HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010 01 20 PW 2011-2015 CIP MemoM E M O R A N D U M CITY OF SPRINGFIELD
DATE: January 11, 2010
TO: Springfield Planning Commission PLANNING
COMMISSION
TRANSMITTAL
FROM: Ken Vogeney, P.E., City Engineer MEMORANDUM
Jeff Paschall, P.E., Supervising Civil Engineer
SUBJECT: 2011 - 2015 Capital Improvements Program
A Community Reinvestment Plan
ISSUE
The draft of Springfield’s 2011-2015 Capital Improvements Program (CIP) is ready for
the Planning Commission’s review and comments. We will forward the Commission’s
comments and recommendations to the City Council. The City Council will review,
conduct a public hearing, and adopt the CIP in February.
BACKGROUND
Springfield’s CIP is a five-year plan for funding and construction of the City’s public
facilities and it is updated annually. Projects are selected from a long list of needed
capital improvements as identified in the various master plans and refinement plans
adopted by the City Council. Because of limited revenues, many projects cannot be
funded during the next five years. These projects are shown in the CIP; however this is
for informational purposes only.
The City has applied for and received nearly $2,000,000 in stimulus funding for several
projects around the City including street and multi-use pathway overlays, traffic signal
upgrades, and lighting upgrades. Additionally, the City has applied for $50 million in a
Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) grant to complete
the Franklin Boulevard Reconstruction Project. City staff also continues to work on
proposals for obtaining future federal stimulus funding as it is made available.
The public input process for the CIP began in November when citizens, organizations,
and City staff were asked to suggest projects for consideration in the CIP. After the
Planning Commission reviews the draft CIP, the City Council will review it in a work
session on February 1, 2010, and then will hold a public hearing prior to adoption at their
meeting on February 16, 2010.
2011 - 2015 Capital Improvements Program Page 1 of 3
2011 - 2015 Capital Improvements Program Page 2 of 3
DISCUSSION
The 2011-2015 CIP reflects projects for which funding is proposed to be programmed
from expected revenues over the next 5 years. In addition, the CIP includes descriptions
of projects that have been identified through various facility planning efforts but do not
currently have an identified funding source. Also, the CIP now includes those projects
that are currently in the capital budget and in various stages of planning, design, and
construction. The following is a list of the most significant of these projects:
Jasper Trunk Sewer– This project will provide sanitary sewer service to the Jasper/Natron
area and will ultimately allow the decommissioning of three existing pump stations. The
project is necessary for continued urban growth in Jasper/Natron. The project is currently
in the design phase and the project proposal in the draft CIP is to delay construction of
the project to 2013, thus delaying future revenue bond sales and reducing the immediate
impact on user rates. The total estimated cost for development and construction of this
project is approximately $11.2 million with construction estimated at $9.3 million of the
total. By delaying the project construction, the funding that was set aside for its
construction can be reprogrammed to several other required rehabilitation and upgrade
projects over a longer time frame.
Sanitary Basin #22 Rehabilitation – This is the next large project identified in the 2008
Wastewater Master Plan with the goal of rehabilitating the sanitary sewer collection
system to control infiltration and inflow (I/I) of rain and ground water into the local waste
water system, thereby reducing system capacity and creating the potential for sanitary
overflows. The City is obligated under an Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) order
to maintain the wastewater system such that all sanitary sewer overflows (SSOs) are
eliminated as well as assuring public health and safety. The estimated cost for the project
is $6.2 million.
Gateway/Beltline Intersection Improvements – This project will add turn lanes and
through lanes to the existing intersection to alleviate congestion and improve safety. This
is Phase 1 of the full Gateway/Beltline Intersection project as approved in the 2003
Revised Environmental Assessment (REA). The design phase of this project has just
been completed and it is anticipated that construction will begin in April or May. The
estimated cost for completion of the Phase 1 project is $10 million. The future Phase 2
project is estimated at $20 million and is projected to be needed by 2018.
In addition to the above major projects, several other projects are also already budgeted
and scheduled, including: the Regional Fuel Facility upgrade and Energy Efficiency and
Conservation Block Grant (EECBG)-City Hall Lighting upgrades.
For the 2011-2015 five-year outlook, one of the most significant aspects of this CIP is the
projection of a continual decrease in funding for street preservation projects. The main
reason for this is the well documented loss of annual funding the City had received from
the County as part of the Secure Rural Schools Act. Further, revenues generated from the
2011 - 2015 Capital Improvements Program Page 3 of 3
local motor fuel tax are not projected to provide sufficient funding to adequately fund the
City’s current street preservation program.
Sewer and drainage capital funds and sewer SDC funds continue to be fully programmed
over the 5 year period toward debt from current and prior sewer capacity projects, and
ongoing programs that fund small repair projects and permits. With little or no funding
available for several major stormwater initiatives, including funding the final phase of the
Mill Race rehabilitation project and a number of capital projects related to the City’s
obligation to address stormwater quality, permitting and threatened fish impacts, the City
Council may consider issuing additional revenue bonds in the coming years.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
The CIP does not carry budget authority. It is, however a valuable planning tool used to
guide staff, the Budget Committee, and the City Council in creating the annual budget.
Future operational and maintenance impacts, both positive and negative, that result from
projects are estimated where possible.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission support the draft 2011-2015 CIP and
recommend it for Council adoption.
COMMISSION ACTION REQUESTED
The Commission is requested to review staff’s proposal and forward it to the City
Council with comments and a recommendation for adoption.
Attachment A: Draft CIP
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................... 1
SECTION I CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
CIP Goals ........................................................................................................................... 6
CIP Project Development and Review Process ................................................................. 6
Types of Capital Needs ...................................................................................................... 6
Project Selection Resources .............................................................................................. 7
Facilities Plans
Wastewater Master Plan ..................................................................................... 7
Stormwater Facilities Master Plan ....................................................................... 8
DLR Building Condition Report ............................................................................ 8
Urban Renewal Plans ........................................................................................... 9
Land Use Plans
Public Facilities and Services Plan ...................................................................... 10
TransPlan ........................................................................................................... 10
Refinement Plans ............................................................................................... 11
SECTION II FUNDING
Capital Project Funding ................................................................................................... 14
System Development Charges ........................................................................................ 15
External Revenue Sources ............................................................................................... 16
Other Revenues .............................................................................................................. 17
City Accounting Funds Used for Capital Resources ........................................................ 17
SECTION III FINANCIAL SUMMARIES
Financial Summaries—All Programs ............................................................................... 20
SECTION IV PROJECTS
Master Projects List ........................................................................................................ 21
Master Project Map ........................................................................................................ 23
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION
The City of Springfield’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP) is a five‐year Community Reinvestment Plan
which describes the funding and construction of City public facilities. The CIP is updated annually and is
an intermediate step in a process that originates with long term planning activities that anticipate the
need for public facilities at least 20 years into the future, and the ultimate construction and operation of
those facilities. The CIP identifies the facilities concepts that may reasonably be expected to be required
in the next five years, refines those concepts, and provides a priority list of projects. Priority projects are
selected from the long list of needed capital improvements identified in the various master plans and
refinement plans adopted by the City Council. After inclusion in the CIP, the next step in the process is
the City’s annual Capital Budget which draws from the first year of the CIP, with such modifications as
are necessary or prudent to respond to immediate concerns and the often fluid nature of funding
opportunities. The 2011‐2015 CIP includes those projects that are currently in the capital budget and in
various stages of planning, design, and construction. In addition, the CIP includes descriptions of
projects that have been identified through various facilities planning efforts but do not currently have
complete funding identified. These projects are aimed at improving neighborhoods, providing for
economic growth, improving traffic safety, mobility and access, complying with environmental
standards, and maintaining the existing city infrastructure. The CIP is the source of projects which form
the capital budget for each ensuing fiscal year.
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT AND REVIEW
The public input process for the CIP begins in October when citizens, organizations, and City staff are
asked to suggest projects for consideration in the CIP. The Planning Commission and the City Council
then review the draft CIP and a public hearing is held prior to Council adoption.
OCTOBER: CIP PROJECT REVIEW PROCESS STARTS
OCTOBER: CAPITAL PROJECT REQUESTS GO TO PUBLIC AND CITY DEPARTMENTS
NOVEMBER/DECEMBER: PUBLISH DRAFT CIP
NOVEMBER/DECEMBER: BEGIN INTERNAL DRAFT CIP REVIEW
JANUARY: PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEWS DRAFT CIP
JANUARY: CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION REVIEWS DRAFT CIP
FEBRUARY: PUBLIC HEARING AT CITY COUNCIL ON DRAFT CIP
APRIL: CAPITAL BUDGET PRESENTED TO BUDGET COMMITTEE
The City’s final commitment to spend public funds occurs through the annual City budget process.
Although the CIP is the starting point for the annual Capital Budget, the projects actually budgeted each
year can vary somewhat from those proposed in the CIP.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 1
PROJECT CATEGORIZATION
Projects in the CIP are grouped first by the relevant infrastructure system (stormwater, transportation,
wastewater, buildings and facilities, and miscellaneous) and by the status of project funding. For
historical purposes, the CIP also includes projects that have been completed within the past year.
Project funding includes three categories: In Process, Funding Secured, and Funding Unsecured. In
Process are those projects that are currently in the Capital Improvement Program, in the Capital Budget,
and are in process of construction. Funding Secured projects are those highest priority projects for
which some or all of the funding has been clearly identified, and the City has taken appropriate steps to
make sure the funding will be available in a timely fashion. Funding Unsecured projects are multiple
levels of priority projects with funding sources that are presently unknown.
The following is a list of the most significant of these projects:
Sewer Wet Weather Flow Abatement – This program deals with capacity problems in the wastewater
system and treatment facilities in the most cost‐effective manner identified by the 2001 Wet Weather
Flow Management Plan (WWFMP). It is necessary to enable the City to maintain compliance with
Federal and State requirements to eliminate sanitary sewer overflows (SSOs) and continue as a new
WWFMP report will be completed by the end of 2010. It is expected that a new project list will be
generated and the projects completed over the next decade. The City is planning work for Basin #22 to
address the Downtown area.
Gateway/Beltline – This project will add lanes to the intersection to alleviate congestion. This is Phase 1
of the full Gateway/Beltline Intersection project as approved in the 2003 Revised Environmental
Agreement (REA). The estimated cost for completion of this Phase 1 intersection upgrade is $10 million.
The Jasper Natron Stormwater basin project will plan for the construction of channel improvement
along the existing drainage ways to serve new development in this area. The first year of the project will
include additional studies to identify the downstream impacts and design the project and its mitigation
measures. The final design will assess and mitigate impacts to the downstream property owners and
natural drainage ways located beyond the City's Urban Growth Boundary.
The Mill Race project; Phase I is moving the inlet upstream to improve flow throughout the Mill Race.
This project will also rehabilitate the former river channel to carry flow and connect to existing Mill Race
near current inlet and rehabilitate the downstream channel. Phase II will lower elevation of the inlet to
Gorrie Creek, reconfigure the Mill Pond to create a meandering channel with a 12‐foot wide low flow
channel and 15‐foot wide high flow benches, similar to the upper Mill Race. Each of these projects is
multi‐jurisdictional and accomplishes the broadest range of natural resource, ESA and habitat
improvements, stormwater management and community benefit possible. They include the goals of the
Corp of Engineers, Fish and Wildlife, Division of State Lands and Springfield’s Metro partners and Team
Springfield.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 2
FINANCING
There are limited sources of funding for capital activity. The principal sources include revenues derived
from user fees or those taxes (such as fuel taxes) which function like user fees. By Council policy, these
are preferentially devoted to preservation of existing public infrastructure. The second major source is
System Development Charges (SDC), which are designed to recover from development the cost impact
that development has on public infrastructure, both existing and needed to meet the demands of
development. A large portion of these revenues must, by law, be devoted to capacity increasing capital
activity. Only that portion of SDC revenue which is derived from a reimbursement fee may be expended
for preservation of existing infrastructure. A third major source of capital funding is external
contributions, in the form of intergovernmental grants or loans, payments by developers for specific
improvements, and assessments of benefitted property owners, also for specific improvements. Other
sources such as revenue leveraged by tax increment financing in the City’s two urban renewal districts,
and revenue from internally generated charges, also play a role, at present minor.
Sewer (wastewater) and Drainage (stormwater) capital funds are derived from user fees and combined
with System Development Charges (SDC) funds are continuing to be fully programmed over the five year
period. In part, the Wastewater SDC funds go toward debt from prior sewer capacity projects and
continuing programs, which fund small repair projects and permits. In addition to user fees and SDCs,
the City sold revenue bonds in March, 2009 to fund the required sanitary sewer rehabilitation work and
the Jasper Trunk Line Extension. The City Council may consider issuing additional revenue bonds in the
coming years due to little or no funding available for several major stormwater initiatives, and a number
of capital projects related to the City’s obligation to address stormwater quality, permitting and
threatened fish impacts.
For the 2011‐2015 CIP, a five‐year outlook, one of the most significant aspects is the projection of a
continual decrease in funding for street preservation projects. The main reasons for this are the well
documented loss of annual funding the City has received from the County, the continued deterioration
in revenues from State and local fuel taxes as increased fuel efficiency drives down revenue even in the
face of increased miles traveled, and the failure of System Development Charges revenues to keep pace
with development’s demands for new infrastructure.
A second significant aspect of the funding scenario is the current imbalance between user fees and SDCs
as sources of capital funding. City staff has documented that in many cases user fees are funding a
disproportionate share of capital projects. Until full implementation of the revised SDCs occurs, existing
users of the systems will continue to bear most of the costs associated with expanding and upgrading
them. This has resulted, in part, from the recent development and adoption of updated facilities plans
for the local sewer and storm drainage infrastructure. These plans identify significant new capital
project and financing needs, and the SDC methodologies and charges also needed updating to reflect
new projects and costs. Although work has been completed to update these SDCs, current economic
conditions have led Council to defer significant portions of SDC increases that have been proposed
based on updated facilities plans.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 3
There are a number of projects added to the CIP for which there are no identified funding sources.
Because of limited revenues, even many of the projects traditionally listed in the CIP cannot be funded
during the next five years. These projects are shown in the CIP to make it possible for the Council and
the public to better understand the scope of the City’s infrastructure need and compare that need to
the resources presently available, and provide the basis for developing long‐term capital financing
strategies.
Highlights
The FY 2010 ‐ 2014 CIP and the FY 2010 Capital Budget included funding for the design and construction
of the Jasper Trunk Line Extension sewer. The revenue for funding this $11.3 million project was
planned from a revenue bond sale in March, 2009. The current CIP contemplates adjusting the
construction timing for the Jasper Trunk sewer to FY 2013 instead of FY 2011. By deferring the
construction, the City can ease pressure on user rates and delay a second revenue bond sale for a year
or more. This CIP further contemplates funding other high‐priority wastewater system construction
projects, such as the system rehabilitation in wastewater Basin 22 with the remaining proceeds from the
2009 bond sale.
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, which provides stimulus funding to States, has
become a source of funding for some projects and the City is working on proposals for obtaining more of
the federal stimulus funding. If successful, the Council will have an opportunity to obligate more of
these funds to projects that are ready for construction but not currently funded and that will meet the
timing restrictions for the Federal stimulus funding. This approach would then allow the City Council to
reprogram funds that are not yet budgeted to other projects listed in the CIP.
As part of the Recovery Act program, Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER)
grants will provide up to $1.5 billion in grants for capital investments in surface transportation
infrastructure projects. These grants are awarded on a competitive basis and will be announced in early
2010. The City of Springfield submitted a TIGER grant request totaling $49.5 million for the
reconstruction of Franklin Boulevard as a multi‐way, multi‐modal boulevard. The Project cannot be
completed without significant Federal resources. The City has made a $250,000 investment in project
planning and development activity, and is currently working with URS consulting for National
Environmental Policy ACT (NEPA) documentation and with CH2M Hill consulting for Project design.
NEPA activity will be paid for by the Project partners using a mix of local transit, urban renewal and
transportation systems development funds. The Springfield Economic Development Agency (urban
renewal district) is carrying $2,650,000 on its tax increment financing project list for this important
project. The Lane Transit District will contribute approximately $2,120,000 to the Project, including EmX
bus shelters worth $618,000, and EmX buses worth approximately $1,500,000 million. If successful in
receiving the grant, TIGER will pay 94% of Project costs.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 4
Included is a chart showing annual project funding needs and resources.
CONCLUSION
The Capital Improvement Program serves as a guide for the City’s needed improvements. It is shaped by
citizen input, the best professional judgment of staff and outside experts, and estimates of the City’s
projected financial resources. The CIP is subject to annual review and revision. The direction provided by
this document helps the City of Springfield target its resources to capital improvements which best serve
the needs of the citizens of Springfield. The CIP is available on the web for public viewing at
http://www.ci.springfield.or.us /Pubworks/CIP.htm.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 5
SECTION I CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
CIP GOALS
The goals of the CIP include:
1) Providing a balanced program for capital improvements given anticipated funding over a five‐
year or greater planning period and identifying the extent to which resources can meet capital
needs;
2) Improving neighborhoods;
3) Providing for economic and community growth;
4) Improving safety, access, and mobility of transportation modes;
5) Complying with environmental standards and improving environmental quality;
6) Maintaining the existing City infrastructure; and
7) Protect public health and safety.
CIP PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND REVIEW PROCESS
The following criteria are used to evaluate and rank projects for listing in the CIP. In order to prioritize
the use of scarce funds, these criteria are used to make sure the projects in the CIP meet the City’s goals
and priorities. Capital improvements must be consistent with the Metropolitan Area General
Comprehensive Plan, including the Public Facilities and Services Plan and TransPlan (the transportation
element of the Comprehensive Plan), and all other Council adopted plans and policies. The relevant
plans are listed in a subsequent section of this report. In the adopted CIP only those capital
improvements which are funded within the current projections for the appropriate revenue streams are
considered adopted. Projects for which the funding is not identified or secured are shown strictly for
informational purposes only.
Capital Projects included in the CIP meet one or more of the following criteria:
1) Project addresses State or Federal laws or regulations to eliminate or reduce the potential for
environmental degradation or health hazards or to address issues that affect the safety and
general welfare of the community.
2) Project maintains existing assets, extends the useful life of assets, or improves or expands
infrastructure such that operations are improved.
3) Project responds to requests from citizens, neighborhood groups, advisory committees, or
government bodies, and provides a public benefit.
4) Project is included in local and/or regional infrastructure plans.
TYPES OF CAPITAL NEED
Rehabilitation & Preservation of Existing Capital Assets
The CIP reflects the broad direction of the City Council as set forth in the Financial Management Policies
to preserve existing capital assets before they fall into disrepair and require expensive rehabilitation or
replacement. Preservation is an important tool used to protect or extend a City asset’s useful life. If
preservation doesn’t happen on a regular basis, the asset will deteriorate prematurely and its benefit to
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 6
the community will be lost. In that event reconstruction may be required. Reconstruction costs are
frequently multiple times the cost of preservation and maintenance, particularly for street surfaces.
Rehabilitation is necessary for some capital assets and the City must demonstrate fiscal responsibility by
planning for this need. Inclusion of these projects in the CIP is a necessary task to plan for that
rehabilitation.
New Capital Facilities and Capacity Enhancements
As the City reaches outward into the Urban Growth Boundary or anticipates infill or increased density of
development in the city limits, the need to plan for expansion of capital assets and provide safe and
efficient capital facilities increases. New streets are necessary to provide access and the delivery of
goods and services to developing areas. In addition, wastewater and stormwater systems are necessary
for protection of water quality and the environment to preserve the health, welfare, and safety of the
community.
PROJECT SELECTION RESOURCES
The following is a list of various plans with descriptive summaries that guide the decisions made about
CIP project choice. The City draws a distinction between facilities plans, which focus on facility needs
and how systems function, and land use plans, which provide more general guidance. General guidance
can inform the development of facilities plans, and can constrain facility development to conform to the
policy set of the land use planning document. (TransPlan is somewhat of an exception to these
distinctions, since it is a land use plan that also serves as a facilities plan and does contain specific
project guidance.)
FACILITIES PLANS
Wastewater Master Plan (2008)
The City of Springfield provides wastewater collection and conveyance services by way of a system of
pipelines and pump stations that it owns and operates. Along with the City of Eugene, Springfield
discharges to a regional collection and treatment system owned by the Metropolitan Wastewater
Management Commission (MWMC). Springfield’s Wastewater Master Plan provides an assessment of
existing and future needs for the City’s collection system. Because the City’s system connects to the
regional system, the Master Plan must consider and reflect results of the MWMC’s Wet Weather Flow
Management Plan (WWFMP), which identifies system maintenance and rehabilitation activities for the
wastewater collection and treatment facilities in the Eugene‐Springfield metropolitan area. Therefore,
Springfield’s plan provides a local solution for existing and future needs within the context of the similar
regional solution.
The Master Plan is intended to identify existing and future capacity constraints, determine capacity
requirements and identify system improvements necessary to meet the City’s projected population and
employment growth through the 2025 planning year. The Department Environmental Quality has issued
a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit (#102486) for Springfield, Eugene and
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 7
MWMC, which includes conditions under which treated wastewater can be discharged to the
Willamette River. Included in those conditions is the requirement that Springfield, Eugene and MWMC
fully implement the WWFMP, and that no untreated wastewater can be discharged to the waters of the
State and US except under the following conditions; for flows greater than those occurring for the 24‐
hour duration, 1 in 5‐year winter and 1 in 10‐year summer storms. These conditions form the baseline
assumptions for overflow avoidance in this plan and are consistent with the assumptions of the
WWFMP.
Stormwater Facilities Master Plan (2008)
In 2008, the City Council adopted a comprehensive Stormwater Facilities Master Plan (SWFMP). The
purpose of this document is to provide a guide to plan for more comprehensive, efficient, and multi‐
objective management of the City’s stormwater system. The majority of the City’s stormwater runoff
drains through an integrated network of pipes and open channels, discharging either directly to the
main stem Willamette or McKenzie Rivers or through outfalls to a tributary of either of those rivers.
Before the SWFMP, the City has typically been designing and constructing facilities for treating and
conveying stormwater runoff on an individual development or site‐by‐site basis. In addition, as is typical
for nearly all cities, most of the City’s stormwater collection and conveyance system was historically
designed and built with the sole objective of addressing flooding issues.
Most of the major portions of the City’s stormwater drainage system infrastructure were built during
the 1960s and as development increased, the system was retrofitted with extensions and additions.
Most of the main conveyance system was not upsized to facilitate the increased flows associated with
full City build out.
The City also has a Council‐adopted Stormwater Management Plan, which establishes goals, policies and
implementation actions that address water quality and management of the stormwater system,
including open waterways within the City’s jurisdiction. This plan is required and approved by the
Department of Environmental Quality as part of its issuance and management of the City’s stormwater
discharge permit. Additionally, the Willamette River and McKenzie River (a tributary to the Willamette
River) are listed on the State’s 303(d) list indicating that water quality standards for specific pollutants in
these streams are currently not being met. The City must address Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL)
through implementation of the Stormwater Management Plan and the TMDL Implementation Plan.
These plans and requirements impact the nature and design of capital projects that are constructed to
manage stormwater.
DLR Building Condition Report (2006)
The DLR identifies and addresses capital improvement needs at City owned buildings, including: City
Hall, Springfield Museum, fire stations, Public Works maintenance buildings, and the Depot. The report
provides a snapshot of repairs and asset preservation improvements that are immediately evident, and
which have been deferred for various reasons, together with ongoing maintenance needs and necessary
replacement of building systems expected to reach the end of their useful life during the next 30 years.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 8
The City faces several critical building/facilities operations, maintenance and preservation issues. The
DLR Buildings Condition Report (DLR) identified $600K deferred/backlog facilities repair needs and
$300K ongoing annual maintenance/preservation needs. City Council was presented the DLR findings
and recommendations in January 2007, and faced the unplanned and unfunded replacement of Fire
Station #1. This heightened the Council’s awareness and commitment to develop a funding mechanism
to address the City’s immediate buildings repair backlog and to provide for more timely preservation
maintenance of buildings/facilities assets. In FY 2009, the City implemented an Internal Building
Preservation Charge and programmed $300k for ongoing preservation and $200k to start addressing the
backlog projects. This funding was cut to $150k in FY 2010; however, $300k is anticipated for the FY
2011 budget. The first priority of staff charged with this capital program was to develop a 5‐year City
Buildings/Facilities Work Plan inclusive of all City Fire Stations, City Hall, Springfield Justice Center, Public
Works maintenance facilities, Springfield Depot, and the newly acquired Carter Building. This 5‐year
work plan is reviewed and updated annually, and used as the basis for project budgeting each fiscal
year.
Additionally, there are other project management responsibilities related to public buildings and
facilities maintenance and preservations that have been identified through previously adopted CIP
documents, such as, preservation projects at the Depot and Booth Kelly, and demolition of the
Carpenter shed and gun range at Booth Kelly. Also, any future building needs such as new fire station
construction will be addressed through the CIP process.
Urban Renewal Plans
Downtown Urban Renewal Plan (2007)
The primary goal of the Downtown Urban Renewal Plan is to assist in the revitalization of business and
elimination of blight in the downtown area. The Downtown Urban Renewal Plan has projects listed to
obtain these goals. The plan’s projects include:
Improvements to streets, sidewalks, bike ways and pathways;
Improvements to water, storm and sanitary sewer infrastructure;
Improve the visual appearance of the downtown area;
Improve and expand the existing public parking facilities;
Financial assistance to rehabilitate existing properties and encourage new construction;
Acquisition and disposal of land for public improvements.
Glenwood Urban Renewal Plan (1999, updated 2004)
The primary goal of the Glenwood Urban Renewal Plan is to eliminate blighting influences found in the
Renewal Area. The Glenwood Urban Renewal Plan has projects listed to obtain these goals. The plan’s
projects include:
Promote private development and redevelopment;
Rehabilitate building stock;
Improvements to streets, sidewalks, bike ways, pathways, streetscapes, parks, and open spaces;
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 9
Utility improvements;
Parking;
Public facilities;
Housing;
Public signage and community gateway entrance improvements.
LAND USE PLANS
Public Facilities and Services Plan
The Public Facilities and Services Plan (PFSP) is an element of the Eugene‐Springfield Metropolitan Area
General Plan (Metro Plan). It is the element which identifies significant facilities in general terms and
confirms that those facilities are consistent with the planning policies set out in the Metro Plan. The
projects identified in the PFSP are generally a subset of the projects contained in the various facilities
plans. The PFSP does not identify transportation projects, which are covered in TransPlan, but does
identify wastewater and stormwater projects, among others. The PFSP does not, nor should it, identify
every project; it includes only those projects identified as significant on the basis of definitions set forth
in the PFSP.
TransPlan (2002)
The Eugene‐Springfield Metropolitan Area Transportation Plan (TransPlan) is the transportation element
of the Eugene‐Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan. While adopted as a refinement to MetroPlan,
and therefore technically a land use plan, TransPlan is also intended as a system plan that guides local
and regional transportation system planning and development in the Eugene‐Springfield metropolitan
area. TransPlan also serves as the City’s facilities plan (transportation system plan, or TSP) for identifying
projects needed to meet the transportation demand of residents over a 20‐year planning horizon while
addressing transportation issues and making changes that can contribute to improvements in the
region’s quality of life and economic vitality. In addition to roadway facilities, TransPlan also calls for
significant increases in the amount and convenience of transit service, increases in the amount of
bikeways and sidewalks, and an expansion of the existing program of transportation demand
management (TDM) travel incentives. TransPlan is a jointly adopted document that serves as a local
transportation system plan for both Springfield and Eugene, which, at present, share a joint urban
growth boundary. As a result of legislation approved in 2007 the two cities are now in the process of
developing separate urban growth boundaries. Following that step, each city will be required to adopt a
local transportation system plan (TSP) that will replace TransPlan. The CIP includes a project describing
the costs and resources available to Springfield to complete that task.
The TransPlan theme, ‘Improving Our Transportation Choices’, reflects the plan’s focus to provide
citizens with a range of safe, convenient, and efficient transportation options characterized by smooth
connections between modes. TransPlan strives to support the need to diversify transportation choices,
while avoiding reliance on any one transportation mode or method of managing the transportation
system. TransPlan establishes the framework upon which all public agencies can make consistent and
coordinated planning decisions regarding inter‐ and intra‐jurisdictional transportation.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 10
Refinement Plans
Downtown Refinement Plan (1986, updated 2005)
The primary goal of the Springfield Downtown Refinement Plan is to provide goals and policies through
which downtown Springfield may become a more vital and attractive place to shop, conduct business,
and recreate. Goals were set forth to guide this revitalization. These goals are:
Create a pedestrian and transit friendly downtown;
Preserve the past;
Reconnect to key natural resource features;
Encourage evening activity in the downtown;
Create new opportunities for office, commercial, residential, civic, and mixed uses;
Ensure adequate parking;
Create civic gathering places;
Create downtown partnerships;
Identify catalyst projects;
Create a positive identity for downtown.
East Kelly Butte Neighborhood Plan (1992)
The primary goal of the East Kelly Butte Neighborhood Plan is to address the concerns of the citizens
living within the East Kelly Butte Neighborhood. Goals were set to address these concerns. The goals of
the neighborhood plan are:
Encourage a variety of land uses and housing opportunities;
Provide a safe and effective transportation system;
Provide and maintain public facilities and services;
Improve the character and identity of the neighborhood.
East Main Refinement Plan (1988)
The primary goal of the East Main Refinement Plan is to address the concerns of the citizens living within
the East Main Refinement Plan Neighborhood. Goals were set to address these concerns. The goals of
the refinement plan are:
Provide affordable housing for all segments of the population;
Allow flexibility for large vacant areas that are surrounded by mixed uses;
Provide for commercial centers which meet the needs of the community;
Encourage additional industrial development which is compatible with surrounding uses;
Enhance and develop the natural and built environment;
Develop recreational facilities which fill the needs of the area;
Create a safe and efficient street system;
Provide safe, efficient and convenient bicycle facilities.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 11
Gateway Refinement Plan (1992)
The primary goal of the Gateway Refinement Plan is to refine and augment the Eugene‐Springfield
Metropolitan Area General Plan to provide specificity for site‐specific land use decisions, and to identify
the near and long‐term public facilities needs to support development and livability of the area. This
plan incorporates goals and policies, controls and design standards in areas where protections need to
be stringent. These elements are:
Community and Economic Development
Residential;
Commercial;
Industrial;
Natural Assets, Open Space/Scenic Areas, and Recreation;
Historic Resources;
Transportation; and
Public Facilities
Glenwood Refinement Plan (1999)
The intent of the Glenwood Refinement Plan is to provide background information and policy direction
for public and private decisions affecting the growth and development of the Glenwood area. The plan
will guide the provision of public service, such as sanitary sewers and street improvements. It will serve
as a basis for evaluating private development proposals, such as zone change requests. It will also
provide a common framework for those engaged in the conservation, development, and redevelopment
of the area. The Glenwood Refinement Plan is currently being updated. The community direction goals
in the existing plan are:
Maintain and improve Glenwood’s sense of identity and community as it transitions into the
City;
Maintain the viability of the residential area within Glenwood by conserving and upgrading the
quality of existing housing wherever possible while retaining its affordable character;
Promote Glenwood as an attractive industrial area because of its easy access to I‐5 and rail
service, its convenient location between Eugene and Springfield, and the availability of a variety
of sizes of vacant industrial parcels.
Reduce conflicts between industrial and residential development through use of site review
procedures.
Foster Franklin Boulevard and the McVay Highway as a desirable commercial location while
improving its visual quality;
Encourage a variety of commercial, industrial, and residential uses as an integral part of the
Glenwood community;
Promote use of rail service as a viable method of transport of industrial materials and goods;
Improve bicycle and pedestrian access into, out of, and within Glenwood and along the river;
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 12
Provide urban services in a timely way, including providing sanitary sewers to those who need
them, improving street drainage, ensuring timely public safety response, and maintaining the
viability of James Park or other park facilities;
Be sensitive to annexation concerns and provide for voluntary annexation wherever feasible;
Provide access to the river and promote development opportunities along the river, which take
advantage of the river’s natural assets and are sensitive to the river environment;
Improve the community’s quality of life by addressing such issues as litter and noise pollution.
Mid‐Springfield Refinement Plan (1986)
The primary goal of the Mid‐Springfield Refinement Plan is to assign site‐specific plan designations in
areas designated “Mixed‐Use” on the Metro Plan Diagram and to recognize the needs of industrial and
commercial land uses and to resolve conflicts with residential neighbors. Goals were set to address
these concerns. The goals of the refinement plan are:
Maximize industrial development potential of industrial designated land;
Encourage functional commercial development on commercially designated land along Main
and 42nd Streets;
Preserve the integrity of residentially designated areas;
Provide a safe and efficient transportation system;
Provide a means to implement the goals and policies of this refinement plan.
Q Street Refinement Plan (1987)
The primary goal of the Q Street Refinement Plan is to guide land use decisions in the Q Street area.
