HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015 01 21 AIS Main VisionAGENDA ITEM SUMMARY Meeting Date: 1/21/2015
Meeting Type: Regular Meeting
Staff Contact/Dept.: Linda Pauly/DPW Staff Phone No: 541-726-4608
Estimated Time: 30 Minutes
S P R I N G F I E L D PLANNING COMMISSION Council Goals: Encourage Economic Development and
Revitalization through Community Partnerships
ITEM TITLE: MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN: A “ROADMAP” TO SUPPORT ACHIEVEMENT OF THE COMMUNITY’S PREFERRED FUTURE LAND USE
AND TRANSPORTATION OUTCOMES (TYP413-00006)
ACTION
REQUESTED:
The Planning Commission is asked to conduct a public hearing on the Vision Plan
(Attachment 2) and to forward a recommendation to the City Council to adopt/not adopt the Plan. Project consultant Tom Litster from OTAK will provide a brief
overview presentation prior to the opening of the hearing.
ISSUE STATEMENT: The Draft Main Street Corridor Vision Plan (Attachment 2) identifies a new broad, achievable vision: the transition of Main Street to a “complete community street.”
The Plan identifies specific vision statements, goals, activity nodes, redevelopment
opportunity sites and potential implementation strategies for three distinct “segments” along 7 miles of Main Street between Downtown and Thurston, based
on what we’ve heard from the community, and in response to existing and expected
future conditions in the corridor.
ATTACHMENTS: 1. Planning Commission Briefing Memo 2. A. Council Resolution
B. Main Street Corridor Vision Plan C. Addendum D. Community Outreach Summary
DISCUSSION:
On November 4th, 2014, the Planning Commission conducted a work session and provided
input on the Draft Vision Plan — the work product of an 18-month effort by the City to gather public input that provides a foundation for future land use and transportation
planning and projects. Over 500 citizens, business owners, city leaders, and property owners have participated in the visioning process to identify a preferred future for
Springfield’s Main Street Corridor (ATT2 - D). At the September 16th work session, the Planning Commission reviewed and provided input on potential implementation strategies
and actions the City could pursue in the short term and long term to advance new visions for the corridor (ATT2-C).
Staff mailed information about the Plan and the public hearings to the property owners and
residents in the study area, conducted an open house on January 20th, and emailed information to interested parties. Staff has also met with several property owners and
developers to discuss the Plan and potential projects. The City Council is scheduled to conduct a hearing on February 17th.
The new vision for Main Street is one important piece in Springfield’s overall community
development vision. With an adopted Vision Plan serving as a Big Picture roadmap of where the City is going, the City and its partners can more effectively align and leverage
partnerships, projects and resources to support the kinds of positive changes in the corridor the community wishes to see over both the short and longer terms. The potential projects
and programs suggested in the Plan do not represent any decisions by the City to fund or participate in projects, programs and redevelopment projects, but the plan can be used to
facilitate continued public conversation about the future of Main Street.
M E M O R A N D U M City of Springfield
Date: 1/21/2015
To: Planning Commissioners
PLANNING
COMMISSION
BRIEFING
MEMORANDUM
From: Anette Spickard, AIC DPW Director
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner
Subject: MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN: A
“ROADMAP” TO SUPPORT ACHIEVEMENT
OF THE COMMUNITY’S PREFERRED FUTURE LAND USE AND
TRANSPORTATION OUTCOMES
ISSUE: The Draft Main Street Corridor Vision Plan (Attachment 2) identifies a new broad,
achievable vision: the transition of Main Street to a “complete community street” consistent
with the Five Goals for Our Main Street Projects:
Encourage economic revitalization and land use redevelopment.
Provide transportation choices to residents, businesses and commuters to encourage
individual and community well-being and public safety.
Improve transportation safety and access for walkers, cyclists, transit riders and drivers along and through the corridor.
Improve aesthetics on Main Street, making it an attractive place to live, work and shop.
Create Main Street identities.
The Plan identifies more specific vision statements, goals, activity nodes, redevelopment opportunity sites and potential implementation strategies for four distinct “segments” along 7 ½
miles of Main Street between Downtown and Thurston, based on what we’ve heard from the
community, and in response to existing conditions in the corridor.
DISCUSSION: The new vision for Main Street is one important piece in Springfield’s overall
community development vision. The Main Street Corridor Vision Plan creates a sensible and
appealing picture of the future and outlines logical actions and strategies for achieving the vision over time. New visions and goals for preferred future land use and transportation outcomes have
emerged from the community visioning process, as documented in the Plan (Attachment 2B), in
Attachment 2-D Community Outreach Summary and as more fully described in Planning Project File No. TYP413-00006.
Broad-based community input was essential to fulfilling the stated objectives of the Main Street Corridor Vision Plan project — establishing a vision for mutually supportive land uses and
transportation systems that provide enhanced opportunities for successful commerce and corridor redevelopment; improving safety and balancing mobility for motorists, pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users; and increasing corridor accessibility to jobs, workforce, education,
services, and the ability to accommodate future growth in travel. Council’s adoption of the Vision Plan will memorialize the public involvement received through the visioning process and provide a strong foundation of public opinion to help guide and inform future land use plan and
zoning updates along the corridor, local transportation planning and corridor enhancement projects.
Evolving land uses, multimodal transportation improvements and enhanced aesthetics in the Main Street corridor will help the City meet goals for new jobs and economic vitality and are
essential aspects of the new vision for Main Street. The community expressed desire to see
more appealing places to live, work and shop in each segment of the corridor. Implementation of
Attachment 1-1
1/15/2015 Page 2
some or all of the transformations illustrated in the Vision Plan will contribute to Springfield’s vitality as a preferred community in which to live and work. The corridor enhancements and
land uses depicted in the Vision Plan will also improve the walkability and bike-ability of Main
Street’s neighborhoods — supporting significant health benefits and better accessibility for citizens of all ages and physical abilities. Implementation of the new vision enhances the City’s
ability to help seniors age in place while attracting a younger cohort of residents — stimulating
the City’s ability to generate interest from employers and entrepreneurs from the business clusters that seem most attracted to this region.
As a state highway, Main Street was initially designed to optimize access and capacity for automobile and truck trips. Main Street is also an important business corridor where much of the
customer base relies on auto travel. It will continue to function as both. However, input from the community outreach reflects a wide-spread desire for a better balance of transportation choices for Main Street, a balance of improved walking and cycling safety, slower traffic speeds and
mobility for all travel options including transit service. Changes in the corridor that balance the needs of all corridor users will become more and more paramount if the City is to retain its inviting small town feel as the City grows.
The Main Street Corridor Vision Plan supports achievement of outcomes identified in the
guiding goals for Our Main Street projects (established by the multi-agency Main Street
Projects Governance Team) as follows:
Encourage economic revitalization and land use redevelopment
The Main Street Corridor Vision Plan includes vision statements and pictures for each segment to help envision realistic future development patterns along Main Street.
The Plan identifies six Activity Nodes (at 14th, 21st, 30th, 42nd, 54th and 58th) that present opportunities for intensification of commercial and mixed uses and targeted investments
in public realm enhancement such as streetscape projects, public art and enhanced design of transit stations. These locations have major street connections to adjacent
neighborhoods, and are important places to implement initiatives such as Safe Routes to
Schools and access-to-transit improvements.
The Plan identifies eleven Opportunity Sites, potential land use and zone changes to help envision and encourage economic revitalization and land use redevelopment activity in the Corridor. Staff is currently conducting outreach to property owners of
these sites.
The Plan identifies Business Activities that build on successful existing business, take
advantage of specific redevelopment opportunities and are consistent with realistic market potential. New business opportunities also support the City of Springfield’s long-
term employment goals.
The Plan identifies Housing Choices that will accommodate a mix of incomes and age
groups in a range of housing options. New housing development will help sustain “Alive after Five” energy at key nodes along Main Street and support transit investments
throughout the corridor. The Plan points out places in the corridor where residential
development makes the most sense.
Provide transportation choices to residents, businesses and commuters to encourage individual and community well-being and public safety.
The Main Street Corridor Vision Plan includes Transportation Choices goals for each
segment of the Corridor.
Attachment 1-2
1/15/2015 Page 3
The Plan includes Framework Plans for Multi Modal Transportation identifying potential multi-modal options that could improve safety for all users, increase transit
ridership and support increased residential and business development. The frameworks identify Regional Connections, Primary Neighborhood Connections and Secondary Neighborhood Connections, and illustrate potential locations for projects and
programs. The plans are diagrammatic and are not detailed concepts for future projects. They do not represent any decisions by the City to fund or participate in the
recommended projects and programs and redevelopment projects. The framework plans
can be used to help set priorities, allocate resources, and to facilitate continued public conversation about the future of Main Street.
The Plan identifies Activity Nodes at major street connections to adjacent
neighborhoods that can play a significant role in improving Neighborhood Connectivity through initiatives such as Safe Routes to Schools and access-to-transit improvements.
Enhanced Transit Service is a potential desired outcome of the Main-McVay Transit Study. The Plan identifies potential transit improvements in the corridor that could
support safer mobility, economic revitalization and Main Street identity.
Improve transportation safety and access for walkers, cyclists, transit riders and drivers
along and through the corridor.
The Main Street Corridor Vision Plan identifies implementation actions to improve
safety and access for each segment.
The Plan identifies a community preference for reducing traffic speeds. Traffic Calming Studies are needed to determine the most effective measures to reduce traffic speeds and appropriate locations for the measures. Reduced speeds will improve
pedestrian safety and overall walkability within the corridor.
The Plan includes Framework Plans for Public Realm Enhancements that could be
used to help set priorities, allocate resources, and to facilitate continued public conversation about the future of Main Street.
The Plan identifies potential locations for parallel bike routes for east-west travel that
could provide an alternative to on-street paths for some riders.
Improve aesthetics on Main Street, making it an attractive place to live, work and shop.
The Main Street Corridor Vision Plan identifies implementation actions for each segment that could transform the aesthetics of Main Street significantly.
The Plan identifies Public Realm Enhancements — investments in streetscape amenities, lighting, pedestrian and bicycle facilities, trees and landscaping, public art,
façade improvements, transit stations, public spaces and storefront improvements that could greatly improve the visual attractiveness of Main Street. Conversations with Main Street property owners have confirmed that the features depicted in the Vision Plan will
encourage economic development and revitalization. Public realm enhancements also will promote Springfield’s small town feel as the City grows.
The Plan identifies Activity Node design features such as permanent transit stations, intersections treatments such as decorative crosswalks and decorative street lighting,
streetscape amenities and public art that complement redevelopment opportunities.
Attachment 1-3
1/15/2015 Page 4
The Plan identifies street design concepts for each segment that could be implemented through redevelopment or larger capital projects when funding is available.
Create Main Street identities.
The Main Street Corridor Vision Plan identifies and emphasizes different Segments and Activity Nodes along the corridor to distinguish them and to encourage unique placemaking opportunities that reflect surrounding neighborhoods.
The Plan identifies Public Realm Enhancements that can be designed to create new
identities or reinforce existing or historic identities that have meaning for Main Street’s communities.
A more detailed description of these potential implementation strategies and actions is included in the Plan Addendum (Attachment 2C).
BACKGROUND: The Main Street Corridor Vision Plan project is one of five projects being
closely coordinated as part of Our Main Street attention on the seven mile Main Street Corridor between Downtown and Thurston to identify
potential actions that will influence the local economy and community livability for decades to
come. Beginning in the summer of 2013, the City has conducted a series of outreach activities with caring citizens, business owners, city leaders, and property owners to listen to and learn
about peoples’ views (ATT2D). Hundreds of people came together to share their personal
visions and to talk about what works well now and what changes are desired — now and in the future as Springfield grows.
The Planning Commission provided input on the Vision Plan at the September 16th and November 4th, 2014 work sessions and several commissioners participated in the Visioning
workshops. The Commission reviewed and provided input on potential implementation strategies and actions the City could pursue in the short term and long term to advance new visions for the corridor.
Consultant services for this project are funded through the State’s Transportation and Growth Management (TGM) program.
Attachment 1-4
CITY OF SPRINGFIELD
RESOLUTION NO. _______
A RESOLUTION OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SPRINGFIELD
ADOPTING THE SPRINGFIELD MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN
WHEREAS, the stated purpose of the Main Street Corridor Vision Plan project is to engage
citizens and stakeholders in a community visioning process to describe desired future conditions
in the Main Street/Oregon Highway 126B corridor and to identify strategies for implementing that vision; and
WHEREAS, stated objectives of the Main Street Corridor Vision Plan project include establishing
a vision for mutually supportive land uses and transportation systems that provide enhanced
opportunities for successful commerce and corridor redevelopment; improving safety and
balancing mobility for motorists, pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users; and increasing
corridor accessibility to jobs, workforce, education, services, and the ability to accommodate
future growth in travel; and
WHEREAS, this project was partially funded by a grant from the Transportation and Growth
Management (TGM) program, a joint program of the Oregon Department of Transportation and
Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development; and
WHEREAS, on November 5, 2012, the Council accepted the TGM grant; and
WHEREAS, between the summer of 2013 and February 2015, the City conducted a public involvement process to seek input from the community to prepare an integrated land use and
transportation vision for lands along Springfield’s Main Street/Highway 126; and
WHEREAS, over 500 members of the public participated in the visioning process as documented
in the Plan Addendum “Community Engagement Summary” and in City Planning File No.
TYP413-00006 “Phase One”; and
WHEREAS, the Project Study Area for the Main Street Corridor Vision Plan includes the street
(Oregon Highway 126B) and adjacent lands located along the one way couplet of Main Street
and South A from 10th Street east to 20th Street, and Main Street from 20th Street east to 69th
Street; and
WHEREAS, land uses addressed in the Vision Plan are primarily those within ½-block of Main /
South A Street, with consideration of adjacent commercial and industrial districts; and
WHEREAS, the Main Street Corridor Vision Plan is a strategic blueprint for short and long-term
changes in the Main Street corridor; and
WHEREAS, the Main Street Corridor Vision Plan is not a land use criteria that can be applied to
development applications;
Attachment 2-1
WHEREAS, the Main Street Corridor Vision Plan is not a land use or transportation policy plan;
and
WHEREAS, the Main Street Corridor Vision Plan is Phase One of a multi-phase Main Street
Corridor Planning project; and
WHEREAS, the Plan and the public input received through the visioning process will be used to
guide future updates to the Springfield Comprehensive Plan and Springfield Development Code
in Phase Two of the Main Street Corridor Plan project; and
WHEREAS, Main Street is the “heart” of the community and five projects have been thinking
concurrently about the future of Main Street – collectively called “Our Main Street”; and
WHEREAS, the Main Street Corridor Vision Plan is one of those five projects and develops short-
term and long-range visions, goals, and implementation actions for land use changes and
transportation choices on Main Street between 10th Street and 69th Street that are coordinated with the other four “Our Main Street” projects; and
WHEREAS, the Main Street Corridor Vision Plan is a resource for coordinating current and
future transportation planning and design, economic development actions and corridor
improvement activities for three distinct “segments” along 7 miles of Main Street between
Downtown and Thurston, based on community input, and in response to existing and expected
future conditions in the corridor as described in the Addendum “Existing Conditions Memorandum”; and
WHEREAS, the Main Street Corridor Vision Plan identifies activity nodes and redevelopment
opportunity sites that are mutually supportive of potential future transit system improvements,
consistent with Springfield Comprehensive Plan Residential Land Use and Housing policies; and
WHEREAS, the Council’s adoption of the preferred land use and transportation vision identified in the Main Street Corridor Vision Plan is a source of broad public input to inform the Main-
McVay transit study and subsequent design of potential transit improvements in the Main Street
Corridor; and
WHEREAS, the Council’s adoption of the preferred land use and transportation vision identified
in the Main Street Corridor Vision Plan supports effective alignment and leveraging of
partnerships, future projects and resources to improve the corridor; and
WHEREAS, while the Plan identifies preferred land use and transportation visions and potential
implementation through plan and code updates, the Main Street Corridor Vision Plan is not
binding on Council but rather will provide guidance in the adoption of future land use and transportation policy updates; and
WHEREAS, the potential projects and programs suggested in the Plan do not represent any decisions by the City to fund or participate in projects, programs and redevelopment projects.
Attachment 2-2
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT:
1. The City Council of the City of Springfield adopts the draft Springfield Main Street
Corridor Vision Plan attached hereto as Exhibit A; and
2. This Resolution shall take effect upon its adoption by the City Council and approval by
the Mayor.
ADOPTED by the Common Council of the City of Springfield this _______ day of
_______________________ 2014, with a vote of _____ for and _____ against.
______________________________
Christine L. Lundberg, Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________ Amy Sowa
City Recorder
N:\City\Planning Zoning\Main Street Vision Plan\Resolution RE Springfield Main Street Corridor Vision Plan.docx
Attachment 2-3
Exhibit A-1
Attachment 2-4
Exhibit A-2
Attachment 2-5
Exhibit A-3
Attachment 2-6
Attachment 2-7
SPRINGFIELD MAIN STREET
CORRIDOR VISION PLAN
January 2015
Exhibit B-1
Attachment 2-8
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Project Management Team
Technical Review Committee
Consultant Team
Otak, Inc.
Blue Mountain Economics
DKS Associates
Cogito
-
Exhibit B-2
Attachment 2-9
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................1
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................5
EXISTING CONDITIONS, OPPORTUNITIES AND CONSTRAINTS .......................8
A STRATEGIC VISION FOR CHANGE ....................................................................13
SEGMENT 1 – COUPLET AREA: 10TH STREET TO 23RD STREET ......................19
SEGMENT 2 – MID-SPRINGFIELD BUSINESS CORRIDOR: 23RD TO BOB STRAUB
PARKWAY ....................................................................................................................31
SEGMENT 3 – THURSTON NEIGHBORHOOD AREA: BOB STRAUB PARKWAY
AND 69TH ST .............................................................................................................47
CONCEPTS FOR FUTURE ZONING AND PLAN UPDATES .................................55
TRANSIT SERVICE AND COMMUNITY BUILDING ................................................58
Exhibit B-3
Attachment 2-10
This page intentionally left blank
Exhibit B-4
Attachment 2-11
SPRINGFIELD MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN | 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Our Main Street
Our
Main Street
Main Street Corridor Vision Plan
Main - McVay Transit Study
Smart Trips Program
Main Street Pedestrian Crossing Project
Downtown Demonstration Project
The Project Area
(Figure 1).
The Need for a Long-Term Vision
Future Employment and Residential Growth
FIGURE 1. PROJECT AREA
Project Area
Exhibit B-5
Attachment 2-12
2 | SPRINGFIELD MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Future Transportation Improvements
What is the Vision, What are the Goals?
Our Main Street
Main Street Corridor Vision
Plan
Community Outreach
Main Street Corridor
Vision Plan
PROJECT SCHEDULE AND COMMUNITY OUTREACH
Main Street Vision Plan and Adoption
Vision and Goal Implementation StrategiesProject KickoffVision to Action WorkshopPublic Event #1 Stakeholder OutreachStakeholder OutreachPublic Event #2Public Event #3Stakeholder OutreachDraft Main Street Vision Corridor PlanPlanning Commission/ City Council Work SessionsAdoption HearingsFinal Main Street Vision Corridor PlanJanuary
2014
February
2014
March
2014
April
2014
August
2014
September
2013
September
2014
October
2013
November
2014
November
2013
October
2014
December
2013
February
2015Stakeholder OutreachProject Kickoff
Existing Conditions and Opportunities
Potential Vision Statements and Goals
June
2014
May
2014
Exhibit B-6
Attachment 2-13
SPRINGFIELD MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN | 3
Summary
Draft Main Street Corridor Vision
Plan
Draft Main Street Corridor Vision Plan
Vision Statements and Goals
A Framework Plan for the Corridor
Main Street Corridor Vision
Plan
An Implementation Strategy
Plan Addendum - Strategies
and Actions Memorandum
Community Workshop
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Exhibit B-7
Attachment 2-14
This page intentionally left blank
Exhibit B-8
Attachment 2-15
SPRINGFIELD MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN | 5
Main Street Corridor Vision Plan
Our Main Street
Main - McVay Transit Study and
Main Street Pedestrian Crossing Project
Main Street Corridor Vision Plan
Area
(Figure 2)
Segment 1 - Couplet Area
Segment 2 -
Segment 3 -
2035 Regional
Transportation Plan
Community Context
(Figure 3)
INTRODUCTION
FIGURE 3. COMMUNITY CONTEXT MAP
1.2.3.
DOWNTOWN DISTRICT URBAN DESIGN PLANWIL
L
AM
E
T
T
E
R
I
V
E
R 58TH ST66TH ST48TH ST42ND ST14TH ST10TH STWATER AV
E MIL
L
ST PION
EER
PKWY
E23RD ST30TH ST28TH ST21ST STCOM
M
E
R
C
I
A
L
A
V
EMOHAWK BLVD54TH ST69TH STVIRGINIA AVE
E STREET
ASTREET
MAIN ST
DAISY ST
S A STREET
WASHBURNEDISTRICT
MOHAWKDISTRICT MID SPRINGFIELDDISTRICT THURSTONDISTRICT
WIL
L
AM
E
T
T
E
R
IV
E
R 58TH ST66TH ST48TH ST42ND ST14TH ST10TH STWATER
AVEMIL
L
STPION
E
ER
PKW
Y
E23RD ST30TH ST28TH ST21ST STCO
M
M
E
R
C
I
A
L
A
V
EMOHAWK BLVD54TH ST69TH STVIRGINIA AVE
E STREET
ASTREET
MAIN ST
DAISY ST
S A STREET
WASHBURNEDISTRICT
MOHAWKDISTRICT MID SPRINGFIELDDISTRICT THURSTONDISTRICT
FIGURE 2. CORRIDOR SEGMENTS
Exhibit B-9
Attachment 2-16
6 | SPRINGFIELD MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN
Community Outreach
Main Street Corridor Vision Plan
Meaningful:
Accountable:
Outcome-oriented:
Main-McVay Transit Study
INTRODUCTION
Exhibit B-10
Attachment 2-17
SPRINGFIELD MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN | 7
Community Workshop
Public Realm
Business and Housing
INTRODUCTION
Transportation
Summary
“We are heading towards a tipping point where
“We need to be sensible, but don’t say never.”
“We need to be clear and transparent about everything,
but over 20-30 years lots of things can happen - so go
ahead and let yourself vision.”
Exhibit B-11
Attachment 2-18
8 | SPRINGFIELD MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN
Plan Addendum
Transportation
Safety Improvements
Main Street Pedestrian Crossing Project
Transit Service
EXISTING CONDITIONS, OPPORTUNITIES
AND CONSTRAINTS
Future Travel Conditions
Land Use Patterns
(Figure 4)
Exhibit B-12
Attachment 2-19
SPRINGFIELD MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN | 9
Real Estate Market Conditions
Segment 1 - Couplet Area
Segment 3 -
EXISTING CONDITIONS, OPPORTUNITIES
AND CONSTRAINTS
Activity Nodes
14th Street
30th Street
42nd Street
54th Street
58th Street
Exhibit B-13
Attachment 2-20
This page intentionally left blank
Exhibit B-14
Attachment 2-21
SPRINGFIELD MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN | 11
FIGURE 4. LAND USE PATTERNS
1.2.3.WI
L
LAM
ET
TE
R
IV
ER
MILLRACE 58TH ST66TH ST48TH ST42ND ST14TH ST10TH STWATER AVEMILL
STPIONEER
PKWY
E23RD ST30TH ST28TH ST21ST STCO
M
M
E
R
C
I
A
L
A
V
EMOHAWK BLVD54TH ST69TH STVIRGINIA AVE
E STREET
ASTREET
DAISY ST
MAIN ST
S A STREET
MAPLE ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL
WILLAMALANE CENTER
AGNES STEWART MIDDLE SCHOOL
DOUGLAS GARDENS
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
MT VERNON ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL
RIVERBEND ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL THURSTON HIGHSCHOOL
JESSE MAINE PARK
THURSTON
PARK
THURSTON
MIDDLE SCHOOL
LIVELY PARK
RIDGEVIEWELEMENTARY SCHOOL
ROB ADAMS
PARK
VOLUNTEER PARK
BLUEBELLE PARK
FORT PARK
WILLAMALANE PARK
SPRINGFIELD HIGH SCHOOL
TWO RIVERS - DOS RIOS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
A3 HIGH SCHOOL
GATEWAYS HIGH
SCHOOL
BRATTAIN LEARNING
CENTER
SPRINGFIELD
STATION
SPRINGFIELD
SCHOOL DISTRICT
ISLANDPARK
MILLRACEPARK
WILAMETTE HEIGHTS
PARK
MEADOW
PARK
DOUGLAS GARDENS PARK
TYSON PARK
PRIDE PARK 0R 126
0R 126
BOB
S
T
R
AUB
PKW
Y
WASHBURNE
DISTRICT
DOWNTOWN DISTRICT
URBAN DESIGN PLAN
MOHAWK
DISTRICT
MID SPRINGFIELD
DISTRICT
THURSTON
DISTRICT
0 1000 2000
EXISTING CONDITIONS, OPPORTUNITIES AND CONSTRAINTS COMMUNITY COMMENTSKEY:
SINGLE FAMILY
MULTIFAMILY
RETAIL
OFFICE
COMMERCIAL
INDUSTRIAL
GOVERNMENT
CHURCH
PARK/OPEN SPACE
SCHOOL
VACANT
SEGMENT 1: COUPLET AREA
SEGMENT 2: MID SPRINGFIELD
BUSINESS CORRIDOR
SEGMENT 3: THURSTON AREA
1.
2.
3.
Exhibit B-15
Attachment 2-22
This page intentionally left blank
Exhibit B-16
Attachment 2-23
SPRINGFIELD MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN | 13
A STRATEGIC VISION FOR CHANGE
Vision Statement and Goals
23rd Street)
Framework Plans
Main Street Corridor Vision Plan
Multimodal Transportation
Exhibit B-17
Attachment 2-24
14 | SPRINGFIELD MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN
Figure 5
Main
Street Corridor Vision Plan
Main-McVay Transit Study
City-wide Bike and Pedestrian Plan
Land Use
Plan
Constraints
A STRATEGIC VISION FOR CHANGE
Exhibit B-18
Attachment 2-25
SPRINGFIELD MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN | 15
Public Realm Enhancements
Implementation Strategy
Main Street Corridor Vision
Plan
Main Street Corridor Vision Plan
A STRATEGIC VISION FOR CHANGE
Exhibit B-19
Attachment 2-26
This page intentionally left blank
Exhibit B-20
Attachment 2-27
SPRINGFIELD MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN | 17
FIGURE 5. MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION FRAMEWORK
0 1000 2000
A STRATEGIC VISION FOR CHANGE - TRANSPORTATION
1.2.3.WI
L
LAM
ET
TE
R
IV
ER
MILLRACE 58TH ST66TH ST48TH ST42ND ST14TH ST10TH STWATER AVEMILL
STPIONEER
PKWY
E23RD ST30TH ST28TH ST21ST STCO
M
M
E
R
C
I
A
L
A
V
EMOHAWK BLVD54TH ST69TH STVIRGINIA AVE
E STREET
ASTREET
MAIN ST
DAISY ST
S A STREET
MAPLE ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL
WILLAMALANE CENTER
AGNES STEWART
MIDDLE SCHOOL
DOUGLAS GARDENS
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
DOUGLAS GARDENS PARK
MT VERNON ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL
RIVERBEND ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL THURSTON HIGHSCHOOL
THURSTON
PARK
THURSTON
MIDDLE SCHOOL
RIDGEVIEWELEMENTARY SCHOOL
VOLUNTEER PARK
BLUEBELLE PARK
WILLAMALANE
PARK
SPRINGFIELD
HIGH SCHOOL
BRATTAIN LEARNING
CENTER
SPRINGFIELD STATION
MEADOW
PARK
PRIDE PARK
TYSON PARK
FORT PARK
ROB ADAMS
PARK
LIVELY PARK
ISLANDPARK
MILLRACE PARK
JESSE MAINE PARK
TWO RIVERS - DOS RIOS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
A3 HIGH SCHOOL
GATEWAYS HIGH
SCHOOL
SPRINGFIELD
SCHOOL DISTRICT
WILAMETTE HEIGHTS
PARK
0R 126
0R 126
BOB STRAUBPKWYWASHBURNE
DISTRICT
DOWNTOWN DISTRICT
URBAN DESIGN PLAN
MOHAWK
DISTRICT MID SPRINGFIELD
DISTRICT
THURSTON
DISTRICT
“How do you make a 5-lane highway inviting for business? How do you
make it friendly to bikers when cars are going 45 miles per hour? How
can you slow things down enough to make it more inviting?”COMMUNITY COMMENTSREGIONAL CONNECTION
PRIMARY NEIGHBORHOOD
CONNECTION
EXISTING BUS ROUTE
POTENTIAL BIKE BOULEVARD
SECONDARY NEIGHBORHOOD
CONNECTION
POTENTIAL ENHANCED TRANSIT
SERVICE
KEY:
ACTIVITY NODE
EXISTING RAILROAD
PARK/OPEN SPACE
SCHOOL
SEGMENT 1: COUPLET AREA
SEGMENT 2: MID SPRINGFIELD
BUSINESS CORRIDOR
SEGMENT 3: THURSTON AREA
1.
2.
3.
FUTURE MILLRACE PATH/TRAILHEAD
Exhibit B-21
Attachment 2-28
18 | SPRINGFIELD MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN
A STRATEGIC VISION FOR CHANGE
1.2.3.WI
L
LAM
ET
TE
R
IV
ER
MILLRACE 58TH ST66TH ST48TH ST42ND ST14TH ST10TH STWATER AVEMILL
STPIONEER
PKWY
E23RD ST30TH ST28TH ST21ST STCO
M
M
E
R
C
I
A
L
A
V
EMOHAWK BLVD54TH ST69TH STVIRGINIA AVE
E STREET
ASTREET
MAIN ST
DAISY ST
S A STREET
MAPLE ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL
PRIDE PARK
WILLAMALANE CENTER
AGNES STEWART
MIDDLE SCHOOL
DOUGLAS GARDENSELEMENTARY SCHOOL MT VERNON ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
RIVERBEND ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL THURSTON HIGHSCHOOL
THURSTON
PARK
THURSTON
MIDDLE SCHOOL
RIDGEVIEWELEMENTARY SCHOOL
VOLUNTEER PARK
BLUEBELLE PARK
WILLAMALANE
PARK
SPRINGFIELD
HIGH SCHOOL
BRATTAIN LEARNING
CENTER
SPRINGFIELD STATION
MEADOW
PARK
DOUGLAS GARDENS PARK
TYSON PARK
FORT PARK
ROB ADAMS PARK
ISLANDPARK
MILLRACE PARK
JESSE MAINE PARK
TWO RIVERS - DOS RIOS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
A3 HIGH SCHOOL
GATEWAYS HIGH
SCHOOL
SPRINGFIELD
SCHOOL DISTRICT
WILAMETTE HEIGHTS
PARK
0R 126
0R 126
BOB STRAUBPKWY
WASHBURNE
DISTRICT
DOWNTOWN DISTRICT
URBAN DESIGN PLAN
MOHAWK
DISTRICT MID SPRINGFIELD
DISTRICT
THURSTON
DISTRICT
0 1000 2000
FIGURE 6. LAND USE VISION FRAMEWORK
“I feel like the draft vision plan and goals help Main Street be a better
place to live. I would most definitely shop and eat here.”
to eat and shop in Eugene. Wish I could do those things more in COMMUNITY COMMENTSOPPORTUNITY SITE
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL
AND HOUSING CHOICES
MIX OF INDUSTRIAL AND
COMMERCIAL USES
AFFORDABLE COMMUNITY
COMMERCIAL
PARK/OPEN SPACE
SCHOOL
RESIDENTIAL WITH
NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES
PRIMARY NEIGHBORHOOD
CONNECTION
POTENTIAL ENHANCED TRANSIT
SERVICE
KEY:
ACTIVITY NODE : MIXED USE
ACTIVITY NODE : COMMUNITY
COMMERCIAL
ACTIVITY NODE : COMMUNITY
COMMERCIAL & PUBLIC FACILITIES
ACTIVITY NODE : RESIDENTIAL AND
COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL
EXISTING RAILROAD
SEGMENT 1: COUPLET AREA
SEGMENT 2: MID SPRINGFIELD
BUSINESS CORRIDOR
SEGMENT 3: THURSTON AREA
1.
2.
3.
Exhibit B-22
Attachment 2-29
SPRINGFIELD MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN | 19
20-Year Vision Statement for Main
Street
Downtown Urban District Design Plan Goals for Main Street
Transportation Goals
Goal 1
Goal 2
SEGMENT 1 – COUPLET AREA: 10TH STREET
TO 23RD STREET
Pedestrian-Oriented Environments
Exhibit B-23
Attachment 2-30
20 | SPRINGFIELD MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN
Public Realm Enhancement Goals
Goal 1
Goal 2
Goal 3
Business Activity Goals
Goal 1
Goal 2
Goal 3
Housing Goals
Goal 1
Goal 2
Live/Work HousingStorefront Retail
SEGMENT 1 – COUPLET AREA
Exhibit B-24
Attachment 2-31
SPRINGFIELD MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN | 21
20-Year Vision Statement for South
A Street
Goals for South A Street
Transportation Goals
Goal 1:
Goal 2:
Public Realm Enhancement Goals
Goal 1
Goal 2
Business Activity Goals
Goal 1
Goal 2
Goal 3
Housing Goals
SEGMENT 1 – COUPLET AREA
Exhibit B-25
Attachment 2-32
22 | SPRINGFIELD MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN
Framework - Transportation and
Public Realm Opportunities
Figure 7
Plan Addendum - Strategies and Actions Memorandum for
Transportation Goals
Main Street Corridor Vision Plan
Public Realm Enhancement Goals
Green Street Approach.
SEGMENT 1 – COUPLET AREA
Exhibit B-26
Attachment 2-33
SPRINGFIELD MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN | 23
FIGURE 7. FRAMEWORK - TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC REALM OPPORTUNITIES
WI
L
LAM
E
T
T
E
R
IV
ER 58TH ST62ND PL66TH STS 58TH PL48TH ST12TH ST10TH ST14TH ST16TH ST17TH ST118TH ST19TH ST21ST ST23RD ST28TH STS 32ND ST30TH ST36TH STS 37TH STS 40TH ST40TH ST42ND ST48TH STN 51ST STS 51ST PLS 54TH STS 42ND STS 44TH STWATER AVEMILL STPIONEER
PKWY
E
CO
M
M
E
R
C
I
A
L
A
V
EMOHAWK BLVD54TH ST69TH STVIRGINIA AVE
E ST
DST
C ST
E ST
DST
C ST
A ST
B ST
MAIN ST
MAIN ST
S A ST
A ST
DAISY ST
MAIN ST
MOUNTAINGATE DR
MAPLE ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL
WILLAMALANE
CENTER
DOUGLAS GARDENSELEMENTARY SCHOOL
DOUGLAS GARDENS PARK
MT VERNON ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
RIVERBEND
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
THURSTON
HIGHSCHOOL
THURSTON
PARK
THURSTON
MIDDLE SCHOOL
RIDGEVIEWELEMENTARY SCHOOL
VOLUNTEER PARK
BLUEBELLE PARK
JESSE MAINE PARK
FORT PARK
WILLAMALANE
PARK
SPRINGFIELD
HIGH SCHOOL
BRATTAIN LEARNING CENTER
SPRINGFIELD
STATION
SPRINGFIELD MIDDLE SCHOOL
MEADOW
PARK
MT VERNON SHCOOL
PRIDE PARK
TYSON PARK
0R 126
0R 126
BOB STRAUB
PKWYWASHBURNE
DISTRICT
MOHAWK
DISTRICT
MID SPRINGFIELD
DISTRICT THURSTON
DISTRICT
DOWNTO
W
N
D
I
S
T
R
I
C
T
URBAN D
E
S
I
G
N
P
L
A
N
MILLRACE
0 1000 2000
SEGMENT 1 – COUPLET AREA
“Walkable and more pedestrian-friendly.”COMMUNITY COMMENTSMAIN STREET CORRIDOR
STREET DESIGN PLAN
TRAFFIC CALMING STUDY
REGIONAL CONNECTION
PRIMARY NEIGHBORHOOD
CONNECTION
EXISTING BUS ROUTE
POTENTIAL BIKE BOULEVARD
SECONDARY NEIGHBORHOOD
CONNECTION
POTENTIAL ENHANCED TRANSIT
SERVICE
FUTURE MILLRACE PATH/TRAILHEAD
KEY:
ACTIVITY NODE
EXISTING RAILROAD
PARK/OPEN SPACE
SCHOOL
Exhibit B-27
Attachment 2-34
24 | SPRINGFIELD MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN
Garden Street Plan - Main Street
between 10th Street and 23rd
Street
Public Art Plan - Main Street
between 10th Street and 23rd
Street and Activity Nodes
Artful Street Furniture Outdoor Seating and Plazas
Planting the Street Corner Greening the Street
Art You Play With
Art at Transit Stations
Art You Sit With
Art and Buildings
SEGMENT 1 – COUPLET AREA
PUBLIC REALM ENHANCEMENT
Exhibit B-28
Attachment 2-35
SPRINGFIELD MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN | 25
A Green Street Approach -
between 10th Street and 23rd
Street
Stormwater Planters Stormwater Planters
Stormwater Plaza Stormwater Art
Many Opportunities with Development On-Site Bioretention
Roof Top Stormwater Planters Stormwater Art
Low Impact Development (LID)
Approach - between 10th
Street and 23rd Street
SEGMENT 1 – COUPLET AREA
PUBLIC REALM ENHANCEMENT
Exhibit B-29
Attachment 2-36
26 | SPRINGFIELD MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN
Redevelopment Opportunity Sites
Potential Redevelopment within
Activity Nodes
Medium-Density Residential
SEGMENT 1 – COUPLET AREA
Neighborhood Retail
Exhibit B-30
Attachment 2-37
SPRINGFIELD MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN | 27
SEGMENT 1 – COUPLET AREA
3.
1.
2.4.
5.6.
7.8.
9.
10.11.WI
L
LAM
E
T
T
E
R
IV
ER
MILLRACE 58TH ST62ND PL66TH STS 58TH PL48TH ST12TH ST10TH ST14TH ST16TH ST17TH ST118TH ST19TH ST21ST ST23RD ST28TH STS 32ND ST30TH ST36TH STS 37TH STS 40TH ST40TH ST42ND ST48TH STN 51ST STS 51ST PLS 54TH STS 42ND STS 44TH STWATER AVEMILL
STPIONEER
PKWY
E
CO
M
M
E
R
C
I
A
L
A
V
EMOHAWK BLVD54TH ST69TH STVIRGINIA AVE
E ST
DST
C ST
E ST
DST
C ST
A ST
B ST
MAIN ST
MAIN ST
S A ST
A ST
DAISY ST
MAIN ST
MOUNTAINGATE DR
MAPLE ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL
PRIDE PARK
WILLAMALANE
CENTER
AGNES STEWART
MIDDLE SCHOOL
DOUGLAS GARDENSELEMENTARY SCHOOL
MT VERNON ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
RIVERBEND
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
THURSTON
HIGHSCHOOL
THURSTON
PARK
RIDGEVIEWELEMENTARY SCHOOL
VOLUNTEER PARK
BLUEBELLE PARK
WILLAMALANE
PARK
SPRINGFIELD
HIGH SCHOOL
BRATTAIN LEARNING CENTER
SPRINGFIELD
STATION
SPRINGFIELD MIDDLE SCHOOL
MEADOW
PARK
MT VERNON SHCOOL
DOUGLAS GARDENS PARK
TYSON PARK
FORT PARK
THURSTON
MIDDLE SCHOOL
JESSE MAINE PARK
0R 126
0R 126
BOB STRAUB
PKWYWASHBURNE
DISTRICT
MOHAWK
DISTRICT
MID SPRINGFIELD
DISTRICT THURSTON
DISTRICT
DOWNTO
W
N
D
I
S
T
R
I
C
T
URBAN D
E
S
I
G
N
P
L
A
N
0 500 1000
FIGURE 8. SEGMENT 1-LAND USE VISION OPPORTUNITIES
“I think Alive after Five is important in
making Main Street a destination.”COMMUNITY COMMENTSNEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL
AND HOUSING CHOICES
MIX OF INDUSTRIAL AND
COMMERCIAL USES
AFFORDABLE COMMUNITY
COMMERCIAL
PARK/OPEN SPACE
RESIDENTIAL WITH
NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES
PRIMARY NEIGHBORHOOD
CONNECTION
POTENTIAL ENHANCED TRANSIT
SERVICE
KEY:
ACTIVITY NODE : MIXED USE
ACTIVITY NODE : COMMUNITY
COMMERCIAL
ACTIVITY NODE : COMMUNITY
COMMERCIAL & PUBLIC FACILITIES
ACTIVITY NODE : RESIDENTIAL AND
COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL EXISTING RAILROAD
SEGMENT 1: COUPLET AREA
SEGMENT 2: MID SPRINGFIELD
BUSINESS CORRIDOR
SEGMENT 3: THURSTON AREA
1.
2.
3.
OPPORTUNITY SITE (SEE PAGE 26)
Exhibit B-31
Attachment 2-38
28 | SPRINGFIELD MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN
14TH STREET ACTIVITY NODE
Current Uses Supportive of the Vision Land Use and Transportation Opportunities
58TH STS 59TH STS 58TH PL57TH ST56TH ST42ND ST41ST STS 41ST STS42ND STS43RD ST14TH ST15TH ST12TH ST30TH ST28TH STS 28TH STS 32ND ST21ST ST19TH20TH22NDN 23RDS 21ST STS 19THS 20THS 22NDS 23RDN24TH54TH ST55TH STS 54TH STS 53RD STMAIN ST
ASTER ST
ASTER ST
MAIN ST
BOB STRAUB
PKWY
A ST
A ST
LEOTA ST
B ST B ST
MAIN ST
BLUEBELLE WAY
ASTER ST
A ST
MAIN ST
OREGON ST
VIRGINIA AVE
MAIN ST
S A ST
A ST
A ST
B ST
S A ST
MAIN ST
1
2
4
5
6 2
4
3
5
5
Long-Term Vision Example
SEGMENT 1 – COUPLET AREA
1
Exhibit B-32
Attachment 2-39
SPRINGFIELD MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN | 29
Land Use and Transportation Opportunities
58TH STS 59TH STS 58TH PL57TH ST56TH ST42ND ST41ST STS 41ST STS42ND STS43RD ST14TH ST15TH ST12TH ST30TH ST28TH STS 28TH STS 32ND ST21ST ST19TH20TH22NDN 23RDS 21ST STS 19THS 20THS 22NDS 23RDN24TH54TH ST55TH STS 54TH STS 53RD STMAIN ST
ASTER ST
ASTER ST
MAIN ST
BOB STRAUB
PKWY
A ST
A ST
LEOTA ST
B ST B ST
MAIN ST
BLUEBELLE WAY
ASTER ST
A ST
MAIN ST
OREGON ST
VIRGINIA AVE
MAIN ST
S A ST
A ST
A ST
B ST
S A ST
MAIN ST
21ST STREET ACTIVITY NODE
Long-Term Vision Example
Current Uses Supportive of the Vision
674
123
5
SEGMENT 1 – COUPLET AREA
Exhibit B-33
Attachment 2-40
30 | SPRINGFIELD MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN
Priority Implementation Actions
TABLE 1. SHORT-TERM ACTION PLAN SUMMARY (2015-2020)
Strategies and Actions Goals Supported
SEGMENT 1 – COUPLET AREA
Exhibit B-34
Attachment 2-41
SPRINGFIELD MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN | 31
20-Year Vision Statement
SEGMENT 2 – MID-SPRINGFIELD BUSINESS
CORRIDOR: 23RD TO BOB STRAUB PARKWAY
Goals
Transportation Goals
Protected Bike Lane Pedestrian Crossing Improvements
Exhibit B-35
Attachment 2-42
32 | SPRINGFIELD MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN
Maintain Viable Commercial Uses
Goal 1
Goal 2
Housing Goals
Goal 1
Goal 2
Goal 1
Goal 2
Goal 3
Goal 4
Public Realm Enhancement Goals
Goal 1
Goal 2
Business Activity Goals
Medium-Density Housing Choices
SEGMENT 2 – MID-SPRINGFIELD
BUSINESS CORRIDOR
Exhibit B-36
Attachment 2-43
SPRINGFIELD MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN | 33
Framework - Transportation and
Public Realm Opportunities
Plan Addendum - Strategies and Actions Memorandum for all
Transportation Goals
Main Street Corridor Vision Plan
Main
Street Corridor Streetscape Plan
Public Realm Enhancement Goals
SEGMENT 2 – MID-SPRINGFIELD
BUSINESS CORRIDOR
Exhibit B-37
Attachment 2-44
This page intentionally left blank
Exhibit B-38
Attachment 2-45
SPRINGFIELD MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN | 35
FIGURE 9. FRAMEWORK-TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC REALM OPPORTUNITIES
WI
L
LAM
E
T
T
E
R
IV
ER 58TH ST62ND PL66TH STS 58TH PL48TH ST12TH ST10TH ST14TH ST16TH ST17TH ST118TH ST19TH ST21ST ST23RD ST28TH STS 32ND ST30TH ST36TH STS 37TH STS 40TH ST40TH ST42ND ST48TH STN 51ST STS 51ST PLS 54TH STS 42ND STS 44TH STWATER AVEMILL
STPIONEER
PKWY
E
CO
M
M
E
R
C
I
A
L
A
V
EMOHAWK BLVD54TH ST69TH STVIRGINIA AVE
E ST
DST
C ST
E ST
DST
C ST
A ST
B ST
MAIN ST
MAIN ST
S A ST
A ST
DAISY ST
MAIN ST
MOUNTAINGATE DR
MAPLE ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL
WILLAMALANE
CENTER
DOUGLAS GARDENS
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
DOUGLAS GARDENS PARK
MT VERNON ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL
RIVERBEND
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
THURSTON
HIGHSCHOOL
THURSTON PARK
THURSTON
MIDDLE SCHOOL
RIDGEVIEW
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
VOLUNTEER PARK
BLUEBELLE PARK
JESSE MAINE PARK
FORT PARK
WILLAMALANE
PARK
SPRINGFIELD
HIGH SCHOOL
BRATTAIN LEARNING
CENTER
SPRINGFIELD
STATION
SPRINGFIELD MIDDLE
SCHOOL
MEADOW
PARK
MT VERNON SHCOOL
PRIDE PARK
TYSON PARK
0R 126
0R 126
BOB STRAUB
PKWYWASHBURNE
DISTRICT
MOHAWK
DISTRICT
MID SPRINGFIELD
DISTRICT THURSTON
DISTRICT
DOWNTO
W
N
D
I
S
T
R
I
C
T
URBAN DE
S
I
G
N
P
L
A
N
MILLRACE
0 1000 2000
SEGMENT 2 – MID-SPRINGFIELD BUSINESS CORRIDOR
“When you make it a more aesthetically pleasing corridor,
people will slow down.”COMMUNITY COMMENTSMAIN STREET CORRIDOR
STREET DESIGN PLAN
TRAFFIC CALMING STUDY
REGIONAL CONNECTION
PRIMARY NEIGHBORHOOD
CONNECTION
EXISTING BUS ROUTE
POTENTIAL BIKE BOULEVARD
SECONDARY NEIGHBORHOOD
CONNECTION
POTENTIAL ENHANCED TRANSIT
SERVICE
FUTURE MILLRACE PATH/TRAILHEAD
KEY:
ACTIVITY NODE
EXISTING RAILROAD
PARK/OPEN SPACE
SCHOOL
Exhibit B-39
Attachment 2-46
This page intentionally left blank
Exhibit B-40
Attachment 2-47
SPRINGFIELD MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN | 37
Main Street Corridor Design Plan - Landscaping
Main Street Corridor Design Plan - Street Furnishings
Plazas and Outdoor Seating
SEGMENT 2 – MID-SPRINGFIELD
BUSINESS CORRIDOR
PUBLIC REALM ENHANCEMENT
Exhibit B-41
Attachment 2-48
38 | SPRINGFIELD MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN
Redevelopment Opportunity Sites
Street
SEGMENT 2 – MID-SPRINGFIELD
BUSINESS CORRIDOR
Exhibit B-42
Attachment 2-49
SPRINGFIELD MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN | 39
52nd Street
Street
Potential Redevelopment within
Activity Nodes
SEGMENT 2 – MID-SPRINGFIELD
BUSINESS CORRIDOR
Neighborhood - Serving Commercial Uses
Exhibit B-43
Attachment 2-50
This page intentionally left blank
Exhibit B-44
Attachment 2-51
SPRINGFIELD MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN | 41
SEGMENT 2 – MID-SPRINGFIELD BUSINESS CORRIDOR
3.
