Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/18/1999 Work Session . MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION MEETING OF THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL HELD MONDAY, OCTOBER 18,1999 The city of Springfield council met in work session in the Jesse Maine Room, 225 Fifth Street, Springfield, Oregon, on Monday, October 18, 1999, at 6:00 p.m., with Mayor Maine presiding. , -ATTENDANCE Present were Mayor Maine, Councilors Ballew, Fitch, Hatfield, Leiken, Lundberg and Simmons. Also present were City Manager Michael Kelly, Assistant City Manager Gino Grimaldi, City Attorney Joe Leahy, Senior Management Analyst Rosie Pryor, City Recorder Julie Wilson and members of the staff.- 1. Amendments to Appendix 1, Development Code Fees Schedule, Springfield Development Code, Jo. No. 99-05-124. Finance Director Bob Duey presented the staff report on this issue. At the work session on March 1, 1999, council reviewed three types of fees: those referenced by the Springfield Municipal Code, those administrative in nature, and those set by the Springfield Development Code (SDC). Council directed staff to adjust fees to recover 75% of the true cost of providing services, based on the average cost, for both city limits and urbanizing areas. This ordinance for SDC fee schedule changes is the last in a series of three resolutions/ordinances presented to council to reach that directive. . Twenty-five fees are being affected by the adoption of this ordinance. Of those twenty-five fee changes, three new fees are being proposed; Pre-Application Report Minimum Development, and Site Plan Review Minor Modification. All changes to the SDC Fee Schedule are being made to better enable the city to recover 75% of the cost of providing these services. It is anticipated that these changes will increase revenue by approximately $35,000.00 annually. ' Following the March 01, work session, staff presented Council with a tentative schedule that anticipated bringing an Ordinance to adjust Development Code fees at the end of June, after receiving a review by the Planning Commission. Prior to the end of June, it was decided that additional public input should be received and the schedule was amended to include time for public input over the summer months. This effort included sending the fee change information to the Springfield Chamber, the Lane County Homebuilders Association, all- prominent local builders and developers, identified land use consultants and engineering firms, and all neighborhood associations. This effort was concluded in September. Also subsequent to the work session, a review of the Development Code discovered that fee changes in the development code fees is the one exception for all development code items needing to be processed through the Planning Commission. In view of that, the Planning Commission, although informed of the potential fee changes, has not been asked to make a recommendation. . The City received three contacts in regards to the information mailed out to interested parties. The Springfield Chamber responded by phone that they were supportive of the effort if it was related to cost recovery. One developer phoned and expressed concern over the site plan fee. Written testimony was received from one land use consultant and is included in Attachment C as part of the staffs response to the public input. The staffs response to the concern over Work Session Minutes October 18, 1999 Page 2 . the site plan fee raised by both the developer and the land use consultant is included as one of the responses in that attachment. The fees changes being recommended are the result of staff reviewing the time and materials required to complete activity related to the various planning processes. Additional calculations were made and added to account for department and citywide overhead. The new fees are based on the average time it takes to review a particular application type. In a couple of cases, where there was a great disparity in the staff effort required for certain applications (site plan review) or where staff believed that the continuation of certain activities should be encouraged (pre-application meeting), additional consideration was given prior to establishing the new fee. As discussed at the work session, the costs generated by staff for this fee review were completed through a manual record keeping effort for time spent on each application type during a specific time period. It is believed to be fairly representative of the applications as a whole and will be subject to review on a periodic basis for future fees and charges reviews. Attachment B identifies the changes that are being recommended to the Development Code. They essentially follow the information reviewed with Council at the March 01, work session. Minor modification were made in a small number of the fees as staff reviewed the final numbers, language changes were added to provide clarification of intent, and several changes were made in response to public input received (see Attachment C). . The staff effort that is involved in the review of Development Code applications is financed through the General Fund, the Street Fund and the Sewer Operations Fund. The estimated revenue that may be generated by the fee changes is between $30,000 and $35,000 and would be recognized in one of the three mentioned funds, depending upon the time and effort involved in processing of the development application. Mr. Duey answered questions from council. Mr. Duey discussed plans for review and methodology to be used for future review. Councilor Fitch discussed the financial impact of about $35,000. She asked what was expected in return for the increase in fees. Mr. Duey explained the fee adjustment is just that, an increase to cover the cost to provide services. Development Services Director Susan Daluddung answered questions regarding turn-around times. 