Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/24/1995 Work Session tI>./ .~ . . . City of Springfield Work Session Minutes MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION MEETING OF THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL HELD MONDAY, WLY 24,1995 The City of Springfield Council met in Work Session in the Jesse Maine Room, 225 Fifth Street, Springfield, Oregon, on Monday, July 24, 1995, at 6:15 p.m., with Mayor Morrisette presiding. ATTENDANCE Present were Mayor Morrisette, Councilors Beyer, Burge, Dahlquist, Maine, and Shaver. Councilor Walters was absent (excused). Also present were City Manager Michael Kelly, Assistant City Manager Gino Grimaldi, City Attorney Tim Harold, Administrative Aide Julie Wilson and members of the staff. 1. Funding Strategy for Staffing and Operation of Gateway Fire Station. Deputy Chief/EMS John Garitz presented the staff report on this issue. Mr. Garitz reported that several revenue options have been prepared for staffing and operating the proposed Gateway Fire Station #5. At Council's request, a funding recommendation is also proposed. Mr. Garitz reported the Springfield Tomorrow Improvement Plan Advisory Committee recommended, and the City Council approved, including the Gateway area fire station on the capital bond project list. If the bond measure is passed by the voters in November, 1995, the station could be built between April and December, 1996, and staffed by January, 1997. There is currently no identified strategy for funding the ongoing costs of staffing and operating the station. Mr. Garitz reported the annual costs of operating the proposed station on a 24-hour basis with one fire engine crew (three persons) is estimated at $507,900 in FY 96-97 and $822,700 in FY 97-98. Operating costs are expected to increase by approximately 5.9% per year thereafter. Mr. Garitz reminded Council of it's July 10, 1995 work session direction for staff to recommend a funding strategy to Council. Staff is recommending a strategy that raises some new revenue and allocates certain other revenue for fire station operations. The plan maintains a positive long range financial projection general fund balance through FY 97-98. The Council reviewed the recommended funding plan and the City's long range financial plan with Fire Station #5 expenses and revenue added. City Manager Mike Kelly answered questions from Council regarding the proposed funding plan. He explained that in order to re- negotiate the fire service contracts the city has with the three surrounding water districts (Rainbow, Willakenzie and Glenwood) one year from now, notice would need to be given to the three districts now. He stated that if Council desired, they could direct staff to provide notice to the three districts that the city desired to discuss possible re-negotiations of their contracts. Mayor Morrisette stated that a goal was to give an indication to the public that if the bond measure passes, that the city has a good handle on where the funding for operations will come from. He stated that when looking at possible road funding, he did not want to commit the use of Bancroft funds. Councilor Burge agreed with Mayor Morrisette's comments regarding the use of Bancroft funds. He discussed the fire contracts outside the city and stated he was committed to, in addition to operation and maintenance costs, a reasonable recovery of a pro rata share of ~.r ...... Work Session Minutes July 24, 1995 - Page 2 . capital costs. He felt that if the city was going to sell it's services to other than those who already pay for it, then the third party needs to pay a share of the capital costs that have already been paid by bond payers within the city over a period of years. Council also discussed the alternative revenue sources provided in the agenda item summary document. Mr. Kelly stated that he wanted to maintain open communication so that the Council was comfortable with the funding and staffing information. Mayor Morrisette stated he did not support the recommendation to establish an EMS first response fee. He also stated he did not want to commit the use of Bancroft funds. City Manager Mike Kelly answered additional questions from Council regarding the proposed funding strategy. He also discussed possible additional income from future housing development because of economic development successes. The Council further discussed tax rates, annexation and increased taxes. IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR SHAVER, WI1.'H A SECOND BY COUNCILOR DAHLQUIST, TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO BEGIN THE NOTIFICATION PROCESS FOR RENEGOTIATING FIRE SERVICE CONTRACTS WITH RAINBOW, WILLAKENZIE AND GLENWOOD WATER DISTRICTS. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 5 FOR AND 0 AGAINST. . 