HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/11/2011 Work SessionCity of Springfield
Work Session Meeting
MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION MEETING OF
THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL HELD
TUESDAY, JANUARY 11, 2011
The City of Springfield Council met in a work session in the Jesse Maine Meeting Room,. 225 Fifth
Street, Springfield, Oregon, on Tuesday, January 1' 1, 2011 at 5:35 p.m., with Mayor Lundberg
presiding. -
ATTENDANCE
Present were Mayor Lundberg and Councilors Ralston, Wylie, Moore, and Pishioneri. Also present
were City Manager Gino Grimaldi, Assistant City Attorney Mary Bridget Smith, City Attorney Joe
Leahy, City Recorder Amy Sowa, and members of the staff.
Mayor Lundberg asked Councilor-elect Woodrow to join the council at the table for the work session.
1. Library Board Applicant Review.
Library Director Rob Everett presented the staff report on this item. The Board interviewed current
board member Jocelyn Harley at its November meeting and interviewed Sattler, Madsen, and
Anderson at its December meeting. Harley, who was seeking reappointment, recused herself from the
December interviews. Janice Friend was unavailable at the time of the interviews. The Board would ....
encourage her to reapply for future openings. The board communicated the same sentiment to Ms.
Anderson. ~ -
The Board recommended that Robyn Sattler and Laura Madsen be appointed to the Board, and that
Jocelyn Harley be reappointed to the Board.
Harley's 4-year term would run from January 2011 until December 31, 2014. Sattler and Madsen
would be filling out the unexpired terms of Board Chair Marilee Woodrow (12/31/11).and Board
member Kristin Dahlin (12/31 / 11).
Jocelyn Harley - A teacher in the 4J School District lived within, walking distance of the Library. She
had been an articulate and effective member of the Board since the Fall of 2008. This would be her.
first full term on the board.
Robyn Sattler -currently served on the board of the Friends of the Library as the Membership Chair:
She had been active in library fund-raising activities for several years. In addition she had served on
Springfield's Community Development Advisory Committee and the Downtown Citizen Advisory
Committee.
Laura Madsen - An educator and school librarian in the Springfield School District, Laura lived in
east Springfield. She was active in many reading initiatives including Gift of Literacy and Oregon
Battle of the Books.
Mr. Everett noted that another member resigned just recently leaving a fourth vacancy that Council
could choose to fill at this time if they so desired. The Library Board recommended Jody Anderson for
the fourth position.
City. of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
January 11, 2011
Page 2
Councilor Wylie clarified the recommendations.
Mr. Everett said he had talked with the Board members to re-affirm that they would like to choose
Jody Anderson for the fourth position. He had also talked with Ms. Anderson and re-affirmed that she
was interested in serving on the Board if chosen.
Council consensus was to appoint the four recommended candidates to the Library Board during the
January 18, 201.1 Council meeting.
2. Ward 1 Council Position Interviews.
City Manager Gino Grimaldi presented the staff report on this item. Due to the appointment of
Christine Lundberg to the position of Mayor, the Ward 1 City Council position was.vacant and would.
be filled through arecruitment/appointment process. An application period was opened and four
applications were received. It was the City Council's policy to interview proposed appointees to
council.
In response to council direction, the City Manager's Office initiated the recruitment process for the
vacant Ward 1 position. The attached news release and application packet were prepared and available
for distribution beginning December 8, 2010. Application packets were due to the City Manager's
Office by December 30, 2010 and were attached for Council review and consideration.
Four applications were received by the closing deadline.
The term for this appointment would expire December 31, 2012. If the person appointed chose to run
for another term, the primary election for this position would be held in May of 2012. .
The chosen applicant for the Ward 1 position would be ratified at an upcoming City Council regular
meeting. ~ .
The Mayor and Council discussed the questions and-chose which one each would ask of the
candidates.
