will be referenced as preferred design process. He discussed the environmental assessment process. It will eventually be submitted for New Starts Funding with the federal government. Authorization would hopefully be provided, then federal funding requests would be pursued. The various options are outlined in prepared packets. A sample packet was shared with council. Councilor Lundberg expressed information about possible concerns, routing and traffic flows. She said we need to be sensitive about where the stops are. There are many levels of how rapid transit will interface with traffic flow. Mr. Pangborn said there are other residents in that area and it is hoped options will help to serve residents. , Councilor Pishioneri discussed the frontage property to be acquired and potential impact to businesses. An LID representative recognized that one specific area had some frontage (lawn strip). Mr. Amis said staff will work through many questions and other factors. He said the environmental assessment hopefully will identify and address these concerns. Mr. Pangborn reviewed timing related to the schedule. See the Pioneer Parkway EmX project schedule. The city will be provided with a written schedule. They could slow the process down if needed. Mayor Leiken said there will be a lot of work occurring in the ar~a, and noted the disruption to citizens, especially in the Harlow Road area. As we move along, the Council represents the entire community. LID is more single focused (transportation services). Mayor Leiken said there has been good partnership between the City and LID on this project. He appreciated the fact that LID was flexible and willing to slow the process if needed. Mayor Leiken spoke to the issue of funding. He asked about LIDs stand regarding funding (sources). Mr. Pangborn discussed Congress struggles with earmarked funding. He said there has been some controversy regarding transportation issues. He recognized that there will need to be national effort related to how we support transportation infrastructure. Councilor Ralston said the automobile is still the higher used transportation mode. Things that interfere with this mode of transportation are a concern. Road narrowing can increase the possibility of accidents. Mr. Pangborn referenced route No. 11 and said it is highly used by Springfield residents and recognized that transit will always have a role in this community. Councilor Lundberg discussed bicycle riders and the importance of keeping children on the sidewalk or bike lane. As we narrow the street, it is a consideration we need to be aware of - there is an elementary school in the project area. Mayor Leiken referenced information Mr. Tamulonis has provided in the past. In the year 2020 we could see over 10,000 individuals employed and working in the Gateway area. . . . L City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes February 21, 2006 Page 6 Councilor Pishioneri said we need to be aware of system capacity in the year 2020. Nick Amis shared information about right of way and lane width as well as impacts to property. He said since these referenced areas are arterials, eleven feet is as narrow as we can go. LID will provide specific figures related to this during the next work session presentation on this topic. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at approximately 6:55 pm. Minutes Recorder - Julie Wilson Attest: . Am~~ City Recorder