Land use decisions will be made to follow certain goals. The majority of the goals for the refinement
plan are:
Provide vacant and re‐developable land to allow for commercial development;
Encourage commercial shopping centers where safe and efficient vehicular access can be
provided;
Participate in efforts to maintain and enhance existing residential neighborhoods and attract
medium and high density residential developments;
Implement mitigating measures for noise, dust, and traffic impacts to residential areas;
Encourage private and public recreational facilities in high density areas;
Buffer multiple family development from single family development and residential land from
commercial land through site plan review;
Work with Willamalane to provide adequate park and recreational facilities to residents;
Discourage through truck traffic in residentially designated areas;
Encourage bicycle path into the design of recreational and new residential facilities.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 13
SECTION II FUNDING
CAPITAL PROJECT FUNDING
There are limited sources of funding for capital activity. The principal sources include 1) revenues
derived from user fees or those taxes (such as fuel taxes) which function like user fees; 2) System
Development Charges (SDCs), which are designed to recover from development the cost impact that
development has on public infrastructure; 3) external contributions, in the form of intergovernmental
grants or loans, payments by developers for specific improvements, and assessments of benefitted
property owners, also for specific improvements; and 4) other sources such as revenue leveraged by tax
increment financing in the City’s two urban renewal districts, and revenue from internally generated
charges, which at present play a minor role in capital project funding. The City of Springfield’s accounts
for these four revenue sources are in special revenue or enterprise funds, such as the Street Capital
Fund, System Development Charges funds, and the Wastewater and Drainage Capital funds. The funds
used by the City to record and account for capital funding are listed following this discussion, along with
the limitations imposed by local, state, or federal laws associated with the funding source.
USER FEES
Each of the three public infrastructure systems (streets, sanitary sewers, and storm drainage) is funded
by fees paid by those who use the system. In the case of the local wastewater and storm drainage
systems those fees are directly billed to users. In the case of the transportation system those fees are
collected in the form of taxes on motor fuel at both the state and local level, and by state fees for
licensing and registration of drivers and vehicles, as well as weight mile taxes imposed on the trucking
industry.
City Council policy calls for a portion of those fees, in excess of that required for current operation of the
systems, to be devoted to preservation of the existing systems. However, in the past several years it has
been necessary to devote some portion of those revenues to fund expansion of the system, either
through direct funding of capital activity or by funding debt service on revenue bonds. To date, the only
revenue bonds issued have been to fund local wastewater capital activity; although during FY 2011 the
Council may decide to issue additional revenue bonds to fund storm drainage capital projects. This level
of capital support has produced circumstances which have led to substantial increases in user fees, and
created concerns that user fees might be approaching levels which test the traditional level of citizen
support.
Another significant aspect of the funding scenario is the current imbalance between user fees and SDCs
as sources of capital funding. City staff has documented that in many cases user fees are funding a
disproportionate share of capital projects which has led Council to defer significant portions of SDC
increases that have been proposed based on updated facilities plans. Until full implementation of the
revised SDCs occurs, existing users of the systems will continue to bear most of the costs associated with
expanding and upgrading them.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 14
For the 2011‐2015 CIP, a second source of concern is the projection of a continual decrease in funding
for street preservation projects. State and local fuel tax revenue continue to decline because of the
current recession, and increased fuel efficiency that reduce revenue even in the face of increased miles
traveled. While the Council has increased storm drainage and local wastewater fees to maintain and
enhance the level of preservation for those systems, the City no longer has the authority to increase its
local fuel tax. While the State Legislature approved an increase in the State fuel tax, it will not go into
effect until either the State experiences two quarters of positive non‐farm employment growth, or
January 2011, whichever occurs first. At present, the latter event seems most likely to be the trigger. In
addition the loss of annual funding the City has received from the County (due in large part to the
County’s loss of revenue from the Secure Rural Schools Act) has caused revenues for transportation to
decline.
SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGES
The second major source of capital funding is System Development Charges (SDCs). These are charges
imposed on development to provide funding to assure that the City can fund the cost of the
infrastructure needed to serve that level of development. There are several types of SDCs that can be
used for capital projects. One of the SDC funds is the “Old” SDCs, which were funds collected under SDC
laws in effect prior to 1991, and have different restrictions on use than the current SDC funds.
These charges are calculated based upon a methodology which must be adopted by the Council and
which must conform to State law. The process involves two separate components. The first is an
improvement fee which is based on: a determination of which capital projects are needed to
accommodate growth, the amount of additional capacity that is created by those projects, and a
determination of the unit cost of additional capacity calculated by dividing the sum of project costs by
the sum of the capacity created. The second component, a reimbursement fee, is calculated by
determining the value of the existing system, the amount of capacity available in that system, and the
value of a unit of capacity. If the system has existing capacity, then development can be charged a fee
based upon the units of existing capacity development will require. These charges are increased
annually based on documented increase in the Cost of Construction Index.
Unfortunately, the facilities plans which are used to derive the projects to be constructed and the
capacity created by those projects (which dated from the 1970s), had been significantly out of date for
both local wastewater and storm drainage. As a result, fees collected were far below the amount,
permissible under the statutes, which were needed to construct improvement projects. In 2008, the
City did update those two facilities plans and moved in 2009 to update the SDCs. While that process
resulted in substantial increases in fees, the decline in development activity has resulted in minimal
increases in SDC revenue. In addition, because of the economic downturn, the Council deferred the
increases as they applied to one and two family residential construction until spring 2010.
While the Transportation project list was much more current, having last been updated in 2000, it did
not reflect significant price escalation during the current decade. At the same time that Council updated
the project lists for the other infrastructure systems, it also updated the costs on the transportation list,
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 15
leading to a substantial increase in SDCs. As with the local wastewater and storm drainage systems, the
recession, and Council deferral of residential increases have reduced the revenue impact of those
increases.
In July 2009, the City Council approved a new revenue source for capital activities in the stormwater
system; a Stormwater Reimbursement SDC fee. This fee is new for Springfield and provides a
“reimbursement” payment from new users to the City to pay for a portion of the excess capacity in the
stormwater system that was provided when the existing system was constructed. Reimbursement SDC’s
are less constrained than Improvement SDC’s because they can be used for maintenance of the existing
system as well as for funding new expansion projects. Since this is a new funding source that the City
hasn’t begun to collect at this time, this CIP includes programming of only about $21,000 in FY 2011
expenditures.
EXTERNAL REVENUE SOURCES
These sources include both intergovernmental grants and loans as well as contributions by private
individuals to the cost of infrastructure either through assessments imposed by the City or voluntarily as
part of a proposal to develop property in the City. In many cases these sources of revenue, however
derived, are accompanied by restrictions on their use.
The City regularly receives allocations of transportation funding from Federal programs. The
Metropolitan Policy Organization (MPO) acting through its Metropolitan Policy Committee (MPC)
allocates Federal formula funds to its member jurisdictions for planning, preservation and construction
projects on portions of the transportation system that are regionally significant. In addition, the City
regularly seeks Federal funding directly through efforts focused on the Oregon congressional delegation.
The City was instrumental in securing over $20 million in Federal funding to modernize the interchange
at I‐5 and Beltline Road. Most recently, the City received almost $2.2 million in Federal funding under
the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act (ARRA), which was created as part of the Federal
economic stimulus plan. In addition, the City has applied for a $49.5 million grant under the
Transportation Improvements Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) stimulus program, to completely
reconstruct and modernize Franklin Boulevard in Glenwood. Although that funding is not assured, the
project has been identified in the CIP.
In addition to Federal transportation grants the City has received significant transportation funding from
Lane County in past years, although the County’s fiscal condition makes receipt of future grants unlikely.
The local wastewater system also benefits from a variety of Federal programs, most notably the Clean
Water State Revolving Fund (a program funded by Federal dollars). In recent years, however, Federal aid
for local wastewater activity has declined sharply.
Private contributions toward capital funding also are available, but generally in restricted circumstances.
In order to facilitate provision of services to a new development, a developer can make a significant
contribution to a particular project when it is needed for the development in question when the City
does not have the financial resources to construct the project in circumstances which fit with the
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 16
developer’s timetable. Lastly, individual citizens sometimes contribute in the form of assessments for
specific projects which benefit their properties. This is done through the creation of a local improvement
district, including all of the benefitted properties. The cost of the project is then assessed against those
properties on a proportionate basis.
OTHER REVENUES
There are two other alternative revenue sources available for capital project funding. The first is tax
increment financing through the two urban renewal districts created by the City – one in Glenwood and
one in Downtown. In an urban renewal district additional taxes resulting from increases in assessed
value are sequestered and made available to the district, which then uses those revenues to support
debt service on urban renewal bonds used to finance projects within the district. At this point the
revenues of either district have not risen to the level deemed adequate to support bond issuance.
Nonetheless, that may occur within the period of the CIP, hence some of those projects are included.
The second alternative revenue source is an internal charge which is assessed against City departments’
operating Budgets to provide funding for preservation and rehabilitation of City buildings and structures.
CITY ACCOUNTING FUNDS USED FOR CAPITAL RESOURCES
USER FEE/TAX FUNDS
Street Capital Fund
Purpose: To account for operation, maintenance, and construction of the City’s streets and
transportation system. This includes the City’s pavement preservation program, signal operations, and
street light replacement and maintenance. Revenues are generated from a three‐cent local motor
vehicle fuel tax and a State fuel tax. Use of these funds is restricted to activities within public rights of
way by the Oregon Constitution.
Wastewater Capital Bond
Purpose: To account for the construction of capital facilities which are identified within the Wastewater
Master Plan as requiring rehabilitation of the existing system or expansion to support growth and
development. Bond proceeds provide the financing for the expenditures of this fund.
Restrictions: Funding provided by bond proceeds, including interest earnings, are restricted by the
terms of the bond contract developed at the time of the bond sale.
Wastewater Capital Fund
Purpose: To account for the operation, construction, and maintenance of the City’s wastewater
collection system. Wastewater user fee collections provide the financing for the expenditures of this
fund.
Restrictions: As allowed under state statute, the proceeds of the user fees are retained in the fund for
planning, constructing, maintaining and operating the wastewater collection system.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 17
Stormwater Capital Fund
Purpose: To account for the operation, construction, and maintenance of the City’s stormwater
collection and treatment system. Stormwater user fee collections provide the financing for the
expenditures of this fund.
Restrictions: As allowed under state statute, the proceeds of the user fees are retained in the fund for
planning, constructing, maintaining, and operating the stormwater collection and treatment system.
SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE (SDCS) FUNDS
Local Wastewater System Development Charge Reimbursement Capital Projects Fund
Purpose: To account for available capacity within the existing wastewater collection system that is
attributable to growth. Financing is provided by a SDC levied against developing properties.
Reimbursement SDCs are restricted for use on the wastewater collection system.
Local Wastewater System Development Charge Improvement Capital Projects Fund
Purpose: To account for construction of the growth related portion of capacity‐enhancing capital
projects. Financing is provided by a SDC levied against developing properties. Expenditures of
Improvement SDCs are restricted by state law to capacity‐enhancing projects for the wastewater
system.
Stormwater System Development Improvement Capital Projects Fund
Purpose: To account for construction of the growth related portion of capacity‐enhancing capital
projects. Financing is provided by a SDC levied against developing properties. Expenditures of
Improvement SDCs are restricted by state law to capacity‐enhancing projects for the stormwater
system.
Stormwater Systems Development Reimbursement Capital Projects Fund
This fund has not yet been created. If the City Council implements the Reimbursement fee
contemplated by the approved methodology these funds may be used for capital activity on the
Stormwater System.
Transportation Systems Development Improvement Capital Projects Fund
Purpose: To account for construction of the growth related portion of capacity‐enhancing capital
projects. Financing is provided by a SDC levied against developing properties. Expenditures of
Improvement SDCs are restricted by state law to capacity‐enhancing projects for the transportation
systems.
Transportation System Development Reimbursement Capital Projects Fund
Purpose: To account for available capacity within the existing transportation system that is attributable
to growth. Financing is provided by a SDC levied against developing properties. Reimbursement SDCs
are restricted for use on transportation system capital projects.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 18
EXTERNAL CONTRIBUTION FUNDS
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Fund
Purpose: To account for Federal grant revenues received for the primary purpose of advancing capital
projects that primarily benefit low income persons.
Restrictions: CDBG funds, including interest earnings, must meet the Federal government criteria of
benefiting low to moderate income individual’s needs, eliminating slums and blight, and addressing
urgent needs.
Development Projects Fund
Purpose: To account for county, State and Federal grants awarded to the City for the purpose of
preserving or enhancing City facilities. This fund also accounts for funds donated by developers toward
the construction of capital projects directly affected by the particular development.
Restrictions: Funding is usually project specific and must only be spent towards those capital projects
for which they were collected.
Special Assessments Capital Project Fund
Purpose: To account for the interim financing and related costs of construction for public improvements
which primarily benefit adjacent property owners of the subject capital project. Revenues are
generated through special assessments being levied against the benefiting properties.
Restrictions: State law restricts assessments to the specific improvement constructed.
OTHER FUNDS
Springfield Economic Development Agency (SEDA) Funds
Purpose: To account for funds collected and set aside within Urban Renewal Districts as defined and
adopted by the City Council.
Restrictions: Funds collected within the specified Urban Renewal District and set aside for capital
projects are restricted for use on capital projects benefiting the Urban Renewal District.
Booth Kelly Fund
Purpose: To account for revenues received from rents and leases at the Booth Kelly Center. These
funds are set aside for Capital Improvement projects that improve the Booth Kelly Center.
Building Preservation Fund
Purpose: To account for funds collected and set aside for maintenance and improvements to City
owned buildings and facilities.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 19
SECTION III FINANCIAL SUMMARIES
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 20
SECTION VI PROJECTS
SYSTEM PAGE
UNDERSTANDING THE PROJECT SHEETS .................................................................................. 22
ALL PROJECTS MAP ............................................................................................................ 23
STORMWATER
Overview ..................................................................................................................................... 25
Project Map and Legend ............................................................................................................. 27
Summary of Projects ................................................................................................................... 29
Constructed Projects ................................................................................................................... 33
In Process Projects ...................................................................................................................... 37
Funding Secured Projects ........................................................................................................... 41
Funding Unsecured Projects ....................................................................................................... 49
TRANSPORTATION
Overview ..................................................................................................................................... 69
Project Map and Legend ............................................................................................................. 71
Summary of Projects .................................................................................................................. 73
Constructed Projects ................................................................................................................... 77
In Process Projects ...................................................................................................................... 81
Funding Secured Projects ........................................................................................................... 87
Funding Unsecured Projects ....................................................................................................... 99
WASTEWATER
Overview ................................................................................................................................... 111
Project Map and Legend ........................................................................................................... 113
Summary of Projects ................................................................................................................ 115
Constructed Projects ................................................................................................................. 119
In Process Projects .................................................................................................................... 129
Funding Secured Projects ......................................................................................................... 133
Funding Unsecured Projects ..................................................................................................... 141
BUILDINGS AND PROPERTY
Overview ................................................................................................................................... 153
Project Map and Legend ........................................................................................................... 155
Summary of Projects ................................................................................................................ 157
In Process Projects .................................................................................................................... 159
Funding Secured Projects ......................................................................................................... 163
Funding Unsecured Project ....................................................................................................... 167
MISCELLANEOUS
Overview .................................................................................................................................. 179
Summary of Projects ................................................................................................................ 181
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 21
UNDERSTANDING THE PROJECT SHEETS
Once projects are identified and selected for inclusion in the Capital Improvement Program, a project
page is created for the project. The project page includes important information about a project such
as: project description, justification, driver, trigger, and status. This information is important for
conveying and tracking details as each project moves from conception to construction. The following is
a list and description of these elements:
Project Description – This is a detailed description or early scope for a project. Many times this
description will be very broad as it may be taken from a master plan or refinement plan and most likely
in conceptual form. As a project enters the planning phase the project scope is refined.
Project Justification – This element relates why the project is an identified capital need. Justification
includes meeting regulatory requirements, correcting existing deficiencies, or periodic preservation to
maintain an asset and offset the need for costly repairs or replacement in the future.
Project Driver – The project driver is usually relevant to the specific project. Typical drivers include the
need to accommodate future growth, regulatory requirements, or the need to maintain public health
and safety. This element helps explain why a project is included within the Capital Improvements
Program.
Project Trigger – A project trigger is also relevant to the specific project. Triggers can be completion of a
previous capital improvement, development within a certain region of the City, or necessary
preservation activities as identified through various asset management tools.
Project Status – Status describes the current stage of the Project, e.g. Planning, design, or construction.
Specific Plans/Policies related to this Project – This is a list of the various master plans, refinement plans,
adopted policies, and/or reports that relate to a project.
Improvement SDC Eligibility – Some projects are eligible to receive SDC funding; however most projects
are not eligible for 100% SDC funding. If eligible, this element gives the percent of the total project cost
eligible for improvement SDCs funds.
Expenditure Schedule – Lists various project activities and estimates the timing and cost to accomplish
the project activity.
Operational Impact – Estimates the financial impact by fiscal year to the operating budget upon
completion if the capital improvement. This can be a positive or negative number as some projects
improve existing facilities reducing the operations and maintenance impact while the addition of new
infrastructure will increase operations and maintenance costs due to adding one or more new assets to
the City inventory.
Funding Source – Describes how and when a project will/needs to be funded and the source of that
funding (e.g. bonds, capital funds, SDCs, grants).
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 22
STORMWATER
Overview
Stormwater projects fall into several categories:
Stormwater studies – These projects typically fund a study of an area that will provide for a future water
quality feature or system expansion. Projects may include studies for improving water quality in a
drainage way, providing data for future Federal funding, or exploring how to improve the existing
system.
Stormwater Rehab/Improvements – These projects typically provide upgrades to the City’s existing
stormwater system or removal of inactive or potentially unsafe storm lines. Projects may include repair
of storm lines, upsizing of lines, or the addition of storm lines to reduce localized flooding.
Capacity Enhancement – These projects typically provide additional capacity to the stormwater system.
These types of improvements may include an additional detention pond, detention facilities and offline
water quality treatment facilities.
Restoration – These projects typically involve restoring of streams and waterways. Projects may include
repairing deterioration of channels, providing access for fish passage, or improving flow capacity.
New Facilities ‐ These projects typically involve the construction of new stormwater facilities as a result
of or in anticipation of new development. Projects may include storm lines built as part of a new
subdivision, and extension of storm main trunk lines.
Project Maps
SW1 South 67th and Ivy Street Drainage
SW2 68th & “D” Street Drainage
SW3 Mill Race Interim Pump
SW4 Mill Race Restoration
SW6 Drainage Repair
SW10 “S” and “T” Streets Drainage
SW11 59th, Aster, and Daisy Street
SW12 Woodstave Removal
SW13 Jasper/Natron Drainage
SW15 McKenzie Oxbow
SW16 Island Park
SW17 Lower Mill Race / Mill Race Outfalls
SW18 I‐5 N. Gateway / Sports Way Channel
SW19 Irving Slough Headgate to Outfalls
SW20 Mill Race Stormwater Facility
SW21 South 67th Street
SW22 “Q” Street Channel
SW23 Glenwood
SW24 Maple Island Slough
SW25 North Willamette Heights
SW26 Booth Kelly Drainage
SW27 Jasper Slough
SW28 Gray Creek/72nd Street
SW29 Corporate Way Pond
SW30 Cedar Creek Intake Reconstruction
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 25
This page left intentionally blank
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 26
Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Stormwater Capital Projects Total Total Total Total Total Total Total
Constructed
South 67th & Ivy Street Drainage -$ -$ - - - - -
Capital Fund (425)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (440)-$ - - - - - -
Revenue Bonds (xxx)-$ - - - - - -
Unspecified Stormwater Funds -$ - - - - - -
Other -
68th & "D" Street Drainage -$ -$ - - - - -
Capital Fund (425)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (440)-$ - - - - - -
Revenue Bonds (xxx)-$ - - - - - -
Unspecified Stormwater Funds -$ - - - - - -
Other -
In Process
Mill Race Interim Pump 50$ - - - - - 50
Capital Fund (425)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (440) 50$ - - - - - 50
Revenue Bonds (xxx)-$ - - - - - -
Unspecified Stormwater Funds -$ - - - - - -
Mill Race Restoration 5,825$ 3,150 - - - - 8,975
Capital Fund (425) 1,000$ - - - - - 1,000
Improvement SDCs (440) 975$ - - - - - 975
Revenue Bonds (xxx)-$ - - - - - -
Federal Funds (420) 1,850$ 3,150 - - - - 5,000
Land Match 2,000$ - - - - - 2,000
Funding Secured
Metro Waterways Study 100$ 50 50 50 50 50 350
Capital Fund (425)-$ 25 25 25 25 25 125
Improvement SDCs (440) 100$ 25 25 25 25 25 225
Revenue Bonds (xxx)-$ - - - - - -
Other -$ - - - - - -
Drainage Repair 200$ 150 200 200 200 200 1,150
Capital Fund (425) 150$ 150 191 129 100 100 820
Improvement SDCs (440) 50$ - - - - - 50
Revenue Bonds (xxx)-$ - - - - - -
Reimbursement SDCs (xxx)-$ - 9 71 100 100 280
Channel Improvement 80$ 57 100 100 100 100 537
Capital Fund (425) 80$ 55 78 78 78 78 447
Improvement SDCs (440)-$ 2 2 2 2 2 10
Revenue Bonds (xxx)-$ - - - - - -
Reimbursement SDCs (xxx)-$ - 20 20 20 20 80
MS4 Permit Requirements 30$ 25 30 30 30 30 175
Capital Fund (425) 30$ 25 15 15 15 15 115
Improvement SDCs (440)-$ - - - - - -
Revenue Bonds (xxx)-$ - - - - - -
Reimbursement SDCs (xxx)-$ - 15 15 15 15 60
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 29
Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Stormwater Capital Projects Total Total Total Total Total Total Total
Riparian Land Management 40$ 11.40 26.40 29.65 29.65 29.65 166.75
Capital Fund (425) 13$ 10 10 13 13 13 72
Improvement SDCs (440)-$ 1.40 1.40 1.65 1.65 1.65 7.75
Reimbursement SDCs (xxx)-$ - 15 15 15 15 60
Unspecified Stormwater Funds 27$ - - - - - 27
S & T Drainage -$ - - - 150 450 600
Capital Fund (425)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (440)-$ - - - 76 - 76
Reimbursement SDCs (xxx)-$ - - - 74 411 485
Unspecified Stormwater Funds -$ - - - - 39 39
59th, Aster, & Daisy Street 150$ 400 2,100 - - - 2,650
Capital Fund (425)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (440) 150$ 102 - - - - 252
Revenue Bonds (xxx)-$ - - - - - -
Unspecified Stormwater Funds -$ 298 2,100 - - - 2,398
Funding Unsecured
Woodstave Removal -$ - - - - - -
Capital Fund (425)-$ -$ - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (440)-$ - - - - - -
Revenue Bonds (xxx)-$ - - - - - -
Unspecified Stormwater Funds -$ - - - - - -
Jasper-Natron -$ 1,000 2,000 2,000 - - 5,000
Capital Fund (425)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (440)-$ - - - - - -
Revenue Bonds (xxx)-$ 1,000 2,000 2,000 - - 5,000
Unspecified Stormwater Funds -$ - - - - - -
Channel 6 -$ 500 - - 1,000 - 1,500
Capital Fund (425)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (440)-$ 18 - - 35 - 53
Revenue Bonds (xxx)-$ - - - - - -
Unspecified Stormwater Funds -$ 482 - - 965 - 1,447
McKenzie Oxbow 125$ - 500 500 - - 1,125
Capital Fund (425)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (440) 65$ - 78 - - - 143
Revenue Bonds (xxx)-$ - - - - - -
Unspecified Stormwater Funds 60$ - 422 500 - - 982
Island Park -$ 2,000 - - - - 2,000
Capital Fund (425)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (440)-$ 257 - - - - 257
Revenue Bonds (xxx)-$ - - - - - -
Unspecified Stormwater Funds -$ 1,743 - - - - 1,743
Lower Mill Race 30$ 1,247$ - - - - 1,277
Capital Fund (425)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (440)5$ 157 - - - - 162
Revenue Bonds (xxx)-$ - - - - - -
Unspecified Stormwater Funds -$ 1,065 - - - - 1,065
OWEB grant(420) 25$ -$ - - - - 25
MWMC Sponsorship 25 - - - - 25
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 30
Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Stormwater Capital Projects Total Total Total Total Total Total Total
I-5 N. Gateway/Sports Way Channel -$ - - - 105 440 545
Capital Fund (425)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (440)-$ - - - 13 56 69
Revenue Bonds (xxx)-$ - - - - - -
Unspecified Stormwater Funds -$ - - - 92 384 476
Irving Slough Headwaters -$ - 2,382 - - - 2,382
Capital Fund (425)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (440)-$ - 83 - - - 83
Revenue Bonds (xxx)-$ - - - - - -
Unspecified Stormwater Funds -$ - 2,299 - - - 2,299
Mill Race Stormwater Facility -$ 650 1,200 - - - 1,850
Capital Fund (425)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (440)-$ 83 152 - - - 235
Revenue Bonds (xxx)-$ - - - - - -
Unspecified Stormwater Funds -$ 567 1,048 - - - 1,615
South 67th Street -$ - 325 - - - 325
Capital Fund (425)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (440)-$ - 31 - - - 31
Revenue Bonds (xxx)-$ - - - - - -
Unspecified Stormwater Funds -$ - 294 - - - 294
"Q" Street Channel -$ - 100 100 100 100 400
Capital Fund (425)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (440)-$ - 12 13 13 13 51
Revenue Bonds (xxx)-$ - - - - - -
Unspecified Stormwater Funds -$ - 88 87 87 87 349
Glenwood -$ - - 2,000 2,000 2,000 6,000
Capital Fund (425)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (440)-$ - - 30 35 175 240
Revenue Bonds (xxx)-$ - - - - - -
SEDA Funds (429)-$ - - 1,970 1,965 1,825 5,760
Maple Island Slough -$ - - 550 - - 550
Capital Fund (425)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (440)-$ - - 70 - - 70
Revenue Bonds (xxx)-$ - - - - - -
Unspecified Stormwater Funds -$ - - 480 - - 480
North Willamette Heights -$ - - 60 - - 60
Capital Fund (425)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (440)-$ - - 8 - - 8
Revenue Bonds (xxx)-$ - - - - - -
Unspecified Stormwater Funds -$ - - 52 - - 52
Booth Kelly Drainage -$ - 360 - - - 360
Capital Fund (425)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (440)-$ - - - - - -
Revenue Bonds (xxx)-$ - - - - - -
Booth Kelly (618)-$ - 50 - - - 50
Unspecified Stormwater Funds -$ - 310 - - - 310
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 31
Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Stormwater Capital Projects Total Total Total Total Total Total Total
Jasper Slough -$ - - 60 - - 60
Capital Fund (425)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (440)-$ - - 50 - - 50
Revenue Bonds (xxx)-$ - - - - - -
Unspecified Stormwater Funds -$ - - 10 - - 10
Gray Creek - 72nd Street -$ - - - 3,000 3,000 6,000
Capital Fund (425)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (440)-$ - - - 289 38 327
Revenue Bonds (xxx)-$ - - - - - -
Unspecified Stormwater Funds -$ - - - 2,711 2,962 5,673
Corporate Way Pond -$ - 210 - - - 210
Capital Fund (425)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (440)-$ - - - - - -
Revenue Bonds (xxx)-$ - - - - - -
Unspecified Stormwater Funds -$ - 210 - - - 210
Cedar Creek -$ 100 100 100 100 100 500
Capital Fund (425)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (440)-$ - - - - - -
Revenue Bonds (xxx)-$ - - - - - -
Unspecified Stormwater Funds -$ 100 100 100 100 100 500
Annual Totals 6,605$ 9,315 9,633 5,780 6,865 6,500 44,698
Capital Fund (425) 1,273$ 265 319 260 231 231 2,579
Improvement SDCs (440) 1,395$ 645.40 384.40 199.65 489.65 310.65 3,425
Reimbursement SDCs (xxx)-$ - 59 121 224 561 965
Revenue Bonds (xxx)-$ 1,000 2,000 2,000 - - 5,000
Federal Funds (420) 1,850$ 3,150 - - - - 5,000
SEDA Funds (429)-$ - - 1,970 1,965 1,825 5,760
Land Match 2,000$ - - - - - 2,000
Unspecified Stormwater Funds 87$ 4,255 6,871 1,229 3,955 3,572 19,969
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 32
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 33
Stormwater Funding Secured: Yes
Account #850192
System Expansion, Upgrades, Rehabilitation, and Water Quality
South 67th and Ivy Street Drainage 0%
Map ID-SW1
Project Driver:
Total Project Constructed Cost:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
Identified Maintenance Issue
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering 5$ 5$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction -$
Other 55$ 55$
Total 60$ 60$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 420 -$
User Fees 425 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 440 -$
Other -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: Install 300 feet of 8 inch storm sewer under the Ivy Street sidewalk between South 67th and South
68th Street. Connect this 8 inch pipe to the existing storm system in Ivy Street. Connect the residential storm laterals and
down spouts to this 8 inch pipe.
Improve functionality of the City's storm drainage system.
Construction completed awaiting final approvals.
Justification: This project corrects a problematic stormwater drainage condition in the area of South 67th and Ivy Street.
Stormwater from existing residential homes is directed onto Ivy Street through curb weep holes. Ivy Street is a shed
design and the water fans out onto and across the roadway. During freezing weather icing occurs presenting potentially
hazardous conditions for motorists approaching the intersection of South 67th and Ivy. Consequently, this condition
requires frequent sanding of the area by the Public Works Maintenance Division to minimize the hazard potential.
Not Available at time of Publishing.
Construction of this new facility will significantly reduce maintenance efforts associated with sanding
Ivy Street and add minor amount of effort and cost to maintain this pipe section.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 34
Stormwater Funding Secured: Yes
Account #
System Expansion, Upgrades, Rehabilitation, and Water Quality
68th & "D" Street Drainage 0%
Map ID-SW2
Project Driver:
Total Project Constructed Cost:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
Identified Maintenance Issue
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering 20$ 20$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 200$ 200$
Other -$
Total 220$ 220$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 420 -$
User Fees 425 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 440 -$
Other -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Construction completed awaiting final approvals.
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: Construct 900 to 1000 feet of new storm pipe and disconnect the 68th and "D" Street inlets from the
60 inch pipe in the 69th Street drainage channel. Currently the pipe connecting the inlets is flat and causes localized
flooding of the 68th and "D" Street intersection during winter rain storms.
Justification: During the winter months, the 69th Street channel carries a high volume of storm water which causes a
backflow problem at the 68th and "D" Street inlets due to the configuration at which the pipes outfall to the open channel.
Improve functionality of the City's storm drainage system.
Not Available at time of Publishing.
Construction of this new facility will reduce significant maintenance efforts associated with localized
flooding and add a minor amount of effort and cost to maintain the new pipe section.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 35
This page left intentionally blank
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 36
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 37
Stormwater Funding Secured: Partial
Account #850193
System Expansion, Upgrades, Rehabilitation, and Water Quality
Mill Race Interim Pump 0%
Map ID-SW3
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
Mill Restoration Project
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning 50$ 50$
Engineering -$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction -$
Other -$
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Determination that new flow in Mill Race may, on occasion, prove inadequate. Mill Race Management.
Pending completion of Phase I of the Ecosystem Restoration Project
Project Description: Determine the need for an electric water pump at Clearwater Park to provide supplemental flow in
the Mill Race when flows in the Willamette River are not sufficient to sustain adequate water levels in the Mill Race to meet
municipal and industrial supplies. Programmed funds are for design and evaluation following completion of Phase I of the
Mill Race Ecosystem Restoration Project.
Justification: Analysis underlying the Mill Race Ecosystem Restoration Project being constructed by the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers suggests the possibility that up to 10 percent of the time, flows in the Willamette will be inadequate to sustain
flows in the rehabilitated Mill Race. This project will evaluate flows once Phase I of the Mill Race Project is completed to
determine the extent of any need for auxiliary pumping. If pumping is required, a permanent pump will be designed and
located near the new inlet to the Mill Race.
Need to maintain Mill Race flows without interruption
Other -$
Total 50$ 50$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 420 -$
User Fees 425 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 440 50$ 50$
Other -$
Total 50$ 50$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 38
Stormwater Funding Secured: Yes
Account # 830001
System Expansion, Upgrades, Rehabilitation, and Water Quality
Mill Race Restoration 100%
Map ID-SW4
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
2008 Stormwater Facilities Master Plan
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning 800$ 800$
Engineering 500$ 500$
Land/Right of Way 2,000$ 2,000$
Construction 5,675$ 2,525$ 3,150$
Phase 1 in construction; Phase II, to be constructed FY 2010/11.
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: Phase I: Move inlet upstream to improve flow; rehabilitate former river channel to carry flow and
connect to existing Mill Race near current inlet; rehabilitate downstream channel. Phase II: lower elevation of inlet to Gorrie
Creek. Reconfigure Mill Pond to create a meandering channel with a 12-foot wide low flow channel and 15-foot wide high
flow benches, similar to the upper Mill Race. The channel between the F Street Bridge and the Mill Pond inlet will be
narrowed. The channel in the pond will have a higher riparian terrace alongside each bank, and seasonal wetland ponds
will be created. The proposed three seasonal wetland ponds have a total surface area of three acres and connections at
the upstream and downstream ends. At each point, the inlet is designed to be at the channel invert elevation with the
outlet. A rock weir is proposed at each pond outlet to prevent head cuts into the ponds.
Justification: Improve water quality on existing drainage way; provide habitat restoration; provide aesthetic environmental
amenities in downtown; support redevelopment of downtown.
In construction
Increase water quality along the Mill Race.