The Mayor and Council interviewed the following applicants:
• Christine Stole
• Tony McCown
~ Sean VanGordon
• Barbara Stramler
Mayor Lundberg welcomed each of the applicants and explained. the process. The. Mayor and Council
asked the following questions of each candidate:
• Question #2: What unique abilities or experiences would you bring to the Council? (Councilor
Wylie)
• Question #4: When faced with a complex problem with multiple solutions, what process
would you use to select the best solution to the problem? (Councilor-elect Woodrow)
• Question #6: If there were three things in Springfield you were permitted to do, whether it be
to add, eliminate or change anything, what would those be? (Councilor Moore)
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
January 11, 2011
Page 3
• Question #l: What are the. primary reasons for your interest in the Ward 1 City Council
position? (Mayor Lundberg)
• Question #9: Councilors are elected citywide rather than by ward. What advantages or
disadvantages do you see with that process? (Councilor Ralston)
• Question #3: How do you define success and how' do you know you are successful?,
(Councilor Pishioneri)
• Question # 10: What is your greatest life accomplishment to date? (Councilor Ralston)
Councilor Moore asked about Mr. McCown's schedule on his other boards, committees and
commissions.
Mr. McCown said he served on the Lane Community College Board of Education which met once a
month on Wednesdays; the LCOG Executive Committee which met every third month on Thursdays;
and the Lane County Planning Commission which met every other Tuesday. He said if he was chosen
to fill the Council position, he would most likely.step down from some of the other committees and
commissions that would cause conflicts of interest.
The Mayor and Council discussed each of the applicants and their strengths.
Council discussed whether or not comments and concerns of each of the councilors should be
considered as they made their decision.
After deliberation, the majority of the Council said they would like. to appoint Sean VanGordon to the
Ward. l Council position.
Mayor Lundberg acknowledged that there were a number of citizens in the lobby waiting for Council-
elect Woodrow's official swearing in and oath of office. She asked if they would like to recess the
meeting at this time to go into Regular Session for the swearing in.
Councilor-elect Woodrow said she would prefer to wait unti17:30pm.
Mayor Lundberg suggested moving the Financial Report to this part of the meeting, recess for the
Special Regular Meeting, then reconvene for the Planning Commission interviews and the Main Street
Study Report.
3. 2010 Annual Financial Report.
Accounting Supervisor Nathan Bell presented the staff report on this item. In accordance with Oregon
Statues and the City's charter, the City was required to complete an annual audit and financial
statement. The report would be presented to the City Council at the January 18, 2011 regular meeting
on the consent calendar..
Grove, Mueller & Swank, the City's independent auditors, had completed their audit of the City's
2009/2010 CAFR and had issued their opinion thereon. Mr. Bell introduced Mr. Swank of Grove,
Mueller & Swank, who would review the audit.process, the Independent Auditor's Report, and the
City's CAFR with the Council members.
As a preliminary summary, for the Council's information, it was noted that the auditor's found no
material weaknesses in the City's internal financial controls and they issued a "clean opinion" on the
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes -
January 11; ZO11
Page 4
City's financial statements. This meant that the City was properly accounting for its resources and
using adequate financial controls to help prevent the improper use of those resources.
Mr. Bell noted that the City surpassed their goal in getting the CAFR to the State within 175 days from
the fiscal year by submitting the report at 168 days.
Councilor Pishioneri asked about certification.
Mr. Grimaldi spoke regarding certification, and noted that the audit was the more useful tool and more
beneficial to the City.
Mr. Swank agreed.
Mr. Grimaldi said if the City chose to submit the budget report, they would receive the award because
we followed the guidelines.
Councilor Pishioneri asked if it was an advantage to have the certification for levies and bonds.
Mr: Grimaldi said the audit would affect those.
Councilor Moore asked about the reference to bond rating.
Mr. Swank said bond rating agencies read this, but there was a lot more they took into consideration
than just the financial statements.
Councilor Moore referred to the highlights. It appeared the City was better off this year than last.
Mr. Bell said it was about the same. Some things that looked like an improved situation might include
donations by developers, such as infrastructure. Those types of things must be reported as revenue.