1.
2.4.
5.6.
7.8.
9.
10.11.WI
L
LAM
E
T
TE
R
IV
ER
MILLRACE 58TH ST62ND PL66TH STS 58TH PL48TH ST12TH ST10TH ST14TH ST16TH ST17TH ST118TH ST19TH ST21ST ST23RD ST28TH STS 32ND ST30TH ST36TH STS 37TH STS 40TH ST40TH ST42ND ST48TH STN 51ST STS 51ST PLS 54TH STS 42ND STS 44TH STWATER AVEMILL
STPIONEER
PKWY
E
CO
M
M
E
R
C
I
A
L
A
V
EMOHAWK BLVD54TH ST69TH STVIRGINIA AVE
E ST
DST
C ST
E ST
DST
C ST
A ST
B ST
MAIN ST
MAIN ST
S A ST
A ST
DAISY ST
MAIN ST
MOUNTAINGATE DR
MAPLE ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL
PRIDE PARK
WILLAMALANE
CENTER
AGNES STEWART
MIDDLE SCHOOL
DOUGLAS GARDENS
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
MT VERNON ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL
RIVERBEND
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
THURSTON
HIGHSCHOOL
THURSTON PARK
RIDGEVIEW
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
VOLUNTEER PARK
BLUEBELLE PARK
WILLAMALANE PARK
SPRINGFIELD
HIGH SCHOOL
BRATTAIN LEARNING
CENTER
SPRINGFIELD
STATION
SPRINGFIELD MIDDLE
SCHOOL
MEADOW
PARK
MT VERNON SHCOOL
DOUGLAS GARDENS PARK
TYSON PARK
FORT PARK
THURSTON
MIDDLE SCHOOL
JESSE MAINE PARK
0R 126
0R 126
BOB STRAUB
PKWYWASHBURNE
DISTRICT
MOHAWK
DISTRICT
MID SPRINGFIELD
DISTRICT THURSTON
DISTRICT
DOWNTO
W
N
D
I
S
T
R
I
C
T
URBAN DE
S
I
G
N
P
L
A
N
0 500 1000
FIGURE 10. SEGMENT 2-LAND USE VISION OPPORTUNITIES
“Enhance business variety, encourage destination businesses.”COMMUNITY COMMENTSNEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL
AND HOUSING CHOICES
MIX OF INDUSTRIAL AND
COMMERCIAL USES
AFFORDABLE COMMUNITY
COMMERCIAL
PARK/OPEN SPACE
SCHOOL
RESIDENTIAL WITH
NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES
PRIMARY NEIGHBORHOOD
CONNECTION
POTENTIAL ENHANCED TRANSIT
SERVICE
KEY:
ACTIVITY NODE : MIXED USE
ACTIVITY NODE : COMMUNITY
COMMERCIAL
ACTIVITY NODE : COMMUNITY
COMMERCIAL & PUBLIC FACILITIES
ACTIVITY NODE : RESIDENTIAL AND
COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL
EXISTING RAILROAD
SEGMENT 1: COUPLET AREA
SEGMENT 2: MID SPRINGFIELD
BUSINESS CORRIDOR
SEGMENT 3: THURSTON AREA
1.
2.
3.
OPPORTUNITY SITE (SEE PAGES 38-39)
Exhibit B-45
Attachment 2-52
This page intentionally left blank
Exhibit B-46
Attachment 2-53
SPRINGFIELD MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN | 43
30TH STREET ACTIVITY NODE
Long-Term Vision Example
Current Uses Supportive of the Vision
Goodwill 58TH STS 59TH STS 58TH PL57TH ST56TH ST42ND ST41ST STS 41ST STS42ND STS43RD ST14TH ST15TH ST12TH ST30TH ST28TH STS 28TH STS 32ND ST21ST ST19TH20TH22NDN 23RDS 21ST STS 19THS 20THS 22NDS 23RDN24TH54TH ST55TH STS 54TH STS 53RD STMAIN ST
ASTER ST
ASTER ST
MAIN ST
BOB STRAUB
PKWY
A ST
A ST
LEOTA ST
B ST B ST
MAIN ST
BLUEBELLE WAY
ASTER ST
A ST
MAIN ST
OREGON ST
VIRGINIA AVE
MAIN ST
S A ST
A ST
A ST
B ST
S A ST
MAIN ST
6
4
5
3
1
2
6
SEGMENT 2 – MID-SPRINGFIELD
BUSINESS CORRIDOR
Land Use and Transportation Opportunities
Exhibit B-47
Attachment 2-54
44 | SPRINGFIELD MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN
Long-Term Vision Example
Current Uses Supportive of the Vision
42ND STREET ACTIVITY NODE
58TH STS 59TH STS 58TH PL57TH ST56TH ST42ND ST41ST STS 41ST STS42ND STS43RD ST14TH ST15TH ST12TH ST30TH ST28TH STS 28TH STS 32ND ST21ST ST19TH20TH22NDN 23RDS 21ST STS 19THS 20THS 22NDS 23RDN24TH54TH ST55TH STS 54TH STS 53RD STMAIN ST
ASTER ST
ASTER ST
MAIN ST
BOB STRAUB
PKWY
A ST
A ST
LEOTA ST
B ST B ST
MAIN ST
BLUEBELLE WAY
ASTER ST
A ST
MAIN ST
OREGON ST
VIRGINIA AVE
MAIN ST
S A ST
A ST
A ST
B ST
S A ST
MAIN ST
3
2
2
5
3 2
3
SEGMENT 2 – MID-SPRINGFIELD
BUSINESS CORRIDOR
Land Use and Transportation Opportunities
Exhibit B-48
Attachment 2-55
SPRINGFIELD MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN | 45
54TH STREET ACTIVITY NODE
Long-Term Vision Example
Current Uses Supportive of the Vision 58TH STS 59TH STS 58TH PL57TH ST56TH ST42ND ST41ST STS 41ST STS42ND STS43RD ST14TH ST15TH ST12TH ST30TH ST28TH STS 28TH STS 32ND ST21ST ST19TH20TH22NDN 23RDS 21ST STS 19THS 20THS 22NDS 23RDN24TH54TH ST55TH STS 54TH STS 53RD STMAIN ST
ASTER ST
ASTER ST
MAIN ST
BOB STRAUB
PKWY
A ST
A ST
LEOTA ST
B ST B ST
MAIN ST
BLUEBELLE WAY
ASTER ST
A ST
MAIN ST
OREGON ST
VIRGINIA AVE
MAIN ST
S A ST
A ST
A ST
B ST
S A ST
MAIN ST
55
4
6
7
31
6
SEGMENT 2 – MID-SPRINGFIELD
BUSINESS CORRIDOR
Land Use and Transportation Opportunities
Exhibit B-49
Attachment 2-56
46 | SPRINGFIELD MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN
Priority Implementation Actions
TABLE 2. SHORT-TERM ACTION PLAN SUMMARY (2015-2020)
Strategies and Actions Goals Supported
SEGMENT 2 – MID-SPRINGFIELD
BUSINESS CORRIDOR
Exhibit B-50
Attachment 2-57
SPRINGFIELD MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN | 47
20-Year Vision Statement
Goals
Transportation Goals
Goal 1
Goal 2
Goal 3
SEGMENT 3 – THURSTON NEIGHBORHOOD
AREA: BOB STRAUB PARKWAY AND 69TH ST
Public Realm Enhancement Goals
Goal 1
Goal 2
Business Activity Goals
Goal 1
Goal 2
Exhibit B-51
Attachment 2-58
48 | SPRINGFIELD MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN
Housing Goals
Goal 1
Goal 2
Framework - Transportation and
Public Realm Opportunities
Figure 11
Plan Addendum-Strategies and
Actions
Transportation Goals
Public Realm Enhancement Goals
SEGMENT 3 – THURSTON
NEIGHBORHOOD AREA
Exhibit B-52
Attachment 2-59
SPRINGFIELD MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN | 49
FIGURE 11. SEGMENT 3 - TRANSPORTATION AND THE PUBLIC REALM
WI
L
LAM
E
T
T
E
R
IV
ER 58TH ST62ND PL66TH STS 58TH PL48TH ST12TH ST10TH ST14TH ST16TH ST17TH ST118TH ST19TH ST21ST ST23RD ST28TH STS 32ND ST30TH ST36TH STS 37TH STS 40TH ST40TH ST42ND ST48TH STN 51ST STS 51ST PLS 54TH STS 42ND STS 44TH STWATER AVEMILL STPIONEER
PKWY
E
CO
M
M
E
R
C
I
A
L
A
V
EMOHAWK BLVD54TH ST69TH STVIRGINIA AVE
E ST
DST
C ST
E ST
DST
C ST
A ST
B ST
MAIN ST
MAIN ST
S A ST
A ST
DAISY ST
MAIN ST
MOUNTAINGATE DR
MAPLE ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL
WILLAMALANE
CENTER
DOUGLAS GARDENSELEMENTARY SCHOOL
DOUGLAS GARDENS PARK
MT VERNON ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
RIVERBEND
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
THURSTON
HIGHSCHOOL
THURSTON
PARK
THURSTON
MIDDLE SCHOOL
RIDGEVIEWELEMENTARY SCHOOL
VOLUNTEER PARK
BLUEBELLE PARK
JESSE MAINE PARK
FORT PARK
WILLAMALANE
PARK
SPRINGFIELD
HIGH SCHOOL
BRATTAIN LEARNING CENTER
SPRINGFIELD
STATION
SPRINGFIELD MIDDLE
SCHOOL
MEADOW PARK
MT VERNON SHCOOL
PRIDE PARK
TYSON PARK
0R 126
0R 126
BOB STRAUB
PKWYWASHBURNE
DISTRICT
MOHAWK
DISTRICT
MID SPRINGFIELD
DISTRICT THURSTON
DISTRICT
DOWNTO
W
N
D
I
S
T
R
I
C
T
URBAN D
E
S
I
G
N
P
L
A
N
MILLRACE
0 500 1000
SEGMENT 3 – THURSTON
NEIGHBORHOOD AREA
“Safer routes to schools”COMMUNITY COMMENTSTRAFFIC CALMING STUDY
REGIONAL CONNECTION
PRIMARY NEIGHBORHOOD
CONNECTION
POTENTIAL BIKE BOULEVARD
SECONDARY NEIGHBORHOOD
CONNECTION
POTENTIAL ENHANCED TRANSIT
SERVICE
KEY:
ACTIVITY NODE
EXISTING RAILROAD
PARK/OPEN SPACE
SCHOOL
EXISTING BUS ROUTE
MAIN STREET CORRIDOR
STREET DESIGN PLAN
Exhibit B-53
Attachment 2-60
50 | SPRINGFIELD MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN
Main Street Corridor Design Plan - Landscaping
Main Street Corridor Design Plan - Street Furnishings
Plazas and Outdoor Seating
SEGMENT 3 – THURSTON
NEIGHBORHOOD AREA
PUBLIC REALM ENHANCEMENT
Exhibit B-54
Attachment 2-61
SPRINGFIELD MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN | 51
(Figure 12)
Redevelopment Opportunity Sites
Street
Potential Redevelopment within
Activity Nodes
Medium-Density ResidentialSingle-Family Residential on small lots
SEGMENT 3 – THURSTON
NEIGHBORHOOD AREA
Exhibit B-55
Attachment 2-62
52 | SPRINGFIELD MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN
SEGMENT 3 – THURSTON
NEIGHBORHOOD AREA
3.
1.
2.4.
5.6.
7.8.
9.
10.11.WI
L
LAM
E
T
T
E
R
IV
ER
MILLRACE 58TH ST62ND PL66TH STS 58TH PL48TH ST12TH ST10TH ST14TH ST16TH ST17TH ST118TH ST19TH ST21ST ST23RD ST28TH STS 32ND ST30TH ST36TH STS 37TH STS 40TH ST40TH ST42ND ST48TH STN 51ST STS 51ST PLS 54TH STS 42ND STS 44TH STWATER AVEMILL STPIONEER
PKWY
E
CO
M
M
E
R
C
I
A
L
A
V
EMOHAWK BLVD54TH ST69TH STVIRGINIA AVE
E ST
DST
C ST
E ST
DST
C ST
A ST
B ST
MAIN ST
MAIN ST
S A ST
A ST
DAISY ST
MAIN ST
MOUNTAINGATE DR
MAPLE ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL
PRIDE PARK
WILLAMALANE
CENTER
AGNES STEWART MIDDLE SCHOOL
DOUGLAS GARDENSELEMENTARY SCHOOL
MT VERNON ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
RIVERBEND
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
THURSTON
HIGHSCHOOL
THURSTON
PARK
RIDGEVIEWELEMENTARY SCHOOL
VOLUNTEER PARK
BLUEBELLE PARK
WILLAMALANE
PARK
SPRINGFIELD
HIGH SCHOOL
BRATTAIN LEARNING CENTER
SPRINGFIELD
STATION
SPRINGFIELD MIDDLE
SCHOOL
MEADOW
PARK
MT VERNON SHCOOL
DOUGLAS GARDENS PARK
TYSON PARK
FORT PARK
THURSTON
MIDDLE SCHOOL
JESSE MAINE PARK
0R 126
0R 126
BOB STRAUB
PKWYWASHBURNE
DISTRICT
MOHAWK
DISTRICT
MID SPRINGFIELD
DISTRICT THURSTON
DISTRICT
DOWNTO
W
N
D
I
S
T
R
I
C
T
URBAN D
E
S
I
G
N
P
L
A
N
0 500 1000
FIGURE 12. SEGMENT 3-LAND USE VISION OPPORTUNITIES
“Diverse incomes and ages make for richer,
more exciting, vibrant places”COMMUNITY COMMENTSNEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL
AND HOUSING CHOICES
MIX OF INDUSTRIAL AND
COMMERCIAL USES
AFFORDABLE COMMUNITY
COMMERCIAL
PARK/OPEN SPACE
SCHOOL
RESIDENTIAL WITH
NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES
PRIMARY NEIGHBORHOOD
CONNECTION
POTENTIAL ENHANCED TRANSIT
SERVICE
KEY:
EXISTING RAILROAD
SEGMENT 1: COUPLET AREA
SEGMENT 2: MID SPRINGFIELD
BUSINESS CORRIDOR
SEGMENT 3: THURSTON AREA
1.
2.
3.
ACTIVITY NODE : COMMUNITY
COMMERCIAL
OPPORTUNITY SITE (SEE PAGE 51)
Exhibit B-56
Attachment 2-63
SPRINGFIELD MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN | 53
58TH STREET ACTIVITY NODE
Long-Term Vision Example
Current Uses Supportive of the Vision 58TH STS 59TH STS 58TH PL57TH ST56TH ST42ND ST41ST STS 41ST STS42ND STS43RD ST14TH ST15TH ST12TH ST30TH ST28TH STS 28TH STS 32ND ST21ST ST19TH20TH22NDN 23RDS 21ST STS 19THS 20THS 22NDS 23RDN24TH54TH ST55TH STS 54TH STS 53RD STMAIN ST
ASTER ST
ASTER ST
MAIN ST
BOB STRAUB
PKWY
A ST
A ST
LEOTA ST
B ST B ST
MAIN ST
BLUEBELLE WAY
ASTER ST
A ST
MAIN ST
OREGON ST
VIRGINIA AVE
MAIN ST
S A ST
A ST
A ST
B ST
S A ST
MAIN ST
1
7
66
3
22
1
4
2
SEGMENT 3 – THURSTON
NEIGHBORHOOD AREA
Land Use and Transportation Opportunities
Exhibit B-57
Attachment 2-64
54 | SPRINGFIELD MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN
Priority Implementation Actions
TABLE 3. SHORT-TERM ACTION PLAN SUMMARY (2015-2020)
Strategies and Actions Goals Supported
Main-McVay Transit Study
SEGMENT 3 – THURSTON
NEIGHBORHOOD AREA
Exhibit B-58
Attachment 2-65
SPRINGFIELD MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN | 55
A for Main Street
A for South A
Street
Main Street Corridor Vision Plan
Plan
Addendum-Strategies and Actions
Segment 1 - Couplet Area
CONCEPTS FOR FUTURE ZONING AND PLAN
UPDATES
Exhibit B-59
Attachment 2-66
56 | SPRINGFIELD MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN
Business Corridor and
Segment 3 - Thurston Area
th
A
Main Street
Corridor Vision Plan
Activity Nodes
Main Street Corridor Vision Plan
CONCEPTS FOR FUTURE ZONING AND PLAN
UPDATES
Exhibit B-60
Attachment 2-67
SPRINGFIELD MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN | 57
Summary of Recommendations
Table 4Strategies and Actions – Concepts
for Future Zoning and Plan Updates
Corridor Segment Concept A Concept B Concept C
th rd
th rd
rd
th
TABLE 4. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS BY CORRIDOR SEGMENT
CONCEPTS FOR FUTURE ZONING AND PLAN
UPDATES
Exhibit B-61
Attachment 2-68
58 | SPRINGFIELD MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN
Choice
Job Growth
Affordability
Urban Amenities
TRANSIT SERVICE AND COMMUNITY
BUILDING
Exhibit B-62
Attachment 2-69
SPRINGFIELD MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN | 59
Public Health
Financial Return on Private
Investment
Transit Goals for Main Street
TRANSIT SERVICE AND COMMUNITY
BUILDING
Goal 1
Goal 2
Goal 3
Transit Stations as Urban AmenitiesMultimodal Transportation Choices
Exhibit B-63
Attachment 2-70
Exhibit B-64
Attachment 2-71
SPRINGFIELD MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN
PLAN ADDENDUM
January, 2015
[add Our Main Street banner at the bottom of the page]
Community Outreach
Exhibit C-1
Attachment 2-72
Two technical memoranda were important to developing the visions and goals Main Street and the
strategies and actions to guide implementation transitional change over the next 20 years. Priority
short-term actions were included in the Main Street Corridor Visions Plan (2015). The memoranda
have been included on the following pages.
Strategies and Actions Memorandum
A comprehensive strategy detailing short-term and long-term actions, projects, and programs that
will effectively guide the City, partner agencies, private and non-profit investors, businesses, and
citizens toward achieving the visions and goals of the Main Street Corridor Vision Plan (2015). It
provides clarity about the City’s expectations, roles and responsibilities in facilitating desired land use
and transportation changes. Recommendations reflect the unique vision statements for each corridor
segment.
Existing Conditions, Opportunities and Constraints Memorandum
This memorandum is an inventory and analysis of the existing conditions of the project area for the
Springfield Main Street Corridor Vision Plan (2015). The identification of opportunities and constraints
helped inform the community dialogue and develop the vision statements, goals, and
implementation strategies and actions. The memorandum addresses:
• An overview of key corridor issues and characteristics.
• A description of the land use, business, transportation, infrastructure and real estate market
conditions in the corridor.
• A preliminary evaluation of the opportunities and constraints for redevelopment and
transportation improvements.
The maps from this inventory and analysis have also been included.
Exhibit C-2
Attachment 2-73
Memorandum
808 SW Third Avenue, Suite 300
Portland OR 97204
Phone (503) 287-6825
Fax (503) 415-2304
In Association with
Cogito
Blue Mountain Economics
DKS Associates
Main Street Corridor Vision Plan
City of Springfield
To: Linda Pauly, Principal Planner– City of Springfield
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
From: Tom Litster, Otak
Anne Fifield, Blue Mountain Economics
Brad Coy and Scott Mansur, DKS Associates
Date: September 23, 2014
Subject: Memo #4 –Strategies and Actions
Project No.: 16786
Exhibit C-3
Attachment 2-74
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner ─ City of Springfield Page 2
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Draft Strategies and Actions ─ Memo #4 September 23, 2014
Acknowledgements
Project Management Team
Linda Pauly, City of Springfield, City Project Manager
David Helton, Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT), Transportation and Growth
Management Program (TGM), Grant Manager
John Evans, Lane Transit District (LTD)
Consultant Team
Otak, Inc.
Tom Litster, Project Manager
Mandy Flett, GIS Planner
Ashley Cantlon, P.E., Project Engineer
Kayla Gutierrez, Project Assistant
Blue Mountain Economics
Anne Fifefield, Senior Economist
DKS Associates
Scott Mansur, P.E., Transportation Planner
Brad Coy, P.E. Traffic Engineer
Cogito
Julie Fischer, Community Outreach
Ellen, Teninty, Community Outreach
Technical Review Committee
Linda Pauly, City of Springfield
Kristi Krueger, City of Springfield
Michael Liebler, City of Springfield
David Reesor, City of Springfield
Matt Stouder, City of Springfield
Sunny Washburn, City of Springfield
Tom Boyatt, City of Springfield
Courtney Griesel, City of Springfield
John Tamulonis, City of Springfield
John Evans, Lane Transit District
David Helton, ODOT
Exhibit C-4
Attachment 2-75
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner ─ City of Springfield Page 3
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Draft Strategies and Actions ─ Memo #4 September 23, 2014
Table of Contents
Page
Introduction ....................................................................................................................................................... 4
Transportation, Transit and the Public Realm ........................................................................................... 8
Transportation Choices .............................................................................................................................. 8
Transit Service and Community Building ............................................................................................. 11
Transit Goals for Main Street................................................................................................................. 12
Public Realm Enhancements ........................................................................................................................ 15
Business Activities.......................................................................................................................................... 18
Corridor Segment 1 ― Main Street Couplet Area .......................................................................... 18
Corridor Segment 1 ― South A Street Couplet .............................................................................. 21
Corridor Segment 2 ─ Mid-Springfield Business Corridor ............................................................. 22
Corridor Segment 3 ―Thurston Neighborhood Area .................................................................... 23
Housing Choices ............................................................................................................................................ 25
Corridor Segment 1 ―The Main Street Couplet ............................................................................. 25
Corridor Segment 2 ― Mid-Springfield Business Corridor ............................................................ 27
Corridor Segment 3 ―Thurston Neighborhood Area .................................................................... 29
Concepts for Future Zoning and Plan Updates ...................................................................................... 29
Concept A― Update with Existing Zoning Districts ....................................................................... 30
Concept B ― Update with Existing Zoning Districts and a Plan District.................................... 32
Concept C ― Update with a Form-Based Code (FBC) .................................................................. 33
Summary of Recommendations ............................................................................................................. 34
Implementation Strategy Updates .............................................................................................................. 36
Main Street Corridor Vision Plan Project or Program Proposal ........................................................ 37
This project was partially funded by a grant from the Transportation and Growth Management Program (TGM), a
joint program of the Oregon Department of Transportation and the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and
Development. This TGM grant is funded, in part, by federal Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation
Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA_LU) and local government and State of Oregon funds. The contents
of this document do not necessarily reflect views or policies of the State of Oregon.
Exhibit C-5
Attachment 2-76
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner ─ City of Springfield Page 4
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Draft Strategies and Actions ─ Memo #4 September 23, 2014
Introduction
The Main Street Corridor Vision Plan is one of five projects being closely coordinated as part of Our
Main Street ― an opportunity for the community to look at and think about the future of the seven
miles that make up the Main Street corridor, and discuss what will influence the local economy and
community livability for decades to come. The projects share five guiding goals:
• Encourage economic revitalization and land use redevelopment.
• Provide transportation choices to residents, businesses and commuters to encourage
individual and community well-being and public safety.
• Improve transportation safety and access for walkers, cyclists, transit riders and drivers along
and through the corridor.
• Improve aesthetics on Main Street, making it an attractive place to live, work and shop.
• Create Main Street identities.
Project Area
The Main Street Corridor Vision Plan begins at the intersections of Main Street and South A Street with
10th Street and extends east along Main Street to 69th Street. The project area is the roadway and the
properties adjacent to the roadway. Three distinct segments for this 7-mile corridor have been
identified based on differences in land use patterns for business and housing and consideration of
urban renewal and refinement plan areas of the City and the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area
General Plan.
Segment 1 ─ Couplet Area begins at 10th Street and extends to the eastern boundary of the
Downtown Urban Renewal Area (URA) at 23rd Street and Main Street. This segment is an OR
Highway 126B couplet for most of the segment.
Segment 2 ─ Mid-Springfield Business Corridor extends from 23rd Street to the Bob Straub
Parkway. This segment includes Main Street and adjacent properties within the Mid-Springfield
Refinement Plan area and the East Main Street Refinement Plan areas.
Segment 3 ─ Thurston Neighborhood Area begins at the Bob Straub Parkway and extends
eastward to the end of the Project Area at 69th Street.
Segment 1 Segment 2 Segment 3
Exhibit C-6
Attachment 2-77
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner ─ City of Springfield Page 5
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Draft Strategies and Actions ─ Memo #4 September 23, 2014
Within the segments, Activity Nodes were identified at 14th Street, 21st Street, 30th Street, 42nd
Street, 54th Street and 58th Street.
Corridor Segments and Activity Nodes
Goals of the Plan
A constructive dialogue with property and business owners, the community and civic organizations
resulted in broad goals for the plan. A unique vision statement was developed for each segment,
with specific goals for each segment. The broad goals are:
Business activities that build on successful existing business, take advantage of specific
redevelopment opportunities and are consistent with realistic market potential. New business
opportunities also support the City of Springfield’s long-term employment goals.
Housing choices that will accommodate a mix of incomes, and age groups in a range of housing
options. New housing choices will help sustain “Alive after Five” energy at key nodes along Main
Street and support transit investments throughout the corridor.
Transportation choices for multi-modal travel that will improve safety for all users, increase transit
ridership and support increased residential and business development.
Public realm and infrastructure investments which will improve basic functions, such as
stormwater management, and the visual attractiveness of Main Street.
Implementation of the Plan
A comprehensive strategy detailing City actions in the Main Street corridor is the most effective way
to guide future actions by the City, private and non-profit investors, businesses, citizens and partner
agencies. It will provide clarity about the City’s expectations, roles and responsibilities in land use
and transportation changes leading to the desired future for Main Street. Recommendations reflect
the unique vision statements for each corridor segment.
Exhibit C-7
Attachment 2-78
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner ─ City of Springfield Page 6
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Draft Strategies and Actions ─ Memo #4 September 23, 2014
What is an Implementation Strategy?
An implementation strategy integrates the vision statements and goals. This strategy makes
recommendations for City actions in support of the Main Street Corridor Vision Plan. The strategies
and actions are organized around the four broad goals of the Plan. The recommendations include a
set of short-term strategies (carried out in 1-5 years) and long-term strategies (carried out over a 5-15
year timeline). They anticipate adoption of the Main Street Corridor Vision Plan in early 2015. Specific
projects and programs have also been recommended, along with potential funding sources and
organizational support and potential City zoning, planning and policy updates. For successful
implementation, a “one size fits all” approach would not address the diversity and special
circumstances of the Main Street corridor.
How is an Implementation Strategy Intended to be Used?
An adopted implementation strategy will help guide the development of annual budgets and can
serve as a tool to communicate the City’s goals to other agencies. In some cases, the actions may be
undertaken in partnership with other agencies, such as Lane Transit District (LTD) or community
organizations such as the Neighborhood Economic Development Corporation (NEDCO). As
projects and programs are successfully completed, the strategy can be updated to reflect changing
opportunities and conditions in the Main Street corridor, as well as lessons learned during the early
years of implementation. Strategies previously identified as long-term may be moved forward as new
short-term strategies.
Early implementation steps will build awareness of the corridor’s potential and build momentum
and support for achieving the visions and goals. Focused spending of limited financial and staff
resources should be emphasized. The early success of implementation will:
• Sustain community involvement along Main Street.
• Build confidence in the Plan by achieving small successes.
• Leverage other funding and projects in order to meet multiple goals and objectives.
• Create or strengthen partnerships.
How was the Implementation Strategy Developed?
A community outreach process between October 2013 and June 2014 led to vision statements and
goals documented in Vision, Goals and Opportunities. The outreach included a wide range of
stakeholders, residents and businesses owners along the corridor. Those conversations suggested
specific strategies and actions to realize the goals for each segment of the corridor. The
recommended strategies and actions also reflect a review of existing corridor conditions, current
public plans and policies relevant to Main Street and input from City staff and LTD.
Will the Community Stay Involved?
The public conversation with stakeholders and the community at-large has been essential to
development of this strategy. Continued community engagement after adoption of the Main Street
Corridor Vision Plan will be important for effective implementation and the on-going refinement of
strategies and actions as conditions change. A process should be created to encourage citizens or
community groups to propose specific projects or programs they believe will help achieve the vision
and goals for Main Street.
Exhibit C-8
Attachment 2-79
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner ─ City of Springfield Page 7
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Draft Strategies and Actions ─ Memo #4 September 23, 2014
General Principles for Implementation
The General Principles are a broad language that will apply to all decisions affecting the adopted
Main Street Corridor Vision Plan. They are intended to be used consistently throughout the
implementation period to guide short-term and long-term strategies, projects and programs.
Outreach. Future planning and implementation will be founded on the inclusive community
engagement process begun in the Main Street Corridor Vision Plan. The City will continue to provide
opportunities for the general public, stakeholders, property and business owners, residents,
organizations and advocacy groups to access and provide input to decision-making.
Community Benefits. Implementation of the Main Street Corridor Vision Plan should be of most
benefit to residents and businesses within the project area. Mobility and transportation choices,
improved roadway safety, provision of transportation linkages, creation of business and job
opportunities, expansion of housing choices and public realm and infrastructure investments will
enhance the livability and private investment appeal of the project area.
Focused Investment along Main Street. Areas immediately abutting Main Street will bear the
greatest impacts and opportunities associated with future changes. Therefore these areas will be an
important focus of public investment and City actions to encourage private investment.
Equitable Distribution of Resources. It is essential that there be a fair distribution of City
resources throughout the entire project area.
Coordination. To optimize the effectiveness of public sector investments, the City of Springfield
will coordinate and integrate implementation of the Main Street Corridor Vision Plan with the
Downtown Urban Renewal program (SEDA), LTD, Oregon Department of Transportation and
with ther agencies and stakeholders with an economic or transportation interest in corridor.
Sustainable Development. Promote and encourage resource and energy efficient design in
accordance with relevant City’s policy and standards such as a Climate Action Plan, Green Building
design standards, Low Impact Development standards, Sustainable Sites Initiatives or energy and
water conservation programs.
Exhibit C-9
Attachment 2-80
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner ─ City of Springfield Page 8
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Draft Strategies and Actions ─ Memo #4 September 23, 2014
Transportation, Transit and the Public Realm
Transportation Choices
Main Street has historically been an important transportation corridor providing through travel and
access to business. Big themes emerging from community outreach were desires for improved
walking and cycling safety, slower speeds, mobility for all travel options and convenient transit
service. Main Street livability for the future requires a new balance between maintaining the historic
functions of Main Street as a state highway and the opportunities to create a stronger sense of a
shared community street designed with all users in mind ― drivers, transit users, pedestrians,
bicyclists, older people, children, and people with disabilities.
Goal 1: Safer and more comfortable walking and cycling to jobs, shopping and
entertainment through street design improvements.
Goal 2: Reduce traffic speeds
Goal 3: Maintain flow of traffic including access to properties that front Main Street.
Key Implementation Issues
Main Street/OR 126B has historically been a transportation corridor for regional and local traffic. It
is designated as a City Truck Route and as a State Highway. It is part of the National Highway
System and the National Network as a Federally Designated Truck Route east of the Bob Straub
Parkway. Fundamental transportation functions of Main Street must be protected and maintained.
Opportunities to implement significant design changes to Main Street will require concurrence by
ODOT. Roadway design will require approval by ODOT in accordance with ODOT and ASSHTO
design guidelines and standards. Any proposed variance must be granted a Design Exception.
For many business owners, especially the smaller owners, ODOT policies regarding access
management, permitting new driveways or efforts to consolidate current driveways can be a source
of concern and confusion. A City role in helping owners understand requirements and facilitating
agreements with ODOT might be welcome assistance.
Speed Feedback Sign Improved Pedestrian Crossings
Exhibit C-10
Attachment 2-81
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner ─ City of Springfield Page 9
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Draft Strategies and Actions ─ Memo #4 September 23, 2014
Short-term Strategies (2015-2020)
The following actions are compatible with existing ODOT plans and policies.
Strategic Goal Action
Encourage multimodal transportation choices.
Install additional bicycle parking facilities in Segment 1
and the Activity Nodes consistent with
recommendations of the Region Bike Parking Study.
Coordinate with the Regional Transportation Options
Plan (RTOP) to fully implement transportation options.
Evaluate the construction of additional pedestrian
crossings utilizing innovative solutions like the
Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB) or the
Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon (PHB).1
Implement a bike boulevard on Virginia Street and
Daisy Street to serve as a parallel Main Street bicycle
route on the south side of Main Street.
Determine type, location and cost for pedestrian and
bicycle way-finding signage and initiate installation.
Update and maintain the Americans with Disabilities
Act (ADA) Transition Plan as part of a larger city-wide
plan to address deficiencies in the existing system.
Determine locations for additional roadway lighting to
improve nighttime visibility, especially of pedestrians
crossing the street.
Strategic Goal Action
Encourage slower speeds along the Main Street
corridor.
Explore landscaping options such as medians with
foliage that would have a traffic-calming effect while
providing streetscape enhancement and/or
stormwater management functions.
Evaluate a potential need for speed feedback signs in
Segment 1 and identify specific areas to implement
them.1
Strategic Goal Action
Improve mobility and safety throughout the
Main Street corridor.
Identify potential signal-head and phasing
modifications to ensure safe and efficient travel.
Work with ODOT to implement the Draft short-range
Expressway Management Plan (EMP) improvements
identified for the Hwy 126 and Main interchange
Provide a balanced, context-sensitive approach to
addressing future land uses and transportation needs
in the corridor.
Identify any necessary signal timing improvements to
ensure the most efficient movement of traffic.
Implement access management through land use
development.
1 Specific location recommendations for Segments 2 and 3 can be found in a previous DKS
Associates Report: Springfield Main Street (OR 126) Safety Study. 2011
Exhibit C-11
Attachment 2-82
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner ─ City of Springfield Page 10
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Draft Strategies and Actions ─ Memo #4 September 23, 2014
Long-term Strategies (2020-2035)
Most of the following actions would require concurrence by ODOT and must meet AASHTO NHS
standards, regardless of jurisdiction.
Strategic Goal Action
Encourage pedestrian and bicycle activity along the
corridor.
Evaluate the benefits and feasibility of protected bike
lanes.
Evaluate the ability to expand sidewalk and bicycle
facilities and amenities either by acquiring additional
right of way or narrowing the vehicular travel lanes.
Strategic Goal Action
Encourage slower speeds along the Main Street
corridor.
Explore the option of narrowing motor vehicle lanes.
This will have the added benefit of increasing the area
available for widening sidewalks along the corridor.
Explore the option of transforming key signalized
intersections into dual-lane roundabouts.
Strategic Goal Action
Improve mobility throughout the Main Street
corridor.
Assess the potential for installing new LED Street lights
along the entire corridor.
Prepare Access Management Plan that integrates
business owners and their access needs, zoning and
development code updates and opportunities to
improve the safety and appeal of pedestrian and
bicycle trips throughout the corridor.
Projects and Programs
Project and programs for transportation choices are closely related to efforts to improve the public
realm and transit facilities on Main Street. They all serve multiple objectives of improving safety and
mobility for all users and enhancing the visual attractiveness of Main Street.
Main Street Safety Study – Phase II
A potential “next-step” program could be to extend the recommendations given in the Springfield Main Street
Safety Study into Segment 1 because it currently applies only to Segments 2 and 3. Previously, the Springfield Main
Street Safety Study received funding, and most of the spot locations recommended also have approved funding
from ODOT (around $1 million worth). However, the plan only covered Segments 2 and 3. Identifying similar
improvement and strategies for Segment 1 would build on the prior successes and potentially facilitate funding
opportunities and agency support.
1 Specific location recommendations for Segments 2 and 3 can be found in a previous DKS Associates Report: Springfield
Main Street (OR 126) Safety Study. 2011
Exhibit C-12
Attachment 2-83
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner ─ City of Springfield Page 11
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Draft Strategies and Actions ─ Memo #4 September 23, 2014
Transit Service and Community Building
Transit helps connect people to the places they want to go. In doing so, it contributes to multiple
community benefits through coordinated planning between the City of Springfield and LTD.
Community benefits include the following.
Choice
Enhanced transit service, such as the potential for Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) service along Main
Street, provides more than options for transportation. It can be an infrastructure investment that
encourages and helps organize the development of new housing, businesses, employment and
education opportunities. This offers more livability choices within and between neighborhoods that
mix uses, income levels and age groups.
Job Growth
Implementing enhanced transit service, such as the potential for Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) service
along Main Street, would improve access to employment throughout the region and would benefit
some employers by expanding access to the labor force. Enhanced transit service also has potential
to increase the number of jobs in the corridor and to support diversification of the local economy as
Springfield grows. Station areas are attractive to jobs in several economic sectors, including some of
Springfield’s target industries.
Affordability
The combined cost of housing and transportation consumes a large percentage of household
incomes. Investment in transit and transit-supportive neighborhoods increases affordable housing
opportunities and reduces transportation costs by encouraging transit, pedestrian and bicycle trips.
Urban Amenities
Transit-supportive neighborhoods and business districts often support higher quality urban
amenities such as attractive streetscapes, parks and trails, schools and a range of neighborhood
services. Amenities provide benefits and monetary values to residents, employers and employees.
Public Health
Transit and transit-supportive development is an important strategy for improving public health.
Evidence suggests that compact, mixed use districts increase biking and walking, providing all the
health benefits of exercise. Reducing automobile trips means reducing emissions that pose both
short-term and long-term risks from degraded air quality and unfavorable climate change.
Financial Return on Private Investment
Transit does not create market, but it can help organize and distribute growth, especially when
transit planning and real estate development are understood as a single comprehensive process.
Mixed use strategies and transit investments allow for flexibility in responding to market cycles.
Exhibit C-13
Attachment 2-84
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner ─ City of Springfield Page 12
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Draft Strategies and Actions ─ Memo #4 September 23, 2014
Transit Goals for Main Street
Improving the convenience and frequency of service, the qualities of the transit experience and
access to individual transit stops will address mobility challenges. It will also help maintain
household affordability and open up new community development opportunities along and
connecting through the corridor. Amenities associated with transit projects can add new vitality to
transit stations in the corridor, reinforce existing district identities, and help create community hubs
through station design, landscaping, lighting and public art.
Goal 1: Frequent high capacity transit service for Main Street.
Goal 2: Enhancements to the total transit experience which includes cost, convenience,
walking or bike access to transit stops and the design qualities of the stops themselves.
Goal 3: Successful leveraging of redevelopment strategies and infrastructure investments
between the City and LTD.
Key Implementation Issues
A strong partnership between the City and LTD can leverage funding sources for public realm
infrastructure, provide education and information about transit’s contribution to community
livability and jointly stimulate new jobs and housing. This partnership is in keeping with the best
practices for transit and transit-supportive development.
Potential service enhancements for Main Street include potential Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) service.
Regardless of the type of service, increasing transit appeal for “choice riders” (people who chose to
use transit rather than drive their car for a given trip) is integral to multiple transportation goals.
Since most transit trips begin on foot, improvements in neighborhood walkablity will also increase
the functional “walkshed” of a station.
If BRT service is implemented, there will be opportunities for collaborative design of transit stations
and station environments, incentivizing strategic redevelopment and early outreach to property
owners and existing business in order to capture the economic and marketing benefits of the transit
investment and to manage potential construction impacts.
Enhanced Transit Service Transit-Supportive Development
Exhibit C-14
Attachment 2-85
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner ─ City of Springfield Page 13
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Draft Strategies and Actions ─ Memo #4 September 23, 2014
Short-term Strategies (2015 -2020)
Improving the convenience and frequency of service and access to transit will address mobility
challenges, help maintain household affordability and open up new economic opportunities along
the corridor.
Strategic Goal Action
Encourage comfortable bicycle and pedestrian
access to existing transit stops.
Evaluate the need to install additional pedestrian
crossings near transit stops.
Undertake neighborhood walkability assessments that
include access to Main Street transit stops.
Assess the need for pedestrian and bicycle way-finding
signage.
Assess opportunities for neighborhood bike
boulevards that provide connectivity to Main Street
transit stops.
Long-term Strategies Jointly Undertaken with LTD (2015 -2020)
Partnership is a way to leverage funding sources for public realm infrastructure, provide education
and information about transit’s contribution to community livability and to jointly pursue
opportunities to stimulate new jobs and housing.
Strategic Goal Action
Encourage comfortable bicycle and pedestrian
access to transit.
Coordinate pedestrian crossing improvements and
transit stations along Main Street.
Extend, and create pedestrian and bicycle linkages
within neighborhoods adjacent to Main Street in order
to improve access to transit.
Encourage transit- supportive redevelopment. If BRT is selected for future service on Main Street, the
City and LTD can development incentives,
infrastructure investments, business recruitment and
streetscape improvements with planned transit
stations wherever possible.
Assess current park-and-ride facilities in the corridor
and how existing or future facilities could be more
effectively integrated into or coordinated with the
City’s vision for Downtown redevelopment and
redevelopment scenarios for the corridor consistent
with 2030 Plan and TSP policies.
Effective businesses outreach and support.
The City and LTD should target local businesses for
support of transit through a coordinated framework
for communication, early planning, advertising and
business retention strategies for the corridor.
Continued stakeholder involvement. A coordinated framework of communication,
education and participation in planning efforts that
targets Main Street property owners and businesses.
Exhibit C-15
Attachment 2-86
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner ─ City of Springfield Page 14
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Draft Strategies and Actions ─ Memo #4 September 23, 2014
Projects and Programs
In BRT service is planned for Main Street, the following activities could be collaboratively
undertaken by the City and LTD.
BRT Station Design Workshops
Engage the community in workshops to explore context-sensitive design opportunities for transit
stations. Transit stations can provide transit system identity as well as Main Street identity. High-
quality transit stations also provide additional urban design opportunities for a comprehensive
streetscape plan for Main Street, particularly a plan that integrates public art and wayfinding.
Station Area Planning
Collaborate with LTD to facilitate station area planning at for the Activity Ngodes along Main
Street. Station area plans should address redevelopment feasibility, infrastructure needs, public space
and gateway opportunities and infrastructure needs. Require development concepts and specific
project implementation strategies consistent with the Main Street Corridor Vision Plan.
Business Support Program During Construction
The City should partner with LTD to offer a business support program during constructions.
Potential elements of the program include efforts to minimize construction impacts and provide
construction timing information. Additional services might include marketing and technical support,
free business workshops and low-interest loans to affected businesses.
High-Quality Station Design Transit and Public Art
Exhibit C-16
Attachment 2-87
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner ─ City of Springfield Page 15
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Draft Strategies and Actions ─ Memo #4 September 23, 2014
Public Realm Enhancements
Main Street is one of Springfield’s most important business corridors. The visual qualities of the
public realm can strongly influence the perceptions of the attractiveness of the Main Street. The
public realm of the corridor consists of streetscape amenities, gateway features, pedestrian and
bicycle facilities and transit stops within the street right-of-way and the land uses, buildings, parking
areas and any outdoor plazas visible from the street. The following goals were identified:
Goal 1: Attractive sidewalk corridor as a “front door” for businesses and residents.
Goal 2: Attractive development that is consistent with the vision statements for each
segment and uses high-quality, long-lasting materials that complement adjacent buildings.
Goal 3: Unique design features within Activity Nodes as focal points for the corridor.
Key Implementation Issues
An appealing public realm requires public investment in street design and infrastructure and private
investments in building design and in site design features such as parking, landscaping and outdoor
pedestrian areas. From the City’s perspective, the regulatory context of policies, zoning and design
standards can encourage desired private investments that improve the public realm with regard to
use, functionality, scale and appearance. The City can also utilize supportive programs that can
contribute financial resources and technical expertise to building owners in order to improve Main
Street attractiveness and the viability of businesses. From the private perspective, the regulatory
context should be mindful of building forms and site designs that are efficient for desired uses, as
well as the costs of construction and maintenance.
A “one size fits all” approach will not address the special circumstances of the corridor.
Enhancements should reflect the vision statements and individual neighborhood characteristics. For
example, the streetscape amenities, pedestrian facilities and outdoor areas surrounding buildings
designed to an “Alive after Five” environment will be noticeably different than a public realm suited
to an affordable business corridor with an emphasis on vehicle access and visibility.
Pedestrian-Oriented Streetscapes Functionally Attractive Streetscape
Exhibit C-17
Attachment 2-88
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner ─ City of Springfield Page 16
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Draft Strategies and Actions ─ Memo #4 September 23, 2014
Short-term Strategies (2015-2020)
These strategies are intended to result in relatively low cost design studies and conceptual plans. The
plans can be used to identify long-term funding sources and to update the implementation strategy.
Strategic Goal Action
Attractive sidewalk corridor.
Complete a comprehensive design plan for Main
Street and South A Street within the project area.
Update the Wayfinding Action Plan to include all of
Segment 1.
Develop a Main Street public art program with an
emphasis on identified activity nodes.
Initiate a Pilot Parklet Program for the Main Street in
the Downtown District and Segment 1.
Strategic Goal Action
Attractive development consistent with the
vision statements.
Evaluate zoning and comprehensive plan updates,
including innovative codes that emphasis building
form and the public realm while providing flexibility
for uses.
Utilize a storefront improvement program along Main
Street.
Coordinate plans for public realm enhancements with
transit station area planning in order to help focus and
incent transit-supportive development.
Long-term Strategies (2020-2035)
These strategies emphasize implementation through construction. They will require long-term
efforts to acquire funding based on short-term planning or an on-going source of project funding.
Strategic Goal Action
Attractive sidewalk corridor.
Undertake demonstration projects in areas of high
visibility based on a comprehensive street design plan
for the project area (see short-term strategies).
Strategic Goal Action
Attractive development consistent with the
vision statements.
Actively engage in storefront improvement projects.
Evaluate potential public-private joint development
projects with potential for high-quality design.
Exhibit C-18
Attachment 2-89
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner ─ City of Springfield Page 17
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Draft Strategies and Actions ─ Memo #4 September 23, 2014
Projects and Programs
Initiate conceptual public realm planning through a Request for Proposals process. Upon
completion of a plan, update the implementation strategy to reflect to reflect long-term phasing and
implementation of the projects. Plans should identify funding sources for construction.