,$,$,$
Other -$
Total 8,975$ 5,825$ 3,150$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs 30$ 5$ 5$ 5$ 5$ 5$ 5$
Personnel Costs 300$ 50$ 50$ 50$ 50$ 50$ 50$
Total 330$ -$ 55$ 55$ 55$ 55$ 55$ 55$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 420 -$ -$
User Fees 425 1,000$ 1,000$
Federal Aid 420 5,000$ 1,850$ 3,150$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 440 975$ 975$
Land Match 2,000$ 2,000$
Unspecified -$
Total 8,975$ 5,825$ 3,150$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 39
This page left intentionally blank
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 40
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 41
Stormwater Funding Secured: Yes
Account # 830017
System Expansion, Upgrades, Rehabilitation, and Water Quality
Metro Waterways Study 12.7%
Map ID-SW5
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
Springfield Stormwater Management Plan
Metro Waterways Project
DEQ Stormwater Discharge Permit
Total Maximum Daily Load Implementation Plan
Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning 350$ 100$ 50$ 50$ 50$ 50$ 50$
Engineering -$
Land/Right of Way $
Accumulating fund for projects as developed.
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: Springfield is participating along with Eugene and Lane County in an ongoing Army Corps of
Engineers General Investigation Study authorized under the Water Resources Development Act. Springfield’s share (25%)
of this approximately $3,500,000 project is $875,000. The current project is a feasibility study necessary to identify future
water quality projects within the Eugene/Springfield metropolitan watershed. CIP projects, such as Channel Improvements,
Floodplain Mapping (currently underway) and McKenzie Oxbow will qualify as in-kind match and satisfy the balance of the
local obligation. The Cedar Creek Drainage Basin has been identified as Springfield’s highest priority study area. The
Cedar Creek Intake reconstruction is identified as the initial project in the Metro Waterways Study. The Intake
Reconstruction is identified in a separate project sheet.
Justification: This planning study will assist the City in future years to gain access to federal funding (similar to the Mill
Race funding) for capital improvement projects that address drainage capacity, water quality, and flood control.
Future growth, stormwater management and water quality.
Currently stormwater from the Thurston area outfalls into Cedar Creek. Future developments will
increase stormwater and impact Cedar Creek.
Land/Right of Way-$
Construction -$
Other -$
Total 350$ 100$ 50$ 50$ 50$ 50$ 50$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 420 -$
User Fees 425 125$ 25$ 25$ 25$ 25$ 25$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 440 225$ 100$ 25$ 25$ 25$ 25$ 25$ -$
Other -$
Total 350$ 100$ 50$ 50$ 50$ 50$ 50$ -$
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 42
Stormwater Funding Secured: Yes
Account # 850014
System Expansion, Upgrades, Rehabilitation, and Water Quality
Drainage Repair 0%
Map ID-SW6
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
Springfield Stormwater Management Plan
Metro Waterways Project
DEQ Stormwater Discharge Permit
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Regulatory requirements, minimize risk and liability, capacity needs, opportunities to reduce
maintenance costs, citizen requests, aged facilities .
Accumulating fund for projects as developed.
Project Description: This program involves the rehabilitation of Springfield drainage system to repair or replace older
pipe in the system and solve flooding problems and reduce street surface failures due to poor drainage. This program also
includes rehabilitation of catch basins and culverts to prevent flooding, and the contractual cleaning of large storm sewer
pipe. Projects include: Repair West B St. storm outfall to Willamette River; Restore capacity in culverts on 69th St.,
Channel 6, 72nd St. and 48th St. canals; Repair damaged gutter bars causing localized flooding at 2138 9th St., 1105 S
St., 345 22nd St., 1500 B St. and Olympic St., F St. - 9th to 10th.; Repair catch basins at various locations; Replace catch
basin at 717 71st St. with combination catch basin/curb inlet; Replace storm line segments at Centennial Blvd at 10th St.
intersection, A St. at 26th St. intersection, Centennial Blvd at 12th St. to Mohawk Blvd; Install storm line catch basin from
intersection of 17th and S St. to storm system at 17th and T St.; Remove abandoned catch basin vault at 1482 T St.; Pipe
the backyard drainage ditch between S. 46th - S. 47th St. and Bluebell - Aster St; Drainage repairs on Quarry Street and
Park Street.
Justification: The program will repair and replace pipe which has reached the end of its useful life, reducing maintenance
and operating costs of the drainage system by reestablishing stormwater efficiency. Reduced costs would be realized in
operational costs currently expensed by responding to localized flooding problems during rain events.
Citizen requests, field surveys, history of identified problem areas.
DEQ Stormwater Discharge Permit
Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering 100$ 15$ 10$ 15$ 15$ 15$ 15$ 15$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 1,250$ 185$ 140$ 185$ 185$ 185$ 185$ 185$
Other -$
Total 1,350$ 200$ 150$ 200$ 200$ 200$ 200$ 200$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs (10)$ (1)$ (1)$ (1)$ (2)$ (2)$ (3)$
Personnel Costs (22)$ (2)$ (3)$ (3)$ (3)$ (3)$ (4)$ (4)$
Total (32)$ (2)$ (4)$ (4)$ (4)$ (5)$ (6)$ (7)$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 420 -$
User Fees 425 920$ 150$ 150$ 191$ 129$ 100$ 100$ 100$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 440 50$ 50$
SDCs. Reimb. xxx 380$ 9$ 71$ 100$ 100$ 100$
Total 1,350$ 200$ 150$ 200$ 200$ 200$ 200$ 200$
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 43
Stormwater Funding Secured: Yes
Account # 850089
System Expansion, Upgrades, Rehabilitation, and Water Quality
Channel Improvement 3.5%
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
Springfield Stormwater Management Plan
Metro Waterways Project
DEQ Stormwater Discharge Permit
Total Maximum Daily Load Implementation Plan
Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering 79$ 12$ 7$ 12$ 12$ 12$ 12$ 12$
Land/Right of Way -$
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
The need to meet regulatory requirements and address capacity issues.
Accumulating fund for projects as developed.
Project Description: This project is intended to provide improvements to key drainage ways to address barriers to fish
passage, and to correct previous channel modifications that have caused deterioration of flow capacity, water quality, and
fish habitat functions. These improvements include culvert replacements or retrofits, road crossing and outfall
modifications, and channel restoration. The adoption of the Springfield Total Maximum Daily Load Implementation Plan
identifies an additional temperature benefit from channel restoration and shading.
Justification: This project addresses the "Take Guidance" provided by the National Marine Fisheries Service in their
issuance of the Environmental Species Act Section 4(d) rules to conserve and protect remaining Spring Chinook Salmon.
This project also enables the City to meet Clean Water Act requirements by improving water quality through channel
restoration improvements. The listing of the Willamette and McKenzie rivers for temperature identifies the need to provide
riparian improvement and shading.
Regulatory and environmental requirements.
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 140$ 20$ 20$ 20$ 20$ 20$ 20$ 20$
Other 318$ 48$ 30$ 48$ 48$ 48$ 48$ 48$
Total 537$ 80$ 57$ 80$ 80$ 80$ 80$ 80$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs 9$ 1$ 1$ 1$ 1$ 1$ 2$ 2$
Personnel Costs 44$ 5$ 5$ 6$ 6$ 7$ 7$ 8$
Total 53$ 6$ 6$ 7$ 7$ 8$ 9$ 10$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 420 -$
User Fees 425 525$ 80$ 55$ 78$ 78$ 78$ 78$ 78$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 440 12$ 2$ 2$ 2$ 2$ 2$ 2$
SDCs. Reimb. xxx 100$ 20$ 20$ 20$ 20$ 20$
Total 637$ 80$ 57$ 100$ 100$ 100$ 100$ 100$
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 44
Stormwater Funding Secured: Yes
Account # 850117
System Expansion, Upgrades, Rehabilitation, and Water Quality
MS4 Permit Requirements 0%
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
Stormwater Facilities Master Plan Pre-2008 and the Stormwater Management Plan
City of Springfield Municipal and Development Codes
Regulatory Requirements
Total Maximum Daily Load Implementation Plan
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering -$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction -$
Accumulating funds for projects as developed.
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: Develop and implement programs and projects to comply with the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Discharge requirements.
Justification: In 2003, the City applied for an MS4 permit from the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ),
which will authorize the City to lawfully discharge stormwater to the McKenzie and Willamette Rivers and their tributaries.
The permit requires the City to implement programs and capital projects that improve stormwater quality. Data show that
stormwater in Springfield waterways routinely violates water quality standards established to protect human health and
aquatic life. This project provides for minor capital improvements and/or capital equipment purchases necessary and
appropriate to address high priority water quality problem areas. In January of 2007, the City received the permit and this
will become an ongoing program to maintain the permit.
Project Driver: Regulatory and environmental requirements.
The work under the MS4 Plan in on going to address permit requirements.
Other 200$ 30$ 25$ 25$ 30$ 30$ 30$ 30$
Total 200$ 30$ 25$ 25$ 30$ 30$ 30$ 30$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs 56$ 8$ 8$ 8$ 8$ 8$ 8$ 8$
Total 56$ 8$ 8$ 8$ 8$ 8$ 8$ 8$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 420 -$
User Fees 425 130$ 30$ 25$ 15$ 15$ 15$ 15$ 15$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 440 -$
SDCs. Reimb. xxx 75$ 15$ 15$ 15$ 15$ 15$
Total 205$ 30$ 25$ 30$ 30$ 30$ 30$ 30$
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 45
Stormwater Funding Secured: Yes
Account # 850093
System Expansion, Upgrades, Rehabilitation, and Water Quality
Riparian Land Management 12.7%
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
Stormwater Facilities Master Plan and Stormwater Management Plan
City of Springfield Development Code
Clean Water Act and Endangered Species Act
Metro Waterways identified land acquisitions
Total Maximum Daily Load Implementation Plan
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Development activity impacts on storm drainage flows and water quality
Accumulating funds for projects as developed.
Justification: This project facilitates community growth and property development consistent with City Development Code
requirements and federal regulations protecting water quality and salmon habitat. Currently, some Springfield waterways
do not meet federal and state water quality safety standards for human and aquatic life. In addition to the Federal Clean
Water Act requirements to improve stormwater quality, the City Council has established a ten-year target goal for at least
75% of Springfield's waterways to meet water quality standards. Protected riparian areas are necessary to achieve this
objective and some riparian protection has been established in the Development Code. In cases where riparian area
protection poses disproportionate constraints on private land owners, this funding will enable the City to identify priority
areas for protection and to compensate property owners.
Regulatory requirements and community livability.
Project Description: This project provides funding for purchase of riparian area lands from private property owners where
needed to meet City and regulatory objectives for stormwater management, flood control and habitat protection. It also
provides funding for consultant services to evaluate riparian buffer areas, City and other activities affecting them. Property
acquisitions will typically result in increase operational spending to maintain city owned property. Projects developed on
property acquired may, however, produce savings through reduced spending for flood control and water quality
improvement activities. Project funding levels have been reduced to conform to eligibility levels for improvement SDCs.
Council adoption and implementation of a reimbursement SDC may permit restoration of prior funding levels.
Total Maximum Daily Load Implementation Plan
Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering -$
Land/Right of Way 128$ 40 14.65$ 14.65$ 14.65$ 14.65$ 14.65$ 14.65$
Construction -$
Other -$
Total 127.90$ 40$ 14.65$ 14.65$ 14.65$ 14.65$ 14.65$ 14.65$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs 14$ 1$ 1$ 2$ 2$ 2$ 3$ 3$
Personnel Costs 9$ 1$ 1$ 1$ 1$ 1$ 2$ 2$
Total 23$ 2$ 2$ 3$ 3$ 3$ 5$ 5$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
SDCs. Reimb. xxx 75$ 15$ 15$ 15$ 15$ 15$
User Fees 425 85$ 13$ 10$ 10$ 13$ 13$ 13$ 13$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 440 9.40$ 1.40$ 1.40$ 1.65$ 1.65$ 1.65$ 1.65$
Other 27$ 27$
Total 196.40$ 40$ 11.40$ 26.40$ 29.65$ 29.65$ 29.65$ 29.65$
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 46
Stormwater Funding Secured: Partial
Account #
System Expansion, Upgrades, Rehabilitation, and Water Quality
"S" and "T" Streets Drainage 12.7%
Map ID-SW10
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
SCS Channel 6 Report
Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan
Stormwater Facilities Master Plan
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering 75$ 75$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 475$ 25$ 450$
Other 50$ -$ 50$
Total 600$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 150$ 450$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Justification: This project will expand capacity and relieve local flooding and ponding in the "S" Street area.
Redevelopment and/or completion of Channel 6 improvements and capacity issues.
Deferred pending funding.
Project Description: Construction of a combination of channels and pipe drainage system along "T" and "S" Streets
between 10th and Debra Streets. The Stormwater Facilities Master Plan expands upon the original Channel 6 report with a
necessary downstream Channel 6 project. Increasing the pipe size or pipe length will increase operational costs slightly.
Citizen complaints regarding localized flooding. Redevelopment of County standard streets.
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs 18$ 3$ 3$ 3$ 3$ 2$ 2$ 2$
Total 18$ 3$ 3$ 3$ 3$ 2$ 2$ 2$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
SDCs. Reimb. xxx 485$ 74$ 411$
User Fees 425 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 440 76$ 76$ -$
Unspecified 39$ 39$
Total 600$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 150$ 450$ -$
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 47
Stormwater Funding Secured: Partial
Account #850191
System Expansion, Upgrades, Rehabilitation, and Water Quality
59th, Aster, and Daisy Street 9.5%
Map ID-SW11
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
2008 Stormwater Facilities Master plan
Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning 30$ 30$
Engineering 550$ 250$ 300$
Land/Right of Way 30$ 30$
Construction 1,800$ 1,800$
Other 240$ 90$ 150$
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: Phase 1 of this project is to install 350 feet of 42 inch storm sewer in the area of South 59th Street
and Aster Street. Phase 2 will be to install additional parallel stormwater pipe in Daisy Street to provide additional
capacity.
Capacity issue, minimize risk and liability, and an opportunity to reduce maintenance costs. Additional
capacity will minimize liability and risk from flooding.
Phase I in progress. Phase II deferred pending funding.
Justification: This project will complete a piped storm system for the Mountain Gate area drainage. The current system
now consists of a piped system in the unimproved Aster Street Right-of-Way that outfalls into a open ditch in a wetland
area. The wetland then drains back into a piped system. The open ditch does not have the capacity to convey stormwater
from large rain events creating a flooding situation over South 59 Street and adjoining properties. Phase II Daisy St.
parallel pipe will be needed to provide capacity through the system to the 48th St. channel
Citizen complaints, localized flooding and development impacts. The Stormwater Facilities master
Plan prioritized this project for completion in 2010.
Total 2,650$ 150$ 400$ 2,100$ -$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs (3)$ 1$ 1$ (1)$ (1)$ (1)$ (1)$ (1)$
Total (3)$ 1$ 1$ (1)$ (1)$ (1)$ (1)$ (1)$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 420 -$
User Fees 425 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 440 252$ 150$ 102$
Unspecified 2,398$ 298$ 2,100$
Total 2,650$ 150$ 400$ 2,100$ -$ -$ -$ -$
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 48
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 49
Stormwater Funding Secured: No
Account #850177
System Expansion, Upgrades, Rehabilitation, and Water Quality
Woodstave Removal 0%
Map ID-SW12
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
Stormwater Facilities Master Plan Pre-2008
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering -$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction -$
Other 50$ 50$
Total 50$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 50$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Deferred pending funding
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: Project to take the last active portion of the woodstave storm line out of service. This line is located
south of S. A Street, between S.10th Street and S. 18th Street. Portions of this line lie under buildings and across
properties in areas without easements. Excavated material may be hazardous waste with special disposal requirements.
Initial project cost involves scoping the extent of the removal, permitting and disposal requirements and developing
updated costs. Additional funds will then be programmed as needed to complete the project.
Justification: This is a remnant system across private property with reverse slopes and potential maintenance problems
and costs.
Citizen request and Council priority
Regulatory and environmental requirements. Delay may increase City's risk.
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 420 -$
User Fees 425 50$ 50$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 440 -$
Other -$
Total 50$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 50$
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 50
Stormwater Funding Secured: No
Account #
System Expansion, Upgrades, Rehabilitation, and Water Quality
Jasper/Natron Drainage 83.4%
Map ID-SW13
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
2008 Stormwater Facilities Master Plan
Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan
Total Maximum Daily Load Implementation Plan
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning 250$250$
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Justification: Will expand the storm sewer system to service future growth.
Development within the Jasper/Natron area following completion of the Jasper Trunk Sewer
(CIP Map ID WW-10). Council direction.
Deferred pending funding
Project Description: Construction on channel improvement along the existing drainage ways to serve new
development in the Jasper Natron basin. Impacts to the downstream property owners and natural drainage
ways located beyond the City's Urban Growth Boundary will need to be assessed and mitigated in the final
design. The first year of the project will include additional studies to identify the downstream impacts and design
the project and its mitigation measures. Construction will occur in the following years. The impact on the City's
operations budget is estimated on the conceptual project but may change on final design. There is an expected
increase in both the annual maintenance and personnel budget.
Springfield desires to provide services to areas within the existing Urban Growth Boundary
(UGB) to promote future urban development. The Stormwater Facilities master Plan
prioritized this project for completion in 2011.
Planning 250$ 250$
Engineering 500$ 500$
Land/Right of Way 500$ 500$
Construction 3,500$ 1,500$ 2,000$
Other 250$ 250$
Total 5,000$ -$ 1,000$ 2,000$ 2,000$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs 116$ 29$ 29$ 29$ 29$
Personnel Costs 12$ 3$ 3$ 3$ 3$
Total 128$ -$ -$ -$ 32$ 32$ 32$ 32$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds xxx 5,000$ 1,000$ 2,000$ 2,000$
User Fees 425 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 440 -$
Unspecified -$
Total 5,000$ -$ 1,000$ 2,000$ 2,000$ -$ -$ -$
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 51
Stormwater Funding Secured: No
Account #
System Expansion, Upgrades, Rehabilitation, and Water Quality
Channel 6 3.5%
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
2008 Stormwater Facilities Master Plan
Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning 50$ 50$
Engineering 210$ 60$ 150$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 1,240$ 440$ 800$
Other -$
Total 1,500$ -$ 500$ -$ -$ 1,000$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000 )
Deferred pending funding
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: Improvements to the existing storm drainage pipes and channel, a proposed by-pass pipe, and
construction of a new regional detention facility. This project needs additional study and design to better meet regulatory
goals. It is possible to pursue in phased increments.
Justification: This project will increase capacity and help to reduce and eliminate the localized flooding along the
channel, which will lower annual operations costs.
Identified capacity and water quality needs identified in Stormwater Facilities Master Plan Project #4
FC and #4 WQ
Flooding in area around channel 6, between I-105 and Hayden Bridge Road. Total Maximum Daily
Load goals for shading and channel improvement. The Stormwater Facilities master Plan prioritized
this project for completion in 2009.
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs 30$ 5$ 5$ 5$ 5$ 5$ 5$
Personnel Costs 14$ 2$ 2$ 2$ 2$ 3$ 3$
Total 44$ -$ 7$ 7$ 7$ 7$ 8$ 8$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 420 -$
User Fees 425 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 440 53$ 18$ 35$
Unspecified 1,447$ 482$ 965$
Total 1,500$ -$ 500$ -$ -$ 1,000$ -$ -$
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 52
Stormwater Funding Secured: Partial
Account #830012
System Expansion, Upgrades, Rehabilitation, and Water Quality
McKenzie Oxbow 12.7%
Map ID-SW15
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
2008 Stormwater Facilities Master plan
McKenzie River Oxbow Natural Area
Total Maximum Daily Load Implementation Plan
Metro Waterways Study Project #8WQ
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning 125$ 125$
Engineering 250$ 250$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 500$ 500$
Other 250$ 250$
Deferred pending funding
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Justification: The McKenzie Oxbow area was donated to the City and has been maintained by the City for some time. In
2001, there were plans to turn the area over to Willamalane. However, before that can happen, it is important to find out
what effects the stormwater has that is draining to the river, and if any changes need to be made prior to the transfer of the
land over to Willamalane.
McKenzie Oxbow Management Plan
Project Description: Study of the McKenzie Oxbow area to determine the impact of existing stormwater flows on the
McKenzie River. The study will include options on what needs to be done before the area can be turned over to
Willamalane Park. Phase 2 of this project includes construction of facilities and improvements identified in the study.
Stormwater quality requirements, Willamalane Park District needs and Council direction.
Total 1,125$ 125$ -$ 500$ 500$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 420 -$
User Fees 425 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 440 143$ 65$ 78$
Unspecified 982$ 60$ 422$ 500$
Total 1,125$ 125$ -$ 500$ 500$ -$ -$ -$
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 53
Stormwater Funding Secured: No
Account #
System Expansion, Upgrades, Rehabilitation, and Water Quality
Island Park 12.7%
Map ID-SW16
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
2008 Stormwater Facilities Master Plan Project #16WQ
Stormwater Management Plan
Total Maximum Daily Load Implementation Plan
Mill Race Ecosystem Plan
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering 500$ 500$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 1,500$ 1,500$
Other -$
Total 2,000$ -$ 2,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Deferred pending funding
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: These projects are intended to improve stormwater quality from urban runoff in two heavily
trafficked downtown drainage basins. Stormwater from these basins drain to the Springfield Mill Race and the Island Park
Slough, both of which have significantly impaired water quality.
Justification: These types of projects are needed to meet the City obligations to improve the quality of urban
stormwater under the Clean Water Act, the City's National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System stormwater discharge
permit, and support stormwater management requirements of new development downtown. The Stormwater Facilities
master Plan prioritized this project for completion in 2009.
Community Mill Race restoration
Stormwater quality requirements.
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs 7$ 11111 2
Personnel Costs 8$ 1$ 1$ 1$ 1$ 2$ 2$
Total 15$ -$ 2$ 2$ 2$ 2$ 3$ 4$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 420 -$
User Fees 425 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 440 257$ 257$
Unspecified 1,743$ 1,743$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Total 2,000$ -$ 2,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 54
Stormwater Funding Secured: No
Account #
System Expansion, Upgrades, Rehabilitation, and Water Quality
Lower Mill Race / Mill Race Outfalls 12.7%
Map ID-SW17
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
2008 Stormwater Facilities Master Plan Stormwater Management Plan
Economic Development Downtown Mill Race Ecosystem Plan
Booth Kelly Stormwater Master Plan Total Maximum Daily Load Implementation Plan
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning 30$ 30$
Engineering 247$ 247$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 1,000$ 1,000$
Other -$
Total 1 277$30$1 247$-$-$-$-$-$
Deferred pending funding
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: Construct a daylight or diversion pretreatment structure, an offline water quality treatment facility,
and a green pipe open channel improvement. Additional detail for this multi-faceted project are in WQ-12 project of the
Stormwater Facilities Master Plan.
Completion of the Mill Race Restoration Project.
Justification: These types of projects are needed to meet the City obligations to improve the quality of urban stormwater
under the Clean Water Act, the City's National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System stormwater discharge permit, and
support stormwater management requirements of new development downtown. The City's agreement with the Corps of
Engineers (ACOE) for the Mill Race includes efforts to improve stormwater quality in this waterway. The Stormwater
Facilities master Plan prioritized this project for completion in 2009.
Completion of the Phase 1 of the Mill Race Restoration Project and stormwater quality requirements
for water entering the Mill Race.
Total 1,277$ 30$ 1,247$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs 12$ 2$ 2$ 2$ 2$ 2$ 2$
Personnel Costs 41$ 11$ 5$ 5$ 5$ 5$ 5$ 5$
Total 53$ 11$ 7$ 7$ 7$ 7$ 7$ 7$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 420 -$
User Fees 425 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 440 162$ 5$ 157$
OWEB grant 25$ 25$
MWMC sponsorship 25$ 25$
Unspecified 1,065$ 1,065$
Total 1,277$ 30$ 1,247$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 55
Stormwater Funding Secured: No
Account #
System Expansion, Upgrades, Rehabilitation, and Water Quality
12.7%
Map ID-SW18
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
2008 Stormwater Facilities Master Plan
Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan
Total Maximum Daily Load Implementation Plan
Stormwater Management Plan
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering 105$ 105$
Land/Right of Way 440$ 440$
Construction -$
Other -$
Total 545$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 105$ 440$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Deferred pending funding
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Justification: Improve localized water quality and add capacity to reduce flooding problems.
Stormwater Facilities Master Plan identified and capacity issues.
I-5 N. Gateway/Sports Way Channel
Project Description: Construct a combination flood control/water quality facility. Improve the open channel system and
construct a 7 acre foot combination treatment wetland facility on City owned property adjacent to the Gateway Natural
Resource area.
Stormwater quality requirements and capacity needs related to development. The Stormwater
Facilities master Plan prioritized this project for completion in 2014.
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs 4$ 2$ 2$
Personnel Costs 10$ 5$ 5$
Total 14$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 7$ 7$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 420 -$
User Fees 425 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 440 69$ 13$ 56$
Unspecified 476$ 92$ 384$
Total 545$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 105$ 440$ -$
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 56
Stormwater Funding Secured: No
Account #
System Expansion, Upgrades, Rehabilitation, and Water Quality
Irving Slough Headgate to Outfalls 3.5%
Map ID-SW19
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
2008 Stormwater Facilities Master Plan
Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan
Stormwater Management Plan
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering 440$ 440$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 1,757$ 1,757$
Other 185$ 185$
Total 2,382$ -$ -$ 2,382$ -$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Deferred pending funding
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: The project consists of open channel improvements in multiple locations for flood control and the
construction of a storage facility. Water quality improvements will be incorporated into the project where applicable to
meet regulatory requirements.
Justification: This project is identified in the Stormwater Facilities Master Plan and will help to reduce localized flooding
and provide water quality improvements.
Regulatory requirements, minimize risk and liability from flooding incidents, and opportunities to reduce
maintenance costs,
Flood Control and water quality. The Stormwater Facilities master Plan prioritized this project for
completion in 2010.
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs 9$ 1$ 2$ 2$ 2$ 2$
Total 9$ -$ -$ 1$ 2$ 2$ 2$ 2$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 420 -$
User Fees 425 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 440 83$ 83$
Unspecified 2,299$ 2,299$
Total 2,382$ -$ -$ 2,382$ -$ -$ -$ -$
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 57
Stormwater Funding Secured: No
Account #
System Expansion, Upgrades, Rehabilitation, and Water Quality
Mill Race Stormwater Facility 12.7%
Map ID-SW21
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
2008 Stormwater Facilities Master Plan
Mill Race Project
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning $$
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: Project is a stormwater treatment facility on land immediately north of the present Mill Pond on land
recently acquired from McKenzie Forest Products. The project will intercept and treat stormwater from the
industrial/commercial sub-basin south of Main Street from the Booth Kelly site (the new Woodstave line). The project will
include open vegetative treatment for problematic pollutants to improve water quality in the Springfield Mill Race. It will
also provide detention for stormwater and enhance planned public amenities in this area. The project will require careful
phasing to coincide with projected Mill Race /Mill Pond work to maximize efficiencies.
Completion of the Mill Race Restoration Project
Planning and design 2011
Justification: Stormwater in this sub-basin discharges into the Mill Race, and includes various industrial pollutants from
log yards, industrial sites, and heavy downtown vehicle traffic, resulting in periodic violations of state water quality
standards and presenting hazards to endangered fish species. The City's agreement with the Corps of Engineers (ACOE)
for the Mill Race includes efforts to improve stormwater quality in this waterway. Unique sites and facilities will enhance
the Mill Race renovation project, and provide educational opportunity and a community amenity while improving water
quality. It may provide some contribution to the Mill Pond renovation project by providing fill material at a low cost.
Completion of the Phase 1 of the Mill Race Restoration Project and stormwater quality requirements for
water entering the Mill Pond. The Stormwater Facilities master Plan prioritized this project for
completion in 2011.
Planning -$ -$
Engineering 650$ -$ 650$
Land/Right of Way -$ -$
Construction 1,200$ 1,200$
Other -$
Total 1,850$ -$ 650$ 1,200$ -$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs 4$ 1$ 1$ 1$ 1$
Personnel Costs 31$ 1$ 1$ 1$ 7$ 7$ 7$ 7$
Total 35$ 1$ 1$ 1$ 8$ 8$ 8$ 8$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 420 -$
User Fees 425 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 440 235$ 83$ 152$
Unspecified 1,615$ 567$ 1,048$
Total 1,850$ -$ 650$ 1,200$ -$ -$ -$ -$
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 58
Stormwater Funding Secured: No
Account #
System Expansion, Upgrades, Rehabilitation, and Water Quality
South 67th Street 9.5%
Map ID-SW22
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
2008 Stormwater Facilities Master Plan
Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning 10$ 10$
Engineering 65$ 65$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 250$ 250$
Other -$
Total 325$ -$ -$ 325$ -$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Deferred pending funding
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Justification: Reduce localized flooding identified in Stormwater Facility Master Plan Project #13FC
Minimize risk and liability, and an opportunity to reduce maintenance costs
Project Description: Pipe improvements for flood control. Currently, during heavy rainfall the storm system surcharges
at 67th and Main Street flooding private property.
Citizen complaints and localized flooding. The Stormwater Facilities master Plan prioritized this project
for completion in 2010.
Maintenance Costs $
Personnel Costs 3$ 1$ 1$ 1$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Total 3$ 1$ 1$ 1$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 420 -$
User Fees 425 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 440 31$ 31$
-$
Unspecified 294$ 294$
Total 325$ -$ -$ 325$ -$ -$ -$ -$
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 59
Stormwater Funding Secured: No
Account #
System Expansion, Upgrades, Rehabilitation, and Water Quality
"Q" Street Channel 12.7%
Map ID-SW23
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
2008 Stormwater Facilities Master Plan
Stormwater Management Plan
Total Maximum Daily Load Implementation Plan
Metro Waterways
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning 100$ 100$
Engineering 100$ 100$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 300$ 100$ 100$ 100$
Other -$
Total 500$ -$ -$ 100$ 100$ 100$ 100$ 100$
Deferred pending funding
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: Channel repair, riparian enhancement and shading to address temperature issues in the Total
Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) and other water quality concerns. Reduce impact of nuisance species on water quality and
bank stability. The Q Street Channel connects to the Alton Baker Canoe Canal near Autzen Stadium. Water quality
improvements in the Springfield portion of the system will also support other efforts to restore fish habitat in the Canoe
Canal.
Justification: Improve water quality and temperature on existing drainage way.
Regulatory requirements and environmental opportunities.
Stormwater quality requirements. The Stormwater Facilities master Plan prioritized this project for
completion in 2014.
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs 17$ 1$ 1$ 3$ 3$ 3$ 3$ 3$
Total 17$ 1$ 1$ 3$ 3$ 3$ 3$ 3$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 420 -$
User Fees 425 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 440 63$ 12$ 13$ 13$ 13$ 12$
-$
Unspecified 437$ 88$ 87$ 87$ 87$ 88$
Total 500$ -$ -$ 100$ 100$ 100$ 100$ 100$
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 60
Stormwater Funding Secured: No
Account #
System Expansion, Upgrades, Rehabilitation, and Water Quality
Glenwood 8.8%
Map ID-SW24
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
2008 Stormwater Facilities Master Plan
Glenwood Refinement Plan
I-5 Bridge Replacement Plan
Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan
Stormwater Management Plan
Total Maximum Daily Load Implementation Plan
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Deferred pending funding
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: Stormwater system construction, including pipe and open channel improvements for flood control
and water quality improvements at various locations within Glenwood as identified in the Stormwater Facilities Master Plan
(SWFMP), and to support implementation of the existing refinement plan for Glenwood. The project will also involve
evaluation and construction/enhancement of stormwater outfall structures to the Willamette River. Specific projects will
be implemented as development occurs, consistent with the Public Facilities and Services Plan (PFSP). The City's
current effort to update the Glenwood Refinement Plan will likely result in modifications to some of the projects identified
in the SWFMP, and will be addressed in future system studies that will be performed as the Refinement Plan work
proceeds.
Justification: Provide infrastructure for new development and to correct existing deficiencies that meet current and future
water quality requirements.
Completion of the Glenwood Refinement Plan Update and development within the Glenwood Area.
Stormwater quantity and quality requirements for development within the Glenwood area. The
Stormwater Facilities master Plan prioritized this project for completion in 2013. This project may
require reprioritization should the City receive federal funding for the Franklin Boulevard project.
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning 300$ 300$
Engineering 1,450$ 700$ 300$ 450$
Land/Right of Way 1,000$ 500$ 500$
Construction 2,500$ 1,200$ 1,300$
Other 750$ 500$ 250$
Total 6,000$ -$ -$ -$ 2,000$ 2,000$ 2,000$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs 75$ 25$ 25$ 25$
Personnel Costs 23$ 2$ 2$ 2$ 2$ 5$ 5$ 5$
Total 98$ 2$ 2$ 2$ 2$ 30$ 30$ 30$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 420 -$
User Fees 425 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 440 240$ 30$ 35$ 175$
-$
SEDA 429 5,760$ 1,970$ 1,965$ 1,825$
Total 6,000$ -$ -$ -$ 2,000$ 2,000$ 2,000$ -$
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 61
Stormwater Funding Secured: No
Account #
System Expansion, Upgrades, Rehabilitation, and Water Quality
Maple Island Slough 12.7%
Map ID-SW25
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
2008 Stormwater Facilities Master Plan
Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan
Total Maximum Daily Load Implementation Plan
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning 75$ 75$
Engineering -$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 475$ 475$
Other -$
Total 550$ -$ -$ -$ 550$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Deferred pending funding
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: Conduct an engineering study to evaluate capacity needs for future development. Develop a
vegetation management plan with the intent to improve water quality from the Corporate Park area.
