Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/21/1996 Work Session r" . . . ~ c MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION MEETING OF THE SPRINGFIELD CJTY COUNCIL HELD MONDAY, OCTOBER 21, 1996 The city of Springfield Council met in Work Session in the Jesse Maine Room, 225'Fifth Street, Springfield, Oregon, on Monday, October 21, 1996, at 6:00 p.~., with Council President Stu Burge presiding. ' ATTENDANCE Present were Councilors Ballew, Beyer, Burge, Dahlquist, Maine and Shaver. M~yor Morrisette was absent (excused). Also present were City Manager Michael Kelly, Assistant City Manager ' Gino Grimaldi, City Attorney Joe Leahy, City Recorder Eileen Stein, Administrative Aide Julie, Wilson and members of the staff. 1. Arts Commission Application Review. ' Museum Coordinator Kathy Jensen presented the staff report on this issue. Linda Larson r~signed her position due to a work conflict. The position has been vacant since November 17, 1995 and expires December 1, 1997. Sharon Neylon applied to complete Larson's term on the 9-member commission. The Arts Commission recommends that Sharon Neylon be appointed to membership on the Arts Commissi9n. Neylon attended the October 9th regular meeting, and meets'the residency requirements that members have a residence or business within the 97477, 97478, or 97482 zip code area. In addition, Neylon meets City Council requirements for membership on a commISSIOn. The city has conducted two unsuccessful recruitments, before receiving Ms. Neylon's application. There are two positions for which no applications have been received. These vacancies will be advertised for during the upcoming recruitment process beginning on '" October 30th. ) Volunteers on the Arts Commission provide professional services to the city. By Council Consensus, Sharon Neylon would be appointed to the Art,S Commission during the regular session meeting. c j Ms. Stein explained this was the last appointment prior to the new recruitment process. I 2. Signal at Main Street and 69th Street. Publ'ic Works Director Dan Brown introduced this issue. He explained that staff recommendation was a difficult one but was in the best interest of the community. Terry Thames, Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) manager, was introduced by Mr. Brown. He was available to answer questions from Council. City Engineer Al Peroutka provided additional information regarding this issue. ODOT has requested the City Council consider -...~ . . . . Work Session Meeting Minutes October 21, 1996 Page 2 and select one of the options for signalization and intersection improvements at Main Street and 69th Street. Mr. Peroutka explained that for more than 10 years, the city of Springfield has recognized the 'need for signalization at one or more locations in the section of Main Street east of 58th, Street. He explained the original need voiced by citizens in the area was for a safe pedestrian access across Main Street. As traffic volumes have increased on Main Street and growth has occurred in the Thurston Hills, vehicular access to a signal from south of Main Street has become more of a need. ' Mr. Peroutka explained Springfield has made requests of ODOT to fund traffic signal projects at, 66th and/or 69th Streets,in the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). He explained that two years ago, during the STIP update process, Springfield requested signaJization of 66th Street and 69th Street with the understanding that ODOT would possibly fund one but not both projects. As the update process was going on, Mountain Gate , Subdivision was proposed. That required the city and,ODOT to reconsider the long-term impacts of development on the East Main Street corridor. Mr. Peroutka explained that during meetings, neighbors have expressed a range of concerns. The greatest related to the difficulty in getting opto Main Street safely from the south side. There was consensus that the proposed traffic signal at 69th Street would provide no significant improvement to that situation. There was a general preference by the Neighbors 'for extending 69th Street south of Main and connecting to the dead end of South 69th Place. The project budget was not sufficient to pursue this option in the short teml. Neighbors felt , strongly that whatever signal project is done should serve the residents on the south side of Main between 67th and 70th. Mr. Peroutka explained that as an effort to analyze how access to the south side could best be addressed,'the city contracted with Access Engineering to analyze tWo alternatives for the signalization project that seemed feasible and supported by the neighborhood group. That work analyzed highway and street operations for two options: 1. Signalization of Main Street at South 68th Place and Main Street at North 69th Street. 