HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011 06 21 Glenwood Refinement Plan Phase IMEMORANDUM CITY OF SPRINGFIELD
DATE OF WORK SESSION: June 21, 2011
TO: Springfield Planning Commission PLANNING COMMISSION
TRANSMITTAL
FROM: Molly Markarian MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: Glenwood Refinement Plan Phase I
Metro Plan/Refinement Plan Amendment LRP2008-00017
ISSUE
BRIEFING AND DISCUSSION ABOUT THE DRAFT PUBLIC FACILITIES & SERVICES,
FINANCING PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE, AND URBAN TRANSITION & ANNEXATION
CHAPTERS FOR THE PHASE I UPDATE OF THE GLENWOOD REFINEMENT PLAN.
DISCUSSION
At the May 17, 2011 and June 7, 2011 Work Sessions, staff briefed the Planning Commission
on the status of the Glenwood Refinement Plan Update Project and presented information on
the Draft Land Use, Transportation, Open Space, and Housing & Economic Development
Chapters. At this Work Session, staff will continue the Glenwood Refinement Plan review
process by presenting information and answering questions regarding the Draft Public Facilities
& Services, Financing Public Infrastructure, and Urban Transition & Annexation Chapters.
Staff prepared these draft chapters in coordination with the Glenwood Technical Advisory
Committee starting in March 2011. In May 2011, the Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC)
recommended forwarding the policies and implementation strategies in each of these chapters
to the Planning Commission for its consideration.
A majority of CAC members supported these recommendations, and the reasons for lack of
support were noted. Concurrently with the development of subsequent chapters, staff has
continued to revise the Draft Public Facilities & Services, Financing Public Infrastructure, and
Urban Transition & Annexation Chapters based on feedback from the CAC and the City
Attorney’s Office (Attachments 1, 2, and 3).
ACTION REQUESTED
None – for information only.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1: Draft Public Facilities & Services Chapter
Attachment 2: Draft Financing Public Infrastructure Chapter
Attachment 3: Draft Urban Transition & Annexation Chapter
Public Facilities and Services Chapter Draft 1 May 26, 2011
Page 1 of 16
Introduction
As mentioned a number of times in this Plan, the availability of adequate public facilities and services is
a key factor influencing redevelopment and new development in the Glenwood Riverfront. As land
development patterns change over time, the demand for urban services also increases and changes.
These changes require that service providers, both public and private, plan for the provision of services
in a coordinated manner, using consistent assumptions and projections for population and land use.
This chapter refines the Public Facilities and Services Element of the Metropolitan Area General Plan
(Metro Plan) to focus specifically on the public facilities and services changes that are anticipated to be
needed to implement the Land Use policies put forth in this Plan for the Glenwood Riverfront,
consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 11, Public Facilities and Services, and the goals of this Plan.
On urban lands in Springfield, new development must be served by at least the minimum level of key
urban services and facilities at the time development is completed and, ultimately, by a full range of key
urban services and facilities1. This Chapter outlines objectives, policies, and implementation strategies
for the minimum level of key urban facilities and services applicable in the Glenwood Riverfront:
wastewater; stormwater; electric; water; police; fire and emergency medical; and public schools.
Communication is discussed in the electric section of this Chapter. Solid waste management will be
addressed in Glenwood Phase II since the region’s solid waste and recycling facilities are located within
the Phase II boundary in Glenwood. Land use controls are addressed in the Land Use Chapter.
Transportation is addressed in the Transportation Chapter. Citywide and local parks and recreation
facilities and services are addressed in the Open Space Chapter. The Glenwood Riverfront does not
necessitate refinement of Metro Plan natural gas and library facilities and services policy direction.
Wastewater Facilities and Services
Development in Glenwood over the last 20 years has been limited, in part, by a lack of existing public
wastewater (sanitary sewer) infrastructure. The City has partially removed this limitation by constructing
some of the key components of the public wastewater system, including two pump stations and the
Glenwood Trunk Sewer in Franklin Boulevard. Challenges remain for providing public wastewater
service to all areas in the Glenwood Riverfront. There are over 225 unincorporated acres in the
Glenwood Riverfront, and there are several properties annexed to Springfield since 2000 that continue
to be served by on‐site sewage disposal systems (septic tanks). Significant investments in public and
private wastewater infrastructure are needed in order for the Glenwood Refinement Plan to be fully
implemented.
1 The Metro Plan defines the minimum level of key urban facilities and services as: wastewater service; stormwater service;
transportation; solid waste management; water service; fire and emergency medical services; police protection; citywide park
and recreation programs; electric service; land use controls; communication facilities; and public schools on a district‐wide basis
(in other words, not necessarily within walking distance of all students served). The Metro Plan defines a full range of key
urban facilities and services as the minimum level plus urban public transit, natural gas, street lighting, libraries, local parks,
local recreation facilities and services, and health services.
Attachment 1-1
Public Facilities and Services Chapter Draft 1 May 26, 2011
Page 2 of 16
Private Wastewater System
Existing septic systems in the Glenwood Riverfront include both central collection systems for some of
the mobile home parks, and individual septic tanks and drain fields for commercial and industrial
properties and single housing units, as depicted in Figure 1. Based on studies and inventories conducted
by Lane County and Springfield, a number of the septic systems appear to be marginal or have already
failed. The continued use of functional septic systems is allowed for existing uses in unincorporated
areas of the Glenwood Riverfront. Springfield Municipal Code and Oregon Administrative Rules require
that properties must be annexed to Springfield prior to connecting to the City’s wastewater system. In
the event of a failing septic system and accompanying health hazard, as defined by the Oregon Revised
Statutes, unincorporated properties are required to annex to Springfield and connect to the City’s
wastewater system if such a system exists within a specified distance.
As property owners pursue annexation to develop or redevelop their property in the Glenwood
Riverfront, they will most likely be required to connect to the public wastewater system. City policy
requires that the cost of connection to public wastewater facilities be borne by the property owner
upon annexation.
Objective:
Continue to apply Springfield’s citywide policy on private wastewater systems in the Glenwood
Riverfront, and provide public wastewater service to properties that do not have functional on‐site
treatment systems.
Policies & Implementation Strategies:
• Allow the use of on‐site wastewater systems in unincorporated areas of the Glenwood
Riverfront to continue and/or expand as may be permitted in the Oregon Administrative Rules,
Springfield Development Code and Springfield Municipal Code, unless a health hazard is
declared as specified in Oregon Revised Statutes.
• Collaborate with property owners to eventually eliminate on‐site wastewater systems as
properties are annexed to Springfield.
Public Wastewater System
The Springfield Wastewater Master Plan states that adequate wastewater capacity will be available in
Glenwood with the completion of the backbone system, including: upgrades to the Glenwood Pump
Station; upgrades to, or decommissioning of, the Nugget Way Pump Station; and the extension of the
Glenwood Trunk Sewer, as discussed below and as depicted in Figure 2.
The Glenwood Pump Station is owned and operated by the Metropolitan Wastewater Management
Commission (MWMC). It is located north of Franklin Boulevard, and east of Glenwood Boulevard.
While the Glenwood Pump Station is capacity‐constrained under 2008 land use zoning, reserve capacity
would exist within the station via the installation of additional pumps. The timing of the installation of
additional pumps will be driven by the type and rate of new development and redevelopment
connecting to the wastewater system within the basin, both from Eugene and Springfield.