Justification: Corporate pond and the Sports Way stormwater channel have overflow outlets that discharge to the
Maple Island Slough. A study is needed to evaluate water quality and capacity needs within existing drainage ways.
Identified in Stormwater Facilities Master Plan and new development
Stormwater quality requirements and flood control. The Stormwater Facilities master Plan prioritized
this project for completion in 2011.
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 420 -$
User Fees 425 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 440 70$ 70$
-$
Unspecified 480$ 480$
Total 550$ -$ -$ -$ 550$ -$ -$ -$
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 62
Stormwater Funding Secured: No
Account #
System Expansion, Upgrades, Rehabilitation, and Water Quality
North Willamette Heights 12.7%
Map ID-SW26
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
2008 Stormwater Facilities Master Plan
Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning 60$ 60$
Engineering -$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction -$
Other -$
Total 60$ -$ -$ -$ 60$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Planning
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: Develop a basin plan to guide new development and redevelopment activities with respect to
drainage and water quality.
Justification: This is a largely undeveloped area which creates runoff to the Mill Race and the Booth Kelly site. Provide
a drainage study for future development including water quality elements to protect the Mill Race
Stormwater management and water quality requirements to guide new development and re-
development.
New development and re-development within the North Willamette Heights drainage basin. The
Stormwater Facilities master Plan prioritized this project for completion in 2011.
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 420 -$
User Fees 425 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 440 8$ 8$
Unspecified 52$ 52$
Total 60$ -$ -$ -$ 60$ -$ -$ -$
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 63
Stormwater Funding Secured: No
Account #
System Expansion, Upgrades, Rehabilitation, and Water Quality
Booth Kelly Drainage 0%
Map ID-SW27
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
Booth Kelly Industrial Complex Stormwater Master Plan
Stormwater Facilities Master Plan
Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan
Total Maximum Daily Load Implementation Plan
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering 60$ 60$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 300$ 300$
Other -$
Total 360$ -$ -$ 360$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Deferred pending funding.
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: Drainage master plan implementation for the Booth-Kelly site.
Justification: Stormwater runoff from the City-owned Booth-Kelly property is discharged to the Mill Race. The site
currently does not have a drainage system adequate to avoid localized flooding during the wet weather season or provide
pretreatment of runoff prior to discharge to the Mill Race. A site drainage master plan has been completed to address this
issue in order to support ongoing operation of the Booth-Kelly industrial center and to comply with Clean Water Act storm
water requirements and address Endangered Species Act concerns.
Completion of the Mill Race Restoration Project
The stormwater system in Booth Kelly is aging and under developed. Basic drainage function and
water quality are necessary for discharge into the Mill Race. The Stormwater Facilities master Plan
prioritized this project for completion in 2011.
Total 360$ $ $ 360$ $ $ $ $
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs 3$ 0.5$ 0.5$ 0.5$ 0.5$ 0.5$
Personnel Costs 5$ 1$ 1$ 1$ 1$ 1$
Total 8$ -$ -$ 2$ 2$ 2$ 2$ 2$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 420 -$
User Fees 425 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 440 -$
Booth-Kelly 618 50$ 50$
Unspecified 310$ 310$
Total 360$ -$ -$ 360$ -$ -$ -$ -$
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 64
Stormwater Funding Secured: No
Account #
System Expansion, Upgrades, Rehabilitation, and Water Quality
Jasper Slough 83.4%
Map ID-SW28
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
2008 Stormwater Facilities Master Plan
Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan
Total Maximum Daily Load Implementation Plan
Stormwater Management Plan
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering 10$ 10$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 50$ 50$
Other -$
Total 60$ -$ -$ -$ 60$ -$ -$ -$
Deferred pending funding and development activity
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: Culvert and open channel improvements for flood control, riparian enhancement and planting for
Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL) concerns.
Justification: Localized filling and degradation of the channel and road crossings cause flooding and erosion. The lack
of riparian cover increases temperature and reduces natural resource value of a natural stream. City stormwater currently
discharges into the Jasper Slough at three locations. The Jasper Slough flows into the Mill Race which has water quality
requirements.
TMDL requirements, local flooding and future development,
Localized flooding and regulatory requirements. The Stormwater Facilities master Plan prioritized this
project for completion in 2011.
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs 4$ 1$ 1$ 1$ 1$
Personnel Costs 8$ 2$ 2$ 2$ 2$
Total 12$ -$ -$ -$ 3$ 3$ 3$ 3$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Asset.-$
Revenue Bonds 420 -$
User Fees 425 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 440 50$ 50$
Unspecified 10$ 10$
Total 60$ -$ -$ -$ 60$ -$ -$ -$
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 65
Stormwater Funding Secured: No
Account #850148
System Expansion, Upgrades, Rehabilitation, and Water Quality
Gray Creek/72nd Street 21.1%
Map ID-SW29
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
Metro Waterways
2008 Stormwater Facilities Master Plan
Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning 300$ 300$
Engineering 600$ 300$ 300$
Land/Right of Way 500$ 250$ 250$
Construction 4,300$ 2,000$ 2,300$
Other 300$ 150$ 150$
Total 6,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 3,000$ 3,000$ -$
Deferred pending funding and development activity
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: As outlined in Appendix E of the 2008 Stormwater Facilities Master Plan, this project includes
constructing a new open channel to convey discharges from the eastern most portion of Gray Creek to a new outfall to
Cedar Creek. Then, regrade the existing open channel and down stream piped portions of the conveyance system to
mitigate anticipated flooding due to future development.
Justification: Provide anticipated flood control for future development combined with localized water quality
improvements.
Future development
Development in the east Springfield area. The Stormwater Facilities Master Plan prioritized this project
for completion in 2013.
Total 6,000$ $ $ $ $ 3,000$ 3,000$ $
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs 15$ 5$ 5$ 5$
Personnel Costs 3$ 1$ 1$ 1$
Total 18$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 6$ 6$ 6$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 420 -$
User Fees 425 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 440 327$ 289$ 38$
Unspecified 5,673$ 2,711$ 2,962$
Total 6,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 3,000$ 3,000$ -$
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 66
Stormwater Funding Secured: No
Account #
System Expansion, Upgrades, Rehabilitation, and Water Quality
Corporate Way Pond 12.7%
Map ID-SW30
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
2008 Stormwater Facilities Master Plan
Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan
Total Maximum Daily Load Implementation Plan
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering 60$ 60$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 150$ 150$
Other -$
Total 210$ -$ -$ 210$ -$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
$
Deferred pending funding
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: Develop a vegetation management plan for the Corporate Pond that discharges to Maple Island
Slough. See Stormwater Facilities Master Plan 43-WQ. Refined construction cost will be developed with the study.
Justification: Flood control and regulatory Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) program requirements.
Identified in the Stormwater Facilities Master Plan and citizen driven.
Stormwater quality requirements.
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 420 -$
User Fees 425 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 440 -$
Unspecified 210$ 210$
Total 210$ -$ -$ 210$ -$ -$ -$ -$
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 67
Stormwater Funding Secured: No
Account #
System Expansion, Upgrades, Rehabilitation, and Water Quality
Cedar Creek Intake Reconstruction 12.7%
Map ID-SW31
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
Metro Waterways Project.
2008 Stormwater Facilities Master Plan
N t l H d Miti ti Pl
Deferred pending funding
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: The Cedar Creek drainage is the focus of a comprehensive series of stormwater system
improvements identified in the Metro Waterways Study. Metro Waterways represents a regional partnership which
includes state, federal, and local partners, including the US Corps of Engineers, Bureau of Land Management and Oregon
Dept. of Fish and Wildlife, as well as local utilities and jurisdictions and the McKenzie Watershed Council. Projects
identified in the study focus on enhancing riparian areas and stream habitat for the benefit of endangered species,
reducing urban pollutants, and repairing/restoring critical flood control infrastructure on the McKenzie River and Cedar
Creek.
This project, the first of those identified in the multi-year study, is the reconstruction of the intake structure and associated
channel improvements to the inlet of Cedar Creek from the McKenzie River. This work will provide for managing seasonal
flows to both reduce the potential for serious wintertime flooding from the McKenzie River, and ensure adequate
summertime flows for fish habitat and downstream water users, including the Springfield Utility Board. Springfield has
participated in the Metro Waterways partnership since 2003.
Justification: Improvements will ensure summertime stream flows in Cedar Creek to provide stormwater management
and habitat to endangered species, and will manage high storm flows, which presently threaten citizens’ homes.
Metro Waterways Study, Cedar Creek Partnership and Salmon Trout Enhancement Program (STEP)
project. The Stormwater Facility Master Plan identified this project as an ongoing need through 2018.
Implementation of the initial project developed out of the Metro Waterways Study and the STEP
project.
Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan
Total Maximum Daily Load Implementation Plan
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning 125$ 100$ 25$
Engineering 75$ 75$
Land/Right of Way 100$ 100$
Construction 300$ 100$ 100$ 100$
Other -$ -$
Total 600$ -$ 100$ 100$ 100$ 100$ 100$ 100$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 420 -$
User Fees 425 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 440 -$
Unspecified 600$ 100$ 100$ 100$ 100$ 100$ 100$
Total 600$ -$ 100$ 100$ 100$ 100$ 100$ 100$
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 68
TRANSPORTATION
Overview
Transportation projects fall into the categories noted below:
Planning and Project Development – These projects range from larger facility planning, to concept
project planning, to specific project development. Funding for these projects relies heavily on Federal
and State funds, with City funds used to supplement project budgets and in some cases provide required
match funding to external resources. Current examples of this in the CIP are the Springfield
Transportation System Plan and the Franklin Boulevard Planning project.
Maintenance and Operations – These projects are typically programmatic and can provide funding for a
range of activities within each project. Street Light Infill and Pole Replacement, Traffic Control Projects,
and Intelligent Transportation System investments fall in to this category.
Pavement Preservation – These projects are identified by the Maintenance Division through the
Infrastructure Management System. Funding for these projects rely heavily on the local and State fuel
tax revenues and are supplemented with Transportation Reimbursements SDCs. Examples of pavement
preservation projects identified in the CIP are the Street Seal and Overlay program and the “A” Street
Overlay project.
System Improvement, Existing – These projects typically either bring existing infrastructure up to the
adopted urban standards, or make capacity and safety improvements to existing facilities. Funding for
these projects rely on all available resources. Current examples of these types of projects in the CIP are
the Gateway/Beltline Intersection improvements and the International Way Illumination projects.
System Improvement, New Facilities – These projects typically add new infrastructure to the City’s
transportation system and are identified within the various planning documents. The trigger for these
projects is driven mostly by growth and an identified future need to relieve stress on the system.
Project funding relies on all available sources.
Project Maps
TP 1 69th Reconstruction
TP 2 5th Street Overlay
TP 3 ADA Ramp Upgrade “A” and 4th Street
TP 4 International Way Illumination
TP 5 International Way Paving
TP 6 Gateway/Beltline Intersection
TP 7 South Bank Viaduct Extension
TP 10 Arterial/Collector Street Seal & Overlay
TP 14 S. 48th Street Connection (Main to
Daisy)
TP 15 Franklin Boulevard Planning
TP 19 Roundabout Pedestrian Crossing
Treatments
TP 24 “A” Street Overlay
TP 25 21st Street Reconstruction
TP 27 Maple Island Improvements
TP 28 Franklin Boulevard Reconstruction
Project
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 69
This page left intentionally blank
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 70
Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Total Total Total Total Total Total Total
In Process
International Way Illumination 80$ 13 - - - - 93
Capital Fund (434)80$ 13 - - - - 93
Improvement SDCs (447)-$ - - - - - -
Reimbursement SDCs (446)-$ - - - - - -
Other -$ - - - - - -
International Way Paving 100$ - - - - - 100
Capital Fund (434)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (447)-$ - - - - - -
Reimbursement SDCs (446) 100$ - - - - - 100
Other -$ - - - - - -
Gateway - Beltline Intersection 9,850$ 1,530 1,297 1,530 1,418 1,249 16,874
Federal Aid (420) 2,200$ - - - - - 2,200
Improvement SDCs (447)-$ 750 636 750 - 395 2,531
Reimbursement SDCs (446)-$ - - - - - -
Unspecified -$ 780 661 780 1,418 854 4,493
Other 7,650$ - - - - - 7,650
South Bank Viaduct Extension 300$ 2,100 - - - - 2,400
Federal Aid (420) 200$ 1,200 - - - - 1,400
Improvement SDCs (447)-$ - - - - - -
Reimbursement SDCs (446)-$ - - - - - -
Unspecified -$ - - - - - -
State Aid (420) 100$ 900 - - - - 1,000
Transportation System Plan 100$ 169 36 - - - 305
Capital Fund (434)-
Improvement SDCs (447)-$ - - - - - -
Reimbursement SDCs (446)-
Federal Aid (420) 100$ 169 36 - - - 305
Funding Secured
Transportation Demand Mgmt 45$ 20 20 20 20 20 145
Capital Fund (434)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (447)45$ 10 10 10 10 10 95
Reimbursement SDCs (446)-$ - - - - - -
Unspecified -$ 10 10 10 10 10 50
Art/Collectors Street Seal & Overlay 237$ 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 5,237
Capital Fund (434)-$ - - - - 73 73
Federal Aid (420)-$ 400 - - - - 400
Improvement SDCs (447)-$ - - - - - -
Reimbursement SDCs (446) 237$ - 140 - 194 81 652
Unspecified -$ 600 860 1,000 806 846 4,112
Traffic Control Projects 327$ 117 117 117 117 117 912
Capital Fund (434)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (447)327$ 35 35 35 35 35 502
Reimbursement SDCs (446)-$ 40 40 40 40 40 200
Unspecified -$ 42 42 42 42 42 210
Gateway Traffic Improvements 1,159$ 500 500 500 416 400 3,475
Capital Fund (434)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (447)1,159$ 250 250 250 208 200 2,317
Reimbursement SDCs (446)-$ - - - - - -
Unspecified -$ 250 250 250 208 200 1,158
Intelligent Transportation Systems 311$ 50 50 50 50 50 561
Capital Fund (434)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (447)311$ 25 25 25 25 25 436
Reimbursement SDCs (446)-$ 25 25 25 25 25 125
Revenue Bonds (xxx)-$ - - - - - -
Other -$ - - - - - -
Transportation and Street
Capital Projects
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 73
Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Total Total Total Total Total Total Total
Transportation and Street
Capital Projects
South 48th Street (Main to Daisy)175$ - 927 - - - 1,102
Capital Fund (434)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (447)-$ - 361 - - - 361
Reimbursement SDCs (446)-$ - - - - - -
Unspecified -$ - 391 - - - 391
Other (Developer) 175$ - 175 - - - 350
Franklin Boulevard Plan 450$ 25 25 25 25 25 575
Capital Fund (434)-$ - - - - - -
Federal Aid (420)50$ - - - - - 50
Improvement SDCs (447)250$ 25 25 25 25 25 375
Reimbursement SDCs (446)-$ - - - - - -
Other (LTD)50$ - - - - - 50
SEDA (429) 100$ - - - - - 100
EECBG Pedestrian Lighting 73$ - - - - - 73
Capital Fund (434)-
Improvement SDCs (447)-
Reimbursement SDCs (446)-
Federal Aid (420)73$ - - - - - 73
EECBG Signal Lighting 117$ - - - - - 117
Capital Fund (434)-
Improvement SDCs (447)-
Reimbursement SDCs (446)-
Federal Aid (420) 117$ - - - - - 117
Bridge Preservation -$ 10 10 10 10 10 50
Capital Fund (434)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (447)-$ - - - - - -
Reimbursement SDCs (446)-$ 10 10 10 10 10 50
Unspecified -$ - - - - - -
Roundabout Ped Crossing Tmnt 200$ - 385 - - - 585
Capital Fund (434)-
Improvement SDCs (447)200$ - - - - - 200
Reimbursement SDCs (446)-
Uspecified -$ - 385 - - - 385
Funding Unsecured
Street Light Infill & LPS Replmnt 50$ 280 280 280 280 280 1,450
Capital Fund (434)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (447)-$ - - - - - -
Reimbursement SDCs (446)-$ - - - - - -
Other 50$ 280 280 280 280 280 1,450
Local Street Seal & Overlay -$ 300 300 300 300 300 1,500
Capital Fund (434)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (447)-$ - - - - - -
Reimbursement SDCs (446)-$ - - - - - -
Other -$ - - - - - -
Unspecified -$ 300 300 300 300 300 1,500
Street Light Pole Test -$ 80 - - - - 80
Capital Fund (434)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (447)-$ - - - - - -
Reimbursement SDCs (446)-$ - - - - - -
Uspecified -$ 80 - - - - 80
Street Lights - NESC Compliance -$ 12 - - - - 12
Capital Fund (434)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (447)-
Reimbursement SDCs (446)-$ - - - - - -
Other -
Unspecified -$ 12 - - - - 12
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 74
Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Total Total Total Total Total Total Total
Transportation and Street
Capital Projects
"A" Street Overlay 225 555 - - - - 780
Capital Fund (434)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (447)-$ - - - - - -
Reimbursement SDCs (446) 225$ - - - - - 225
Unspecified -$ 555 - - - - 555
21st Street Reconstruction -$ - - 1,475 - - 1,475
Capital Fund (434)-
Improvement SDCs (447)-
Reimbursement SDCs (446)-
Unspecified -$ - - 1,475 - - 1,475
Wayfinding -$ 50 50 50 50 50 250
Capital Fund (434)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (447)-$ - - - - - -
Unspecified -$ 50 50 50 50 50 250
Maple Island Improvements 229$ - 550 100 831 - 1,710
Capital Fund (434)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (447)229$ - 440 80 664 - 1,413
Reimbursement SDCs (446)-
Unspecified -$ - 110 20 167 - 297
Franklin Blvd-TIGER Grant 5,000$ 25,000 13,000 7,000 - - 50,000
Capital Fund (434)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (447)-$ - - - - - -
Reimbursement SDCs (446)-$ - - - - - -
Other -
Unspecified 5,000$ 25,000 13,000 7,000 - - 50,000
Intelligent Lighting Control 100$ 100 100 100 100 100 600
Capital Fund (434)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (447)-$ - - - - - -
Reimbursement SDCs (446)-$ - - - - - -
Unspecified 100$ 100 100 100 100 100 600
MUTCD Compliance -$ - 85 85 85 - 255
Capital Fund (434)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (447)-$ - - - - - -
Reimbursement SDCs (446)-$ - - - - - -
Unspecified -$ - 85 85 85 - 255
Annual Totals 16,288$ 29,162$ 18,311 12,642 4,702 3,601 84,706
Capital Fund (434)80$ 13$ -$ -$ -$ 73$ 166
Improvement SDCs (447) 2,521$ 1,095$ 1,782$ 1,175$ 967$ 690$ 8,230
Reimbursement SDCs (446) 562$ 75$ 215$ 75$ 269$ 156$ 1,352
Unspecified 5,100$ 27,699$ 15,859$ 11,112$ 3,186$ 2,402$ 65,358
Other (Developer) 175$ -$ 175$ -$ -$ -$ 350
Other (LTD)50$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 50
SEDA (429) 100$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 100
Other 7,700$ 280$ 280$ 280$ 280$ 280$ 9,100
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 75
This page left intentionally blank
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 76
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 77
Transportation and Street Capital Projects Funding Secured: Yes
Account #: 850097
System Upgrades, Reconstruction, Rehabilitation, and Preservation
69th Reconstruction 13%
Map ID-TP1
Project Driver:
Total Project Constructed Cost:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
Adopted in the Central Lane TMA Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program.
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering -$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction -$
Other -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Street Fund 434 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 447 -$
SDCs, Reimb. 446 -$
CDBG 210 -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Required funding secured.
Constructed and accepted by Council
Project Description: Major rehabilitation of 69th Street, B to Thurston Road, including structural overlay and
reconstruction of pavement and an intersection operational improvement at Thurston Road. Cost estimate based on a
concrete section. Includes some safety improvements and storm drainage work to alleviate localized flooding
Justification: Funding was received in FY09 through the local region Surface Transportation Program (STP). This is
Federal funding made available through ODOT for use on collector or higher level streets. Additional funding was made
available for FY05-06 from the same program to allow for a more complete reconstruction and modernization of 69th
Street.
$1,454,950
This project is one of the major items identified by Public Works under the Street Seal/Overlay
Category. This project is seen as a priority to keep the status of the City's collector and arterial
roadways in a manageable state.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 78
Transportation and Street Capital Projects Funding Secured: Yes
Account #: 850175
System Upgrades, Reconstruction, Rehabilitation, and Preservation
5th Street Overlay 0%
Map ID-TP2
Project Driver:
Total Project Constructed Cost:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering -$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction -$
Other -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Street Fund 434 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 447 -$
SDCs, Reimb. 446 -$
CDBG 210 -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: Overlay 5th Street from "B" Street to Centennial Boulevard. Some locations may require more
extensive base repair due to the dilapidated condition.
Justification: The pavement surface has aged and is in need of an overlay and some localized base rock repair. This is
the last major segment of 5th Street that is in need of preservation work as the segment from Centennial Boulevard to
Hayden Bridge Way was overlayed during the summer of 2005.
Projects are identified by the Infrastructure Management System.
Constructed and accepted by Council
$436,650
This project is one of the major items identified by Public Works under the Street Seal/Overlay
Category. This project is seen as a priority to keep the status of the City's collector and arterial
roadways in a manageable state. By overlaying the remainder of 5th Street now, we can lengthen the
life of the street and avoid a costly reconstruction project.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 79
Transportation and Street Capital Projects Funding Secured: Yes
Account #: 860015
System Upgrades, Reconstruction, Rehabilitation, and Preservation
ADA Ramp Upgrade "A" and 4th Street 0%
Map ID-TP3
Project Driver:
Total Project Constructed Cost:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
American with Disabilities Act requirements
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering 12$ 12$
Land/Right of Way 2$ 2$
Construction 113$ 113$
Other -$
Total 127$ 127$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Street Fund 434 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
Storm User Fees 425 30$ 30$
SDCs, Imp. 447 -$
SDCs, Reimb. 446 32$ 32$
CDBG 210 65$ 65$
Total 127$ 127$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Constructed and accepted by Council
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: This project will bring ADA ramps up to code within the same project boundary as the 4th and "A"
Street Overlay.
Justification: Several ADA ramps within the project boundary are out of compliance with the current code. Utilization of
CDBG funds will allow the ADA ramps to be brought within compliance before the street section is rehabilitated.
Grant funding secured
$127,540
The need for an overlay on 4th and "A" Street due to the relocation of the LTD bus routes.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 80
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 81
Transportation and Street Capital Projects Funding Secured: Yes
Account #: 850201
System Upgrades, Reconstruction, Rehabilitation, and Preservation
International Way Illumination 0%
Map ID-TP4
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
TransPlan
Council Goals
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering -$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 93$ 80$ 13$
Other -$
Total 93$ 80$ 13$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Street Fund 434 93$ 80$ 13$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 447 -$
SDCs, Reimb. 446 -$
Other -$
Total 93$ 80$ 13$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Committed to LTD to pay for fixtures. LTD has included this work in their construction plans.
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: Replace low pressure sodium (LPS) street lights on International Way as a part of Lane Transit
District's EmX project.
Justification: LTD is reconstructing International Way to accommodate the EmX bus system. The illumination system
will be reconstructed to facilitate EmX stops and other construction. City will pay to replace the light fixtures and LTD will
pay for other improvements.
LPS light replacement schedule.
Opportunity for two agencies to cooperate for mutual benefit. International Way is on first priority LPS
light replacement list.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 82
Transportation and Street Capital Projects Funding Secured: Yes
Account #: 850101
System Upgrades, Reconstruction, Rehabilitation, and Preservation
International Way Paving 0%
Map ID-TP5
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
Council adopted Engineering Design Standards and Procedures
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering -$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 100$ 100$
Other -$
Total 100$ 100$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Street Fund 434 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 447 -$
SDCs, Reimb. 446 100$ 100$
Other -$
Total 100$ 100$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Justification: LTD is reconstructing International Way to accommodate the EmX bus system. It is in the City's economic
interest to pave the remainder of International Way in PCC to avoid costly future maintenance.
LTD EmX Project
Committed to LTD to pay for paving. LTD has included this work in their construction plans.
Project Description: LTD has proposed to place a concrete bus lane down the middle of International Way including the
portion from Sports Way to Gateway Street, which is currently paved with asphalt. Engineering has looked at the
economics of leaving the non-bus lane portions of the street in asphalt with just an overlay, or re-paving the street in PCC,
and determined that for the long term viability of the street it would be in the best interest of the City to pave all of
International Way with PCC. This funding will be set aside to pay the City's share of LTD's project.
Opportunity for two agencies to cooperate for mutual benefit.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 83
Transportation and Street Capital Projects Funding Secured: Partial
Account #: 850151
System Upgrades, Reconstruction, Rehabilitation, and Preservation
Gateway/Beltline Intersection 49%
Map ID-TP6
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
I-5/Beltline Environmental Assessment
TransPlan
Regional Transportation Plan
Gateway Refinement Plan
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning 250$ 50$ 50$ 50$ 100$
Engineering 1,300$ 550$ 750$
Land/Right of Way 10,650$ 5,000$ 5,650$
Construction 10,626$ 4,000$ 6,626$
Other 7,174$ 300$ 1,530$ 1,297$ 1,480$ 1,368$ 1,199$ -$
Total 30,000$ 9,850$ 1,530$ 1,297$ 1,530$ 1,418$ 1,249$ 13,126$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Street Fund 434 -$
Federal Aid 420 2,200$ 2,200$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 447 8,965$ 750$ 636$ 750$ 395$ 6,434$
SDCs, Reimb. 446 -$
Unspecified 11,185$ 780$ 661$ 780$ 1,418$ 854$ 6,692$
Other 420 7,650$ 7,650$
Total 30,000$ 9,850$ 1,530$ 1,297$ 1,530$ 1,418$ 1,249$ 13,126$
Phase 1 construction pending in 2010.
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: Intersection improvements at Gateway/Beltline and surrounding intersections, including
construction of a couplet and purchase of right-of-way. CIP project funding contributes to overall project estimate of $30
million.
Justification: Needed to improve level of service at the intersection and maintaining proper function of the intersection
in relationship to the I-5/Beltline Interchange.
Project Phase 1 is in design and right of way acquisition. Project Phase 2 trigger is set by traffic
operations agreement with ODOT.
Community growth and agreements with Federal Highways and ODOT to construct intersection
improvements as part of the larger I-5/Beltline interchange upgrade project.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 84
Transportation and Streets Funding Secured: Yes
System Upgrades, Reconstruction, Rehabilitation, and Preservation
South Bank Viaduct Extension 0%
Map ID-TP7
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
TransPlan Glenwood Refinement Plan
Regional Transportation Plan Willamalane River Path Plan
Council Goal
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2016
Planning 75$ 75$
Engineering 225$ 225$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 2,100$ 2,100$
Other -$
Total 2,400$ 300$ 2,100$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2016
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2016
Street Fund 434 -$
SDCs. Imp. (Str.) 447 -$
SDCs. Reimb. (Str.) 446 -$
Federal Aid 420 1,400$ 200$ 1,200$
State Aid 420 1,000$ 100$ 900$
Other 446 -$
Unspecified -$
Total 2,400$ 300$ 2,100$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
The project is currently working through environmental permitting and preliminary design.
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: The South Bank Viaduct Extension (SVE) is located along the south bank of the Willamette River between
the I-5 Bridge and the Oldham property on the north side of Franklin Boulevard. The SVE will connect the existing bike path from
the south side of the Knickerbocker pedestrian/bike bridge west of I-5, north of Franklin Boulevard, under the I-5 Bridge, and
along the river bank to the sidewalk along Franklin on the south edge of the Oldham property. In the future the SVE will also be
able to connect to the planned Glenwood Riverfront Path.
Justification: The SVE is a crucial link between Eugene and Springfield for bicycles and pedestrians. The SVE provides the
necessary link between the existing Multi-use path in Eugene and the planned Riverfront Bike Path in Glenwood. The Glenwood
Riverfront Path is a planned bike route in TransPlan and the Regional Transportation Plan. Currently, the bicycle lane on the
north side of Franklin Boulevard does not connect safely to the multi‐use path, forcing cyclists to cross Franklin Boulevard
without a safe crossing treatment to access the path. The SVE provides for the safe and continuous connection.
ODOT agreement to build the SVE in conjunction with the I-5 Willamette River Bridge replacement
project.
A safe bicycle/pedestrian connection on the north side of Franklin Boulevard between Eugene and
Springfield.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 85
Transportation and Street Capital Projects Funding Secured: Yes
Infrastructure Planning & Inventory Study
Springfield Transportation System Plan 50%
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2016
Planning 305$ 100$ 169$ 36$
Engineering -$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction -$
Other -$
Total 305$ 100$ 169$ 36$ -$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2016
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2016
Special Assmt.-$
AFG Grant 420 -$
SDCs. Reimb. (WW) 442 -$
Federal Aid 420 305$ 100$ 169$ 36$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs. Imp (Storm) 440 -$
SDCs, Reimb. (Str.) 446 -$
Unspecified -$
Total 305$ 100$ 169$ 36$ -$ -$ -$ -$
IN PROGRESS - Transportation inventory has been completed by City Staff. Consultant, CH2M Hill,
will be hired to assist with other portions of the project. Currently waiting on Notice to Proceed from
ODOT.
Statewide Planning Goal 12, Oregon Highway Plan, Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan, Oregon Transportation Plan,
Regional Transportation Plan, Oregon Freight Plan, Metro Plan, TransPlan, Lane County Transportaton System Plan,
Willamalane Comprehensive Plan, Local Refinement Plans, Springfield Bicycle Plan, Springfield Development Code,
Springfield Engineering Design Standards Manual
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: The Transportation System Plan (TSP) update is intended to serve as a blueprint to guide future multi-
modal transportation system improvements and investment decisions for the City of Springfield. This project includes an
inventory and general assessment of the existing transportation system; a determination of existing and future needs; a road
plan; a public transportation plan; a bicycle/pedestrian plan; a parking plan; a transportation system management and demand
management plan; an air, rail, water, and pipeline plan; and a financing and implementation plan.
Justification: The Transportation Planning Rule (TPR), Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR) 660 Division 12 requires
jurisdictions throughout Oregon to prepare and adopt regional or local transportation plans that serve as the transportation
element for their comprehensive plans (660 012 0015(2) (4)). Plan updates should respond to transportation, land use,
environmental, population growth, economic and social changes that have occurred in the community since the TSP was last
prepared. Historically, TransPlan has served as the local TSP for both Springfield and Eugene. However, since the passage of
HB 3337, Eugene and Springfield are required to have seperate UGBs, and thus seperate TSPs.
Project Driver: Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) - OAR 660 Division 12
HB 3337 - Changes in land inventories and UGB boundary
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 86
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 87
Transportation and Street Capital Projects Funding Secured: Yes
Account #: 870003
System Upgrades, Reconstruction, Rehabilitation, and Preservation
Transportation Demand Management Varies
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
TDM Goals Regional Transportation Plan
TransPlan State Legislation
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering -$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 35$ 35$
Other 130$ 10$ 20$ 20$ 20$ 20$ 20$ 20$
Total 165$ 45$ 20$ 20$ 20$ 20$ 20$ 20$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Street Fund 434 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 447 105$ 45$ 10$ 10$ 10$ 10$ 10$ 10$
SDCs, Reimb. 446 -$
Unspecified 60$ 10$ 10$ 10$ 10$ 10$ 10$
Total 165$ 45$ 20$ 20$ 20$ 20$ 20$ 20$
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Justification: TransPlan was adopted with a set of Transportation Demand Management (TDM), or ‘transportation
options’ (TO) policies and projects as required by State rules. This project contributes to funding project costs necessary
to meet those requirements. At times, TDM activities include locations that are included on the Transportation System
Development Charge Project List. For those activities, Transportation Improvement SDC funds can be used to provide
project funding up to the percentage that the project location is eligible per the SDC Project List. The TDM project also
provides resources to address state-mandated Green House Gas (GHG) reduction requirements for the transportation
sector.
Project Driver: TransPlan policies, and state land use, transportation, and GHG reduction laws, statues and rules. TDM
and TO program activities promote alternatives to 1-person/1-car auto trips and is a growing aspect of system
management when the funding and/or land is not available to continue to build new system capacity
TransPlan policies, current and pending state regulatory requirements, transportation system
management need.
Funding balance is for accumulating finds for projects as developed.
Project Description: The project includes match funding for other transportation options projects to enhance non-auto
travel links in the community like the 60th and "E" Street multi-use path, park and ride facilities coordinated with transit
stations, and other activities that promote non-single auto travel choices. This funding can be used as the funding source
for Bike Lane projects on the Transportation System Development list.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 88
Transportation and Street Capital Projects Funding Secured: Partial
Account #: 850008
System Upgrades, Reconstruction, Rehabilitation, and Preservation
Arterial/Collector Street Seal & Overlay 0%
Map ID-TP10
Marcola Rd. (2,602 ft., $521,000)
G St. 21st -28th (1,981 ft., $396,200)Thurston Rd. (2,763 ft., $553,000)
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Infrastructure Management System
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering 765$ 45$ 120$ 120$ 120$ 120$ 120$ 120$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 5,472$ 192$ 880$ 880$ 880$ 880$ 880$ 880$
Other -$
Total 6,237$ 237$ 1,000$ 1,000$ 1,000$ 1,000$ 1,000$ 1,000$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Street Fund 434 73$ - - 73$
Federal Aid 420 400$ 400$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 447 -$
SDCs, Reimb. 446 652$ 237$ 140$ 194$ 81$
Unspecified 5,112$ 600$ 860$ 1,000$ 806$ 846$ 1,000$
Total 6,237$ 237$ 1,000$ 1,000$ 1,000$ 1,000$ 1,000$ 1,000$
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project: Council Goals
Ongoing Program
W. "D" St. (4,508 ft., $902,000) 42nd St. (2,889 ft., $578,000)
Commercial Ave. (496 ft., $100,000)
Justification: This activity repairs and extends the life of the streets, providing the most cost effective long term
preventative maintenance application. Sealing streets before excessive deterioration occurs prolongs the street life and
delays more costly repairs. Overlays are effective where street surface failures have advanced beyond the point that is
effectively treated by sealing, and prevent expensive structural base failure.
