HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/04/2010 Work SessionCity of Springfield
Work Session Meeting
MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION MEETING OF
THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL HELD
MONDAY, OCTOBER 4, 2010
The City of Springfield Council met in a work session in the Jesse Maine Meeting Room, 225 Fifth
Street, Springfield, Oregon, on Monday, October 4, 2010 at 6:00 p.m., with Mayor Leiken presiding.
ATTENDANCE
Present were Mayor Leiken and Councilors Lundberg, Wylie, and Simmons. Also present were
Assistant City Manager Jeff Towery, Assistant City Attorney Mary Bridget Smith, City Recorder Amy
Sowa, and members of the staff.
Councilors Ralston and Pishioneri were absent (excused).
1. Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Update -Goal, Objective and Policy Review and
Update.
Transportation Planner David Reesor presented the staff report on this item. The TSP update was
intended to serve as a blueprint to guide future multi-modal transportation system improvements and
investment decisions for the City of Springfield. Development of the TSP would be coordinated with
and would support the City's recent residential and employment buildable lands analysis and adoption
of a new urban growth boundary.
On September 21St, 2010, staff led the Planning Commission through an initial goal, objective and
policy prioritization exercise. The Planning Commission reviewed and discussed existing TransPlan
goals, objectives and policies and considered their relevance to the new TSP update. The results of this
Planning Commission exercise would be presented to the Council for their consideration.
Staff now sought Council input on this topic over the course of two work sessions. This first work
session would allow the Council to review existing TransPlan goals, objectives and policies and begin
considering their relevance to the new TSP update. Staff would present draft regional issues which
provided context to the update process. These draft regional issues were created through the
Metropolitan Policy Committee's (MPC) Regional Policy Subcommittee.
A second work session would be held on October 18th to begin prioritizing existing TransPlan goals,
objectives and policies. The resulting Council input would provide a beginning framework for the TSP
Technical Advisory Committee during future policy discussions. Additional opportunity for Council
input would also be provided later in the process.
Mr. Reesor presented the power point presentation which was included in the agenda packet. He noted
that Springfield was developing their own TSP. Currently, we had TransPlan which was Eugene and
Springfield, but this would be specific to Springfield. It was a great opportunity for Springfield to
focus on their own issues as well as their regional context. He discussed the connection between
transportation and land use. He referred to recent greenhouse gas (GHG) legislation and noted that
there was no funding allocated for that legislation.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
October 4, 2010
Page 2
Mr. Reesor said the MPO had assigned the Regional Policy Subcommittee and City Manager Gino
Grimaldi served on that subcommittee as the Springfield representative. He discussed the issues this
subcommittee was addressing:
• Overarching Themes: Sustainability
• Key Goals: Transportation/land use integration, safety, and equity
• Public Policy Issues: Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, healthy economics, public health, and
peak oil
• System Components: Transportation options, transit, and rail
• Measures: Vehicle miles travelled (VMT) and air quality
Mr. Reesor discussed. the feedback from the Springfield Planning Commission During the staff
meeting with the Planning Commission, the Planning Commissioners prioritized existing goals,
~` objectives and policies and made recommendations to either keep them as they were, modify them, or
eliminate them. Council would go through a similar exercise on October 18. The Planning
Commission generally supported existing TransPlan goals, objectives and polices, but did feel that
some should be modified. The policies they felt should be modified included:
^ Land Use Policy #1: Nodal Development
^ Land Use Policy #S: Implementation of Nodal Development
^ TDM Policy #2: Parking Management
^ . TSI Policy #3: Corridor Preservation
^ TSI System-Wide Policy #5: TransPlan Project Lists
^ TSI Roadway Policy #1: Mobility and Safety for all Modes
^ TSI Roadway Policy #2 (2) & (3): Motor Vehicle Level of Service
^ TSI Roadway Policy #3: Coordinated Roadway Network
^ TSI Transit Policy #2: Bus Rapid Transit
^ TSI Transit Policy #3: Transit/ High-Occupancy Vehicle
^ TSI Transit Policy #4: Park-and-Ride Facilities .
^ TSI Bicycle Policy #4: Implementation of Priority Bikeway Miles
^ TSI Pedestrian Policy #2: Continuous and Direct Routes
^ TSI Pedestrian Policy #3: Sidewalks
^ TSI Other Modes Policy #2: High Speed Rail Corridor
^ TSI Other Modes Policy #3: Passenger Rail and Bus Facilities
^ Finance Policy #4: New Development
. There were only three they identified that should be eliminated:
^ TDM Policy #l: TDM Program Development due to the word "mandatory"
^ Finance Policy #6: due to being a Eugene specific policy
^ TSI Roadway Policy #4: Access Management
Mr. Reesor referred to a table showing the planning process. He noted that he would be presenting
before the Lane County Board of Commissioners later this month.