Attachment 1-2
Public Facilities and Services Chapter Draft 1 May 26, 2011
Page 3 of 16
The Nugget Way Pump Station, owned and operated by Springfield, is located near the intersection of
East 19th Avenue and Nugget Way. The Wastewater Master Plan identifies the Nugget Way Pump
Station as capacity‐deficient for both existing and future developed conditions under 2008 land use
zoning. Though the Wastewater Master Plan and the 2011‐2015 Capital Improvement Program (CIP)
identify the Nugget Way Pump Station for an upgrade, the recent rehabilitation of manholes in Nugget
Way have removed excess flow from the station, providing adequate capacity available for growth. A
preferred alternative to upgrading the pump station is to decommission the station and to construct a
local sewer line in East 19th Avenue to connect to the future Glenwood Trunk Sewer extension in McVay
Highway when this becomes available. However, funding for the project has not yet been secured.
The Glenwood Trunk Sewer, owned and operated by Springfield, currently extends east from the
Glenwood Pump Station in Franklin Boulevard to the intersection with McVay Highway. This line was
constructed in 2004 and has several laterals stubbed out at adjacent street intersections with Franklin
Boulevard to allow for future wastewater line extensions in local streets. To accommodate projected
growth in Glenwood, the Wastewater Master Plan identified extending the Glenwood Trunk Sewer
southerly in McVay Highway to the overpass for the Central Oregon and Pacific Railroad.
Extension of the Glenwood Trunk Sewer requires major capital funding. Timing of the construction of
wastewater trunk lines depends on when Springfield will have funds available to construct the system,
and how much demand there is for wastewater facilities or the need to replace failing septic systems.
Springfield can utilize a Reimbursement District, as specified in Springfield Municipal Code, which
provides a mechanism where owners of property that benefits from the construction of public
improvements by another property owner will share in the cost of those improvements through
payment of a reimbursement charge at the time the benefited property is developed and/or the
improvements are utilized. After the Trunk Sewer is constructed, the timing of the construction of local
gravity collection lines depends, in part, upon the pattern of annexation. Generally, any extensions of
the public wastewater system will be located within public right‐of‐ways. Location of service lines
connecting individual properties to the Trunk Sewer will depend on a variety of factors, including land
uses and topography.
Objective:
Provide a public wastewater system capable of serving existing and future development and
redevelopment in the Glenwood Riverfront.
Policies & Implementation Strategies:
• Provide wastewater service in response to a demand for increased urban levels of development
and adopted CIP priorities.
o Evaluate and monitor the capacity of the Glenwood Pump Station to determine if
additional pumps are necessary, and if so, place the project on the CIP.
o Either upgrade or decommission the Nugget Way Pump Station, as funding becomes
available.
Attachment 1-3
Public Facilities and Services Chapter Draft 1 May 26, 2011
Page 4 of 16
o Complete the extension of the Glenwood Trunk Sewer, as funding becomes available.
Water Reuse and Decentralized Design
As populations and cities’ economies grow, water resources become increasingly stressed. Episodic and
long‐term climatic variations will further exacerbate these conditions. Comprehensive water resource
strategies recognize the value of non‐centralized sources of water supplies, including water reuse and
reclamation practices. Water sources can include rainwater harvesting, stormwater infiltration
management, graywater reuse, localized blackwater reclamation systems, and high‐quality recycled
water production. These practices are suited for new development and urban redevelopment efforts,
such as in the Glenwood Riverfront. Federal and state policies2 on water reuse currently exist to
promote and guide community uses.
Rainwater
Rainwater harvesting is an ancient practice that is becoming popular as an alternative modern water
supply. Rainwater harvesting captures, diverts, and stores rainwater for later use. Collection is usually
from rooftops and storage in catchment tanks. Implementing rainwater harvesting techniques benefits
the local area by reducing demand on the water supply and reducing runoff. Reducing runoff can help
prevent localized flooding and helps to reduce contamination of surface water with pollutants such as
sediment, fertilizers, and pesticides. The stored water can be used for non‐potable purposes such as
irrigating lawns, washing cars, or flushing toilets.
Stormwater
As described in the Open Space Chapter, runoff from urban areas, also known as stormwater, is one of
the biggest threats to water quality in local rivers and streams. During rainy weather, contaminants are
flushed into the stormwater system that leads directly to local waterways. On‐site treatment of
stormwater, such as rain gardens, swales, and stormwater planters increase infiltration, filter out
contaminants and replenish groundwater supplies.
Graywater
At the time this Plan was written, the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality’s (DEQ) fact sheet
on graywater stated the following: “Under Oregon law, graywater refers to shower and bath
wastewater, bathroom sink water, kitchen sink wastewater, and laundry wastewater. Graywater does
not include toilet or garbage wastes or wastewater contaminated by soiled diapers.” Graywater can be
contaminated with organic matter, suspended solids, or, potentially, pathogenic microorganisms.
However, if appropriately collected and handled, graywater can be safely reused for flushing toilets and
urinals, as well as for irrigating certain trees and plants. Reuse of graywater reduces the demand on
2 At the time this Plan was written, the following documents provided state and federal guidance on water reuse: Guidelines for
Water Reuse (EPA/625/R‐04/108, September 2004); House Bill 2080: Legalization of graywater for beneficial use in Oregon;
OAR 340‐053: Rulemaking Plan for Graywater Treatment, Disposal, and Reuse; OAR 340‐055: Recycled Water Use Rules;
Governor’s Executive Order No. 05‐04 (March 2005): lists water reuse as an integral component of economic development,
water conservation and environmental sustainability in Oregon; Oregon’s Integrated Water Resources Strategy (OWRD, in
progress); and the Oregon DEQ web site.
Attachment 1-4
Public Facilities and Services Chapter Draft 1 May 26, 2011
Page 5 of 16
other sources of water, such as potable water, surface water, and groundwater.
Blackwater
Blackwater, in contrast to graywater, is domestic wastewater derived from all combined uses, including
toilet and kitchen waste. Blackwater cannot be directly reused, but can be treated onsite for reuse.
Advanatages of blackwater reuse include onsite nutrient recovery and reduction in waste load on the
centralized system. Modern closed‐loop urban buildings can incorporate blackwater treatment systems
such as Living Machine® and Eco‐Machine™ technology, to biologically treat and filter blackwater for
irrigation and other appropriate uses (The Eugene Water and Electric Board’s Roosevelt Operations
Center includes an Eco‐Machine™).
Recycled Water
Water has naturally been recycled through the earth’s water cycle for millions of years. During the past
200 years, “unplanned recycling” has occurred. This is when upstream cities discharge their treated
wastewater to a river or other waterway from which downstream cities obtain water for treatment to
drinking water standards. For example, the Willamette River receives both treated wastewater and
serves as a water source for many towns and cities. For approximately the past 75 years, water agencies
have constructed “planned” recycling projects where treated wastewater is used for non‐potable
purposes.
Recycled water is thus wastewater that is purified through multiple levels of treatment. Recycled water
is treated to strict standards and is rigorously monitored by local, state, and federal agencies to ensure it
meets those standards. Recycled water production results in a dependable, drought‐proof, locally‐
controlled supply of non‐potable water that is safe for beneficial purposes such as landscape and
agricultural irrigation, toilet flushing, and industrial processes. Recycling water may also provide water
quality benefits by decreasing the diversion of freshwater from sensitive ecosystems and reducing the
amount of nutrients and temperature introduced to water bodies.
The MWMC produces recycled water through its current treatment processes and uses recycled water
for irrigation of landscaping and its poplar plantation. At the time this plan was written, the MWMC was
evaluating community interest in increasing recycled water use. Any development of recycled water use
considerations in the Glenwood Riverfront should seek potential partnership with the MWMC.