Aging facilities and programmed preventive maintenance.
Projects are identified by the Infrastructure Management System which tracks maintenance and
improvements to the City's capital infrastructure.
Laura St. (2,625 ft., $525,000)18th St. (2,069 ft., $414,000)
E. 17th St. (945 ft., $189,000) 28
th St. (5.087 ft., $1,020,000)
Q St. (1,790 ft., $358,00 ) 35
th St. (2,452 ft., $491,000)
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Gateway St. (6,820 ft., $1,364,000)
Harlow Rd. (3,934 ft., $787,000) 19
th St. (531 ft., $107,000)
Project Description: A continuing street maintenance effort of pavement sealing and/or overlay of the Arterial/Collector
Street System performed by contract. In order to maintain the City's arterial and collector system at the current Council
target of 85% fair or better level, approximately $750,000 to $1,000,000 in funding is needed annually. Following is a
partial list with the highest priority overlays:
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 89
Transportation and Street Capital Projects Funding Secured: Yes
Account #: 850013
System Upgrades, Reconstruction, Rehabilitation, and Preservation
Traffic Control Projects Varies
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
TransPlan
Council Policy
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering 93$ 33$ 10$ 10$ 10$ 10$ 10$ 10$
Land/Right of Way 75$ 33$ 7$ 7$ 7$ 7$ 7$ 7$
Construction 861$ 261$ 100$ 100$ 100$ 100$ 100$ 100$
Other -$
Total 1,029$ 327$ 117$ 117$ 117$ 117$ 117$ 117$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs 36$ 3$ 3$ 3$ 6$ 6$ 6$ 9$
Personnel Costs -$
Total 36$ 3$ 3$ 3$ 6$ 6$ 6$ 9$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Street Fund 434 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 447 537$ 327$ 35$ 35$ 35$ 35$ 35$ 35$
SDCs, Reimb. 446 240$ 40$ 40$ 40$ 40$ 40$ 40$
Unspecified 252$ 42$ 42$ 42$ 42$ 42$ 42$
Total 1,029$ 327$ 117$ 117$ 117$ 117$ 117$ 117$
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Justification: As traffic increases, additional traffic intersections will not operate in an acceptable manner with stop sign
control. The intersections will meet roundabout or signal warrants. New signals or roundabouts will need to be installed.
The modification of existing signals is needed to maintain adequate traffic safety and to enhance traffic flow.
Citizen requests, high crash locations, congestion.
Ongoing Project. Funding is programmed as a 'sinking fund' to program resources for future projects
as identified and/or required. A typical intersection upgrade project can range between $250,000 -
$1,000,000.
Project Description: This project is for installation of new traffic signals and modification of existing signals or installation
of roundabouts at various City intersections. Potential candidate intersections include: Thurston Rd. & 66th St., 42nd &
Marcola Road, 28th & Main, South 21st & Main, South 42nd & Daisy St., 40th & Daisy St., and 28th & Centennial. The
modification of signals may include change to permissive left turns at some existing signalized intersections. School
speed zone beacons, safety projects, and miscellaneous striping and signing improvements may also be implemented
under the Traffic Control Projects. Funding is set aside in this program and as projects are identified that fit into this
category they are given an individual account and at that time another source of funding will be identified to match the
allowable SDC funds.
Specific projects are based upon the amount of available funding.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 90
Transportation and Street Capital Projects Funding Secured: Partial
Account #: 850069
System Upgrades, Reconstruction, Rehabilitation, and Preservation
Gateway Area Traffic Improvements Varies
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
Gateway Traffic Capacity Analysis
I-5/Beltline Environmental Assessment
Council Goals
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering 666$ 116$ 50$ 100$ 100$ 100$ 100$ 100$
Land/Right of Way 350$ 350$
Construction 3,143$ 1,043$ 100$ 400$ 400$ 400$ 400$ 400$
Other -$
Total 4,159$ 1,159$ 500$ 500$ 500$ 500$ 500$ 500$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Street Fund 434 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 447 2,567$ 1,159$ 250$ 250$ 250$ 208$ 200$ 250$
SDCs, Reimb. 446 -$
Unspecified 1,408$ 250$ 250$ 250$ 208$ 200$ 250$
Other -$
Total 3,975$ 1,159$ 500$ 500$ 500$ 416$ 400$ 500$
Ongoing. Funding balance is a 'sinking fund' to program resources for highest priority projects like
Gateway Street operational and safety improvements. Project may also contribute to Gateway/Beltline
funding needs.
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Justification: Improvements to the street network are needed to reduce traffic congestion, air pollution; to improve
safety of all modes; and, to support continued economic development in the area. A study of the area several years ago
resulted in a list of priority projects.
Gateway area development and traffic conditions.
Project Description: Transportation improvements at various locations in the Gateway area to increase capacity, relieve
congestion, and improve safety. Funding is set aside in this program and as projects are identified that fit into this
category they are given an individual account and at that time another source of funding will be identified to match the
allowable SDC funds.
Community growth in the Gateway area.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 91
Transportation and Street Capital Projects Funding Secured: Partial
Account #: 870001
System Upgrades, Reconstruction, Rehabilitation, and Preservation
Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Varies
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
Regional ITS Operations & Implementation Plan for Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area
TransPlan
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering 61$ 31$ 5$ 5$ 5$ 5$ 5$ 5$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 550$ 280$ 45$ 45$ 45$ 45$ 45$ 45$
Other -$
Total 611$ 311$ 50$ 50$ 50$ 50$ 50$ 50$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs 7$ 1$ 1$ 1$ 1$ 1$ 1$ 1$
Personnel Costs -$
Total 7$ 1$ 1$ 1$ 1$ 1$ 1$ 1$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Street Fund 434 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 447 461$ 311$ 25$ 25$ 25$ 25$ 25$ 25$
SDCs, Reimb. 446 150$ 25$ 25$ 25$ 25$ 25$ 25$
Other -$
Total 611$ 311$ 50$ 50$ 50$ 50$ 50$ 50$
Ongoing Program. Use as a 'sinking fund' to accumulate resources for highest priority projects.
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Justification: Improvements to the street network are needed to reduce traffic congestion, air pollution, fuel use, to
increase safety and to allow for continued economic development.
Ongoing. May provide matching funds to Oregon Department Of Transportation projects with mutual
benefits.
Project Description: ITS projects in various locations to increase capacity, safety and traveler information. Funding is
set aside in this program and as projects are identified that fit into this category they are given an individual account and
at that time another source of funding will be identified to match the allowable SDC funds.
Deploying ITS projects enhance the ability to use the transportation system more effectively by
extracting the maximum capacity from the system. This will delay the need for adding new lanes and
links to the system and improve traveler safety and access to traveler information systems.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 92
Transportation and Street Capital Projects Funding Secured: Partial
Account #: 850162
System Upgrades, Reconstruction, Rehabilitation, and Preservation
S. 48th Street Connection (Main to Daisy) 40%
Map ID-TP14
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
TransPlan
Agreement between City and Westwind Estates, City Council Resolution 06-35, 7/17/06
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering 330$ 175$ 155$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 772$ 772$
Other -$
Total 1,102$ 175$ -$ 927$ -$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Street Fund 434 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 447 361$ 361$
SDCs, Reimb. 446 -$
Unspecified 391$ 391$
Other (Developer 420 350$ 175$ 175$
Total 752$ 175$ -$ 927$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Deferred pending funding and future development activity
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: Construct South 48th Street from Main to Daisy Street. Install traffic signal at Main Street/South
48th Street Intersection. A portion of the cost to construct this project is an obligation of current and future development
south of Daisy Street. The City has received a performance bond for $175,000 to secure the obligation from the
Westwind Estates development.
Justification: Construct new street to urban standards and signalized intersection at Main Street to support planned
land development Project #901 in RTP and TransPlan.
Future development activity
Future development and growth will create a need for connection between Daisy and Main Street to be
constructed to alleviate congestion. Adds needed pedestrian crossing.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 93
Transportation and Street Capital Projects Funding Secured: Partial
Account #: 870007
System Upgrades, Reconstruction, Rehabilitation, and Preservation
Franklin Boulevard Planning 50%
Map ID-TP15
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
Council Priority
Glenwood Refinement Plan Update
TransPlan
Regional Transportation Plan
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning 425$ 425$
Engineering 175$ 25$ 25$ 25$ 25$ 25$ 25$ 25$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction -$
Other -$
Total 600$ 450$ 25$ 25$ 25$ 25$ 25$ 25$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Street Fund 434 -$
Federal Aid 420 50$ 50$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 447 400$ 250$ 25$ 25$ 25$ 25$ 25$ 25$
SDCs, Reimb. 446 -$
Other (LTD) 420 50$ 50$
SEDA 429 100$ 100$
Unspecified -$
Total 600$ 450$ 25$ 25$ 25$ 25$ 25$ 25$
Concept phase complete, federal funds applied for, city-funded NEPA documentation now underway,
although funding gap identified to complete NEPA analysis.
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: Complete project refinement, including National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documentation
for future improvements to Franklin Boulevard, the Franklin/Glenwood and Franklin/McVay intersections and the
McVay/Franklin intersection to support Glenwood redevelopment and regional mobility for transit, bicycles/pedestrians,
and autos. Contribute to the required local match for any federal funding received.
Justification: The segment of Franklin Boulevard in Glenwood does not meet modern design standards for sidewalks,
bike lanes, property access, and intersection control. This project follows the Glenwood Riverfront Area planning and
anticipates redevelopment in the urban renewal district as directed by the Springfield Economic Development Agency.
Project is coordinated with Glenwood Refinement Plan Update work.
City priority focus on Glenwood area redevelopment.
Springfield goal to facilitate redevelopment in Glenwood, with a specific focus on the riverfront area.
Design and function of future improvements to Franklin Boulevard are critical to any Glenwood area
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 94
Transportation and Streets Funding Secured: Yes
System Upgrades, Reconstruction, Rehabilitation, and Preservation
Pedestrian Signal Upgrades 0%
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
Energy Conservation strategies
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2016
Planning -$
Engineering -$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 73$ 73$
Other -$
Total 73$ 73$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2016
Maintenance Costs (12)$ (2)$ (2)$ (2)$ (2)$ (2)$ (2)$
Personnel Costs -$
Total (12)$ (2)$ (2)$ (2)$ (2)$ (2)$ (2)$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2016
Special Assmt.-$
AFG Grant 420 -$
SDCs. Reimb. (WW) 442 -$
Federal Aid 420 73$ 73$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs. Imp (Storm) 440 -$
SDCs, Reimb. (Str.) 446 -$
Unspecified -$
Total 73$ 73$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Funding has been received and projects are in design.
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: The City of Springfield applied for and received a grant from the U.S. Department of Energy for Energy
Efficiency and Conservation Projects under the American Recovery and Revitilization Act (Federal stimulus). The City
received $539,400 from the Stimulus package and with direction from City Council divided the grant between City projects and
projects at Willamalane Park and Recreation District and Springfield Public Schools.
Justification: This is Federal stimulus money used to provide funding for projects that will create new jobs and reduce energy
consumption. There was no matching funding required for this grant and the grant dollars will be leveraged by energy rebates
from the Springfield Utility Board. Between the grant and rebates Team Springfield will be able to make a significant difference
in several locations by increasing lighting quality and conserving energy and reducing future energy costs.
Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant awarded
Manual for Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) requirements and energy conservation.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 95
Transportation and Streets Funding Secured: Yes
System Upgrades, Reconstruction, Rehabilitation, and Preservation
Street Lighting Upgrades 0%
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
Energy Conservation strategies
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2016
Planning -$
Engineering -$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 117$ 117$
Other -$
Total 117$ 117$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2016
Maintenance Costs (12)$ (2)$ (2)$ (2)$ (2)$ (2)$ (2)$
Personnel Costs -$
Total (12)$ (2)$ (2)$ (2)$ (2)$ (2)$ (2)$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2016
Special Assmt.-$
AFG Grant 420 -$
SDCs. Reimb. (WW) 442 -$
Federal Aid 420 117$ 117$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs. Imp (Storm) 440 -$
SDCs, Reimb. (Str.) 446 -$
Unspecified -$
Total 117$ 117$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Funding has been received and projects are in design.
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: The City of Springfield applied for and received a grant from the U.S. Department of Energy for Energy
Efficiency and Conservation Projects under the American Recovery and Revitilization Act (Federal stimulus). The City
received $539,400 from the Stimulus package and with direction from City Council divided the grant between City projects and
projects at Willamalane Park and Recreation District and Springfield Public Schools.
Justification: This is Federal stimulus money used to provide funding for projects that will create new jobs and reduce energy
consumption. There was no matching funding required for this grant and the grant dollars will be leveraged by energy rebates
from the Springfield Utility Board. Between the grant and rebates Team Springfield will be able to make a significant difference
in several locations by increasing lighting quality and conserving energy and reducing future energy costs.
Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant awarded
Upgrading poor lighting fixtures to improved light sources that consume less energy.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 96
Transportation and Street Capital Projects Funding Secured: Yes
System Upgrades, Reconstruction, Rehabilitation, and Preservation
Bridge Preservation and Rehabilitation 0%
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
City Council Goals
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering -$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 60$ 10$ 10$ 10$ 10$ 10$ 10$
Other -$
Total 60$ -$ 10$ 10$ 10$ 10$ 10$ 10$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs 6$ 1$ 1$ 1$ 1$ 1$ 1$
Personnel Costs 30$ 5$ 5$ 5$ 5$ 5$ 5$
Total 36$ -$ 6$ 6$ 6$ 6$ 6$ 6$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
AFG Grant 420 -$
SDCs. Reimb. (WW) 442 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs. Imp (Storm) 440 -$
SDCs, Reimb. (Str.) 446 60$ 10$ 10$ 10$ 10$ 10$ 10$
Unspecified -$
Total 60$ -$ 10$ 10$ 10$ 10$ 10$ 10$
Monitoring
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: This project will address known deficiencies to City owned bridges discovered through required semi-
annual ODOT Bridge Inspections. These inspections have identified $50k of needed repairs to preserve function and structural
integrity of six City bridges.
Justification: There are six bridges maintained by the City that are currently inspected by ODOT in correlation to the State
wide transportation system. Repair activities include bank scour beneath the bridge, rebuilding or replacement of a concrete
nosing, grouting, secure embankment erosion, replacing split spacer block, replacing a wing wall and patching concrete
spalding. Steps need to be taken to address the financing of these projects before they reach a critical stage.
Due to reduction in street funding there will be little or no operating funds to absorb a bridge repair
project if necessary. Aging facilities and regulatory requirements.
ODOT Bridge Inspection reports that are provided on a semi-annual basis - these reports identify
repairs and deficiencies with each bridge. PW Maintenance performs 6 month inspections to identify
new issues and monitor existing ones.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 97
Transportation and Streets Funding Secured: Partial
Construction and Preservation Account #850213
Roundabout Pedestrian Crossing Treatments 32%
Map ID-TP19
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
City Council Direction
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2016
Planning -$
Engineering 55$ 20$ 35$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 530$ 180$ 350$
Other -$
Total 585$ 200$ -$ 385$ -$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2016
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2016
Special Assmt.-$
AFG Grant 420 -$
SDCs. Reimb. (WW) 442 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs. Imp (Storm) 440 -$
SDCs, Imp. (Str.) 447 200$ 200$
Unspecified 385$ 385$
Total 585$ 200$ -$ 385$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Design/Research phase.
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: Addition of pedestrian crossing improvements to the Pioneer Parkway, Martin Luther King, Jr. Parkway,
Hayden Bridge Way Roundabout. The improvements would be pedestrian crossing assistance in the form of a Rectangular
Rapidly Flashing Beacon (RRFB), High intensity Activated cross WalK (HAWK) or other technology that would provide positive
indication for motorists to stop for pedestrians waiting to use the crosswalk.
Justification: Springfield City Council has directed Staff, at the request of a local advocacy group, to implement pedestrian
crossing improvements. The design must be compliant with the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) and
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) guidelines.
Local advocacy group request to City Council.
City Council direction.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 98
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 99
Transportation and Street Capital Projects Funding Secured: No
Account #: 850066
System Upgrades, Reconstruction, Rehabilitation, and Preservation
0%
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
Council Goals
TransPlan
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering 180$ 5$ 25$ 25$ 25$ 25$ 25$ 50$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 1,827$ 45$ 255$ 255$ 255$ 255$ 255$ 507$
Other -$
Total 2,007$ 50$ 280$ 280$ 280$ 280$ 280$ 557$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs (44)$ (2)$ (4)$ (6)$ (8)$ (10)$ (14)$
Personnel Costs -$
Total (44)$ -$ (2)$ (4)$ (6)$ (8)$ (10)$ (14)$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Street Fund 434 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 447 -$
SDCs, Reimb. 446 -$
Unspecified 2,007$ 50$ 280$ 280$ 280$ 280$ 280$ 557$
Total 2,007$ 50$ 280$ 280$ 280$ 280$ 280$ 557$
Ongoing Program
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: Installation of new street lights according to City-wide priority. Locations are typically requested by the
public through the CIP process and throughout the year. Replace 2,720 low pressure sodium (LPS) lights.
Implement Council Policy; Citizen Service Requests
Street Light Infill & LPS Light
Replacement
Justification: Citizens request new lighting and safety studies justify new lighting. LPS lights have higher life cycle costs than
alternatives. Replacement will reduce operations cost and improve visibility.
Specific annual projects are based upon the amount of funding programmed in the City's budget.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 100
Transportation and Street Capital Projects Funding Secured: No
Account #: 850008
System Upgrades, Reconstruction, Rehabilitation, and Preservation
Local/Residential Street Slurry Seal 0%
Total Ft. =46,387 Total = $260,000
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Council Goals
Infrastructure Management System
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering 240$ 40$ 40$ 40$ 40$ 40$ 40$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 1,560$ 260$ 260$ 260$ 260$ 260$ 260$
Other -$
Total 1,800$ -$ 300$ 300$ 300$ 300$ 300$ 300$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Street Fund 434 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 447 -$
SDCs, Reimb. 446 -$
Unspecified 1,800$ 300$ 300$ 300$ 300$ 300$ 300$
Total 1,800$ -$ 300$ 300$ 300$ 300$ 300$ 300$
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
Deferred pending funding.
S 54th (665 ft., $3,325)
49th St. 11 segmt (5,160 ft., $25,800)
65th Pl Main 3 segmt (1,110 ft., $5,050)
Daisy 42nd-Bob Strb 21 segmt (8,236 ft., $41,180)
Camellia Loop area 19 segmt (7,575 ft., $37,870)
S 48th-Daisy 8 segmt (2,295 ft., $11,475)
Gateway 4 segmt (3,726 ft., $18,630)
Kelly Butte 15 segmt (7,411 ft., $37,055)
G-F St 21st-28th 8 segmt (3,122 ft., ($15,610)
Lindale/Pheasant (2,042 ft., $10,210)
A St. 62nd-69th 16 segmt (5,045 ft., $25,215)
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Justification: This activity repairs and extends the life of the streets, providing the most cost effective long term
preventative maintenance application. Sealing streets before excessive deterioration occurs prolongs the street life
and delay more costly repairs. Overlays are effective where street surface failures have advanced beyond the point
that is effectively treated by sealing, and prevent expensive structural base failure.
Specific annual projects are based upon the amount of funding programmed. Aging facilities and
programmed preventive maintenance.
Project Description: A continuing street maintenance preservation efforts by slurry and crack sealing of
Local/Residential Street System performed by contract. In order to maintain the City's local street system
approximately 5 to 8 miles should be crack sealed and slurry annually. Following is a partial list indicating the
highest priority sealing locations:
Projects are identified by the Infrastructure Management System which tracks maintenance and
improvements to the City's capital infrastructure.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 101
Transportation and Street Capital Projects Funding Secured: No
Account #:
System Upgrades, Reconstruction, Rehabilitation, and Preservation
0%
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
City Council goal to maintain infrastructure
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering 7$ 7$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 73$ 73$
Other -$
Total 80$ -$ 80$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Street Fund 434 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 447 -$
SDCs, Reimb. 446 -$
Other -$
Unspecified 80$ 80$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Ongoing Program
Street Light Pole Test, Treat &
Replacement
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: Test and treat light poles at 10 year intervals and replace rotting poles and broken conduits in the
City owned street light system.
Justification: Pole testing reveals condition of all City owned poles. Treating poles reduces rate of deterioration. The
proposed project replaces poles identified as at the end of useful life. The City's light poles were last tested in 1999.
Testing and treating is recommended at 10 year intervals
Specific annual projects are based upon the amount of funding programmed in the City's budget.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 102
Transportation and Street Capital Projects Funding Secured: No
Construction and Preservation
Street Lights - NESC Compliance 0%
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering -$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 22$ 12$ 10$
Other -$
Total 22$ -$ 12$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 10$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2016
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
AFG Grant 420 -$
Street Fund 434 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs. Imp (Storm) 440 -$
SDCs, Reimb. (Str.) 446 -$
Unspecified 22$ 12$ 10$
Total 22$ -$ 12$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 10$
Pending funding approval.
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: Repair and modify street light and traffic signal communication facilities on Springfield Utility Board
(SUB) poles in compliance with National Electric Service Code.
Justification: The Public Utilities Commission (PUC) requires Springfield Utility Board (SUB) to comply with the National
Electric Service Code (NESC). SUB recently completed a review of all SUB poles. SUB notified City of City facilities that are
out of compliance as of late 2009, and is requesting City action to remediate NESC violations. Comcast and Qwest also have
facilities that are in violation. SUB will conduct the work to conform City, SUB, Comcast and Qwest facilities to NESC
compliance. This project will provide for payments to SUB for City share of this work. SUB plans to assess NESC compliance
on a nine year schedule. Since code changes occur periodically it is expected that new compliance issues will be revealed in
the future.
Regulatory requirements and SUB compliance program
Compliance with PUC order and NESC requirements.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 103
Transportation and Street Capital Projects Funding Secured: Partial
Account #: 850194
System Upgrades, Reconstruction, Rehabilitation, and Preservation
"A" Street Overlay 0%
Map ID-TP24
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
Projects are identified by the Infrastructure Management System
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering 100$ 100$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 680$ 125$ 555$
Other -$
Total 780$ 225$ 555$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Street Fund 434 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 447 -$
SDCs, Reimb. 446 225$ 225$
Unspecified 555$ 555$
Total 780$ 225$ 555$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: Overlay "A" Street from 5th Street to Mill Street, and 4th Street from Main Street to "C" Street.
Some locations may require more extensive base repair due to the dilapidated condition
Justice Center completion.
Deferred pending funding
Justification: As part of the construction of the Springfield Justice Center, one block of "B" Street was closed and Lane
Transit District (LTD) bus routes were redirected onto "A" Street. "A" Street is due for an overlay which will also bolster
the structure to withstand the additional stress of the added bus traffic. Along with "A" Street, 4th Street will also be
overlayed between Main Street and "C" Street. This project will be scheduled once all major construction components are
completed on the Justice Center and all street utility work is done.
The need to preserve the street and provide structure to support heavier bus traffic, and to avoid
potential costly reconstruction.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 104
Transportation and Street Capital Projects Funding Secured: No
Account #:
System Upgrades, Reconstruction, Rehabilitation, and Preservation
21st Street Reconstruction 0%
Map ID-TP25
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
Adopted in the Central Lane TMA Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Plan.
TransPlan
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering 200$ 200$
Land/Right of Way 200$ 200$
Construction 1,075$ 1,075$
Other -$
Total 1,475$ -$ -$ -$ 1,475$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Street Fund 434 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 447 -$
SDCs, Reimb. 446 -$
Unspecified 1,475$ 1,475$
Total 1,475$ -$ -$ -$ 1,475$ -$ -$ -$
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: Major rehabilitation/reconstruction of 21st Street from D Street to Main Street. The project will
include new sidewalks, bike lanes, and pavement. The total project cost is estimated to be $1,475,000
Street section has failed
Deferred pending funding
Justification: In 2005, 21st Street from Olympic Street to Centennial Boulevard was overlayed. During summer 2006
the J Street to D Street section of 21st Street was reconstructed. The D Street to Main Street section represents the final
segment of 21st Street to be repaired. This section is in serious structural decline and current maintenance levels cannot
keep up with the current rate of decline. The intersections at "A" Street and Main Street will also be addressed with this
project.
Street structure has failed and current maintenance procedures no longer provide satisfactory results.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 105
Transportation and Street Capital Projects Funding Secured: No
Account #: 860013
System Upgrades, Reconstruction, Rehabilitation, and Preservation
Wayfinding For Low Vision Users 0%
And Pedestrian Safety
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
TransPlan Policies
Americans With Disabilities Act
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering 60$ 10$ 10$ 10$ 10$ 10$ 10$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 240$ 40$ 40$ 40$ 40$ 40$ 40$
Other -$
Total 300$ -$ 50$ 50$ 50$ 50$ 50$ 50$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 420 -$
Street Fund 434 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 447 -$
SDCs, Reimb. 446 -$
Unspecified 300$ 50$ 50$ 50$ 50$ 50$ 50$
Total 300$ -$ 50$ 50$ 50$ 50$ 50$ 50$
Ongoing need, deferred pending funding
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: Installation of pedestrian wayfinding devices and other safety devices based on user requests. The
first project area of interest is the Lane Transit District downtown station and connection within the downtown area.
Accessible pedestrian signal retrofits is a possible part of this project.
Justification: Low vision pedestrians need tactile or audible queues to assist in traveling in high risk routes or areas of
overwhelming sensory input such as high volume streets and intersections, circuitous routes, and rail crossings. This
project was developed in response to citizen service requests from the low-vision community
Citizen Requests
Customer Service Requests from the low vision pedestrian community.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 106
Transportation and Street Capital Projects Funding Secured: Partial
Account #: 850178
System Upgrades, Reconstruction, Rehabilitation, and Preservation
Maple Island Improvements 80%
Map ID-TP27
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
Council Goals
TransPlan
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning 100$ 100$
Engineering 125$ 125$
Land/Right of Way 415$ 415$
Construction 350$ 104$ 246$
Other 720$ 550$ 170$
Total 1,710$ 229$ -$ 550$ 100$ 831$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Street Fund 434 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 447 1,413$ 229$ 440$ 80$ 664$
SDCs, Reimb. 446 -$
Unspecified 297$ 110$ 20$ 167$
Total 1,710$ 229$ -$ 550$ 100$ 831$ -$ -$
Deferred pending funding and future development activity
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: This project will upgrade the roundabout at Maple Island Road and International Way. It will also
extend the Maple Island Loop Road to the north along the Maple Island Slough.
Justification: The City of Springfield desires to promote growth and development in the Gateway Area which will increase
the need for more access and connectivity to alleviate traffic congestion. Private developer has constructed a portion of the
north extension of Maple Island Rd., which the City can acquire at cost before 2017.
Sufficient funding to acquire north extension and/or intersection improvements.
Council Goals and development within the Gateway Area.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 107
Transportation and Street Capital Projects Funding Secured: No
Construction and Preservation
Franklin Boulevard Reconstruction Project 20%
Map ID-TP28
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
Council Priority
Franklin Blvd. Study
Glenwood Urban Renewal Plan
Glenwood Refinement Plan
TransPlan
Regional Transportation Plan
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning
Engineering 5,000$ 3,000$ 2,000$
Land/Right of Way 17,000$ 2,000$ 10,000$ 5,000$
Construction 28,000$ 13,000$ 8,000$ 7,000$
Other -$
Total 50,000$ 5,000$ 25,000$ 13,000$ 7,000$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund #Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Street Fund 434 -$
SDCs. Reimb. (Str.) 446 -$
SDCs. Imp. (Str.) 447 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
Other -$
Unspecified 50,000$ 5,000$ 25,000$ 13,000$ 7,000$
Total 50,000$ 5,000$ 25,000$ 13,000$ 7,000$ -$ -$ -$
Awaiting TIGER grant award and/or inclusion in the reauthorization of the Federal Transportation Bill. National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documentation phase proceeding under Franklin Boulevard Planning project
(#870007).
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: The Franklin Boulevard Reconstruction Project will construct modern urban standards improvements on the old
Hwy 99 alignment in Glenwood called Franklin Boulevard between the Glenwood / Franklin intersection and the Franklin / McVay
intersection to support Glenwood redevelopment and regional safety and mobility for transit, bicycles/pedestrians, and autos.
Justification: The segment of Franklin Boulevard in Glenwood does not meet modern design standards for sidewalks, bike lanes,
property access, and intersection control. This project follows the Glenwood Riverfront Area planning and is integrated with the urban
renewal plan for Glenwood. Project is coordinated with Glenwood Refinement Plan Update work.
City priority to redevelop Glenwood riverfront area.
Springfield goal to facilitate redevelopment in Glenwood, with a specific focus on the riverfront area. Design
and function of future improvements to Franklin Boulevard are critical to any Glenwood area redevelopment.
City, in partnership with Oregon Department Of Transportation and Lane Transit District, has applied for
$50,000,000 in federal stimulus Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) grant
funding and also requested federal transportation bill reauthorization funding through the Oregon
Congressional Delegation.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 108
Transportation and Streets Funding Secured: No
Construction and Preservation
Intelligent Lighting Controls 0%
Project Driver:
Total Project Constructed Cost:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering -$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction -$
Other 600$ 100$ 100$ 100$ 100$ 100$ 100$
Total 600$ 100$ 100$ 100$ 100$ 100$ 100$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2016
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs (56)$ (3)$ (6)$ (8)$ (11)$ (14)$ (14)$
Total (56)$ -$ (3)$ (6)$ (8)$ (11)$ (14)$ (14)$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Street Fund 434 -$
SDCs. Imp. (Str.) 447 -$
SDCs. Reimb. (Str.) 446 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
Other -$
Unspecified 600$ 100$ 100$ 100$ 100$ 100$ 100$
Total 600$ 100$ 100$ 100$ 100$ 100$ 100$ -$
Deferred Pending Funding Allotment: this project is scalable and could be reduced in scope to cover only
areas of high risk of wire theft.
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: An Intelligent lighting system will monitor street light performance. The light monitoring system will monitor
energy consumption, fixture output, light outages, generate work orders and, most importantly, alarm per set conditions. The
alarm feature would be used as a wire theft prevention with the idea of alerting the Police Department when a series of lights on a
circuit suddenly goes dark. This would be a primary method of protecting the public infrastructure and cost of replacing stolen
wire.
Justification: In the past two years the City has lost approximately $150,000 in the repair and replacement of stolen conductors
for street light systems. Also, current loss prevention has resulted in extra expense for our own repair of the systems that do get
damaged. Street light outages are currently reported by citizens and by City personnel conducting physical surveys of the existing
system to search for outages and problems. With the implementation of this system there would be a reduction in labor expense
for monitoring the system, wire loss prevention and reduced time of light outages all improving customer service and satisfaction.
Finally, the system has a dimming control feature that will allow for substantial energy savings by allowing the City to DIM light
output during non peak hours. The system will also include a data base of the lighting assets allowing much better management of
the asset.
Opportunity to reduce operational costs.
Wire theft and street light management.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 109
Transportation and Street Capital Projects Funding Secured: Partial
Account #: 850006
System Upgrades, Reconstruction, Rehabilitation, and Preservation
Uniform Traffic Control Devices Compliance 0%
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices
TransPlan
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering 30$ 10$ 10$ 10$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 225$ 75$ 75$ 75$
Other -$
Total 255$ -$ -$ 85$ 85$ 85$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Street Fund 434 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 447 -$
SDCs, Reimb. 446 -$
Unspecified 255$ 85$ 85$ 85$
Total 255$ -$ -$ 85$ 85$ 85$ -$ -$
OTC Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices update adoption pending.
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: Replace and revise signs, markings, traffic signals, beacons and other work to conform to the
Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD).
Justification: Federal Highways Administration and Oregon Department of Transportation periodically update the Manual.
The City is required to conform to the revisions in the new Manual over specified time frames. Failure to comply violates
state law and jeopardizes federal highway funds.
MUTCD Update by the Oregon Transportation Commission (OTC).
Regulatory mandate and traffic safety.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 110
WASTEWATER
Overview
Wastewater projects fall into several categories:
Preservation and Maintenance – These projects typically involve upgrading the current wastewater
system. Projects may include the rehabilitation of existing sanitary sewer lines, laterals and connections
to reduce infiltration and inflow of groundwater into the system.
New Facilities – These projects typically involve the construction of new wastewater facilities as a result,
or in anticipation of new development. Projects may include sanitary sewer lines built as part of a new
subdivision and extension of sanitary sewer trunk lines.
