HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008 10 07 Complete Staff ReportMEMORANDUM CITY OF SPRINGFIELD
DATE OF WORK SESSION: October 7, 2008
TO: Springfield Committee for Citizen Involvement
FROM: Molly Markarian, Planner II
SUBJECT: Citizen Involvement Plan for Glenwood Refinement Plan Update Project
ISSUE: Staff has prepared a Citizen Involvement Plan (CIP) for the Glenwood Refinement Plan Update
Project consistent with Springfield’s adopted citizen involvement policies and with Statewide Planning
Goal 1, Citizen Involvement. The draft CIP presents background information on the project, the purpose
of the CIP, and proposed strategies to engage the public in the Glenwood planning process. Included
with two components of the plan, the Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) and Technical Advisory
Committee (TAC), are lists of recommended categories of participants.
DISCUSSION: The purpose of this CIP is to provide the Committee for Citizen Involvement (CCI) with an
outline of the general process and strategies proposed to engage the public in the Glenwood Refinement
Plan Update Project. Specific details of each component of the plan, including timelines and proposed
advisory committee participants, will be presented during a future work session once staff has completed
the work plan for the project and recruited potential committee members. At that time, the CCI will be
requested to review target completion dates for each strategy and appoint committee members.
The attached CIP has been designed to provide a broad spectrum of occasions for the public to
participate in the planning process and to include citizens representing a variety of backgrounds and
interests. Two essential elements of the plan are the formation of a CAC and TAC. The CAC presents
an opportunity for citizens to communicate with the project team, to provide input, feedback, and
guidance to staff, and to forward recommendations to the City Council. The TAC will address the
technical aspects of the project and ensure interagency and interdepartmental coordination.
It is crucial to raise awareness of the project early on and at key steps throughout the project and to
transmit this information to a large number of citizens. Therefore, the CIP recommends developing a
project webpage so that the public can have access to information regarding the project, relevant
documents, and meeting announcements. In addition, a newsletter will be produced to disseminate
information in a non-electronic format.
A fundamental part of the Glenwood Refinement Plan Update Project is determining what elements of
the community’s character should be preserved and what changes are needed to support a
contemporary vision for Glenwood. The CIP thus includes a survey to engage the public at large in
envisioning Glenwood’s future. In addition, a series of workshops, focus groups, charrettes, and open
houses will be organized to solicit input and feedback on plan elements. Additionally, staff will schedule
Planning Commission, City Council, and County Commissioner meetings, open to the public, to update
elected officials on the progress of the project and to seek their input and recommendations.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the general process and concepts outlined in the attached
CIP be approved and that the list of CAC and TAC participant categories be approved.
ACTION REQUESTED: The CCI is requested to review and approve or direct modifications to the
proposed CIP, including the proposed CAC and TAC participant categories.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1: Glenwood Refinement Plan Update Citizen Involvement Plan
TRANSMITTAL
MEMORANDUM
CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT PLAN
Glenwood Refinement Plan Update Project
PROJECT BACKGROUND & GOALS
Riverfront cities around the world have traditionally turned their backs to the natural assets
meandering through their midst, utilizing riverfront property as a hub for transportation or heavy
industry. However, in recent decades, new patterns of development have emerged that
embrace the ecological features of such communities. As such, once neglected,
underdeveloped, and heavily industrialized riverfronts have been transformed into vibrant
neighborhoods with a mix of residences, businesses, and open space that attempt to balance
both a community’s economic and environmental interests.
The Glenwood area of Springfield, a tear-drop of land encompassing approximately one square
mile abutted by Interstate 5 (I-5) on the west and south and the Willamette River on the north
and east, is ripe for redevelopment and reconnection to the river. Settled as a farming
community in the 1800s and constrained in its development by recurrent flooding until the
middle of the 20th century when dams were constructed upriver, Glenwood has always been
viewed as a unique district nestled between Eugene and Springfield. In fact, when the Eugene-
Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan, the region’s overarching planning policy document,
was adopted in 1982, the question of which jurisdiction should ultimately provide urban services
to Glenwood arose. Once it had been determined that Glenwood would fall under Eugene
jurisdiction, planning for Glenwood began in earnest in 1985 when Eugene and Lane County
engaged residents and property owners in a five-year process to develop a refinement plan for
the area.