Objective:
Foster opportunities for new development and redevelopment in the Glenwood Riverfront to take
advantage of water reuse to provide economic and environmental benefits to the community.
Policies & Implementation Strategies:
• Explore opportunities to support the implementation of water reuse practices including, but not
limited to, rainwater, stormwater, graywater, blackwater, and recycled water, as properties
redevelop and develop.
• Collaborate with MWMC to implement planned water recycling projects, as properties
Attachment 1-5
Public Facilities and Services Chapter Draft 1 May 26, 2011
Page 6 of 16
redevelop and develop.
Stormwater Facilities and Services
Glenwood has never had a public stormwater collection system or a comprehensive plan guiding how
stormwater runoff should be managed. Most of the runoff from Glenwood either infiltrates or flows
overland to low areas, such as the slough and wetlands along the Union Pacific railroad right‐of‐way.
The water pools in these low spots and then either finds its way to the Willamette River or infiltrates or
evaporates over time. Most of the Glenwood Riverfront infiltrates or sheet flows into the wetlands that
border the Willamette River with an occasional outfall from a public conveyance system and/or a private
outfall discharging directly into the river.
Low Impact Development Approach (LIDA) is the most efficient and preferred method to manage
stormwater runoff in high density urban development and re‐development in the Glenwood Riverfront
LIDA works with the natural and urban surroundings to manage stormwater as close to its source as
possible. The LIDA method strives to treat runoff as a resource that is utilized to enhance a
development rather than a waste product. This approach has several technologies including, but not
limited to, rain gardens, infiltration swales/planters, vegetated roofs, rainwater harvesting, and
permeable pavements. If effectively implemented, LIDA may have lower construction costs than
conventional stormwater treatment infrastructure and can reduce the needed space for these facilities.
In many cases, LIDA can supplement and even replace irrigation systems for landscaped areas and
reduce the need for a traditional, extensive underground piping network to drain a dense, urban area.
Private Stormwater Management Systems
Most of the existing private development in the Glenwood Riverfront does not have access to a public
stormwater management system. Consequently each individual site has developed a way to dispose of
their runoff either onsite or as a direct discharge to the river. The existing private stormwater systems
that infiltrate on site in the Glenwood Riverfront take advantage of the naturally pervious ground
conditions to infiltrate the runoff. Infiltration at these sites is provided by either a drywell system or
surface sheet flows that pond in low areas. In these cases flows are somewhat filtered before entering
and recharging the ground water and making their way to the river. For systems that discharge directly
by way of a piped system to the rivers, the runoff currently may be untreated and unfiltered.
As properties in the Glenwood Riverfront develop and redevelop, they will need to follow the current
City policy which requires management of stormwater runoff on site to provide for water quality
treatment and groundwater recharge to the maximum extent practicable. This can be accomplished
through a variety of ways that can be adapted to match the conditions found for each development
based on the natural and urban surrounding and LIDA application. Where available, a publicly owned
conveyance channel may have additional capacity and be utilized to accept excess flows during large
storm events. In general, vegetative stormwater treatment facilities are preferred over mechanical
treatment. However, when site conditions or constraints related to the unique character of a site and
its redevelopment activities make vegetative treatment untenable, a suitable mechanical treatment can
Attachment 1-6
Public Facilities and Services Chapter Draft 1 May 26, 2011
Page 7 of 16
be utilized. LIDA facilities may be co‐located in required landscaping as a feature that further maximizes
the developable area. In addition to the increase in developable area, long term benefits can be
achieved by reducing the need for maintenance of separate landscaping and stormwater management
areas.
Objective:
Encourage development and redevelopment in the Glenwood Riverfront by enabling property owners to
utilize a range of options to manage stormwater runoff through LIDA and reducing the expense incurred
to install a conventional stormwater collection system and provide for stormwater quality treatment.
Policies & Implementation Strategies:
• To the extent practicable, amend the Springfield Development Code and the Springfield
Engineering Design Standards and Procedures Manual to facilitate the use of LIDA to achieve
stormwater quality and capacity management approaches.
• Allow the use of mechanical stormwater treatment, where necessary.
• Allow the use of public infrastructure if available for overflow capacity, where necessary.
Public Stormwater System
The Springfield Stormwater Facility Master Plan adopted in 2008, identifies Glenwood as the highest
priority area for stormwater infrastructure improvements. The construction of a stormwater system to
serve the public infrastructure in Glenwood will facilitate a high density urban development of the
Glenwood Riverfront area. It will also help improve water quality along the Willamette River with the
construction of stormwater quality treatment facilities that will be constructed as part of the public
infrastructure.
The existing public stormwater facility serving Franklin Boulevard is an undersized system. Current plans
call for replacement by a minimally sized system for the future Multi‐Way Boulevard that utilizes LIDA to
minimize and infiltrate most runoff. Where capacity is available, Springfield will utilize this system to
accept treated stormwater overflows from adjacent development for large rainfall events, but not
runoff from regularly occurring rainfall events which should be addressed on each development site.
A portion of the proposed park blocks in the Franklin Riverfront will be utilized to convey, treat and
infiltrate most runoff from the adjacent streets. Similar areas will be utilized in the proposed Riverfront
Linear Park for treatment and conveyance from public roads. The surface level stormwater treatment
areas in the park blocks (e.g. vegetated facilities) will be used to treat and convey stormwater from
adjacent private development where capacity exists. Simultaneous development of the park blocks,
Riverfront Linear Park, and adjacent private development will allow this capacity to be fully utilized for
denser development along the park and river frontage. In either case, the stormwater areas within the
Glenwood Riverfront open space system can be used for overland conveyance of treated stormwater
and limited additional infiltration capacity for adjacent development where excess capacity exists.
Attachment 1-7
Public Facilities and Services Chapter Draft 1 May 26, 2011
Page 8 of 16
In some cases it may not be feasible to immediately treat stormwater runoff from public roadways.
Limited underground conveyance may be utilized for runoff from the public right‐of‐way to the nearest
treatment facility, which may be located in the Glenwood Riverfront open space system. These limited
underground conveyance systems will be utilized to minimize the required area of public right‐of‐way
and to assist with managing accepted runoff from private development resulting from large storm
events.
Objective:
Provide a public stormwater system capable of serving and managing existing and future development
and redevelopment in the Glenwood Riverfront that provides for conveyance and treatment of
stormwater runoff.
Policies & Implementation Strategies:
• Provide stormwater runoff management in response to a demand for urban levels of
development and adopted CIP priorities.
o Provide treatment and conveyance of stormwater runoff for new public facilities.
o Provide for conveyance of treated stormwater from private development to receiving
areas, such as the Glenwood Slough and the Willamette River.
o Provide treated emergency overflow conveyance to receiving waters to meet Council
Stormwater Goal 1: Protect citizens and property from flooding (Stormwater
Management Plan, Chapter 4) from large rainstorm events, where possible.
Electric Facilities and Services
In 2001, the Springfield Utility Board (SUB) and the Eugene Water and Electric Board entered into an
agreement transferring electric service responsibility in Glenwood to SUB. SUB is now the electric
service provider for all of Glenwood. Communication facilities and services are made available to
existing and future development/redevelopment by private service providers. This Chapter therefore
does not contain specific objectives, policies, or implementation strategies regarding communications.