2. Draft Springfield Commercial Lands Study (SCLS). City Planner Susanna Julber presented the staff report on this issue. As part of the Metro Area's Periodic Review Work Program, the city must prepare a Springfield Commercial Lands Study (SCLS). This Study complies with the requirements of Statewide Planning Goal 9, and sets the framework for commercial development to the year 2015. The overall objective of the SCLS is to ensure that the long-term supply of commercial land is adequate to meet the community's commercial development needs in terms of both quantity and quality. . The Study finds that there is a deficit between the supply and forecasted demand for commercial land. This is the first Council Work Session on the Draft. Subsequent Work Session and Public Hearings are scheduled through January 2000. Work Session Minutes October 18, 1999 Page 3 . Currently, there are approximately 85 vacant acres of developable commercial land remaining in the Springfield Urban Growth Boundary and 12 acres ofland presumed to be redevelopable within the planning period of the Study, a total of97 acres. Of these vacant acres, roughly 30 acres are contained in the former Springfield Airport site, and much ofthe vacant commercial sites in the inventory are small and constrained. The demand for commercial land to the year 2015 is estimatedto be 255 acres, indicating a gap of 158 acres. The Springfield Commercial Lands Citizen Advisory Committee estimates that the present inventory represents a two-year supply at most, given recent trends in commercial development. While an exact figure of commercial acreage will not be 'set aside" for future commercial development as a result of this Study, the SCLS contains policies, implementation strategies, and recommended amendments to the Springfield Development Code to help ensure that Springfield has an adequate supply. The Draft policies and implementation strategies fall into the following categories: . . Policies that help ensure an adequate supply of commercial land is provided in newly developing areas of the UGB; . Policies that recommend re-designating and rezoning where appropriate; . Policies to implement and encourage redevelopment and higher-density infill development, consistent with the transplan; . Policies that provide for the efficient use of commercial land; and . Policies that direct the reconciliation of Plan/Zone conflicts. To ensure compliance with Goal 9 and the requirements of Periodic Review, the Study Recommends Springfield Development Code Amendments, re-designation and rezoning, the implementation of a land use monitoring system, and adoption of incentives for redevelopment. Completing these tasks may impact the City financially in terms of staffing requirements and in adoption of incentive programs. The Sample Implementation Schedule is included in the Agenda Item Summary, page 41 of Chapter four and contains a proposed timeline for completing the implementation strategies. Ms. Julber said most other areas have surplus commercial land. Council asked questions regarding the Glenwood area that would eventually be annexed and how it would be impacted. Ms. Julber explained there are some vacant lands and hopefully that will be evaluated in the future. She said without doing a site-by-site review, it would be difficult to provide information at this time. Ms. Julber answered questions about commercial and mixed-use designations. Planning Manager Greg Mott provided information about trip reduction credit. He also discussed redesignation issues. Councilor Hatfield discussed inventory (Glenwood area) and design standards. He discussed how we might encourage better use of commercial land. He said how we develop retail versus employment commercial is important and said the land study needs to be reviewed. . Work Session Minutes October 18, 1999 Page 4 . Ms. Julber reviewed information on Page 33 of the draft Springfield Commercial Lands Study. This included policy and implementation strategies. City Planner Mel Oberst answered questions from council. Councilor Fitch said we are seeing more people in smaller buildings, with employees working from their home. She asked how we account for this decentralized workforce. Councilor Simmons said this raises a good question. He used an example ofInternet service business and asked if there was a mechanism to account for this type of business. Ms. Julber said the trend section did touch on this issue. Councilor Simmons asked about redefining minimum levels, as defined at the state level. He said technology is changing. Staff would follow-up on this question. Councilor Leiken referenced LCDC and the group discussed state trends. Councilor Hatfield provided examples such as Internet retailers and the need to build warehouses for inventory storage to meet customer service standards. He also discussed standards and compliance. Mayor Maine discussed the new Federal Express site and discussed redistribution centers as they relate to this issue. . Ms. Julber reviewed policies and strategies referenced on page 34 ofthe agenda item staff report. Ms. Julber reviewed Policy 3A, 4, 4A and implementation strategies. Councilor Ballew discussed market and demand issues. The group discussed the depth of commercial lots on Main Street and that they were not deep enough and needed to be increased. Ms. Julber reviewed Policy 6 and discussed parking issues. The group discussed not forcing traffic/vehicles into residential areas. They also discussed on-street parking, surplus parking and minimum standards related to adequate parking needs. The group further discussed parking requirements and design standards. Staff reviewed information related to the Clean Water Act. Council members were encouraged to forward any comments onto Ms. Julber related to this Issue. . . . . .- Work Session Minutes October 18, 1999 Page 5 ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 7:00 p.m. Minutes Recorder - Julie Wilson ~~~ Maureen M. Maine Mayor W(JLJUJ