Councilor Ralston asked if we also had funds set aside for large projects. Until we spent those funds, it
appeared we had extra money. Correct.
Mr. Swank said the General Fund showed more of the City's financial strength. This year the City's
General Fund was $498,000 over in revenues out of $30M, which wasn't much. A big drop in
revenues was cause for concern.
Mayor Lundberg thanked Mr. ,Swank and staff for their hard work.
Mr. Swank said they appreciated the opportunity to work for the City and work with the professional
staff in Finance:
7:30 pm Mayor called to recess the meeting to convene into the Special Regular Meeting.
7:40 pm. The meeting was reconvened.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
January 11, 2011
Page 5
4. Planning Commission Interviews.
Planning Manager Greg Mott presented the staff report on this item. Five candidates had applied for
the Planning Commission vacancy created by Commissioner Sheri Moore'~s appointment to the City
Council in November; this position expired on July 31, 2013. An additional vacancy was now open
due to the selection by Council of Sean VanGordon to fill the vacant Ward 1 position created by
Councilor Lundberg's appointment to Mayor.
The City received five (5) applications for one (1) vacancy during an eight week recruitment process.
Mr. Robert (Bob) Brew resided at 6889 Simeon Drive.; Springfield; and was a Business Manager with
Oregon Secretary of State's Office located in Salem, Oregon.
Mr. Glenn F. Stutzman resided at 1432 6`~ Street, Springfield; and was unemployed at .this time. Mr.
Mott noted that Glenn Stutzman had withdrawn his application as he was unable to attend the Council
meeting tonight for the interview. He understood that it was not possible to reschedule his interview
and chose to withdraw his application. The interview schedule had been adjusted to reflect this change.
Mr. Thomas L. Jones resided at 2645 I Street, Springfield; and was an Improvement Engineer with
Sacred Heart RiverBend.
Mr. Riley M. Smith resided at 231 18~' Street, Springfield; and was a Tattooist and business owner
located in Springfield.
Ms. Stacy L: Salladay resided at 6852 Ivy Street, Springfield; and was a RLID Support & Training
Specialist with The Lane Council of Governments.
The Springfield Planning Commission was a seven member volunteer commission appointed by the
City Council. The members served four-year terms that were staggered to avoid more than two
positions expiring at the same time. Of the seven members, two appointments may live outside the
City limits and two appointments may be involved in the Real Estate profession. Positions were "at-
large", and did not represent specific geographic areas.
Currently the Planning Commission had one member, Commissioner Moe, who lived outside the City .
limits, and none that worked in Real Estate.
The Council was scheduled to ratify the appointment(s) during the Regular Meeting on January 18,
2011. ~.
The Mayor and Council chose the questions they would ask of each of the candidates, and interviewed
the following candidates:
• `Bob Brew
• Thomas Jones
• Riley Smith
• Stacy Salladay
Mayor Lundberg welcomed each of the applicants and explained the process. The Mayor and Council
asked the following questions of each candidate:
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
January 11., 2011
Page 6
• Question # 1: Why are you interested in serving on the Planning Commission? (Mayor
Lundberg)
• Question #6: How would you recommend balancing the, community's need for attractive
commercial and industrial development with the rights of property owners? (Councilor
Pishioneri)
• Question #4: What is your general understanding of the relationship between the Planning
Commission and City Staff, the Planning Commission and the City Council? (Councilor
Ralston)
• Question #3: Many of the land use laws applied by the Planning Commission are state or
federally mandated. During a Planning Commission hearing how would you reconcile your
own personal opinions with the applicant's interests when those interests do not comply with
the land use laws? (Councilor Moore)
• Question #7: The City is in the midst of creating a separate urban growth boundary frotn the
single regional urban growth boundary that encompasses both Springfield and Eugene. What
is your understanding of the purpose of an urban growth boundary? Do you believe it's a good
idea for the cities to discard the single regional urban growth boundary in favor of two
separately administered urban growth boundaries? (Councilor Woodrow)
• Question #5: What role do you think the Planning Commission should have with the
revitalization of downtown? (Councilor Wylie)
Ms. Salladay asked if there were one or two positions available.