Nevertheless, current Development Code standards direct developers, in contracting with these service
providers, to follow regulations similar to electric standards regarding capacity, placement, and visual
impact.
System Capacity
A system of above‐ground and underground backbone distribution feeder lines, as well as above‐ground
and underground service laterals, provide electricity to existing development in Glenwood3, as depicted
in Figure 3. These existing electric facilities are adequate to meet the electricity demand in Glenwood at
this time (approximately six aMW4,). However, SUB has identified the need for an additional substation
3 An above‐ground transmission line crosses the Willamette River at the southern end of the McVay Riverfront but is not associated with service
provision in the Glenwood Riverfront at this time. It will, however, be instrumental in providing service to the Glenwood Riverfront in the
future.
4 An aMW is 8,760 megawatt hours. This is the continuous output of a resource with one megawatt of capacity over a full year. A megawatt
hour is 1,000 kilowatt‐hours, which is the amount of electricity the average Oregon household uses in a month.
Attachment 1-8
Public Facilities and Services Chapter Draft 1 May 26, 2011
Page 9 of 16
to provide electric service to Glenwood, and in particular the Glenwood Riverfront, as redevelopment or
new development occurs. Specifically, this need will be triggered when a single new load requires
greater than three aMW or there is a cumulative need for a total of ten aMW. SUB has indicated that
from the time this need is identified to the time the substation would be able to provide the additional
capacity in the Glenwood Riverfront will be approximately three years.
SUB’s identification of potential sites for acquisition and development of a future substation is on‐going
and guided by the following SUB siting requirements:
• a minimum of two acres in size (preferably flat and rectangular);
• relatively flat access with no sharp bends to accommodate delivery of the transformer;
• proximity to an existing regional transmission line;
• the ability to acquire dedicated easements for extending the transmission line to the substation;
and
• the ease of connectivity to existing distribution lines and loads.
Given the influence of the substation and associated transmission and distribution lines to and from the
substation on the landscape in the Glenwood Riverfront, evaluation of sites must be coordinated with
Springfield, as discussed in the Utility Placement and Visual Impact section below.
Objective:
Provide a public electric system capable of serving existing and future development and redevelopment
in the Glenwood Riverfront.
Policies & Implementation Strategies:
• Collaborate with SUB to increase the capacity of the electric system to meet future development
needs.
o Evaluate potential locations for and construct a future substation in Glenwood in
coordination with expected development.
o Locate and design the future substation and transmission, distribution, and service
facilities as specified in the Utility Placement and Adverse Environmental, Visual, and
Health Impacts section.
o Make electric service available as part of the Land Division and Site Plan Review
processes.
Utility Placement & Adverse Environmental, Visual, and Health Impacts
Electric services infrastructure is an essential part of development, but it can be a source of adverse
visual impact, and its placement can affect the walkability of the neighborhoods in which it is located.
Further, the location of transmission lines in relation to avian migratory patterns, vegetative
management practices used to maintain safe access to transmission lines, and the noise pollution
created by the ‘hum’ of overhead transmission and distribution lines may affect the environment and
public health. As stipulated in the Springfield Development Code (SDC), wherever possible, all utility
lines must be placed underground. However, the SDC provides for some exceptions, such as
Attachment 1-9
Public Facilities and Services Chapter Draft 1 May 26, 2011
Page 10 of 16
transmission lines and backbone distribution feeders. Thus, the placement of electric utilities in the
Glenwood Riverfront, both in the public right‐of‐way and on private property, should be coordinated
with SUB to ensure that the character of the neighborhoods and streetscape envisioned for the
Glenwood Riverfront are achieved as development or redevelopment occur.
Objective:
Minimize the impact of electric facilities on the visual and natural environment, public health, noise
pollution, and pedestrian paths of travel as new development or redevelopment occur in the Glenwood
Riverfront.
Policies & Implementation Strategies:
• Consider views, visual pollution, public health, natural environment, and noise pollution in
locating and screening transmission facilities.
o Follow natural landforms in aligning transmission lines while avoiding alignments along
hillcrests or steep grades that expose the facilities to views and cross hills obliquely
rather than at right angles.
o Align transmission lines along edges of land uses to avoid scenic areas and to avoid
dividing land use patterns.
o Utilize trees to provide a backdrop to minimize the silhouette of transmission lines
against the sky.
o Reduce the length of visible segments of transmission lines by interrupting views with
trees or offsetting the location of segments behind trees and other topographic features
where long views of the transmission lines would otherwise occur.
o Minimize the ‘tunnel effect’ of long, straight, uninterrupted views along transmission
lines by only clearing vegetation that threatens the lines and by jogging the alignment at
road crossings.
o Minimize the number of transmission poles and consider color and materials in
designing the appearance of transmission poles and line attachments so that they blend
harmoniously with their surroundings.
o Route and locate transmission lines to minimize or eliminate the need for vegetation
management.
o Route and locate transmission lines to minimize potential health effects and noise
pollution on Glenwood residents.
o Route and locate transmission lines to minimize potential effects on avian migratory
patterns.
• Consider views and visual pollution in locating and screening distribution lines.
o Coordinate with SUB to locate new distribution feeder lines underground as part of the
Franklin Boulevard and McVay Highway transportation facility upgrades.
• Consider views, visual pollution, and pedestrian mobility in locating and screening feeder lines,
transformers, junction boxes, and equipment cabinets.
Attachment 1-10
Public Facilities and Services Chapter Draft 1 May 26, 2011
Page 11 of 16
o Locate or re‐locate service lines underground in coordination with proposed streets,
driveways, accessways, and paths.
o Coordinate the routing or re‐routing of service lines with private developers to minimize
potential detrimental effects on the layout of new development/redevelopment.
o Locate transformers and junction boxes within buildings or underground, where
possible; where not possible, locate these facilities outside of pedestrian routes, such as
sidewalks, crosswalks, and building entrances, and utilize landscaping and public art to
make these facilities as unobtrusive as possible on the public realm/streetscape.
o Utilize landscaping and public art to make equipment cabinets as unobtrusive as
possible on the public realm/streetscape.
• Consider views and visual pollution in locating and screening the future substation.
o Locate the substation in an industrial or employment‐designated parcel west of
Mississippi Avenue, east of Henderson Avenue, south of E. 19th Avenue, and north of E.
22nd Avenue to minimize the impact of this major public facility on the visual
environment and pedestrian paths of travel.
o Screen the substation and transformer from public view and muffle the noise generated
by these facilities by means of plant materials, earth berms, or enclosure walls.
Water Facilities and Services
There are three water districts currently in Glenwood: The Glenwood Water District (GWD); the Eugene
Water and Electric Board (EWEB); and the Springfield Utility Board (SUB). SUB purchased water from
EWEB and resold it to GWD during the interim period while SUB constructed water transmission
facilities to provide water to GWD. The purchase of water from EWEB was incrementally reduced as
SUB constructed new water distribution facilities in Glenwood and was discontinued in April 2009. The
SUB‐GWD Agreement was updated in 2006.
Until 2001, the GWD contracted with EWEB for water service. At that time, SUB and the GWD signed a
Water Supply and Services Agreement stating that SUB will provide water supply and related
operational and maintenance services to the GWD. SUB purchased water from EWEB and resold it to
GWD during an interim period while SUB constructed water transmission facilities to provide water to
GWD.
SUB owns all water facilities within the City limits and provides water service within the City limits,
including billing and maintenance. The GWD owns all water facilities outside of the City limits and
contracts with SUB to provide water within that part of the system, bill customers for monthly usage,
and provide maintenance on that part of the system. Glenwood water facilities are depicted in Figure 4.