While a community-driven effort to transfer jurisdictional responsibility to Springfield was
approved in 1998, the Glenwood Refinement Plan (GRP) was left largely unchanged.
Development in much of Glenwood is thus still guided by the policies of a GRP developed over
twenty years ago when it seemed appropriate to zone the area predominantly for industrial use
with a residential core and commercial strip development, a land use pattern that undervalues
contemporary opportunities for planning and development. Some areas of Glenwood continue
to be appropriate for the type of industrial development that is attracted to the two rail lines
bisecting Glenwood and I-5 access. However, other sections of Glenwood are well positioned
to attract the type of mixed-use employment, commercial, and residential development that
could create a thriving riverfront district. The unique amenities provided by the Willamette River
as it flows through Glenwood are unsurpassed in the state. In addition, Franklin Boulevard,
running east-west through the northern edge of Glenwood, serves as a major thoroughfare
connecting Springfield and Eugene and sets the stage for Glenwood as a gateway to both cities.
The recent addition of the region’s first Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) line, the EmX, along Franklin
Boulevard, enhances the possibilities for transit-oriented development. Glenwood’s proximity to
the University of Oregon also positions it well for successful, mixed-use residential and
commercial development along the Franklin and McVay corridors.
However, existing conditions and outdated development and annexation policies outlined in the
GRP constrain the likelihood that the area will develop in a way that is consistent with a more
modern vision for the area held by both the community and its elected officials. In 2004, the
City Council proposed and citizens voted affirmatively to form an urban renewal district to fund
catalytic infrastructure and development projects in Glenwood. City Council also approved the
Glenwood Riverfront Plan in 2005, the result of five years of an extensive community planning
process for 48 acres in the northeast corner of Glenwood known as Subarea 8. While the
Riverfront Plan showcases the type of forward-thinking planning concepts envisioned for all of
Glenwood, it represents only one segment of Glenwood. In fact, a market study conducted by
the Leland Group in 2007 indicated that existing development patterns, combined with a lack of
a coordinated development plan for all of Glenwood, would thwart the implementation of the
proposed mixed-use plan for Subarea 8.
The City has taken crucial steps to begin to address these constraints: the Franklin Boulevard
Study and the Glenwood Refinement Plan Update Project. The transportation study, which was
initiated in July 2007, culminated in Spring 2008 with Council approval of a multi-way boulevard
concept, a design that could support the type of high-density, mixed-use development
envisioned in the Glenwood Riverfront Plan. Also, in July 2007, staff presented Council with five
planning options for Glenwood, ranging from maintaining the status quo to a comprehensive
refinement plan update process. Council elected to pursue the complete update of the GRP,
recognizing that it would be a significant undertaking, but was necessary to enable the
implementation of a modern vision for Glenwood. In February 2008, Council directed staff to
make the GRP update a priority work item and approved a three-year phased work plan.
The three-phase update of the GRP will begin in September 2008. Phase One (18 months)
tasks include establishing a planning framework for the entire project, as well as a vision for the
Franklin Boulevard and McVay Highway corridors, including the designation of land uses,
provision of public infrastructure, and a set of development and design standards aimed at
achieving the vision. Phases Two (9 months) and Three (9 months) will follow the adoption of
planning documents associated with Phase One and will focus on the Glenwood Boulevard
Corridor and Glenwood Core, respectively. Together, these phases will comprise a
comprehensive planning process that will include visioning, feasibility analysis, physical
planning, and design. The resulting planning documents will provide property owners,
developers, and residents greater certainty regarding the desired form and character of future
development. In addition, such documents will provide direction to public agencies for the
provision of public services and will guide the City in evaluating annexation and development
proposals. As such, the City will be better able to attract and facilitate the development of
harmonious land uses supported by a community vision.