2. Springwood Development Project Status. Planning Manager Greg Mott presented the staff report on this issue. The Council has requested, pursuant to the Mid-Springfield Refinement Plan, a review of the development activities undertaken by the applicant of the Springwood development to determine whether the development site should retain a Medium Density Residential designation, or if the site should revert to its previous industrial designation. On June 12, 1995, the Council directed staff to include in their forthcoming communications packet a memorandum describing the status of the Springwood project. Based on individual Council response to the memo, staff met with Al Johnson, attorney for Springwood, on July 14, 1995. At that meeting, staff relayed the Council's concerns about retaining the site for the residential development, particularly since no discernible improvement had been made to the site. Mr. Johnson agreed that improvement to the site had fallen well short of the corporation's expectations for the same time period, but that significant progress had been made in many of the other aspects of developing specialized housing. Mr. Johnson submitted copies of information as further evidence of these efforts, and said he and other members of the development group would be pleased to discuss Springwood with the Council. . Mr. Johnson and Mr. Dan Desler, president of Springwood, provided Council with a status report on the project and provided a review of the work program. Mr. Desler and Mr. Johnson answered Council questions regarding land use designation, permit status, state Building Code requirements, HUD information, and appeals. They also discussed income tax credits, air quality issues, and time tables. Councilor Maine expressed concern regarding the impact of delays on financing available. She explained that the report provided was very helpful and the work session also provided a more clear picture of project status. Council recessed at 8:30 p.m. Council reconvened at 8:45 p.m. -- .:.....~ Work Session Minutes July 24, 1995 - Page 3 ' . Mayor Morrisette left the meeting. 3. Rainbow Drive Pedestrian Path Between West L and West M Streets. City Engineer Al Peroutka presented the staff report on this issue. The West M street property owners are requesting the city install a sidewalk along the unimproved Rainbow Drive between West L and West M Streets. Normally, permanent sidewalks are installed and assessed to the abutting property owner when a street is fully improved. Installation of a pedestrian path with city funds is not standard and requires Council approval. At the public hearing for West M Street, several property owners requested a sidewalk be installed along Rainbow Drive between West Land West M Streets for children walking to and from Centennial School. This is a main school pedestrian route. Council directed staff to bring this item to Council work session for discussion. Mr. Peroutka reviewed a map of the area to illustrate a possible path. The temporary pedestrian path is located on the west side of the street where there is least conflict with existing ditches, utility poles, etc. Crosswalk pavement markings and warning signs would also be installed. The construction cost of the path, pavement markings and signage is estimated to be $2,000 to $3,000 using crushed rock, and $2,400 to $3,400 using asphalt. Since this path is not standard, and there are many more situations throughout the city where such a path may be requested, staff recommends against the installation. . Councilor Burge stated he did not agree with any projects done at a substandard quality. He did not see that as a benefit. Councilor Shaver stated that residents should be notified that they could pay for the cost of graveling the area. By consensus, Council agreed that a neighborhood resolution was to the problem was more appropriate and that signage could be provided. 4. Council Initiation of Development Code Amendments. Planning Manager Greg Mott presented the staff report on this issue. Several sections of the Development Code are no longer consistent with recently adopted state law. Several other sections of the Code are no longer responsive to the needs and expectations of the citizens. Staff is requesting the Council to initiate these amendments. The Code references have been proposed for revisions for two principal reasons: 1) they are not responsive to new state laws and court decisions; and 2) their somewhat ambiguous wording can result in a variety of different, but well reasoned, interpretations. This former circumstance is a serious legal liability and the latter circumstance creates delays, confusion and uncertainty. Much of the proposed replacement language has not been prepared yet, but if Council approval is granted to move forward with these Code amendments, they will be submitted for Council consideration following the Council's summer recess. . Additional information and a list of the Code sections proposed for amendment were provided in the staff report. The Code amendments necessitated by changes in the law have been underlined and highlighted on the document. All other sections proposed for amendment are the result of citizen and staff feedback. .v Work Session Minutes July 24, 1995 - Page 4 . Council discussed concerns and staff answered questions from Council. Councilor Shaver agreed with comments made by Councilor Maine for staff to get information to the Council so they can track and become convinced that this needs to be made a top priority. He felt staff had a lot in their work schedule, but that he also did not want the Council to get into a situation where they might be "blind sided" by a change in state law that they should have done something about. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 9: 15 p.m. Minutes Recorder - Julie Wilson Attest: . ~Jt~ < Eileen Stein City Recorder .