The GWD is a taxing district and contracts with Springfield Fire and Life Safety for fire protection and
SUB Electric for the maintenance of street lights in those areas of Glenwood outside the City limits.
When land is annexed into the City, it is subsequently withdrawn from the GWD, thereby diminishing
both the customer base and the service area of the district. As the responsibility of the GWD
diminishes, there will become a time where it is neither logical nor cost‐effective for the GWD to remain
Attachment 1-11
Public Facilities and Services Chapter Draft 1 May 26, 2011
Page 12 of 16
in operation. However, the GWD cannot dissolve until the entire unincorporated portion of Glenwood is
annexed to Springfield due to its continued role in fire protection. The GWD will need to continue to
exist to contract fire protection services for the unincorporated portion of Glenwood.
In 2001, SUB and EWEB signed a Transfer Agreement that discussed the termination of the water service
agreement between GWD and EWEB and specific EWEB water facilities. There are 16‐ and 24‐inch
water mains along the southern border of Glenwood that will remain under EWEB’s jurisdiction in order
to serve Eugene's southern regions and along 30th Avenue, directly north of Lane Community College.
These mains currently terminate at Nugget Way. SUB is leasing a portion of the 24‐inch EWEB water
main east of the Laurel Hill Pump Station to provide a looped system in this area until such time as
EWEB is prepared to extend the transmission main further to the south. EWEB will continue to own the
water mains in its possession.
System Capacity
The water system in the Glenwood Riverfront is comprised of hydrants and distribution piping, as
depicted in Figure 3. The system is fed from an intertie with SUB’s west distribution system located at
the east end of the South A Street Bridge. In 2004, SUB constructed a 24‐inch transmission pipeline
across the bridge. Large diameter 16‐inch water mains have been constructed from the bridge west to
Glenwood Boulevard and south to East 19th Avenue and Nugget Way. Personnel from the GWD and SUB
have reported that existing pipe sections removed from the water system during water improvement
construction projects show existing pipe to be in relatively good hydraulic condition. Additional large
diameter water mains are planned as development occurs that requires the additional capacity. There
are a number of private water wells that service Glenwood properties which will continue in operation
until property is annexed to Springfield.
Objective:
Provide a public water system capable of serving existing and future development and redevelopment in
the Glenwood Riverfront.
Policies & Implementation Strategies:
• Provide water service either directly or by contract.
o Continue to contract with EWEB to provide a looped water system in south Glenwood
until both utilities agree upon an alternative.
o Continue to contract with the GWD to provide water service to customers in the
unincorporated portions of Glenwood until the GWD is dissolved.
o Monitor development in Glenwood and establish a plan for the construction of
additional water mains.
• Determine the appropriate timing for dissolution of the GWD.
o Address the provision of fire protection service to unincorporated Glenwood prior to the
dissolution of the GWD.
o Attempt to assure that the GWD notifies Springfield and SUB well in advance of the
dissolution of the GWD to facilitate orderly transition.
Attachment 1-12
Public Facilities and Services Chapter Draft 1 May 26, 2011
Page 13 of 16
Utility Placement & Adverse Visual and Walkability Impacts
Similar to electric services, water services infrastructure is an essential part of development, but it can
be a source of adverse visual impact, and its placement can affect the walkability of the neighborhoods
in which it is located. Water mains and water service laterals are placed underground. However, SUB
requires the placement of water apparatus, such as water meters and backflow prevention devices,
above ground due to Oregon Health Division rules regarding flooding and draining. Thus, the placement
of water utilities in the Glenwood Riverfront, both in the public right‐of‐way and on private property,
should be coordinated with SUB to ensure that the character of the neighborhoods and streetscape
envisioned for the Glenwood Riverfront are achieved as development or redevelopment occur.
Objective:
Minimize the impact of water facilities on the visual environment and pedestrian paths of travel as new
development or redevelopment occur in the Glenwood Riverfront.
Policies & Implementation Strategies:
• Consider views, visual pollution, and pedestrian mobility in locating and screening water meters,
backflow prevention devices, and other above‐grade water apparatus.
o Locate or re‐locate water lines in coordination with proposed streets, driveways,
accessways, and paths.
o Coordinate the routing or re‐routing of service lines and above‐grade water apparatus
with private developers to minimize potential detrimental effects on the layout of new
development/redevelopment.
o Locate above‐grade water apparatus including, but not limited to, water meters and
backflow prevention devices, outside of pedestrian routes, such as sidewalks,
crosswalks, and building entrances, and utilize landscaping and public art to make these
facilities as unobtrusive as possible on the public realm/streetscape.
Police Facilities and Services
The Springfield Police Department provides patrol service and police protection to those portions of the
Glenwood Riverfront that have been annexed to Springfield. Police protection is currently provided to
the unincorporated portions of the Glenwood Riverfront by the Lane County Sheriff’s Department and
the Oregon State Police. As property owners of unincorporated portions of the Glenwood Riverfront
seek annexation for development and redevelopment, annexed properties will receive the same level of
police services that are provided to other areas within Springfield.
System Capacity
The Springfield Police Department’s Long Range Plan for Police Services considers the impact of adding
additional acreage in the Glenwood Riverfront to Springfield’s police service area as these areas are
annexed. One of the goals of the document is to establish objective criteria that would be used to
evaluate staffing levels. Adding additional acreage in the Glenwood Riverfront to the service area will
have an impact on those models. However, none of the Springfield Police Department’s long‐range
Attachment 1-13
Public Facilities and Services Chapter Draft 1 May 26, 2011
Page 14 of 16
planning will affect Glenwood Phase I for a number of reasons. Glenwood Riverfront
redevelopment/new development is just one part of a larger conversation about measuring police
services (population, crime rates, call loads, geographic coverage, etc.). There are no plans to request
specific system improvements for the Springfield Police Department, such as substations; the issue will
be staffing levels as calls for service grow (work load issue) and as the geographical coverage expands
(response time issue). Response times are driven by three primary considerations: seriousness of the
call; availability of units; and geographic location of units. Higher priority calls in the Glenwood
Riverfront will result in field units being pulled off other calls and re‐routed. That has always been the
Springfield Police Department’s practice, but as areas of the Glenwood Riverfront are annexed further
west and south, the likelihood is that field units will be farther away, and response times across
Springfield will be slower.
Objective:
Provide patrol service and police protection services capable of serving existing and future development
and redevelopment in the Glenwood Riverfront.
Policies & Implementation Strategies:
• Make Springfield Police services available for those properties within the city limits.
o Offer services as specified in Springfield’s Long Range Plan for Police Services.
• Continue to rely on Lane County Sherriff and Oregon State Police services available for those
properties outside of the city limits until annexation to Springfield occurs.
Fire & Emergency Medical Facilities and Services
The Springfield Fire and Life Safety Department currently provides fire and emergency medical services
to all of the Glenwood Riverfront. Springfield provides fire protection services within the City limits, and
the Glenwood Water District (GWD) contracts with Springfield to provide fire protection services to
unincorporated areas of the Glenwood Riverfront. Since 2010, Eugene and Springfield have signed
agreements regarding mutual aid and initial response by the closest unit known as the 3 Battalion
System. Additionally, a functional consolidation of the administrative functions of both fire departments
has occurred as a phase of the eventual possible merger of both fire departments.