Councilor Simmons said they needed to think about intermodal capacity. If there was a way to get the
bus from Springfield or Eugene to the airport, it would have an interesting impact on how people got
from the airport and back: That was not discussed much in the plan. He referred to the peak oil
component iri the plan. He felt staff needed to look at _the issues of replacement fuels, including
alternative fuels. There was also nothing in the plan regarding charging stations. He realized that was
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
October 4, 2010
Page 3
more specific than the plan. He discussed the nodal efforts that had not yet come to fruition. This
needed to be more market responsive. It was a good step in the right direction.
Councilor Lundberg said it was a good start. She was curious why the Planning Commission chose
those things they wanted to modify. She agreed multi-modal was interesting, but a 10 minute bus
service was a very practical solution. There were a lot of concepts that needed to be looked at
carefully so they made sure they had practical solutions. Nodal in its broadest sense didn't work, but
they could look at modifying the definition of nodal. The goal was to reduce. VMT. It involved infill to
a degree in existing neighborhoods. They needed to look at those existing neighborhoods that already
had components of a nodal development.
.Councilor Wylie said~they needed to recognize the transportation and land use connection. She was on
the LTD Board when they first looked at EmX going to RiverBend. The development that had been
done in Gateway allowed them to do that without disrupting a lot of homes and businesses because of
how the transportation plan was set up. The time was now to lay out those routes and the
transportation.
Mr. Reesor said LTD was updating their long range plans and the City was coordinating with them
during the TSP process.
Mayor Leiken referred to the goal and policy context. This was a very good start. He noted the large
,number of people that worked at RiverBend that came from other cities. The biggest challenge in
measuring VMT was the number of people coming from other cities to work in our community. It
would always be a challenge when measuring VMTs. The area Springfield was moving ahead on was
the transit system and the EmX. He was looking forward.to next week's joint meeting with LTD to
talk about that further. As long as the City was doing their part, that was the best we could do. He
appreciated the work staff had been doing.
Councilor Wylie said she came to City Hall at 5 p.m. and the Park-N-Ride lots were full, which meant
we were moving in the right direction.
Mr. Reesor said that within the MPO boundary, the majority of trips were outside the MPO area.
Mayor Leiken said as long as the City was doing their part, that was the best they could do.
2. Willamette River Open Space Vision and. Action Plan.
.Planning Supervisor Linda Pauly presented the staff report on this item. Jeff Krueger of Lane Council
of Governments (LCOG) was at the meeting to present the Willamette River Open Space Vision and
Action Plan -- a comprehensive open space vision for our region's Willamette River corridor. The
open space vision would serve as anon-regulatory, long-term conceptual framework to guide~~future
open space and associated urban connectivity, .tourism, natural function, and recreation planning
efforts for the Willamette River corridor: Incremental implementation of the vision would be achieved
through the combined voluntary efforts of the partner agencies, property owners, and the public.
On September 21, 2010,. the Springfield Planning Commission forwarded a unanimous
recommendation to endorse the plan. The Council was asked to consider the; merits of the plan and to
direct staff whether .to prepare a resolution of support.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
October 4, 2010
Page 4
The Willamette River open space planning effort was initiated in June 2009 by LCOG and Eugene
Parks and Open Space staff in recognition of the need for a collaborative community approach to
riverfront planning. LCOG staff facilitated this visioning process, working closely with fourteen
partner organizations including the City of Springfield (Linda Pauly, DSD and Todd Miller, PW ESD)
and Willamalane (Greg Hyde). Springfield's local initiatives (Glenwood Refinement Plan Update,
Downtown District Plan and Springfield Mill Race Project)-had been incorporated into the vision.
Public outreach had included two workshops, an online survey (completed by nearly 500 participants),
and extensive outreach to a variety of interest groups.
No financial obligation was committed through endorsement of The Vision and Action Plan. The
document would provide valuable context for seeking grants and funding partners for ongoing and
future prof ects.