PROJECT MAPS
WW1 Wet Weather Flow Management Plan –
Basin 7 Rehabilitation
WW2 Wet Weather Flow Management Plan –
Basin 10A Rehabilitation
WW3 Wet Weather Flow Management Plan –
Basin 10B Rehabilitation
WW4 Wet Weather Flow Management Plan –
Basin 19A Rehabilitation
WW5 Wet Weather Flow Management Plan –
Basin 19B Rehabilitation
WW6 Wet Weather Flow Management Plan –
Basin 19C Rehabilitation
WW7 Wet Weather Flow Management Plan –
Marcola Interceptor
WW8 Wet Weather Flow Management Plan –
Basin 49 & 50 Rehabilitation
WW9 Wet Weather Flow Management Plan –
Basin 8, 18, & 20 Rehabilitation
WW10 Jasper Trunk Line Extension
WW11 Cherokee Drive Sewer
WW14 Sanitary Basin #22 Rehabilitation
WW15 10th and “N” Street Upgrade
WW16 58th Street Flow Control Facility
WW17 7th/8th Street Wastewater Pipe
Replacement
WW18 Main Street Improvements Unit 1
WW19 Franklin Boulevard System Expansion
WW20 Nugget Way Pump Station
WW21 Peacehealth/Riverbend Pump Station
WW22 Main Street Improvements Unit 2
WW23 McKenzie Highway Expansion
WW24 “A” Street Improvements Unit 1
WW25 “A” Street Improvements Unit 2
WW26 “A” Street Improvements Unit 3
WW28 Hayden Lo Pump Station
WW29 River Glen Pump Station
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 111
This page left intentionally blank
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 112
Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Wastewater Capital Projects Total Total Total Total Total Total Total
Constructed
WWFMP Basin 7 1,360$ - - - - - 1,360
Capital Fund (409)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (443)-$ - - - - - -
Reimbursement SDCs (442)-$ - - - - - -
Revenue Bonds (409) 1,360$ - - - - - 1,360
WWMFP Basin 10A 505$ - - - - - 505
Capital Fund (409)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (443)-$ - - - - - -
Reimbursement SDCs (442)-$ - - - - - -
Revenue Bonds (409) 505$ - - - - - 505
WWMFP Basin 10B 630$ - - - - - 630
Capital Fund (409)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (443)-$ - - - - - -
Reimbursement SDCs (442)-$ - - - - - -
Revenue Bonds (409) 630$ - - - - - 630
WWFMP Basin 19A 1,230$ - - - - - 1,230
Capital Fund (409)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (443)-$ - - - - - -
Reimbursement SDCs (442)-$ - - - - - -
Revenue Bonds (409) 1,230$ - - - - - 1,230
WWFMP Basin 19B 606$ - - - - - 606
Capital Fund (409)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (443)-$ - - - - - -
Reimbursement SDCs (442)-$ - - - - - -
Revenue Bonds (409) 606$ - - - - - 606
WWFMP Basin 19C 1,740$ - - - - - 1,740
Capital Fund (409)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (443)-$ - - - - - -
Reimbursement SDCs (442)-$ - - - - - -
Revenue Bonds (409) 1,740$ - - - - - 1,740
WWFMP Marcola Interceptor 900$ - - - - - 900
Capital Fund (409)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (443)-$ - - - - - -
Reimbursement SDCs (442)-$ - - - - - -
Revenue Bonds (409) 900$ - - - - - 900
WWFMP Basins 49 & 50 600$ - - - - - 600
Capital Fund (409)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (443)-$ - - - - - -
Reimbursement SDCs (442)-$ - - - - - -
Revenue Bonds (409) 600$ - - - - - 600
WWFMP Basins 8, 18, & 20 720$ - - - - - 720
Capital Fund (409)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (443)-$ - - - - - -
Reimbursement SDCs (442)-$ - - - - - -
Revenue Bonds (409) 720$ - - - - - 720
In Process
Jasper Trunk Line Extension 1,950$ - - 9,300 - - 11,250
Capital Fund (409) 200$ - - - - - 200
Improvement SDCs (443)-$ - - - - - -
Reimbursement SDCs (442)-$ - - - - - -
Revenue Bonds (409) 1,750$ - - 9,300 - - 11,050
Cherokee Drive Sewer 350$ - - - - - 350
Capital Fund (409) 50$ - - - - - 50
Improvement SDCs (443)-$ - - - - - -
Reimbursement SDCs (442)-$ - - - - - -
Special Assmt 300$ - - - - - 300
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 115
Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Wastewater Capital Projects Total Total Total Total Total Total Total
Funding Secured
Sewer Wet Weather Flow Abatement 1,013$ 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,250 1,250 6,513
Capital Fund (409) 1,013 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,250 1,070 6,333
Improvement SDCs (443)-$ - - - - - -
Reimbursement SDCs (442)-$ - - - - - -
Unspecified Wastewater Funds -$ - - - - 180 180
Misc. Wastewater System Repair 252$ 200 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 4,452
Capital Fund (409) 202$ - - - 425 525 1,152
Improvement SDCs (443)-$ - - - - - -
Reimbursement SDCs (442) 50$ 200 200 200 475 413 1,538
Revenue Bonds (409)-$ - - - - - -
Unspecified Wastewater Funds -$ - 800 800 100 62 1,762
Sanitary Basin 22 Rehabilitation 650$ 5,550 - - - - 6,200
Capital Fund (409)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (443)-$ - - - - - -
Reimbursement SDCs (442)-$ - - - - - -
Revenue Bonds (409) 650$ 5,550 - - - - 5,550
10th and "N" Street Upgrade -$ 3,935 - - - - 3,935
Capital Fund (409)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (443)-$ - - - - - -
Reimbursement SDCs (442)-$ - - - - - -
Revenue Bonds (409)-$ 3,935 - - - - 3,935
58th Street Flow Control Facility -$ 2,195 - - - - 2,195
Capital Fund (409)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (443)-$ - - - - - -
Reimbursement SDCs (442)-$ - - - - - -
Revenue Bonds (409)-$ 2,195 - - - - 2,195
7th/8th Street Replacement -$ 476 - - - - 476
Capital Fund (409)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (443)-$ - - - - - -
Reimbursement SDCs (442)-$ - - - - - -
Revenue Bonds (409)-$ 476 - - - - 476
Main Street Improvements Unit 1 -$ 2,102 - - - - 2,102
Capital Fund (409)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (443)-$ - - - - - -
Reimbursement SDCs (442)-$ - - - - - -
Revenue Bonds (409)-$ 2,102 - - - - 2,102
Funding Unsecured
Franklin Boulevard Expansion -$ - - 2,998 - - 2,998
Capital Fund (409)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (443)-$ - - 328 - - 328
Reimbursement SDCs (442)-$ - - - - - -
Revenue Bonds (409)-$ - - - - - -
Unspecified Wastewater Funds -$ - - 2,670 - - 2,670
Nugget Way Pump Station -$ - - 1,443 - - 1,443
Capital Fund (409)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (443)-$ - - - - - -
Reimbursement SDCs (442)-$ - - - - - -
Revenue Bonds (409)-$ - - - - - -
Unspecified Wastewater Funds -$ - - 1,443 - - 1,443
Peacehealth-Riverbend Pump Station -$ - - 3,189 - - 3,189
Capital Fund (409)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (443)-$ - - - - - -
Reimbursement SDCs (442)-$ - - - - - -
Revenue Bonds (409)-$ - - - - - -
Unspecified Wastewater Funds -$ - - 3,189 - - 3,189
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 116
Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Wastewater Capital Projects Total Total Total Total Total Total Total
Main Street Improvements 2 -$ - - 1,145 - - 1,145
Capital Fund (409)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (443)-$ - - - - - -
Reimbursement SDCs (442)-$ - - - - - -
Revenue Bonds (409)-$ - - - - - -
Unspecified Wastewater Funds -$ - - 1,145 - - 1,145
McKenzie Highway Improvements -$ - - 1,683 - - 1,683
Capital Fund (409)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (443)-$ - - - - - -
Reimbursement SDCs (442)-$ - - - - - -
Revenue Bonds (409)-$ - - - - - -
Unspecified Wastewater Funds -$ - - 1,683 - - 1,683
"A" Street Improvements 1 -$ - - - 620 - 620
Capital Fund (409)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (443)-$ - - - 216 - 216
Reimbursement SDCs (442)-$ - - - - - -
Revenue Bonds (409)-$ - - - - - -
Unspecified Wastewater Funds -$ - - - 404 - 404
"A" Street Improvements 2 -$ - - - 285 - 285
Capital Fund (409)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (443)-$ - - - 85 - 85
Reimbursement SDCs (442)-$ - - - - - -
Revenue Bonds (409)-$ - - - - - -
Unspecified Wastewater Funds -$ - - - 200 - 200
"A" Street Improvements 3 -$ - - - 180 - 180
Capital Fund (409)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (443)-$ - - - 72 - 72
Reimbursement SDCs (442)-$ - - - - - -
Revenue Bonds (409)-$ - - - - - -
Unspecified Wastewater Funds -$ - - - 108 - 108
Local Sewer Extensions -$ - - - 1,000 1,000 2,000
Capital Fund (409)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (443)-$ - - - - - -
Reimbursement SDCs (442)-$ - - - - - -
Revenue Bonds (409)-$ - - - - - -
Unspecified Wastewater Funds -$ - - - 1,000 1,000 2,000
Hayden Lo Pump Station -$ - - - 1,050 - 1,050
Capital Fund (409)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (443)-$ - - - - - -
Reimbursement SDCs (442)-$ - - - 1,050 - 1,050
Revenue Bonds (409)-$ - - - - - -
Unspecified Wastewater Funds -$ - - - - - -
River Glen Pump Station -$ - - - - 1,225 1,225
Capital Fund (409)-$ - - - - - -
Improvement SDCs (443)-$ - - - - 257 257
Reimbursement SDCs (442)-$ - - - - 400 400
Revenue Bonds (409)-$ - - - - - -
Unspecified Wastewater Funds -$ - - - - 568 568
Annual Totals 3,915$ 15,458$ 2,000$ 21,758$ 5,385$ 4,475$ 52,991
Capital Fund (409)1,465$ 1,000$ 1,000$ 1,000$ 1,675$ 1,595$ 6,270
Improvement SDCs (443)-$ -$ -$ 328$ 373$ 257$ 958
Reimbursement SDCs (442) 50$ 200$ 200$ 200$ 1,525$ 813$ 2,938
Revenue Bonds (409) 2,400$ 14,258$ -$ 9,300$ -$ -$ 23,558
Unspecified Wastewater Funds -$ -$ 800$ 10,930$ 1,812$ 1,810$ 15,352
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 117
This page left intentionally blank
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 118
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 119
Wastewater Funding Secured: Full
Account #850202
System Expansion, Upgrades, and Rehabilitation
Wet Weather Flow Management Plan 0%
Basin 7 Rehabilitation
Map ID-WW1
Project Driver:
Total Project Constructed Cost:
Project Trigger
Project Status: In Progress Construction completed in FY 2010
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
Council Direction
2008 Wastewater Master Plan
2001 Wet Weather Flow Management Plan
Regulatory Requirements
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering 100$ 100$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 1,260$ 1,260$
Other -$
Total 1,360$ 1,360$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$ -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 409 1,360$ 1,360$
User Fees 409 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 443 -$
SDCs, Reimb. 442 -$
Unspecified -$
Total 1,360$ 1,360$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: The cities of Eugene and Springfield are currently cooperating in the Wet Weather Flow
Management Plan (WWFMP) dealing with excess infiltration and inflow of rain and ground water into the sanitary sewer
system. The final required basins will be complete by January 2010. The work in Basin 7 associated with this effort
includes rehabilitation of approximately 9,000 linear feet of sanitary sewer pipe and associated manholes.
Justification: The project will deal with capacity problems in the sanitary wastewater system and treatment facilities in the
most cost-effective manner identified by the plan. This is necessary to enable the City to maintain compliance with federal
and state requirements to eliminate sanitary sewer overflows. Normal maintenance and inspections will continue as
schedule, thus there is a minimal net impact on the operations and maintenance budget.
Regulatory Requirements
$475,000
Springfield has an obligation to maintain the wastewater system such that all sanitary sewer overflow
(SSOs) are eliminated. This program is a response to the need to both reduce the peak flows to the
regional wastewater plant, but also eliminate SSOs.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 120
Wastewater Funding Secured: Full
Account #850203
System Expansion, Upgrades, and Rehabilitation
Wet Weather Flow Management Plan 0%
Basin 10A Rehabilitation
Map ID-WW2
Project Driver:
Total Project Constructed Cost:
Project Trigger
Project Status: In Progress Construction completed in FY 2010
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
Council Direction
2008 Wastewater Master Plan
2001 Wet Weather Flow Management Plan
Regulatory Requirements
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering 35$ 35$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 470$ 470
Other -$
Total 505$ 505$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 409 505$ 505$
User Fees 409 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 443 -$
SDCs, Reimb. 442 -$
Unspecified -$
Total 505$ 505$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: The cities of Eugene and Springfield are currently cooperating in the Wet Weather Flow
Management Plan (WWFMP) dealing with excess infiltration and inflow of rain and ground water into the sanitary sewer
system. The final required basins will be complete by January 2010. The work in Basin 10A associated with this effort
includes rehabilitation of approximately 4,600 linear feet of sanitary sewer pipe and associated manholes.
Justification: The project will deal with capacity problems in the sanitary wastewater system and treatment facilities in the
most cost-effective manner identified by the plan. This is necessary to enable the City to maintain compliance with federal
and state requirements to eliminate sanitary sewer overflows. Normal maintenance and inspections will continue as
schedule, thus there is a minimal net impact on the operations and maintenance budget.
Regulatory Requirements
$390,000
Springfield has an obligation to maintain the wastewater system such that all sanitary sewer overflow
(SSOs) are eliminated. This program is a response to the need to both reduce the peak flows to the
regional wastewater plant, but also eliminate SSOs.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 121
Wastewater Funding Secured: Full
Account #850204
System Expansion, Upgrades, and Rehabilitation
Wet Weather Flow Management Plan 0%
Basin 10B Rehabilitation
Map ID-WW3
Project Driver:
Total Project Constructed Cost:
Project Trigger
Project Status: In Progress Construction completed in FY 2010
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
Council Direction
2008 Wastewater Master Plan
2001 Wet Weather Flow Management Plan
Regulatory Requirements
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering 35$ 35$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 595$ 595
Other -$
Total 630$ 630$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 409 630$ 630$
User Fees 409 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 443 -$
SDCs, Reimb. 442 -$
Unspecified -$
Total 630$ 630$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: The cities of Eugene and Springfield are currently cooperating in the Wet Weather Flow
Management Plan (WWFMP) dealing with excess infiltration and inflow of rain and ground water into the sanitary sewer
system. The final required basins will be complete by January 2010. The work in Basin 10B associated with this effort
includes rehabilitation of approximately 5,300 linear feet of sanitary sewer pipe and associated manholes.
Justification: The project will deal with capacity problems in the sanitary wastewater system and treatment facilities in the
most cost-effective manner identified by the plan. This is necessary to enable the City to maintain compliance with federal
and state requirements to eliminate sanitary sewer overflows. Normal maintenance and inspections will continue as
schedule, thus there is a minimal net impact on the operations and maintenance budget.
Bond Sale
$430,000
Springfield has an obligation to maintain the wastewater system such that all sanitary sewer overflow
(SSOs) are eliminated. This program is a response to the need to both reduce the peak flows to the
regional wastewater plant, but also eliminate SSOs.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 122
Wastewater Funding Secured: Full
Account #85205
System Expansion, Upgrades, and Rehabilitation
Wet Weather Flow Management Plan 0%
Basin 19A Rehabilitation
Map ID-WW4
Project Driver:
Total Project Constructed Cost:
Project Trigger
Project Status: In Progress Construction completed in FY 2010
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
Council Direction
2008 Wastewater Master Plan
2001 Wet Weather Flow Management Plan
Regulatory Requirements
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering 50$ 50$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 1,180$ 1,180
Other -$
Total 1,230$ 1,230$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 409 1,230$ 1,230$
User Fees 409 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 443 -$
SDCs, Reimb. 442 -$
Unspecified -$
Total 1,230$ 1,230$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: The cities of Eugene and Springfield are currently cooperating in the Wet Weather Flow
Management Plan (WWFMP) dealing with excess infiltration and inflow of rain and groundwater into the sanitary sewer
system. The final required basins will be complete by January 2010. The work in Basin 19A associated with this effort
includes rehabilitation of approximately 6,000 linear feet of sanitary sewer pipe and associated manholes.
Justification: The project will deal with capacity problems in the sanitary wastewater system and treatment facilities in the
most cost-effective manner identified by the plan. This is necessary to enable the City to maintain compliance with federal
and state requirements to eliminate sanitary sewer overflows. Normal maintenance and inspections will continue as
schedule, thus there is a minimal net impact on the operations and maintenance budget.
Bond Sale
Not Available At Publishing
Springfield has an obligation to maintain the wastewater system such that all sanitary sewer overflow
(SSOs) are eliminated. This program is a response to the need to both reduce the peak flows to the
regional wastewater plant, but also eliminate SSOs.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 123
Wastewater Funding Secured: Full
Account # 850206
System Expansion, Upgrades, and Rehabilitation
Wet Weather Flow Management Plan 0%
Basin 19B Rehabilitation
Map ID-WW5
Project Driver:
Total Project Constructed Cost:
Project Trigger
Project Status: In Progress Construction completed in FY 2010
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
Council Direction
2008 Wastewater Master Plan
2001 Wet Weather Flow Management Plan
Regulatory Requirements
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering 35$ 35$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 571$ 571
Other -$
Total 606$ 606$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 409 606$ 606$
User Fees 409 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 443 -$
SDCs, Reimb. 442 -$
Unspecified -$
Total 606$ 606$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: The cities of Eugene and Springfield are currently cooperating in the Wet Weather Flow
Management Plan (WWFMP) dealing with excess infiltration and inflow of rain and ground water into the sanitary sewer
system. The final required basins will be complete by January 2010. The work in Basin 19B associated with this effort
includes rehabilitation of approximately 7,100 linear feet of sanitary sewer pipe and associated manholes.
Justification: The project will deal with capacity problems in the sanitary wastewater system and treatment facilities in the
most cost-effective manner identified by the plan. This is necessary to enable the City to maintain compliance with federal
and state requirements to eliminate sanitary sewer overflows. Normal maintenance and inspections will continue as
schedule, thus there is a minimal net impact on the operations and maintenance budget.
Bond Sale
Not Available At Publishing
Springfield has an obligation to maintain the wastewater system such that all sanitary sewer overflow
(SSOs) are eliminated. This program is a response to the need to both reduce the peak flows to the
regional wastewater plant, but also eliminate SSOs.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 124
Wastewater Funding Secured: Full
Account #850207
System Expansion, Upgrades, and Rehabilitation
Wet Weather Flow Management Plan 0%
Basin 19C Rehabilitation
Map ID-WW6
Project Driver:
Total Project Constructed Cost:
Project Trigger
Project Status: In Progress Construction completed in FY 2010
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
Council Direction
2008 Wastewater Master Plan
2001 Wet Weather Flow Management Plan
Regulatory Requirements
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering 74$ 74$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 1,666$ 1,666
Other -$
Total 1,740$ 1,740$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 420 1,740$ 1,740$
User Fees 409 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 443 -$
SDCs, Reimb. 442 -$
Unspecified -$
Total 1,740$ 1,740$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: The cities of Eugene and Springfield are currently cooperating in the Wet Weather Flow
Management Plan (WWFMP) dealing with excess infiltration and inflow of rain and ground water into the sanitary sewer
system. The final required basins will be complete by January 2010. The work in Basin 19C associated with this effort
includes rehabilitation of approximately 8,000 linear feet of sanitary sewer pipe and associated manholes.
Justification: The project will deal with capacity problems in the sanitary wastewater system and treatment facilities in the
most cost-effective manner identified by the plan. This is necessary to enable the City to maintain compliance with federal
and state requirements to eliminate sanitary sewer overflows. Normal maintenance and inspections will continue as
schedule, thus there is a minimal net impact on the operations and maintenance budget.
Bond Sale
Not Available At Publishing
Springfield has an obligation to maintain the wastewater system such that all sanitary sewer overflow
(SSOs) are eliminated. This program is a response to the need to both reduce the peak flows to the
regional wastewater plant, but also eliminate SSOs.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 125
Wastewater Funding Secured: Full
Account #850208
System Expansion, Upgrades, and Rehabilitation
Wet Weather Flow Management Plan 0%
Marcola Interceptor
Map ID-WW7
Project Driver:
Total Project Constructed Cost:
Project Trigger
Project Status: In Progress Construction completed in FY 2010
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
Council Direction
2008 Wastewater Master Plan
2001 Wet Weather Flow Management Plan
Regulatory Requirements
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering 75$ 75$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 825$ 825
Other -$
Total 900$ 900$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs
Personnel Costs
Total -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 420 900$ 900$
User Fees 409 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 443 -$
SDCs, Reimb. 442 -$
Unspecified -$
Total 900$ 900$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: The cities of Eugene and Springfield are currently cooperating in the Wet Weather Flow
Management Plan (WWFMP) dealing with excess infiltration and inflow of rain and ground water into the sanitary sewer
system. The final required basins will be complete by January 2010. This work is to be completed in sanitary sewer basin
7 and will rehabilitate approximately 2,500 linear feet of 42 inch Marcola Interceptor.
Justification: The project will deal with capacity problems in the sanitary wastewater system and treatment facilities in the
most cost-effective manner identified by the plan. This is necessary to enable the City to maintain compliance with federal
and state requirements to eliminate sanitary sewer overflows. Normal maintenance and inspections will continue as
schedule, thus there is a minimal net impact on the operations and maintenance budget.
Bond Sale
Not Available At Publishing
Springfield has an obligation to maintain the wastewater system such that all sanitary sewer overflow
(SSOs) are eliminated. This program is a response to the need to both reduce the peak flows to the
regional wastewater plant, but also eliminate SSOs.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 126
Wastewater Funding Secured: Full
Account #850210
System Expansion, Upgrades, and Rehabilitation
Wet Weather Flow Management Plan 0%
Basins 49 & 50 Rehabilitation
Map ID-WW8
Project Driver:
Total Project Constructed Cost:
Project Trigger
Project Status: In Progress Construction completed in FY 2010
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
Council Direction
2008 Wastewater Master Plan
2001 Wet Weather Flow Management Plan
Regulatory Requirements
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering 150$ 150$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 450$ 450
Other -$
Total 600$ 600$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 409 600$ 600$
User Fees 409 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 443 -$
SDCs, Reimb. 442 -$
Unspecified -$
Total 600$ 600$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: The cities of Eugene and Springfield are currently cooperating in the Wet Weather Flow
Management Plan (WWFMP) dealing with excess infiltration and inflow of rain and ground water into the sanitary sewer
system. The final required basins will be complete by January 2010. The work in Basins 49 and 50 associated with this
effort includes rehabilitation of approximately 3,000 linear feet of sanitary sewer pipe and associated manholes.
Justification: The project will deal with capacity problems in the sanitary wastewater system and treatment facilities in the
most cost-effective manner identified by the plan. This is necessary to enable the City to maintain compliance with federal
and state requirements to eliminate sanitary sewer overflows. Normal maintenance and inspections will continue as
schedule, thus there is a minimal net impact on the operations and maintenance budget.
Bond Sale
Not Available At Publishing
Springfield has an obligation to maintain the wastewater system such that all sanitary sewer overflow
(SSOs) are eliminated. This program is a response to the need to both reduce the peak flows to the
regional wastewater plant, but also eliminate SSOs.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 127
Wastewater Funding Secured: Full
Account #: 850209
System Expansion, Upgrades, and Rehabilitation
Wet Weather Flow Management Plan 0%
Basins 8, 18, & 20 Rehabilitation
Map ID-WW9
Project Driver:
Total Project Constructed Cost:
Project Trigger
Project Status: In Progress Construction completed in FY 2010
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
Council Direction
2008 Wastewater Master Plan
2001 Wet Weather Flow Management Plan
Regulatory Requirements
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering 75$ 75$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 645$ 645
Other -$
Total 720$ 720$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 409 720$ 720$
User Fees 409 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 443 -$
SDCs, Reimb. 442 -$
Unspecified -$
Total 720$ 720$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: The cities of Eugene and Springfield are currently cooperating in the Wet Weather Flow
Management Plan (WWFMP) dealing with excess infiltration and inflow of rain and ground water into the sanitary sewer
system. The final required basins will be complete by January 2010. The work in Basins 8, 18, and 20 associated with
this effort includes rehabilitation of approximately 6,000 linear feet of sanitary sewer pipe and associated manholes.
Justification: The project will deal with capacity problems in the sanitary wastewater system and treatment facilities in the
most cost-effective manner identified by the plan. This is necessary to enable the City to maintain compliance with federal
and state requirements to eliminate sanitary sewer overflows. Normal maintenance and inspections will continue as
schedule, thus there is a minimal net impact on the operations and maintenance budget.
Bond Sale
Not Available At Publishing
Springfield has an obligation to maintain the wastewater system such that all sanitary sewer overflow
(SSOs) are eliminated. This program is a response to the need to both reduce the peak flows to the
regional wastewater plant, but also eliminate SSOs.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 128
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 129
Wastewater Funding Secured: Full
Account #850105
System Expansion, Upgrades, and Rehabilitation
Jasper Trunk Line Extension 81%
Map ID-WW10
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
Council Direction
2008 Wastewater Master Plan
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning 200$ 200$
Engineering 750$ 350$ 400$
Land/Right of Way 500$ 500$
Construction 9,800$ 900$ 8,900$
Other -$
Total 11,250$ 1,950$ -$ -$ 9,300$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs 33$ -$ 6$ 6$ 7$ 7$ 7$
Personnel Costs 105$ -$ 20$ 20$ 21$ 21$ 23$
Total 138$ -$ 26$ 26$ 28$ 28$ 30$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 409 11,050$ 1,750$ 9,300$
User Fees 409 200$ 200$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 443 -$
SDCs, Reimb. 442 -$
Unspecified -$
Total 11,250$ 1,950$ -$ -$ 9,300$ -$ -$ -$
Design is underway, construction is deferred until 2013 pending funding. The original target was to
have the Trunk Sewer in service in 2010.
Development in the Jasper/Natron Area and the need to decommission 3 pump stations and avoid
costly system upgrades and maintenance activities.
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: Installation of 18,000 feet of 27 to 10 inch diameter sewer along Jasper Road from 42nd Street to
Natron and the Urban Growth Boundary. The City is planning on borrowing the total of the project cost and collecting the
developer share through agreements and reimbursements upon connection to the system. Wastewater trunk lines are
typically cleaned annually and video inspected by maintenance every five years. The additional impact on the operations
and maintenance budget are shown below.
Justification: The Jasper sewer extension project will provide sewer service to areas of the urban fringe which are
currently not serviced. The Jasper Road Extension project from 57th and Main Street to Brand S Road and proposals for
residential and industrial development in this area will stimulate the need for sewers. 100% of project costs are proposed
to be funded with City funds, with an estimated 50% to be reimbursed to the City by grants, developer contributions, or
assessments. Decommissioning of three existing pump stations is included in this project. Given completion of the Bob
Straub Parkway, it is a priority to extend service to this area to meet anticipated development needs. The project is
currently planned for construction in 2013. However, the Lucerne Meadows Pump Station, which will be decommissioned
during construction of this trunk sewer, is at the end of its useful life and needs significant upgrades to continue to
function. These upgrades are currently estimated to cost up to $80,000. Staff is evaluating the alternative for keeping this
pump station operational until the trunk sewer is constructed.
Total Project Constructed Cost:
Springfield desires to provide services to areas within the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) to promote
future urban development. The Wastewater Master Plan prioritized this project for construction by
2010.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 130
Wastewater Funding Secured: No
Account #850215
Construction and Preservation
Cherokee Drive Sewer 0%
Map ID-WW11
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
Conforms to City Ordinance regarding formation and operation of an LID. Initiated by Council Resolution.
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering 50$ 50$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 300$ 300$
Other -$
Total 350$ 350$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs 12$ 1$ 1$ 2$ 2$ 3$ 3$
Personnel Costs 12$ 1$ 1$ 2$ 2$ 3$ 3$
Total 24$ 2$ 2$ 4$ 4$ 6$ 6$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt. 419 300$ 300$
Revenue Bonds 409 -$
User Fees 409 50$ 50$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp.443 -$
SDCs, Reimb. 442 -$
Unspecified -$
Total 350$ 350$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Design Phase. Council has initiated project. Design is being completed by collaboration between Capital
Projects and Land Development section of Public Works
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: Construct the public wastewater main and laterals into a portion of the Douglas Garden neighborhood that is
currently not served by the public system.
Justification: This project was initiated by City Council after being presented with a petition for a Local Improvement District (LID)
from a majority of property owners in the neighborhood requesting the project. This project will provide public wastewater access to
44 homes along Cherokee Drive and S. 38th Street that are annexed and within Springfield City limits, but do not have public
wastewater service available. These properties are currently on septic systems, and at least one has failed, with others likely
needing replacement or repair. This project will allow properties to decommission septic systems and connect to a public
wastewater system. This project will provide for the public wastewater line to be installed at one time and allow the cost to be
spread over the benefitting property owners instead of each home having to extend and connect to the public system individually as
septic failures occur.
Citizen driven - 50% or more of residents signed petition to form LID, council initiates project after receiving
necessary signatures.
Total Project Constructed Cost:
Council action from citizen request. A private citizen in the Douglas Garden neighborhood circulated a
petition to form a local improvement district for the purpose of installing public sewer lines to benefit the
area.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 131
This page left intentionally blank
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 132
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 133
Wastewater Funding Secured: Partial
Account #830010
System Expansion, Upgrades, and Rehabilitation
Sewer Wet Weather Flow Abatement 0%
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:Accumulating funds for projects as developed.
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
Council Direction
2008 Wastewater Master Plan
2001 Wet Weather Flow Management Plan
Regulatory Requirements
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering 1,265$ 500$ 500$ 90$ 125$ 200$ 200$ 150$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 6,581$ 513$ 746$ 1,160$ 1,125$ 1,350$ 1,350$ 850$
Other -$
Total 7,846$ 1,013$ 1,246$ 1,250$ 1,250$ 1,550$ 1,550$ 1,000$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 409 -$
User Fees 409 6,820$ 1,013$ 1,000$ 1,000$ 1,000$ 1,250$ 1,070$ 1,500$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 443 -$
SDCs, Reimb. 442 -$
Unspecified 180$ 180$
Total 7,000$ 1,013$ 1,000$ 1,000$ 1,000$ 1,250$ 1,250$ 1,500$
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: The City of Springfield's obligations in the 2001 Wet Weather Flow Management Plan (WWFMP)
were completed by January 2010; however it is necessary for this program to continue as a new WWFMP report will be
completed by the end of 2010, and it is expected that a new project list will be generated which will need to be completed
over the next decade.
Justification: This program deals with capacity problems in the wastewater system and treatment facilities in the most
cost-effective manner identified by the plan. This is necessary to enable the City to maintain compliance with federal and
state requirements to eliminate sanitary sewer overflows (SSOs) . Normal maintenance and inspections will continue as
schedule, thus there is a minimal net impact on the operations and maintenance budget.
Regulatory requirements.
Springfield has an obligation under the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) order to maintain the
wastewater system such that all sanitary sewer overflow (SSOs) are eliminated as well as assuring
public health and safety. This program is a response to the need to both reduce the peak flows to the
regional wastewater plant, as well as address all other requirements.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 134
Wastewater Funding Secured: Partial
Account #850007
System Expansion, Upgrades, and Rehabilitation
Miscellaneous Wastewater System Repair 0%
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status: Accumulating funds for projects as developed.
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
Council Direction
2008 Wastewater Master Plan
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering 790$ 20$ 20$ 150$ 150$ 150$ 150$ 150$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 4,662$ 232$ 180$ 850$ 850$ 850$ 850$ 850$
Other -$
Total 5,452$ 252$ 200$ 1,000$ 1,000$ 1,000$ 1,000$ 1,000$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 409 -$
User Fees 409 1,302$ 202$ 425$ 525$ 150$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 443 -$
SDCs, Reimb. 442 1,588$ 50$ 200$ 200$ 200$ 475$ 413$ 50$
Unspecified 2,562$ 800$ 800$ 100$ 62$ 800$
Total 5,452$ 252$ 200$ 1,000$ 1,000$ 1,000$ 1,000$ 1,000$
Regulatory requirements.
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: This project involves the contracted repair or replacement of sanitary sewers that require either
emergency rehabilitation as a result of Sanitary Sewer Overflows or the prospect of impending system failures. The PW
Maintenance Division addresses an average of four (4) emergency repairs of this nature annually.
Justification: The project will repair and/or replace pipe which has reached the end of its useful life or is otherwise
causing problems within the collection system. This is necessary to enable the City to maintain compliance with federal
and state requirements to eliminate sanitary sewer overflows (SSO). Normal maintenance and inspections will continue as
schedule, thus there is a minimal net impact on the operations and maintenance budget.
Springfield has an obligation under the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) order to maintain the
wastewater system such that all sanitary sewer overflow (SSOs) are eliminated as well as assuring
public health and safety. This program provides funding for maintenance and engineering to respond
to any system failures or issues quickly and efficiently as they arise or are identified.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 135
Wastewater Funding Secured: Yes
Account #
System Expansion, Upgrades, and Rehabilitation
Sanitary Basin #22 Rehabilitation 0%
Map ID-WW14
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:Planning and Design
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
2001 Wet Weather Flow Management Plan
2008 Wastewater Master Plan
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning 150$ 100$ 50$
Engineering 700$ 300$ 400$
Land/Right of Way 150$ 150$
Construction $4,750 4,750$
Other $450 100$ 350$
Total 6,200$ 650$ 5,550$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 409 6,200$ 650$ 5,550$
User Fees 409 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 443 -$
SDCs, Reimb. 442 -$
Unspecified -$
Total 6,200$ 650$ 5,550$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Regulatory requirements and aged facilities.