System Capacity
Current fire station locations in Eugene and Springfield are adequate to meet the four‐minute response
time standard for nearly all of the Glenwood Riverfront under proposed conditions, as depicted in Figure
5 (annexation of property outside the four‐minute response time requires the property owner to
conduct and document a response time study). A new fire station may be constructed near downtown
Springfield to better balance overall system response time and equipment capabilities for West
Springfield and East Glenwood. If a merger occurs, a new fire station may be located off Franklin
Boulevard in Eugene. If a merger does not occur, the existing 3 Battalion agreement is anticipated to be
continued.
Attachment 1-14
Public Facilities and Services Chapter Draft 1 May 26, 2011
Page 15 of 16
The Springfield Fire and Life Safety Department, through the Fire Marshal’s Office, also issues permits
for the use and storage of hazardous materials, and for hazardous operations utilizing hazardous
materials that are regulated by the Springfield Fire Code.
Objective:
Provide fire and life safety services capable of serving existing and future development and
redevelopment in the Glenwood Riverfront.
Policies & Implementation Strategies:
• Make fire and emergency medical services available for properties within the City limits.
o Consider the impact of a merger between Springfield’s Department of Fire and Life
Safety and Eugene’s Department of Fire and Emergency Services when evaluating
emergency response capability in the Glenwood Riverfront, even after annexation to the
City.
• Consider siting a new fire station in the southwest corner of Subarea C in the event a merger of
the Springfield and Eugene fire departments occurs.
• Consider the relocation of Springfield Fire Station #4 closer to the Pioneer Parkway/Main Street
intersection to better balance overall system response time and equipment capabilities for West
Springfield and East Glenwood.
• Continue to make fire and emergency medical services available in unincorporated areas under
contract with the Glenwood Water District.
o Address the provision of fire protection service to unincorporated areas prior to the
dissolution of the Glenwood Water District.
School Facilities and Services
A majority of property within the Glenwood Riverfront falls within the Eugene School District 4J (District
4J) boundary, with the southern‐most portion of the Glenwood Riverfront falling within the Springfield
School District 19 (District 19) boundary, as depicted in Figure 6. Glenwood students are bused to
schools in District 4J and District 19 because, currently, there are no public schools in Glenwood.
There have been recent conversations between the two school districts concerning the possible transfer
of jurisdiction from District 4J to District 19. While District 19 recognizes the validity of the concerns
about boundary adjustments expressed by District 4J due to declining enrollment and costs, District 19
desires to continue to investigate the topic of jurisdictional transfer. However, school district boundary
changes are regulated under Oregon Revised Statutes and Oregon Administrative Rules. School district
boundary changes require the mutual consent of the involved district school boards, and/or a request
submitted by the electors of the affected districts, or legislative action. Annexation in the Glenwood
Riverfront to Springfield will not directly affect current school district boundaries. Any resolution of the
transfer of jurisdiction question must be brought about by agreement between the two school districts
outside of the scope of Glenwood Phase I.
Attachment 1-15
Public Facilities and Services Chapter Draft 1 May 26, 2011
Page 16 of 16
System Capacity
Both school districts have had seen a steady decline in both funding and enrollment and have had to
consolidate and/or close schools in recent years. In addition, population projections indicate decreasing
household size over the next decade. However, any proposed increased residential density and
development in the Glenwood Riverfront may impact this situation. Nevertheless, both school districts
have indicated that an increase in student enrollment in the Glenwood Riverfront could be served by
existing schools. Thus, it is doubtful a new public school will be built in Glenwood. Both school districts
will continue to serve any increase in Glenwood student enrollment by busing.
Objective:
Continue to provide quality public education to students residing in the Glenwood Riverfront.
Policies & Implementation Strategies:
• Make public education services available to students in either District 4J or District 19 according
to existing school district service boundaries.
o Encourage Districts 4J and 19 to continue discussions on the transfer of school
boundaries, as appropriate.
Attachment 1-16
17TH AVE
15TH AVE
GLENWOOD BLVDHENDERSON AVEMISSISSIPPI AVELEXINGTON AVECONCORD AVEBROOKLYN AVENU
G
G
E
T
W
A
Y McVAY HWY
19TH AVE
21ST AVE
22ND AVE
FRANKLIN BLVD
SENECA AVE14TH AVE
McVay Riverfront
Franklin Riverfront
Multi-unit lot with off-site treatment
Lot containing off-site drain field
Multi-unit lot with on-site treatment
Individual lot with on-site treatment
Phase 1: Septic Facilities
Attachment 1-17
")
")
17TH AVE
15TH AVE
14TH AVE
GLENWOOD BLVDHENDERSON AVEMISSISSIPPI AVELEXINGTON AVECONCORD AVEBROOKLYN AVENU
G
G
E
T
W
A
Y McVAY HWY
19TH AVE
21ST AVE
22ND AVE
FRANKLIN BLVD
SENECA AVE(To MWMC System)
McVay Riverfront
Franklin Riverfront
(upgrades planned)
Existing Pump Station
Planned Trunk Extension
Existing Network
Phase 1: Wastewater Facilities
")
Attachment 1-18
17TH AVE
15TH AVE
GLENWOOD BLVDHENDERSON AVEMISSISSIPPI AVELEXINGTON AVECONCORD AVEBROOKLYN AVENU
G
G
E
T
W
A
Y McVAY HWY
19TH AVE
21ST AVE
22ND AVE
FRANKLIN BLVD
SENECA AVEMcVay Riverfront
Franklin Riverfront
Regional Transmission
Underground Distribution
Overhead Distribution
SUB Electric
Phase 1 Existing (2011) Electricaland Fiber Optic Facilities
SUB
Sprint
consortium
Fiber Optics
Attachment 1-19
(connects to
EWEB reservoir)
EWEB pump station (SUB su
p
pl
y)
17TH AVE
15TH AVE
GLENWOOD BLVDHENDERSON AVEMISSISSIPPI AVELEXINGTON AVECONCORD AVENU
G
G
E
T
W
A
Y
McVAY HWY19TH AVE
21ST AVE
22ND AVE
FRANKLIN
B
L
V
D
McVay Riverfront
Franklin Riverfront
SUB lines
EWEB lines
Phase 1 Existing (2011)
Water Facilities
Attachment 1-20
¦¨
¦¨
Minutes
321 4
(@ 35mph avg)Response Times
Glenwood Plan Area
Phase 1 Area
¨Metro AreaFire Stations
Station #4
Including Proposed New Roads
Phase 1: Fire & Life Safety Response Areas
Attachment 1-21
17TH AVE
15TH AVE
GLENWOOD BLVDHENDERSON AVEMISSISSIPPI AVELEXINGTON AVECONCORD AVEBROOKLYN AVENU
G
G
E
T
W
A
Y McVAY HWY
19TH AVE
21ST AVE
22ND AVE
FRANKLIN BLVD
SENECA AVE14TH AVE
McVay Riverfront
Franklin Riverfront
Eugene District 4J
Springfield District 19
Phase 1: School Districts
Attachment 1-22
Financing Public Infrastructure Chapter Draft 1 May 17, 2011
Page 1 of 4
Introduction
Implementing the Glenwood Refinement Plan to realize the goals and objectives of the community will
require substantial capital investment in public infrastructure. Capital financing has proven to be a
challenge for Springfield and its partner agencies in the years leading up to the time this Plan was
written. As a result, it is reasonable to expect that Springfield and its partner agencies will find it
appropriate to pursue a broad range of strategies to secure necessary capital funding in a timely way to
implement the projects discussed in this Plan.