PURPOSE OF CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT PLAN
Successful planning efforts do not occur in a vacuum. Rather, effective planning requires
engaging the people who know a place best as they are the ones who are best suited to provide
the information needed to develop and implement plans. In addition, working collaboratively
with the community during the visioning and decision-making process is critical for establishing
credibility among those who will be most affected by new plans, a key factor as the plan moves
towards adoption.
In fact, in recognizing the value of participative planning, the State crafted statewide Planning
Goal 1, Citizen Involvement, over thirty years ago to ensue that the general public has a voice in
all aspects of land use planning throughout the state. To comply with the requirements of Goal
1, the City adopted a Citizen Involvement Program in 1990 that provides an overview of how the
City should provide for citizen involvement in the planning process, including the formation of a
planning advisory committee for all refinement plan projects, appointed by the Committee for
Citizen Involvement (CCI). Therefore, this citizen involvement plan has been prepared
consistent with Springfield’s adopted citizen involvement policies and with Goal 1. This citizen
involvement plan is thus aimed at establishing a transparent planning process by promoting
dialogue and building relationships with the community – individuals, interest groups,
corporations, and government agencies – from the beginning. The citizen involvement plan also
strives to create opportunities for the community to provide meaningful input by identifying the
desired character for each of Glenwood’s plan districts and assisting in the development of
strategies to support that vision for the future.
PROPOSED CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT STRATEGIES
The citizen involvement strategies outlined below have been proposed to provide a broad
spectrum of occasions for the public to participate in the Glenwood planning process and to
include citizens representing a variety of backgrounds and interests. These activities give the
public adequate time to provide input and for the project team to consider such contributions.
The plan also strives to provide a range of settings for community members to participate, and it
makes use of technology while still providing opportunities for more traditional citizen
involvement. Some components, such as the newsletter and webpage, serve in part to inform
the public regarding how, when, and where they can participate. Others, such as the public
meetings, are designed to raise awareness of the project early and at key steps throughout the
project. Two tools, the Citizen Advisory Committee and the Technical Advisory Committee,
provide for frequent communication with and on-going guidance from the community, as well as
a forum for building consensus among different interests. Some activities provide opportunities
for the public to become involved in small group discussions to vet specific ideas in depth, and
others, such as the survey and large-group forums, allow for more broad-based discussions and
anonymity.
Newsletter
Given the multi-year duration of the project and the desire to keep a large number of citizens up-
to-date and interested in the project at key intervals, staff will produce a newsletter to be posted
on the website and distributed by mail to all interested parties. The first newsletter will introduce
the project to the public and outline opportunities for public involvement and will be mailed to all
individuals, agencies, and organizations outlined on the ‘interested parties’ list in the Appendix.
Later newsletters will include project updates, reminders about opportunities for public
involvement, and any other relevant information.
Webpage
As part of its efforts to include the use of technology in the planning process and to reach other
segments of the public who may want to engage in the project, the City will make all materials
related to the Glenwood Refinement Plan Update Project available on the internet via the
Planning Division’s Glenwood webpage. On this webpage, the public will have access to
information about Glenwood and the refinement plan update project, including maps, project
background, prior planning studies, and photos. As the project proceeds, staff will post project
updates, draft materials, and other relevant documents. Announcements regarding all
opportunities for public involvement will also be posted, as well as the minutes or recordings of
all public meetings. There will also be a section with staff contact information, a list of FAQs,
and links to planning resources.
Survey
The first opportunity for the public at-large to provide input on the project will be an online
survey. The survey is an opportunity to engage the public in thinking about Glenwood as a
whole prior to any large scale citizen involvement in each phase area. In addition, since
surveys are anonymous, the survey is a tool for reaching community members who may be less
likely to participate in activities in more public settings. The survey, which will be developed and
administered in-house, will be designed to gain an understanding of how people currently ‘use’
Glenwood, what are publicly perceived opportunities and constraints for redevelopment, what
improvements are desired for the area, what possibilities are envisioned for future
redevelopment, and if and how the public would like to change the way they ‘use’ Glenwood.