Mayor Lundberg said there were two.
The Mayor and Council discussed the applicants and their qualifications.
Councilor Moore said she felt she needed to connect with Mr. Smith as a citizen in her ward to discuss
some of the issues he brought up during his interview.
After deliberation, the majority of the.Council chose to appoint Stacy Salladay and Bob Brew to the
Planning Commission positions.
5. Springfield Main Street (OR126) Safety Study. .
City Transportation Planner David Reesor presented the staff report on this item. The Sprin~eld
Main Street (OR 126) Safety Study evaluated a 5-mile length of Main Street and recommended
solutions to create safer pedestrian crossings. After extensive work that included technical analysis,
stakeholder and public input, the draft report was now complete. The Oregon Department of
Transportation's (ODOT's) consultant, DKS Associates, would present a brief project summary and
be available to answer questions. The Council was asked to consider the merits of the Study and to
direct staff whether to prepare a resolution of support for the Study.
As of Apri12010, the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT), the City of Springfield, and
Lane Transit District (LTD) had worked together on a safety study of OR 126 (Main Street) from 20th
Street to 73rd Street in Springfield. Council last provided input on the project during a November 8~',
2010 work session. Tonight's work session provided an opportunity for final input from the Council.
Project team staff sought Council's endorsement of the Study.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
January 11, 2011
Page 7
The draft report was a result of technical analysis that included data collection, analysis of existing
conditions, identification of priority locations, and analysis of improvement alternatives and strategies.
The project team consisted of staff from ODOT, City of'Springfield and LTD. Additional input was
received from the Study Advisory Group, which included local stakeholders. A public open house was
also held on October 19~', 2010, which solicited additional public input.
As noted in the slides and draft report attached to the agenda packet, a total of 9 locations had been
given priority along the corridor. The prioritization of these locations was based upon collection and
analysis of data. The analysis considered the following: current roadway network characteristics;
traffic volume, speed, and classification data; intersection operation performance levels; corridor
collision analysis; pedestrian crossing conflict analysis; pedestrian and bicycle activity; and transit
service. This analysis also helped.the project team develop overall corridor safety strategies which
were listed in the attached slides and report. The draft report had been revised to address all comments
received to-date, including those provided by the Study Advisory Group; on the project website, and at
the public open house.
No financial obligation was committed through endorsement of the Sprin~eld Main Street (OR126)
Safety Study. The Study would, however, provide valuable context for seeking grants and funding
partners for ongoing safety improvements along the Main Street corridor.
Additional project information could be found on the project website at
www.springfieldmainstreet:or~, including existing conditions analysis, pedestrian enhancement
toolbox, and background review documents.
Mr. Reesor introduced Dick Reynolds, project manager from ODOT, Scott Mansur, project manager
from DKS Associates, Brad Coy from DKS Associates, and Sonny Chickering, Oregon Department of
Transportation (ODOT) manager.
Mr. Coy presented a power point presentation. He referred to the timeline of this project and the study
area corridor, where pedestrian safety was studied. He described the public involvement part of the
project, including one-on-one stakeholder interviews, study advisory groups, a public open house on
October 19, 2010, the Council work session on November 8, 2010, and the project website, which
would continue to be updated throughout the duration of the project. To date, all .public comment
received had been addressed. He discussed the agency involvement, which included representatives
from ODOT, the City of Springfield and Lane Transit District (LTD).
Mr. Coy summarized the draft report which was divided into six chapters: 1) Executive Summary; 2)
Existing Conditions; 3) Pedestrian Toolbox; 4) Crossing Concepts; 5) Overall Corridor; and 6) Project
Implementation. This report was also included in the agenda packet. The Technical Analysis included
data collection, existing conditions analysis, pedestrian crossing. observations, and pedestrian crossing
treatment toolbox. Before they did all this work, they took the stakeholder information from the public
and business owners to determine the areas of focus. They then created a tool box of potential options
that could be implemented along the corridor.