A discussion of capital financing resources naturally divides into two categories, locally controlled
sources and sources of funding from external sources; within each category, there are a number of sub‐
categories, as described below.
Locally Controlled Sources
Improvement Systems Development Charge
For most Oregon cities, the method of choice for local funding of new capital infrastructure is the
Improvement Systems Development Charge (SDC)1. SDCs are charges imposed on development to
recover the costs associated with providing infrastructure to meet the demands of growth. The
imposition of these charges, and the use of the revenue, is carefully regulated by state statute.
Springfield imposes SDCs for transportation, local wastewater collection, and stormwater collection. In
addition, the Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission imposes charges for regional
wastewater treatment, the Willamalane Park and Recreation District imposes charges for park and
recreation facilities, and the Springfield Utility Board imposes charges for electric service. Each of the
charges is set by a detailed methodology which depends, in large part, on projects lists of the facilities
that are reasonably expected to be required to meet the needs of growth over a period of
approximately 20 years.
Like many cities, the SDCs imposed by Springfield are implemented on a city‐wide basis, with no
distinction for particular geographical areas. While some Oregon Cities create surcharges or differential
SDCs for particular areas within the city, a Citizen Advisory Committee, which considered updates to
Springfield’s SDC methodologies in 2008, recommended against creating differential SDC rates. That
recommendation was adopted by the Springfield City Council. Willamalane’s park and recreation SDCs
also are implemented on a communitywide basis.
Operating Reserves
A second locally controlled source of capital funding is to reserve amounts from operations revenues for
future capital purposes on a pay‐as‐you‐go basis. This typically occurs when infrastructure systems are
operated as utilities, as does Springfield for its local wastewater, stormwater, and transportation
1 State statutes also authorize a reimbursement SDC. Although Springfield imposes a reimbursement SDC, revenue from that
source, while it can be used to meet the needs of growth, is typically used to fund capital preservation of existing facilities.
Attachment 2-1
Financing Public Infrastructure Chapter Draft 1 May 17, 2011
Page 2 of 4
systems. Although Springfield has typically done this, financial challenges and emerging capital needs
have resulted in these reserves being essentially depleted.
Debt Financing
A third locally driven source of capital funding is the issuance of some form of debt. While the variety of
debt instruments available to local governments is too broad for a detailed discussion in this Plan, two
are worthy of mention: general obligation bonds; and revenue bonds.
General Obligation Bonds
General obligation debt is backed by the full faith and credit of Springfield and all of its General Fund
resources, although for most purposes this means the property tax revenues of the City. If Springfield
issues this particular debt and relies only on existing sources of property tax revenue, the debt may be
issued at the direction of the City Council. More commonly, a city would seek to rely on supplemental
property tax revenue to provide a source of repayment. In that case, the issuance of debt requires the
affirmative vote of the people.
Like Springfield and other units of local government with taxing authority, Willamalane may also fund
capital projects through the use of general obligation bonds. During the last thirty years, Willamalane
has used general obligation bonds to construct the Willamalane Adult Activity Center and SPLASH at
Lively Park, and to renovate and reconstruct Willamalane Park Swim Center. In all cases, Willamalane
has relied upon the voters to approve bond measures to make these improvements. Willamalane may
consider a bond measure in the near future to support additional land acquisition, park development,
and facility improvements as supported by community input and the District’s Comprehensive Plan.
Revenue Bonds
Revenue bonds do not require a vote of the people, but can be issued only if there is a source of
revenue for repayment which is satisfactory to the purchaser of the bonds. Generally, this means a
reliable revenue source such as a user fee. Recently, Springfield has issued revenue bonds supported by
the user fees collected from wastewater and storm drainage users. Historically, Springfield has not
issued revenue bonds to fund street capital improvements. In large part, this is because customarily an
issuer must demonstrate that available user fee revenue equal to 1.25 times the debt service on the
bonds is available to be pay debt service. At the time this Plan was written, the financial condition of
Springfield’s Street Fund does demonstrate this.
Willamalane has used a similar mechanism to revenue bonds called Full Faith and Credit Obligations.
These obligations were issued to construct the Community Recreation Center in 2006 and purchase and
remodel the Regional Sports Center in 2010. Repayment of the obligations is based on the ability of
Willamalane to pay back the obligations with general fund resources (property tax receipts and user fee
revenue). The amount of use and revenue generated from users of the facilities is key to Willamalane’s
internal decision to proceed with issuance of such obligations.
Attachment 2-2
Financing Public Infrastructure Chapter Draft 1 May 17, 2011
Page 3 of 4
Tax Increment Financing
Tax‐increment financing (TIF), which was developed in California in the 1950s, has been enabled by
Oregon statute since 1960. In general, TIF laws allow local officials to designate a geographical area
within their community as a TIF district. In Oregon, TIF districts are referred to as Urban Renewal
Districts2. Once the district boundary is established and the city receives approval to create the district,
property taxes generated within the district are frozen at the current level for the life of the district.
This base level of taxes continues to be allocated as it always has, but any additional taxes that are
collected above that base level due to market appreciation, improvements to existing properties, and
new development, are set aside. This incremental tax revenue is then used for major investments in the
district on a pay‐as‐you‐go basis, or to support the issuance of tax increment bonds. At the end of the
life of the district, all tax revenue from the district is allocated to the original taxing authorities.
In 2004, a majority (72%) of Springfield voters approved establishing a Glenwood Urban Renewal District
to: help facilitate the expansion of industrial areas available to firms; revitalize emerging industrial areas
of this part of Springfield; and redevelop the Glenwood Riverfront. The district was subsequently
adopted by the Springfield City Council and Lane County Board of Commissioners and is governed by the
Springfield Economic Development Agency, comprised of Councilors and Commissioners. The Glenwood
Urban Renewal Plan outlines development strategies, priorities, projects and incentives to guide the use
of tax‐increment funds generated over the life of the district (20 years).
Funding from External Sources
Turning to external resources that might be available for capital funding, there are sources which derive
from other levels of government and sources which involve Springfield partnering with private
enterprise to secure available funding.
State and Federal Programs
Both the State of Oregon and the federal government have a number of programs which offer grants,
loans, or loan subsidies for capital improvements. Most of these programs are system dependent. For
example, the federal Transportation Improvement Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) program has
funded a number of major transportation improvements across the country, and in Oregon. Springfield,
in conjunction with Lane Transit District and Eugene, has applied, unsuccessfully, for funding for Franklin
Boulevard from this program, but might seek to apply should new phases of the program be announced.
Federal funds are also available under the Surface Transportation Program. The Clean Water State
Revolving Fund is an Oregon program backed by federal funding that offers grants and loans for
2 Urban renewal is a program of land redevelopment in areas of moderate to high density urban land use. Its modern
incarnation began in the late 19th century in developed nations and experienced an intense phase in the late 1940s – under the
rubric of reconstruction. The process has had a major impact on many urban landscapes, and has played an important role in
the history and demographics of cities around the world. Many cities link the revitalization of the central business district and
gentrification of residential neighborhoods to urban renewal programs of the 1940s – 1960s. Over time, urban renewal has
evolved into a policy based less on destruction and more on renovation and investment, and today is an integral part of many
local governments, often combined with small and large incentives.
Attachment 2-3
Financing Public Infrastructure Chapter Draft 1 May 17, 2011
Page 4 of 4
wastewater and stormwater projects. Springfield and MWMC both have projects on the funding priority
list for this program. Other programs, such as the Oregon State Public Works Fund (OSPWF) offer grants
and loans for a variety of infrastructure programs.