Mr. Krueger said he had been given the challenge and opportunity to bring about 16 partners together
for this project. He thanked Council for lending staff to participate and represent Springfield. He
provided a power point on the process and background. -The following partners were represented in
this process:
^ Willamalane Park & Recreation District
^ City of Springfield
^ City of Eugene
^ McKenzie Watershed Council
^ Coast Fork Willamette Watershed Council
^ Middle Fork Willamette Watershed Council
^ Long Tom Watershed Council
^ Eugene Water & Electric Board
McKenzie River Trust
^ Lane Council of Governments
^ Lane County Parks
^ Metro Wastewater Management Commission
^ Oregon Parks and Recreation Department
^ Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife
^ The Nature Conservancy
^ Willamette Riverkeeper
Mr. Krueger discussed the area in this plan, which included both public and private land in both
Eugene and Springfield. He referred to the Rivers to Ridges project that was started several years back
and noted that it was the first attempt of creating a regional parks and open space vision. The Rivers to
Ridges vision was developed after working with City of Eugene, City of Springfield, Willamalane and
Lane County and received clear policy direction, including voluntary participation for private land.
Mr. Krueger said that vision went through an endorsement process, which was not a legal land use
decision, but was given standing through the endorsement process. All of the elected officials,
including City of Springfield and. Willamalane, had reviewed this, provided input, and endorsed the
plan by unanimous consent. At the time, there was a request to focus on other areas outside of the
.Rivers to Ridges framework. In 2008, the partners initiated the Ridgeline Area Vision and Action
,Plan, looking at the ridgeline through south Eugene to Fern Ridge Reservoir, about 20 miles past
Spencer Butte over to Springfield and the Buford Recreation area. There was more detail to this plan.
He noted the expanded area on a map in the power point. Many of the habitat areas were in private
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
October 4, 2010
Page 5
ownership and would remain in private ownership. The strategy was to work with watershed councils
and land trust to provide conservation easements and technical assistance for management.
Mr. Krueger said about 18 months ago they initiated a process to look at the Willamette River and the
major tributaries. He provided a brief history of the Willamette River and the changes that have.
occurred in the river over those years. Through those changes, much of the native habitat had been
removed. Part of this project was to reintroduce that native habitat to the river.~He discussed the water
quality which reached its worst in about 1850 or 1860, but was now doing very well. There had been a
Iot of plans done along the river, all of which were reviewed through this process. All of the relevant
information from those past plans was incorporated into the current vision.
Mr. Krueger further discussed the partnership. They had some public meetings, an online survey, an
outreach to many interest groups, and a design charrette. Many things, such~as the Mill Race project,
were currently being implemented. He again noted that they were taking the non-regulatory approach
with private property owners.
Mr. Krueger said there were eight vision elements in this plan:
1. Habitat and habitat enhancements
2. Recreation, including public safety.
3. Bike and Pedestrian Transportation
4. Visual Quality
5. Urban Interface
6. History, Education, and Sense of Place
7. The Working Landscape
8. Tourism ~.
He discussed each of the elements in more detail.
Mr. Krueger noted those that had endorsed this plan to this point: .
^ League of Women Voters of Lane County
^ Lane County Audubon Society
^ Greater Eugene Area Riders (GEARS)
^ Willamette Kayak and Canoe Club .
^ Eugene Planning Commission (May 10)
^ Friends of Buford Park & Mount Pisgah
^ .Eugene Bicycle and Ped. Advisory Committee
^ Native Plant Society of Oregon, Emerald Chap.
^ American Society of Landscape Architects
^ Springfield Planning Commission (Sept. 21)
Lane County Parks Advisory Committee was scheduled for a presentation on October 11.
Councilor Simmons said it was a wonderful concept and a great process for preserving the access of
.the river. He was very supportive. He especially liked the negotiative process with the McKenzie
River Trust and the Wildish property. We needed to preserve the farmland along the river that was
environmentally sound and allowed for food production for the community. He noted a group that was
buying 320,000 acres of farmland to help preserve the riverfront areas and the farmland.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
October 4, 2010
Page 6
Councilor Lundberg agreed. It touched on everything they had supported for years to make sure our
rivers were known.- Any and ail accesses that could be provided for people to know and experience the
rivers were wonderful. Historically, the river was used by the people for many uses. She compared it
to the ocean and that all beaches in Oregon were public and accessible.
Mr. Krueger said visual access was a key strategy. -
Councilor Wylie said it was wonderful.
Mayor Leiken said there were so many possibilities in Glenwood and real potential. He was pleased
that Mr. Krueger had highlighted the riverfront in Portland and what it looked Puce today. He was
grateful for John Brown and his group for their efforts to clean-up the riverfront in Glenwood. He
asked if staff had what they needed.
Ms. Pauly asked that the Mayor write a letter supporting this plan. There was no need for a resolution.
Council agreed.
Mr. Krueger said that worked for them as well.
ADJOL:JRNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at approximately 6:57 p.m.
Minutes Recorder -Amy Sowa
}
Attest:
Amy Sow
City Recor er