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: The 2008 Wastewater Master Plan identified Sanitary Basin #22 as a primary source of Infiltration and
Inflow (I/I), and thus a priority for rehabilitation. This basin has also been identified as a high risk for sanitary sewer overflows.
Justification: The project will deal with capacity problems in the sanitary sewer system and treatment facilities. This is
necessary to enable the City to maintain compliance with federal and state requirements to eliminate sanitary sewer
overflows. Normal maintenance and inspections will continue as schedule, thus there is a minimal net impact on the
operations and maintenance budget.
Springfield has an obligation under the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) order to maintain the
wastewater system such that all sanitary sewer overflow (SSOs) are eliminated as well as assuring public
health and safety. This program is a response to the need to both reduce the peak flows to the regional
wastewater plant, as well as address all other requirements. The Wastewater Master Plan prioritized this
project for completion by 2010, it was deferred as the EPA order put an emphasis on other basins.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 136
Wastewater Funding Secured: Yes
Account #
System Expansion, Upgrades, and Rehabilitation
10th and "N" Street Upgrade 0%
Map ID-WW15
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:Deferral of the Jasper Trunk construction allows this project to be shifted from 2013 to 2011.
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
2008 Wastewater Master Plan
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering 1,396$ 1,396$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 2,539$ 2,539$
Other -$
Total 3,935$ -$ 3,935$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs 39$ 5$ 6$ 6$ 7$ 7$ 8$
Personnel Costs 39$ 5$ 6$ 6$ 7$ 7$ 8$
Total 78$ 10$ 12$ 12$ 14$ 14$ 8$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 409 3,935$ 3,935$
User Fees 409 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 443 -$
SDCs, Reimb. 442 -$
Other -$
Total 3,935$ -$ 3,935$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Regulatory requirements.
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: Construct approximately 6,500 linear feet of 24 inch wastewater pipe parallel to the existing 24 inch
wastewater pipe. This project will require the line to be bored under Highway 126. Wastewater trunk lines are typically
cleaned annually and video inspected every five years, and increasing the City's asset inventory will increase the City's
maintenance work load and need.
Justification: The project will deal with capacity problems in the wastewater collection system and treatment facilities.
This is necessary to enable the City to maintain compliance with federal and state requirements to eliminate sanitary
sewer overflows.
Springfield has an obligation under the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) order to maintain the
wastewater system such that all sanitary sewer overflow (SSOs) are eliminated as well as assuring
public health and safety. The Wastewater Master Plan prioritized this project for completion by 2010.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 137
Wastewater Funding Secured: Yes
Account #
System Expansion, Upgrades, and Rehabilitation
58th Street Flow Control Facility 12%
Map ID-WW16
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:Deferral of the Jasper Trunk construction allows this project to be shifted from 2013 to 2011.
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
2008 Wastewater Master Plan
Compliance with Environmental Protection Agency enforcement order
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering 200$ 200$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 1,500$ 1,500$
Other 495$ 495$
Total 2,195$ -$ 2,195$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs 14$ 2$ 2$ 2$ 2$ 3$ 3$
Personnel Costs 46$ 6$ 6$ 8$ 8$ 9$ 9$
Total 60$ 8$ 8$ 10$ 10$ 12$ 12$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 409 2,195$ 2,195$
User Fees 409 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 443 -$
SDCs, Reimb. 442 -$
Other -$
Total 2,195$ -$ 2,195$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Regulatory requirements.
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: Construct approximately 4,900 linear feet of 15 inch wastewater pipe as a wet weather flow control
facility. This project will cross the Bob Straub Parkway near Main Street and then turn north at 58th Street eventually tying
into the Thurston Road wastewater trunk line. Wastewater trunk lines are typically cleaned annually and video inspected
every five years, and increasing the City's asset inventory will increase the City's maintenance work load and need.
Justification: The project will deal with capacity problems in the wastewater collection system and treatment facilities
during wet weather and peak flow conditions. This is necessary to enable the City to maintain compliance with federal
and state requirements to eliminate sanitary sewer overflows.
Springfield has an obligation under the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) order to maintain the
wastewater system such that all sanitary sewer overflow (SSOs) are eliminated as well as assuring
public health and safety. The Wastewater Master Plan prioritized this project for completion by 2011.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 138
Wastewater Funding Secured: Yes
Account #
System Expansion, Upgrades, and Rehabilitation
7th/8th Street Wastewater Pipe Replacement 0%
Map ID-WW17
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:Deferral of the Jasper Trunk construction allows this project to be shifted from 2013 to 2011.
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
2008 Wastewater Master Plan
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering 169$ 169$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 307$ 307$
Other -$
Total 476$ -$ 476$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 409 476$ 476$
User Fees 409 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 443 -$
SDCs, Reimb. 442 -$
Other -$
Total 476$ -$ 476$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Regulatory requirements.
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: This Project begins at the intersection of Centennial Boulevard between 7th and 8th Street and
replaces approximately 800 linear feet of 12 inch wastewater pipe to the north with a 21 inch wastewater pipe to eliminate
overflow conditions.
Justification: The project will deal with capacity problems in the wastewater collection system and treatment facilities
during wet weather and peak flow conditions. This project is necessary to enable the City to maintain compliance with
federal and state requirements to eliminate sanitary sewer overflows (SSO).
Springfield has an obligation under the Evironmental Protection Agency (EPA) order to maintain the
wastewater system such that all sanitary sewer overflow (SSOs) are eliminated as well as assuring
public health and safety. The Wastewater Master Plan prioritized this project for completion by 2011.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 139
Wastewater Funding Secured: Yes
Account #
System Expansion, Upgrades, and Rehabilitation
Main Street Improvements Unit 1 20%
Map ID-WW18
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:Deferral of the Jasper Trunk construction allows this project to be shifted from 2013 to 2011.
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
Council Direction
2008 Wastewater Master Plan
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning 25$ 25$
Engineering 721$ 721$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 1,356$ 1,356$
Other -$
Total 2,102$ -$ 2,102$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 409 2,102$ 2,102$
User Fees 409 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 443 -$
SDCs, Reimb. 442 -$
Unspecified -$
Total 2,102$ -$ 2,102$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Regulatory requirements and development activity in the east Springfield area.
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: This Project begins at 59th Street and replaces approximately 3600 linear feet of 15 and 18 inch
wastewater pipe to the east with a 24 inch wastewater pipe to provide capacity for future growth. To avoid capacity issues
The 2008 Wastewater Master Plan identifies a need to upgrade to 21 inch pipe for existing land use; however a 24 inch
pipe is recommended to provide for future growth. The Wastewater Master Plan recommends additional flow monitoring
prior to preliminary design.
Justification: This project was identified as a system need to provide capacity for future growth within the existing land
use designations in the east Springfield area.
Springfield has an obligation under the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) order to maintain the
wastewater system such that all sanitary sewer overflow (SSOs) are eliminated as well as assuring
public health and safety. Also, Springfield desires to provide services to areas within the Urban
Growth Boundary (UGB) to promote future urban development. The Wastewater Master Plan
prioritized this project for completion by 2011.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 140
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 141
Wastewater Funding Secured: No
Account #
System Expansion, Upgrades, and Rehabilitation
Franklin Boulevard System Expansion 100%
Map ID-WW19
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:Deferred pending funding
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
Council Direction
2008 Wastewater Master Plan
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning 75$ 75$
Engineering 300$ 300$
Land/Right of Way 250$ 250$
Construction 2,373$ 2,373$
Other -$ -$
Total 2,998$ - - - 2,998 - - -
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs 24$ 3$ 3$ 4$ 4$ 5$ 5$
Personnel Costs 48$ 7$ 7$ 8$ 8$ 9$ 9$
Total 72$ 10$ 10$ 12$ 12$ 14$ 14$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 409 -$
User Fees 409 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 443 328$ 328$
SDCs, Reimb. 442 -$
Unspecified 2,670$ 2,670$
Total 2,998$ -$ -$ -$ 2,998$ -$ -$ -$
Development activity in the Glenwood area.
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: This Project expands the Glenwood wastewater system from the exiting 30 inch trunk line in
Franklin Boulevard south with approximately 3,900 feet of 15 inch pipe and 2,400 feet of 8 inch pipe. Wastewater trunk
lines are typically cleaned annually and video inspected maintenance every five years.
Justification: This project was identified as a system need to provide capacity for future growth within the existing land
use designations in the Glenwood area.
Springfield desires to provide services to areas within the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) to promote
future urban development. The Wastewater Master Plan prioritized this project for completion by 2009.
Additionally, should the City receive federal stimulus dollars for the Franklin Boulevard Project, this will
become a priority as much of the new pipe will be under the reconstructed roadway.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 142
Wastewater Funding Secured: No
Account #
System Expansion, Upgrades, and Rehabilitation
Nugget Way Pump Station 0%
Map ID-WW20
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status: Deferred pending funding
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
2008 Wastewater Master Plan
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning 50$ 50$
Engineering 300$ 300$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 1,043$ 1,043$
Other 50$ 50$
Total 1,443$ -$ -$ -$ 1,443$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs 18$ 3$ 3$ 3$ 3$ 3$ 3$
Total 18$ -$ 3$ 3$ 3$ 3$ 3$ 3$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 409 -$
User Fees 409 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 443 -$
SDCs, Reimb. 442 -$
Unspecified 1,443$ 1,443$
Total 1,443$ -$ -$ -$ 1,443$ -$ -$ -$
Regulatory Requirements and Facilities Master Plan
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: This project is necessary to maintain system capacity for existing users and avoid the potential for
sanitary sewer overflows (SSO). The 2008 Wastewater Master Plan recommends that the existing pump station be
upgraded to provide 2 pumps with a minimum of 911 gpm capacity each. The Master Plan further recommends additional
flow monitoring prior to preliminary design to determine actual capacity requirements and upgrades. Additional funding is
needed in the operations budget for maintenance costs to allow for flow monitoring to occur. Also, completion of the
Franklin Expansion will most likely allow for decommissioning of this pump station as well as reducing the future
maintenance burden.
Justification: The project will deal with capacity problems in the sanitary sewer system and treatment facilities. This is
necessary to enable the City to maintain compliance with federal and state requirements to eliminate SSO.
Springfield has an obligation under the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) order to maintain the
wastewater system such that all sanitary sewer overflow (SSOs) are eliminated as well as assuring
public health and safety. The Wastewater Master Plan prioritized this project for completion by 2009.
Currently the pump station is not experiencing problems, and flow monitoring will be done to determine
if and when future upgrades will be needed.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 143
Wastewater Funding Secured: No
Account #
System Expansion, Upgrades, and Rehabilitation
Peacehealth/Riverbed Pump Station 100%
Map ID-WW21
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
2008 Wastewater Master Plan
Sanitary Sewer Study for RiverBend Subdivision (2005)
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering 956$ 956$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 2,233$ 2,233$
Other -$ -$
Total 3,189$ -$ -$ -$ 3,189$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs 77$ 11$ 11$ 11$ 11$ 11$ 11$ 11$
Personnel Costs -$
Total 77$ 11$ 11$ 11$ 11$ 11$ 11$ 11$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 409 -$
User Fees 409 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 443 -$
SDCs, Reimb. 442 -$
Unspecified 3,189$ 3,189$
Total 3,189$ -$ -$ -$ 3,189$ -$ -$ -$
Deferred pending funding
Development within the RiverBend Area - capacity issues; and/or construction of the NE link between
RiverBend Drive and International Way.
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: This project is for the engineering and construction of a pump station in the RiverBend area. The
need for the pump station will be driven by development within the RiverBend campus area and as defined in the Sanitary
Sewer Study for RiverBend Subdivision.
Justification: This project was identified as a system need to provide capacity for future growth within the existing land
use designations in the RiverBend area.
Springfield desires to provide services to areas within the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) to promote
future urban development. The Wastewater Master Plan prioritized this project for completion by 2012.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 144
Wastewater Funding Secured: No
Account #
System Expansion, Upgrades, and Rehabilitation
Main Street Improvements Unit 2 25%
Map ID-WW22
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
2008 Wastewater Master Plan
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering 406$ 406$
Land/Right of Way -$ -$
Construction 739$ 739$
Other -$ -$
Total 1,145$ -$ -$ -$ 1,145$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 409 -$
User Fees 409 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 443 -$
SDCs, Reimb. 442 -$
Unspecified 1,145$ 1,145$
Total 1,145$ -$ -$ -$ 1,145$ -$ -$ -$
Deferred pending funding
Development activity in the east Springfield area.
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: This Project begins at 69th Street and replaces approximately 2,300 linear feet of 12 inch
wastewater pipe to the east with a 18 inch wastewater pipe to provide capacity for future growth.
Justification: This project was identified as a system need to provide capacity for future growth within the existing land
use designations in the east Springfield area.
Springfield desires to provide services to areas within the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) to promote
future urban development. The Wastewater Master Plan prioritized this project for completion by 2012.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 145
Wastewater Funding Secured: No
Account #
System Expansion, Upgrades, and Rehabilitation
McKenzie Highway Expansion 100%
Map ID-WW23
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
2008 Wastewater Master Plan
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering 600$ 600$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 1,083$ 1,083$
Other -$
Total 1,683$ -$ -$ -$ 1,683$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs 3$ 3$ 3$ 4$ 4$ 5$ 5$
Personnel Costs 3$ 3$ 3$ 4$ 4$ 5$ 5$
Total 6$ 6$ 6$ 8$ 8$ 10$ 10$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 409 -$
User Fees 409 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 443 -$
SDCs, Reimb. 442 -$
Unspecified 1,683$ 1,683$
Total 1,683$ -$ -$ -$ 1,683$ -$ -$ -$
Deferred pending funding and development activity
Development within the east Springfield Area - capacity issues.
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: This project extends the wastewater system from the existing 21 inch trunk line east along the
McKenzie Highway with approximately 2,000 feet of 10 inch pipe and 2,000 feet of 12 inch pipe. Wastewater trunk lines
are typically cleaned annually and video inspected every five years, and increasing the City's asset inventory will increase
the City's maintenance work load and need.
Justification: This project was identified as a system need to provide capacity for future growth within the existing land
use designations in the east Springfield area.
Springfield desires to provide services to areas within the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) to promote
future urban development. The Wastewater Master Plan prioritized this project for completion by 2012.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 146
Wastewater Funding Secured: No
Account #
System Expansion, Upgrades, and Rehabilitation
"A" Street Improvements Unit 1 35%
Map ID-WW24
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
2008 Wastewater Master Plan
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering 200$ 200$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 420$ 420$
Other -$
Total 620$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 620$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 409 -$
User Fees 409 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 443 216$ 216$
SDCs, Reimb. 442 -$
Unspecified 404$ 404$
Total 620$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 620$ -$ -$
Deferred pending funding and development activity
Development within the east Springfield Area - capacity issues.
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: This project replaces approximately 1,000 feet of an exiting 12 inch wastewater pipe with a 15 inch
pipe from 66th Street east along "A" Street. Continued flow monitoring is recommended prior to preliminary design.
Justification: This project was identified as a system need to provide capacity for future growth within the existing land
use designations in the east Springfield area.
Springfield desires to provide services to areas within the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) to promote
future urban development. The Wastewater Master Plan prioritized this project for completion by 2013.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 147
Wastewater Funding Secured: No
Account #
System Expansion, Upgrades, and Rehabilitation
"A" Street Improvements Unit 2 30%
Map ID-WW25
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
2008 Wastewater Master Plan
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering 90$ 90$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 195$ 195$
Other -$
Total 285$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 285$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 409 -$
User Fees 409 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 443 85$ 85$
SDCs, Reimb. 442 -$
Unspecified 200$ 200$
Total 285$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 285$ -$ -$
Deferred pending funding and development activity
Development within the east Springfield Area - capacity issues.
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: This project replaces approximately 529 feet of an exiting 10 inch wastewater pipe with a 12 inch
pipe from 69th Street east along "A" Street. Continued flow monitoring is recommended prior to preliminary design.
Justification: This project was identified as a system need to provide capacity for future growth within the existing land
use designations in the east Springfield area.
Springfield desires to provide services to areas within the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) to promote
future urban development. The Wastewater Master Plan prioritized this project for completion by 2013.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 148
Wastewater Funding Secured: No
Account #
System Expansion, Upgrades, and Rehabilitation
"A" Street Improvements Unit 3 40%
Map ID-WW26
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
2008 Wastewater Master Plan
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering 65$ 65$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 115$ 115$
Other -$
Total 180$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 180$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 409 -$
User Fees 409 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 443 72$ 72$
SDCs, Reimb. 442 -$
Unspecified 108$ 108$
Total 180$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 180$ -$ -$
Deferred pending funding and development activity
Development within the east Springfield Area - capacity issues.
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: This project replaces approximately 325 feet of an exiting 10 inch wastewater pipe with a 12 inch
pipe from 70th Street east along "A" Street. Continued flow monitoring is recommended prior to preliminary design.
Justification: This project was identified as a system need to provide capacity for future growth within the existing land
use designations in the east Springfield area.
Springfield desires to provide services to areas within the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) to promote
future urban development. The Wastewater Master Plan prioritized this project for completion by 2013.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 149
Wastewater Funding Secured: No
Account #
System Expansion, Upgrades, and Rehabilitation
Local Sewer Extensions 0%
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
Council Goal to provide for development.
2008 Wastewater Master Plan
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning 150$ 50$ 50$ 50$
Engineering 450$ 150$ 150$ 150$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 2,400$ 800$ 800$ 800$
Other -$
Total 3,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 1,000$ 1,000$ 1,000$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 409 -$
User Fees 409 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 443 -$
SDCs, Reimb. 442 -$
Unspecified 3,000$ 1,000$ 1,000$ 1,000$
Total 3,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 1,000$ 1,000$ 1,000$
Deferred pending funding
Council decision - Annexation of developed areas within the UGB and/or petitions for Local
Improvement Districts
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: Within the City of Springfield's Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) several areas exist that are fully
developed, but lack wastewater service. The project would fund extending wastewater pipes to these areas upon
annexation with some or all of the cost possibly reimbursable through assessments. Increased infrastructure will increase
the need for more maintenance personnel which impacts the wastewater operations budget. The estimated increase in the
wastewater operations cost is $1,600 per 1,000 feet of new pipe.
Justification: The City will need to provide wastewater service to all development existing and future within the UGB.
Environmental issues, or failing septic tanks within these un-annexed areas within the UGB.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 150
Wastewater Funding Secured: No
Account #
System Expansion, Upgrades, and Rehabilitation
Hayden Lo Pump Station 0%
Map ID-WW28
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
2008 Wastewater Master Plan
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning 50$ 50$
Engineering 150$ 150$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 600$ 600$
Other 250$ 250$
Total 1,050$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 1,050$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs 2$ 1$ 1$
Personnel Costs 4$ 2$ 2$
Total 6$ -$ -$ -$ 3$ 3$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 409 -$
User Fees 409 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 443 -$
SDCs, Reimb. 442 1,050$ 1,050$
Unspecified -$
Total 1,050$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 1,050$ -$ -$
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Justification: The project will deal with capacity problems in the sanitary sewer system and treatment facilities. This is
necessary to enable the City to maintain compliance with federal and state requirements to eliminate SSO.
Regulatory Requirements - Facilities Master Plan, Protection of Public health and safety
Deferred pending funding
Project Description: This project is necessary to maintain system capacity for existing users and avoid the potential for
sanitary sewer overflows (SSOs). The 2008 Wastewater Master Plan recommends that the existing pump station be
upgraded to provide 2 pumps with a minimum of 494 gpm capacity each. The Master Plan further recommends additional
flow monitoring prior to preliminary design to determine actual capacity requirements and upgrades. Additional funding is
needed in the operations budget for maintenance costs to allow for flow monitoring to occur.
Springfield has an obligation to maintain the wastewater system such that all SSO are eliminated. This
is project necessary to enable the City to maintain compliance with federal and state requirements to
eliminate sanitary sewer overflows. The Wastewater Master Plan prioritized this project for completion
by 2014.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 151
Wastewater Funding Secured: No
Account #
System Expansion, Upgrades, and Rehabilitation
River Glen Pump Station 21%
Map ID-WW29
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
2008 Wastewater Master Plan
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning 50$ 50$
Engineering 200$ 200$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 700$ 700$
Other 275$ 275$
Total 1,225$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 1,225$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs 2$ 1$ 1$
Personnel Costs 4$ 2$ 2$
Total 6$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 3$ 3$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 409 -$
User Fees 409 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 443 257$ 257$
SDCs, Reimb. 442 400$ 400$
Unspecified 568$ 568$
Total 1,225$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 1,225$ -$
Deferred pending funding
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Justification: The project will deal with capacity problems in the sanitary sewer system and treatment facilities. This is
necessary to enable the City to maintain compliance with federal and state requirements to eliminate SSO.
Project Driver: Springfield has an obligation to maintain the wastewater system such that all SSO are eliminated. This is
project necessary to enable the City to maintain compliance with federal and state requirements to eliminate sanitary
sewer overflows. The Wastewater Master Plan prioritized this project for completion by 2015.
Regulatory Requirements - Facilities Master Plan
Project Description: This project is necessary to maintain system capacity for existing users and avoid the potential for
sanitary sewer overflows (SSO). The 2008 Wastewater Master Plan recommends that the existing pump station be
upgraded to provide 2 pumps with a minimum of 664 gpm capacity each. The Master Plan further recommends additional
flow monitoring prior to preliminary design to determine actual capacity requirements and upgrades. Additional funding is
needed in the operations budget for maintenance costs to allow for flow monitoring to occur.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 152
BUILDINGS AND PROPERTY
Overview
The Buildings and Property section covers a variety of projects that include; construction of new
facilities; maintenance, repair or renovation of existing facilities; and the demolition of unnecessary or
un‐maintainable facilities. As the City of Springfield grows, so does the need for municipal public
services. These services come with an associated infrastructure that requires continual monitoring,
maintenance, replacement and/or additions. In order to catch up and stay current, Buildings and
Property projects will continue to be a priority.
Numerous other projects are included in the Building Preservation sheet. This project addresses
ongoing maintenance issues as well as maintenance to begin alleviating the backlog of deferred
previously unfunded maintenance projects. There are projects at all City‐owned buildings, including City
Hall, Fire Stations, Museum, Justice Center, Depot, and Public Works Maintenance Division Facilities.
Another project is for the removal of the building constructed over the Mill Race west of the spillway
dam. This project is in conjunction with an Army Corp of Engineers Millrace bank restoration
project. Timing of the removal and related work is related to Army Corp scheduling.
Project Maps
BP1 Building Preservation
BP2 Fuel Facility
BP3 City Hall Lighting Upgrades
BP4 Booth Kelly Building Removal
BP5 Booth Kelly Internal Structural
Improvements
BP6 Booth Kelly Roof Replacement/Repair
BP7 Fire Station #14 Relocation/Replacement
BP8 Fire Station #4 Relocation/Replacement
BP9 Booth Kelly Economic Development
Assistance
BP10 Municipal Parking Lot
BP11 City Storage Facility
BP12 City Hall Storage Facility
BP15 Renovation of City Hall
BP16 City Hall Emergency Generator
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 153
This page left intentionally blank
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 154
Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Total Total Total Total Total Total Total
In Process
Building Preservation 210$ 400$ 400$ 1,000$ 1,000$ 1,000$ 4,010
Drainage Improvement SDCs (440)-$ - - - - - -
Wastewater Reimbursement SDCs (442)-$ - - - - - -
Booth Kelly (618)-$ - - - - - -
Buliding Preservation Fund (420)210$ 400 400 400 400 400 2,210
Unspecified -$ - - 600 600 600 1,800
Fuel Facility 40$ 60 - - - - 100
Drainage Improvement SDCs (440)-$ - - - - - -
Old SDCs (420)20$ 30 - - - - 50
Springfield Sch. Dist (420)16$ 24 - - - - 40
Willamalane P&R (420)3$ 5 - - - - 8
Rainbow Water Dist. (420)1$ 1 - - - - 2
Buliding Preservation Fund (420)-$ - - - - - -
EECBG-City Hall Lighting Upgrades 103$ - - - - - 103
Federal Aid (420)75$ - - - - - 75
Energy Rebate (420)22$ - - - - - 22
Other (420)6$ 6
Funding Secured
Booth Kelly Building Removal 185$ - - - - - 185
Drainage Improvement SDCs (440)-$ - - - - - -
Wastewater Reimbursement SDCs (442)-$ - - - - - -
Booth Kelly (618)35$ - - - - - 35
Unspecified 150$ - - - - - 150
Booth Kelly Internal Structural Imp.420$ 50 - - - - 470
Booth Kelly (618)420$ 50 - - - - 470
Booth Kelly Roof Replacement/Repair 200 200 - - - - 400
Booth Kelly (618)-$ 200 - - - - 200
Unspecified 200$ - - - - - 200
Funding Unsecured
Fire Station 14 -$ 1,150 4,800 - - - 5,950
Unspecified -$ 150 800 - - - 950
Unspecified Grant Funds (420)-$ 1,000 4,000 - - - 5,000
Fire Station 4 -$ - 1,150 4,800 - - 5,950
Unspecified -$ - 150 800 - - 950
Unspecified Grant Funds (420)-$ - 1,000 4,000 - - 5,000
Booth Kelly EDA Grant 250$ - - - - - 250
Booth Kelly (618)-$ - - - - - -
Unspecified Grant Funds (420)250$ - - - - - 250
Municipal Parking Lot -$ - 665 - - - 665
Unspecified -$ - 665 - - - 665
City Storage Facility -$ - - - - 250 250
Unspecified -$ - - - - 250 250
City Hall Storage -$ 75 - - - - 75
Unspecified -$ 75 - - - - 75
Fire Training Facility -$ - 20 - - - 20
Unspecified -$ - 20 - - - 20
Unspecified Grant Funds (420)-$ - - - - - -
Library -$ - - 25,300 - - 25,300
Unspecified -$ - - 25,300 - - 25,300
Building and Property
Maintenance Capital Projects
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 157
Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Total Total Total Total Total Total Total
Building and Property
Maintenance Capital Projects
City Hall Renovation -$ - - 3,000 - - 3,000
Unspecified -$ - - 3,000 - - 3,000
City Hall Generator -$ 100 - - - - 100
Unspecified -$ 100 - - - - 100
Annual Totals 1,366$ 2,005 7,035 34,100 1,000 1,250 46,756
Old SDCs (420)20$ 30$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 50
Booth Kelly (618)455$ 250$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 705
Revenue Bonds (xxx)-$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -
Other (420)6$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 6
Unspecified 350$ 325$ 1,635$ 29,700$ 600$ 850$ 33,460
Federal Aid (420)75$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 75
Unspecified Grant Funds (420)250$ 1,000$ 5,000$ 4,000$ -$ -$ 10,250
Buliding Preservation Fund (420)210$ 400$ 400$ 400$ 400$ 400$ 2,210
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 158
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 159
Buildings and Property Funding Secured: Partial
Account #810050
Building Rehabilitation and Preservation
Building Preservation
Map ID-BP1
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
DLR Building Condition Report
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering -$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction -$
Other 5,010$ 210$ 400$ 400$ 1,000$ 1,000$ 1,000$ 1,000$
Total 5,010$ 210$ 400$ 400$ 1,000$ 1,000$ 1,000$ 1,000$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Capital maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs 560$ 80$ 80$ 80$ 80$ 80$ 80$ 80$
Total 560$ 80$ 80$ 80$ 80$ 80$ 80$ 80$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 420 -$
SDCs. Reimb. (WW) 442 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs. Imp (Storm) 440 -$
SDCs, Reimb. (Str.) 446 -$
Building Preservation 420 2,610$ 210$ 400$ 400$ 400$ 400$ 400$ 400$
Unspecified 2,400$ 600$ 600$ 600$ 600$
Total 5,010$ 210$ 400$ 400$ 1,000$ 1,000$ 1,000$ 1,000$
Aged facilities, regulatory requirements (ADA), implementation of Council 5-year Workplan and 5-year
Building Facility Strategic Plan.
Ongoing capital maintenance program
Justification: These projects are necessary to maintain and preserve City-owned buildings. Project needs, costing, and
prioritization are identified in the Public Works Building Maintenance Work Plan and City Staff. Deferred capital maintenance
(backlog) and annual ongoing capital maintenance needs are identified. Extending beyond the 5-yr CIP, funding needs will
continue and will likely increase as facilities age and costs increase.
Project Description: Perform preservation, capital maintenance and repair projects on City-owned buildings, including City
Hall, 5 Fire Stations, Museum, Justice Center, Depot, Carter Building and Maintenance Facilities. Projects can include the
repair, renovation or replacement of structural, mechanical, electrical, and plumbing systems. Other projects can include
systems preservation such as, painting, roofing, lighting, alarm and elevator projects as well as repair and/or upgrades to
aesthetic and architectural elements.
Council decision to increase useful life of City building/facility assets.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 160
Buildings and Property Funding Secured: Yes
Account #870009
Construction and Preservation
Fuel Facility
Map ID-BP2
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering -$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 100$ 40$ 60$
Other -$
Total 100$ 40$ 60$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
SDCs (old)420 50$ 20$ 30$
Springfield Sch. Dist 420 40$ 16$ 24$
Willamalane P&R 420 8$ 3.2$ 4.8$
Rainbow Water Dist 420 2$ 0.8$ 1.2$
SDCs, Reimb. (Str.) 447 -$
Building Preservation -$
Total 100$ 40$ 60$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Project costs will be shared by all partners based on historic annual average usage.
In progress
Project Description: The Regional Fuel Facility was commissioned in 1990 in partnership with the Springfield School District,
Willamalane Park and Recreation, Rainbow Water District and the City of Springfield. Approximately three (3) million gallons of
fuel are dispensed annually from the facility. Minimal on-going maintenance has been performed over the years and is now time
critical to be proactive to remain in compliance with Federal, State and Local regulatory mandates and codes. Now more major
system upgrades are necessary to remain in compliance. The project is being proposed in two phases: Phase 1 will include
installing leak containment under each pump, replacement of aged dispenser equipment, replacement of the current sump and
leak containment chamber, and install spill containment at the tank fill location. Phase 2 includes replacement of the fuel card
readers, tank monitoring and leak detection systems.
Justification: To meet all applicable Federal, State and Local regulatory mandates, to replace aged equipment and systems, to
address operating efficiency and facilities for all fuel facility partners.
Aged facilities and environmental requirements.
The need for routine improvements and upgrades of inadequate aging facilities.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 161
Buildings and Property Funding Secured: Yes
Account #650118
Construction and Preservation
City Hall Lighting Upgrades
Map ID-BP3
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
Energy Conservation strategies
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2016
Planning -$
Engineering 6$ 6$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 97$ 97$
Other -$
Total 103$ 103$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2016
Maintenance Costs (32)$ (2)$ (6)$ (6)$ (6)$ (6)$ (6)$
Personnel Costs (3)$ (1)$ (1)$ (1)$ (1)$ (1)$ (1)$
Total (35)$ (3)$ (7)$ (7)$ (7)$ (7)$ (7)$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2016
Other 6$ 6$
AFG Grant 420 -$
SDCs. Reimb. (WW) 442 -$
Federal Aid 420 75$ 75$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs. Imp (Storm) 440 -$
SDCs, Reimb. (Str.) 446 -$
Energy rebate 420 22$ 22$
Total 103$ 103$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Funding has been received and projects are in design.
Project Description: The City of Springfield applied for and received a grant from the U.S. Department of Energy for Energy
Efficiency and Conservation Projects. The City received $539,400 from the Recovery Act Stimulus package and with direction
from City Council divided the grant between City projects and projects at Willamalane Park and Recreation District and
Springfield Public Schools. This project in particular is for the replacement of the outdated lighting system under City Hall with
a more efficient system in both energy efficiency and lighting quality and distribution.
Justification: This is Federal stimulus money used to provide funding for projects that will create new jobs and reduce energy
consumption. There was no matching funding required for this grant and the grant dollars will be leveraged by energy rebates
from the Springfield Utility Board. Between the grant and rebates Team Springfield will be able to make a significant difference
in several locations by increasing lighting quality and conserving energy and reducing future energy costs.
Energy Conservation and aged facilities
A mixture of lighting types illuminates the under-side of City Hall. One type is not allowed by current
energy codes. This will bring the City into compliance with code and provide better for building safety &
energy efficiency.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 162
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 163
Buildings and Property Funding Secured: Partial
Account #810043
Construction and Preservation
Booth Kelly Building Removal
Map ID-BP4
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
The Mill Race Restoration Project
Council Goals
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering -$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 150$ 150$
Other 35$ 35$
Total 185$ 185$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
SDCs. Reimb. (WW) 442 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs. Imp (Storm) 440 -$
SDCs, Reimb. (Str.) 446 -$
Booth Kelly 618 35$ 35$
Unspecified 150$ 150$
Total 185$ 185$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Planned
Project Description: Removal of building, wood pilings and Mill Race bank restoration.
Justification: In conjunction with the Army Corp of Engineers Mill Race project, the City is responsible for the removal of the
building constructed over the Mill Race west of the spillway dam.