Congressional Funding
In addition, at the federal level, Springfield has had some success in the past securing funding for
transportation and stormwater projects by directly seeking Congressional funding. These involve
“earmarks” by members of the Oregon Congressional delegation in authorization or appropriation bills
passed by the Congress. Although there seemed to be a general consensus that the earmark approach
would not be favored by Congress at the time this Plan was written, the possibility exists that some form
of targeted spending, under some new name, might be available. To assure that Springfield positions
itself well to take advantage of these opportunities, it will be useful to continue to participate in the
‘United Front’ effort that many local agencies have joined in to present a consolidated list of funding
proposals to the Oregon Congressional delegation.
Local Improvement & Reimbursement Districts
Springfield has also experienced past success in partnering directly with developers and residents to
secure capital funding. Springfield can use local improvement districts (assessment districts) to secure
private funding for infrastructure that specifically benefits certain properties. Springfield can also create
reimbursement districts which permit a developer to fund significant capital improvements and then
recover some portion of the cost through payments from subsequent development which takes
advantage of those improvements. This approach can be attractive to developers who wish to move in
advance of Springfield’s ability to generate adequate resources to fund a capital improvement whose
benefits extend beyond the particular development which requires the project to proceed.
Exactions and Dedications
Lastly, Springfield does have the power to require that a developer, either in the context of an
annexation agreement or a development agreement for a specific development, provide the
infrastructure that is required to serve that development. This ability to exact improvements is limited
by juridical interpretations of both federal and state constitutional limitations against taking private
property for public use.
Objective:
To the extent practicable, utilize a broad variety of funding strategies and partnerships with other public
agencies and private interests to provide the public infrastructure needed to support the Glenwood
Refinement Plan.
Attachment 2-4
Urban Transition and Annexation Chapter Draft 1 May 23, 2011
Page 1 of 3
Urban Transition & Annexation
Introduction
Annexation of undeveloped and underdeveloped properties in the Glenwood Riverfront enhances the
opportunity for compact urban growth, an efficient land use pattern, and a well‐planned supporting
street and infrastructure system.
The Glenwood Riverfront includes land within Springfield’s Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) that is both
inside and outside of the city limits. In 1987, Springfield and Lane County entered into an
intergovernmental agreement, which remains in effect, whereby the County agreed to transfer
jurisdiction of building, zoning, and planning services for land between Springfield’s UGB and the city
limits. This concept of turning over service functions from the County to a City is referred to in this
context as ‘urban transition’. The purpose of urban transition is to give regulatory and administrative
responsibility to the jurisdiction that will be responsible for providing urban services to that area.
Specifically, in the future Springfield would provide these urban services to Glenwood. In 1998,
Springfield, Eugene, and Lane County agreed that properties in Glenwood that had previously been
annexed into Eugene would be annexed into Springfield and that future annexations would be into
Springfield.
Annexation Process
Currently, 28% of the 316 acres that constitute the Glenwood Riverfront are annexed into Springfield,
with the remainder of the area being unincorporated in part due to the desire of property owners and in
part due to a lack of urban public facilities. Most of the annexed acreage is located on the south side of
Franklin Boulevard and the southern end of McVay Highway, as depicted in Figure 1. In those areas of
the Glenwood Riverfront that are not currently within Springfield’s city limits, annexation is necessary
prior to any new development, redevelopment, or expansion of existing uses. Since current City policy
requires annexation before wastewater services are extended, the Glenwood Trunk Line would need to
be completed, as discussed in the Public Facilities and Services Chapter, for annexation to be approved
in areas of the Glenwood Riverfront not currently served by a public wastewater system.
Springfield has not traditionally supported mandatory annexations of developed property, except when
the property is proposed to be redeveloped or to abate public health hazards such as failed septic
systems. The intent is that annexation will occur incrementally as property owners desire to develop in
the Glenwood Riverfront. Annexation generally fulfills one or more of the following purposes:
¾ Provide land to accommodate future urban development;
¾ Provide land for the provision of necessary public facilities or services;
¾ Ensure that properties adjacent to Springfield are developed in a manner consistent with the
urban development standards of the Springfield Development Code; and/or
¾ Allow development of the full economic potential of sites.
Attachment 3-1
Urban Transition and Annexation Chapter Draft 1 May 23, 2011
Page 2 of 3
Oregon Revised Statutes1 grants Springfield the sole responsibility for the review and approval or denial
of all annexation applications. It also stipulates requirements that must be met prior to annexation
approval to ensure orderly growth, such as prohibiting non‐contiguous annexations and providing
information about properties’ contribution to offsite public systems. The annexation application
process thus provides land owners with a clear understanding of what is needed to fully develop their
property as planned. Oregon Administrative Rules (OAR)2 require connection to a public wastewater
system for any property proposed to be partitioned, or for any proposed expansion of an existing use or
new use that is outside of the city limits and is within the distances specified in the OARs to the nearest
public wastewater line. The Eugene‐Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plan) provides
policy direction regarding approval of requests for annexation that includes the prerequisite that a
minimum level of key urban facilities and services3 be provided in an orderly and efficient manner, or a
logical time within which to deliver these services, based upon demonstrated need and budgetary
priorities. The Springfield Development Code specifies the City’s annexation application process.
The availability of public services is determined by Springfield and/or applicable public and private
service providers, based upon existing and planned capacity and cost, as specified in the Transportation,
Open Space, and Public Facilities and Services Chapters. The annexation application process described
in the Springfield Development Code includes a requirement that property owners enter into an
Annexation Agreement, where applicable, with Springfield prior to the submittal of an annexation
application if the minimum level of key urban services are not available at that time to serve the
property. An Annexation Agreement states the terms, conditions, and obligations of the property
owner and the service providers regarding the fiscal and service impacts to Springfield associated with
the annexation, provision of infrastructure, and future development of the property.
Objective:
Provide orderly and efficient conversion of land from urbanizable to urban in the Glenwood Riverfront
through the annexation process based upon the availability of a minimum level of key urban facilities
and services.
Policies & Implementation Strategies:
• Continue recognizing existing public agency service agreements on land outside of the city limits
until annexation occurs.
• Provide for annexation of urbanizable land to occur in a manner consistent with State law and
the Metro Plan, as well as City annexation policies and procedures.
1 At the time this Plan was written, this language was contained in OAR Chapter 222.
2 At the time this Plan was written, this requirement was contained in ORS 340‐071‐0160.
3 The Metro Plan defines the minimum level of key urban facilities and services as: wastewater service; stormwater
service; transportation; solid waste management; water service; fire and emergency medical services; police
protection; citywide park and recreation programs; electric service; land use controls; communication facilities;
and public schools on a district‐wide basis (in other words, not necessarily within walking distance of all students
served.)
Attachment 3-2
Urban Transition and Annexation Chapter Draft 1 May 23, 2011
Page 3 of 3
• Provide for annexation on a voluntary basis, except when health and safety concerns trigger the
need for mandatory annexation, consistent with State law.
Attachment 3-3
17TH AVE
15TH AVE
GLENWOOD BLVDHENDERSON AVEMISSISSIPPI AVELEXINGTON AVECONCORD AVEBROOKLYN AVENU
G
G
E
T
W
A
Y McVAY HWY
19TH AVE
21ST AVE
22ND AVE
FRANKLIN BLVD
SENECA AVE14TH AVE
McVay Riverfront
Franklin Riverfront
Areas Annexedinto City Limits
Phase 1: Annexation
Attachment 3-4