The City will solicit participation in the survey in several ways, including posting notices of the
survey on the project website, in project newsletters, in the Glenwood Gazette, via press
releases to the media, and in advertisements in the Register Guard. All notices regarding the
survey will offer translation / interpretation services and opportunities for the public to take the
survey in paper form, as well.
Citizen Advisory Committee
A citizen advisory committee (CAC) will be formed to provide an opportunity for citizens to
routinely communicate with the project team, providing input, feedback, and guidance to staff
and elected officials throughout the duration of the project. The purpose of the advisory
committee is to:
Voice ideas, preferences, opinions, and concerns
Review, evaluate, discuss, and comment on draft documents and standards
Formulate consensus-based recommendations on preferred policy alternatives
Promote greater overall citizen involvement, including providing advice and assistance
for other public involvement outreach efforts
To ensure that a diverse mix of perspectives and backgrounds is represented on the CAC, the
City will recruit representatives in the categories listed below as these groups are those that will
most likely be affected by or have an interest in the outcome of the project. Members will be
recruited via advertisements in the Register Guard, announcements in the media, on the project
website, and in the initial project newsletter. In addition, since many citizens have been
involved extensively in the planning projects that have occurred in Glenwood over the past
twenty years, the City will also recruit potential CAC members from the list of interested parties
included in the Appendix to ensure continuity with prior planning projects. The final selection of
participants will be based on availability and interest, as well as approval by Springfield’s
Committee for Citizen Involvement as required to comply with the City’s adopted Citizen
Involvement Program and Goal 1. CAC members will be asked to serve on the committee for
the duration of the project.
Interest Group Potential Organizations / Participants # of Participants
Glenwood Residents/Property Owners o Ideally 1 per phase area;
min 1 renter, 1 owner
3
Glenwood Business Owners/Property Owners o Ideally 1 per phase area; min 1
industrial, 1 retail; min 1 renter, 1 owner
3
Glenwood Employees o Ideally 1 per phase area 3
General Public o Live/Work/Own Outside of Glenwood 2
Developers o Homebuilders Association
o Lane Metro Partnership
o Commercial Developer
o Residential Developer
2
Realtors / Lenders o Springfield Board of Realtors
o Eugene Board of Realtors
o Lane County Board of Realtors
o Bankers
2
Designers o AIA
o ASLA
2
Chamber of Commerce o Futures Committee 1
Affordable Housing Advocate o CDAC
o Housing Policy Board
1
While the exact content of each meeting is yet to be determined, a sampling of meeting topics is
outlined below. Additional meeting subjects will be flushed out further as the project proceeds.
Kickoff
The first CAC meeting will focus on orienting the committee to the project and other planning
actions around Glenwood, explaining the role of the committee, outlining CAC member
expectations, and discussing the objectives and likely impacts of the project. Members will also
be asked to reach consensus around a meeting schedule, format, committee process, election
of co-chairs, and adoption of by-laws.
Tour of Glenwood
To give all participants a better on-the-ground understanding of the entire project area, staff will
organize a tour of Glenwood early in the process. The tour will include a brief history of the
area, visits to key sites that illustrate the character of the sub-areas, physical connections and
disconnections, the limited connections to the riverfront, highlight changes occurring in area,
and point out potential redevelopment locations. The tour presents an opportunity for CAC
members to interact informally with each other and familiarize themselves with the different
areas of Glenwood. After the tour, staff will create an interactive map highlighting the route and
stops to post on the website for public access.
Recommendation of Sub-Area Boundaries
After members have a better spatial understanding of Glenwood, staff will solicit input on the
boundaries for each phase prior to initiating planning for Phase One.
Visioning & Opportunities/Constraints Analysis
Around the time the survey is administered to the public at-large, CAC members will also focus
on the vision for the future of Glenwood, along with an analysis of opportunities and constraints.
As such, CAC members will be asked to offer their opinions regarding what characteristics are
important to preserve in Glenwood, what improvements are needed for the area, how they
envision the future of Glenwood, and what will help or hinder the implementation of suggestions
for policy changes.
Evaluation & Recommendation
Over the course of the project, CAC members will be presented with an overview of particular
topics, will be asked to review and discuss alternatives or preliminary results from analyses, and
reach consensus on draft or final recommendations.