Main Street Corridor Streetscape Plan
Engage the community in completing a conceptual design plan for Main Street within Segments 2 and 3
and South A Street within Segment 1. This will be a coordinated effort to bring together businesses,
citizens and community organizations in developing design themes, guidelines and concepts for a
corridor streetscape. In addition to streetscape and public art features, the plan can address street
lighting, potential roadway and intersection reconfigurations and right-of-way impacts.
Main Street Public Art Plan
Develop a public art plan for project area with an emphasis on installation opportunities in the Couplet
Area and in the activity nodes along Main Street. Include local public artists and the community in
developing art themes and guidelines. Establish a proposal and selection process and funding support.
Coordinate with public art planning for downtown and future BRT stations.
1 Parklets should be initiated in conjunction with traffic calming measures.
A Garden Street Public Art
The “Garden Street” Plan
Determine support for developing a unique sidewalk corridor enhancement plan for Main Street
between 10th Street and 23rd Street (Segment 1). The plan would emphasize the “greening of Main
Street” and the garden history of Springfield. This unique streetscape will be a transition between
Downtown and the Mid-Springfield Corridor. Plan elements might include street trees and furnishings,
street corner landscaping, wayfinding, public art and showcase stormwater management best practices.
Pilot Parklet Program for Main Street
Parklet programs have been initiated around the world. Parklets temporarily convert on-street parking
spaces into public spaces to enjoy. The goal is activate the streets, provide downtown open spaces and
support economic vitality of businesses. Develop a Pilot Parklet Program for Main Street that includes
the Downtown District and Segment 1 of this plan. Evaluate the success of the pilot program to
determine if a permanent parklet program should instituted.1
Exhibit C-19
Attachment 2-90
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner ─ City of Springfield Page 18
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Draft Strategies and Actions ─ Memo #4 September 23, 2014
Business Activities
As described in the introduction of this document, the City of Springfield has identified five goals
that are guiding principles for the different projects engaging in long-term planning for Main Street.
One goal is “Encourage economic revitalization and land use redevelopment.” That broad goal
helped guide the community dialogue for this project as visions and goals specific to each segment
of the Main Street Corridor were identified. This section identifies strategies that will positively
affect business activities.
Goals and strategies that address business activity are those that focus on activities directly affecting
businesses and the properties they are built on. It is important to note that the strategies that affect
transportation, the public realm, and even housing will also affect business activity. For example,
improvement to the public realm will enhance the physical appeal for businesses fronting Main
Street, which should positively impact those businesses. Improving the aesthetics and functionality
of Main Street’s public realm will also support City-wide business and community development
activity as the overall image of Springfield is enhanced.
Corridor Segment 1 ― Main Street Couplet Area
Business goals should build on strengths and opportunities created by the economic histories of
each leg of the couplet. The mix of uses is complementary to downtown business and helps create a
more inviting “Alive after Five” environment for the broader community by bringing more people
and positive activities into the neighborhood. The community expressed desires for more diverse
shopping opportunities and destinations reachable by walking in this segment.
Goal 1: An appealing pedestrian-oriented environment.
Goal 2: Storefront businesses with multi-story residences or office above.
Goal 3: New jobs through small-scale service businesses and professional offices.
Goal 4: Comfortable access by all modes of travel to jobs, shopping and entertainment.
Key Implementation Issues
The City of Springfield is engaged in a priority effort to increase business activity in the downtown
core and the Glenwood area. It has established an Urban Renewal District (URD) that is investing in
upgraded infrastructure in the city center. It has other programs that provide financial assistance to
businesses in the downtown core. This part of Main Street, east of 10th Street to 23rd Street is
outside that core. Although the Urban Renewal District boundary extends east of 10th Street, the
planned investments are focused west of 10th Street.
The City will need to evaluate its willingness to expand supportive programs to the east of 10th
Street. The City has identified its priorities to be the downtown core west of 10th Street and the
Glenwood area. If the City extends programs to the Main Street Couplet area and expands its focus,
it risks spreading its resources too thinly.
By focusing on the downtown core in the short term, the City has an improved likelihood of
creating a vibrant city center. A more vibrant downtown core will enhance efforts to make this
Exhibit C-20
Attachment 2-91
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner ─ City of Springfield Page 19
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Draft Strategies and Actions ─ Memo #4 September 23, 2014
portion of Main Street more pedestrian friendly. The short-term strategies identified in this plan will
not detract from on-going efforts in the downtown core.
Another key implementation issue is the City’s ability to provide incentives to encourage business
activity. The City has limited financial resources and a staff already committed to other projects.
With that in mind, this Plan recommends strategies that minimize cost to the City, yet have the
potential to yield positive change in the area.
Short-term Strategies (2015-2020)
Expand the Façade Improvement Program. The City supports a façade-improvement program,
implemented by NEDCO. The program is currently limited to the downtown core. Consider
expanding the boundary of the program to include the Main Street portion of the Couplet Area.
Evaluate the feasibility of a Business Improvement District. The City can reach out to business
owners in the area to assess the viability of a Business Improvement District, or BID.2 A BID is a
small area where the property owners and business owners agree to tax themselves to fund specific
programs. In this case, the funds could be used to ensure the area is kept clean of garbage and
graffiti and could fund some streetscape improvements identified in the above section describing the
Public Realm. The district’s assessment would not be a property tax, based on the property’s
assessed value, avoiding Oregon’s limits on property tax rates. It could be a flat fee or based on
lineal frontage. The affected business and property owners would need to actively support such an
assessment, and perceive it as a tool to improve their immediate area.
Communicate with property owners. Redeveloping a parcel is a partnership between the
developer and the City— the landowner controls the use and condition of the property but the City
controls many key entitlements that affect the property. Planning staff can communicate with
property owners to ensure they are aware of goals of the Main Street Corridor Vision Plan and any
plans to revise the Zoning Code and to create a more pedestrian-friendly environment. Keeping
owners apprised of planned changes may affect owners’ development plans.
Update zoning code and provide clear communication outreach tools. Update zoning to be
fully supportive of the visions and goals of the Main Street Corridor Vision Plan. See Concepts for
Future Zoning specific recommendations.
Provide expedient development review customer service. The City has a reputation for being
responsive to developer requests. The development community considers the City’s quick response
and level of service to be an incentive.
Long-term Strategies (2020-2035)
Consider waiving or reducing System Development Charge (SDCs) for eligible
redevelopment. Reducing or eliminating SDCs can positively affect the financial feasibility of dense
redevelopment. If a redevelopment proposal meets criteria (such as vertical mixed use or mixed
income housing) the City has the ability to improve the financial viability of the development by
2 Such a taxing district can also be called an Economic Improvement District. The two have technical differences but
essentially achieve the same goal through self-taxation.
Exhibit C-21
Attachment 2-92
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner ─ City of Springfield Page 20
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Draft Strategies and Actions ─ Memo #4 September 23, 2014
reducing development costs. Although this strategy negatively affects the City’s ability to pay for
public improvements, it is one potential tool that it can consider using in the future.
Evaluate priorities of the Downtown Urban Renewal District. Springfield’s Downtown Urban
Renewal District extends east to 23rd Street, including the Couplet Area. The Couplet Area has not
been, however, a priority for projects funded with the increment generated in URD. In the long
term, the City can evaluate the priorities of the URD, and determine if the area east of 10th Street
should become a higher priority and be supported by tax increment financing (TIF). If the City
determines that the Main Street Couplet Area should be a higher priority, the City can use funds
generated from the tax increment for a variety of purposes:
• Improvements identified in the Public Realm portion of this document.
• Purchase underused properties and assemble them. Issue a Request for Qualifications asking
for qualified developers for redevelopment proposals. The City could sell the land to a
qualified developer at a discount, as an incentive to build a mixed-use development.
• Provide a low-interest loan or other financial subsidy to new development that meets
specific criteria that support a more pedestrian-friendly area with a mix of uses.
Expand the Downtown Redevelopment Area. The City has received approval from United States
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to designate the downtown core as
“Blighted Area”, as defined by HUD. This gives the City additional options for utilizing Community
Development Block Grant Program (CDBG) funds to address “slum and blight” conditions—
supporting Downtown revitalization. By expanding the boundary, the Main Street Couplet Area
could also be a recipient of those funds.
Identify non-TIF sources. If the City chooses to not make this area a priority of the Downtown
Urban Renewal District, it can still support redevelopment of specific sites so the area transforms
into a more pedestrian-oriented environment. The City would have to identify a different funding
source. Some sources to consider include:
Infrastructure improvements to support the Physical Realm and Transportation can be
added to the City’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP). The CIP identifies the City’s
priorities for capital improvements and ensures the items in the CIP are eligible for funding.
It does not ensure funding, but at a minimum, documents the City’s commitment to a
particular improvement. The improvements that emphasize the greening of Main Street can
be funded by funds from the City’s Stormwater fees.
HUD Section 108 is a loan guarantee provision of the CDBG program. Section 108
provides communities with a source of financing for economic development, housing
rehabilitation, public facilities, and large-scale physical development projects. Section 108
loan capacity is determined by the annual CDBG allocation to the City. It allows a City to
transform a small portion of their CDBG funds into federally guaranteed loans large enough
to pursue physical and economic revitalization projects. Section 108 loans are not risk-free,
however; local governments borrowing funds guaranteed by Section 108 must pledge their
current and future CDBG allocations to cover the loan amount as security for the loan.
EB-5 is a federal program designed to enable foreigners to obtain a US visa leading to
citizenship by making a $500,000 investment, at low interest rates, in American economic
Exhibit C-22
Attachment 2-93
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner ─ City of Springfield Page 21
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Draft Strategies and Actions ─ Memo #4 September 23, 2014
development projects. Each $500,000 investment must create 10 jobs for US residents; these
can be primary jobs (directly part of the business or project), and/or secondary jobs (those
that are indirectly associated with the business/project as well as induced by it). Common
EB-5 projects include senior housing facilities, hotels, office buildings, industrial facilities,
retail, and infrastructure projects (if linked to any of the preceding). The businesses or
projects receiving EB-5 funds must be located in a Targeted Employment Area (TEA).
TEAs are areas within a state that meet federal unemployment guidelines. Metro areas with
populations over 50,000 must have areas within them that meet or exceed 150% of the
national unemployment rate to qualify as a TEA. The rules that allow an area to determine
its unemployment rate are quite flexible, and it is likely the study area could qualify as a TEA.
The New Markets Tax Credit (NMTC) Program permits high net worth taxpayers or
financial institutions to receive a credit against Federal income taxes for making qualified
equity investments in designated Community Development Entities (CDEs). Substantially all
of the qualified equity investment must in turn be used by the CDE to provide investments
in low-income communities (defined for certain census tracts). The CDE invests the cash
derived by selling these credits into eligible projects within qualified census tracts; the entire
Main Street corridor, with the exception of the Thurston area, is eligible for NMTCs. These
NMTC investments are leveraged with other private and public resources for new
development projects or significant rehabilitation projects as well as for businesses that
create jobs, and encourage economic development. Examples of projects the tax credits can
be used for include expansions of small businesses, large mixed-use real estate
developments, including industrial, retail or manufacturing, and adaptive reuse of
commercial or non-profit buildings. They can also be used to rehabilitate for-sale housing
units or construct such community facilities as charter schools, health centers, or museums.
Partner with LTD. The City’s limited financial resources have constrained the City’s ability to
direct public funds to private development. The City could partner with LTD to assemble funds for
the activities that would typically be funded by TIF (see above items).
Projects and Programs
Communication Strategy with Businesses and Property Owners
Establish a regular means of communication with the property owners and businesses in the area. An email
list serve can be used to quickly and efficiently inform them of plans and expected changes.
Identify a staff person at the City who would be the point of contact for these parties if they have a question
or a concern. Make it easy for them to contact the City.
Corridor Segment 1 ― South A Street Couplet
During the public outreach phase of the project, the community expressed a desire that business
activity on the South A Street portion of the Couplet Area should build on strengths and
opportunities created by its economic history. The mix of commerce and industry should support
City goals for job opportunities and be complementary to the retail and pedestrian-oriented
environment on Main Street. The following Business Activity goals were identified for the South A
Street portion of the Couplet Area.
Exhibit C-23
Attachment 2-94
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner ─ City of Springfield Page 22
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Draft Strategies and Actions ─ Memo #4 September 23, 2014
Goal 1: Retain long-standing and viable businesses and industries.
Goal 2: Create new jobs through commercial and service businesses and light industry.
Goal 3: Support new craft industrial uses that need workshop space or retail space.
Key Implementation Issues
A key implementation issue is the City’s limited ability to provide financial incentives to subsidize
business activity. The City has limited financial resources. The following strategies are designed to
minimize cost to the City while supporting positive change and private investment in this segment.
Strategies
Communicate with property owners. Planning staff can communicate with property owners to
ensure they are aware of any changes in the area that may result from adoption and implementation
of the Main Street Corridor Vision Plan. In the event Main Street is selected for extension of EmX,
communications can be coordinated between both efforts. Reach out to these stakeholders early
and establish clear lines of communication. Ensure that their concerns are heard and managed.
Promote the City’s Enterprise Zone. The 2012 Oregon Legislature designated a new Enterprise
Zone (EZ) in the City of Springfield. The EZ covers most of the City of Springfield, and the South
A Street portion of the Couplet Area lies fully within its boundary. An enterprise zone encourages
business investment through property tax relief. An eligible business (generally non-retail) receives
an exemption from property taxes assessed on new plant and equipment for a specified amount of
time. The properties on the south side of the South A Street Couplet Area have traditionally been in
industrial use—making this an ideal location to encourage new light industrial activity. No
information about the EZ is readily available on the City’s website. The City could use the website as
a low-cost way to inform potential participants of the program.
Corridor Segment 2 ─ Mid-Springfield Business Corridor
The Mid-Springfield segment of the corridor is envisioned to continue to be an affordable location
to start and operate a business. There is potential to intensify uses and jobs near the Activity Nodes,
supported by new residential uses near Main Street. Main Street should be safe for pedestrians and
bicyclists, but continue to offer visibility and access business for firms that require automobile
access. Changes to the area should retain successful existing businesses and services and provide
jobs by continuing to diversify services and employment opportunities.
Goal 1: Additional business clusters that require development sites large enough to store
and display merchandise.
Goal 2: Affordable start-up space for businesses, flexible office space.
Key Implementation Issues
The Mid-Springfield Corridor is long, connecting the eastern edge of downtown to the Thurston
area. The parcels along the Corridor tend to be small, limiting the ability to redevelop a meaningful
portion of the Corridor. These two factors make it difficult to focus on a particular area. This plan
identifies activity nodes along the Corridor where planning efforts could be focused.
Exhibit C-24
Attachment 2-95
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner ─ City of Springfield Page 23
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Draft Strategies and Actions ─ Memo #4 September 23, 2014
A key implementation issue is the City’s limited ability to provide financial incentives to subsidize
business activity. As previously noted, the City has limited financial and staff resources. With that in
mind, the Plan has identified strategies designed to minimize cost to the City yet support positive
change in the area.
Strategies
Evaluate the feasibility of a Business Improvement District. During community outreach,
many participants said that the area should be cleaned up and made more attractive. A Business
Improvement District, or BID, is one way to fund on-going garbage and graffiti removal.3 A BID is
a small area where the property owners and business owners agree to tax themselves to fund specific
programs. The City can reach out to business owners in the area to assess the viability of a Business
Improvement District, or BID. In this case, the funds could be used to ensure the area is kept clean
of garbage and graffiti and could fund some streetscape improvements identified in the above
section describing the Public Realm. The district’s assessment would not be a property tax, based on
the property’s assessed value, avoiding Oregon’s limits on property tax rates. It could be a flat fee or
based on lineal frontage. The affected business and property owners would need to actively support
such an assessment, and perceive it as a tool to improve their immediate area.
Promote the City’s Enterprise Zone. The 2012 Oregon Legislature designated a new Enterprise
Zone in the City of Springfield. The EZ covers most of the City of Springfield, and the north side
of the Mid-Springfield Corridor lies fully within its boundary. An enterprise zone encourages
business investment through property tax relief. An eligible business (generally non-retail) receives
an exemption from property taxes assessed on new plant and equipment for a specified amount of
time. The properties in this area have traditionally been in a variety of uses, some industrial and
some office. It is a good location to encourage new light industrial activity. Information about this
program is not readily available. The City could use the website as a low-cost way to inform
potential participants about the program.
Communicate with property owners. Communicate with property owners to ensure they are
aware of plans to revise the Zoning Code and keep them informed about planning process
associated with the BRT. Keeping owners apprised of planned changes may affect owners’
development plans.
Update Zoning Code. Update zoning to be fully supportive of the visions and goals of the Main
Street Corridor Vision Plan. See Concepts for Future Zoning for specific recommendations.
Corridor Segment 3 ―Thurston Neighborhood Area
During the public outreach phase of the project, the community expressed a desire that business
activity in the Thurston Neighborhood should help energize the intersection at Main Street and the
Bob Straub Parkway, making the area vibrant. Local and City-wide shopping options should remain
available and accessible. This plan identifies the following Business Activity goals for the Thurston
Neighborhood segment of the corridor.
3 Such a taxing district can also be called an Economic Improvement District. The two have technical differences but
essentially achieve the same goal through self-taxation.
Exhibit C-25
Attachment 2-96
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner ─ City of Springfield Page 24
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Draft Strategies and Actions ─ Memo #4 September 23, 2014
Goal 1: Small, locally-owned businesses provide essential neighborhood services.
Goal 2: An entertainment cluster with pubs, moderately-priced restaurants and potentially a
family-oriented entertainment venue.
Key Implementation Issues
The Thurston Neighborhood area offers a healthy retail environment at this time. Vacancy rates in
the retail space are low and rents are higher than in other parts of the Main Street Corridor. Any
strategic changes in the area should be careful to avoid detracting from its current success. The retail
development is designed to primarily accommodate automobiles, creating large swathes of surface
parking between buildings and the street. The area has the potential to become more
accommodating to individuals traveling on foot or by bicycle, but retailers located on those sites to
take advantage of the automobile traffic passing through the large intersection.
During the outreach phase of this project, the community stated it would like more locally owned
restaurants and some entertainment in the area. The retail areas are privately owned and operating,
limiting the City’s ability to encourage specific tenants in the area.
Strategies
Work with property managers to diversify the retail offerings. The community would like more
locally owned restaurants and entertainment. The property managers may be unaware of the interest
in more diverse retail offerings. The low vacancy rates make it unlikely that the property managers
are actively seeking to make changes to the tenant mix. The current mix is successful. The City’s
Economic Development staff, as part of its communication strategy with property owners, can bring
the desire to the attention of the property manager and work to identify potential new tenants when
an opportunity arises.
Communicate with property owners. Communicate with property owners to ensure they are
aware of plans to revise the Zoning Code and keep them informed about planning processes
associated with LTD’s transit project. Keeping owners apprised of planned changes may affect
owners’ development plans.
Update Zoning Code. Update zoning to be fully supportive of the visions and goals of the Main
Street Corridor Vision Plan. See Concepts for Future Zoning for specific recommendations.
Exhibit C-26
Attachment 2-97
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner ─ City of Springfield Page 25
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Draft Strategies and Actions ─ Memo #4 September 23, 2014
Housing Choices
The housing visions and goals that emerged from community outreach support housing choices
along the Corridor that will accommodate a mix of incomes and help sustain activity in the evening
hours at key nodes. Those goals have guided the development of implementation strategies that will
positively affect housing in the three segments along the Main Street Corridor.
The goals and strategies that address housing are those that focus on activities that directly affect
residential development. It is important to note that the strategies that affect transportation, transit,
the public realm, and business activity will also affect housing.
Corridor Segment 1 ―The Main Street Couplet
During the public outreach phase of the project, the community expressed a desire to increase the
number of people living near Downtown and Main Street with housing options attractive to a range
of incomes and ages. Residents in this segment can take advantage of excellent public transportation
in the corridor. More residents will help energize the street and help build a stronger market for
commercial businesses that serve the adjacent neighborhood. As more people move in, awareness of
the district will grow as an efficient, functional and desirable place to live and shop. This plan
identifies the following Housing goals for in the Main Street Couplet segment.4
Goal 1: Housing options for mixed incomes and age groups, including live/work options.
Goal 2: Residential mixed-use development that builds sufficient population to support
neighborhood retail and an “Alive after Five” downtown.
Key Implementation Issues
The City of Springfield has plans to increase housing in the downtown core and in the Glenwood
area. Some of the funding tools directly controlled by the City (such as tax increment financing) are
focused on increasing housing opportunities in those areas. A number of programs support
increased activity in the downtown. The eastern boundary of the area is 10th Street, so the Main
Street Couplet segment lies just outside the boundary of the downtown program area. The City will
need to evaluate its willingness to expand supportive programs to the east of 10th Street. The City
has identified its priorities to be the downtown core west of 10th Street and the Glenwood area. If
the City extends programs to the Main Street Couplet area and expands its focus, it risks spreading
its resources too thinly.
By focusing on the downtown core in the short term, the City has an improved likelihood of
creating a vibrant city center. A more vibrant downtown core will enhance the financial viability of
housing in the Main Street Couplet area. In the long term, the City can bring the Main Street
Couplet area into the existing programs that support increased housing.
The strategies are designed to work within the City’s existing efforts for community development.
The short-term strategies are the steps the City can take to remove obstacles to reaching the goals;
the long-term strategies are more active steps the City can take when it is ready to expand its
resources beyond the downtown core.
4 Housing is not a key element of the vision for South A Street.
Exhibit C-27
Attachment 2-98
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner ─ City of Springfield Page 26
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Draft Strategies and Actions ─ Memo #4 September 23, 2014
Short-term Strategies (2015-2020)
Communicate with property owners. Planning staff can communicate with property owners to
ensure they are aware of plans and programs to adjust spending priorities, revise the Zoning Code
and to create a more pedestrian-friendly environment. Redeveloping a parcel is a partnership
between the developer and the City— the landowner controls the use and condition of the property
but the City controls many key entitlements that affect the property. Keeping owners apprised of
planned changes that may affect owners’ development plans.
Update Zoning Code. Update zoning to be fully supportive of the visions and goals of the Main
Street Corridor Vision Plan. See Zoning and Plan Updates for specific recommendations. Provide
clear, easy-to-navigate regulations for development that illustrate the City’s requirements and the
community’s expectations for development in the Main Street corridor.
Promote the availability of federal programs to support housing. The Department of Housing
and Urban Development offers a variety of programs to reduce the cost of developing or
rehabilitating housing. Two key programs are the HUD 221(d)(4) program and the HUD 202
program. The 221(d)(4) program provides a financing guarantee for up to 80% of development
project costs for new construction or rehabilitation of multi-family housing, which helps reduce the
amount of equity a developer needs to raise and helps bring down the overall cost of financing. The
202 program provides interest-free capital advances to private, nonprofit sponsors to finance
housing development for low-income seniors. Occupancy in 202 housing is open to any very low-
income household comprising at least one person who is at least 62 years old at the time of initial
occupancy.
Long-term Strategies (2021-2035)
Expand the Vertical Housing Development Zone. The City has a Vertical Housing
Development Zone (VHDZ) in the downtown core that extends from 1st Street to 10th Street.
Eligible residential development can receive a partial exemption of property taxes for ten years on
the value of the new construction. To qualify, the development must have both residential and
commercial components, which is typically in the form of ground-floor retail space. The tax
exemption improves the financial viability of new market-rate housing by reducing its operating
costs in the first ten years. The City can apply to the State to expand the VHDZ to include the Main
Street Couplet area. This would improve the financial viability of market-rate housing.
Evaluate priorities of the Downtown Urban Renewal District. As discussed above in the
Business Activity section, Springfield’s Downtown Urban Renewal District extends east to 23rd
Street, including the Couplet Area. The Couplet Area has not been, however, a priority for projects
funded with the increment generated in URD. In the long term, the City can evaluate the priorities
of the Urban Renewal District, and determine if the area east of 10th Street should become a higher
priority and be supported by increment funding. If the City determines that the Main Street Couplet
Area should be a higher priority, the City can use funds generated from the tax increment for a
variety of purposes.
Expand the Downtown Redevelopment Area. The City has received approval from HUD to
designate the downtown core as “Blighted Area”, as defined by HUD. This gives the City additional
options for utilizing Community Development Block Grant Program (CDBG) funds to address
“slum and blight” conditions— supporting Downtown revitalization. By expanding the boundary,
Exhibit C-28
Attachment 2-99
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner ─ City of Springfield Page 27
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Draft Strategies and Actions ─ Memo #4 September 23, 2014
the Main Street Couplet Area could also be a recipient of those funds.
Work with providers of low-income housing. The City has partnered with these agencies to build
high-quality housing for low-income households in the downtown core. It can expand its scope to
include the area in the Main Street Couplet area. It could use CDBG funds to acquire distressed or
undervalued property in the area and then make it available to the low-income housing providers for
a new housing development.
Consider waiving or reducing SDCs for eligible redevelopment. Reducing or eliminating SDCs
can positively affect the financial feasibility of dense redevelopment. If a redevelopment proposal
meets specified criteria to create new, dense housing, the City has the ability to improve the financial
viability of the development by reducing development costs. It can be a tool to incent the
development of market-rate housing.
Work with private developers and non-profits to combine local and federal sources. The City
can help bring different financing and funding tools to single projects to make them financially
feasible. The City can work to combine NMTCs or Section 108 (discussed above in the Business
Activity section) with HUD tools (e.g., 221(d)(4) and 202, discussed above in Short-term Strategies).
The City of Springfield has successfully worked with non-profits to develop quality, low-income
housing. A recent example is the Afiya Apartments on Main Street, east of 10th Street that provides
housing to low-income individuals with psychiatric disabilities. The City worked with a non-profit
organization and combined HUD financing with state funds and the City’s HOME funds (a federal
grant program that supports low-income housing) to build quality housing in the study area.
Corridor Segment 2 ― Mid-Springfield Business Corridor
During the public outreach phase of the project, the community expressed a desire that the Mid-
Springfield Corridor would offer quality choices for single-family and multi-family housing near or
adjacent to Main Street to complement increased job opportunities. Residential infill will take
advantage of transit-service investments. This plan identifies the following goals for Housing in
Segment 2 - Mid-Springfield Business Corridor.
Goal 1: Infill development at targeted locations, such as activity nodes and potential BRT
transit stations planned for the future.
Goal 2: Mixed income housing choices to support community diversity and affordability.
Key Implementation Issues
This part of Main Street is a patchwork of uses, with industrial, office, retail, and residential uses.
The commercial activity along the corridor brings heavy trucks; the retail activity tends to require the
customer to haul purchased goods in an automobile. The high level of truck and automobile activity
limit the area’s appeal for housing. The parcels along the Corridor tend to be small, limiting the
ability to redevelop a meaningful portion of the Corridor. These two factors make it difficult to
focus on a particular area. Housing developers are likely to find parcels on quieter streets more
marketable. Nevertheless, this plan has identified nodes of activity where implementation efforts
could be focused.
Exhibit C-29
Attachment 2-100
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner ─ City of Springfield Page 28
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Draft Strategies and Actions ─ Memo #4 September 23, 2014
The City has adopted 2030 Plan policies supporting location of higher density residential
development and increasing the density of development near employment or commercial services
within transportation-efficient Mixed-Use Nodal Development centers and along corridors served
by frequent transit service. The 2030 Plan calls for identifying and evaluating nodal development
opportunities along the proposed Main Street transit corridor. The 2030 Plan calls for targeting
mixed-use nodal development centers and corridors served by transit to focus City redevelopment
incentives and planning efforts; and for matching areas of high infrastructure cost needs (e.g.
Glenwood, Main Street) with higher density development opportunity siting.
The City will need to evaluate its willingness to direct staff time and expand supportive programs to
the Main Street Corridor area. This plan has identified short-term strategies that are low-cost, in
terms of staff time and financial resources. The long-term strategies will require more directed effort
from the City.
Short-term Strategies (2015-2020)
Communicate with property owners. Planning staff can communicate with property owners to
ensure they are aware of visions and goal of this plan, plans to revise the Zoning Code and the
planning process associated with the BRT. Keeping owners apprised of planned changes may affect
owners’ development plans.
Update Zoning Code. Update zoning to be fully supportive of the visions and goals of the Main
Street Corridor Vision Plan. See Zoning and Plan Updates for specific recommendations.
Long-term Strategies (2021-2035)
Work with providers of low-income housing. The City has partnered with these agencies to build
high-quality housing for low-income households in the downtown core. It can expand its scope to
include the area in the Mid-Springfield Corridor area. It could acquire distressed or undervalued
property in the area and then make it available to the low-income housing providers for a new
housing development. The City has successfully partnered with providers of low-income housing in
the past. For example, it partnered with ShelterCare to construct the Afiya Apartments, which
provide housing to low-income individuals with psychiatric disabilities. The City should continue to
work with such organizations.
Consider waiving or reducing SDCs for residential development. Reducing or eliminating
SDCs can positively affect the financial feasibility of redevelopment. If a redevelopment proposal
meets specified criteria to create new, dense housing, the City has the ability to improve the financial
viability of the development by reducing development costs. It can be a tool to incent the
development of market-rate housing. Sites along the Corridor may have a competitive disadvantage
compared to quieter streets, and rents may have to be lower to attract tenants. Lower development
costs make lower rents financial viable.
Exhibit C-30
Attachment 2-101
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner ─ City of Springfield Page 29
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Draft Strategies and Actions ─ Memo #4 September 23, 2014
Partner with LTD. The City’s limited financial resources have constrained the City’s ability to
direct public funds to private development. It could, however, combine its resources with LTD’s
resources to assemble funds that would generate an adequate pool of funds that could be used to
fund land assembly of distressed properties near the identified activity nodes. LTD’s primary
resource would be federal funds to support the expansion of the BRT.
Corridor Segment 3 ―Thurston Neighborhood Area
During the public outreach phase of the project, the community expressed a desire to maintain a
Thurston neighborhood that includes a wide range of residential choices, with housing types from
different eras and in varying sizes and development patterns. New housing developed adjacent or
near to Main Street will help to maintain diversity and workforce housing in the neighborhood. This
plan identifies the following Housing goals for the Thurston Neighborhood segment of the corridor.
Goal 1: Mixed income rental options ranging from family apartments to studio apartments.
Goal 2: Affordable home ownership opportunities.
Key Implementation Issues
The Thurston Neighborhood area offers a mix of housing options now. It is dominated by single-
family detached units, but they are occupied by a mix of owners and renters. There are few
redevelopment opportunities in the area—it is largely built out and the structures have solid values.
There are few vacant properties, but they tend to be small. Opportunity areas may require parcel
assembly, particularly for mid-density housing. However, housing choices in this segment are within
walking distance of Thurston High School and the retail facilities at the intersection of Bob Straub
Parkway and Main Street.
Strategies
Updates to the Zoning Code. Updating the Zoning Code is an effective implementation strategy
for this area in addition to the strategies already recommended for Transportation, Transit and the
Public Realm. See Zoning and Plan Updates for specific recommendations.
Concepts for Future Zoning and Plan Updates
A priority implementation action is an update of the City Zoning and Development Code and the
land use designations identified by the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plan).
The following pages make recommendations for three alternative zoning concepts as a starting point
for discussion. A comprehensive plan and zoning update will follow adoption of the Main Street
Corridor Vision Plan. The concepts are:
• Apply and Modify Existing Zoning Districts
• Create a New Plan District
• Create a New Form-Based Code
No concept is being recommended over another at this point. Whatever updates are ultimately
adopted should bear in mind these common objectives:
Exhibit C-31
Attachment 2-102
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner ─ City of Springfield Page 30
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Draft Strategies and Actions ─ Memo #4 September 23, 2014
• Create a favorable environment for public and private investment.
• Encourage quality development.
• Enhance the public realm as design continuity for the corridor.
Concept A― Update with Existing Zoning Districts
Segment 1 – Couplet Area
Main Street
The 20-year vision is a transition to a more pedestrian-oriented environment complementary to the
Downtown District west of 10th Street. It will offer new storefront retail, vertical mixed use and
diverse housing choices. Potential zoning updates to should be linked to zoning updates for the
Downtown District. Both areas share opportunities and goals for economic growth, walkability and
an attractive public realm. Implementation strategies address the Vertical Housing Development
Zone (VHDZ), the Downtown Redevelopment Area and priorities of the Downtown Urban
Renewal District (URD) that reflect the shared goals. Key objectives include:
Mixed-Use Commercial (MUC)
The downtown core to the west of 10th Street is currently zoned MUC and is within the URD. If
the comprehensive plan and zoning update retains or modifies MUC zoning for downtown, the
same zoning could be extended along Main Street to the URD boundary. The vision statement for
this portion of Main Street would be well-supported by the purpose statement for the MUC zone:
“The primary development objectives of the MUC District are to expand housing opportunities; allow businesses to
locate in a variety of setting; provide options for living, working, and shopping environments…and provide options for
pedestrian-oriented lifestyles.”
Mixed Use Buildings. From the real estate market and development perspectives, the entire
ground-floor of a vertical mixed use building should not be restricted to retail. It should, however,
be focused on creating an active face onto the street. We do not recommend requirements for
residential density or a residential use percentage of the gross floor area in a mixed use building as
currently required in the Mixed Use Residential District (MUR)). Such requirements are often
viewed as too prescriptive and can dissuade development activity supportive of the vision.
Residential Uses. Providing more housing choices is a goal of the Main Street Corridor Vision Plan.
MUC zoning modification should consider allowing multi-story residential buildings with no
commercial use on the ground floor as is currently required by MUC and MUR zones. It may also
be beneficial to allow duplexes as a residential use and to reduce the minimum lot size. Keeping uses
flexible and potential development increments small will increase the opportunities for different
business and housing types to locate in this area. If this flexibility with regard to housing
development is perceived as incompatible with development goals for the Downtown District a new
and flexible MUR zone could be applied to this area of Main Street.
In applying either a modified MUC or MUR zone, consider extending this zone 1-2 blocks north on
Main Street in the Activity Nodes at 14th Street and 21st Street. Zoning that increases density or
Exhibit C-32
Attachment 2-103
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner ─ City of Springfield Page 31
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Draft Strategies and Actions ─ Memo #4 September 23, 2014
allows mixed use on properties near to Main Street, in addition to properties fronting onto Main
Street, will be supportive of increased transit ridership and new neighborhood retail in areas easily
accessible by foot. Encouraging both is consistent with the vision statement for this area.
Segment 1 – Couplet Area
South A Street
The vision for South A Street is a place that works and will continue to provide good jobs. Within
the vision there is room for new and complementary uses such as craft industries, garden stores and
other commercial uses with a retail component and walk in customers coming from downtown.
Mixed-Use Employment District (MUE). A zoning change to consider is applying the MUE
District but with some exceptions for properties within the Main Street Corridor Vision Plan. Any
exceptions should be aimed at reducing barriers to market-realistic development. The requirements
should made be clear and consistent for property owners and developers. Exceptions should include
a careful review of the Categories/Uses to make sure uses with a retail component that are
appropriate given the proximity to downtown are not excluded. Also, some of the General
Development Standards related to building design in the current Mixed-Use District (MUE) may be
discouraging for new development otherwise supportive of the vision statement for South A Street.
A MUE zone with appropriate exceptions may provide a better transition to the build-out of the
Booth Kelly Mixed Use District, which is somewhat isolated from the Main Street environment of
the MUC zoning by current industrial uses.
Mid-Springfield Business Corridor and Thurston Neighborhood Area Segments
Current zoning is primarily Community Commercial, High Density Residential and Medium Density
Residential. These segments include four Activity Nodes identified in this project. The locations
generally correspond to the Nodal Development Areas identified in TransPlan and the Metro Plan, as
well as Mixed Use properties indentified in the Mid-Springfield Refinement Plan and the East Main Street
Refinement Plan. Future population and employment growth and enhanced corridor aesthetics will
likely support incremental densification of land uses over the long term.
The recommendation is a zoning approach that addresses these two segment together and separately
from the Couplet Area. Zoning should allow a variety of housing types on or near Main Street,
particularly in the Activity Nodes. New housing in those areas will take advantage of excellent public
transportation and clustering of neighborhood services. Development of more neighborhood
services and business clusters with a relatively high intensity of jobs will also be supported by
improved transit. While some mixed use developed may occur, and is part of the vision statement
for Activity Nodes in these segments, it is likely that horizontal mixing of uses is more market-
realistic in the shorter term given current economics of vertical mixing.
Retain Existing Zoning with Nodal Overlay Development Districts
Maintain existing CC, HDR and MDR zoning as it is today with the exception of the identified
Activity Nodes:
• 30th Street Activity Node is centered on the 30th Street intersection just north of the
Willamalane Center in the Mid-Springfield Business segment.
Exhibit C-33
Attachment 2-104
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner ─ City of Springfield Page 32
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Draft Strategies and Actions ─ Memo #4 September 23, 2014
• 42nd Activity Street Node is centered on the 42nd Street intersection in the Mid-Springfield
Business segment.
• 54th Activity Street Node lies just west of the Bob Straub Parkway in the Mid-Springfield
Business segment.
• 58th Street Activity Node lies just east of the Bob Straub Parkway in the Thurston
Neighborhood segment.
Within these areas a Nodal Overlay Development District could be applied to better implement
aspects of the vision statements and goals. This approach can support the intensification of use in
nodal areas and a corresponding enhancement of the public realm. The zoning study will need to
determine the exact boundary of each overlay, including how to include properties not directly
fronting onto Main Street. Most of these properties are zoned as Low Density Residential. Allowing
intensification of development near Main Street, as well as on Main Street, will be supportive of
increased transit ridership and a catalyst for transit-supportive development. This will also expand
the opportunities for the City and LTD to jointly undertake strategies and projects to catalyze
redevelopment at strategic locations and implement high-quality transit station design.
A key element of the visions for these segments is affordability. Caution is recommended with
regard to applying design standards or vertical mixed use requirements that create financial
challenges for uses that are otherwise supportive of the Main Street Corridor Vision Plan.
Residential Update for the Thurston Area
A potential change to base zoning would be to apply Medium Density Residential (MDR) to all
parcels currently zoned residential and fronting on Main Street. This would eliminate the patchwork
of low and medium density residential parcels along Main Street and would be consistent with the
Metro Plan for this area. A transition to ccontiguous MDR development adjacent to Main Street will
increase housing opportunities and the customer base for neighborhood businesses, services and
transit.
Concept B ― Update with Existing Zoning Districts and a Plan District
The Couplet Area
For Concept B, the recommendations for this segment are the same as Concept A with respect to
linking zoning updates to the updates for the downtown core, flexibility for housing types and a
potential mixed use employment area along South A Street.
Mid-Springfield Business Corridor and Thurston Neighborhood Area
A new plan district for the project area between the eastern boundary of the URD and end of the
project at 69th Street would retain the base zones but provide additional regulations intended to
implement the visions and goals of the Main Street Corridor Vision Plan. Regulation and incentives
would be intended to guide new development. A plan district can include special plan area character
statements and right-of-way design standards. These statements and standards would influence
design review.
Special Plan Area Character Statements might include:
Exhibit C-34
Attachment 2-105
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner ─ City of Springfield Page 33
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Draft Strategies and Actions ─ Memo #4 September 23, 2014
• Plan Area Character (visible elements of a project that address the vision statement,
neighborhood character and any culturally or historically significant buildings for sites).
• Strengthening the Character of Activity Nodes (guidelines for elements such as mix of
uses and density of new development, transit station design, unique streetscape design
features and public art or wayfinding programs).
• Pedestrian-Oriented Design (Public Realm Enhancements recommended in the Main
Street Corridor Vision Plan, as well as other City policies regarding pedestrian-oriented design)
• Project Design Features (building entrances, landscaping, parking areas, architectural
design and neighborhood compatibility).
Special Right-of-Way Standards can be a companion tool for the Zoning Code and Design
Standards. They can particularly focus on the sidewalk corridor between the curb and the property
line. These standards can be more flexible in the event the City of Springfield accepts jurisdiction of
Main Street/OR 126B, allowing application of standards unique to different segments or Activity
Nodes. The standards and variations can directly reflect community visioning and continuing
community participation of developing public realm enhancement plans.
Concept C ― Update with a Form-Based Code (FBC)
A third scenario is to apply a new FBC to the entire project area. FBC can be an effective tool for
reconciling a community’s vision of the built environment and a desire for flexible land use
regulations. If FBC is being considered for the Downtown District, then the Main Street Corridor
Vision Plan area could be included in that update. Its inclusion would be consistent with the
complementary visions of the Downtown District and the Couplet Area and the financing and
programs available in the URD.
In contrast to conventional zoning, a FBC does not emphasize the segregation of land uses or the
micromanagement of intensity of use through parameters such as floor area ratios and density. It
addresses the form and mass of buildings in relationship to one another, as well as the relationship
between public and private spaces. Public spaces typically addressed include street and sidewalk
design, block sizes and patterns, and open spaces or plazas. Private uses might include building form
and massing, building setbacks, how frontage areas are used and the location of on-site parking.
FBC is not a set of guidelines, it is regulatory. Common components include:
Regulating Plan showing locations where different building form and public realm standards apply
in the three segments of the corridor.
Attractive and Functional Streets that provide functional specifications for sidewalks, travel lanes,
street trees and furniture, and open spaces. This will result in the most predictable and attractive
public realm.
Building Form Standards that regulate placement, configuration, function and features of
buildings especially as they relate to qualities of the public realm.
Building Orientation and Presentation which typically requires that buildings face the street, and
may include requirements for the length and design of front facades.
Exhibit C-35
Attachment 2-106
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner ─ City of Springfield Page 34
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Draft Strategies and Actions ─ Memo #4 September 23, 2014
Facilitating Mixed Uses to define the horizontal and vertical mix of uses rather than separating
them.
Administration that clearly defines an application and project review process.
Supplemental Components that may include architectural standards for external quality and
materials.
Summary of Recommendations
The table below provides a summary of recommendations by corridor segment. (See Figure 1 also)
Corridor Segment Concept A Concept B Concept C
10th Street - 23rd Street
(Main Street)
Mixed Use
Commercial (MUC)
with flexibility for
residential uses
Mixed Use
Commercial (MUC)
with flexibility for
residential only uses
Form-Based Code
(FBC) which does not
require segregation of
uses
10th Street - 23rd Street
(South A Street)
Mixed Use
Employment (MUE)
with exceptions to
General Development
Standards
Mixed Use
Employment with
limited exceptions to
General Development
Standards
Form-Based Code
(FBC) which does not
require segregation of
uses
23rd Street –Bob Straub
Parkway
Existing zoning with
Nodal Overlay
Development Districts
Plan District with
Special Plan Area
Character guidelines
Form-Based Code
(FBC) which does not
require segregation of
uses
Exhibit C-36
Attachment 2-107
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner ─ City of Springfield Page 35
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Draft Strategies and Actions ─ Memo #4 September 23, 2014
Exhibit C-37
Attachment 2-108
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner ─ City of Springfield Page 36
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Draft Strategies and Actions ─ Memo #4 September 23, 2014
Implementation Strategy Updates
It is recommended that the implementation strategies and actions for Main Street be periodically
evaluated and updated as necessary. Completion of specific projects or programs, new funding
sources or funding priorities, significant changes in the real estate market or a major infrastructure
invest are examples of changing conditions that might warrant an update to the strategy. Continued
community engagement in implementing the Main Street Corridor Vision Plan may also provide
suggestions for updates.
Continuing Community Engagement
Continuing community engagement will build trust between the City and the community and build
confidence the visions for Main Street can be achieved. Two specific actions are recommended.
First, the City could form a Citizens Working Group (CWG) to act in an advisory role to help refine
and apply short-term strategies and to make recommendations for the selection of projects and
programs proposed by members of the community (see following page). The CWG can also solicit
information from City departments and other public agencies that directly influence the functions
and livability of Main Street.
A second recommended action is to create a Project and Program Proposal form that is available to
community members on-line and through City offices. This allows community members to become
proponents for projects and programs that they believe have community benefit and will meet the
goals of the Main Street Corridor Vision Plan. Proposals should make reference to specific goals,
principles or strategies of the plan. Individuals, neighborhood associations and organizations can
apply. Selected city staff and the CWG will review the proposals and make recommendations for
selection and implementation. A draft proposal form has been included on the following pages.
Exhibit C-38
Attachment 2-109
37
Main Street Corridor Vision Plan Project or Program Proposal
Proposals will be considered two times a year
Deadlines for submission:
May 1st
November 1st
An online version of this proposal form may be obtained from the contact below. The form can also be accessed from
the Our Main Street website at http://ourmainstreetspringfield.org/.
Please direct questions and completed forms to:
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner
City of Springfield
225 N 5th Street
541.726.4608
lpauly@springfield-or.gov
Exhibit C-39
Attachment 2-110
38
Proposal Worksheet Description
This worksheet makes reference to specific documents, plans and boundaries for the Main Street
Corridor Vision Plan. A Project/Program Proposal form was developed as part of an implementation
strategy for the project. It is intended to help community proponents put forward ideas for projects
or programs within the project area that meet the goals and conform to the principles of the Main
Street Corridor Vision Plan.
Who Can Apply
Individual community members, neighborhood associations and partner organizations may apply.
The City intends to solicit and review proposals twice a year.
Decision Making Process1
The City of Springfield will review proposals and make the final decisions about project selection.
The visions, goals and preferred actions expressed by the community during the development of the
Main Street Corridor Vision Plan will be used in evaluating proposals. Decision and evaluations will be
made publically available in June and December. Ideas for public improvement projects will be
reviewed through the annual CIP update process.
1If a Main Street Advisory Committee is established; they could review proposals and make
recommendations to the City.
Eligibility Criteria
To ensure eligibility of your project idea, please make sure you meet the criteria below.
• Is the project located in the Main Street Corridor Vision Plan boundary?
• Does the project focus on the roadway functions, aesthetics or infrastructure of Main Street,
on public spaces adjacent or landscape or gateway or landscape feature for Main Street?
• Does the project support applicable Main Street Corridor Vision Plan goals for safety,
transportation choices, business and employment growth or housing choices?
• Does the proposal focus on existing City projects or programs or on projects or programs
you believe could be initiated and managed by the City?
If you believe all of these criteria are met, please complete the rest of this form.
Exhibit C-40
Attachment 2-111
39
Contact Information
Name: ________________________________ Organization:_____________________________
Address:_______________________________________________________________________
City: ___________________________ State:________________________ Zip:______________
Phone: _________________________ Email:_________________________________________
Project or Program Information
Please complete the following. You may attach additional sheets if necessary.
Project/program title and brief description
Project/program location
Proposed timeline
Proposed project partners (agencies, organizations, individuals)
Overall estimate of budget and potential funding sources
How will the project/program be maintained and supported over time?
Exhibit C-41
Attachment 2-112
40
Coordination with Main Street Corridor Vision Plan
Please complete the following. You may attach additional sheets if necessary.
How will input from residents or business owners be solicited?
How will be project/program meet the goals and principles of the Main Street Corridor
Vision Plan?
How does the project/program support goals and principles of related neighborhood plans
or City policies?
How will the project/program involve other agencies or organizations?
How will this project/program leverage other sources of funding or create strategic
partnerships?
Exhibit C-42
Attachment 2-113
41
Detailed Project Description
Please describe your ideas or need for you project/program on one page or less.
