HomeMy WebLinkAboutNotes, Meeting Miscellaneous 10/9/2007 (2)
MINUTES
Springfield Planning Commission
Work Session
Springfield City Hall-Jesse Maine Room
225 Fifth Street, Springfield
July 5, 2006
6 p.m.
PRESENT: David Cole, Chair; Frank Cross, Vice Chair; Greg Shaver, Lee Beyer, Gail Decker,
members; Bill Grile, Greg Mott, Colin Stephens, Andy Limbird, City of
Springfield staff; Joe Leahy, City Attorney.
ABSENT: Bill Carpenter. ,
1. COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL BUILDABLE LANDS STUDY
Commissioner Cole called the meeting to order.
Mr. Mottjoined the commission for a discussion of the Commercial and Industrial
Buildable Lands Study. He noted the upcoming joint elected officials meeting on July 12,
2006, to be held at the Lane County Public Works Department, at which the officials
would receive the study. Mr. Mott called attention to the background materials, which
noted one of the focuses of the study, the creation of a data base that would be populated
from a variety of sources, including local RLID and GIS files, and which could be easily
consulted and updated.
Mr. Mott said that the study was funded by the elected officials of the three local
jurisdictions and the Lane Metro Partnership in response to issues that were raised by the
partnership in 2003 and was based on the requirements of the Oregon Administrative Rule
for commercial and industrial lands and Goal 9 (Economic). The inventory was an attempt
to match supply with future demand and creat~ opportunities for development. He
recalled that the last time work was done on the inventory was in the late 1980s. A special
study advisory committee had been formed in the early 1990s to address the supply, but
the effort died away after a preliminary conclusion that there was surplus supply. He said
that during the most recent periodic review Springfield was tasked to examine its
commercial lands supply, and in 2001 the City had concluded the supply was inadequate.
Mr. Mott said that staff was aware that commercial sites were few and far between and
those that existed did not necessary match the needs of a shifting economy. Springfield
had a work program task to look at other potential commercial sites and determine what
kinds of businesses were likely to come to the community and what kind the council
would like to attract. That task was forestalled by the commercial and industrial lands
inventory.
Mr. Mott anticipated that within the next eight months the three jurisdictions would have a
better idea of what was actually available, and what was likely to be needed. He said that
the report addressed only supply and did not discuss demand. However, he anticipated a
MINUTES-Springfield Planning Commission
Work Session
July 5, 2006
Page 1
1\;
C:I
~
"
-:\'
~'
"'0
<D
>...J
. ffi <C
U
<Di..:
Q::Q.)
<DC:
.....c:
ro.i2
00..
demand analysis would be done. That would be a decision of the joint elected officials.
Mr. Mott invited questions.
Responding to a question from Commissioner Beyer about how the data would be
updated, Mr. Mott agreed with a suggestion from Commissioner Beyer that to some
degree, the process would be an matter of straightforward subtraction, but pointed out that
the jurisdictions relied on information provided by applicants, which could vary in
accuracy. In addition, if someone had a 15 acre parcel and was developed 9 acres, were
the remaining 6 acres available for development and were they included in the inventory?
He deferred more technical questions to the City's GIS staff.
Commissioner Beyer emphasized the importance of updating the data base and ensuring
that it considered sites constrained with natural resources. Mr. Mott indicated that staff
identified 20 features that were relevant to the quality of a site, including natural resource
constraints.
Commissioner Beyer said that many commercial lands were constrained by natural
resources, utilities, lack of access, and small size. Mr. Mott said that both the Springfield
Utility Board and the Eugene Water & Electric Board had indicated where transmission
lines and substations would be located in the future. He noted that the system would be set
up so other relevant data bases could be queried. Commissioner Beyer commended that
approach.
Commissioner Cross asked if the system could search data bases statewide or nationwide.
Mr. Mott said that the data base could search other local data bases currently in place.
Information could be shared between the three jurisdictions. Responding to a follow-up
question from Commissioner Cross, Mr. Mott said that each jurisdiction would maintain
its own data. He said that Springfield had an interest in ensuring that its data was the most
current possible. He noted the difficulty that Springfield currently had with ensuring that
assessor's information was updated in a timely way. Mr. Grile observed that there could
be a nine-month delay in getting lot numbers from Lane County.
Commissioner Decker asked for information about the meaning of the term "land use,
polygon." Mr. Mott indicated he would provide the commission with additional
information.
Commissioner Shaver emphasized the importance of system connectivity.
Commissioner Shaver asked if there was anything that the commission could do to address
the delays created by the assessor. Commissioner Beyer suggested that the problem for the
assessor's office was one of resources.
Mr. Mott believed that the approach being taken was a trend that would continue in regard
to each jurisdiction's data. Increasingly, each would be more and more in control of its
own data. Commissioner Beyer asked if Springfield had ever discussed the potential that
Springfield could do the data entry needed. Mr. Leahy reviewed the current process used
by Lane County to assign tax lot numbers, explaining that Lane County did not assign
numbers until the deed went throu~. He said that it would not be possible for Springfield
MINUTES-Springfield Planning Commission
Work Session
July 5, 2006
Page 2
~
~
~\
~\
"0
(!)
>.....1
'CD <(
u
Q)i..;
Q::ID
<Dc
_c
cacti
cO:
to assign those numbers.
Commissioner Beyer asked if it would be possible for the commission to receive annual
updates of the supply in the future. Mr. Mott said yes. He anticipated that the information
would be shared in a manner similar to the residential lands report.
2. JUSTICE CENtER-REQUEST FOR VACATION OF ALLEY
Mr. Limbird circulated pictures taken of the subject alley taken on June 20 that showed
both ends of the alley marked with "do not enter" signs and the location of the Lane
County ballot box. He said that there were two slots in the ballot box, one a "snorkel" slot
for vehic,les driving up to the box via B Street through the parking lot.
Mr. Limbird called attention to the map on page 1-2 of the staff report, which showed
traffic circulation patterns in the vicinity. He said currently, the central parking lot area
was already restricted to police parking and was signed accordingly. He invited questions.
Co.mrr1issioner Beyer asked if staff had discussed with Lane County other sites for the
ballot box. Mr. Limbird indicated that had not yet occurred. He agreed with a statement
from Commissioner Beyer that the location was somewhat awkward to use.
Commissioner Shaver pointed out that one advantage was that the vehicle using the box
did not have to cross a lane of traffic to access the location.
Mr. Limbird said that it had been suggested that the ballot box be relocated to City Hall.
He was unsure that it could be located where it could be directly accessed, and suggested
one suitable location could be under City Hall.
Commissioner Decker believed that the box should be located on a one-way street so the
driver could access the box.
3. ADJOURN
Commissioner Cole adjourned the meeting at 6:55 p.m.
(Recorded by Kimberly Young)
DatE1 r~ecelved:
Planner: AL
/O/'1~7
II
MINUTES-Springfield Planning Commission
Work Session
July 5, 2006
Page 3