Technical Advisory Committee
In addition to the CAC described above, a technical advisory committee (TAC) will be formed to
establish a regular sounding board for more technical aspects of the project and to ensure
interagency and interdepartmental coordination. The TAC will include representatives from all
of the public agencies and departments listed in the Appendix. However, the TAC will be
divided into sub-committees with different scopes of work and responsibilities. For instance, the
group of TAC members listed below1 represents entities that own or operate infrastructure
within Glenwood. As such, these members will be expected to attend all formally scheduled
TAC meetings and to work closely with the project team routinely throughout the course of the
1 Development Services Department – Planning Division; Department of Public Works – Transportation, Engineering, and
Environmental Services Divisions; City Manager’s Office – Economic Development Division; Fire & Life Safety; Police; Willamalane
Park & Recreation District; Springfield Utility Board; Glenwood Water District; Eugene Water & Electric Board; Oregon Department
of Transportation; Union Pacific & Central Oregon and Pacific Railroads; Lane Transit District
project. On the other hand, the remaining TAC members will be asked to provide input,
recommendations, and feedback at specific milestones of the project, via one-on-one or small
group sessions and attendance at specific TAC meetings.
Interest Group Meetings & One-on-One Outreach
While the City will endeavor to include representatives of all key interest groups on the CAC so
that there is a direct line of communication with such groups, staff will make presentations or
attend events as requested by interest groups to discuss the project in general, understand
group concerns, and answer questions.
Additionally, over the course of the project, it may be prudent to hold focus groups or interest
group meetings to discuss issues and concepts related to a specific phase of the project with
targeted audiences. Such groups might include developers, architects, real estate
professionals, the business community, youth and university students, property owners, large
employers, or neighborhood residents. The method of notice used to advertise such meetings
will be tailored to the target audience.
In addition, to kickoff each phase of the project, staff will send a postcard invitation to all
property owners in the phase area announcing the start of the phase work and inviting owners
to contact planning staff if so desired. Such one-on-one contact will familiarize staff with the
property owners in the phase area, introduce key stakeholders to the planning process for that
phase, solicit preliminary ideas, and address any questions or concerns.
Workshops / Charrettes / Open Houses
The project team will organize and promote a series of events to engage the public at-large in
the planning process at major milestones of each phase. Such events, including workshops,
charrettes, and open houses, will provide a chance for community members to become
informed about the project, provide input, and exchange ideas, both in large groups and smaller
break-out sessions. Staff intends to seek an assistance grant from the Oregon Transportation &
Growth Management Program to fund a facilitated public charrette for this project.
The City will use different techniques to attract participants to the various public meetings,
including posters, postcards to interested parties, press releases to the media, listings on
community calendars, and newspaper ads, as well as on the project website and in the project
newsletters.
As with the CAC timeline, the format and content of each meeting will develop over time.
However, the following is a list of possible topics:
Introduce Project Phase, Identify Issues, & Establish Vision
At the beginning of each phase, the City will hold a public meeting to present an overview of
planning process and provide information on existing conditions in the sub-area. Staff may
present and discuss issues identified in the survey and solicit additional input regarding
opportunities and constraints and visual preferences.
Generate Ideas
During the process when land use designations are being considered and development and
design standards are being created, staff will hold a more focused discussion regarding the
future of each sub-area. Such an event might include the project team introducing a toolbox of
strategies in a large-group setting, then breaking into small groups in a more facilitated
charrette-type setting to discuss and decide how to apply such tools, and then re-group to share
the ideas generated with the rest of the participants. These events are also an opportunity to
involve local architecture and planning students in the Glenwood project to facilitate a workshop
or charrette.
Analyze Alternatives & Test Recommendations
Using the ideas generated from prior public meetings in each phase, the project team will draft
more formalized options and recommendations and then seek the help of the community in
narrowing down alternatives. In such sessions, the range of options would be presented and
interactive activities developed to evaluate such alternatives and reach consensus on preferred
concepts. For instance, once development and design standards have been drafted for each
phase, it will be helpful to test the effects of the proposed standards on building prototypes in a
workshop-type setting led by the consultant hired to craft such standards. Similarly, as part of
the land use analysis, staff may use computer imaging software to illustrate the impact of the
recommended alternatives to help in analyzing alternatives.