Exhibit C-43
Attachment 2-114
Exhibit C-44
Attachment 2-115
Memorandum
L:\Project\16700\16786\Planning\Task 2\Final\Springfield Existing Conditions Revised Memo #2.doc
808 SW Third Avenue, Suite 300
Portland OR 97204
Phone (503) 287-6825
Fax (503) 415-2304
In Association with
Cogito
ECONorthwest
DKS Associates
Main Street Corridor Vision Plan
City of Springfield
To: Linda Pauly, Principal Planner– City of Springfield
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
From: Tom Litster, Otak
Date: January 6, 2014
Subject: Revised Memo #2 - Existing Conditions,
Opportunities and Constraints
Project No.: 16786
Exhibit C-45
Attachment 2-116
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner City of Springfield Page 2
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Revised Existing Conditions Memorandum #2 January 6, 2014
L:\Project\16700\16786\Planning\Task 2\Final\Springfield Existing Conditions Revised Memo #2.doc
This page left intentionally blank.
Exhibit C-46
Attachment 2-117
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner City of Springfield Page 3
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Revised Existing Conditions Memorandum #2 January 6, 2014
L:\Project\16700\16786\Planning\Task 2\Final\Springfield Existing Conditions Revised Memo #2.doc
Contents
Figures ................................................................................................................................................................. 4
Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................ 6
Key Issues Overview ......................................................................................................................................... 6
Future Employment and Residential Growth ........................................................................................... 6
Future Transportation Improvements ....................................................................................................... 6
Implementation ............................................................................................................................................. 7
Coordination with Other Efforts ................................................................................................................ 7
Existing Land Use Conditions ......................................................................................................................... 7
Corridor Segments ........................................................................................................................................ 7
Pattern of Land Uses Adjacent to the Corridor ....................................................................................... 8
Summary of Households ............................................................................................................................ 12
Activity Nodes ............................................................................................................................................. 19
Infill and Redevelopment Potential .......................................................................................................... 21
Real Estate Market Conditions .................................................................................................................. 23
Preliminary Assessment of Opportunities and Constraints .................................................................. 28
Public Realm Qualities .................................................................................................................................... 29
Preliminary Assessment of Opportunities and Constraints .................................................................. 29
Multimodal Transportation ............................................................................................................................ 30
Motor Vehicle Facilities and Activity ....................................................................................................... 30
Pedestrian Facilities and Activity .............................................................................................................. 37
Bicycle Activity and Facilities .................................................................................................................... 39
Transit Service/Future EMX Study ......................................................................................................... 40
Future Travel Conditions ........................................................................................................................... 41
On-Street Parking ........................................................................................................................................ 41
Preliminary Assessment of Opportunities and Constraints .................................................................. 41
Public Infrastructure ........................................................................................................................................ 42
Stormwater Facilities ................................................................................................................................... 42
Wastewater Facilities ................................................................................................................................... 43
Water Service ............................................................................................................................................... 44
Preliminary Assessment of Opportunities and Constraints .................................................................. 44
Exhibit C-47
Attachment 2-118
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner City of Springfield Page 4
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Revised Existing Conditions Memorandum #2 January 6, 2014
L:\Project\16700\16786\Planning\Task 2\Final\Springfield Existing Conditions Revised Memo #2.doc
Figures
Figure 1. Land use in the Main Street Study Boundary .............................................................................. 11
Figure 2. Land use in Segments 1, 2, and 3, by Acre .................................................................................. 11
Figure 3. Census tracts used to describe Main Street Corridor Study Area ............................................ 12
Figure 4. Age Distribution, Oregon, Eugene-Springfield, and Main Street Corridor, 2010 ................. 13
Figure 5. Population distribution by age, Main Street Corridor 2000 and 2010 ..................................... 14
Figure 6. Race and ethnicity, Oregon, Eugene-Springfield, Main Street Corridor ................................. 15
Figure 7. Educational Achievement, Population 25 and older, Oregon, Eugene-Springfield, Main
Street Corridor .................................................................................................................................................. 16
Figure 8. Household Income, Oregon, Eugene-Springfield, Main Street Corridor, 2007-2011 .......... 17
Figure 9. Means of Transportation to Work, Oregon, Eugene-Springfield, Main Street Corridor,
2007-2011 .......................................................................................................................................................... 18
Figure 10. Housing Type by Number of Units in Structure, Main Street Corridor ............................... 19
Figure 11. Improvement-to-Land Ratio, Main Street Study Boundary ................................................... 22
Figure 12. Improvement-to-Land Ratio, Main Street Study Boundary ................................................... 23
Figure 13. Median Sale Price, Single-Family Homes, Oregon, Eugene Metro Area, and Springfield,
1996-2013 .......................................................................................................................................................... 24
Figure 14. Office Absorption and Vacancy, 2003 to 2013 ........................................................................ 25
Figure 15. Retail Absorption and Vacancy, 2003 to 2013 .......................................................................... 26
Figure 16. Industrial Absorption and Vacancy, 2003 to 2013 ................................................................... 27
Figure17: 24-Hour Direction Volumes West of 30th Street ....................................................................... 33
Figure 18: 24-Hour Directional Volumes East of 51st Street .................................................................... 33
Figure 19: 24-Hour Directional Volumes East of Moutaingate Drive .................................................... 34
Figure 20: Existing Traffic Control and Peak Hour Volumes .................................................................. 35
Figure 21: Recent Pedestrian Crossing Improvement at 51st Street ......................................................... 38
Tables
Table 1. Land use in the Study Area ............................................................................................................. 10
Table 2. Median household and per capita income, Oregon, Eugene-Springfield, Main Street
Corridor, 2007-2011 ........................................................................................................................................ 17
Table 3. Housing Tenure, Oregon, Eugene-Springfield, Main Street Corridor, 2010 .......................... 18
Table 4. Improvement-to-Land Ratio, Main Street Study Boundary ....................................................... 22
Table 5. Improvement-to-Land Ratio, Segments 1, 2, and 3 .................................................................... 23
Exhibit C-48
Attachment 2-119
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner City of Springfield Page 5
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Revised Existing Conditions Memorandum #2 January 6, 2014
L:\Project\16700\16786\Planning\Task 2\Final\Springfield Existing Conditions Revised Memo #2.doc
Table 6. Office Market – Key Indicators, Segments 1, 2, and 3 ............................................................... 25
Table 7. Retail Market – Key Indicators, Segments 1, 2, and 3 ................................................................ 26
Table 8. Industrial Market – Key Indicators, Segments 1, 2, and 3 .......................................................... 27
Table 9: Existing Study Area Roadway Characteristics .............................................................................. 30
Table 10: Main Street (OR 126) Bi-Directional Volumes, Speeds, and Heavy Vehicle Usagea ........... 32
Table 11: Applicable Study Intersection Mobility Standards .................................................................... 36
Table 12: Study Intersection Performance ................................................................................................... 37
Table 13: Main Street (OR 126) Avenue Pedestrian Crossing Volumes ................................................. 39
Table 14: Main Street (OR 126) Avenue Bicycle Crossing Volumes ....................................................... 40
Table 15: Transit Routes Operating on Main Street (OR 126) ................................................................. 40
Exhibit C-49
Attachment 2-120
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner City of Springfield Page 6
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Revised Existing Conditions Memorandum #2 January 6, 2014
L:\Project\16700\16786\Planning\Task 2\Final\Springfield Existing Conditions Revised Memo #2.doc
Introduction
This memorandum is a summary and evaluation of the existing conditions of the project area for the
Springfield Main Street Corridor Vision Plan. The project will engage the community in envisioning
a preferred future for Main Street between Downtown and Thurston. The visioning process will lead
to an adopted plan outlining strategies to guide the City’s plans, rules and actions for future
economic and transportation development. It will be a blueprint for coordinated development of
employment and housing, and improved safety and mobility for motorists, pedestrians, bus riders
and bicyclists. This Vision Plan is also an essential first step in updating the Comprehensive Plan
designations and zoning to support successful integration of development and transportation.
The Project Study Area includes a seven-mile strip and adjacent lands from the one-way couplet of
Main Street and South A, from 10th Street east to 20th Street, and Main Street, from 20th Street east to
69th Street (Map 1). These streets are also designated as Oregon Highway 126B. It is Springfield’s
longest commercial strip, and the gateway to Springfield and the primary way to move between east
and west. Land uses considered are primarily those within ½-block of Main / South A Street, with
some evaluations expanded to the north or south to adequately include some adjacent commercial
and industrial districts. The inventory and analysis of existing conditions in the study area includes:
• An overview of key corridor issues and characteristics.
• A description of the land use, business, transportation, infrastructure and real estate market
conditions in the corridor.
• A preliminary evaluation of the opportunities and constraints for redevelopment and
transportation improvements.
Key Issues Overview
Future Employment and Residential Growth
The City is required to plan and zone sufficient land to meet the needs of our population through
the year 2030. A significant amount of planned and zoned commercial and industrial lands are
located along the Main Street Corridor. Many of these parcels will redevelop over the next 20 years.
A primary goal of the City is the creation of more than 13,000 new jobs by 2030. Additionally,
developers increasingly are seeking approval for a mix of land uses and higher densities on a site to
maximize and diversify their investments. If planned well now, neighborhoods along Main Street
can grow and develop to support growth of existing businesses, generate new employment and
expand the range of housing choices available in the corridor.
Future Transportation Improvements
Main Street also provides access to many Springfield neighborhoods and destinations. As the City
grows, more transportation options and better connections will be needed. Transportation options
will help create the opportunities for private sector investment and support growth and
enhancement of existing commerce and employment in the corridor. A critical factor in improving
transportation options is improved safety and access for everyone using the corridor, resulting in
Exhibit C-50
Attachment 2-121
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner City of Springfield Page 7
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Revised Existing Conditions Memorandum #2 January 6, 2014
L:\Project\16700\16786\Planning\Task 2\Final\Springfield Existing Conditions Revised Memo #2.doc
increased accessibility to jobs, workforce, education and services. Increases in mobility for all modes
of travel will also increase the capacity to accommodate future growth in travel.
Implementation
The identification of opportunities and subsequent framework plans for land use and transportation
systems will allow the City to take smart, practical steps to prevent haphazard development and
traffic congestion and make the most of public infrastructure. An adopted Main Street Corridor
Vision Plan will establish direction for future changes in the Corridor to encourage private sector
development and growth of existing businesses. The City intends to follow this project with Phase
Two that will develop amendments to the Comprehensive Plan, zoning code, and development code
that are needed to implement the Main Street Corridor Vision Plan.
Coordination with Other Efforts
Successful framework planning and implementation for this project must coordinate with related
ongoing efforts in the Project Study Area, including the Main -McVay Improved Transit Feasibility
Study being led by Lane Transit District (LTD), the Smart Trips program led by LTD Point-to-Point
Solutions and the Main Street Pedestrian Crossing Project that addresses issues identified in the OR
Hwy 126 Main Street Safety Study. Coordination is needed to create efficiencies, avoid duplicative
efforts and reduce public confusion by coordinating public involvement efforts.
Existing Land Use Conditions
Corridor Segments
For purposes of inventory and analysis, the corridor has been divided into three segments with one
segment subdivided into two subareas (Maps 2-5). These segments are not based on current zoning.
The segments do reflect noticeable changes in the mix and type of current development, particularly
an increase in residential development in Segments 2 and 3. The segments also roughly correspond
to Springfield Refinement Plan areas as they are currently identified.
• Segment 1 Close-In Commercial is bounded by 10th Street to the west and 26th Street to
the east and is largely smaller-scale commercial uses. For most of Segment 1, Highway 26 is
couplet of Main Street (westbound) and A Street (eastbound). This segment is immediately
east of the previously identified Downtown Node and “Retail Hot” Spot, as shown in the
City Council’s adopted vision plan: Downtown Dist4ict Urban Design Plan 2010. Largely
residential uses of the Central Springfield Neighborhood are north of the segment. South of
Segment 1, there are commercial and heavy industrial uses, many of which are historically
railroad-oriented. Current zoning is Community Commercial and Heavy Industrial with
mostly Low Density Residential to the north.
• Segment 2 Mid-Springfield Commercial/Residential extends from 26th Street to the
Bob Straub Parkway and is the longest of three segments at about 2.8 miles. This segment
has been subdivided into subareas 2a and 2b. The percentage of residential uses increases
significantly in this segment, as does the amount of larger-scale commercial uses. North and
south of this segment is a mix of residential, commercial and industrial uses and a
continuation of the Central Springfield Neighborhood and falls within the Mid-Springfield
Exhibit C-51
Attachment 2-122
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner City of Springfield Page 8
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Revised Existing Conditions Memorandum #2 January 6, 2014
L:\Project\16700\16786\Planning\Task 2\Final\Springfield Existing Conditions Revised Memo #2.doc
Refinement Plan area. Current zoning is largely Community Commercial with a mix of Medium
Density and Low Density Residential to the north and south. The segment includes an area
identified in this document as a Potential Interchange Area associated with the Bob Straub
Parkway. Future ODOT transportation planning and needs assessment with regard to a
potential interchange is pending.
• Segment 3 East Main Residential begins at the Bob Straub Parkway and extends to the
end of the Project Area at 69th Street. The zoning is a mix of Low Density and Medium
Density Residential and the current uses are predominantly residential, including to the north
and south of the Project Area. This segment falls with the East Main Refinement Plan area.
Pattern of Land Uses Adjacent to the Corridor
This section describes existing land use patterns on the Corridor to provide a general understanding
of existing development and use patterns. This is not a land use inventory, to assess total buildable
lands. Instead, it aims to describe the area to enhance our understanding of redevelopment potential.
The different existing land uses in the Main Street Corridor are summarized by segment. To
characterize current land use patterns, ECONorthwest used parcel data from Lane County
Assessment and Taxation (A&T), provided by the City of Springfield. The parcel dataset includes
descriptive fields for land and improvements (i.e., built structures) on the land. Lane County A&T
maintains two descriptive fields for land use: Statistical Class and Property Class. This analysis
provides a broad summary of current uses, which may not be consistent with comprehensive plan
designation or zoning.
• Statistical Class classifies structural improvements on each parcel and includes details about
building type and class. There are 76 different classifications for parcels in the Main Street
Corridor
• Property Class is based on each parcel’s highest and best use, based on legally permitted and
financially feasible uses, and may not reflect a parcel’s current use.1 There are 18 different
classifications for parcels in the Main Street Corridor.
Given the large number of statistical class and property class categories, ECONorthwest identified
ten broad land use categories to characterize the Main Street Corridor. We used the Statistical Class
to identify the land use category that most closely matches the use. However, in the cases where the
parcel lacked data in the Statistical Class field, we used the Property Class to categorize the parcel.
The Main Street Corridor included four parcels, comprising 15 acres, which had no data in either
field. Those parcels were categorized manually (Appendix A provides the full cross-referencing
between Lane County A&T classifications and our land use categories).
We categorized the many different statistical class and property class categories into ten broad
categories so that we could identify general patterns of land use. These categories provide
information uses and densities. The ten land use categories are as follows.
1 Oregon Department of Revenue, Appraisal Methods Manual, Glossary. Accessed 25 October 2013.
http://www.oregon.gov/dor/PTD/docs/303-415/16-glossary.pdf
Exhibit C-52
Attachment 2-123
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner City of Springfield Page 9
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Revised Existing Conditions Memorandum #2 January 6, 2014
L:\Project\16700\16786\Planning\Task 2\Final\Springfield Existing Conditions Revised Memo #2.doc
• Single Family includes single-family dwellings, manufactured homes, and mobile home
parks. This category also includes parcels with the Statistical Code of “Accessory Structures,”
as they have a Property Code of Residential.
• Multifamily includes duplexes, apartments, and condominiums. This category also includes
senior independent and assisted-living facilities.
• Retail includes businesses as varied as banks, motels, day cares, car washes, bars, and retail
lumber yards.
• Office includes office buildings, medical buildings and clinics, and houses that have been
converted to offices.
• Commercial (Unknown Type) consists of parcels with an inconclusive Statistical Code
and a Property Code that indicates commercial use. We lack sufficient information to
categorize these parcels as either office or retail.
• Industrial includes a variety of industrial uses, including lumber yards, rail yards, and
warehouses (including self-storage)
• Government includes schools, post offices, fire stations, public utilities, and other
government buildings. The fitness center portion of Willamalane Center is included in this
category. However, not all parcels owned by government agencies are included in this
category. A government-owned vacant parcels was categorized as vacant, rather than
government.2
• Church includes parcels with a Statistical Class of Church. Six parcels (4.8 acres) are
classified as church.
• Open Space / Agriculture includes vacant forest and farm lands and all unbuilt parcels
owned by Willamalane Park and Recreation District, including the recreation fields adjacent
to Willamalane Center. Given current uses and zoning, are likely to remain as open space.
• Vacant includes parking lots, vacant lands, and unbuildable lands. This diverse category of
unbuilt properties provides information about density along the Corridor.
The land use characterizations for distinct sub-areas of the Corridor are illustrated in four maps.
• MAP 6 shows Segment 1 and the Downtown Node. Segment 1-Close In Commercial is
bounded by 10th Street to the west and 26th Street to the east. For most of Segment 1,
Highway 26 is couplet of Main Street (westbound) and A Street (eastbound).
• MAP 7 shows the western portion of Segment 2 (Segment 2a). Segment 2-Mid Springfield
Commercial/Residential extends from 26th Street to 54th Street. At about 2.7 miles, Segment
2 is the longest of three segments.
• MAP 8 shows the eastern portion of Segment 2 (Segment 2b); and
• MAP 9 shows Segment 3, Bob Straub Parkway and the Potential Interchange Area
associated with the parkway. Segment 3 extends from Bob Straub Parkway to 69th Street.
2 If a government-owned parking lot is a separate tax lot, it is categorized as ‘Vacant’.
Exhibit C-53
Attachment 2-124
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner City of Springfield Page 10
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Revised Existing Conditions Memorandum #2 January 6, 2014
L:\Project\16700\16786\Planning\Task 2\Final\Springfield Existing Conditions Revised Memo #2.doc
The maps show all parcels that intersect the segments, potential activity nodes, and areas of interest
(i.e., Downtown, Railroad Oriented Industry, and Potential Interchange Area). The maps show the
Main Street Corridor Study Boundary with a black, dotted line. This boundary includes the half-
block north and south of Main Street, between 10th and 69th Streets. The maps also show the
boundaries for the three segments, a heavy light-blue line. This boundary includes land beyond the
half-block boundary of the Study Boundary, to include adjacent land that influences uses and
activities on the Corridor.
Parcels that are publicly owned are indicated with diagonal hatch marks. The publicly owned
category includes parcels owned by City of Springfield, Lane Transit District, Lane County,
Springfield School District, Oregon Department of Transportation, Willamalane Park and
Recreation Department, Springfield Utility Board, and other public agencies. We determined public
ownership with Lane County A&T exemption codes.
Table 1 summarizes existing land use within the Main Street Study Boundary (shown as a black
dotted line on all maps) and Segments 1, 2, and 3. The Table shows acreage within the study
boundaries. If a parcel is divided by the boundary, and a portion of it lies outside the boundary, the
acreage outside the boundary is not included in the Table.
Table 1. Existing Land Development in the Study Area
Acres
% of
acres Acres
% of
acres Acres
% of
acres Acres
% of
acres
Single Family 26.3 16% 8.5 10% 46.1 18%65.6 48%
Multifamily 16.5 10% 6.3 7% 29.6 12%34.6 25%
Retail 56.1 34% 32.4 39% 49.3 20%6.0 4%
Office 8.8 5% 4.1 5% 15.1 6%0.9 1%
Commercial (Unknown Type) 17.8 11% 9.8 12% 28.8 11%0.0 0%
Industrial 15.6 9% 10.9 13% 36.1 14%0.0 0%
Government 2.7 2% 1.0 1% 3.7 1%1.3 1%
Church 1.2 1% 1.4 2% 0.6 0%1.3 1%
Open Space / Agriculture 0.0 0% 0.0 0% 0.4 0%1.3 1%
Vacant 22.4 13% 9.5 11% 42.6 17%26.5 19%
Total 167.3 100% 83.9 100% 252.4 100%137.4 100%
Segment 1Segment 2Segment 3
Main Street Study
Boundary
Source: City of Springfield taxlot data, analysis by ECONorthwest.
Table 1 shows that about one-quarter (26%) of the Main Street Study Boundary is in residential uses
and about half (49%) of the parcel area is in commercial uses (retail, office, and unknown
commercial). The most common use by land area is retail. The remaining 25% consists of vacant
(13%), industrial (9%), and other uses (3%). There is no open space / agricultural land in the Main
Street Study Boundary. Figure 1 graphically shows the acres by use for the Main Street Study
Boundary.
Exhibit C-54
Attachment 2-125
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner City of Springfield Page 11
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Revised Existing Conditions Memorandum #2 January 6, 2014
L:\Project\16700\16786\Planning\Task 2\Final\Springfield Existing Conditions Revised Memo #2.doc
Figure 1. Land use in the Main Street Study Boundary
Source: City of Springfield taxlot data, analysis by ECONorthwest.
Figure 2 shows land use, by acre, for Segments 1, 2, and 3.
• Of the approximately 84 acres of Segment 1 that are within parcels, about 46 acres (55%)
have commercial land uses and 39% are in retail use. Residential uses make up about 18% of
land use in Segment 1.
• Segment 2 has a more diverse mix of uses than Segment 1. Of the 252 acres, commercial
uses make up about 37% of parcel acreage, while residential uses make up about 30%. Most
parcels that front Main Street have retail or other types commercial land uses.
• Segment 3 is primarily residential, with 73% of the parcel area in residential uses and nearly
half of the parcel area is single-family. Commercial uses (retail and office) comprise only 5%
of parcel area in Segment 3.
Figure 2. Land use in Segments 1, 2, and 3, by Acre
Source: City of Springfield taxlot data, analysis by ECONorthwest.
The analysis of land use shows that the study is filled with a diverse mixes of uses and the mix varies
in the different parts of the Corridor. The three different Segments have a very different mix of uses.
Segment 1 is dominated by retail (39% of total acreage) and Segment 3 is dominated by single-family
residential (48% of total acreage) Segment 2, is not dominated by any single use—no single use
makes up more than 20% of total acres. The uses consuming the most land are single-family
residential, retail, industrial, and vacant land.
Exhibit C-55
Attachment 2-126
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner City of Springfield Page 12
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Revised Existing Conditions Memorandum #2 January 6, 2014
L:\Project\16700\16786\Planning\Task 2\Final\Springfield Existing Conditions Revised Memo #2.doc
Summary of Households
This section summarizes the population that lives along the Corridor. It is organized into four parts:
• Population discusses the number of people, household, and population growth trends
• Income and Wages describes the incomes of the population in the Study Area and how
that compares to the region.
• Transportation and Commute describes modes of transportation used by the working
population in the Study Area.
• Housing discusses housing values and types of housing in the Study Area.
Population
To describe the households in the area, we relied on data from the US Census. Census data are
available at the Census-tract level, and the boundaries of the tracts do not align with the boundaries
of the Main Street Corridor Study Area. To collect data to describe the study area, we identified the
Census tracts that overlapped with the Study Area.
Figure 3 shows the boundary of the Study Area and the boundary of the Census tracts we used to
describe the population in the Study Area.
Figure 3. Census tracts used to describe Main Street Corridor Study Area
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 1990, 2000, 2010 Census
The map shows that the Census Tracts do not align well with the Study Area. The Tracts that lie
within the Study Area extend well to the north and south of the Study Area, including many
households outside the Study Area. However, a more precise description of the households in the
Study Area is not possible.
Springfield’s Main Street Corridor (Study Area) had about 20,800 residents at the census block group
level in 2010. The average annual growth rate of the population between 2000 and 2010 in the
Study Area was 0.7%, the same growth rate as Eugene-Springfield, but slower than the growth rate
of Oregon (1.1%).
Exhibit C-56
Attachment 2-127
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner City of Springfield Page 13
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Revised Existing Conditions Memorandum #2 January 6, 2014
L:\Project\16700\16786\Planning\Task 2\Final\Springfield Existing Conditions Revised Memo #2.doc
Figure 4 shows that relative the broader community, the Study Area has a higher portion of children
and individuals in the early stages of their working lives (25 to 34 years), indicating that the area
attracts young families. It has a smaller portion of individuals over the age of 55. The Study Area has
a small portion of individuals aged 18-24, relative to the entire Eugene-Springfield metropolitan area.
The metropolitan area’s high portion of 18-24 year olds is driven by the University of Oregon
student population. The low portion of this age group in the Study Area indicates that it does not
attract a student population.
Figure 4. Age Distribution, Oregon, Eugene-Springfield, and Main Street Corridor, 2010
23% 20% 25%
9% 13% 10%
14% 13%
16%
13% 12%
13%
14% 14%
14%
13% 14%
11%
8% 8% 6% 6% 7% 5%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Oregon Eugene-Springfield Main Street Corridor Percent of population Over 75
65-74
55-64
45-54
35-44
25-34
18-24
Under 18
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census
Exhibit C-57
Attachment 2-128
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner City of Springfield Page 14
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Revised Existing Conditions Memorandum #2 January 6, 2014
L:\Project\16700\16786\Planning\Task 2\Final\Springfield Existing Conditions Revised Memo #2.doc
Figure 5 shows how the age of the Main Street Corridor population changed between 2000 and
2010. The most notable shift was the increase in the population over the age of 55. This shift was
driven by the baby boom generation, as they aged into their 50s over the last decade. Although that
age group has increase in the Study Area since 2000, it makes up a smaller portion of the Study
Area’s population than in the broader metropolitan region.
The area has also seen the portion of children decline over the last decade, dropping from 29% of
the population to 25%.
Figure 5. Population distribution by age, Main Street Corridor 2000 and 2010
29% 25%
9% 10%
16% 16%
17% 13%
12%
14%
7% 11%
5% 6%
5% 5%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
2000 2010 Percent of population Over 75
65-74
55-64
45-54
35-44
25-34
18-24
Under 18
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census
Exhibit C-58
Attachment 2-129
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner City of Springfield Page 15
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Revised Existing Conditions Memorandum #2 January 6, 2014
L:\Project\16700\16786\Planning\Task 2\Final\Springfield Existing Conditions Revised Memo #2.doc
Figure 6 shows the racial and ethnic composition of Oregon, Eugene-Springfield, and the Main
Street Corridor in 2010. Eugene-Springfield and the Main Street Corridor have less racial and ethnic
diversity than Oregon, with the majority of the population being white (85% and 81%). The Study
Area has a slightly higher concentration of individuals who reported to be Hispanic/Latino.
Figure 6. Race and ethnicity, Oregon, Eugene-Springfield, Main Street Corridor
78% 85% 81%
12% 7% 12% 4% 2% 4% 5% 5%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Oregon Eugene-Springfield Main Street Corridor Percent of population White (non-Hispanic) Hispanic/Latino
Asian Black/African American
Other Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census
Exhibit C-59
Attachment 2-130
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner City of Springfield Page 16
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Revised Existing Conditions Memorandum #2 January 6, 2014
L:\Project\16700\16786\Planning\Task 2\Final\Springfield Existing Conditions Revised Memo #2.doc
Figure 7 shows the education levels for Oregon, Eugene-Springfield, and the Main Street Corridor.
The Study Area has a less educated population compared the surrounding metro area and the State.
The Study Area has a higher portion of individuals who did not graduate from college than the rest
of the Eugene-Springfield area.
Figure 7. Educational Achievement, Population 25 and older, Oregon, Eugene-Springfield, Main
Street Corridor
11% 10% 17%
25% 25%
35%
35% 37%
40%
18% 17%
5% 11% 11% 3%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Oregon Eugene-Springfield Main Street Corridor Percent of population 25 years and older Graduate Degree
Bachelor's Degree
Some college, no degree
HS Diploma
Less than HS
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2007-2011 American Community Survey, 5-Year Estimates
Income and Wages
Figure 8 shows the level of household income in Oregon, Eugene-Springfield, and the Main Street
Corridor. The data shows that the Study Area has a high portion of households with incomes less
than $50,000 and small portion of households with incomes greater than $75,000 per year. Given the
relatively high portion of households with children, the Study Area has relatively low levels of
disposable income.
Exhibit C-60
Attachment 2-131
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner City of Springfield Page 17
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Revised Existing Conditions Memorandum #2 January 6, 2014
L:\Project\16700\16786\Planning\Task 2\Final\Springfield Existing Conditions Revised Memo #2.doc
Figure 8. Household Income, Oregon, Eugene-Springfield, Main Street Corridor, 2007-2011
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
< $25,000 $25,000 -
$49,999
$50,000 -
$74,999
$75,000 -
$99,999
$100,000 -
$149,999
$150,000 + Percent of households Oregon Eugene-Springfield Main Street Corridor Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2007-2011 American Community Survey, 5-Year Estimates
Table 2 shows the median household income and the per capita income in Oregon, Eugene-
Springfield, and the Main Street Corridor. The table shows that the average income in the Study
Area is lower than that of Eugene-Springfield and of Oregon. A mix of low household income and
relatively large household size drives the low per capita income in the Study Area.
Table 2. Median household and per capita income, Oregon, Eugene-Springfield, Main
Street Corridor, 2007-2011
Median HH Income Per Capita Income
Oregon $49,850 $26,561
Eugene-Springfield $42,621 $24,105
Main Street Corridor $37,087 $18,044 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2007-2011 American Community Survey, 5-Year Estimates
Transportation and Commute
Nearly 90% of individuals living in the Main Street Corridor drove as their means to work as
compared to 81% in the Eugene-Springfield area and 86% in Oregon.
Figure 9 shows the portion of Oregon, Eugene-Springfield, and the Main Street Corridor that used
other means of transportation to get to work (i.e., did not drive). Employed individuals in the Study
Area are less likely to use alternative transportation to get work, relative to rest of the Eugene-
Springfield area.
Exhibit C-61
Attachment 2-132
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner City of Springfield Page 18
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Revised Existing Conditions Memorandum #2 January 6, 2014
L:\Project\16700\16786\Planning\Task 2\Final\Springfield Existing Conditions Revised Memo #2.doc
Figure 9. Means of Transportation to Work, Oregon, Eugene-Springfield, Main Street
Corridor, 2007-2011
0%
1%
2%
3%
4%
5%
6%
7%
Public
Transportation
(includes Taxicab)
Walked Bicycle or other Worked at Home Percent of workers 16 years and over Oregon Eugene-Springfield Main Street Corridor Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2007-2011 American Community Survey, 5-Year Estimate
Housing
Table 3 shows that the Main Street Corridor has fewer owner-occupied homes than Eugene-
Springfield and Oregon. About 53% of housing units are owner occupied in the Main Street
Corridor, 7 percentage points less than Eugene-Springfield and a full 10 percentage points less than
Oregon. Nationwide, about 66% of households own their homes.
Table 3. Housing Tenure, Oregon, Eugene-Springfield,
Main Street Corridor, 2010
Owner
Occupied
Renter
Occupied
Oregon 63% 37%
Eugene-Springfield 60% 40%
Main Street Corridor 53% 47% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census
Figure 10 shows the housing type by number of units in Springfield and the Main Street Corridor. A
little more than 50% of houses are single-unit detached homes in Springfield and the Study Area.
About 17% of housing units in Springfield are multi-family properties with five or more units and
about 13% of housing units in the Study Area of the same type. The remainder is a mix of attached
single-family homes, duplexes, triplexes quads and mobile homes.
Exhibit C-62
Attachment 2-133
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner City of Springfield Page 19
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Revised Existing Conditions Memorandum #2 January 6, 2014
L:\Project\16700\16786\Planning\Task 2\Final\Springfield Existing Conditions Revised Memo #2.doc
Figure 10. Housing Type by Number of Units in Structure, Main Street Corridor
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
1 unit,
detached
1 unit,
attached
2-4 units 5+ units Mobile
home
Springfield
Main Street Corridor
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2007-2011 American Community Survey, 5-Year Estimates
Activity Nodes
Six activity nodes identified in the study area based on existing conditions. Within the nodes are a
variety of retail and commercial uses and key transportation connections to the neighborhoods
north and south of Main Street. The nodes are also currently served by transit via bus routes 11 and
91. Residential uses are present currently but are not a significant component in the land use mix,
especially with regard to uses fronting onto Main Street or A Street.
The 14th Street Activity Node lies on the couplet, with east-bound traffic on A Street and west-
bound traffic on Main Street. It is dominated by low-density retail, most of it located in small, older
strip malls. The retail businesses include a mix of locally owned and larger chains. Businesses located
in this node included:
• Goodfellas Lounge
• Club 1444 (an adult entertainment bar)
• 14th and Main Market
• A
• 7-11
• Grocery Outlet
• Steve’s Breakfast and More
• Ace Buyers (pawn shop)
• A landromat
• Springfield Rentals (equipment rentals)
Exhibit C-63
Attachment 2-134
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner City of Springfield Page 20
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Revised Existing Conditions Memorandum #2 January 6, 2014
L:\Project\16700\16786\Planning\Task 2\Final\Springfield Existing Conditions Revised Memo #2.doc
The 21st Street Activity Node is just east of the couplet. The west side of the intersection has retail
space, but the buildings are vacant. On the east side of the intersection, there is on-street retail.
Businesses located in this node included:
• Dead Man’s Chest (used goods)
• Hutch’s Bicycle Stores
Just east of the intersection lies Paramount Center, a busy strip mall. It offers a mix of small retailers
and the Busy Bee Café.
The 30th Street Activity Node is centered around the railroad crossing between 28th Street and 30th
Street. Current land uses are mainly industrial and low-density, auto-oriented retail. The Willamalane
Center is located near this node. Businesses located in or near this node include3:
• American Auto Salvage
• AutoZone
• Americas
• Roberts Supply (retail, work wear)
• OK Tavern
• Goodwill
The 42nd Street Activity Node is centered on the intersection of 42nd Street and Main Street.
Land use in this node is primarily retail, with some industrial, residential, and vacant land. Land uses
include:
• Automotive retail, including several gas stations, 24 Hour Finish Line Car Wash, B&A
Automotive, Tire Factory, Pennzoil Pit Stop, O’Reilly Auto Parts, J&K Auto Repair, Acme
collision service. These uses are especially common in the western portion of the node,
between 41st and 42nd.
• Fast food, centered on the intersection of Main Street and 42nd. Fast food businesses
include: Taco Bell, Jack in the Box, Arby’s, and Subway.
• McKenzie West shopping plaza
• Main Street Mini Storage
• Residential, especially south of Main street and along 42nd South of Main
The 53rd Street Activity Node has a mix residential and retail uses. It offers a handful of apartment
buildings and the following businesses:
• Time Out Tavern
• VFW Post
3 Google Street View, accessed 24 October 2013.
Exhibit C-64
Attachment 2-135
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner City of Springfield Page 21
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Revised Existing Conditions Memorandum #2 January 6, 2014
L:\Project\16700\16786\Planning\Task 2\Final\Springfield Existing Conditions Revised Memo #2.doc
• Umpqua Bank
• McKenzie Animal Hospital
• a mini-storage facility
The 58th Street Activity Node lies just east of the Bob Straub Parkeway intersection.. Businesses
located in this node included:
• Walgreens
• 7-11
• Goodwill
• Big Lots
• Bi-Mart
• 76 Gas Station
• McDonalds
• Albertsons
• Chase Bank
• Shell Gas Station
Infill and Redevelopment Potential
The ratio of improvement value to land value of a parcel is a metric used to summarize the level of
development on a parcel and it provides a starting place for assessing the infill and redevelopment
potential of an area. A low improvement-to-land ratio indicates that there is comparatively little built
on the land, while high improvement-to-improvement ratio indicates a higher level of investment on
a property. An improvement-to-land ratio of 1.0 indicates that the land value is equal to the
improvement value. The improvement-to-land ratio does not take into account if a parcel faces
constraints to development, such as steep slopes, floodplains, brownfields, and small parcel size.
Four maps illustrate the potential in distinct sub-areas of the Corridor.
• MAP 10 shows Segment 1 and the Downtown Node;
• MAP 11 shows the western portion of Segment 2 (Segment 2a);
• MAP 12 shows the eastern portion of Segment 2 (Segment 2b); and
• MAP 13 shows Segment 3 and Potential Interchange Area.
Table 4 summarizes improvement-to-land ratios for parcel acres within the Main Street Study
Boundary (shown as a black dotted line on MAPs 6-9). Approximately 10% of parcel acreage within
the Main Street Study Boundary is vacant (i.e., has $0 of improvement value). For an additional 33%
of the acreage within the Study Boundary, the value of improvements is less than the value of the
land. Figure 11 graphically shows the same data.
Exhibit C-65
Attachment 2-136
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner City of Springfield Page 22
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Revised Existing Conditions Memorandum #2 January 6, 2014
L:\Project\16700\16786\Planning\Task 2\Final\Springfield Existing Conditions Revised Memo #2.doc
Table 4. Improvement-to-Land Ratio, Main Street Study Boundary
Improvement-to-Land Value Category Acres
% of
acres
0.0 17.5 10%
0.01 - 0.50 29.6 18%
0.51 - 1.00 25.8 15%
1.01 - 2.00 48.8 29%
2.01 or more 45.7 27%
Total 167.3 100% Source: City of Springfield taxlot data, analysis by ECONorthwest.
Figure 11. Improvement-to-Land Ratio, Main Street Study Boundary
Source: City of Springfield taxlot data, analysis by ECONorthwest.
Table 5 shows improvement-to-land ratios for parcel area in Segment 1, Segment 2, and Segment 3.
Figure 12 graphically shows the same data.
• Segment 1 has a low portion of parcels with no improvement values. As the most centrally
located portion of the Corridor, there are very few parcels that show no improvement value.
Just over half (54%) of the Segment has a ratio exceeding 1.0, but most of the land is in the
lower end of the range, with ratios between 1.0 and 2.0. It has a relatively high portion of
land with a very low ratio, where the improvement is valued at less than 50% of the land
value.
• Segment 2 has the highest portion of land (34%) in the highest ratio category (2.0 and
higher). Only 12% of the Segment has parcels with zero improvement value. The map shows
that parcels are small and the ratio varies across the Segment.
• Segment 3 has the highest portion of land that lacks any improvement value. The map
suggests that many of these parcels are constrained by steep slopes. The Segment has a low
portion of land with a very low improvement-to-land ratio (greater than zero but less than
0.50).
Exhibit C-66
Attachment 2-137
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner City of Springfield Page 23
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Revised Existing Conditions Memorandum #2 January 6, 2014
L:\Project\16700\16786\Planning\Task 2\Final\Springfield Existing Conditions Revised Memo #2.doc
Table 5. Improvement-to-Land Ratio, Segments 1, 2, and 3
Acres % of acres Acres % of acres Acres % of acres
0.0 7.9 9% 30.3 12% 26.0 19%
0.01 - 0.50 18.4 22% 41.2 16% 12.0 9%
0.51 - 1.00 11.7 14% 31.1 12% 25.4 19%
1.01 - 2.00 29.0 35% 64.9 26% 41.1 30%
2.01 or more 16.9 20% 84.8 34% 32.5 24%
Land value is $0,
Improvement value > 0
0.0 0% 0.0 0% 0.4 0%
Total 83.9 100% 252.4 100% 137.4 100%
Segment 3Segment 2Segment 1Improvement-to-
Land Value
Source: City of Springfield taxlot data, analysis by ECONorthwest.
Figure 12. Improvement-to-Land Ratio, Main Street Study Boundary
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
0.0
0.01 0.50
0.51 1.00
1.01 2.00
2.01+
Total Acres ImprovementtoLand Value Segment 1
Segment 2
Segment 3
Source: City of Springfield taxlot data, analysis by ECONorthwest.
Real Estate Market Conditions
In this section, we describe average prices for single-family homes, and provide market trends for
the office, retail and industrial markets.
Residential Uses
Figure 13 shows the median sale price for single-family homes in Oregon, Eugene-Springfield, and
the Main Street Corridor. Prices follow a similar trend in all three geographic areas, peaking in 2007
and then falling until 2012.
Although the three geographies follow a similar trend, Oregon consistently has the highest prices
followed by the Eugene Metro area and the Eugene Metro area consistently has higher prices than
Springfield. The median sale price gap between the Eugene Metro area and Springfield was about
$15,000 on average in 2000, but increased to about $35,000 in 2012.4
4 ECONorthwest was not able to obtain housing values specific to the study area.
Exhibit C-67
Attachment 2-138
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner City of Springfield Page 24
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Revised Existing Conditions Memorandum #2 January 6, 2014
L:\Project\16700\16786\Planning\Task 2\Final\Springfield Existing Conditions Revised Memo #2.doc
Figure 13. Median Sale Price, Single-Family Homes, Oregon, Eugene Metro Area, and
Springfield, 1996-2013
$0
$50,000
$100,000
$150,000
$200,000
$250,000
$300,000 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Median Sales Price Oregon Eugene Metro Springfield Source: Zillow.com
Office Uses
To describe real estate trends for non-residential uses, ECONorthwest relied on CoStar, a provider
of commercial real estate data. Using CoStar’s mapping service, we drew an area around each of the
three segments to identify key indicators of the market. The boundary includes about three blocks
around the Corridor. However, almost all office, retail, and industrial spaces are located directly on
the Corridor.
Commercial uses include both retail and office space. Some businesses have both retail and office
elements, such as an insurance business or real estate office. The key factors that affect the demand
for retail space are visibility, access, and competing supply. Office space has different demand
factors, including proximity to complementary services (such as government offices) and proximity
to the labor force. Service-oriented office uses, such as financial services and medical offices, locate
near population centers so that customers can access the facility easily. Service-oriented offices, such
as realtors and insurance brokers, often use retail space.
Figure 14 shows vacancy rates for the office space market in the three segments, as well as the
Eugene-Springfield area. The vacancy rates for the three segments show wide variation and sudden
swings. The large swings in vacancy rates are due to the small number of data points in the small
geographic areas.
Exhibit C-68
Attachment 2-139
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner City of Springfield Page 25
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Revised Existing Conditions Memorandum #2 January 6, 2014
L:\Project\16700\16786\Planning\Task 2\Final\Springfield Existing Conditions Revised Memo #2.doc
Figure 14. Office Absorption and Vacancy, 2003 to 2013
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
16%
18%
2003
1Q 2003
3Q 2004
1Q 2004
3Q 2005
1Q 2005
3Q 2006
1Q 2006
3Q 2007
1Q 2007
3Q 2008
1Q 2008
3Q 2009
1Q 2009
3Q 2010
1Q 2010
3Q 2011
1Q 2011
3Q 2012
1Q 2012
3Q 2013
1Q 2013
3Q
Vacancy Rates
EugeneSpringfield
Segment 1
Segment 2
Segment 3
Source: ECONorthwest and CoStar.]
Table 6 shows the most recent data for key indicators of office market conditions: total rentable
building area, current average rent, and the current vacancy rate.
Table 6. Office Market – Key Indicators, Segments 1, 2, and 3
Rentable
Building Area
(SF)
Current
Average Rent
(NNN)
Current
Vacancy
Rate
Segment 1 69,500 $20.00 3.7%
Segment 2 75,173 $7.87 12.4%
Segment 3 18,016 NA 10.0% Source: CoStar, analysis by ECONorthwest.
• In Segment 1, the office market has been fairly steady for the last ten years. Vacancy is low,
at roughly 4%. Rents are reasonably high, at $20 per SF, higher than the metro-wide average
of $16.5
• In Segment 2, there is more rentable square footage, but rents are lower and vacancies are
higher. The vacancy rate rose dramatically in 2012 to about 16%. Rents have declined since
2009, dropping from about $13 per SF to under $8 per SF.
• In Segment 3, there is very little office space, making it difficult to show trend data.
Vacancy rates increased in 2011 and are currently at about 10%. No data describing rent
were available.
Retail Trends
Figure 15 shows vacancy rates for the retail space market in the three segments, as well as the
Eugene-Springfield area.
5 Rents are triple net, noted as NNN, which excludes the cost of janitorial services, property taxes, and insurance.
Exhibit C-69
Attachment 2-140
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner City of Springfield Page 26
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Revised Existing Conditions Memorandum #2 January 6, 2014
L:\Project\16700\16786\Planning\Task 2\Final\Springfield Existing Conditions Revised Memo #2.doc
Figure 15. Retail Absorption and Vacancy, 2003 to 2013
0%
1%
2%
3%
4%
5%
6%
7%
8%
2006
1Q 2006
3Q 2007
1Q 2007
3Q 2008
1Q 2008
3Q 2009
1Q 2009
3Q 2010
1Q 2010
3Q 2011
1Q 2011
3Q 2012
1Q 2012
3Q 2013
1Q 2013
3Q
Vacancy Rates
EugeneSpringfield
Segment 1
Segment 2
Segment 3
Note: Not all property managers report their rent to CoStar, and for small
geographies there are sometimes too few data points to calculate an average rent.
Source: ECONorthwest and CoStar.
Table 7 shows the most recent data for key indicators of retail market conditions: total rentable
building area, current average rent, and the current vacancy rate. The table shows that CoStar lacked
adequate data for current rents for two segments.
Table 7. Retail Market – Key Indicators, Segments 1, 2, and 3
Rentable
Building Area
(SF)
Current
Average Rent
(NNN)
Current
Vacancy
Rate
Segment 1 495,445 NA 0.8%
Segment 2 851,315 $9.00 7.0%
Segment 3 146,535 NA 0.0% Note: Not all property managers report their rent to CoStar, and for small
geographies there are sometimes too few data points to calculate an average rent.
Source: CoStar, analysis by ECONorthwest.
• In Segment 1, the retail market has been fairly steady. Vacancy is very low, at less than 1%.
CoStar was not able to provide current rents, but they were over $10 in 2011.
• In Segment 2, the retail vacancy rate has steadily risen since 2006. The area has a substantial
amount of retail space, almost 900,000 SF. Rents in Segment 2 average about $9 per SF,
about 75% over the metro-wide figure of just over $12 per SF.
• In Segment 3, there is much less retail space than in Segments 1 and 2, but it has no
vacancy. In 2011, the area commanded an average rent of about $22 per SF, much higher
than in the rest of the Corridor. This indicates that Segment 3 offers a healthy amount of
retail space, and it is not so over-supplied that rents have declined.
Exhibit C-70
Attachment 2-141
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner City of Springfield Page 27
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Revised Existing Conditions Memorandum #2 January 6, 2014
L:\Project\16700\16786\Planning\Task 2\Final\Springfield Existing Conditions Revised Memo #2.doc
Industrial Trends
Figure 16 shows vacancy rates for the industrial space market in the three segments, as well as the
Eugene-Springfield area.
Figure 16. Industrial Absorption and Vacancy, 2003 to 2013
0%
1%
2%
3%
4%
5%
6%
7%
8%
9%
2003
1Q 2003
3Q 2004
1Q 2004
3Q 2005
1Q 2005
3Q 2006
1Q 2006
3Q 2007
1Q 2007
3Q 2008
1Q 2008
3Q 2009
1Q 2009
3Q 2010
1Q 2010
3Q 2011
1Q 2011
3Q 2012
1Q 2012
3Q 2013
1Q 2013
3Q
Vacancy Rates
EugeneSpringfield
Segment 1
Segment 2
Source: ECONorthwest and CoStar.
Table 8 shows the most recent data for key indicators of industrial market conditions: total rentable
building area, current average rent, and the current vacancy rate.
Table 8. Industrial Market – Key Indicators, Segments 1, 2, and 3
Rentable
Building Area
(SF)
Current
Average Rent
(NNN)
Current
Vacancy
Rate
Segment 1 244,071 $3.33 0.0%
Segment 2 241,935 $3.24 7.6%
Segment 3 NA NA NA Source: CoStar, analysis by ECONorthwest.
