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