Review Draft & Final Recommendations
Towards the end of each phase, the project team will organize an open house-type event to
present the proposed refinement plan changes and plan district recommendations to the public.
Elements of the events might include a slide show documenting the project background and
planning process, a display of maps & documents from prior public meetings, exhibits of the
preferred recommendations, opportunities for question and answers with the project team, and
a way for the public to ‘vote’ on details of the plan or preferred elements.
Public Hearings
At key milestones during the course of the project, staff will schedule Planning Commission and
City Council work sessions to update elected officials on the progress of the project and to seek
their input and recommendations. In addition, at the end of each phase of the project, staff will
schedule joint public hearings for the Planning Commission, City Council, and Lane County
Planning Commission and Board of Commissioners to deliberate formal adoption of the final
work products. As with all work sessions and public hearings, notice will be published per City
protocol for these meetings, which are open to the public, and, in the case of the public
hearings, are opportunities for community members to submit formal comments to their elected
officials regarding the project.
APPENDIX - Interested Parties2
City-Related Groups Public Sector Private Sector Associated Advisory
Group Members3
City Attorney’s Office Lane Council of Governments (LCOG) 1000 Friends of Oregon Anderson, Susan
City Council Lane Regional Air Protection Agency (LRAPA) American Society of Landscape Architects (ASLA) Armstead, Joan
CMO – Economic Development
Division Lane Transit District (LTD) Chamber of Commerce Barton, Steve
Community Development Advisory
Committee (CDAC) Central Oregon and Pacific Railroad Eugene Board of Realtors Brombaugh, John
DSD – Planning Division City of Eugene Glenwood Business Tenants Carvo, Dave
Fire & Life Safety Eugene Water & Electric Board (EWEB) Glenwood Employees Cassara, William
Historic Commission Glenwood Water District Glenwood Property Owners Cochran, Robert
Planning Commission Housing Policy Board Glenwood Residents Collier, Fred
Police Lane County Goal 1 Coalition Crandall, Lola
PW – Engineering Division Lane Metro Partnership Homebuilders Association of Lane County Draggoo, Tom
PW – Environmental Services Division NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) LandWatch Lane County Dynes, Ruth
PW – Maintenance Division Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife
(ODFW) Lane County Board of Realtors Gordon, Eric
PW – Transportation Division Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) Manufactured Home Owners of Oregon (MHOO) Grandahal, Martin
Springfield Economic Development Agency (SEDA) Oregon Department of State Lands (DSL) Northwest EcoBuilding Guild Hledik, Randy
Oregon Department of Transportation
(ODOT)
Southwest Chapter of American
Institute of Architects (AIA) Jones, Don
School Districts 19 & 4J Springfield Board of Realtors Karotko, George
Springfield Utility Board (SUB) Springfield Renassaince Development Corporation (SRDC) Little, Gary
Union Pacific Railroad U of O Architecture & Planning Programs Marino, Marge
University of Oregon – University Planning Office Marvin, Phil
Willamalane Park & Recreation District Miller, Michael
Moe, Steve
Moynier, Bill
Myrmo, Erik
Nelson, Debbie
Oldham, John
Pape, Gary
Pardo, Steve
Peterson, James
Phillips, Nathan
Ramsey, Taylor
Rasmussen, John
Roth, Steve
Santiago, Guy
Sasson, Koren
Schneider, Keith
Seaver, David
Seaver, Pamela
Skillern, John
Smith, Howard
Spicer, Jim
2 This list will grow over the course of the project as more community members express their interest in staying informed about the
project.
3 This list represents most of the individuals who have served on the advisory committees for the original Glenwood Refinement
Plan (1985-89), the jurisdictional update of the refinement plan (1999), the Glenwood Urban Renewal District (2005-present), the
Glenwood Riverfront Plan (2000), and the Franklin Boulevard Study (2007-08).