• In Segment 1, the industrial market has been fairly steady. Vacancy is at 0%. The average
industrial rent is about $3 per SF, about 75% of the metro-wide rent of about $4 per SF.
• In Segment 2, the industrial vacancy rate increased from less than 1% to about 8% in 2008
and has remained high since that time. Average rents are just over $3 per SF.
• In Segment 3, there is no data available describing industrial property. Segment 3 is not an
idustrial area, so it is not surprising that CoStar has no data for the industrial market in the
area.
Broad Trends
The market trends provide further evidence of a varied use of mixes in the Corridor.
• Segment 1 has a strong market for office uses and a reasonably strong market for retail uses.
• Segment 2 has an over-supply of office, retail, and industrial uses.
Exhibit C-71
Attachment 2-142
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner City of Springfield Page 28
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Revised Existing Conditions Memorandum #2 January 6, 2014
L:\Project\16700\16786\Planning\Task 2\Final\Springfield Existing Conditions Revised Memo #2.doc
• Segment 3 has a reasonably strong market for retail uses, because retail has not been over-
built. The office market is over-supplied in Segment 3.
Preliminary Assessment of Opportunities and Constraints
The seven-mile Corridor has a mix of uses, densities, and values. There are few areas of
concentration of a single use. Instead, the different types of parcels abut each other, creating a
jumble of uses with no sense of connectivity one moves along the Corridor. This section provides
some preliminary conclusions about the Corridor, and potential direction to focus different land
uses.
Segment 1 Close-In Commercial. The smallest of the defined segments, it makes up the outer
edge of downtown Springfield. It is dominated by retail uses. Although the retail vacancy rate is low,
so are rents. The area is mostly developed, but a large portion of the built environment is relatively
low value.
As an extension of downtown, it can provide a mix of different uses and services and higher
densities of development. The area could expand its office space, particularly space for service-
oriented offices, such as medical practitioners. The area could also expand its residential space. The
area could be an opportunity to provide relatively high-density housing. The area has a growing
population over the age of 65. As individuals age, they may choose to downsize their homes—as
empty-nesters they need less space and can avoid the costs associated with maintaining a larger
home. As individuals age, they are more likely to lose the ability to drive. This portion of the
Corridor could provide opportunities to provide housing that would appeal to this demographic,
and be close to existing retail services.
Segment 2 Mid-Springfield Commercial Residential. The middle segment is the largest and
has broad mix of uses. The largest use class is retail, and that retail includes small walk-in stores,
drive-through fast food, and retail stores with large yards providing space for lumber. As an auto-
oriented corridor, with large traffic volumes, the area provides good visibility for retailers. However,
the length of the segment provides more space for potential retailers than there is demand.
The area includes industrial properties, including some that have been there for decades. The area is
not likely to attract new large industrial facilities in the future. The small average parcel size and the
distance from the I-5 limit the area’s appeal for new large industrial development.
The area does provide space that appeals to firms that have an industrial and retail element, such as
retail/wholesale lumber yards, auto repair shops, storage facilities, and landscaping materials. The
area’s low rents and good visibility will continue to attract these businesses. The area is also
appealing for small industrial uses in flex space—small, industrial buildings that offer space to a wide
variety of businesses.
The area includes residential uses. The relatively new residential development off the Bob Straub
Parkway has reinforced the area’s residential element. That area on the eastern portion of the
segment has potential to continue to expand its residential element, creating consistent uses with the
area to the south.
Exhibit C-72
Attachment 2-143
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner City of Springfield Page 29
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Revised Existing Conditions Memorandum #2 January 6, 2014
L:\Project\16700\16786\Planning\Task 2\Final\Springfield Existing Conditions Revised Memo #2.doc
Segment 3 East Main Commercial. The eastern edge of the Corridor is dominated by single-
family and multifamily residential uses. It has very little office space and no industrial space. It offers
retail directly on Highway 126, giving it an appearance of having a high portion of retail space. In
reality, the segment’s predominant land uses are residential (73%) and vacant (19%). Much of the
vacant land has steep slopes, making it difficult to develop, or has not been developed yet.
The small amount of retail space in the area has a very low vacancy rate and the rents are the highest
along the Corridor. This indicates that the segment has an appropriate level of retail. It serves the
surrounding residential area, as well as the drive-through traffic. If the area’s retail is expanded, it
risks becoming over-retailed, which will drive rents down and make it financially difficult to invest in
the area, leading to dilapidated buildings. Maintaining the relatively low levels of retail in the area will
help to maintain the retail market’s strength, provided the mix of neighborhood commercial services
continues to support residential and employment growth within this segment. The area is well suited
for residential and should continue to offer a mix of housing options.
Public Realm Qualities
The public realm of a major urban corridor is typically an interconnected system of public spaces,
streetscape amenities, pedestrian walkways and bicycle paths, public transit, and the mix of uses and
architecture along the roadway edge. The qualities of the public realm are experienced by all users of
the roadway, as well as businesses, customers and residents. The perception of the public realm is
usually positive when it is engaging, fully accessible and well-maintained. It becomes a place to be as
much as way to go places.
Currently, the most engaging and accessible public realm for Main Street lies just outside of the
Project Study Area. It is the Downtown Node west of 10th Street. Implementation of the Downtown
Springfield/Glenwood Vision from the Downtown Dist4ict Urban Design Plan 2010 and completion of
Downtown Demonstration Project will enhance its qualities. Moving east, into the corridor
addressed by this project, the public realm qualities are less engaging. Most of the corridor lacks
continuous streetscape amenities and there is a lack of attractive small-scale gathering spaces and
plazas. The adjacent land uses in Segments 1 and 2 are predominantly auto-oriented commercial and
industrial land uses. There are relatively few architecturally interesting buildings or retail storefronts.
Preliminary Assessment of Opportunities and Constraints
Enhancements can come through improving the sidewalks and completing the Main Street
Pedestrian Crossing Project. Sidewalk improvements could include repairing damaged surfaces,
establishing a consistent sidewalk design standard for concrete finishes and establishment of right-
of-way landscaping and streets where feasible. These enhancements can be implemented through
future capital projects or required frontage improvements for new development. The following may
be additional long-term opportunities for positive changes.
Exhibit C-73
Attachment 2-144
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner City of Springfield Page 30
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Revised Existing Conditions Memorandum #2 January 6, 2014
L:\Project\16700\16786\Planning\Task 2\Final\Springfield Existing Conditions Revised Memo #2.doc
• Activity Node redevelopment with retail and residential mixed uses. This mix of uses can
create attractive architectural and open space designs with different forms, scales and public
components.
• Streetscape theme for each segment to be implemented through redevelopment or larger
capital projects when funding is available.
• Implementing the planned wayfinding elements in the corridor (as envisioned in the
Citywide Wayfinding Report).
• A Main Street public art program that eventually includes all of the Activity Node areas.
• City and LTD collaboration to create distinctive transit stop designs for the corridor.
Multimodal Transportation
This section summarizes the inventory and analysis of existing transportation conditions for the
Main Street (OR 126) Corridor in the City of Springfield, Oregon. The summary reflects
information provided by City staff and additional analysis by DKS Associates, including the previous
efforts of the Main Street (OR 126) Safety Study.6 The facilities and activity for motor vehicles,
pedestrians, bicycles, and transit are documented.
Motor Vehicle Facilities and Activity
Motor vehicle facilities and activity were inventoried and analyzed for the Main Street (OR 126)
Corridor. Considerations include roadway network characteristics; road pavement and curb
condition; vehicular volume, speed, and classification; intersection turn movement volumes; mobility
standards; and existing intersection performance.
Roadway Network Characteristics
The transportation characteristics of Main Street and its key cross streets (which include the Pioneer
Parkway couplet, 14th Street, 21st Street, 28th Street, 32nd Street, 42nd Street, 48th Street, 51st Street, 54th
Street, 58th Street, and 69th Street) are shown in Table 9 and include functional classification, number
and direction of travel lanes, posted speeds, and the presence of sidewalks and/or bike lanes. The
functional classification is a key characteristic because it specifies the purpose of the roadway7 and is
a determining factor of applicable cross-section, access spacing, and intersection performance
standards.
Table 9: Existing Study Area Roadway Characteristics
Roadway Functional Classification Travel
Lanes
Posted
Speed Sidewalk Bike Lanes ODOTa TransPlanb
Main Street (OR
126) Principal Arterial Principle Arterialc 5 30-45
d Yes Yes
6 Main Street (OR 126) Safety Study – Existing Conditions Analysis, DKS Associates, July 9, 2010.
7 The primary purpose of an arterial is to provide mobility, whereas at the opposite end of the spectrum, a local road is
primarily concerned with site access. Collector roadways provide a transition between arterials and local roads.
Exhibit C-74
Attachment 2-145
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner City of Springfield Page 31
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Revised Existing Conditions Memorandum #2 January 6, 2014
L:\Project\16700\16786\Planning\Task 2\Final\Springfield Existing Conditions Revised Memo #2.doc
Pioneer Pkwy W
(OR 528)
Minor Arterial Minor Arterial 3e 35 Yes Yesg
Pioneer Pkwy E
(OR 528)
Minor Arterial Minor Arterial 3 35 Yes Yes
g
14th Street Minor Arterial Minor Arterial 3 25 Yes Yes
21st Street Urban Collector Major Collector 2 25 Yes No
28th Street Minor Arterial Minor Arterial 3 35 Some Gaps No
32nd Street Minor Arterial Minor Arterial 3 35 Yes Yes
42nd Street Minor Arterial Minor Arterial 2-3 30 Yes Yes
48th Street Urban Collector Major Collector 2-3 25-40
f No (North)/
Yes (South)
No (North)/
Yes (South)
51st Street Local Road Local Road 2 25 Yes No
54th Street Local Road Local Road 2 25 Yes No
58th Street Urban Collector Major Collector 3 35 Yes Yes
69th Street Urban Collector Major Collector 2 25 Yes No
a Obtained from ODOT GIS Unit Map Products, ODOT City Maps, Springfield, OR.
b Obtained from 2001 Eugene-Springfield Transportation System Plan, Roadway Functional Classification figure.
c The Oregon Highway Plan classifies OR 126 from MP 6.23-7.97 as a Truck Route.
d Posted speed limit of 30 mph west of 20th St, 40 mph between 20th St and 60th St, and 45 mph east of 60th Pl.
e Pioneer Parkway E and W both have two travel lanes and a “bus only” lane.
f Posted speed limit is 40 mph north of Main Street (OR 126) and 25 mph south of Main Street (OR 126).
g Multi-use pathway exists in lieu of bike lanes.
Main Street (OR 126) is the main east-west roadway in the study area and carries 17,000 to 26,000
vehicles per day.8 Traffic volumes are heavier on either end of the corridor and lower near 51st
Street. Main Street (OR 126) is designated a State Highway and part of the National Highway System
for the entire corridor length. From MP 6.23 to MP 7.97 ( Bob Straub Parkway to the eastern
project limits) the roadway classified as a Truck Route.9 In addition, the Eugene-Springfield
Transportation System Plan (TSP), also known as TransPlan,10 designates Main Street (OR 126) in
the study area as a principle arterial.
Vehicular Volume, Speed, and Classification
Table 10 presents data collected from 24-hour tube counts11 at three select locations along the Main
Street (OR 126) corridor. This data includes vehicular bi-directional volumes, 85th percentile speed12,
and heavy vehicle traffic percentages. As shown in the table, the vehicle directionality is fairly evenly
split along the entire corridor.
8 All Traffic Data 24-hour classification and volume counts were taken on Thursday April 22, 2010.
9 1999 Oregon Highway Plan (as amended January 2006).
10 2001 Eugene-Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP)
11 All Traffic Data 24-hour classification and speed counts were taken on Thursday April 22, 2010.
12 The 85th percentile speed is defined as the speed below which 85 percent of the vehicles are traveling.
Exhibit C-75
Attachment 2-146
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner City of Springfield Page 32
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Revised Existing Conditions Memorandum #2 January 6, 2014
L:\Project\16700\16786\Planning\Task 2\Final\Springfield Existing Conditions Revised Memo #2.doc
Table 10: Main Street (OR 126) Bi-Directional Volumes, Speeds, and Heavy Vehicle Usagea
Surveyed Data Location along Main Street (OR 126)
West of 30th Street East of 51st Street East of Mountaingate Drive
Average Daily Traffic
Eastbound 12,610 (50%) 8,910 (52%) 10,590 (50%)
Westbound 12,860 (50%) 8,380 (48%) 10,640 (50%)
Total 25,470 17,290 21,230
85th Percentile Speed
Eastbound 39 mph 43 mph 49 mph
Westbound 38 mph 44 mph 49 mph
Posted Speed
Both Directions 40 mph 40 mph 45 mph
Truck Traffic Percentageb
Eastbound 3% 2% 4%
Westbound 2% 3% 3%
a All Traffic Data 24-hour classification and speed counts were taken on Thursday, April 22, 2010.
b Specified as vehicles with three or more axles.
To further understand the vehicular use of Main Street (OR 126) over the course of a 24-hour
period, Figure 17 shows the vehicle movements throughout the day at the location just west of 30th
Street. This graph shows the highest traffic volume for both eastbound and westbound vehicles is
during the p.m. peak hour. The westbound direction is used more heavily during the a.m. hours and
the eastbound direction tends to have a slightly heavier movement during the p.m. hours. The
directionality split is a typical scenario with the a.m. flow towards the downtown Springfield central
business district and the p.m. traffic moving away from the downtown core.
Exhibit C-76
Attachment 2-147
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner City of Springfield Page 33
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Revised Existing Conditions Memorandum #2 January 6, 2014
L:\Project\16700\16786\Planning\Task 2\Final\Springfield Existing Conditions Revised Memo #2.doc
Figure17: 24-Hour Direction Volumes West of 30th Street
Figure 18 shows the vehicular volumes throughout the day just east of 51st Street. Notice the 2 hour
volumes near 51st Street are lower than at 30th Street due to vehicles using Bob Struab Parkway.
Figure 18: 24-Hour Directional Volumes East of 51st Street
Figure 19 shows the 24 hour vehicular volumes just west of Mountaingate Drive. The 24 hour
volumes near Mountaingate Dr are similar to the volumes detected at 30th Street and the directional
flow is spilt evenly between eastbound and westbound traffic.
Exhibit C-77
Attachment 2-148
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner City of Springfield Page 34
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Revised Existing Conditions Memorandum #2 January 6, 2014
L:\Project\16700\16786\Planning\Task 2\Final\Springfield Existing Conditions Revised Memo #2.doc
Figure 19: 24-Hour Directional Volumes East of Moutaingate Drive
Intersection Turn Movement Volumes
Intersection vehicle turn movement volumes were collected at six signalized and two unsignalized
intersections along the Main Street (OR 126) corridor. These intersections are listed below from
west to east:
• Main Street (OR 126)/21st Street
• Main Street (OR 126)/32nd Street
• Main Street (OR 126)/42nd Street
• Main Street (OR 126)/48th Street
• Main Street (OR 126)/51st Street
• Main Street (OR 126)/54th Street
• Main Street (OR 126)/58th Street
• Main Street (OR 126)/69th Street
The traffic volumes were counted during the a.m. (7:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m.), afternoon (2:00 p.m. to
4:00 p.m.) and p.m. (4:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.) peak periods.13 The a.m., afternoon and p.m. peak hour
traffic volumes for the eight study intersections are shown in Figure 20. Also included in Figure 20
are the lane configurations and traffic control at the study intersections. The detailed two-hour
traffic counts are included in the appendix.
13 All Traffic Data turn movement counts taken on Thursday April 22, 2010.
Exhibit C-78
Attachment 2-149
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner City of Springfield Page 35
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Revised Existing Conditions Memorandum #2 January 6, 2014
L:\Project\16700\16786\Planning\Task 2\Final\Springfield Existing Conditions Revised Memo #2.doc
Figure 20: Existing Traffic Control and Peak Hour Volumes
Mobility Standards
Agency mobility standards often require intersections to meet level of service (LOS) or volume-to-
capacity (V/C) intersection operation thresholds.
• The intersection LOS is similar to a “report card” rating based upon average vehicle delay.
Level of service A, B, and C indicate conditions where traffic moves without significant
Exhibit C-79
Attachment 2-150
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner City of Springfield Page 36
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Revised Existing Conditions Memorandum #2 January 6, 2014
L:\Project\16700\16786\Planning\Task 2\Final\Springfield Existing Conditions Revised Memo #2.doc
delays over periods of peak hour travel demand. Level of service D and E are progressively
worse operating conditions. Level of service F represents conditions where average vehicle
delay has become excessive and demand has exceeded capacity. This condition is typically
evident in long queues and delays.
• The volume-to-capacity (V/C) ratio represents the level of saturation of the intersection
or individual movement. It is determined by dividing the peak hour traffic volume by the
maximum hourly capacity of an intersection or turn movement. When the V/C ratio
approaches 0.95, operations become unstable and small disruptions can cause the traffic
flow to break down, as seen by the formation of excessive queues.
The entire Main Street (OR 126) study corridor is located within the Eugene-Springfield
Metropolitan Area and is an Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) facility classified as a
Statewide Highway. According to the 1999 Oregon Highway Plan (OHP), ODOT mobility standards
are given as V/C ratios and are based on the highway category.14 The corridor is not a freight route;
(though it is a truck route to the east of Bob Straub Parkway). The mobility standards for Main
Street (OR 126) are show in Table 11 and are the same for both signalized and unsignalized
intersections. The City of Springfield’s standards are also shown in Table 11.
Table 11: Applicable Study Intersection Mobility Standards
Major Roadway Jurisdiction (Category) Mobility Standard
Main Street (OR 126) ODOT (Statewide Highway) V/C 0.90
Main Street (OR 126) City of Springfield LOS D or better
Existing Intersection Performance
The existing performance of the study intersections was evaluated using Synchro™ software, which
employs methodology from the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual.15 The traffic volumes and
transportation system configurations described previously were used to determine intersection levels
of service (LOS) and volume-to-capacity (V/C) ratios. Because the focus of this study is on
pedestrian safety and not motor vehicle operations, no effort was made to seasonally adjust traffic
volumes or to determine 30th highest hour levels. Intersection signal timing was obtained from the
City of Springfield and also used in the analysis. The results of the intersection operations analysis
are presented in Table 12. As shown, all of the intersections currently meet both ODOT and City of
Springfield mobility standards. A comparison between peak hours indicates that the afternoon and
p.m. peak hour have similar V/C ratios.
14 1999 Oregon Highway Plan, Oregon Department of Transportation, 1999; Table 6 in Policy 1F displays the maximum
allowable V/C ratios for areas outside of the Portland Metropolitan Area.
15 2000 Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2000.
Exhibit C-80
Attachment 2-151
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner City of Springfield Page 37
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Revised Existing Conditions Memorandum #2 January 6, 2014
L:\Project\16700\16786\Planning\Task 2\Final\Springfield Existing Conditions Revised Memo #2.doc
Table 12: Study Intersection Performance
Intersectiona Operating Standard A.M. Peak Hour Afternoon Peak
Hour P.M. Peak Hour
ODOT City Delay LOS V/C Delay LOS V/C Delay LOS V/C
Signalized
(1) Main St/21st St 0.90 V/C LOS D 10.1 B 0.39 13.3 B 0.45 10.1 B 0.39
(2) Main St/32nd
St
0.90 V/C LOS D 25.0 C 0.48 20.9 C 0.52 25.0 C 0.48
(3) Main St/42nd
St
0.90 V/C LOS D 29.8 C 0.68 41.6 D 0.78 32.4 C 0.63
(6) Main St/54th St 0.90 V/C LOS D 10.4 B 0.33 13.7 B 0.41 10.4 B 0.33
(7) Main St/58th St 0.90 V/C LOS D 32.2 C 0.75 35.5 D 0.72 32.2 C 0.75
(8) Main St/69th St 0.90 V/C LOS D 11.9 B 0.38 9.6 A 0.24 11.9 B 0.38
Unsignalized
(4) Main St/48th St 0.90 V/C LOS D 1.5 A/B 0.25 1.4 A/C 0.32 1.5 A/B 0.25
(5) Main St/51st St 0.90 V/C LOS D 1.2 A/B 0.24 0.9 A/B 0.24 1.2 A/B 0.24
Signalized intersection:
Delay = Average Intersection Delay (sec.)
LOS = Level of Service
V/C = Volume-to-Capacity Ratio
Unsignalized intersection:
Delay = Critical Movement Approach Delay (sec.)
LOS = Major Street LOS/Minor Street LOS
V/C = Critical Movement Volume-to-Capacity Ratio
a Numbers correspond to Figure 20.
Pedestrian Facilities and Activity
Pedestrian facilities and activity were observed along the Main Street (OR 126) corridor with
emphasis at select locations based on local knowledge,16 the locations of bus stops and pedestrian
generators in the area (especially businesses such as taverns and markets that would have higher
percentages of walk-in users), recent pedestrian collision information, and the availability of other
data (e.g., recent traffic counts performed within the last few years).
Pedestrian Facilities
A map of the pedestrian facilities is provided in Maps 14-16. As shown, sidewalk facilities are
present on both sides of Main Street (OR 126) for the entire study corridor. There are also eight
signalized intersections that accommodate signalized pedestrian crossings and one enhanced
pedestrian crossing. In addition, there are four raised median islands used by pedestrians crossing
Main Street (OR 126), although they are not ADA accessible.
16 Local knowledge was provided at a project kick-off meeting with ODOT, City of Springfield, and LTD staff that was held
on April 13, 2010. In addition, informal interviews were held with two residents, four business owners/representatives, two
concerned community members, and five LTD Route 11 operators during the week of April 26 through 30, 2010.
Exhibit C-81
Attachment 2-152
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner City of Springfield Page 38
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Revised Existing Conditions Memorandum #2 January 6, 2014
L:\Project\16700\16786\Planning\Task 2\Final\Springfield Existing Conditions Revised Memo #2.doc
Recent and Planned Enhanced Pedestrian Crossing Improvements
ODOT recently installed two enhanced pedestrian crossing improvements along the Main Street
(OR 126) corridor and is preparing to construct several more. The current locations are 44th and 51st
Streets, and planned locations include between 34th and 35th Streets, 40th Street, 41st Street, between
43rd and 44th Streets, between 48th and 49th Streets, Chapman Lane, and 57th Street. These
improvements include striped crosswalks, ADA accessible pedestrian refuge islands, sidewalk ramps,
and rectangular rapid flashing beacon (RRFB) sign assemblies with pedestrian push buttons. Figure
20 shows a photograph of the enhanced pedestrian crossing improvement at 51st Street.
Figure 20: Recent Pedestrian Crossing Improvement at 51st Street
Pedestrian Activity
Pedestrian crossing activity was observed for the a.m., afternoon, and p.m. peak hours along Main
Street (OR 126) at ten locations that covered approximately 250 feet in each direction. The counts
were taken on April 22, 2010, which was a dry day and expected to have typical pedestrian activity
levels. The count results are shown in Maps 14-16, and the following locations had the highest
crossing activity levels:
• Main Street (OR 126)/35th Street: 47 total during a.m., afternoon, and p.m. peak hours
• Main Street (OR 126)/41st Street: 89 total during a.m., afternoon, and p.m. peak hours
Pedestrian crossing volumes were also collected in conjunction the intersection turn movement
counts on April 22, 2010, and are also shown in Maps 14-16 (however, the crossing volumes shown
near 51st Street were collected prior to the construction of the enhanced pedestrian crossing
treatment). More details regarding these pedestrian crossing volumes are provided in Table 13. The
following four intersections have the highest pedestrian activity levels:
• Main Street (OR 126)/32nd Street: 86 total during a.m., afternoon, and p.m. peak hours
• Main Street (OR 126)/42nd Street: 86 total during a.m., afternoon, and p.m. peak hours
• Main Street (OR 126)/54th Street: 93 total during a.m., afternoon, and p.m. peak hours
• Main Street (OR 126)/58th Street: 136 total during a.m., afternoon, and p.m. peak hours
Exhibit C-82
Attachment 2-153
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner City of Springfield Page 39
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Revised Existing Conditions Memorandum #2 January 6, 2014
L:\Project\16700\16786\Planning\Task 2\Final\Springfield Existing Conditions Revised Memo #2.doc
The highest crossing volumes at these intersections occur during the afternoon peak, which is
expected at the intersections of 54th Street and 58th Street due to their proximity to Riverbend
Elementary School and Thurston High School. It is also expected that students returning home
from school contribute to the higher afternoon volumes at 32nd Street and 42nd Street.
Table 13: Main Street (OR 126) Avenue Pedestrian Crossing Volumes
Study Intersection
(Signalized Y/N)
A.M. Peak Hour
Pedestrian Crossings
Afternoon Peak Hour
Pedestrian Crossings
P.M. Peak Hour
Pedestrian Crossings
Major
Street
Minor
Street Total Major
Street
Minor
Street Total Major
Street
Minor
Street Total
Main St/21st St (Y) 4 7 11 12 7 19 20 23 43
Main St/32nd St (Y) 9 9 18 51 24 75 26 12 38
Main St/42nd St (Y) 18 17 35 43 30 73 29 24 53
Main St/48th St (N) 0 2 2 1 17 18 3 14 17
Main St/51st St (N) 14 1 15 21 8 29 27 14 41
Main St/54th St (Y) 7 9 16 47 31 78 44 23 67
Main St/58th St (Y) 21 8 29 71 32 103 35 15 50
Main St/69th St (Y) 16 9 25 24 14 38 24 9 33
Note: All Traffic Data 1-hour counts were taken on Thursday, April 22, 2010.
Bicycle Activity and Facilities
Bicycle facilities and activity were observed along the Main Street (OR 126) corridor at the same
locations where pedestrian crossings were observed. Discussion of the facilities and activity are
provided below.
Bicycle Facilities
Bicycle facilities are documented on the Springfield Bicycle Map.17 According to the map, Main
Street (OR 126) is classified as having a “Bike Lanes (Usually on higher traffic streets).” The very eastern
end of Main Street (OR 126) from 69th Street to 73rd Place is characterized as “Busy
Streets/Highways (No bicycle facilities). However when the area was field verified, bike lanes are
present in this eastern section. In addition to the bike lanes on Main Street (OR 126), several of the
cross-streets are classified as being marked with Bike Lanes including 42nd Street and 58th Street.
Other streets were marked as being “Popular Bicycle Routes (Shared roadway on lower traffic streets),”
including 51st Street, 66th Street and 69th Street. Field observations revealed bike lanes were also
present on 32nd Street and 48th Street.
17 Springfield Bicycle Map, October 2009.
http://www.ci.springfield.or.us/pubworks/transportation/Bike%20Info/SpringfieldMap.pdf.
Exhibit C-83
Attachment 2-154
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner City of Springfield Page 40
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Revised Existing Conditions Memorandum #2 January 6, 2014
L:\Project\16700\16786\Planning\Task 2\Final\Springfield Existing Conditions Revised Memo #2.doc
Bicycle Activity
Bicycle counts were taken at the intersections where turn movement counts were performed during
the a.m., afternoon, and p.m. peak vehicular periods. The counts were taken on April 22, 2010,
which was a dry day. These volumes are shown in Table 14 by north-south or east-west approaches
for both the a.m., afternoon, and p.m. peak hours. As shown, bike activity in the study area is
relatively low. During peak hour vehicular activity the two intersections with the most bike activity
were Main Street (OR 126)/32nd Street (10 bicycles) and Main Street (OR 126)/48th Street (9
bicycles).
Table 14: Main Street (OR 126) Avenue Bicycle Crossing Volumes
Study Intersection
(Signalized Y/N)
A.M. Peak Hour
Bicycle Crossings
Afternoon Peak Hour
Bicycle Crossings
P.M. Peak Hour
Bicycle Crossings
Major
Street
Minor
Street Total Major
Street
Minor
Street Total Major
Street
Minor
Street Total
Main St/21st St (Y) 2 0 2 6 0 6 7 0 7
Main St/32nd St (Y) 5 2 7 7 2 9 8 2 10
Main St/42nd St (Y) 0 0 0 1 2 3 6 0 6
Main St/48th St (N) 1 0 1 3 0 3 9 0 9
Main St/51st St (N) 1 0 1 1 0 1 4 0 4
Main St/54th St (Y) 0 0 0 4 0 4 5 1 6
Main St/58th St (Y) 0 0 0 2 2 4 3 2 5
Main St/69th St (Y) 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1
Note: All Traffic Data 1-hour counts were taken on Thursday, April 22, 2010.
Transit Service/Future EMX Study
Lane Transit District (LTD) provides public transit to the Eugene-Springfield area. In the study area,
two LTD bus lines run along Main Street (OR 126) and some of the surrounding roadways. These
routes are summarized inTable 15. In addition, Maps 17-19 show the transit routes, bus stops,
transit center locations, and ridership information along the corridor. The two transit centers also
have park-and-ride lots. These stations are located in downtown Springfield (Springfield Station) and
on the south side of Main Street (OR 126) just east of Bob Straub Parkway (Thurston Station).
Table 15: Transit Routes Operating on Main Street (OR 126)
Bus Line Route
Number and Name
Roadways Served Weekday
Headway (min)
Weekday Hours
of Operation
Service Area
11-Thurston Main St, A St, 58th St,
69th St, Thurston Rd
7.5 to 30
depending on
peak periods
5 a.m. to 11 p.m. Between Downtown
Springfield Station and
69th Street
91 – McKenzie Bridge
(Rural Route)
I-105, HWY 126 Only two a.m.
routes and two
p.m. routes
5 a.m. to 6 p.m. Between Eugene Station
and McKenzie River
Ranger Station
Exhibit C-84
Attachment 2-155
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner City of Springfield Page 41
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Revised Existing Conditions Memorandum #2 January 6, 2014
L:\Project\16700\16786\Planning\Task 2\Final\Springfield Existing Conditions Revised Memo #2.doc
Lane Transit District (LTD) reported in 2010 that Route 11 has a daily boarding volume of 4,200
passengers and a daily alighting18 volume of 4,100 passengers. Compared to Route 91 (140 boarding;
148 alighting), Route 11 has the greatest passenger volume in the study area and the second highest
ridership in the LTD system.
LTD recently received a grant to conduct a study on the proposed EMX extension in Springfield
from the Thurston Station on Main Street to Lane Community College. It will include a two-phase
approach that first seeks public and stakeholder input on transportation challenges and successes
along Main Street, and then, if problems are identified, explores improvement options to help
improve the Main-McVay corridor.
Future Travel Conditions
Future travel conditions were forecasted for Main Street (OR Business) as part of current efforts on
the Springfield Transportation System Plan.19 The draft plan indicates that the 42nd Street, OR 126,
and 58th Street intersections on Main Street (OR 126 Business) are forecast to exceed current
capacity. In addition, the corridor segments between 21st and 48th, as well as in the vicinity of the
OR 126 intersection, are anticipated to experience congestion. Traffic congestion will significantly
increase travel times and delay for vehicles using Main Street, particularly during the morning and
evening peak hours.
On-Street Parking
The Main Street (OR 126) study corridor currently has on-street parking only on the section west of
19th Street. Between 10th Street to 19th Street, there are two westbound travel lanes (i.e., one-way), a
westbound bike lane, and on-street parking on the north side of the street only. Then, in downtown,
there is on-street parking on both sides of Main Street and no bike lanes.
The section of Main Street east of 19th Street serves two-way traffic with two travel lanes in each
direction, bike lanes on both sides of the street, and no on-street parking. Because of lack of right-
of-way, higher travel speeds, and other constraints, there are significant challenges to adding on-
street parking to this section of Main Street.
Preliminary Assessment of Opportunities and Constraints
Roadway improvements with an emphasis on multimodal balance will play an important role in
corridor revitalization that attracts new businesses, new jobs and a mix of infill residential
development. With increased levels of automobile congestion expected in the corridor, increased
transportation choices will increase mobility, enhance livability and contribute to reduced household
expenses.
A few potential improvement opportunities and constraints include:
• Main Street (OR 126) is designed to ODOT standards, so it has 14-foot center turn lane and
12-foot travel lanes. ODOT may allow some reductions of travel lanes to allow widening
18 Alighting is another term for de-boarding.
19 2035 Transportation System Plan (Draft), City of Springfield, August 26, 2013.
Exhibit C-85
Attachment 2-156
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner City of Springfield Page 42
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Revised Existing Conditions Memorandum #2 January 6, 2014
L:\Project\16700\16786\Planning\Task 2\Final\Springfield Existing Conditions Revised Memo #2.doc
sidewalks for improved bicycle or transit facilities. However, all recommendations for design
modifications to Main Street will need to conform to ODOT design guidelines and
standards, including the Highway Design Manual (HDM). Any variance would require the
City to request and be granted a Design Exception. If the City of Springfield and ODOT to
a jurisdictional transfer in the future, the HDM standards and Design Exception process
would no longer be a mandatory compliance.
• With more than 4,000 daily boardings and alightings on LTD bus routes along Main Street in
Springfield, the corridor will be a strong candidate for future bus rapid transit and future
transit oriented development.
• City of Springfield received funding to construct six additional enhanced pedestrian crossing
improvements that will improve accessibility for all bikes, pedestrians, and transit. Two
enhanced pedestrian crossings have already been constructed at 44th and 51st Streets.
• Long-term reconstruction of the sidewalk system to fill in the few missing links and to create
a uniform sidewalk design, width and surface conditions.
• Roadway modifications requiring additional right-of-way will be a concern for affected
stakeholders.
Public Infrastructure
The analyses for the Main Street Corridor project area relating to water, sewer and stormwater
conditions is based upon information provided by City staff and review of the Stormwater Facilities
Master Plan (SWFMP) 2008, Wastewater Master Plan (WWMP) 2008 and Staff Analysis of Potential
Nodal Development Areas 2003. Nodal development areas are locations where high-density
residential, commercial and employment uses are encouraged. The analysis included questionnaires
completed by service providers to ascertain limitations of public facilities. City policy is for new
development to pay for the cost of, stormwater facilities and wastewater facilities needed to serve
the development. The Springfield Utility Board (SUB) determines policies and rate structures for
providing water service to new development. Extra capacity facilities required to meet the standards
of the Master Plans are paid for from accumulated revenue of the System Development Charge
Fund. User fees pay for the cost of maintaining and improving the existing system.
Stormwater Facilities
In 2003, the City began a citywide evaluation of stormwater infrastructure needs, concluding with
the 2008 SWFMP. The Main Street corridor is generally flat and is part of the Upper Willamette
Drainage Basin. The corridor has historically has been drained through network pipes and open
channels into Willamette or McKenzie Rivers. Most of that system was constructed in the 1960s and
was primarily designed to address flooding issues. Flooding was identified as occurring when any
water came up into the street.
The SWMFP addresses both flooding and water quality issues, integrating both as part of a multi-
objective management plan. A 2013 update of the City’s Engineering Design Standards and
Procedures Manual revised standards for stormwater quality facilities and references Portland’s
Exhibit C-86
Attachment 2-157
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner City of Springfield Page 43
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Revised Existing Conditions Memorandum #2 January 6, 2014
L:\Project\16700\16786\Planning\Task 2\Final\Springfield Existing Conditions Revised Memo #2.doc
Stormwater Manual (see Section 3.01). A new section adds submittal requirements and design
criteria for managing stormwater using Low Impact Design Approaches (LIDA). The SWMFP also
identifies a number of high priority CIP projects for flood control within or adjacent to the study
area including:
• Parallel pipe system to improve flood control along South A Street
• Parallel pipe system to improve flood control south of Main Street near 59th Street
• Parallel pipe system to improve flood control south of Main Street near 67th Street
• Improve open channel drainage north of Main Street near 69th Street
Flood control projects were modified to include water quality measures to extent practicable.
Additional priority water quality CIP projects within or adjacent to the study area include:
• 72nd Street channel
• 69th Street channel
According to the 2003 Staff Analysis of Potential Nodal Development Area, existing stormwater
facilities will be adequate for short-term infill. Long-term infill capacity along for the Main Street
nodes was expected to be improved with completion of the Higher Priority and Lower Priority CIP
projects identified in the SWFMP.
Wastewater Facilities
The City of Springfield operates a pipeline and pumping system for wastewater conveyance. The
system discharges to a regional collection and treatment system owned by the Metropolitan
Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC). DEQ has issued a National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permit for Springfield, Eugene and the MWMC specifying condition
under which treated wastewater can be discharged to the Willamette River. No untreated wastewater
may be discharged.
The existing system serves all of the property in the Main Street Corridor study area. Based on
analysis from the Wastewater Management Plan (WWMP) of 2008, sanitary sewer overflows are
possible given the existing system, particularly in the downtown and Thurston areas. This could
include some locations in the study area along the Main Street trunk line and pumping stations
between 10th Street and 21st Street. Major upgrades will be required in the future. The upgrades are
listed and described in WWMP, including gravity replacement pipes, parallel pipes, diversions and
pump stations. The improvements must also comply with the MWMC’s Wet Weather Flow
Management Plan (WWFMP). That plan has indentified cost-effective and politically feasible
solutions for managing excessive wet weather wastewater flows.
The WWMP used project growth estimates and current zoning to include future land uses in the
analysis of deficiencies and needed improvements. In order identify the relative contribution to
project costs according to land use conditions; peak flows were determined for both existing and
future conditions for each project. Based on those peak flows a percentage of flow was calculated as
a basis for SDC allocations.
Exhibit C-87
Attachment 2-158
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner City of Springfield Page 44
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Revised Existing Conditions Memorandum #2 January 6, 2014
L:\Project\16700\16786\Planning\Task 2\Final\Springfield Existing Conditions Revised Memo #2.doc
Water Service
Springfield Utility Board (SUB) provides potable water service for the Main Street Corridor. The
main water line is located on the north side of Main Street running E-W, with services to customers
on the south side of Main Street running underneath the street. These service lines were last replaced
in 1966 when Main Street was widened. The waterline east of 32nd Street was installed in 1951 and
the waterline from 19th Street to 32nd Street is only slightly newer. Capacity due to pipe size and the
age of pipes may become an issue for future redevelopment. Good planning with other Main Street
projects will be critical since these upgrades will be major infrastructure projects over multiple years
and will impact traffic on Main Street during construction.
Preliminary Assessment of Opportunities and Constraints
A prioritized list of stormwater projects to reduce flooding has already been identified by the City,
along with a commitment to integrate more Green Street practices for stormwater treatment within
the roadway. Green Streets are an alternative to conventional street drainage systems designed to
quickly collect stormwater and put it ‘out of sight and out of mind’ beneath our community streets.
Historically, the message of conventional stormwater management practices has been that rain water
is waste water. A more sustainable approach is to design for a better balance between urban
development and natural hydrological processes that will result in a healthy watershed. By more
closely mimicking the natural hydrology of a particular site, Green Streets can help reduce the
impact of urban development. Green Streets may be a significant new opportunity to promote a
vision of sustainable growth for the City of Springfield. A significant opportunity may be using
redevelopment to introduce Green Streets as a defining characteristic of Main Street, particularly in
the Activity Node areas.
Low Impact Development Approaches (LIDA) could be part of future property redevelopment in
the Main Street corridor. LIDA strategies mimic natural hydrology and address some of the
stormwater problems resulting from traditional development methods that largely ignore
predevelopment hydrology and rainwater infiltration and runoff conditions. Typical LID practices
for site development include connected landscape planting areas, bioretention swales in parking
areas and landscape buffer areas, pervious paving, flow-through planters for building runoff and
‘green roofs’ for buildings. These approaches have been shown to improve water quality of runoff,
slow stormwater peak flow rates and discharge velocities and reduce flooding.
Green Streets and LIDA can also integrate goals of livability and multimodal transportation choices
and help communities meet State Land Use Goals 5, 6 and 7, while also meeting EPA requirements.
Shared objectives include:
Capture the raindrop where it falls. Managing stormwater at the source (i.e., where the rain drop
falls) is an effort to imitate the hydrologic cycle of pre-developed conditions. This is done through
small facilities that are well distributed throughout the street right-of-way.
Let nature do its work. These facilities treat stormwater and promote infiltration into the native
soils. Keeping stormwater on the surface and out of a more conventional pipe system allows nature
do its work. Plants and amended soils found in Green Street facilities will absorb, slow, and filter
runoff.
Exhibit C-88
Attachment 2-159
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner City of Springfield Page 45
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Revised Existing Conditions Memorandum #2 January 6, 2014
L:\Project\16700\16786\Planning\Task 2\Final\Springfield Existing Conditions Revised Memo #2.doc
Design stormwater facilities that are simple. Simple facilities are usually the most cost-effective
and will enhance the aesthetics of the streetscape or the development. They can be incorporated into
sidewalks, landscaped areas, small plazas and parking areas. The proper use of these techniques can
reduce the size and costs of conventional stormwater infrastructure needed for new or retrofit
roadway drainage projects.
LIDA Costs: Costs are very site specific, and will depend on characteristics of the site and creativity
of the designers. However, case studies and pilot programs have shown significant cost reductions
over conventional approaches to infrastructure associated with site development, stormwater fees
and maintenance. Savings can enable builders and developers to add aesthetic and value-enhancing
features to the property or even recover more developable space. Commonly seen cost benefits
include:
• Multifunctionality such landscape design features that also act at stormwater management
features. This creates functional open space without any loss of developable area.
• Lower lifetime costs which include operation, repair, maintenance and decommissioning at
the end of their lifecycle or current use of the site.
• Reduced off-site costs since LIDA addressed stormwater at its source, reducing the likely
costs of sewer and outfall systems.
• Additional environmental and social benefits which may not be typically measure in cash
but have environmental and community benefits.
Exhibit C-89
Attachment 2-160
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner City of Springfield Page 46
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Revised Existing Conditions Memorandum #2 January 6, 2014
L:\Project\16700\16786\Planning\Task 2\Final\Springfield Existing Conditions Revised Memo #2.doc
Appendix A Land Use Classifications
Exhibit C-90
Attachment 2-161
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner City of Springfield Page 47
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Revised Existing Conditions Memorandum #2 January 6, 2014
L:\Project\16700\16786\Planning\Task 2\Final\Springfield Existing Conditions Revised Memo #2.doc
Primary Land Use Classification
Statistical Class Land Use Classification
Church Church
Fire Station Government
Fitness Center Government
Govt Bldgs (Not Post Office) Government
Post Office Government
Public Utility (City Well, Etc Government
School Government
Chemical, Resins & Related Industrial
Class C Warehouse (Obsolete) Industrial
Class D Warehouse (Obsolete) Industrial
Dry Kilns Industrial
Equipment Building Industrial
Industrial Building Industrial
Industrial Flex Industrial
Mini Warehouse Industrial
Plywood Plants Industrial
Truck & Heavy Equipment Repair Industrial
Warehouse, Distribution Industrial
Warehouse, Storage Industrial
Apartment Multifamily
Class 3 Condo Or Townhouse Multifamily
Class 3 Duplex Multifamily
Class 3 Fourplex Multifamily
Class 3 Tandem Plex Multifamily
Class 3 Triplex Multifamily
Class 3 Unclassified, <5 Units Multifamily
Class 4 Duplex Multifamily
Class 4 Fourplex Multifamily
Class 4 Triplex Multifamily
Independent Living Facilities Multifamily
Special Care, Nrsng/Retirement Multifamily
Medical Building & Clinics Office
Office - One To Three Story Office
Old House Conversion To Office Office
Small Office Office
Non-Living Unit - Farm Variety Open Space / Agriculture
Exhibit C-91
Attachment 2-162
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner City of Springfield Page 48
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Revised Existing Conditions Memorandum #2 January 6, 2014
L:\Project\16700\16786\Planning\Task 2\Final\Springfield Existing Conditions Revised Memo #2.doc
Primary Land Use Classification, Continued
Statistical Class Land Use Classification
Auto (Service Station)Retail
Auto & Truck Dealers (New)Retail
Auto Repair Shop Retail
Bank Retail
Barber/Beauty Shop Retail
Billboards/Outdoor Ads Retail
Bowling Alley Retail
Car Wash Retail
Coffee Kiosk, Coffee Retail Retail
Convenience Store With Gas Retail
Convenience Store, No Gas Retail
Day Care Retail
Laundromat Retail
Lot Sales, Used Auto/Truck, Ms Retail
Lumber Yard Retail
Motel Or Motor Lodge Retail
Other Food Store Retail
Quick Lube Retail
Restaurant (Dining)Retail
Restaurant (Fast Food)Retail
Retail, Multi Tenant Retail
Retail, Single Tenant Retail
Shop With Yard Retail
Shopping Center (Neighborhood) Retail
Store With Shop Retail
Super Food Store Retail
Tavern Retail
Theater Retail
Accessory Structure(S)Single-family
Class 1 Single Family Dwelling Single-family
Class 2 Single Family Dwelling Single-family
Class 3 Single Family Dwelling Single-family
Class 4 Single Family Dwelling Single-family
Class 5 Single Family Dwelling Single-family
Class 6 Single Family Dwelling Single-family
Mobile Home Park Single-family
Ms On Real Property Single-family
Parking Lot With Other Bldg Vacant
No Data Use Secondary Classification
Obsolete - (Do Not Use)Use Secondary Classification
Exhibit C-92
Attachment 2-163
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner City of Springfield Page 49
David Helton, TGM Grant Manager – ODOT
Revised Existing Conditions Memorandum #2 January 6, 2014
L:\Project\16700\16786\Planning\Task 2\Final\Springfield Existing Conditions Revised Memo #2.doc
Secondary Land Use Classification (used when Statistical Class is “Obsolete, Do Not Use”
or No Data).