2. Signalization of Main Street at 69th Street only, assuming extension of South 69th Place to Create a four~way intersection., Mr. Peroutka explained that ODOT reviewed the alternatives analyzed by Access Engineering. ODOT staff opposed the two-signal proposal. Their primary concerns were 1) .insufficient storage between the two intersections among vehicles making conflicting left- · turns from Main Street into South 68th, 69th and private driveways; and 2) .removal of the .South 68th'signalin the future would be very difficult. ODOT's position is that a single signalized intersection serving both sides of Main Street should be pursued. , , City and ODOT staff discussed what it would take technically, financially and politically to accomplish some type of street realignment that would produce a single four-:legged intersection. Technically, two possibilities were c,?nsidered. ODOT agreed to develop ~, -' ...~ - Work Session Meeting Minutes October 21, .1996 Page 3 . preliminary drawings and cost estimates for the two street realignment options. City staff looked at the available capital funding sources for possible city funding ,to assist this project. Preliminary cost estimates for the two options were about $850,000 to $950,000. Staff of ODOT and the city were fairly resigned to settling for a three-legged intersection for at)east an interim time period. In that case, the intersection would be designed for eventual creation of a southern leg. Only recently, on August 25, 1996, the city received notice from ODOT that an additional $489,000 of Federal funding would be made available through the Hazard Elimination Program (HEP) for this project, specifically to address the issue of , vehicular access to the signal from the south hills area to increase safety. This brought the project budget to a level where the extension of a south leg from the intersection was financially possible. However, this additional funding is only available if the project is ready 'forbids by September 30, 1997. This requires a selection ofa preferred option by Council by October 21, 1996. . Mr. Peroutka explained'staff developed five options which are included in the staff report. A public meeting was held on October 10, 1996 to take public comment on the options. Invitations were sent to property owners and residents in the Thurston Hills, as well as <!ffected property owners along Main Street. ODOT and city staffwerejoined by Councilor Maine and Mayor Morrisette in presenting the options, answering questions and taking c<;>mments. The meeting was attended by approximately 75 residents or property owners of the area. The following general themes were captured from written comments from participants in this meeting, from participants in a previous neighborhood meeting held on September 5, 1996, arid from other written comments received. Mr. Peroutka reviewed the' . pros and cons for option numbers three, four and five. , Option Three - 69th Place through Henderson. The pros included a straightforward engineering design, 69th Place is best alignment with existing 69th Street, seems to have least objections from adjacent property owners and Henderson property is for sale. The cons were that it takes substantial amounts of several properties and some opposition to ' making 69th Place a through street. Option Four - South 70th Option. Pros included little or no property impacts south of Main Street and state fU11dingwould improve existing city street in need., The cons included very poor alignment with existing 69th Street, creates inefficient out-of-direction travel pattern, , takes substantial amounts of property north of Main, leaves awkward shaped parcels and doubt ODOT maybe able to participate in project. , ' Option Five - No South Leg Option. The pros included lower cost and the least impact to 'properties. The cons included no signal access from south of Main Street, continued safety problems in entering Main Street from the south and further development on current vacant properties will make creation of a south leg in the future more difficult. . Mr. Thames responded to a question from Councilor Shaver and explained they did have specifications that would ne,ed to be followed but they would try to work with the city of Springfield. He also explained that once right-of-way issues were raised, these things would be'worked out by a right-of-way staff person. He also explainedthatthe right-of-way agents ...t ..... ft.. '- . . . /, ....., Work Session Meeting Minutes October 21, 1996 Page 4 would check with designers to ensure the design was feasible. Input could also be solicited from property owners. Mr. Browtl eXplained the city of Springfield would like to be ale to work with ODOT and possible be the liaison between those working on the project. Mr. Thames responded it was their preference that the city take the lead on the project. Councilor Maine asked about the funding secured for the project. Mr. Tames explained funding could be used for the South 70th Option, option number 4; although that alternative, was.not supported. Mr. Peroutka discussed the tradeoffs for the different options. He did receive feedback regarding the value ofa parcel on the north side. He stated he did not know what would be left of the wetland area. - , . , Mr. Brown discussed the right-of-way on drawing four and referenced it to option number 3, drawing three. He stated that with drawing number 4, there would most likely not be enough money to carry the project very far up through south 70th Street. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 6:40 p.m. Minutes Recorder - Julie Wilson .~\lA~ tit Morrise~ ' Mayor