Project Driver: The Mill Race Restoration Project
Construction of the Mill Race Restoration Project
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 164
Buildings and Property Funding Secured: No
Account 810043
Construction and Preservation
Booth Kelly Internal Structural Improvements
Map ID-BP5
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering -$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 570$ 420$ 50$ 100$
Other -$
Total 570$ 420$ 50$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 100$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
AFG Grant 420 -$
SDCs. Reimb. (WW) 442 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs. Imp (Storm) 440 -$
SDCs, Reimb. (Str.) 446 -$
Booth Kelly 618 570$ 420$ 50$ 100$
Total 570$ 420$ 50$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 100$
Booth Kelly Development Plan
Project Description: Structural repair/improvements to the Booth Kelly Center.
Justification: This project will complete the internal structural rehabilitation of certain areas of the facility that were
considered nonessential when the initial repairs were completed in the early 1990s. Certain structural and/or lease space
modifications are also anticipated due to tenant vacancies. This project also includes new roof covering for the southeast
portion of the facility and waterline replacement in the east-west alleyway.
Structural repair/improvements to the Booth Kelly Center
Planned
Internal and structural improvements. This project supports the preservation of the Booth Kelly
Center.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 165
Buildings and Property Funding Secured: Partial
Account #
Construction and Preservation
Booth Kelly Roof Replacement/Repair
Map ID-BP6
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering -$
Land/Right of Way
Construction 600$ 200$ 200$ 200$
Other -$
Total 600$ 200$ 200$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 200$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
AFG Grant 420 -$
SDCs. Reimb. (WW) 442 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs. Imp (Storm) 440 -$
SDCs, Reimb. (Str.) 446 -$
Booth Kelly 618 400$ -$ 200$ 200$
Unspecified 200$ 200$
Total 600$ 200$ 200$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 200$
This project supports the preservation of the Booth Kelly Center and is consistent with the Booth Kelly Development Plan.
Project Description: Complete roof replacement or epoxy over coating of the existing metal roof decking of the "Saw-
tooth" building, commonly referred to as Building G at the Booth-Kelly Center.
Justification: The existing roof material of the "Saw-tooth" building is over 50 years old and no longer provides
adequate weather protection for the building users or interior equipment.
The replacement or over coating of the roof decking will significantly reduce/eliminate the
ongoing maintenance demands of the roof for a period of approximately 20 years.
Planned
Internal and structural improvements
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 166
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 167
Buildings and Property Funding Secured: No
Account #
Construction and Preservation
Fire Station #14 Relocation/Replacement
Map ID-BP7
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
City of Springfield Department of Fire and Life Safety Standards (SFLS) of Cover and Deployment Study - April 2007
SFLS Strategic Plan.
Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning 150$ 150$
Engineering 550$ 200$ 350$
Land/Right of Way 550$ 550$
Construction 3,950$ 3,950$
Other 750$ 250$ 500$
Total 5,950$ -$ 1,150$ 4,800$ -$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs 30$ 10$ 10$ 10$
Personnel Costs -$
Total 30$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 10$ 10$ 10$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
AFG Grant 420 5,000$ 1,000$ 4,000$
SDCs. Reimb. (WW) 442 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs. Imp (Storm) 440 -$
SDCs, Reimb. (Str.) 446 -$
Unspecified 950$ 150$ 800$
Total 5,950$ -$ 1,150$ 4,800$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Deferred pending grant award
Project Driver: Development and Annexation in Jasper Natron requires relocation of fire stations to provide urban level of
service.
AFG grant; Standards of Cover and Deployment Study; Annexation of Jasper/Natron
Justification: Fire Station #14 located at 4765 Main Street, was originally constructed in 1961 and then remodeled in 1999. In
2007, the Department of Fire and Life Safety Standards of Cover and Deployment Study was conducted by Emergency
Services Consulting Inc. The following evaluation of the station was observed; "while minimally functional, this station is not a
positive environment for the staff. Storage and living space are at a critical point. The station does not meet today's standards.
The building is not fully ADA compliant; and appears to not be in compliance with fire and life safety codes." The location of the
station was established in 1961. Since that time the addition of other fire stations to provide fire and emergency service for the
expanding city has caused a significant overlap of coverage. Relocation of this station's response apparatus to the south to
cover the Jasper Natron area will not negatively impact current coverage and will accommodate future annexations and
development. Without relocation of this high impact Public Utility Facility, the fire department will be unable to deliver this key
urban service to these future developments.
Project Description: The Project will be constructed in east Springfield, utilizing the site at 725 S. 57th Street. The design of
the new facility will need to reflect the character of the neighborhood, and be an asset to the area and to the City of Springfield.
The City intends for the completed project to meet the needs of the staff, equipment, and materials necessary to provide
proper Fire and Life Safety services to the City of Springfield and specifically to extend Fire and Emergency services to the
Jasper/Natron area. Funding for this project is dependent on a $5M stimulus grant.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 168
Buildings and Property Funding Secured: No
Account #
Construction and Preservation
Fire Station #4 Relocation/Replacement
Map ID-BP8
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
City of Springfield Department of Fire and Life Safety Standards (SFLS) of Cover and Deployment Study - April 2007
SFLS Strategic Plan.
Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning 200$ 200$
Engineering 550$ 200$ 350$
Land/Right of Way 400$ 400$
Construction 3,950$ 3,950$
Other 850$ 350$ 500$
Total 5,950$ -$ -$ 1,150$ 4,800$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs 20$ 10$ 10$
Personnel Costs -$
Total 20$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 10$ 10$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
AFG Grant 420 5,000$ 1,000$ 4,000$
SDCs. Reimb. (WW) 442 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs. Imp (Storm) 440 -$
SDCs, Reimb. (Str.) 446 -$
Unspecified 950$ 150$ 800$
Total 5,950$ -$ -$ 1,150$ 4,800$ -$ -$ -$
Project Description: The Project will be constructed in downtown Springfield. The design of the new facility will need to
reflect the character of the neighborhood, and be an asset to the area and to the City of Springfield. The City intends for the
completed project will meet the needs of the staff, equipment, and materials necessary to implement proper Fire and Life
Safety services to the downtown are of the City of Springfield and specifically to extend Fire and Emergency services to the
Glenwood area. Funding for this project is dependent on a $5M stimulus grant.
Project Driver: Development and Annexation in Glenwood requires relocation of Fire Station #4 to provide urban level of
service.
AFG Potential; Standards of Cover and Deployment Study; Annexation of Glenwood
Deferred pending grant award
Justification: Fire Station #4, located at 1475 5th Street, was originally constructed in 1973. In 2007, the Department of Fire
and Life Safety Standards of Cover and Deployment Study was conducted by Emergency Services Consulting Inc. The
following evaluation of the station was observed; "Age and construction type has led to increasing maintenance costs. The
entire structure shows signs of excessive usage and wear. The station does not meet today's standards. The building is not
fully ADA compliant; and appears to not be in compliance with fire and life safety codes." The location of the station was
established in 1973. Since that time the acceptance of Glenwood into the City's Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) from the City
of Eugene has created a gap in the Springfield Department of Fire and Life Safety's ability provide this key urban level of
service to portions of Glenwood. Relocation of this station's response apparatus to the south will provide improved coverage to
the downtown area and accommodate future annexations and developments in Glenwood with the appropriate response time.
Without relocation of this high impact Public Utility Facility the Fire Department will be unable to deliver urban service levels to
future annexations and developments in some areas of Glenwood.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 169
Buildings and Property Funding Secured: No
Account #
Infrastructure Planning & Inventory Study
Booth Kelly Economic Development Assistance
Map ID-BP9
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering -$
Land/Right of Way
Construction -$
Other 250$ 250$
Total 250$ 250$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
AFG Grant 420 -$
SDCs. Reimb. (WW) 442 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs. Imp (Storm) 440 -$
Booth Kelly 618 -$
Unspecified*250$ 250$
Total 250$ 250$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Combine and leverage forces of project needs related to Mill Race restoration and Booth-Kelly site development as related
to urban renewal and downtown redevelopment plans. A coordinated approach may then progress with complementary
restoration and redevelopment activities that support downtown economic revitalization.
Project Description: The City of Springfield needs to reassess, update and expand the 1987 planning, engineering, and
subsurface studies of the 17-acre site and its 200,000+ square feet of buildings known as the Booth Kelly center. This study
will include the firing range decommission, verify, analyze and evaluate the site's limiting factors, utilities, markets, and
opportunities for private reinvestment/redevelopment, including infrastructure survey. Also included will be a Brownfield
Redevelopment Assessment, Stormwater Management Design Plan survey, and a Geotechnical Survey. The City will also
develop effective plans to overcome site and building limitations; broaden market opportunities; find, leverage, and
coordinate resources; and bring new and innovative uses, private re-investment, and new firms and jobs to the site. These
redevelopment plans will coordinate and complement restoration and redevelopment activities that support downtown
economic revitalization, promote entrepreneurship, and attract increased private capital investment. Full funding for this
project is dependent on a $250,000 grant*.
Justification: Several businesses in Booth Kelly have relocated out of the building as they grew and markets expanded.
Repairing and upgrading the site and buildings could create between 5-20 construction jobs for about a year. Possible
upgrades or a new direction and re-use of the facility or tear-down and reconstruction of newer buildings could provide, 25-
200 job opportunities for the site, and by tying development with updated plans for the downtown that are now being
considered.
Project Driver: The future development of Booth Kelly Center
EDA Grant Application Approved
Pending Funding Award
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 170
Buildings and Property Funding Secured: No
Account #
Construction and Preservation
Municipal Parking Lot
Map ID-BP10
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering -$
Land/Right of Way 475$ 475$
Construction 190$ 190$
Other -$
Total 665$ -$ -$ 665$ -$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs 21$ 3$ 3$ 3$ 3$ 3$ 3$ 3$
Personnel Costs -$
Total 21$ 3$ 3$ 3$ 3$ 3$ 3$ 3$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
SDCs. Reimb. (WW) 442 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs. Imp (Storm) 440 -$
SDCs, Reimb. (Str.) 446 -$
Unspecified 665$ 665$
Total 665$ -$ -$ 665$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Deferred pending funding
Project Description: This project is for the purchase of land and construction of a 150 car asphalt parking lot with concrete
curbs and gutters for City of Springfield employees and fleet vehicles. This will replace the former lot at 4th and B Streets that
was incorporated into the Springfield Justice Center as well as providing adequate parking for City Hall fleet vehicles.
Justification: Construction of the Justice Center required removal of 84 spaces previously reserved for City staff parking. This
loss has caused staff to park curbside in the adjacent business district, residential neighborhood, and/or in dedicated public
parking around City Hall. Staff have received complaints from business and property owners and from the patrons visiting City
facilities. By relocating staff and fleet vehicles away from City Hall additional parking will be made available for customers
patronizing downtown businesses and Municipal facilities.
Capacity Issues, citizen concerns and business accessibility.
Downtown redevelopment, citizen concerns and business accessibility.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 171
Buildings and Property Funding Secured: No
Account #
Construction and Preservation
City Storage Facility
Map ID-BP11
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering -$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 250$ 250$
Other -$
Total 250$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 250$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs (16)$ (16)$
Personnel Costs 1$ 1$
Total (15)$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ (15)$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
SDCs. Reimb. (WW) 442 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs. Imp (Storm) 440 -$
SDCs, Reimb. (Str.) 446 -$
Unspecified 250$ 250$
Total 250$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 250$ -$
Deferred pending funding
Project Description: This project is to construct a 3,000 square foot storage facility to provide long term storage for City
Departments. The facility construction is proposed to be a pre-engineered metal building with a concrete floor and include
multiple compartments to accommodate the varying storage needs of Departments. The building would be weather-tight and
climate controlled to assure proper storage of materials and equipment.
Justification: The City owns land at the Public Works-Maintenance Shops at South 18th street that could be used to construct
this facility. Every Department has growing storage needs which include; long term file retention, historical items, materials,
equipment and supplies. Limited storage space at City facilities have caused several Departments to rent storage in the private
sector. This facility will reduce or eliminate the need for rental spaces.
Capacity Issues
Limited space
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 172
Buildings and Property Funding Secured: No
Account #
Construction and Preservation
City Hall Storage Facility
Map ID-BP12
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering -$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 75$ 75$
Other -$
Total 75$ -$ 75$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
SDCs. Reimb. (WW) 442 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs. Imp (Storm) 440 -$
SDCs, Reimb. (Str.) 446 -$
Unspecified 75$ 75$
Total 75$ -$ 75$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Deferred pending funding
Project Description: This project is to construct a 1,000 square foot storage facility under City Hall to provide long term file
storage for City Departments. The facility is proposed to be weather-tight split face concrete block construction with a concrete
floor, it will be climate controlled and fire protected to assure proper storage of materials and files.
Justification: There is unutilized space under City Hall between the fleet vehicle parking and the public sidewalk where we
could construct this storage facility. Every Department has growing storage needs particularly for long term file retention and
supplies. Limited storage space in City Hall have caused several Departments to rent storage or crowd files in work areas. This
facility will reduce or eliminate the need for rental spaces and create additional useable space for staff.
Limited space
Capacity Issues
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 173
Buildings and Property Funding Secured: No
Account #
Infrastructure Planning & Inventory Study
Springfield Fire Training Facility
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
City of Springfield Department of Fire and Life Safety Standards (SFLS) of Cover and Deployment Study - April 2007
SFLS Strategic Plan.
Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2016
Planning 20$ 20$
Engineering -$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction -$
Other -$
Total 20$ -$ -$ 20$ -$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2016
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2016
Special Assmt.-$
AFG Grant 420 -$
SDCs. Reimb. (WW 442 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs. Imp (Storm) 440 -$
SDCs, Reimb. (Str. 446 -$
Unspecified 20$ 20$
Total 20$ -$ -$ 20$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Planning Stage
Project Driver: Development and expansion of city, increased calls for all hazard incident response requires broader
training scope, Dept of Public Safety Standards and Training
AFG Grant, Standard of Cover and Deployment Study
Project Description: A new fire department training facility needs to be constructed to provide indoor and outdoor space to
meet the ever increasing training demands of the Springfield Department of Fire and Life Safety. The facility will need
adequate space and features and be centrally located in order to not impact the response time capability of crews being
trained in the event of an emergency response. Central location is also necessary to minimize the shifting of response
assets away from the core response areas to minimize the cost of maintaining timely response capability. This facility needs
to be able to serve the needs of the Department for 25 to 50 years in to the future.
Justification: Current Fire Training facilities in Springfield consist of Fire Station 3 classroom and offices for training staff
and the S.16th Street temporary training site that is currently on loan from Springfield Public Works. 2007 Standards of
Cover Study conducted by ESCi stated about FS #3 "There is limited space for training and company drills". The temporary
training site at S.16th is 2.16 acres and is too small for setting up the NAPD driving courses required for apparatus operators
as well as running multi-company drills. The site is on loan and not under the control of the Fire Department. As a makeshift
training site it is barely adequate but the alternative is to conduct training on city streets or private parking lots with the
inherent liability associated. A site size 3-4 acres is adequate for current needs however ideally a 5-6 acre site could be
developed in phases that match department training needs going forward. Ideally, the following characteristics would serve
the need: Acreage:5-6 acres, Access: centrally located within city response area, with restricted access/security,
Buildings: 7,000 ft2 classroom and offices, 40,000 ft2 multi-purpose drill building, Paved surface area: 131,000 ft2, Water
supply: large main feeding multiple hydrants, supporting sustained 4,000 GPM fire operations flow, Runoff: self-contained
or filtered, Props: live fire, drafting, command simulation, ventilation, Urban Search And Rescue, and Wildland fire.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 174
Buildings and Property Funding Secured: No
Account #:
Construction and Preservation
Library Building
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2016
Planning -$
Engineering 2,500$ 2,500$
Land/Right of Way 2,000$ 2,000$
Construction 16,800$ 16,800$
Other 4,000$ 4,000$
Total 25,300$ -$ -$ -$ 25,300$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2016
Maintenance Costs 24$ 6$ 6$ 6$ 6$
Personnel Costs 320$ 80$ 80$ 80$ 80$
Total 344$ -$ -$ -$ 86$ 86$ 86$ 86$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2016
Special Assmt.-$
AFG Grant 420 -$
SDCs. Reimb. (WW) 442 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs. Imp (Storm) 440 -$
SDCs, Reimb. (Str.) 446 -$
Unspecified 25,300$ 25,300$
Total 25,300$ -$ -$ -$ 25,300$ -$ -$ -$
Council Goals #4 - Maintain & Improve Infrastructure and Facilities and # 5 - Preserve Hometown Feel,
Livability and Environmental Quality.
Project Description: Construct an approximately 60k sq. ft. Library facility adequate to serve the needs of Springfield citizens
for the next 20-30 years based on currently adopted population estimates. The projected cost of the new library will be $25.30
million including design, site preparation, construction, FF&E and landscaping. Estimated facility size and cost were derived
from: Standards for Oregon Public Libraries, 2008 by the Public Library Division of the Oregon Library Association; Public Library
Space Needs: A Planning Outline, 2009, Anders C. Dahlgren, President of Library Planning Associates, Inc., Wisconsin Dept. of
Public Instruction; Robertson/Sherwood Architects, Eugene, Oregon, Randy Nishimura - Architect.
Justification: The Library is currently below Oregon Library Standards for both facilities and open hours for communities our
size. It is at "threshold" (minimum) standards for size of collection. Recently, the Library has experienced double digit increases
in both circulation (13%) and program attendance (20%). It cannot expand it's collections in any meaningful way due to space
limitations. The Library cannot keep up with public demand for programming and for community meeting space and is hampered
in effectively deploying new technology due, in part, to the age and infrastructure of the building. Population estimates project
Springfield's population to grow to over 80,000 people in the next 20 years increasing the difficulty in providing services in a sub-
standard facility. In addition, a new Library building can help in the City's efforts at revitalizing the downtown core by attracting
tens of thousands of people to the area through its services and programs and by serving as a community gathering place.
Project Driver: Growing demand for Library services; current facility cannot sustain current usage level nor can it address
projected population growth into the future; ability for new Library to act as a positive factor in revitalizing downtown core.
Ability to provide library service from current facility declines to the point that both quality and quantity of
service are impacted. Citizen feedback and staff reporting support Council action.
Deferred pending funding
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 175
Buildings and Property Funding Secured: No
Account #
Construction and Preservation
Renovation of City Hall
Map ID-BP15
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering 300$ 300$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 2,700$ 2,700$
Other -$
Total 3,000$ -$ -$ -$ 3,000$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
SDCs. Reimb. (WW) 442 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs. Imp (Storm) 440 -$
SDCs, Reimb. (Str.) 446 -$
Unspecified 3,000$ 3,000$
Total 3,000$ -$ -$ -$ 3,000$ -$ -$ -$
Goals #4 - Maintain & Improve Infrastructure and Facilities and # 5 - Preserve Hometown Feel, Livability and Environmental
Quality.
Deferred pending funding
Project Description: Once the Library moves out of City Hall into a building of its own, City Hall will be left with about 25,000
square feet of empty space that will need to be reallocated to meet departmental space needs. This project is for the renovation
of City Hall to improve building safety, energy efficiency and space allocation. This project includes additional seismic bracing,
upgraded HVAC system and ductwork, better insulation and interior redesign to better utilize space.
Justification: City Hall hold the majority of City Employees and many essential municipal functions are based out of this aging,
retrofitted building. The building is not designed to current seismic codes and as such is vulnerable to earthquakes. Also while
renovations have improved some energy efficiency from the original construction, additional improvements would increase user
comfort and increase energy efficiency and reduce energy consumption. Finally with the space created by the Library moving to
its own building, City Hall can be reconfigured into a more efficient space for staff and users with room for growth as the City
grows.
Approval of funding for a new Municipal Library
Providing a safe, energy efficient and functional space for citizens and staff.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 176
Buildings and Property Funding Secured: No
Account #
Construction and Preservation
City Hall Emergency Generator
Map ID-BP16
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2016
Planning -$
Engineering 10$ 10
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction 90$ 90
Other
Total 100$ -$ 100$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2016
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2016
Special Assmt.-$
AFG Grant 420 -$
SDCs. Reimb. (WW) 442 -$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs. Imp (Storm) 440 -$
SDCs, Reimb. (Str.) 446 -$
Unspecified 100$ 100$
Total 100$ -$ 100$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Deferred pending funding
Goals #4 - Maintain & Improve Infrastructure and Facilities and # 5 - Preserve Hometown Feel, Livability and Environmental
Quality.
Project Description: Springfield City Hall is a 93,000 square foot structure that houses several hundred people at any given
time including staff, citizens and patrons. In order to assure that everyone can safely exit the building in the event of an
emergency, the City is required to have an emergency generator to provide adequate lighting of emergency egress pathways.
The current generator is old and in need of replacement. This project will replace the old generator with a new, more efficient
generator that not only satisfies these egress requirements but is also up-sized to account for additional emergency loads
implemented after the original generator was sized and installed.
Justification: The existing generator is old and is experiencing regular breakdowns. The City is repairing it, but soon repair will
not be possible or will prove to be uneconomical. This project will replace the existing generator with an new larger generator that
is sized to serve two critical functions. First is the need to assure that code required emergency Fire and Life Safety issues are
maintained. Second is to increase generator capacity to include emergency power for the City's Information Technology (IT)
infrastructure. In the last year, the City has had at least two incidents where the IT server room lost power, causing or potentially
causing interruptions to computer, phone and radio services to multiple City facilities. This is potentially a very serious issue. If
essential City services lose computers and/or communications, people and property would be put at risk. To a lesser degree,
when IT is out of service, worker productivity will be dramatically reduced and patrons would be inconvenienced.
Project Driver: Fire and Life Safety and increased demand or uninterrupted municipal services, especially essential services
such as Police, Fire and Public Works.
Aged Facilities
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 177
This page left intentionally blank
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 178
MISCELLANEOUS
Overview
The Miscellaneous section covers debt collection and tracking of public facilities and infrastructure. As
the City of Springfield grows, so does the need for municipal public services. These services come with
an associated infrastructure cost that at times requires the City to acquire debt.
Current debt includes the Springfield Justice Center Facility bond which included the construction of a
jail facility to house misdemeanor offenders.
In 2009, the City issued $22.8 million in sewer revenue bonds to pay for various capital wastewater
rehabilitation and improvement projects to the City’s sewer system for the health and safety of citizens
as well as to meet regulatory requirements.
Other projects address ongoing facility and infrastructure upgrades that include storm, sewer, and
transportation structures. These projects encompass a variety of areas, like the City’s participation in
public improvements of private developments, for example, the McKenzie/Gateway Corporate Park.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 179
Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Micellaneous Capital Projects Total Total Total Total Total Total Total
Debt - SLI 82$ 82 82 82 82 43 453
Drainage Improvement SDCs (440) 30$ 30 30 30 30 30 182
Wastewater Reimbursement SDCs (442) 39$ 39 39 39 39 - 197
Transportation Reimbursement SDCs (446) 12$ 12 12 12 12 12 74
Debt - Interceptor 3,823$ 661 512 367 370 299 6,032
Wastewater Reimbursement SDCs (442) 55$ - - - - - 55
Wastewater Improvement SDCs (443) 109$ - 20 - - - 129
Wastewater Capital (409) 3,659$ 661 492 367 370 299 5,848
City Participation 440$ 300 300 300 300 300 1,940
Drainage Improvement SDCs (440) 105$ 50 50 50 50 50 355
Drainage Capital (425) 55$ 50 50 50 50 50 305
Wastewater Reimbursement SDCs (442) 70$ 33 33 33 33 33 235
Wastewater Improvement SDCs (443) 45$ 34 34 34 34 34 215
Wastewater Capital (409) 40$ 33 33 33 33 33 205
Transportation Reimbursement SDCs (446) 45$ 50 50 50 50 50 295
Transportation Improvement SDCs (447) 80$ 50 50 50 50 50 330
Other -$ - - - - - -
Topographic Remapping Project -$ 410 - 120 - 145 675
Drainage Improvement SDCs (440)-$ 13 - 4 - 5 21
Drainage Reimbursement SDCs (xxx)-$ 21 - 6 - 7 34
Drainage Capital (425)-$ 21 - 6 - 7 34
Wastewater Reimbursement SDCs (442)-$ 21 - 6 - 7 34
Wastewater Improvement SDCs (443)-$ 51 - 15 - 18 84
Wastewater Capital (409)-$ 21 - 6 - 7 34
Street Fund (434)-$ 21 - 6 - 7 34
Transportation Reimbursement SDCs (446)-$ 21 - 6 - 7 34
Transportation Improvement SDCs (447)-$ 28 - 8 - 10 46
Other -$ 195 - 57 - 69 320
Annual Totals 4,345$ 1,453 894 869 752 787 9,100
Drainage Improvement SDCs (440) 135$ 93 80 84 80 85 559
Drainage Reimbursement SDCs (xxx)-$ 21 - 6 - 7 34
Drainage Capital (425) 55$ 71 50 56 50 57 339
Wastewater Reimbursement SDCs (442) 164$ 93 72 78 72 40 520
Wastewater Improvement SDCs (443) 154$ 85 54 49 34 52 428
Wastewater Capital (409) 3,699$ 715 525 406 403 339 6,087
Street Fund (434)-$ 21 - 6 - 7 34
Transportation Reimbursement SDCs (446) 57$ 83 62 68 62 70 403
Transportation Improvement SDCs (447) 80$ 78 50 58 50 60 376
Other -$ 195 - 57 - 69 320
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 180
Miscellaneous Funding Secured: No
Account #
Debt Service, City Participation, and Others
Debt - SLI 37%
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
Wastewater master Plan
Council Direction
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Engineering -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Land/Right of Way -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Construction -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Other 453$ 82$ 82$ 82$ 82$ 82$ 43$ -$
Total 453$ 82$ 82$ 82$ 82$ 82$ 43$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Personnel Costs -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 420 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
SDCs. Reimb. (WW) 442 197$ 39$ 39$ 39$ 39$ 39$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs. Imp (Storm) 440 182$ 30$ 30$ 30$ 30$ 30$ 30$
SDCs, Reimb. (Str.) 446 74$ 12$ 12$ 12$ 12$ 12$ 12$
Unspecified -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Total 453$ 82$ 82$ 82$ 82$ 82$ 43$ -$
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Justification: The loan and repayment of the loan was approved by Council in 1994.
Loan secured
Projects completed this represents the debt service payments
Project Description: Oregon Special Public Works payment on a loan for a portion of the public improvements in the
McKenzie/Gateway Corporate Park. The total loan amount is $952,309 and is to be paid over a 20 year period. The last
payment will be in 2014.
Development and growth.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 181
Miscellaneous Funding Secured: Full
Account #NA
Wastewater System Expansion and Upgrades
Sanitary Sewer Interceptor - Debt Service 8.3%
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:In repayment
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
Council Direction
1980 Wastewater Master Plan
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$
Engineering -$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction -$
Other (Debt Pymt)3,843$ 1,335$ 661$ 512$ 367$ 370$ 299$ 299$
Total 3,843$ 1,335$ 661$ 512$ 367$ 370$ 299$ 299$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Special Assmt.-$
Revenue Bonds 420 -$
User Fees 409 3,659$ 1,171$ 661$ 492$ 367$ 370$ 299$ 299$
Federal Aid 420 -$
State Aid 420 -$
SDCs, Imp. 443 129$ 109$ 20$
SDCs, Reimb. 442 55$ 55$
Unspecified -$
Total 3,843$ 1,335$ 661$ 512$ 367$ 370$ 299$ 299$
Bond Sale.
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: Annual payment of 20 year revenue bonds and State Revolving Fund (SRF) loan to fund the South
Springfield Interceptor.
Justification: A portion of the South Springfield Interceptor sewer was funded with loans and bonds amortized over a 20
year period. The SRF loan of $1,075,000 for Phase 1 resulted in an annual payment of $75,000. In Phase II, the $3.3
million revenue bond sold in 1995 resulted in an annual payment of $285,000. The payment on the $2,900,000 DEQ
Revolving Loan for Phase III in FY 1998 equals $300,000 per year.
Springfield desires to provide services to areas within the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) to promote
future urban development.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 182
Miscellaneous Funding Secured: No
Account #
Debt Service, City Participation, and Others
City Participation Varies
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
City participation in private developments is guided by Resolution #90-35 and Resolution #70-45.
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Planning -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Engineering -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Land/Right of Way -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Construction 2,240$ 440$ 300$ 300$ 300$ 300$ 300$ 300$
Other -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Total 2,240$ 440$ 300$ 300$ 300$ 300$ 300$ 300$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Maintenance Costs -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Personnel Costs -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2015
Wastewater Capital 409 238$ 40$ 33$ 33$ 33$ 33$ 33$ 33$
SDCs. Imp. (WW) 443 249$ 45$ 34$ 34$ 34$ 34$ 34$ 34$
SDCs. Reimb. (WW) 442 268$ 70$ 33$ 33$ 33$ 33$ 33$ 33$
Storm Capital 425 355$ 55$ 50$ 50$ 50$ 50$ 50$ 50$
SDCs. Imp (Storm) 440 405$ 105$ 50$ 50$ 50$ 50$ 50$ 50$
SDCs. Imp (Str.) 447 380$ 80$ 50$ 50$ 50$ 50$ 50$ 50$
SDCs, Reimb. (Str.) 446 345$ 45$ 50$ 50$ 50$ 50$ 50$ 50$
Street Capital 434 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Total 2,240$ 440$ 300$ 300$ 300$ 300$ 300$ 300$
860002,
870004,
880001
On-going sinking fund
Project Description: City cost participation in public improvements constructed in private developments under the City's
Construction Permit process. To respond to known and potential private development projects, it is necessary to budget
$100,000 each fiscal year in each infrastructure program area, i.e. Transportation, Local Wastewater and Stormwater, and the
programmed funds for FY11 are only those necessary to meet that need. Currently other programmed funds are not yet tied
to specific projects.
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Justification: In many cases, it is necessary for a development to oversize or deepen sewers, drainage and/or streets
beyond a size necessary to serve the development in order to serve adjacent neighborhoods. Such increases in capacity are
paid by the City under Council adopted participation policies.
Private development projects.
Development and growth. City requirement of developer to oversize infrastructure.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 183
Miscellaneous Funding Secured: No
Account #
Data Improvements
Topographic Remapping Project Varies
Project Driver:
Project Trigger:
Project Status:
Specific Plans/Policies Related to this Project:
Most other CIP Projects Engineering Map Books (Sewer Maps)
Mill Race Project Police Map Books
HB 3337 Planning (UGB, Comp Plan, BLI Inventories)Fire and Life Safety Map Books
Glenwood Refinement Plan Water Rescue Maps
2010 FEMA Remapping Project Wastewater and Stormwater Master Plans
Local Wetland Inventory (LWI)TransPlan
Standard and Special Purpose Maps Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2016
Planning -$
Engineering -$
Land/Right of Way -$
Construction -$
Other 675$ 410$ 120$ 145$
Total 675$ -$ 410$ -$ 120$ -$ 145$ -$
OPERATIONAL IMPACT ($000s)
Project Element Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2016
Maintenance Costs -$
Personnel Costs -$ -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
FUNDING SOURCE ($000s)
Source Fund # Total Thru 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Beyond 2016
Special Assmt.-$
WW User Rate 409 33.8$ -$ 20.5$ 6.0$ 7.3$
STM Drainage User Rate 425 33.8$ -$ 20.5$ 6.0$ 7.3$
Street User Rate 434 33.8$ -$ 20.5$ 6.0$ 7.3$
SDCs. Imp (Storm) 440 21.4$ -$ 13.0$ 3.8$ 4.6$
SDCs. Reimb. (WW) 442 33.8$ -$ 20.5$ 6.0$ 7.3$
SDCs. Imp. (WW)443 84.5$ -$ 51.3$ 15.0$ 18.2$
SDC Reimb. (Street) 446 33.8$ -$ 20.5$ 6.0$ 7.3$
SDC Reimb. (Storm) NA 33.8$ -$ 20.5$ 6.0$ 7.3$
SDCs, Imp. (Str.)447 46.4$ -$ 28.2$ 8.3$ 10.0$
Unspecified 320.0$ -$ 194.5$ 56.8$ 68.7$
Total 675$ -$ 410$ -$ 120$ -$ 145$ -$
Pending funding. (Funding estimates an approximately 53/47 split where 53% comes from various
Public Works user rate and SDC funds and the remaining 47% comes from other funds managed by
other departments.)
Improvement SDC Eligibility:
Project Description: Replace out-of-date topographic maps (base maps) for the entire City that were last developed in 2000.
New maps will address development induced changes that have occurred across the City and will include updating full topography
(e.g., elevation, structures, surface facilities, vegetation and surface waterways) on all City base maps used to support key City
functions by all Departments. Proposing full remapping in 2010 and then incremental remapping every 2 years to assure that from
2011 forward, base maps for all areas of the City are current to within 3 years - all areas are remapped every three years.
Justification: Current base maps are woefully out-of-date. Base maps do not reflect significant development that has occurred
over the last 10 years such as PeaceHealth and MountainGate and do not reflect other development activity such as smaller capital
improvement projects, private developments, natural resource changes, etc. that have occurred since that last update. Many City
functions such as facilities planning, design, construction and maintenance; current and long range land use planning, and public
safety incident response (fire, police and ambulance) depend on current and complete base maps. In order to serve the broad
array of citywide needs for current and complete base map information, this topographic remapping project is required. Errors and
omissions on the topographic maps have already begun to impact functions citywide.
Topographic data have reached the end of their useful life and are now obsolete
City wide needs for current and complete base map information are not being met because
topographic data is 10 years old.
2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program Draft 4 Page 184