Property Class Land Use Classification
Commercial, Improved Commercial (Unknown Type)
Commercial, Industrial Zone, Improved Commercial (Unknown Type)
Commercial, Improved Commercial (Unknown Type)
Industrial, Improved Industrial
Miscellaneous, Industrial, Centrally Assessed Industrial
Miscellaneous, Industrial, Improvement Only Industrial
Multi-Family, Commercial Zone, Improved Multifamily
Multi-Family, Improved Multifamily
Forest, Unzoned Farm Land, Vacant Open Space / Agriculture
Residential, Manufactured Structure Single-family
Commercial, Vacant Vacant
Industrial, Vacant Vacant
Miscellaneous, Commercial, Unbuildable Vacant
Miscellaneous, Industrial, Unbuildable Vacant
Miscellaneous, Residential, Unbuildable Vacant
Multi-Family, Vacant Vacant
Residential, Potential Development, Vacant Vacant
Residential, Vacant Vacant
Exhibit C-93
Attachment 2-164
Exhibit C-94
Attachment 2-165
48th Street10th Street69th StreetBob S
t
raub
Parkway58th Street28th Street42nd Street14th Street5th StreetLegend
Main Street Study Boundary
City Limits
Date: 12/17/2013
Map 1
0 2,400 4,8001,200
Feet
±
Main Street Corridor Vision Plan
O u r M a i n S t r e e t
Project Study Area
Exhibit C-95
Attachment 2-166
Matchline1Downtown Node
Transit Center
Retail Hot Spot
Railroad Oriented Industry
Legend
Activity Nodes
Segment 1 (Close inCommercial)
Segment 2 (Mid SpringfieldCommercial & Residential)
Segment 3 (East MainResidential)
Railroad Oriented Industry
Downtown Node*
Retail Hot Spot*
Transit Center
Major Road
Minor Road
Main Street Study Boundary
Date: 12/5/2013
Map 2
0 800 1,600400
Feet
±
Main Street Corridor Vision Plan
O u r M a i n S t r e e t
Segment 1
Mi
l
l
S
t
.8th St.10th St.5th St.12th St.14th St.16th St.19th St.21st St.28th St.*Identified in the 2010 Downtown District Urban Design Plan
Exhibit C-96
Attachment 2-167
MatchlineMatchline2
Legend
Activity Nodes
Segment 1 (Close inCommercial)
Segment 2 (Mid SpringfieldCommercial & Residential)
Segment 3 (East MainResidential)
Railroad Oriented Industry
Downtown Node*
Retail Hot Spot*
Transit Center
Major Road
Minor Road
Main Street Study Boundary
Date: 12/5/2013
Map 3
0 800 1,600400
Feet
±
Main Street Corridor Vision Plan
O u r M a i n S t r e e t
Segment 2a
42nd St.39th St.36th St.33rd St.30th St.28th St.*Identified in the 2010 Downtown District Urban Design Plan
Exhibit C-97
Attachment 2-168
MatchlineMatchline2 Potential Interchange Area
Legend
Activity Nodes
Segment 1 (Close inCommercial)
Segment 2 (Mid SpringfieldCommercial & Residential)
Segment 3 (East MainResidential)
Railroad Oriented Industry
Downtown Node*
Retail Hot Spot*
Transit Center
Major Road
Minor Road
Main Street Study Boundary
Date: 12/5/2013
Map 4
0 800 1,600400
Feet
±
Main Street Corridor Vision Plan
O u r M a i n S t r e e t
Segment 2b
54th St.51st St.48th St.*Identified in the 2010 Downtown District Urban Design PlanBob S
t
raub
Pkwy58th St.Exhibit C-98
Attachment 2-169
Matchline3Potential Interchange Area
Legend
Activity Nodes
Segment 1 (Close inCommercial)
Segment 2 (Mid SpringfieldCommercial & Residential)
Segment 3 (East MainResidential)
Railroad Oriented Industry
Downtown Node*
Retail Hot Spot*
Transit Center
Major Road
Minor Road
Main Street Study Boundary
Date: 12/5/2013
Map 5
0 800 1,600400
Feet
±
Main Street Corridor Vision Plan
O u r M a i n S t r e e t
Segment 3
69th St.66th St.58th St.54th St.Bob S
t
raub
Pkwy
*Identified in the 2010 Downtown District Urban Design Plan
Exhibit C-99
Attachment 2-170
Main St
Main St
S A St
RetailHot Spot
TransitCenter
DowntownNode
RailroadOrientedIndustry
1
MatchlineS 17th StS28thStSBStS5thSt4th StN A St
S15thStS 8th StA St
S 9th StS 17th PlS10thStS 11th StS 18th StS 19th StS 20th St17th StAster St S 21st StS14thStS 22nd StS16thStD St
C St
Mil
l
St26th St23rd St24th St7th St6th St5th St25th St22nd St8th St9th StS A St
S F St20th St19th St18th St28th St12th St16th StPioneerPky14th St10th St21st
S
t
S
2
n
d
S
t
Booth KellyRd
Land Use Categories
Single Family
Multifamily
Retail
Office
Commercial (Unknown Type)
Industrial
Government
Church
Open Space / Agriculture
Vacant
Publicly owned
Main Street Study Areas
Activity Node
Segment 1 (Close in Commercial)
Segment 2 (Mid SpringfieldCommercial & Residential)
Railroad Oriented Industry
Downtown Node*
Retail Hot Spot*
Transit Center
Major Road
Minor Road
Main Street Study Boundary
Date: 12/10/2013
0 800 1,600400
Feet
±
Main Street Corridor Vision Plan
O u r M a i n S t r e e t
Segment 1-Land Use PatternsThese existing uses do not necessarilyreflect current zoning or comprehensiveplan designations.
Map 6
*Identified in the 2010 DowntownDistrict Urban Design Plan
Exhibit C-100
Attachment 2-171
Main StMain StMain StMain St 2
MatchlineMatchline38th St37th
St36th St35th StS28thStBSt
SmithL
oopS35thSt43rdPl
S E Ct S 41st PlSmith Way
Oregon Ave S 47th StS 46th StD St
C St
44th StAster St34th StS 38th StS 44th StS42ndPlS 34th St26th St23rd St24th St25th St41stStA St
S43rdStS F St S 40th St38thPlVirginia Ave 40thSt42nd St28th St39th StS 37th StS 41stSt32nd St30th St33rdSt
S 32nd StS42ndSt
CommercialAve
Booth Kelly Rd
Land Use Categories
Single Family
Multifamily
Retail
Office
Commercial (Unknown Type)
Industrial
Government
Church
Open Space / Agriculture
Vacant
Publicly owned
Main Street Study Areas
Activity Node
Segment 1 (Close in Commercial)
Segment 2 (Mid SpringfieldCommercial & Residential)
Railroad Oriented Industry
Major Road
Minor Road
Main Street Study Boundary
Date: 12/10/2013
0 800 1,600400
Feet
±
Main Street Corridor Vision Plan
O u r M a i n S t r e e t
Segment 2a-Land Use Patterns
These existing uses do not necessarilyreflect current zoning or comprehensiveplan designations.
Map 7
Exhibit C-101
Attachment 2-172
Main St
Bob S
t
raub
Pa
rkway
Main StMain St PotentialInterchangeArea2
MatchlineMatchlineS49thPl
S 52nd StSmithL
oopC St
60th PlB St43rdPl
Leota St
S57thPlS 47th StS 46th St57th St56thStS 59th St44th StChapmanLnS 44th StS 50th PlS42ndPlAster St
S 51st PlS58thPl49th StA St 55th StS43rdStS52ndP
l S53rdStS57thStS54thSt48thStB
ooth
K
ellyRd 54th St51 stSt12658thSt
Daisy St
Land Use Categories
Single Family
Multifamily
Retail
Office
Commercial (Unknown Type)
Industrial
Government
Church
Open Space / Agriculture
Vacant
Publicly owned
Main Street Study Areas
Activity Node
Segment 2 (Mid SpringfieldCommercial & Residential)
Segment 3 (East Main Residential)
Major Road
Minor Road
Main Street Study Boundary
Date: 12/10/2013
0 800 1,600400
Feet
±
Main Street Corridor Vision Plan
O u r M a i n S t r e e t
Segment 2b-Land Use Patterns
These existing uses do not necessarilyreflect current zoning or comprehensiveplan designations.
Map 8
Exhibit C-102
Attachment 2-173
Main St
Main St
Bob S
t
raub
Pa
rkway
PotentialInterchangeArea 3
MatchlineS 52nd StS63rdSt60th Pl64th PlLeota St
62nd PlS57thPl69th Pl57th St56thStS 59th StChapmanLn65th PlA St
Aster St
S 69th Pl68th StS68thPlS58thPl6
5t
hSt55th StS52ndP
l S53rdStS57thStS54thStB St66th St54th StS67thSt58thSt69th StDaisy St
126
Land Use Categories
Single Family
Multifamily
Retail
Office
Commercial (Unknown Type)
Industrial
Government
Church
Open Space / Agriculture
Vacant
Publicly owned
Main Street Study Areas
Activity Node
Segment 2 (Mid SpringfieldCommercial & Residential)
Segment 3 (East Main Residential)
Major Road
Minor Road
Main Street Study Boundary
Date: 12/10/2013
0 800 1,600400
Feet
±
Main Street Corridor Vision Plan
O u r M a i n S t r e e t
Segment 3-Land Use Patterns
These existing uses do not necessarilyreflect current zoning or comprehensiveplan designations.
Map 9
Exhibit C-103
Attachment 2-174
Main StMain St
Main St
S A StS A St
RetailHot Spot
TransitCenter
DowntownNode
RailroadOrientedIndustry
Matchline4th StN A St
S 8th StS 5th StS 9th StS 17th PlS10thStS 11th StS 17th StS 18th StS 19th StS 20th StS 15th St17th StAster St S 21st StS14thStSBSt S 22nd StS16thStD St
C St
Mil
l
St26th St23rd St24th St7th St6th St5th St25th St22nd St8th St9th StS A St
A St
S F St20th St19th St18th St28th St12th St16th StPioneerPky14th St10th St21st
S
t
S28thStS
2
n
d
S
t
Booth KellyRd
I/L Ratio (buildingvalue/land value)
0.00
0.01 - 0.50
0.51 - 1.00
1.01 - 2.00
Greater than 2
Land value is $0, bldg value is > $0
Main Street Study Areas
Activity Node
Segment 1 (Close in Commercial)
Segment 2 (Mid SpringfieldCommercial & Residential)
Railroad Oriented Industry
Downtown Node*
Retail Hot Spot*
Transit Center
Major Road
Minor Road
Main Street Study Boundary
Date: 12/10/2013
0 800 1,600400
Feet
±
Main Street Corridor Vision Plan
O u r M a i n S t r e e t
Segment 1-Improvement to Land Value
Map 10
*Identified in the 2010 DowntownDistrict Urban Design Plan
Exhibit C-104
Attachment 2-175
Main St Main St
Main St2
MatchlineMatchlineBSt
43r
d
P
l
S E Ct S 41st PlSmith Way
Oregon Ave S 47th StS 46th StD St
C St
44th StAster St34th StS 38th StS 44th StS42ndPlS 34th St26th St23rd St24th St25th St41stStA St
S43rdStS F St S 40th St38thPl35th StVirginia Ave 40thSt42nd St28th St38th St39th St37th
StS 37th StS 41stSt32nd St30th St33rdSt
36th StS 32nd StS28thStS42ndSt
CommercialAve
Booth Kelly Rd
I/L Ratio (buildingvalue/land value)
0.00
0.01 - 0.50
0.51 - 1.00
1.01 - 2.00
Greater than 2
Land value is $0, bldg value is > $0
Main Street Study Areas
Activity Node
Segment 1 (Close in Commercial)
Segment 2 (Mid SpringfieldCommercial & Residential)
Railroad Oriented Industry
Major Road
Minor Road
Main Street Study Boundary
Date: 12/10/2013
0 800 1,600400
Feet
±
Main Street Corridor Vision Plan
O u r M a i n S t r e e t
Segment 2a-Improvement to Land Value
Map 11
Exhibit C-105
Attachment 2-176
Main St Main St Main St
Bob S
t
raub
Pkwy
PotentialInterchangeArea2
MatchlineMatchlineC St
60th PlB St
43r
d
P
l
Leota St
S57thPlS49thPlS 47th StS 46th St57th St56thStS 59th St44th StChapmanLnS 44th StS 50th PlS42ndPlAster St
S 51st PlS58thPl49th StA St 55th StS43rdStS 52nd StS52ndP
l S53rdStS57thStS54thSt48thStB
ooth
K
ellyRd 54th St51 stSt58thStDaisy St
126
I/L Ratio (buildingvalue/land value)
0.00
0.01 - 0.50
0.51 - 1.00
1.01 - 2.00
Greater than 2
Land value is $0, bldg value is > $0
Main Street Study Areas
Activity Node
Segment 2 (Mid SpringfieldCommercial & Residential)
Segment 3 (East Main Residential)
Major Road
Minor Road
Main Street Study Boundary
Date: 12/10/2013
0 800 1,600400
Feet
±
Main Street Corridor Vision Plan
O u r M a i n S t r e e t
Segment 2b-Improvement to Land Value
Map 12
Exhibit C-106
Attachment 2-177
Main St Main St
Bob S
t
raub
P
kwy
PotentialInterchangeArea 3
Matchline60th Pl64th PlLeota St
62nd PlS57thPl69th Pl57th St56thStS 59th StChapmanLn65th PlAster St
S 69th Pl68th StS68thPlS58thPl6
5t
hStA St 55th StS 52nd StS52ndP
l S53rdStS57thStS54thStB St66th St54th StS67thSt58thSt69th StDaisy St
126
I/L Ratio (buildingvalue/land value)
0.00
0.01 - 0.50
0.51 - 1.00
1.01 - 2.00
Greater than 2
Land value is $0, bldg value is > $0
Main Street Study Areas
Activity Node
Segment 2 (Mid SpringfieldCommercial & Residential)
Segment 3 (East Main Residential)
Major Road
Minor Road
Main Street Study Boundary
Date: 12/10/2013
0 800 1,600400
Feet
±
Main Street Corridor Vision Plan
O u r M a i n S t r e e t
Segment 3-Improvement to Land Value
Map 13
Exhibit C-107
Attachment 2-178
4 (12) [20] 2 (8) [24] 2 (5) [7] Raised Median
Traffic Signal
Approximate Location of 500-foot
Pedestrian Count Segment
Inactive Traffic Signal
Highest Hourly Pedestrian
Volumes During Peak Motor
Vehicle Periods (2010)
AM (Afternoon 2-4pm) [PM]
Pedestrian Count Location with
Marked Crossing
Pedestrian Count Location with
Unmarked Crossing
Exhibit C-108
Attachment 2-179
0 (0) [2] 4 (23) [7] 5 (28) [19] 4 (26) [21] 10 (17) [8] 0 (1) [1] 16 (6) [9] 5 (15) [27] 34 (22) [33] 10 (6) [12] 3 (5) [10] Raised Median
Traffic Signal
Approximate Location of 500-foot
Pedestrian Count Segment
Inactive Traffic Signal
Highest Hourly Pedestrian
Volumes During Peak Motor
Vehicle Periods (2010)
AM (Afternoon 2-4pm) [PM]
Pedestrian Count Location with
Marked Crossing
Pedestrian Count Location with
Unmarked Crossing
Exhibit C-109
Attachment 2-180
6 (7) [11] 10 (17) [13] 17 (46) [18] 4 (25) [26] 7 (36) [25] 0 (11) [14] 6 (5) [2] 8 (16) [25] 11 (11) [9] 6 (7) [3] 1 (9) [3] 4 (9) [5] Raised Median
Traffic Signal
Approximate Location of 500-foot
Pedestrian Count Segment
Inactive Traffic Signal
Highest Hourly Pedestrian
Volumes During Peak Motor
Vehicle Periods (2010)
AM (Afternoon 2-4pm) [PM]
Pedestrian Count Location with
Marked Crossing
Pedestrian Count Location with
Unmarked Crossing
Exhibit C-110
Attachment 2-181
Exhibit C-111
Attachment 2-182
Exhibit C-112
Attachment 2-183
Exhibit C-113
Attachment 2-184
Attachment 2-185
SPRINGFIELD MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN
COMMUNITY OUTREACH SUMMARY
January, 2015
[add Our Main Street banner at the bottom of the page]
Exhibit D-1
Attachment 2-186
Community Outreach
Community outreach has been essential to development of Main Street Corridor Vision Plan. The
project team was committed to a public dialogue that was:
• Meaningful: provide timely information.
• Accountable: respond to input.
• Inclusive: communicate outside of structured meetings.
• Transparent: make decisions public; post materials on the website.
• Realistic: inform about constraints and objectives.
• Outcome-oriented: engage the public to maximize success.
Community outreach occurred between October 2013 and October 2014. City staff and Consultant
team connected with over 500 individuals to share the objectives of the project and to ask about
their vision for the future of Main Street, including a wide range of stakeholders, residents and
businesses owners along the corridor. Residents, youth, and seniors contacted at supermarkets,
schools, recreation facilities, and social service agencies. A goal was also to include a growing sector
of our population: Latino first time meeting-goers. The City and Consultant team worked with local
organizations and individuals to personally invite people to events and provided Spanish translation.
Methods of engaging the community included focus groups, community forums, street corner
outreach, individual visits to area businesses, website, email and phone calls. Close collaboration
with other projects looking at and thinking about the future of Main Street resulted in an umbrella
website (“Our Main Street”), coordination of email news updates, and a Main Street Managers
meeting to share public involvement goals and activities. Specific activities included:
• Project website.
• Interested parties list and email updates.
• Presentations to civic organizations, public committees and boards.
• Direct outreach at area stores to people who don’t attend meetings.
• Youth outreach at schools and youth recreation programs.
• Door-door on-site business outreach.
• Spanish outreach to Latino corridor businesses.
• Stakeholder meetings.
• Visioning workshop.
• Large Community Forums.
• Media and Public Comments.
Exhibit D-2
Attachment 2-187
Participation in stakeholder meetings, community workshops and community events was robust.
Participation continued to grow at each meeting, common themes emerged and ideas for previous
events were reinforced a subsequent events. Meetings and events included:
• Focus groups: 27 attendees.
• Visioning workshop: 30 attended.
• Project Invitation Postcard mailed to approximately 3000 residents, businesses, and property
owners within the Study Area.
• Project updates: 9 updates e-mailed to over 500 individuals.
• Public meeting #1: December 2013 to brainstorm “What is most important to you about Main
Street.” 16 attendees (winter snow storm).
• Public meeting #2: March 2014: Draft Visions and Goals - 50 attendees.
• Public meeting #3: June 2014: Draft Implementation Strategies - 45 attendees.
• Kiwanis and Lions Club: 27 attendees.
• Rotary Club: 70 attendees.
• Youth: Willamalane After-School Club and Thurston Leadership Class: 56 youth.
• Latino community: Invitation shared in person at Downtown Languages and LCC ESL
programs: 80 people.
• Hand-delivered meeting invitation to Main Street businesses: 86 employees/owners.
• Display outreach in the corridor (11 locations): approximately 320 conversations with the public.
• 10+ Organizations forwarded invitation to their members, including Rotary, Chamber of
Commerce, NEDCO, Emerald Arts Center, LTD Board, EmX Steering Committee, and Main-
McVay Stakeholder Advisory Committee, City Elected Officials, Commissions and Committees:
City Council, Planning Commission, Historic Commission, Development Advisory, Downtown
Citizen Advisory, Springfield Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory.
General themes expressed by the public throughout the project include: safety, beautification,
community building, walking, bicycling, parking, access to businesses, transit, place making,
supporting businesses, and addressing crime. Specific recommendations from the final community
workshop include:
Public Realm
• Remember history of the area, maintain “old town flavor.”
• Make the area “human scale,” family friendly.
• Take what is working downtown and “move it out.”
• Support what exists now: don’t displace people or businesses.
• LIGHTING – this was mentioned multiple times!
• Beautify, make it inviting: trees, landscaping, new paint.
• Address crime and increase safety.
Exhibit D-3
Attachment 2-188
• Stormwater treatment opportunities.
• Economic viability.
• Collaborate with Willamalane.
Business and Housing
• Expand housing choices, support affordable housing.
• Flexibility in zoning, signage.
• Flexibility in access management (ODOT).
• Natural, local foods market.
• Support existing properties, businesses!
• Mix housing, business, industry, art.
• Support downtown living.
Transportation
• Concern about decreasing vehicle speeds, AND support for slowing traffic.
• Better signage.
• Increase biking and walking safety Recognize impacts on property owners of broadening the
street.
• Don’t do bulb-outs.
• Transit ideas: Improve shelters and services, helps spur development, walking and biking.
• Recognize impacts of transit stop distance, locations, EmX buses.
• Community Outreach.
Community comments have been fully summarized on the following pages.
Exhibit D-4
Attachment 2-189
!1!
!
MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN
PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT SUMMARY
November-December 2013
Introduction
The City of Springfield is engaging the community in a planning process to envision a
preferred future for Main Street between Downtown and Thurston. Community members
are coming together to share their visions and views about how they experience Main
Street today and what changes in land use and transportation they’d like to see. Through
their participation in a variety of events and activities including a series of small and
large group conversations, one-to–one direct outreach and e-communications through
the project website, citizens are providing important input into the development of the
Main Street Corridor Vision Plan - a set of recommendations that will inform the City's
land use policy and transportation system planning over the next several years for the
lands along the Corridor.
Community Outreach Summary
The City of Springfield is conducting focused outreach to residents, property owners,
business owners, community leaders, elected officials, and corridor users to ensure
broad and representative public involvement in the Vision Plan. Because it can be
challenging to take the time to attend public meetings, much of the project outreach is
pro-active: calling a business owner on the phone, or standing in front of a store,
speaking with Springfield residents.
To date, the City has hosted four meetings to introduce the project to residents. Groups
were asked two key questions about Main Street: How does the corridor work for you
now? And what is your vision for the future? Each meeting included a different set of
individuals, and the summary of each meeting is included in this report:
1. November 19, 2013 Stakeholder Conversation at 8:00 am included business owners
and property owners in the Main Street Corridor, as well as some other community
members.
2. November 19, 2013 Stakeholder Conversation at 6:00 pm included a diverse set of
individuals from organizations such as Springfield School District, Lions, Shelter
Care, Chamber of Commerce, Springfield Utility Board, City Club, Emerald Arts
Center.
3. November 21, 2013 Youth Discussion at Willamalane, including Middle School and
High School students in Springfield.
4. December 11, 2013 Public Meeting: “Share Your Ideas” included residents, property
owners, and community leaders.
Exhibit D-5
Attachment 2-190
!2!
What did we hear?
Key themes emerging from the conversations with community members:
• Use multiple strategies to address differences between areas in the 7 mile Corridor
• Create focus areas where the City supports denser development
• Create identities between areas within the corridor
• Improve safety – this was a very consistent theme in the youth discussion
• Maintain business access, parking, visibility, and vitality along the corridor
• Maintain traffic volumes
• Enhance connections between key destinations, such as McKenzie River, Glenwood,
mountains, etc.
• Recognize and support existing industry and jobs in the corridor
• Improve the experience for pedestrians and bicycles using the corridor, such as
lighting
• Improve the look and feel of the corridor: clean it up!
• Address the drug and crime issues
• Expand and improve bus service
• Address congestion and stop-and-go traffic
• Thoroughfare or destination?
• Create incentives for middle and upper income housing
• Support local and existing businesses, remove barriers to development
• Share information about community events via banners, etc.
Key words:
• Place making
• Prosperity
• Realistic, feasible, sensible
• Community building
• Place to ride a bike, walk and find businesses
• Commerce, business, transportation.
• Opportunity
• Safety
• Multi-use
• Beautification
• Community enrichment
• Unique mix that works well
• Business access
Summary of Methods to Publicize Project and Meetings
Invitation Postcard mailed to approximately 3000 residents, businesses, and property
owners within the Study Area.
Invitation e-mailed to approximately 300 individuals
Organization Partners for Newsletters, Calendars and Announcements
Chamber of Commerce: Jeff Thompson posted on website; handed out fliers to
Chamber Committees and City Club
Emerald Arts Center: Included invitation in Saturday email blast
Rotary Club: Invitation was announced at weekly meeting
Exhibit D-6
Attachment 2-191
!3!
Lions Club: Invitation was announced at weekly meeting
Planning Commission: Received e-mail invite
City Club: Forwarded e-invite to email list, handed out flyers at meeting.
NEDCO: Sent e-invite to 1,000-person list; added to Facebook page.
E-invites sent to: Saint Vincent de Paul, Willamalane, Springfield High School, and
Thurston High School
General Outreach with Display Board
Bi-Mart (East Main)
Albertsons (East Main)
Erika’s Meat Market
Grocery Outlet
LTD Station Springfield Downtown
Downtown Languages: Announced in classes
LCC ESL Classes: Announced in classes
Saint Vincent de Paul, The Royal Building
Bi-lingual outreach to Latino businesses to give invitation included: El Rey, El Pique,
Taqueria El Trenecito, Memos Mexican Restaurant, La Mixteca Market.
Media
Media Advisory sent by City on December 4
Register Guard Community Calendar
KUGN Radio Interview with Niel Laudati
Article in Register Guard
Stakeholder Conversations
November 19, 2013 at 8:30 am & 6:00 pm at Springfield City Hall
Purpose
Meet with community members from an array of perspectives and experiences to
introduce Our Main Street projects, and the Main Street Vision Plan in particular, and
request participation. In addition, stakeholders contribute practical feedback on existing
conditions, opportunities and constraints, which will guide the development of a long-
term plan for Main Street.
!
Presenters
Linda Pauly, City of Springfield, City Project Manager
Tom Litster, Otak, Consultant Project Manager
Julie Fischer, Cogito, Public Involvement
!
Attendees
Individuals from a variety of community organizations, businesses, residents, corridor
users, and property owners in Springfield, including: Springfield School District, Lions,
Shelter Care, Chamber of Commerce, Springfield Utility Board, City Club, Emerald Arts
Center. Nine individuals attended the morning session, and over twenty individuals
attended the evening session.
Agenda
Exhibit D-7
Attachment 2-192
!4!
• Our Main Street and the Vision Plan
• Group Introductions
• Project Timeline and Major Tasks
• Needs, Opportunities and Constraints
• Questions & Discussion
• Thank You & Help Promote December 11th Community Meeting
Presentation: Project Timeline and Major Tasks
Needs, Opportunities and Constraints
Tom Litster of Otak introduced the project and shared major milestones and goals. Visit
the website at http://ourmainstreetspringfield.org/main-street-corridor-vision-plan/ for key
project information.
Conversation Notes
The majority of the meeting was spent listening to views, concerns, hopes, ideas, and
answering questions about the project. Following is a summary of comments from both
stakeholder sessions on November 19. Italics below indicate a response from the
project team.
Words used about Main Street in introductions
• Live in Thurston. Have a lot of investment in Main Street future.
• Potential for place making.
• Prosperity.
• Community building.
• Place to ride a bike, walk and find businesses I like.
• Commerce, business, transportation.
• Too much truck traffic.
• Would like to see connection between Main and Glenwood.
• Feel safe on my bike.
• Opportunity.
• Place-making.
• Safety.
• Multi-use.
• Developed and more developed past 21st towards Thurston.
• Big grocery store.
• Safe transportation.
• Safety for employees and clients.
• Main St. as a whole improved and cleaned up.
• Safety: address drug problem so people feel safe.
• I see drugs there every day.
• Safety.
• Beautification.
• Community enrichment.
• Unique mix that works well.
• Want people to be safe on Main St. and to remain a thoroughfare for industrial
and mixed uses.
• Serious concerns about a crosswalk that is impacting my business access.
• Main St. has a big mix of populations and uses.
Exhibit D-8
Attachment 2-193
!5!
• Here to participate and be part of the citizenry of Springfield.
• Here to hear what others have to say. Concerned about the city taking more
for parking, sidewalk and trees. We want vehicles and cars and do not need
LTD for our business.
• Don’t want to lose more parking and sidewalk.
• Have customers from 40 miles away.
• Organizing a conference here: 300 tattoo artists from all over the world are
coming to Springfield. Time of day matters to what is going on Main St.
Questions & Discussion
Want to see a movie theater, doctors, dentists, Willamalane. Ray’s food couldn’t make it
pencil to build there. Feasibility is an issue, because people don’t have enough income
to support businesses.
Is it a Main St. or more of a throughway? Where do you want to bring people?
Lived here forever. Been on Eugene Planning Commission and City Council. It’s great to
start by listening to concerns. This is where to start solving problems. This is great
process. You are involving people. Successful developments, like Pearl St. in Portland,
make me think of little parks, playgrounds, funky art. People will come because it has
been done well. You do the best you can. It’s about people. Look at Bridgeport Mall.
People feel good there because you can walk around and look at things. Are we
facilitating this for people—doing business there, getting there?
Vision has to be realistic. It looks good, but look at Glenwood plans.
Test of the plan should be: “does it improve this area for everyone--people driving
through, living there, shopping there?” You have to start somewhere and you can’t have
everything.
It’s important during visioning to be careful of over-assuming what is not feasible. You
can take contaminated brownfield sites, and if you have enough money you can do
things. Pearl Street was a brownfield with old warehouses. Public/private partnerships
can overcome the cost barriers, if the market wants that site. Still need to be sensible,
but just don’t say “never.”
We had a mill in Grants Pass from the 1920s and knew it had huge environmental
issues, but there was still a bidding war to get that land.
We do need to be clear and transparent about everything, but over 20-30 years lots of
things can happen—so go ahead and let yourself vision.
We are heading towards a tipping point where Springfield becomes a sought-after
destination. The work of Willamalane, City, School District are helping us get there. We
are tooting our horn a bit better. Doing something, even low cost, shows people things
are getting done. Seeing things happen gets us to tipping point.
Who could have imagined all of the student housing in Eugene? Downtown Eugene is
busy and vibrant at night now—so different than 10 years ago.
Exhibit D-9
Attachment 2-194
!6!
Do you see dense housing along Main St.? I don’t want low-income on Main. We need
people with money for our businesses.
I agree we have enough low-income housing there.
Log trucks going down the street make it smell like Christmas. It’s not where you go to
buy clothes. What’s wrong with Main now? We are destination stores and businesses.
Choose the circles that are empty. How about the mall at 42nd? That could be a hub.
Help Willamalane. Help those existing little food stores.
Retail has very few employees except big stores. Want banners that support local
business. Want new restaurants downtown.
Is this about a road project or is it about making nice buildings? Like Glenwood vision
with ground floor retail and upscale apartments above?
We looked at a lot of places when we considered moving to build a campus-type
business complex. You can create anything on your land, with Main Street as an easy
way to get there.
Keep it mostly the same but redevelop some nodal areas.
We have 300 employees in good times. The majority are from Springfield, but also from
all over.
We have 80 employees and half are from Springfield. Let’s keep them in Springfield for
lunch and errands.
Rotating shifts at some places. Can they get what they need on the way to and from
work? There’s nothing telling us what is going on in Main Street. Let’s use it for
advertising, making it active.
Finally, we can use sandwich boards again.
What’s the ODOT budget for?
It’s for the planning and not implementation.
What practically are we talking about and how does that happen?
It’s not a roadway project. Some of the other Main Street projects are more so, and we
are coordinating with them.
We aren’t here to decide right-of-way issues. Things happen in several ways. There is
almost always a private sector and public sector role. Currently Main St. is 50%
commercial uses, 25% of acreage is residential, and a small percentage is industrial. Do
we want more residential? Understand your concerns about look and socio-economic
target. Market will drive this when there is a right-size parcel, the financial market is
ready to loan, and a willing land owner sees they can make money based on the value
of the land for redevelopment. When those stars align, then redevelopment can happen.
The public sector can prioritize based on vision. What can city do to help private sector
redevelop in a way that fits the vision? That’s what we mean about an implementation
strategy. Change is inevitable at some level.
Exhibit D-10
Attachment 2-195
!7!
I have a sense that there is disproportionate number of people who work in Springfield
and live in Eugene. I’d like to have people who work in Springfield want to live in
Springfield and not see it as only gritty blue collar. Make it more attractive to create a
better impression of Springfield. Springfield has the reputation as welcoming industry
and business, but I also want people to live here.
Eugene is a joke in how it looks architecturally. Create a sense of place without following
wacky trends.
Moved here a year ago, and we bought in Springfield because of property values. Still
go out to eat and shop in Eugene. Wish I could do those things more in Springfield.
I tried to buy business property in Springfield nine times and the cost was consistently
jacked up by requirements.
I live in Walterville and want parking near the places I go. There’s no parking at
Planktown. Want better quality restaurants out by Thurston. Support hubs idea. Want it
upscale feel. Allow parked cars in front so that people know it’s busy and open.
Appreciate you coming today and want your help talking to other businesses. We know
people are busy at work. It’s early in the process. Please help businesses know so we
hear that representation. We want to be sure to hear from you and other businesses.
What’s the word to spread?
Get involved and be part of the solution. This is your opportunity to participate in the
blueprint for the corridor--not what is wrong with it. We want to capture opportunities.
We will communicate with you to make sure you can see things as they develop and we
want to make sure people can hear what you think.
People are mad—well, get over it and help. You have to speak, listen, and then ask
what are we going to do about it. I hear you and I get it. This process should be part of
solutions and not just state problems.
We have a corridor—use it. Like the banners ideas. Support Main Street! Is the city
doing any recruiting?
How about “Connect Thurston!” on a banner?
I was at another meeting with possibilities mentioned. Don’t bottle neck the Main St. of
this city. Don’t make traffic terrible for everybody. Do pullouts for buses, rather than a
lane for buses only. Need balance to be good for business. Unlike Eugene, Springfield
only has one East/West route. We have to see how it affects each business along Main
St.
City got a grant from ODOT for the study. So is your hope to get a bigger grant to get
your dreams fulfilled?
Yes.
Are you talking about this going up into the hills?
Exhibit D-11
Attachment 2-196
!8!
No, the study area is a ¼ mile on each side of Main St. However, the topography in
different areas impacts what happens in those segments of the corridor. Currently, it is
50% commercial, 9% industrial, and 25% residential
What is the meaning of commercial, industrial, residential percentages—are you trying to
change that?
Don’t know. That’s a question.
Municipalities want to take the property rights away from individuals.
I like that you have done homework about identifying opportunity areas. I have sat in on
meetings where we discuss need for more land for industrial growth and to deal with
population growth.
We know where Hayden Bridge is. We know about Downtown. But how do you say “mid-
Springfield?” This is long overdue. Want it to be a positive discussion about potential.
We want to develop place-making of hubs along Main St.
Street lighting—there are portions of Main St. that are completely dark and I am
concerned about the children and safety.
It is a likely outcome to improve lighting, because it is both safety and aesthetic
improvement.
Past 14th, I don’t have a reason to stop unless I have a specific destination. I don’t look
much left or right. I just drive to Thurston. I like mixed-usage because it makes little
communities and feels safer.
I go downtown, to 32nd at Willamalane, and to 58th to see mother-in-law. These are the 3
places I go. I want to see more exciting and interesting things along this corridor so that
my family wants to take Main St. over the quickest route.
Have to get rid of the drug problem. No one is willing to do that. No one listened.
Having been downtown for a long time, when we get viable businesses downtown the
problems decrease. New businesses opening up create an environment that is not
welcoming for drug-related problems.
Good thing is that we have a great opportunity on Main St. But it is only one street.
Social networking through festivals and community gatherings is a must. Use attracts
people or not. Extend sidewalks for commerce; develop small parks—or “parklets.”
Bring more people downtown with more things happening. Diversity of places to
patronize is important. Re-purpose some public spaces for small parks.
Drugs are here and not going away, but Springfield has a stronger police force. Right
mix of business, commercial and residential can drive out the drugs. Some businesses
are running drugs, but businesses can band together and run that type of behavior away.
I see this in my work. I invest in Springfield because the community is stronger.
Exhibit D-12
Attachment 2-197
!9!
The current downtown is cleaner than it was. We had community support to build the
Justice Center and support of police. They are doing a good job, and they need support.
Keep the corridor marketable for the employees that work there. My employees get in
their cars and go away for lunch. I want to see somewhere nice they can walk for lunch
by fountains and parks to places to eat.
Mix of commercial/ industry?
More diversity is more opportunity.
Have diversity on Main St, but want to create more of a destination. How do you do this
with 7 miles of highway? People who live east of 126 take it and don’t go downtown.
Give people more to look at. How much land is city-owned so you could create parks?
Some, but not a great deal.
Open spaces around 49th St. Give cohesion with lighting and landscaping that tie it
together.
Zoning is very important and should be planned out carefully because my restaurant
can’t be near something giving off fumes.
City is doing something for you - not to you. Need to have to have some pioneers, but
market has to work in these areas. Public investment can be a catalyst, but key role for
city is to lay the groundwork so the market has incentive. It takes about 3-4 hours to walk
Main St. and see hugely underutilized whole blocks. Just like in downtown, the private
sector is now making investment. Investment can only come if it can make money.
There is probably a logical sequence for 7 miles of redevelopment. Main St. is a key
along with Glenwood. City can assemble some parcels and make a park, but do
something the private sector wants to work with.
Destinations. Synergies. How to move this into the corridor.
ODOT not always a good partner. It is a state highway, but it is Main Street and it makes
a big difference for what it is like. What about light pollution for people trying to sleep? It
gets complicated.
How do you make a 5-lane plus bike lane highway inviting for businesses? How do you
make it friendly to bikers when cars are going above 45 miles per hour? How can you
slow things down enough to make it more inviting? That is a huge challenge.
I worked in Springfield for 30 years and it created an identity for itself with Emerald Arts
Center and the Theater, but what about the whole strip? I worked with teenagers and
though they identified with Mohawk and Gateway as their community, and I would say to
go to your local businesses for fundraising. It’s about relationship and identity that is
coming from within.
Layout is so long and we should develop districts with connections to neighborhoods.
Mixed-uses and not this-versus-that. You bring great minds together to figure out how to
do this mix. “Parklets”—not big parks. What do you want the public street experience to
be in 20 years? Can we do all of these things?
Exhibit D-13
Attachment 2-198
!10!
It’s faster paced and almost industrial after 28th. Have to take it in increments.
Zoning can be something to figure out and tighten up. You have to deal with
hodgepodge, where businesses don’t have to register with the city. Most don’t have to
register unless it’s a restaurant or some other uses. And that can mean you don’t get the
best businesses happening. I would like to see zoning tightened up.
Thank you for inviting us to the table. I am with Volunteers in Medicine Clinic on Marcola
Rd. It is fascinating for me to think about history and where the future is headed.
Need permits, like from Fire Department, even if you don’t have to register your business.
Have to look at market to mesh with zoning. I have a big corner lot and wanted to
understand zoning.
“Rooftop employers” create hubs. Businesses can’t count on just their neighborhood to
support them. Springfield residents don’t come downtown. Tipping point. We have found
people are coming from all over to Planktown. Advantages to being near Planktown. It’s
the first time here for many.
Have to pick an area to start.14-28th Street area needs a lot of help.
If those things change, will it make the things that are there now disappear? I have been
here for 40 years (21 years in this place) and don’t want to be told I should disappear
and can’t be part of it. If it is that way I’m 100% against it.
What supports existing businesses? What are key things that support you? Customers
come from everywhere.
I don’t think you can identify a business that was forced out. Some empty places have
been re-used.
I would like to take a walk along Main St. walk with you. When you divide the strip into 3
areas, that is not enough. You can’t make a 4-mile destination. We start with one block
and maybe two eventually. It will be challenging. Agree with zoning. Delivery is
necessary event though I said ”too much truck traffic.” Trucks should go around by E126
and down I-5. We need to get the state to change that. Pick some hotpots and work on
that neighborhood. 8-10 destinations/hubs.
Transportation, including skateboards and bikes and pedestrians and buses and rapid
transit and cars, is going to be very difficult. Good luck with that.
Don’t forget that we need higher density housing in this so we don’t have to get in cars.
I want to be able to walk and feel safe past 14th.
It’s about getting people’s energy together, figuring out what is important and doing it.
What a great group in this room.
Exhibit D-14
Attachment 2-199
!11!
Why did you go to 69th instead of to 72nd for this Vision Plan? This was the project area
as defined by the City of Springfield. Recommendations can include areas outside of
that defined area.
What’s wrong with Main today? Why do we need to change it? 42nd Street used to be
busiest intersection in Lane County, but Bob Straub Parkway changed everything. It
impacted my business negatively by 40%. Less traffic down Main St is hard on us.
When 126 changed, Main Street died. Another change could reduce traffic further. My
sign is important. Don’t shut us down again.
Bottom line, are you trying to be more bus-oriented than cars? That will be bad for my
business and it will be our taxes paying for this.
I just did a market study because I sent postcards to select people. People are making
$60,000 less since 2004. People don’t ride a bus to get a bale of hay. Cost me $6,000
to get environmental study for my property due to dry cleaning business across the
street. There are lots of restrictions on these properties due to previous uses. You may
have wonderful ideas, but new businesses can’t go on sites that have pollution from
previous uses due to clean up costs.
Maintain traffic volumes.
Maybe we could cut out red tape.
Would like to have banners and signs between Thurston and 42nd. We have all these
guests and they don’t know about the nice events we have downtown. We need more
gateway signage.
Need to connect Thurston more because residents zip onto the freeway. Want to help
those residents feel connected to Springfield.
Bike lanes and planter strips mean impacting businesses negatively. Very worried about
widening frontages impacting existing businesses. If you have to widen for bus lanes
and planters you will hurt our parking.
Franklin Blvd is going to cause impacts to those businesses.
I lost 20 feet of frontage and parking from last LTD action. I have had only two
customers from the bus.
I want to leave house in Walterville and get safely to where I’m going. Prefer more
stoplights and fewer pedestrian crossings. Not helpful to businesses. More stoplights to
slow traffic to 35 MPH. If you want to go fast, go on Beltline.
Keep our parking, make access easy, keep trees that we have, and don’t make street
wider to allow for other things.
Truck traffic is also part of the picture. You don’t want to stop a log truck every three
blocks.
Exhibit D-15
Attachment 2-200
!12!
When you get to Main St. closer to downtown, you don’t stop at all the lights but if you go
the speed limit you can go straight through. We need to time the lights for the speed
limit.
Don’t want median curbs. Death traps for businesses because people can’t get in to
business from each side.
Want to see greater mix of commercial to draw more people. Want other industries in
addition to auto.
Be realistic.
Public Event #1: Share Your Ideas
December 11, 2013 from 4 pm to 7 pm at Springfield City Hall
Purpose
Meet with community members from an array of perspectives and experiences to
introduce Our Main Street projects, and the Main Street Vision Plan in particular. Gather
practical feedback on existing conditions, opportunities and constraints, which will guide
the development of a long-term plan for Main Street.
Presenters
Linda Pauly, City of Springfield
Tom Litster, Otak
Julie Fischer, Cogito
Scott Mansur, DKS Transportation Solutions
Anne Fifield, ECONorthwest
Attendees
Due to several inches of snow and prolonged below-freezing temperatures, attendance
at the meeting was low. However, the conversation with the 16 community members
who did attend was insightful and robust.
Agenda
Welcome
Presentation
Discussion
Conversation Notes
The majority of the meeting was spent listening to views, concerns, hopes, ideas, and
answering questions about the project. Following is a summary of comments by
individuals at the meeting. Italics below indicate a comment or response from the
project team.
You are all Main Street users. What are your experiences? What is your vision for the
future? What would you change if you could?
7-mile corridor will need multiple strategies
Exhibit D-16
Attachment 2-201
!13!
You have the Main St corridor. Are you looking at other areas? Not with this project.
Don’t they need this kind of effort? We have done a lot of planning work on Glenwood,
Franklin Boulevard and Downtown. Main St is a natural extension of that and it is our
primary corridor. We have an adopted plan for Downtown and a Redevelopment Plan for
Glenwood. We have done nothing like that for Main St for a long time. We have old
plans for Main St. from the 1980’s.
Do you have ideas for other corridors that you think rise to this level for study?
Another thing that is important about Main St. is that it crosses everything, and there is a
huge sunk infrastructure cost that is already there. We can grow and add jobs along
Main St and the sanitary sewer system is there, right-of-way width is there, stormwater is
there already.
You talk about what we want to see in 20 years, but are there things that people want
fixed now? Pedestrian safety comes up over and over again.
Are there other refinement plans that touch the corridor? Will this be separate refinement
plan and will it affect others? Not sure yet. We will learn about that as we go.
How do you use Main Street? I travel as a commuter and resident patronizing
businesses. It’s busy and useful. It’s important to our community.
It’s a busy street with lots of traffic and not pedestrian friendly. I don’t know if there is
anything to be done about it.
When did you notice that there was a problem? The Christmas Parade used to come up
28th and why wasn’t it addressed sooner if you think it has a downturn. The focus has
been on downtown. Paint the light poles. Businesses don’t want to improve property. I
have trouble renting because of lack of maintenance. I feel there is a bad attitude in the
city regarding upkeep between 14th to 28th. Not primarily a roadway project. Plans aren’t
always about fixing things that are broken. They could be about manifesting something
new. Do you shop on Main St?
No I don’t. It’s easier to go other places. I have lived in area for 50 years. I used to shop
at stores in Springfield and gather cherries and get them pitted. It’s changed. I am not an
antique store person.
Lived in Springfield 29 years and use Main St. quite a bit. It seems like fly-over states in
Midwest. Why? It is a difficult place to make a left turn across two lanes of truck traffic. It
is difficult to imagine the future, but it will be more of the same but faster, more crowded
and bigger, which will make it virtually impossible to uses. Won’t be able to make left
turn. Businesses are more industrialized and not places individuals would want to go.
The cities I like best have distinct neighborhoods with character of their own, are
accessible by many modes (bike, transit, walking), and independent. I would make better
transit, narrow the street, and slow it down. Not the best way to get your log truck
through town. Stabilize the neighborhoods.
There are things here I don’t understand. It’s impossible to know the future 20 years.
The only thing we can have impact on is a functional roadway. The businesses exist
Exhibit D-17
Attachment 2-202
!14!
because of the traffic that goes through there. You say no log trucks, then what happens
to the sawmill? I don’t think that will work.
Dichotomy of going slow to access businesses and getting trucks through.
I live off Q Street. Grassroots businesses and we talk about the future of our area. We
have freeway, other streets and businesses and homes. Lots of traffic over there too.
Are there any groups of business owners for 10th to 69th-- a Main St Business Owners
Group that are talking about this?
The Chamber of Commerce. We did a mailing to all the businesses.
It would be better if you had property owners involved.
I have been working on Main St since 1956. Want City to look better. Are you trying to
look at what infrastructure should be? Transportation? What are you trying to do here? I
love Springfield. I want to drive from Eugene to Springfield and see a clear difference. I
want it to be mowed and look good—like there’s money here. I want Main St to look like
that too. You are going to have a hard time telling businesses to clean the place up.
They’ll say, “Here’s the door.” But Springfield owns property that looks unpresentable—
not open for business. Clean up and look prosperous is the first thing. Then business will
want to bring their people here. Not sure I could move my business downtown, because
it isn’t nice enough yet. Appearance.
If you did an Enterprise Zone that businesses could reinvest those dollars to improve
property.
What’s this project about? What would make more people love to be on Main St? What
can the city do as a public sector actor do to help it be that way.
Who lives here? I lease commercial.
Do you know anyone who lives on Main St? No.
Is that OK or would you like to see that change so people would want to live there?
Some is commercial.
I’m just back from Israel where people live above businesses and people are out at night
and I feel alive. But it is a different culture here, that isn’t oriented to that. I walk and
bike and like the history on Main Street but just putting houses doesn’t mean people will
be out there. Need businesses and children walking around. It is something about our
culture and how we live.
Noisy on street.
Who wants to live downtown? I would. Thank you for having this community gathering
for this Vision Project. Springfield is coming together with a vibrant downtown,
committees and volunteers working together to get more activity there. I am wondering
about living on a state highway—how about a block away? Apartments by NEDCO and
by Pioneer Parkway,
Exhibit D-18
Attachment 2-203
!15!
Royal Building. I would like to see more housing near Booth Kelly or near wetland area
that is convenient to bus station and downtown.
I have fresh eyes because I am new, but I live downtown and work on 58th. I wouldn’t
mind living on Main St. Why does eastbound run faster than westbound Main St? New
businesses in downtown are really cool. The drug use in downtown Eugene is not good
for business, and that is not the case in Springfield. Perhaps because closer to prison or
better ability to hold criminals in Springfield. We don’t want the loitering and harassing
problems in Springfield that happen in downtown Eugene.
Open campus now for juniors and seniors at Thurston High School, and more students
are using the businesses and we are concerned about pedestrian issues. 58th Street is a
problem where kids cross without a crosswalk.
Downtown and Thurston are areas, but it is flyover in between. We take Straub to skip
Main St. It takes so long. It’s a 41-minute bus ride from Thurston to downtown.
Dissuades use. Express buses would help, a commuter bus that’s faster, and buses that
run straight out to LCC.
My association is that I work at SUB. I use Main for transportation, not as a resident or
business owner. For SUB it’s a priority to keep traffic signals working well on Main St. I
am here to listen to public sentiment for area. What are the contributing factors for
interacting with utility?
NEDCO is doing Main St project downtown. Have done some lease-to-own housing off
Main St but close to it on east end. One way to think about this project is a wide city
street and not a state highway. Multi-use boulevard concept could work well. Is there
enough room there for that? Slow traffic near the businesses and through traffic in the
center lanes. I live close to downtown in Eugene on 11th. Used to be lots of log trucks
on 11th and there are things that you can do to live on a busy street and not be impacted
by the noise.
Been in Springfield 3 years from Hawaii. See tremendous opportunity and potential. Fell
in love with it here immediately. See log trucks, but it is part of our history of what
Springfield was and still is. Think about the amount of wood being processed in
Springfield. We don’t want to lose that tax base that pays for our services. This is a
difficult and chaotic conversation, but lots of potential. Large streets. Don’t know the
answers, but good to have conversation. What about Walterville and communities further
out and how this impacts them?
Main St. and congestion. I live in Thurston. I don’t go Main St. typically I take 126. Look
at corridors people take to freeway. 28th is good but can’t get to the freeway and get
bottle-necked at Mohawk. 14th lots of lights, 21st lots of lights. 42nd is a bottleneck by
railroad. If you want to get people on and off Main St, create better corridors that connect
to the north.
Hospital expansion. What’s that going to add to Main St.?
What is the vision for identity of businesses on Main St?
Exhibit D-19
Attachment 2-204
!16!
Remarkable that Chad said it was a nice, friendly drug-free place. This is due to hard
work by some individuals. It’s remarkable that I won’t walk around downtown Eugene at
night, and now I live 2 blocks off of Main St. and walk my dog there every night.
Focus and vision.
10th-14th is a section, 14th-21st is a section.
I do fitness at 32nd. I go Centennial to 28th to avoid stop and go traffic.
When you get to blueprint stage and other agencies are implementing with limited
budgets they need to focus energy strategically.
I am observing this common set of issues. It’s about a way to get somewhere, but others
are thinking about being there—not getting there or passing through. This is two sides
of a common conversation that will be part of the puzzle.
A third part is the business and commercial part of it. Not a fix-all solution. Yes, different
strategies and different blueprints for success.
The teens are focused on what is and enjoying the moment. What comes out of that is
their ideas for a zoo and Simpsonville. Adults focus on problems and solutions, but we
encourage you to look at what youth have said they want.
Have you had any conversations with folks around 30th around Maple Elementary? We
are early on and it is challenging to find folks who live on Main St.
How about walking around that area?
Role-play from perspective of coming to visit town. Amazing potential to think about
things—where would you stay? What walking tour would you take? What are the cultural
resources? It’s a different overlay that needs to be done and provides other possibilities,
even for businesses.
Node is planner speak for place. Need to segment this and look at more granular level
and what will give sense of place that can be created or built upon. Superior transit than
we have today. My commute on EmX is half the time it used to be. Real difference and
an option to having and using a car. Discreet locations. Do transit-oriented development.
Downtown is happening, but need other places along corridor where there is a reason to
live there and stay there. A couple issues about depth of lots for businesses.
Consolidate and assemble lots for businesses. Depth is important for bigger enterprises,
build-to lines and things like that so you don’t get parking lots on both sides, rather than
buildings that look interesting.
Next Meeting: March 2014
Exhibit D-20
Attachment 2-205
!1!
MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN
Youth Discussion
November 21, 2013 at 5:30
Willamalane two50 Youth Center
Presenters
Julie Fischer, Cogito, Public Involvement
Judith Castro, Cogito, Public Involvement
Claire Femal, A3 High School, Youth Involvement Assistant
Linda Pauly, City of Springfield, Project Manager
!
Attendees
Sixteen students attended the session, held during an after-school activity club at Willamalane
Recreation Center at the corner of 32nd Street and Main Street. Fourteen students were middle
schoolers, and two were from A3 High School located in downtown Springfield.
!
Agenda
• Brief introduction to Our Main Street
and the Vision Plan
• Group Introductions
• Project Timeline and Activities
• Brainstorming Session
• Full Group Debrief
Presentation: Our Main
Street Vision Plan
Julie Fischer introduced Linda Pauly
and provided a brief overview of project
goals. Judith Castro talked about how
important it is to involve youth in big
projects. Claire Femal described the
process for the brainstorming activity.
Brainstorming Session
Participants gathered around 4 topic
areas developed to relate to youth: Transportation, Money on Main Street (land use and businesses),
Safety, and Fun and Beauty (aesthetics and activities). Facilitators at each table encouraged
participants to share, write, and draw their ideas. Participants moved to a new topic every 5 minutes.
At the end, the group gathered together to debrief the experience. On the next pages are the results of
each topic discussion.
!
!
!
Left: Woman with a walker crossing the street. Right: Separated
bike path adjacent to street.
Exhibit D-21
Attachment 2-206
!2!
Safety
Question: Is Main Street safe to walk, bike, drive? If
not, what would make it more safe? What are your
stories about Main Street?
• My dad said when he was a kid he was in a
crosswalk and he almost got run over and
now he’s afraid.
• My mom almost got hit crossing Main Street
at one of those flashing beacons. She was
wearing a neon shirt.
• I was walking, saw trash, picked it up, almost
got run over.
• Crime: scary section between 32nd and 42nd
or after 28th. Island park and other parks –
issues.
• My stepdad got hit near the bridge by the
“Welcome to Springfield” sign. He was on his
bike.
• People 5 feet away don’t use crosswalk
• More crosswalks needed. More pedestrian
activated.
• Pedestrian bridge
• Sidewalks are bumpy and broken
• Bike lanes are narrow, reckless drivers by Thompsons
• Wish I could ride bike to 7/11 by Bob Staub but parents don’t let me
• Safer crosswalk- blocks cars- press button, wood boards slam down cars can’t go
• Bikes have their own lane like the bus
• More cross walks
• Crosswalks with flashing lights
• Skateboard crosswalk
• Bike lane like Pioneer Parkway, separated from cars
• My friend almost got hit playing froggy across Main Street
• Need more street lights, its too dark by Bob Straub
• More “safe places” to help people
• The bus works really well, wish there were more buses too/from Thurston
• Main Street is fine by downtown, bring that kind of energy to E. Main Street
Top: Pedestrian crosswalk. Bottom: Pedestrian
bridge arching over street.
Left: pedestrian bridge arching over
street. Right: Pedestrian crosswalk. .
Exhibit D-22
Attachment 2-207
!3!
Fun and Beauty
Question: Does Main Street look good now? What
should be changed, what would make it more fun?
• Downtown Springfield Simpsons theme
(cartoony)
• There should be a paintball store in
Springfield instead of Eugene
• More parks
• Ice cream truck
• Clean up trash on street
• The store people should be nicer
• They should clean up Main Street
• Sometimes Main Street scares me cause
there’s scary people walking
• Hobos creep me out when they’re walking
outside my house
• More random art
• Sculptures on sidewalks
• Video game stores
• More kid stores and teen stores
• Make the crosswalk safer and make the
street cleaner, also more chicken wings
• Hopscotch, murals, fountains, sculptures,
wishing wells, community bulletin board,
places to hang
• Colorful storefronts (more lively!)
• Colored streetlights ie. parking lots, back
streets, etc.
• Places/areas for teens to hang out besides
Springfield station (ie. plazas and small
parks on main street)
• Fun Houses
• More places for concert posters and
community announcements
• Murals in places besides downtown, murals
all over Main Street
• Take Portland as an example for beauty
• More parks that are safe
• More stores in the Bob Straub area
• Arcade
• Places for all ages to hang out and have
fun, also they need more food carts
• Pickle flavored ice cream
• Have a zoo in Springfield
Exhibit D-23
Attachment 2-208
!4!
Money on Main Street
Question: If you were going to open a business on Main
Street what would it be?
• Family owned business
• Bagel sphere
• Family diners
• Thrift stores
• Low income resource centers
• All age clubs
• Venues
• More food carts
• Food pantries for the homeless
• Colorful lively store fronts that welcome people
• Tourist areas (big profit for money, possibly
Simpson cartoony areas)
• Quick- E- Mart
• Paintball
• Coffee shops
• Toy stores
• Take most of the run-down buildings out
• Money falling from the sky
• Money trees
Transportation
Question: How do you travel Main Street now? How do you imagine traveling Main Street in the future?
• Take the bus everywhere, drive
• Biking not safe/scary
• Bike lane not consistent- redo bike lane
• There’s a bus stop at 42nd and Main and that gets me anywhere. I will be using the bus more
than car because it’s cheaper, easier. Day pass less than gallon of gas. Cars are expensive. I
love EmX.
• People walking across street at night scary for drivers
• Need pedestrian signals
• A subway, more buses
• Clearer bike lanes for bikers
• Zip cars
• A bike path that went behind the stores
• Buses from Thurston station that go around the neighborhoods-different routes
• Railed bike paths
• Electric car stops at gas stations
• Sidewalks with bike rentals
• Phone app built in GPS that while driving your phone won’t unlock
• Hover cars
• Flying cars
• More limos
• Rocket skates
• Rocket scooter
• More street lights
• More speed limit safety signs
Exhibit D-24
Attachment 2-209
!5!
!
Summary Ideas
• Paintball palace!
• Zoo on Main Street
• Hoover/scooter skateboard
• Pickle flavored ice cream
• Skateboard crossing
• Bridge for pedestrians across Main Street
• Safe crosswalk, clean streets
• Make sure plants don’t block visibility,
better lighting
• Curbs that separate bikes from drivers
• More lively storefronts- Simpsons theme,
more tourists
• Safety stuff most important: more
crosswalks, scary at night, brighter lighting
• Crime: install burglar alarms
• Drive in movie theater
• Zip cars!
• Too small bike lanes
• Roots in sidewalks- how about brick sidewalks? Roots come through bricks instead of
push up pavement
• How about a walk bridge from Springfield to Glenwood
• Crosswalk on 35th
Exhibit D-25
Attachment 2-210
1
MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN
Youth Discussion
November 21, 2013 at 5:30
Willamalane two50 Youth Center
Presenters
Julie Fischer, Cogito, Public Involvement
Judith Castro, Cogito, Public Involvement
Claire Femal, A3 High School, Youth Involvement Assistant
Linda Pauly, City of Springfield, Project Manager
Attendees
Sixteen students attended the session, held during an after-school activity club at Willamalane
Recreation Center at the corner of 32nd Street and Main Street. Fourteen students were middle
schoolers, and two were from A3 High School located in downtown Springfield.
Agenda
• Brief introduction to Our Main Street
and the Vision Plan
• Group Introductions
• Project Timeline and Activities
• Brainstorming Session
• Full Group Debrief
Presentation: Our Main
Street Vision Plan
Julie Fischer introduced Linda Pauly
and provided a brief overview of project
goals. Judith Castro talked about how
important it is to involve youth in big
projects. Claire Femal described the
process for the brainstorming activity.
Brainstorming Session
Participants gathered around 4 topic
areas developed to relate to youth: Transportation, Money on Main Street (land use and businesses),
Safety, and Fun and Beauty (aesthetics and activities). Facilitators at each table encouraged
participants to share, write, and draw their ideas. Participants moved to a new topic every 5 minutes.
At the end, the group gathered together to debrief the experience. On the next pages are the results of
each topic discussion.
Left: Woman with a walker crossing the street. Right: Separated
bike path adjacent to street.
Exhibit D-26
Attachment 2-211
2
Safety
Question: Is Main Street safe to walk, bike, drive? If
not, what would make it more safe? What are your
stories about Main Street?
• My dad said when he was a kid he was in a
crosswalk and he almost got run over and
now he’s afraid.
• My mom almost got hit crossing Main Street
at one of those flashing beacons. She was
wearing a neon shirt.
• I was walking, saw trash, picked it up, almost
got run over.
• Crime: scary section between 32nd and 42nd
or after 28th. Island park and other parks –
issues.
• My stepdad got hit near the bridge by the
“Welcome to Springfield” sign. He was on his
bike.
• People 5 feet away don’t use crosswalk
• More crosswalks needed. More pedestrian
activated.
• Pedestrian bridge
• Sidewalks are bumpy and broken
• Bike lanes are narrow, reckless drivers by Thompsons
• Wish I could ride bike to 7/11 by Bob Staub but parents don’t let me
• Safer crosswalk- blocks cars- press button, wood boards slam down cars can’t go
• Bikes have their own lane like the bus
• More cross walks
• Crosswalks with flashing lights
• Skateboard crosswalk
• Bike lane like Pioneer Parkway, separated from cars
• My friend almost got hit playing froggy across Main Street
• Need more street lights, its too dark by Bob Straub
• More “safe places” to help people
• The bus works really well, wish there were more buses too/from Thurston
• Main Street is fine by downtown, bring that kind of energy to E. Main Street
Top: Pedestrian crosswalk. Bottom: Pedestrian
bridge arching over street.
Left: pedestrian bridge arching over
street. Right: Pedestrian crosswalk. .
Exhibit D-27
Attachment 2-212
3
Fun and Beauty
Question: Does Main Street look good now? What
should be changed, what would make it more fun?
• Downtown Springfield Simpsons theme
(cartoony)
• There should be a paintball store in
Springfield instead of Eugene
• More parks
• Ice cream truck
• Clean up trash on street
• The store people should be nicer
• They should clean up Main Street
• Sometimes Main Street scares me cause
there’s scary people walking
• Hobos creep me out when they’re walking
outside my house
• More random art
• Sculptures on sidewalks
• Video game stores
• More kid stores and teen stores
• Make the crosswalk safer and make the
street cleaner, also more chicken wings
• Hopscotch, murals, fountains, sculptures,
wishing wells, community bulletin board,
places to hang
• Colorful storefronts (more lively!)
• Colored streetlights ie. parking lots, back
streets, etc.
• Places/areas for teens to hang out besides
Springfield station (ie. plazas and small
parks on main street)
• Fun Houses
• More places for concert posters and
community announcements
• Murals in places besides downtown, murals
all over Main Street
• Take Portland as an example for beauty
• More parks that are safe
• More stores in the Bob Straub area
• Arcade
• Places for all ages to hang out and have
fun, also they need more food carts
• Pickle flavored ice cream
• Have a zoo in Springfield
Exhibit D-28
Attachment 2-213
4
Money on Main Street
Question: If you were going to open a business on Main
Street what would it be?
• Family owned business
• Bagel sphere
• Family diners
• Thrift stores
• Low income resource centers
• All age clubs
• Venues
• More food carts
• Food pantries for the homeless
• Colorful lively store fronts that welcome people
• Tourist areas (big profit for money, possibly
Simpson cartoony areas)
• Quick- E- Mart
• Paintball
• Coffee shops
• Toy stores
• Take most of the run-down buildings out
• Money falling from the sky
• Money trees
Transportation
Question: How do you travel Main Street now? How do you imagine traveling Main Street in the future?
• Take the bus everywhere, drive
• Biking not safe/scary
• Bike lane not consistent- redo bike lane
• There’s a bus stop at 42nd and Main and that gets me anywhere. I will be using the bus more
than car because it’s cheaper, easier. Day pass less than gallon of gas. Cars are expensive. I
love EmX.
• People walking across street at night scary for drivers
• Need pedestrian signals
• A subway, more buses
• Clearer bike lanes for bikers
• Zip cars
• A bike path that went behind the stores
• Buses from Thurston station that go around the neighborhoods-different routes
• Railed bike paths
• Electric car stops at gas stations
• Sidewalks with bike rentals
• Phone app built in GPS that while driving your phone won’t unlock
• Hover cars
• Flying cars
• More limos
• Rocket skates
• Rocket scooter
• More street lights
• More speed limit safety signs
Exhibit D-29
Attachment 2-214
5
Summary Ideas
• Paintball palace!
• Zoo on Main Street
• Hoover/scooter skateboard
• Pickle flavored ice cream
• Skateboard crossing
• Bridge for pedestrians across Main Street
• Safe crosswalk, clean streets
• Make sure plants don’t block visibility,
better lighting
• Curbs that separate bikes from drivers
• More lively storefronts- Simpsons theme,
more tourists
• Safety stuff most important: more
crosswalks, scary at night, brighter lighting
• Crime: install burglar alarms
• Drive in movie theater
• Zip cars!
• Too small bike lanes
• Roots in sidewalks- how about brick sidewalks? Roots come through bricks instead of
push up pavement
• How about a walk bridge from Springfield to Glenwood
• Crosswalk on 35th
Exhibit D-30
Attachment 2-215
Springfield Main Street Vision Plan: Public Engagement Summary 1/2014-3/2014 1
MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN
PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT SUMMARY
January-March 2014
Introduction
The City of Springfield is engaging the community in a planning process to envision a
preferred future for Main Street between Downtown and Thurston. Citizens are providing
important input into the development of the Main Street Corridor Vision Plan - a set of
recommendations that will inform the City's land use policy and transportation system
planning over the next several years for the lands along the Corridor. The first public
meeting was held in December 2013 to share project goals and brainstorm “What is
most important to you about Main Street”. The second public meeting was held on
March 6th of 2014 and presented draft visions and goals for the corridor (see page 3 for
a meeting summary). The third and final meeting will be held in June 2014 to present
draft implementation strategies.
Publicizing the Project and March 6 Meeting
The City of Springfield is committed to involving the public in the project. The project
team focused on personal invitations to the March 6 meeting by stopping by businesses,
visiting with youth at Thurston High School, and calling people on the phone. These
conversations provided the opportunity to share project goals and gather the information
needed to connect with people in the future. Between December 2013 and March 2014
the interested parties list for the project doubled from 200 to nearly 400 people. Specific
activities included:
• Speaking engagements at the Lion’s Club, Kiwanis, and Thurston High School
Leadership Class (see page 14 for input results)
• Invitation e-mailed to approximately 370 individuals.
• Phone calls to over 100 individuals involved in civic issues or connected to Main St.
• Invitation Postcard hand-delivered to over 100 businesses on the corridor. Over 20
businesses were invited in Spanish, and some businesses chose to share postcards
with customers.
Organization Partners
Helped by advertising in Newsletters, Calendars and Meeting Announcements
• Chamber of Commerce: Bottomline newsletter to approximately 2,000 area
businesses; two press releases on website, handed out postcards at Gateway
Development Committee, City Club, and all Chamber Meetings
• Emerald Arts Center: Saturday email blast
Exhibit D-31
Attachment 2-216
Springfield Main Street Vision Plan: Public Engagement Summary 1/2014-3/2014 2
• Rotary Club: Meeting announcement, put in newsletter
• Lions Club: Meeting announcement, staff recruited at meeting
• Kiwanis: Meeting announcement, staff recruited at meeting
• City Club: Posted on website. Meeting announcement
• NEDCO: e-invite to 1,000-person list; added to Facebook page. Outreach at Spout
Friday Market
• LTD: Invitation sent to LTD Board and EmX Steering Committee. Postcards handed
out at EmX Steering Committee meeting.
• City Committees: Historic Commission, Planning Commission, City Council,
Development Advisory, Downtown Citizen Advisory, Springfield Bicycle and
Pedestrian Advisory
• Downtown Languages Students and Leaders
• Head Start
• LCC ESL Students
• E-invites sent to: Thurston High School, A3, Willamalane, Springfield High School,
and Thurston High School, LCC, Downtown Languages, Centro Latino, NACCP,
Saint Vincent de Paul.
Invitation
Exhibit D-32
Attachment 2-217
Springfield Main Street Vision Plan: Public Engagement Summary 1/2014-3/2014 3
General Outreach with Display Board
Project staff talked with people at the following locations and asked if they wanted to
receive project information via email. Materials included a display board about the
project, postcards about the March 6 meeting, and an email sign-up sheet:
Albertsons (East Main)
Sprout Market
Ride LTD #11 to Thurston
Thurston LTD station
Downtown Languages: Announced in classes
LCC ESL Classes: Announced in classes
Saint Vincent de Paul housing
Media
Media Advisory
Register Guard Community Calendar
KEZI News Story
Eugene Weekly announcement
Public Meeting Summary
Our Main Street: New Discoveries, Inspiring Visions
Thursday, March 6th from 4 pm to 7 pm at Springfield City Hall
Purpose
Gather input on visions, goals and opportunities for the different places along the Main
Street Corridor from project stakeholders. Key Questions: Do the draft vision and goals
help make Main Street a better place to live, work, shop and travel? Has an important
opportunity been missed? Which goals do you think are most important to the
community?
Presenters
Linda Pauly, City of Springfield, City Project Manager
Tom Litster, Otak, Consultant Project Manager
Julie Fischer, Cogito, Public Involvement
Attendees
Fifty Individuals from a variety of community organizations, businesses, residents,
corridor users, and property owners in Springfield, including: Springfield School District,
Lions, Rotary, Chamber of Commerce, Sprout, City Club, and Emerald Arts Center.
Agenda
Welcome
Presentation
Small Group Discussion
Full Group Debrief
Exhibit D-33
Attachment 2-218
Springfield Main Street Vision Plan: Public Engagement Summary 1/2014-3/2014 4
Welcome
Linda Pauly introduced the project goals and how this project relates to other key
projects in Springfield.
Presentation: Draft Vision and Goals for the Corridor
Tom Litster of Otak introduced draft visions and goals for each of 3 major corridor
segments: Couplet Area, Mid-Springfield Business Corridor, and Thurston Neighborhood
Area. He also shared corridor-wide draft goals for transportation and the public realm.
Visit the website at http://ourmainstreetspringfield.org/main-street-corridor-vision-plan/
for a copy of the powerpoint presentation.
Questions from Participants
Q: Where are the images from? A: From all over Oregon. We would love your thoughts
on the images.
Q: Since Springfield has acquired Glenwood, I am wondering why the planning process
doesn’t include the Glenwood area- which 20 years from now may be the most exciting
part of Springfield. A: We have a really great plan for Glenwood, have been planning for
the last 7 years. The Council has approved the Glenwood Refinement Plan and the
implementation has already begun.
Q: Do you have any data on where these people are going when they blow through Main
St? A: No we do not have that data. We have some data but this is something we are
currently working on.
Small Group Discussion
Participants discuss presentation concepts at their tables with a facilitator. See page 5
for the results.
Large Group Discussion
• One of the interesting things about this process, very well thought out, is the
presumption on the part of both the staff and planners. The economic model we are
looking at and visioning is what the economic model is going to be in the later part of
the 21st Century. We need to be watchful that Main St, which has been the
connectivity point for the last 100 years, continues to be. Connect the economic
growth with the different businesses. We need to watch how the strip integrates with
the resources we have with the river. How we plan this and where this goes we have
to be watchful of where the reality of the future economy goes. This is a very
rewarding methodology.
• We agreed that mixed-use is a positive thing but other places are more appropriate.
Businesses on the bottom, residents on top. Better fitted for sections 1 and 3.
• I can see the difficulty you have in coming up with only 3 areas. We also see the
Thurston areas as a gateway into Springfield and can see it being an entertainment
center with more destinations.
• Make it a safer area, automobiles and crime. Attractive and well-lit. Have more
pedestrian refuge. Protected bikeways. More destinations!
• We spoke on the third segment about all the activities and the difficult crossings,
especially with high school. That whole area should be slowed down and be more
accessible.
Exhibit D-34
Attachment 2-219
Springfield Main Street Vision Plan: Public Engagement Summary 1/2014-3/2014 5
• We also thought that section 1 closer to downtown should be slowed down and give
refuge for people to enjoy being part of downtown. Currently it is difficult because of
the speed of traffic in that area.
• We suggested roundabouts! In jest, but it would slow people down, especially at the
1st segment and the south A part. We also talked about nodes or something to go
into to draw residential/businesses and begin to cluster. We have no idea how to
implement that.
• One thing we really talked about was slowing down the traffic and more lighting.
Down to 35 MPH. We didn’t think a bus system was really the way to go on Main St.
Basically, slow it down and light it up.
• The concept of taking these roads and continuing it all the way out to Thurston.
Engineering shows that slows traffic down. Multi-way boulevard will allow Springfield
to use that as a focus for redevelopment.
• Crosswalks should be in places where people are walking the most. Each crosswalk
should be thought of as a unique place and connect the neighborhoods. This should
be reflected in the design of the crosswalks, in addition to the standard components.
Get a sense of the place. You always see something different. Crosswalks
themselves can become places.
• Lower speeds, lots of people are jaywalking currently. We as businesses owners
absolutely have to have the center lane. We need the ability for our customers to turn
into our stores. It is a road that is used by big trucks and they need access.
• Have hubs all along the area that weaves. Places where people can garden –
community garden with artistic endeavors.
• I think it would be helpful if there was a map that showed the possible change in
ownership. People think that they have to do this on their own. But if we are making
big changes than we need help for the community. I would like to see what land is
available to see what we COULD do together to solve the access issues.
• We brought up some great points about the new trail systems coming in. We want to
connect these systems to downtown corridor.
Written Responses on Input Forms
THE
COUPLET
AREA –
MAIN
STREET
Housing/mixed use should be more vertical, more dense—More
efficient for land and infrastructure.
Its nice to see intent in trying to get public involvement - set some
rules and enforce them.
Thanks for such an opportunity for community engagement. Very
pleased with plans.
Keep strong connection to downtown especially for walkers/bikers.
Use landscaping to separate walkers from traffic.
Need cultural/historic resource assessment of corridor – document
the history
Better lighting would help with safety
Lets not ignore A Street! We all use it just as much to get to work
or home.
Community art/public beautiful buildings – artistic
126 – feeders 14th St. 42ND Bob Straub Key Residential Feeders
28th, 32nd, 42nd, 66th, 69th
14th St. Focal point for development, feeds from Mohawk
14th and Main as a first node to focus on
Exhibit D-35
Attachment 2-220
Springfield Main Street Vision Plan: Public Engagement Summary 1/2014-3/2014 6
Walk able-more walk able friendly environment
3 & 4 story building – mix of heights more connections
Historical roots- some good. Old physical patterns that are diverse.
Encourage this. Protect residential. Keep natural light where closed
to main.
Don’t change South A and Main. No 2-way traffic on Main.
A way to connect Main and A in industrial area.
Beauty and industry do not have to be virtually exclusive.
Think long term. Have a plan but focus and be flexible.
Yet act small, look for, facilitate early, visible, projects. Will build
enthusiasm. Create incentives.
Can south provide visual and vehicle access to Main St.
connection: Mill Race?
More accessibility – on bikes- no bike laws.
Area speaks to “almost downtown”
Sidewalk quality/availability
Speed a real factor
Business
Activity
I think “Alive after Five” is important in making Main St. a
destination. I feel there is some positive progress already
happening. Adding housing to the retail will add a sense of a
community or neighborhood.
Consider form-based zoning for redevelopment
Storefront retail sounds like a good idea, but check economic
viability before making it mandatory.
To the extent that makes sense, develop a theme.
Increase connection to Willamalane and nearby businesses
Concentrate activity at 14th and at 21st (Paramount Dist)
Improve sidewalk condition everywhere esp. north side of S. A
Street.
Don’t try to compete with Downtown
Clean up appearance of that area
Enhance social service access for lower income and transient
residents
Beautify A St. on North side for residents. Sidewalks, trees,
greenway
Clusters exist – historic significance
Diversity of building and uses – existing arch components are
important
Building/Infrastructure becomes the art
Some retail, larger commercial with smaller supporting craft
More retail and commercial facing Main St.
Storm water, Lights, Green, Stop lights more
Do not put more on sidewalk, do not widen the road = neg impact
on business
Concern about types of clientele
Main St Mill to 21st, get trucks – thru traffic off of Main.
Slow down speeds. Focus on local traffic.
Whole corridor (Mill to 21st) should be downtown, commercial,
retail, mixed use, small, vertical uses. Offices, residential.
In order to encourage mixed use add traffic calming
Exhibit D-36
Attachment 2-221
Springfield Main Street Vision Plan: Public Engagement Summary 1/2014-3/2014 7
Like how its not competing with downtown commerce.
Mill race is a potential as well
Sight lines from S. A to Main street and Willamalane
Like alive after 5. More lights and activity.
Lighting, reduce traffic, a lot of low income housing.
Housing Good ideas to live and work near Main St. and Mix incomes and
age groups.
Need to protect established residences w/ setbacks, “step” backs,
height limits
Height restrictions?
Many density and housing types
Difficulties crossing South A barrier to live, work, vacant lot infill
Infill housing just off Main St., accessed by side streets… quieter
and more pleasant than being right on Main thoroughfare.
Townhouses and apartments to increase population density and
get more people living near the core.
Like St. Vincent De Paul between S A and Main add retail on
bottom and housing on top on vacant lots
Parks – more problems with these folks combined (in real estate
and reserve police)
There already is low cost rent
21st area needs fixing
Wide sidewalks. Good street trees. (What’s been planted are
wrong ones)
Improved lighting. Color. Activate sidewalk zone.
Start with businesses – add amenities to make housing boarder
Mill Race connections
Perspective: What do we do with land to South A
COUPLET
AREA –
South “A”
STREET
Good idea to support close-in industrial uses and jobs
Grow jobs ok
Craft industrial uses ok
Develop alternative E-W bike routes
Develop identities for neighborhoods/business Dist.
Way finding-connections between Main St. Other destinations like
Mohawk District, river path, Splash, etc.
Must facilitate truck movements
Find some way to celebrate trucks instead of tolerating them.
Concerned about inherent conflict between commercial and
residential interest in slowing traffic and existing industrial and
potential new craft industrial’s need to move materials
Food, beverage, manufacturing, tech – knowledge based economy
Business incubators – food beverage
Make zoning laws, while remaining effective, flexible and receptive
to innovative ideas.
Cluster activities to give neighborhood 3 lane section, causing high
speed, some retail to compliment and cause friction for speeding.
Large unused industrial areas could be redeveloped into larger
commercial centers
Land in South “A” may become a park near mill race.
Lighting: women really like this idea
Do not put in low income housing without crosswalk
Exhibit D-37
Attachment 2-222
Springfield Main Street Vision Plan: Public Engagement Summary 1/2014-3/2014 8
Slow down the traffic
Street lights, stop lights
Raised, textured intersections of crosswalks.
Underground all utilities. Yes tough to do. Yes expensive. Do it
anyway.
South A: Make it the highway, the place for thru-traffic.
Commercial, light industrial uses.
Without a 2 way Main St. on A St. could open up view shed to the
South and North
Add housing and connectivity to Mill Race
Cross the rail corridor to the wetlands
20.2 min. average travel tie. 17 min.
Willamalane vision being the focus.
MID
SPRINGFIELD
BUSINESS
CORRIDOR
21st-48th
Don’t forget that adjacent streets are part of corridor section
Find attractive business development for corner of 32nd – need
Main St. access
Like to see alternate truck route – 28th st. south to freeway
Not incubator material
Be mindful interface between residential and commercial
All new construction is beautiful
Zone, physically, noisy/smelly from where people spend a lot of
time
Do something about railroad delay
Flashing lights
Leave 28th as is: truck route
Please widen the truck route
Do not want to lose valuable industrial zone
35 mph is a good speed
All of Main street, but especially this section needs:
o Continuous sidewalks: wide, setback from the street.
o Landscape strip between curb and sidewalk.
o Canopy trees in lands strip.
o Raised, curbed, landscaped, treed center island
o Protected left turn pockets
o Protected ped crossings
o Improved, increased level of lighting
Include: transit, emx lanes, stations, bikes
Consolidate: driveways, shared access between properties
Incentives: Allow wide array of uses, where downtown can be
more mix, vertical, zero setback, finer grained scale of
business; here larger lots, adequate parking
Business
Activity
Consider some degree of coordinated landscape improvements
to soften asphalt
Don’t overlook traded sector opportunities even if they are tech-
heavy -> dollars they generate will multiply jobs in other sectors.
Old space is more affordable than new or improved space –
Exhibit D-38
Attachment 2-223
Springfield Main Street Vision Plan: Public Engagement Summary 1/2014-3/2014 9
upgrading and affordability can be contradictory
Shopping center at 30th and Main needs better access – Hey
ODOT!
Safe routes to school!!!
Signals at streets that serve schools
More shopping and restaurants. Encourage destination
businesses like Gray’s Garden Center
Destination places drive-in movie theater
Niche/nodes
Backs of businesses are a complementary face to residential
Vertical farming
More art and art enclaves
Encourage innovation in ideas that identify businesses to the
community
Rosboro anchors area
Added industrial corridor on 28th utilities vacant had along 30th
Find new big businesses for open space. Call center, tech??
Not something that will kill off the small shops.
Turn lanes at 28th onward are good – several people concurred.
Update the backside of 28th street where it is industrial and
trucks travel at northside of Main St. (several people concurred)
Beautification along corridor needs incentives; taxes going up =
worry.
Concern about EMX, bus riders are shabby.
Level of bus service is too much = mere direct routes. (Feel 11th
bus is okay)
They like the river bend loop at EMX
Not super walkable, improve streetscape
Enhance business variety
Mixed use doesn’t fit here.
No place to go to lunch via foot. Have to walk too far to get
anywhere. Doesn’t bring in the family crowd.
Housing Good realization – protect adjacent established residences –
locate near transit
Housing is protected despite intense commercial growth
Separate resident in area from industrial focus
Keep housing quiet and secure while encouraging the beauty
and joy of being there and coming there
Every crosswalk is an opportunity to become and unique place
and reinforces sense and places they connect.
Heavy single family homes. Mixed use housing more suitable
for closer to downtown. Mixed use further to west.
Exhibit D-39
Attachment 2-224
Springfield Main Street Vision Plan: Public Engagement Summary 1/2014-3/2014 10
THURSTON
NEIGHBORHOOD
AREA
48th – 69th
Need E-W Bike/Ped connections – bike/ped bridge north
and south of main
Lower speed limits from 40 to 35
Cars going too fast
People jaywalking at night – not using crosswalks
Change law to make crossing the highway illegal
Lanes for residential driveway access
Generate sense of entry into open spaces – wayfinding
Celebrate sense of changing places through which we
travel: walking journey always changing on each occasion.
Destination points on Main St. to draw people in.
Rear access to Thurston (someone suggested that is in the
works) then he suggested between 58th to 66th to improve
the truck transit.
Yes, downtown is office, professional, educ, govt. Mid
section is thru-way, larger business. Yet, Thurston is not
only our east gateway, but also a distinctive neighborhood.
We need to support neighborhood businesses. Family
oriented.
Connect to Thurston Hills/Middle Fork Willamette
Mixed use housing works well/entertainment features
Bike/ped bridge over Bob Straub?
Primary entrance from E
Business Activity Any restaurant would be good. Aside from a Mexican and
fast food. There’s nothing.
Ok to support small biz
Interesting concept of entertainment clusters
Re: Segment 3 – Thurston Neighborhood The friends of the
Springfield Arch, a non-profit community group has
independently designed and built 5’ wide scale model of
our proposed Arch, which would
anchor” the east end of town. This is a double-sided
landmark which would welcome travelers from the east to
Springfield and inform travelers from the West. See
examples. INCLUDE CONTACT INFORMATION FOR
THOMAS LINCOLN if he wants that.
Drive-in movie theatre would draw folks
Create safer pedestrian environment
More food accessibility for walking/bike
Definitely needs a destination
Small recreation kayak store
By Bimart/Albertsons they like the area.
Movie theater = @ 69th
No easy access to mountain gate park
Thurston does not need to grow east
Hub for future entertainment opportunities
No destination… make it a destination!
Mixed use housing working better on East section
Exhibit D-40
Attachment 2-225
Springfield Main Street Vision Plan: Public Engagement Summary 1/2014-3/2014 11
Housing Protect from infill or higher density development
Ok for mix incomes and age group housing options
How to support quality rental options?
Encourage M-F along main, especially on South side
(current SF Neighborhood on south side is a narrow strip)
Thurston currently has a strong community – downtown has
growing community – downtown has growing community.
Need to build communities in between.
Increased bike connectivity without
Folks felt that housing is sufficient
Springfield school district has land there now
Diverse incomes and ages make for richer, more exciting,
vibrant places.
Housing chokes = own – rent – detached – attached –
large-small = here too, the more diverse, the healthier the
community.
Willamalane future development
Mixed use could work here!
Connect thru to ridgeline and river.
A gateway, welcome to Springfield!
CORRIDOR
WIDE GOALS
Transportation Downtown food co-op focus on McKenzie River farms + Tech
Incubator – small, collaborate with Symantec
Concerning safe speeds. I would like to see Main St. a slow
two way street. I do understand the hurdles since it is a state
highway.
Travel speed/time on Main St. is a big plus – it could use some
“dressing up”
Safety is key
Ok to accessible transit
Yes, don’t forget HWY 126 is still a highway!
Ped education – safety needed
Make jaywalking illegal
Reduce development codes and fees for adaptive re-use
especially in couplet and midtown
Center turn lane crucial for business
Jaywalking citations for unsafe crossing on Main St.
Lower speed limits 40 to 35 MPH
Slow it down 35 MPH
Make jaywalkers illegal and ticket people to keep them safe.
Hard to see one-sized fits all – look at in segments
TOD – Corridor would be great
There are few options for development in Springfield
Artists “hub” in neighborhoods through out – weaving studios
community garden youth, glass blowing studio, LCC extension
Everything is art; art is not just a thing. Think of “Art as a way”
when concerning infrastructure, development, the feel of
places and the life that takes place there.
Exhibit D-41
Attachment 2-226
Springfield Main Street Vision Plan: Public Engagement Summary 1/2014-3/2014 12
Too large of blocks > more friendly lower speed limit
Crosswalks as place making tools.
Extremely frequent services
Public Realm Yes, please make pedestrian-orientated design better! With
signs, lighting, banners
What is an emerald necklace?
Wider sidewalks
Not everywhere – trees in couplet ok – east of I-105 too but
block views of businesses in other segment
Maintain access for biz – some need truck access
Focus on smaller community nodes but ensure there is good
connectivity between them
Things always change. Never see exactly the same thing
twice. Always more.
Celebrate the element of water as events that delight as well
as give life.
Comments on Table Maps
Couplet
o Add housing and connectivity
o Think about connections to Mill Race natural area.
o Be mindful of freight
o Wide sidewalks
o Through traffic, or local? If through traffic from East can go elsewhere, it will
benefit area. Large trucks in narrow lanes is difficult.
o Reserve open lots to make improvements – prioritize setbacks.
o Lower speeds and better environment to encourage pedestrian level activities.
Mid Business
o Trees
o Continue Boulevard concept: wider, slow traffic down so log trucks are less
threatening. Wide-median (vision for Franklin as an example). Allows for higher
density (some disagreement on this concept)
o No good bike connection between 28th and 32nd.
o Re. Infill housing graphic: Don’t envision this ON main Sty but a block or two OFF,
more pleasant.
o Median island not as good as narrow road for pedestrian crossing (flashing light
as a stop gap measure). Benefit is slowing traffic down.
Thurston
o Enhance variety of businesses
o More mixed use from 48th to 54th
o Make Albertson’s area a hub – entertainment
o More wayfinding signage
o Capitalize on trail system, start mountain bike trail off of Main, create it as a
destination, can you connect trails to center of Thurston?
o How do you connect river to ridgeline?
o Slower speed
o More lighting
Exhibit D-42
Attachment 2-227
Springfield Main Street Vision Plan: Public Engagement Summary 1/2014-3/2014 13
o Lots of cars coming off Bob Straub too quickly, unsafe for pedestrian crossing.
No signage telling you to slow down.
General
o Expand transit frequency to Thurston
o Swap on-street and bike lanes
o Transit adds vibrancy
o Frequent bus service
o More pedestrian crossings
o Vision should accommodate transit depending on BRT extension.
o Mixed use, not just clusters.
Exhibit D-43
Attachment 2-228
Springfield Main Street Vision Plan: Public Engagement Summary 1/2014-3/2014 14
Youth Meeting Summary
Our Main Street: New Discoveries, Inspiring Visions
Wednesday, March 5th from 9:30 a.m to 11 a.m. at Thurston High School
Purpose
Gather input on visions, goals and opportunities for the different places along the Main
Street Corridor from youth. Key Questions were the same as public meeting: Do the
draft vision and goals help make Main Street a better place to live, work, shop and
travel? Has an important opportunity been missed? Which goals do you think are most
important to the community?
Presenters
Linda Pauly, City of Springfield, City Project Manager
Julie Fischer, Cogito, Public Involvement
Judith Castro, Cogito, Public Involvement
Attendees
Forty high school students in the Thurston Leadership Class, primarily Juniors and
Seniors, participated in the session. Teacher Noland Peebles asked students to think
ahead of time about Main Street, and here are their comments:
• National chain restaurant in the Thurston area
• Too many auto repair shops facing Main Street
• Cafe Yumm
• Food carts or kiosks for food
• Cross walk somewhere between 58th and 69th
• More trees
• Something in the vacant lot behind Dutch Bros.
• Farmer's market in Thurston
• Clothing store
• More street lights--between 58th and 69th--only on one side of street
• Street sweeping
• Remove vacant houses/buildings
• Adjust traffic lights -- too short
• Planned landscaping
• Covered LTD stops; enlarge bus stop in front of high school
Agenda
Welcome
Presentation
Small Group Discussion
Full Group Debrief
Exhibit D-44
Attachment 2-229
Springfield Main Street Vision Plan: Public Engagement Summary 1/2014-3/2014 15
Welcome
Linda Pauly introduced the project goals and how this project relates to other key
projects in Springfield.
Presentation: Draft Vision and Goals for the Corridor
Julie and Judith introduced draft visions and goals for each of 3 major corridor
segments: Couplet Area, Mid-Springfield Business Corridor, and Thurston Neighborhood
Area. Visit the website at http://ourmainstreetspringfield.org/main-street-corridor-vision-
plan/ for a copy of the powerpoint presentation.
Concluding Questions and Comments from Youth
• Crosswalk at 58th
• Better traffic lights (timing)
• Food-better restaurants
• Less bars
• Bowling alley close to Thurston
• Healthy restaurants
• Clean up graffiti
• Less empty lots (near dairy queen)
• Less car services
• Tackle strip clubs first
• No empty buildings
• Taller more modern buildings- looks better
• Planktown restaurant-good
• Question: How do we pay for this?
• More trash and recycling bins- pollution
• Homeless- crime. How do we prevent crime?
• Place/shelter for homeless to stay
• Weyerhauser behind dairy queen- not used except for cows
• Plazas outdoor seating- what about rain?
• Covers over bus stops, covered benches
• Entertainment- putters or bowling, fun- mid section 32nd
• Gymnastics center or laser tag- by recreation center at 32nd
• Footbridge between 69th and 58th
• Downtown- expand that
• Fun for parents multiple recreation things
• Beautifying- last page
• Question: When do we see change?
Youth Written Responses on Input Forms
THE
COUPLET
AREA -
Main Street
A draft vision and goals to make Main Street a better place overall.
I think that it’s really important to create places where people can
eat healthy, have good shopping stores, and overall for the town to
at least look nice. We don’t need any more coffee shops. There is
a lot of space behind Albertsons that we could use.
I do believe the goals help envision Main Street as a better place to
live. It looks cleaner and more of a place people would like to stop
at while traveling. Not only do I think we should up our looks with
Exhibit D-45
Attachment 2-230
Springfield Main Street Vision Plan: Public Engagement Summary 1/2014-3/2014 16
buildings/shops, but also with agriculture and trees/gardens. I like
the small plazas and public art.
I think that trash cans with recycling bins next to them are
necessary on all sidewalks through Main Street. Ghetto vacant
buildings should be torn down.
Expand though downtown main, the sections near A3 look good
but before that is run down. Add restaurants, quick but quality food
places, Panera Bread, Baja Café, Hawaiian Time.
Expand off of down town main by A3. Gateways and the library
are some nice places.
Saturday Market alive after 5
I think the most important goal should be the overall health of
residents living near Main Street. You should be most concerned
about the people living near by. Thus, we should implement more
healthy food choices and make the overall atmosphere better. Tear
down vacant building and build new housing.
Apartment and housing above. More diverse shopping, all ideas
look good
Get rid of junky and run down businesses. Add nice apartment
space or town houses. Do something with the empty mill. Have
more events there or turn it into something else, such as a park.
Make an official drive-in movie theatre. Add more evening activities
there isn’t anything to do past 6 except eat. Add a park! More
date-type activities.
Brick business, big windows, separate building, bright lights
Cleaner and nicer signs, street signs, business signs. Cleaned up
businesses and requirements for paint color, brick businesses,
bright lights
Cleaner and nicer streets, more bright, white lights, certain
requirements for paint color.
Lights, vibrant lights for poppin night life, clean up the
streets/people, green, red, white, blue, yellow, black..more colorful
drawing
Better shopping, more sit-down coffee houses, cleaner looking
street lights, repair road lines, bark a mulch, plant flowers and
trees, power wash buildings, have cleanliness rules
Shopping, shopping center, mall-café/restaurants, walking areas,
apartments/townhouses
Get rid of Adult Shops, more healthy food choices, cleaner looking
roads and sidewalks, better landscaping, walking paths
Getting better shopping options would be awesome. Currently you
have to drive all the way to Eugene to get to any good restaurants
or clothing places. Plus, new businesses would help beautify Main
Street, which would maybe help fix the current dangerous feel.
Plus new businesses would help the economy.
I feel like if we carry through with these plans, Springfield will be a
much more beautiful place for tourists to travel through. I think the
most important thing is to get restaurants and shops near Thurston
area, not near downtown. I also think we need more options of
food. The only fast food options we have are mainly burgers and
junk, we need healthier options.
Exhibit D-46
Attachment 2-231
Springfield Main Street Vision Plan: Public Engagement Summary 1/2014-3/2014 17
I feel like the draft vision and goals help Main Street a better place
to live. I would most definitely shop and eat here. An opportunity
has been missed from waiting until now to start this project. The
goals I think that are important are more housing, like apartment
buildings and more healthier fresher food places. I also feel like
there should be more gyms so it will get people more active.
More diverse shopping, more modern businesses, plazas, theatre
building, no more run downs! University District apartments? Need
higher job density. Make and industrial district.
Get rid of run down places, do something with the creepy mill,
make Wildish more of a performance venue (smaller concerts) to
attract tourists/locals, add a few nice apartments or
duplex/townhouses, a nice park.
We need downtown to be safer and cleaner, less gangs. I feel like
you guys are trying to turn this place into a party city and not a
home town. Personal safety. How to grow jobs? Where to put new
businesses?
Add a place to shop, new buildings, new nice vegetation areas
Yes, I think it will make it a more desirable place to go to. I think
they have waited too long. I really like the idea of apartments
above businesses.
Yes. The draft vision and goals would help make Main Street a
better place in general. An opportunity has been missed by waiting
so long to start this project. I think the goals that are most
important are housing complexes and more activity build places
that people in the community could enjoy.
The goals I feel most important is safety, healthier, and places
being convenient at more times.
Farmers market, lighted crosswalks
Make it look cleaner and nicer, not favorable for getting rid of
businesses but instead improve! Wendys= 100% all real beef,
always fresh never frozen, been helping families there value menu
since 1910
Too dark, need more lights, feel very unsafe in downtown
Springfield at night, more food
More street lights, find some of the kind of stores with little jobs and
little $ being earned for ideas that would be more beneficial
Instead of putting flowers that are small and near to the ground
level, we should plan growing big trees that are solid and would not
be damaged, working on creating more recreational things as a
whole and not including age barriers, repaint the businesses that’s
gonna stay standing
The visions depict a good representation of how greener could
improve the streets, adding more recreation (bowling) for all age
fun, repaint current run down businesses to add liveliness
A shopping place would be great, art and vegetation to nicen area
up, new businesses are important
Shops, coffee shops, restaurants, more diverse shopping, movie
theatre, bowling alley, look like Bend
Yes, alive after 5/Saturday Market
Exhibit D-47
Attachment 2-232
Springfield Main Street Vision Plan: Public Engagement Summary 1/2014-3/2014 18
MID
SPRINGFIELD
BUSINESS
CORRIDOR
Small cute movie theatre! Tea place, yoga, zumba building.
Movie theatre in this area would be a good idea. Frozen
yogurt, small shops, bicycle parking, Buffalo Exchange #1
drawing
Bowling alley, mini gold, big family restaurant, more apartment
housing.
Fill in empty space by 32nd like skating rink (ice), Red Robin.
More housing, apartments (cute ones). Camp put, more things
for families to do, activities
Paint jobs every where. Drive in movie theatre
Add more entertainment sources such as- bowling, lazer tag,
movie theatre. Also take vulgar shops out make our area look
trashy. Healthier eating choices- jamba and Café Yum. Add
more gyms and fitness centers
I think the more modern looking buildings is the best idea
Add more entertainment sources( bowling, lazer tag). Make
building pretty/modernize. Get rid of strip clubs and adult
shops. More parks. Healthy eating places (both fast and
casual sit down) Jamba Juice, Café Yum. Retail stores/nice
strip mall. More gyms and community fitness centers with
classes and activities
Clean up the street
Put in restaurants and cafes, make a desirable area to be
around, beautify the area, make it like the Crescent Village
area/complex off of Gateway and Old Coburg Rd.
Clean out the empty lots and build businesses on those
lots.42nd and main, Dutch Brothers lot, strip needs filled and
cleaned. Less bars and more restaurants
Oxy clean, clean it up, beautify the area
Black (pole) street lights, bark a mulch, power wash buildings,
Whole Foods store or restaurant, cool architecture, sit down
coffee shops.
Less empty lots, more businesses-employ workers
More jobs, cleaner environment
I personally really liked the stormwater drain idea, which’ll help
Main Street look much cleaner. Plus, it’ll probably help keep
our river clean. I think that improving transit, and maybe make
riding the bus less intimidating. Because right now it some
times feels like you’re going to get mugged/stabbed at the bus
stop.
I think we need better options for entertainment. Such as an
indoor building for fun, like NAAG (gymnastics academy), a
laser tag building, an indoor park, etc. We have nothing close
to Thurston. I also think it looks too plain and boring. We are
heading to the future and need new up-to-date looking
buildings. The examples are too vintage.
Yes, it looks more up-to-date. I would love to see Springfield
more like this. Some of the goals I would like to reach in this
community: taking advantage of abandoned buildings,
Exhibit D-48
Attachment 2-233
Springfield Main Street Vision Plan: Public Engagement Summary 1/2014-3/2014 19
businesses and parking lots. It will give people more jobs and
a happier place to live.
I love these ideas and drawing of Thurston Gateway District. It
looks very up-to-date and I think we deserve a great and
beautiful atmosphere to be in.
Think Malls? Shopping centers? Higher recognition stores
(Nike, Sports Authority, Ross, Target) Costco! Offices for local
services, stack the lots for businesses, use the room, not
cluttered though. Possibly bring back National Gov Boot
Camp? Not Army
Make places look nicer and friendlier, add more trees, maybe
some good neighborhood places (small grocery stores),
provide things for low income people
We need a Jamba Juice, more trees, don’t take away from
what we have. These is people that live in low income housing
here, don’t kick them on street with building big businesses.
Plants and trees dividing streets, make buildings look newer,
add new restaurants
I think it should be cleaned up and more urbanized. They need
to incorporate more businesses in this area
I think this area of Springfield should look more like the vision
with more housing complexes. We should also incorporate a
restaurant or two. The housing should be more modern.
I think this would make the Thurston area look nicer than it is
now. But, I don’t think some of the buildings should look like
that, like the black one with the red dot.
Paint jobs, nicer buildings
Ikea
Really dirty, buildings need to be refaced, it’s not very clean,
more restaurants, sit down options
Utilize empty lots across from McKenzie Feed, make bar by
Dairy Queen smaller (takes up a full lot with pointless
building), too many storage places, talk to Weyerhauser
(whoever runs that) about huge field behind Dairy Queen (has
cows but too much unused space)
Should work on growing trees in middle lane of road, should
repaint the houses on road, can have small multi purpose
stores and food places
More infill housing behind storage unit between 42nd-48th,
possibly a nice place to eat to increase activity
Infill housing behind storage area, small road connecting
housing, nice restaurant on side of said street, N 40th
Modernize businesses, less run down, all of the above. I think
it’s most important that we have a community we can be proud
of, Café Yum*, Yogurt Joint, Laser Tag, Jamba*, Mucho
Gusto, Chipolte, BJ’s *=must have
Paint jobs every where, drive in movie theatre
Exhibit D-49
Attachment 2-234
Springfield Main Street Vision Plan: Public Engagement Summary 1/2014-3/2014 20
THURSTON
NEIGHBORHOOD
AREA
More park, ice rink, bowling alley, clothing stores, nice
apartments, spring field, roller coaster
Parks-cleaner, smaller food carts/shops, Humble Bagel, pita
pit, Panera bread, Café Yum, Yogurt X-treme, ice rink,
bowling alley, gym, swim and tennis facility, more modern
apartments like Crescent Village
Bagle Sphere, Café Yum, family restaurants like BJ’s, Red
Lion, Mezza Luna, sushi place.
More food options/healthier, Bagel Sphere, Café Yum, sushi
Food! High schoolers want more food places, not fast food,
Ex Bagel, Café Yum, Qdoba, Burrito Amigos. Fam
Restaurants: BJ’s, Red Robin, sushi
Parks, a strip of stores and buildings containing: Café Yum,
Jamba Juice, Bagel Sphere, tiny thrift clothing store, a small
yoga/zumba facility, frozen yogurt, antique store, cute
Oregon store or shoe store. A healthy food store. Cute
apartment facilities, more flowers and trees
Walls on THS (or new). Pizza by the Slice, Foyo/Cold
Stone. Outdoor pool, family restaurants: Red Robin, BJ’s,
Olive Garden, turf field
Add more modern street signs- some street signs are hard
to read. Implement more modern town houses and living
facilities for people with smaller budgets. Add more healthy
restaurants such as Mucho Gusto
Small, local owned businesses is a good idea especially
around the school when they would get a lot of business
Nicer housing, more parks, more prominent and modern
street signs, Add places to get food, especially near the
high school (healthier) Jamba Juice, frozen yogurt, Café
Yum, Mucho Gusto. More date options/activities. Sit-down
restaurants, nice places to walk around parks and nice
lighted side walks). Entertainment (more theatre, bowling,
drive in movie, theatre, shopping.
Clean up graffiti, more parking, more fun things to do in
Thurston. Drive through in summer, road repair.
Requirements of a certain amount of green space per
parking lot. Bike path. More street lights, more awareness of
littering, cafes or simple chain restaurants
More areas for greenery, more awareness with littering, add
chain restaurants, bike path
Bigger and better more modern building, more recreational
activities/ mini golf, movies, bowling, skating. More likeable
too. More side roads to be fixed
More parks, black street lights, sit down coffee shops,
healthy restaurants, sweep streets, more bike friendly, food
carts, bark a mulch, gym, local foods carts (selling farm
fresh stuff0, sit down study restaurants
Places to eat-sit down: entertainment, cross walks, bike
trails, safety, shops
Exhibit D-50
Attachment 2-235
Springfield Main Street Vision Plan: Public Engagement Summary 1/2014-3/2014 21
Cleaner building, sit down restaurants, more activities, more
modest buildings, lots of more trees and plants, HEALTHY
STORES, gyms
Thurston is ugly and has nothing. Adding new businesses, I
think would improve the local economy and draw money
back into Thurston instead of letting it bleed away to
Walmart. Any entertainment services would be very
appreciated too.
I like the ideas and where this is going. I think the mini-
shops need to be a nice, small restaurant (i.e. Dickie Jo’s)
and everyone seems to like adding a Fro-Yo building there
also. Because it’s close to home and easy to walk to during
school lunch/summer. We mainly need a better variety of
foods/shops/etc. More people live here so we need it to be
a nice area of Springfield. I like the pictures and examples.
Major housing refurbishment, new housing, complex’s,
apartments, condos less motes, more housing, wider variety
of building design, building plotting/placement, human
services, local hospital not urgent care
More affordable and healthy food places (not sit down
restaurants, Café Yum, Jamba Juice, Baja Fresh, Chipolte),
more middle-class places to live. Currently lots of low and
high income housing. I think the entertainment venue would
be better downtown, bowling alley
We don’t need taller, just renovate, less bars, less gangs,
less graffiti. We live in a beautiful valley, keep it clean. We
need a Jamba Juice and restaurant for families, Panda
Express, more trees for every building you build or
renovate. Don’t make our home tourist attraction. We live
here not Portland. Remember it rains here…
New restaurants, Panda Express. More trees, streetscapes,
fix up buildings
I think that Thurston has a lot of potential. I think it should
be turned into the nicest part of Springfield.
This area should be more restaurant and food based. We
should have places like Café Yum. We should make the
Thurston area the nicest part in the world.
I feel like these visions would make Thurston more
inviting.
The visions that are drawn up would certainly make the
place more inviting and a nicer place to be. When I picture
that area now, I picture run down buildings and kind of a
sketchy area. I think a bunch of opportunity are being
created like jobs and better for the economy. I think that
better and safer night life are goals for the environment
there.
Crosswalks between 58th and 69th by big bust stop, too
much foot traffic cross rode b/c it is a huge walk in either
direction to cross safely, empty lot by Safeway
We can have some game centers, can establish portable
food carts near Thurston with nutritious food, also we can
Exhibit D-51
Attachment 2-236
Springfield Main Street Vision Plan: Public Engagement Summary 1/2014-3/2014 22
start growing more trees
Don’t add/remove buildings, just revamp what’s there with
new paint and classier designs
General clean up, nicer food and public establishments
T-town, Bagel Sphere, Chipolte, Jamba Juice, soup, sushi
joint, Sonic, pizza, Target, Hawaiian Time, Chuck-E-Cheese
New Thurston High School, Pizza by the Slice, Fro Yo,
outdoor pool, family-dinner type restaurants, Olive Garden,
Drive in movie theatre
CORRIDOR
WIDE GOALS:
Transportation
and Public
Realm
Fix light changes in certain places, more bike areas/bike
paths. I believe our bus stations are fine as they are. More
cross walk awareness other than small flashing light.
Make bus stop signs prettier, cover and bench.
Make covers over the bus stop areas to wait for bus
Bus stops prettier, covers, bench
Less of the lighted cross walks. I think they are dangerous to
drivers who aren’t paying attention or are used to them.
Covered bus tops (all!) over pass
Legible and modern signs
Have background music on buses so its not extremely
annoying
General improvements for all areas: healthier food choices,
entertainment after 6, legible street signs, more
pedestrian/biker friendly, parks and parks with covered
seating, community gym/fitness classes center, less strip clubs
and adult shops, modernized building and nice housing.
Transportations: longer left turn light at 58th and main
intersection going towards THS, legible street signs,
nicer/wider sidewalks, street lights on both sides of the road,
more tree canopies all down Main Street.
When people are at the bus stops there is usually not a
covered area. We need one. Better bike paths.
Bike path! Awareness of pollution, car pooling, riding bikes
and walking
More LTD bus stops like the one on Pioneer Parkway
Old bus stops/New LTD drawing #16
I already said how I feel about the bus. The sidewalks are
really buckled and just generally bad looking. Let’s fix them
up.
Longer lights-more even, more crosswalks time, safer building
zone, cleaner streets, safer drain system, housing for
homeless/specific district
Cover the bus stops, it rains! Murals would be cool.
Safer bus routes, crosswalks, more medians, more murals that
represent the city, remember it rains here
More bus stops, bike lanes, sidewalks, more crosswalks
Get less sketchy taxis/busses, make busses more inviting,
more crosswalks
Get less sketchy taxis, make busses more inviting and clean,
Exhibit D-52
Attachment 2-237
Springfield Main Street Vision Plan: Public Engagement Summary 1/2014-3/2014 23
make prices for the bus cheaper, have bike renting places for
visitors that come to visit, make places where people are
going more inviting and comfortable for them to be walking
Bike repair stations every 3 miles, free air, inner tube vending
machine
The LTD bus kills our roads, bigger bike lanes, crosswalks, fix
street lights, Main Street more lights so it’s safer to walk at
night
I like the “emerald necklace” idea of parks that surround city.
Good separation b/w road and sidewalks, sidewalks should be
decorative, we can also put some boards reminding the
people who pass by the road saying “be happy, you are living
a good life”, release stress and bring joy!
Bigger bus stops, protection from weather
LTD stops should all be covered, be more equipped for
Oregon weather
Subway not sandwich joint like in NY, crosswalks 62nd st
EMS to Thurston bus station, foot bridges, 69th drawing #40
Exhibit D-53
Attachment 2-238
Exhibit D-54
Attachment 2-239
Springfield Main Street Vision Plan: Public Engagement Summary 4/2014-6/2014 1!
!
MAIN STREET CORRIDOR VISION PLAN
PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT SUMMARY
April - June 2014
Introduction
The City of Springfield is engaging the community in a planning process to envision a preferred
future for Main Street between Downtown and Thurston. Citizens are providing important input
for the development of the Main Street Corridor Vision Plan - a set of recommendations that will
inform the City's land use policy and transportation system planning over the next several years.
The first public meeting was held in December 2013 to brainstorm “What is most important to
you about Main Street.” The second public meeting, held on March 6, 2014, presented draft
visions and goals, and the third meeting on June 25 of 2014 shared the draft implementation
strategies.
Community Outreach Summary
This third round of public input included both follow up with individuals involved in previous
meetings as well as outreach to people not yet connected to the project. Public discourse was
respectful, thoughtful, and hopeful. Participation continues to grow: we introduced the project
to over 150 new community members in the past few months and over forty individuals attended
the June 25th meeting. Ideas that were brought up in previous meetings were reinforced on
June 25th, supporting project goals and emerging strategies. The base concept of dividing the
corridor into segments and looking for opportunities within each segment was well received. The
launch of the Main-McVay Transit Study energized the transportation discussion and produced
more specific strategy input than the other two topics: Public Realm and Business/Housing. A
full summary of public comments is listed on page 6-17 of this report, but here are key themes:
What did we hear?
Public Realm:
• Remember history of the area, maintain “old town flavor”
• Make the area “human scale,” family friendly
• Take what is working downtown and “move it out”
• Support what exists now: don’t displace people or businesses
• LIGHTING – this was mentioned multiple times!
• Beautify, make it inviting: trees, landscaping, new paint
• Address crime and increase safety
• Stormwater treatment opportunities
• Economic viability
• Collaborate with Willamalane
Exhibit D-55
Attachment 2-240
Springfield Main Street Vision Plan: Public Engagement Summary 4/2014-6/2014 2!
Business and Housing:
• Expand housing choices, support affordable housing
• Flexibility in zoning, signage
• Flexibility in access management (ODOT)
• Natural, local foods market
• Support existing properties, businesses!
• Mix housing, business, industry, art
• Support downtown living
Transportation:
• Concern about decreasing vehicle speeds, AND support for slowing traffic
• Better signage
• Increase biking and walking safety by:
o Dedicated/separated bike and pedestrian paths
o Parallel bike path along Booth Kelly Road
o Better sidewalks, wider in “activity nodes”
o More pedestrian crossings, build a bike/ped bridge overpass
• Recognize impacts on property owners of broadening the street
• Don’t do bulb-outs
• Transit ideas:
o Improve shelters and services
o Helps spur development, walking and biking
o Recognize impacts of transit stop distance, locations, EmX buses
Publicizing the June 25 Meeting
The City of Springfield is committed to involving the public in the project. The project team
focused on direct outreach to the community at public events and speaking engagements at key
civic organizations. Specific activities included:
ChamberFest, June 11th, 5-8 pm
There were roughly 250 attendees in total at the event. Of those attendees, the Main St Vision
Plan outreach team spoke with about 150 people about the project, gaining 36 new sign ups for
Our Main St Interested Parties List. Many people told us they obtain their information through
the Springfield Chamber of Commerce, confirming that the Chamber and its many committees
and communication tools should continue to be a key organizational partner for information
dissemination.
Springfield Rotary, June 18th, 12-1 pm
There were 70 attendees. When asked how many had heard about the Our Main St Project,
three-quarters raised their hands in the affirmative. All received the invitation to the upcoming
meeting along with a project update from Linda Pauly, Project Manager. Seventeen people
signed up for the Our Main St Interested Parties List. Most of the discussion questions were
about downtown issues, with one about crosswalks on East Main.
Willamalane Summer Solstice Dash & Bash, June 21st, 5-8 pm
Roughly 400 people attended, and Main St Vision Plan outreach workers talked to people non-
stop. Twenty-two new people signed up for the project’s Interested Parties List. Since many of
these people had not heard about the project, they asked that a few minutes at the beginning of
the upcoming meeting help to orient newcomers.
Exhibit D-56
Attachment 2-241
Springfield Main Street Vision Plan: Public Engagement Summary 4/2014-6/2014 3!
Organization Partners
Helped by advertising in Newsletters, Calendars, and Meeting Announcements
• Chamber of Commerce: Bottomline newsletter to approximately 2,000 area businesses; two
press releases on website, handed out postcards at Gateway Development Committee, City
Club, and all Chamber Meetings
• Emerald Arts Center: Saturday email blast
• City Club: Posted on website, meeting announcement
• NEDCO: E-invite to 1,000-person list
• LTD: Invitation sent to LTD Board, EmX Steering Committee, and Main-McVay Stakeholder
Advisory Committee.
• City Elected Officials, Commissions and Committees: City Council, Planning Commission,
Historic Commission, Development Advisory, Downtown Citizen Advisory, Springfield Bicycle
and Pedestrian Advisory
Invitation
This invitation was e-mailed to approximately 600 individuals on the interested parties list. In
addition, the project made phone calls to over 50 individuals involved in civic issues or
connected to Main St. to invite them to the meeting.
Media: Media Advisory, Register Guard Community Calendar, KEZI News Story
Having trouble viewing this email? Click here
Main Street Vision Plan: Emerging Visions, Viable Future
How can we work together to make Springfield's Main Street Corridor better
over the next 20 years as Springfield grows? The City of Springfield invites
you to provide input on specific strategies, projects and programs that will help
bring about changes the community would like to see.
When: Wednesday, June 25, 5:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m.
Where: Springfield City Hall, 225 Fifth Street, Library Meeting Room
Please RSVP so we can plan refreshments!
Agenda
Opening Remarks
Presentation: Implementing the Vision and Goals
Three Table Discussions: Transportation Choices; Public Realm
Enhancements; Business and Housing
Large Group Discussion
The Main Street Corridor Vision Plan will be a set of recommendations that
inform the City's land use and transportation planning over several years for
the lands along Main Street. The meeting location is ADA accessible. For
translation services or for a personal PA receiver if hearing-impaired please
call 541.726.3610 to arrange for these services.
Main-McVay Transit Study
Advances
From: Our Main Street <info@ourmainstreetspringfield.org>
Subject: June 25 Meeting Agenda, Main-McVay Update, Downtown Lighting
Date: June 18, 2014 3:36:32 PM PDT
To: juliefisch@msn.com
Reply-To: info@ourmainstreetspringfield.org
Exhibit D-57
Attachment 2-242
Springfield Main Street Vision Plan: Public Engagement Summary 4/2014-6/2014 4!
Public Meeting Summary
Our Main Street: Emerging Visions, Viable Future
Wednesday, June 25th from 5:30 pm to 7:30 pm at Springfield City Hall
Purpose
Gather input on implementation ideas for moving toward the vision for Main Street. Key
Questions: What are a few key things that could be done to make Main Street a better place to
live, work, shop, and travel? Which ideas do you think are most important to the community?
Presenters
Linda Pauly, City of Springfield, City Project Manager
Tom Litster, Otak, Consultant Project Manager
Anne Fifield, Blue Mountain Consulting, Economics
Brad Coy, DKS Associates, Transportation
Julie Fischer, Cogito, Public Involvement
Attendees
Approximately 45 individuals from a variety of community organizations, businesses, residents,
corridor users, and property owners in Springfield, including: Kiwanis, Rotary, Chamber of
Commerce, the Historical Commission, the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee, Sprout,
and City Club.
Agenda
• Welcome: Opening overview
• Presentation: Implementing the Visions and Goals
• Table Discussions: Transportation, Business and Housing, Public Realm
• Large Group Conclusions
Welcome
Linda Pauly introduced the project goals and how this project relates to other key projects in
Springfield.
Presentation: Emerging Visions, Viable Future
Tom Litster of Otak introduced draft implementation strategies in three key areas: transportation,
business and housing, and public realm. Visit the website at
http://ourmainstreetspringfield.org/main-street-corridor-vision-plan/ for a copy of the PowerPoint
presentation. Questions from participants following the presentation:
Q: There are images on the wall. Can we send back ideas of “like this not that” a week or so
later after we have time to think about it? A: We’ll post the materials on website so you can have
time to look at it and send comments.
Q: Where does 19th St activity node come from instead of 21st? A: It’s open for discussion in the
Public Realm area.
Exhibit D-58
Attachment 2-243
Springfield Main Street Vision Plan: Public Engagement Summary 4/2014-6/2014 5!
There were no further questions, so Julie provided participants with basic instructions on the
small group discussion tables: choose a table, listen to a brief introduction by the group
facilitator, participate in the discussion, fill out the input form, and use the dots to identify things
you like on the display posters.
Small Group Discussion Notes
!
Public Realm Table
Facilitator introduction: What appeals to you? What do you want to see along Main St?
Garden Street idea? More or less of these elements? Stormwater management has potential to
be more for the public realm. Individual distinctive gateways? Good idea?
These aren’t proposals, but visual representation of ideas for your feedback.
We have a cultural landscape between 10th and 21st—it’s a cultural landscape that has history!
19th isn’t the right breakpoint. Paramount is a better place.
You are asking where people would like to occupy? Not just vehicles. Why not the whole way?
One community. I don’t want a “gateway” at Bob Straub.
Just one “gateway” into Springfield. Without a gateway we have different areas based on speed.
If you think about grammar and syntax you can put things together in different ways, so the idea
is to create a vocabulary. More human scale. Downtown core will move outward with
landscaping and public seating and traffic calming.
Q: Why isn’t there anything west of 10th avenue? A: Already have plans completed for
downtown. It’s project definition.
Q: I don’t know what that downtown plan is. We could start with tearing down this building. How
can you do Main St without including downtown? A: This vision would compliment the
downtown plan. Need another panel that shows downtown vision so we can build on it. We don’t
know what it is, you do.
It does feel different as you drive east. We do want to take that downtown feel and move it out.
Lighting downtown is really important—not just for illumination but also for how it feels. I would
like to extend the downtown lighting into the next segment.
Facilitator: What are things that would change your perception of Main St? City has to pick
targets because there aren’t enough resources to do it all.
Take corner of 14th, bakery, stores. What would get displaced it you implement this? It’s
important to understand if we are gentrifying and make sure they are part of the new vision. It’s
their community.
You have pedestrian, bike, transit, vehicle realms. I used to think of bikes as recreational vehicle
and that isn’t the case anymore. We need to make sure bikes have safe way to use these
streets.
Multi-way Boulevard could be part of this. Well-lit walkways make a difference in feeling safe
and getting out. I would like to see an overlay of elements that are good for youth and families to
Exhibit D-59
Attachment 2-244
Springfield Main Street Vision Plan: Public Engagement Summary 4/2014-6/2014 6!
be out. Main focus should be how to generate the interest in this—a lot of people believing that
beautifying this will pay off. We wanted a hospital in 1950s and people bought bonds to fund
that. If people want it, it will be built. You have to sell it to the community through public
involvement. Direct this energy to specifics—not this broad stuff.
Q: Public participation is what gets people excited. We need a success that generates proof to
businesses that people will come. Can’t get investment without that. Is this part of talking about
re-zoning of areas? A: City will undertake that in the near future through another public process.
Safety and lighting are my main interest. My cousin and I took the bus to a basketball game. We
got off at 21st and it was dark and scary. Is it safe to walk there? Is it sheltered and comfortable
when I am waiting for the bus? Wildish Theater parking doesn’t feel safe one block away from it.
I think this city hall is a dangerous feeling. It’s an albatross. It’s a dead zone. A black hole.
I think with the landscape idea there is an opportunity to use stormwater to do this. How do you
maintain this? There isn’t money to maintain the great landscaping on Pioneer Parkway. Can
we use a model in a place to show others how they could do this in their yards?
Q: How far off Main are you going? A: One parcel each side of Main St.
Q: Since Main St is a state highway, can we get money from them to help? A: Can ask ODOT to
be a project partner but it takes time to get that.
This area is very industrial (mid-section) and then some stores around Thurston.
There are more shops by Paramount. Could we make it more inviting for people to come in
there? Something that makes it noticeable as a shopping area that draws attention?
Basically it’s all pretty ugly and anything will be an improvement.
Most of the growth has been out in the Gateway area.
Make parklettes near corner—take over a few parking spaces for a few days and do cool
things—not permanent. Mohawk is a shopping center and it has expanded around there. It’s
kind of frozen in time though.
Great ideas. We have free parking. It’s a perfect place for improvement.
Q: I like garden street plan. But why would people be walking there? They sure don’t now. A:
The vision is that there will be more things that would make you want to walk there and have
possibility of living there too. Complimentary to that vision is better public realm.
Has to be economically viable.
Willamalane has done a lot by bringing Millrace to life. City needs to cooperate with that. Main
focus is that city needs to do enhancements hand in glove with Willamalane—cooperatively. A:
City recognizes need for Willamalane to be a strong partner.
It can also be a magnet for kids that don’t have anything to do and for people who have
nowhere to be. Not good.
Exhibit D-60
Attachment 2-245
Springfield Main Street Vision Plan: Public Engagement Summary 4/2014-6/2014 7!
I think enhancements make such a big difference to how it feels.
See below for the written results of the input forms:
Public Realm
Street signage (wayfinder) similar to Salem
More trees on Main Street that provide shade (oak, maple, elm)
Empty lots have lawns
Urban farming
Art walks/rides
Mural walks/rides
Community gardens
Co-use bike/ped/auto
Separated traffic system bikes/auto on Main
Develop accessible neighborhood gardens
Street calming programs
Attractive areas to draw people, families to spend time here – water, grassy areas, picnic
tables, small shops – what to do about the fast traffic? Trees, landscaping.
We need to have codes that are not so restrictive that they discourage
business/residential development but they have restrictions that DO discourage
“shlocky” development. It’s a hard balance to achieve.
1. DO NOT put in bio-swales if there isn’t dedicated budget to maintain them. Portland is
full of weed patches. Very un-friendly to the street-scape. 2. Curb extensions can be a
bikers’ nightmare. Your 3 categories here are interdependent. Also, I HATE biking with
buses chasing me.
Safety is my preferred priority although appeal to business owners would be a close
second.
Sufficient width of sidewalks to accommodate appropriate landscaping
D/N necessarily need parkways between sidewalk and street, but some w/ be
appreciated.
- Monument signs for business and places of interest
- Better (increased) street sweepers
Business and Housing Table
Is there a possibility to create a space between 42nd & 48th where we have an area with a daily
farmer's market?
A natural food market, which is big like Safeway, near downtown, would be good.
Sprout is doing a great job!
Q: Please expand our housing choices in this area! There is land near Rexius which would be a
great housing spot - is it being used? Plans? A: It is currently privately owned, don’t know about
future plans for the property.
Exhibit D-61
Attachment 2-246
Springfield Main Street Vision Plan: Public Engagement Summary 4/2014-6/2014 8!
Q: Will there be flexibility in zoning with housing? A: They will assess what potential changes
might need to be made based on development recommendations.
Q: How will business property owners be impacted? How will the zoning codes change? A: The
decision is influenced by the recommendations/needs of the community, businesses feedback,
and zoning requirements from ODOT, the City, and LTD.
It would be helpful if you did not have to go to ODOT to get permission to put in new
openings/access. Bigger business can afford to go from agency to agency to get the permits,
but a smaller business or residents cannot. We need help with getting road access, selling a
business, expanding business access - in a less costly manner.
On the other hand, the city cannot pay for everything.
Does the city have overlay zones? If it is not flexible this might stop the progress.
I am in favor of coupling housing and business - especially because we need more little
restaurants.
We also need to be supportive of the industrial zone and have more industry in the middle
corridor.
But, we do need to be cautious with the type of industry mixed with housing so that people do
not get sick.
There was a special on OPB recently every Thursday night 8-9pm they have a report on
communities. The last one was on Portland and how they mix industry, art communities, and
housing.
Please make the central corridor more attractive.
Let's maintain the old town flavor while updating.
28th to 42nd corridor is narrow. Please deal with this.
Communicate from 42nd to 52nd that anyone who wants to ride bike has a death wish. Please
put a bridge that expands from this area all the way across or maybe even all the way to
downtown.
The Bob Strauss area is really nice - x4 people really like the beauty/park of this area.
Please put lighting near South A Street - that would help housing.
Separate roads for bikes. Should have a bike path near 32nd area.
Need more car-share if the city could help with this.
A bike share would help this area too.
Exhibit D-62
Attachment 2-247
Springfield Main Street Vision Plan: Public Engagement Summary 4/2014-6/2014 9!
See below for the written results of the input forms:
Business and Housing
- Passive house standard building (ultra energy efficient construction)
- Food co-op that focuses on local farms, open 7 days a week – similar to co-ops in
Portland
- Urban farming
Truck routing throughout city
Business shopping centers
Neighborhood access bikes/peds (seating and food)
Seasonal activities – sponsorships, Christmas parade, dog parade, kid parade, bike
parade, school parade
Community gardens
People living downtown
Small, local grocery store(s)
The Pearl District in Portland is very desirable and attractive. We should adopt policies
that would foster this kind of development in Springfield. – Downtown Springfield Main St
is probably the most likely location.
Zoning is the key. Don’t expect people to walk/bike to the store when you allow sprawl.
Affordable housing – don’t preclude allowing high densities
Make a Node at 48th & Main. HACSA has property and would love to build near services
Takeover Main St. from ODOT
Review zone rules, laws make it as easy as possible for businesses to make changes
and/or start up
Zoning that is flexible per needs of investor and stakeholders
Love the concept of nurturing existing businesses and perhaps using them as the
foundation for a community personality/culture.
Don’t discount strip malls, as they serve a purpose and are used widely, especially by
commuters w/ limited time to do chores and shopping.
Housing – multiple units that do not disturb or stress SFR areas. Also, placement near
traffic lights would soothe traffic entering and exiting Main St.
Transportation Table
GENERAL COMMENTS:
I would like to transportation be more humane here.
I want to ride my bike but areas like 37th /Main are way too scary. It’s 7.5 miles of ugly.
Bicycling or walking down Main Street is a deafening experience because of the logging trucks.
Transit seems to be working but it could be faster and updated.
Pedestrian safety is still a problem.
Vehicle speeds are too high.
Would like Main Street to be more multimodal.
Exhibit D-63
Attachment 2-248
Springfield Main Street Vision Plan: Public Engagement Summary 4/2014-6/2014 10!
Live on 55th Place. It’s been my primary route for the last 75 years. There are things about it to
improve but we need to be careful so we don’t impair or damage other parts of it.
Plan for people not cars.
PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES
Q: Has there been any study on pedestrian bridges over Main? Think it’s a good idea because
there is no place to cross with high volume of traffic. A: No.
Live on S. 51st Street and have to cross over Main to get to Riverbend Elementary. It’s very
frightening to do so with kids.
Q: How do you acquire the property for wider sidewalks? Do you just take it or condemn it? A:
Ideally it’s an agreement between the property owner and the jurisdiction.
What’s happening in Glenwood now, could happen on Main St. If you broaden the street into a
boulevard, you need to be frank that you are going to have to take from property owners to add
to the existing ROW. It’s realistic. Don’t be coy about this fact.
Don’t do bulb-outs. It’s a pain for motorists and you lose parking spots.
Q: What’s the purpose of wider sidewalks? A: Walkability.
I really like separation of road and pedestrians with a buffer. It creates a nicer walking
experience.
You don’t need wider sidewalks for the whole corridor, just in the activity modes.
I don’t have pedestrians as customers.
I like the wider sidewalks with planter boxes and outside seating, all of which improve the Main
Street experience for people.
Q: Don’t bulb-outs impede bicycles? A: Bulb-outs work with very fast traffic paced streets.
We need a bridge overpass since there are very few cross streets or any logical or natural
crossings.
Not enough pedestrian crossings.
We have 7 miles of ugly. Main Street has been planned not as people matter but only as cars
matter with narrow sidewalks, high speeds, and minimal bike lane width. Pedestrians and
bicyclists got the dregs that were left over after planning for cars.
There are no good places to cross.
Plan it as people matter, not cars.
Q: Is there any way to get the traffic off of Main Street? A: Depends on where you are on the
corridor.
Main Street shouldn’t have freight trucks. ODOT should have given Main Street to the city when
Hwy 105/126 was built.
Exhibit D-64
Attachment 2-249
Springfield Main Street Vision Plan: Public Engagement Summary 4/2014-6/2014 11!
Like wider sidewalk with a planting buffer. Use this in areas where there isn’t parking.
Consider bicycle-parking corrals. Bike parking on street bike corral.
ACCESS TO TRANSIT
Build decent transit stops with shelters. What we now have is a joke.
Lived in Portland when the streetcar developed and in L.A. when they expanded the subway
system. People complained and moaned. Those projects turned out to be huge successes and
have led the growth of the cities. Increasing quality of transit makes a huge difference.
Transit could drive the development along the Main Street corridor.
Look at the connections between transit and pedestrian/bicycle access.
Transit shouldn’t widen the roadway so that access and crossings are more difficult for
pedestrians.
Transit leads to development.
Promote walking and biking to transit.
EmX in corridor: recognize that the current design won’t handle the articulated hybrid buses.
Too much damage to asphalt.
If a NEPA analysis happens and a decreased number of transit stops are proposed, recognize
that people will need to walk further to get to stops. There are Title VI issues to address.
Concerned about removing travel lanes for EmX.
Q: What are the percent of people who are just travelling though east and west along Main? A:
We have not done an origin/destination analysis on the corridor.
Q: How do you divert that through-traffic? A: Depends on where you are on the corridor. Hwy
105/126 could be used.
Slow it down and give people an opportunity to stop.
BICYCLE FACILITIES
Cycle path - YES!
There are substandard bike lanes. Make them wider with a barrier between road and bikes.
Protected bike lanes are a stupid idea and dangerous to bikes.
No barriers. I think it is a bad idea because cars will turn into it.
Move curb out and put a multi-purpose path along Main.
Almost be better not to have a bike lane. It creates bad situations.
Consider a parallel bike boulevard along the Booth Kelly Road. It has available ROW and a
functional capacity but no one has the vision for that alternative.
Exhibit D-65
Attachment 2-250
Springfield Main Street Vision Plan: Public Engagement Summary 4/2014-6/2014 12!
Maintenance of bike lane is important.
Need separation between the road and bikes. For people doing family bike rides with young
people, it’s essential.
Dedicated space for bicycles.
Bicycle space needs to be connected to businesses.
Need to maintain access to businesses and not limit it because of bicycle lanes.
I like bike boulevards.
Think about a barrier between road and bike lanes with movable pylons to help educate people.
Need to reduce vehicle speeds.
Need to be careful with reducing speeds because it could restrict business.
Could you change speeds along the corridor in certain areas?
I am more likely to see businesses if I am driving slower.
More signage for slower speeds.
Add street trees and signage to slow people down.
If you want to Main Street slower for bicyclists, then why not make it 20 mph and see how
businesses will go away.
Plan as if people matter.
Look at Hwy 126 Safety Study as a base for discussion and planning.
When you make it a more aesthetically pleasing corridor, people will slow down.
Need a happy medium on the speed issue.
Use technology. We could have variable speeds throughout the day based on traffic volume.
Alter the speed.
See below for the written results of the input forms:
Transportation Choices
Safe and set aside bike lane
Murals of interest at stops directions and community interest points
Bus stop art program – Duck/Beaver art. Murals of interest at stops
Routing for bus peds and bikes/distance and interest points (time & distance)
Safe routes for bike/ped/auto – distance/time
Central points for transferring modes (bus/bike, auto/bus)
Points of interest/directions/time-distance… half mile factor
Bike access
Exhibit D-66
Attachment 2-251
Springfield Main Street Vision Plan: Public Engagement Summary 4/2014-6/2014 13!
Walkers
Upgrade bike lane design and lane design to handle transit loading and improve bike safety
Lower speed limit on parts of Main St
Transit needs to promote economic development, promote use by riders who are transit
dependent as well as those who have cars. Transit needs to consider and interface with land
use policy.
EmX seems like a highly effective form of transit. 1. Attracts riders and increases ridership. 2.
Reduces congestion. 3. Improves travel time for transit AND autos. 4. Stimulates business
development and increases business for existing businesses. 5. Reduces vehicle miles
traveled.
Don’t have bus stops that use the bike lane to stop or cross-through.
Lighting improved for safer biker commuting and intersection connections
Lower speed limit between 20th through Thurston area (35?)
A key to sustainable communities. Availability of a plethora of transportation options is key to
longtime viability and Springfield does a great job of working with partners to enable the
population.
Don’t over accommodate bicycles and buses at the expense of auto movement and safety.
Less than 10% (my est.) of travel occurs in alternate transportation. This is a state highway
and can’t be overly pedestrian-ized without negatively influencing efficient movement of
traffic.
More connectivity to Clearwater Path?
Full Group Discussion/Conclusion
I’d like to have better LTD shelters—not just a seat
I would have liked to go to the other groups since they all connect. I do agree we can’t see it as
one thing, but need activity nodes and segments. We also need various forms of transportation
recognized.
It’s nice to see it coalescing and gelling. A clearer picture is developing.
I’m pleased to see so many people and glad that people came to share their time and energy.
It is moving in a good direction.
Concluding comments from the project team:
Thank you for participating. We could have been here a few more hours talking about
transportation. We are all experts of our own experience. Please stay part of the discussion.
Next step, City Council will talk about this July 7th and will talk about this same stuff. Then we
will prepare the draft Vision Plan and it will go to Council in September. We will probably do an
open house--not a meeting-- around then. And this is informing the Main McVay Transit Plan.
Stay involved. Continued public involvement is necessary. A strategy isn’t getting it done. These
things are living documents and should be updated and be an ongoing conversation.
Note: See page 17 for public comments on wall maps and graphics.
Exhibit D-67
Attachment 2-252
Springfield Main Street Vision Plan: Public Engagement Summary 4/2014-6/2014 14!
Outreach Results from Latino Businesses
A goal of the project is to represent the views of stakeholders who do not often attend public
meetings. In addition, the project is committed to translating information into Spanish so that
the Latino community can participate. The project’s bi-lingual outreach leader had
conversations with 13 businesses between June 26 and July 7, 2014. Conversations focused on
sharing community results from prior outreach and meeting efforts, and recording input for the
current phase. A total of 10 businesses chose to participate, including: Las Tunas, Maribel’s
Hair Salon, El Trenecito, El Ranchito Grill, Memos, El Viejo Pilon Bakery, El Kiaman, La
Tortilleria, and Laura’s and Daisy’s, and Erica’s. The business owners made the follow
comments in contribution to the Main Street Vision Plan:
PUBLIC REALM
More lights are needed to illuminate the dark, the car stores in the mid corridor have some
lights, but other businesses do not.
Remodel and fix the old streets - we like the designs that are portrayed. This image is what I
am talking about because the buildings have paint and are clean. I like the bright paint colors.
More lights in street
Please place more lights in this area
Need more lighting in the middle corridor, but other areas seem fine
Please have more lights for safety
Garbage cans please
Take unused buildings, make paint updates, make it more beautiful
I like the seating outside and green area
More trees
More flowers
More lighting, remove people that drive customers away, and thank you for removing the
building where people were gathering and doing inappropriate things
BUSINESS AND HOUSING
New housing that is prettier and affordable
Please help with banners and signs
Create a banner program “Try it and if you like it you pay” – so that businesses can have a
break on their new signage and to help attract customers. If that is not possible create a
discount.
I would like there to be an organization that helps organize the local business owners to help
the homeless and feed them our left over food with donations from restaurants
Lights will help businesses
Help businesses with signs so that we can be seen
I like my area of business (around 34th)
I need more flexibility on signs
Keep encouraging businesses to clean up and paint buildings that are old
I would like there to be more help for business owners
TRANSPORTATION
We need more stop lights
More cross walks
We need cross walks that are more active in the morning and evening especially in the winter
where visibility is low
Slow traffic down please
Please note that there are no stoplights between 32nd and 42nd or between 42nd and 54th and
Exhibit D-68
Attachment 2-253
Springfield Main Street Vision Plan: Public Engagement Summary 4/2014-6/2014 15!
this is a very dangerous area
More bridges in this area in the mid-corridor to downtown
More parking and more security
More transportation: bus or EmX
Need more free parking please for customers
New sidewalks and streets
New pavement
Please slow speeds down
Have a different route for morning traffic
I would like there to be more parking
GENERAL COMMENTS
I have never had problems though my neighbors have and they need the security
Please clean up the mid-corridor area it looks disheveled
Please clean up the streets
Need more security because there are a lot of people who are on drugs. They are dangerous
and drive customers away. (This business is close to 14th)
I like the changes that the city is making and that are being thought of (according to the images
and discussion so far) – going in the right direction
Please find a way to create help for the homeless. I help them sometimes by feeding them,
but they drive customers away. They have not been aggressive, but give a bad impression.
Have drivers’ licenses available so that customers can drive
I like these photos and ideas that the public is sharing
Please help police focus on drug and homeless folks
I like the design ideas
The area between Eugene and Springfield needs help
!
Public Comments
The following comments were received via phone, email, and website between April and June
2014
June 27 via email:
Hi, I enjoyed the evening and wish I was able to participate at all tables. I was at the
transportation table and one over-riding issue we discussed was traffic and crossings. What
came to mind afterwards was the thought: “Why does Main Street have to do all the work?” One
reason for this is that there are so few other cross-town streets to provide alternative routes, and
none close to Main Street. There are several opportunities for this: The Booth
Kelly/Weyerhauser Road; Centennial Blvd; Industrial Ave.
April 14, 2014 via email:
I wanted to share a picture that was brought to my attention from a Chamber staff who used to
live in this city. She thought that Downtown Springfield would look stunning with the signage and
planters on the light posts. Thought I would share that with you folks.
http://www.lakecochamber.com/community/lakeport.asp
April 2014 phone call: At 1260 Main Street a historic house burned down, Brattain-Hadley
Homstead heritage site. I think it should be restored to its original state.
Exhibit D-69
Attachment 2-254
Springfield Main Street Vision Plan: Public Engagement Summary 4/2014-6/2014 16!
In response to the March 6 Meeting:
4/8/14 To: "info@ourmainstreetspringfield.org
I was sorry to miss the meeting. I am very disappointed with the overall plans of LTD access as
the primary focus. I still don't see a focus group of what each rider would expect to bring to the
table. A 7-mile Walking Main St. with Bicycle Access is unrealistic with outdoor seating with rain
300 days a year. Really not reasonable! I appreciate the fact that vehicle traffic is spoken of but
I do not want to lose my business or be forced out with expansion plans for widening I-126. We
are still in an economic downturn and the unreasonable expense of what you are requesting
would provide a lot of meals. I DO NOT WANT MAIN TO BECOME WILLAMETTE STREET.
One-way turned to two-way ect..I believe Main will become the place to avoid if the restrictions
in traffic flow are put in place. 126 to Eugene will become the exit to easy, avoid Main at all
costs it goes forever to nowhere. Thurston, Mid Springfield, Downtown Springfield, Glenwwod,
Eugene. Too many miles of single time destinations will decrease traffic and revenue . My
average customer spends $45 per visit, on an average of every two weeks. What will your bus
rider average at my destination?
Exhibit D-70
Attachment 2-255
Main Street Corridor Vision Plan June 25 Meeting: Emerging Visions, Viable Future
TOPIC AREA What are a few key things that could be done to make Main Street a better place to live, work, shop and
travel? Which ideas do you think are most important to the community?
TRANSPORTATION
CHOICES
PUBLIC REALM
BUSINESS AND
HOUSING
Please submit completed forms at the end of this meeting, or reply via email: info@ourmainstreetspringfield.org
or mail to: Linda Pauly, Development and Public Works, City of Springfield, 225 Fifth Street, Springfield, OR 97477
Exhibit D-71
Attachment 2-256
Exhibit D-72
Attachment 2-257
June 25 Meeting: Public Comments on Wall Maps and Graphics
Image 1 Written comments:
- Next to image of “Paved Intersection and Crosswalks”: “shorter x-walks better than just concrete @
intersection”
- Under image of “Gateway Arch”: “only at very special locations“
Exhibit D-73
Attachment 2-258
June 25 Meeting: Public Comments on Wall Maps and Graphics
Image 2 Written Comments:
- Under “Garden Street Plan” bullet points: “lighting”
- Under “Public Art Plan” paragraph: “include Springfield history pieces/info”
Exhibit D-74
Attachment 2-259
June 25 Meeting: Public Comments on Wall Maps and Graphics
Exhibit D-75
Attachment 2-260
June 25 Meeting: Public Comments on Wall Maps and Graphics
Image 4 Written Comments:
- Next to image of Stormwater planters: “LTD Springfield station water treatment – very
attractive”
- Under image of Stormwater planters: “? texture of sidewalks”, “incorporate place making
elements”
- Above parking lot image labeled “Many Opportunities with Development”: “A tree for every 4-
5 parking spaces yields sufficient shading!”
Exhibit D-76
Attachment 2-261
June 25 Meeting: Public Comments on Wall Maps and Graphics
Image 5 Written Comments:
- The words “Facade Improvement” circled and “MORE $” written below
- Under the image labeled “Pedestrian-Oriented Design”: “I like this look – very inviting and
attractive”
Exhibit D-77
Attachment 2-262
June 25 Meeting: Public Comments on Wall Maps and Graphics
Exhibit D-78
Attachment 2-263
June 25 Meeting: Public Comments on Wall Maps and Graphics
Exhibit D-79
Attachment 2-264
June 25 Meeting: Public Comments on Wall Maps and Graphics
Image 8 Written Comments:
- Next to “Bike Facilities” header: “Lighting?”
- Under the image labeled “Protected Bike Lane Next to Sidewalk”: “Bad idea”
Exhibit D-80
Attachment 2-265
June 25 Meeting: Public Comments on Wall Maps and Graphics
Image 9 Written Comments:
- Next to the “Pedestrian Facilities” Header: “Lighting?”
- Below the image labeled “Enhanced Station Design and Passenger Amenities”: “Bus shelters
that actually shelter passengers from rain, wind and snow”
Exhibit D-81
Attachment 2-266
June 25 Meeting: Public Comments on Wall Maps and Graphics
Image 10 Written Comments:
- Arrows drawn along segment two and labeled “Bike access from Thurston to downtown”
- 48th Street circled with comments: “Look at possible node here”, “HASCA property need ?
and trans”
Exhibit D-82
Attachment 2-267
June 25 Meeting: Public Comments on Wall Maps and Graphics
Image 11 Written Comments:
- Segment 1 Activity Node circled with comment: “Have WB trucks use A St (North lane)
- Segment 2 portion circled with comment: “Pedestrian bridge?”
- Black line connecting two orange dots labeled: “Bike route?”
Exhibit D-83
Attachment 2-268
Attachment 2-269