Nine prioritized locations were identified. These locations were shown on a map in the power point.
. One of the high priorities at 51St Street had already received some improvements, but additional
lighting was planned so it had remained on the list. He discussed the other priority locations. He
highlighted the improvements that were being recommended for the priority locations, including street
. lighting improvements, transit stop locations, driveway closures, and pedestrian signals.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
January 11, 2011
Page 8
Councilor Ralston asked if there would be something to tell the pedestrians when not to cross.
Mr. Coy said they would push a button that would activate the yellow flashing lights, but there was not
a walk signal. He explained. The pedestrians would need to decide when it was safe to cross.
Councilor Ralston said people needed to be aware that they needed to still look.for traffic to stop.
Councilor Woodrow discussed the safety issues regarding the transit stop on Main Street near the
Driftwood.
Mr. Coy said. cars were required to stop by law when the flashing beacon was activated.
Councilor Woodrow said it was difficult for drivers to see the lights flashing or the pedestrians
crossing when behind the bus.
Mr. Coy said the intent was to have a far side stop. They were trying to move that transit stop.
Councilor Woodrow asked when the transit station v.~ould be moved.
Mr. Chickering said this particular transit station was currently moved and was now situated so the
back of the bus was across the crosswalk.
Councilor Pishioneri explained further.
Mr. Coy said the intent was to move the transit station to avoid that situation. They had looked at
overall corridor strategies, such as transit stop locations, pedestrian signal timing options, and new
traffic signals. He described some of the alternate signals that were being considered. Speed feedback
signs were also being considered, as well as corridor street lighting. He discussed the process in
determining whereto relocate transit stops. He noted the corridor-wide improvements where the
countdown timers and feedback signs would be placed. He referred.to a chart of prioritized safety
improvements. He discussed each improvement and where they recommended they be implemented.
There would be one more Technical Advisory Committee meeting the week of January 17, 2011, and
a final report in February 2011.
Councilor Pishioneri asked about positioning for speed limit signage and asked about the difference
between the residential areas near 69th Street, and 51St and Main Street in regards to the justification of
45 mph versus 40 mph. He noted the risk at the 69t~ Street with the higher speed limit. There was. a lot
of pedestrian traffic at the signaled intersection at 69t~ Street and Main Street. He felt the speed should
be reduced prior to a fatal accident. He also discussed the street lighting along Main Street that was
intermittent light, then dark. He asked if anything could be done regarding the position of the bulb or
the design of the shrowd.
Mr. Coy said the street lighting issue was a safety concern. Part of their proposal was to get uniformity
along that corridor to improve that. The speed was based on what traffic was actually travelling.
Traffic was travelling at about 50 mph where it was posted at 45 mph.
Councilor Pishioneri said if it was posted at 40 mph, traffic would go slower.
City of Springfield .
Council Work Session Minutes
January 11, 2011
Page 9
Mr. Chickening said when doing speed studies they normally did analysis, a study of the speed, and.
looked at the 85~' percentile of speed. This was a highway and traffic needed to be moving along. They
relied on drivers to drive. safely. There were examples where other factors came into play and
exceptions. could be made to lower the speed an additional 5 mph.
Councilor Pishioneri referred to the Fire Station at that location as-well.
Mr. Chickening said the initial analysis of this area with speed and number of accidents, didn't warrant
a need to reduce the speed. If that was something the full Council was interested in looking at fiirther,
there was a process they could-go through separate from this study. He said they would also want to
work with the City's Police Department on that.
Councilor Moore asked where the speed changed from 55 to 45.
Mr. Chickening said it was just beyond the cemetery at South 72nd
Councilor Moore asked if center islands were planned at each crossing.
Mr. Coy said not all, but at seven of the locations.
Councilor Moore said in talking with LTD about an extension of EmX to Thurston, they had talked
about using the center lane for the EmX. She didn't want to see the islands put in only to be removed
shortly afterwards. She asked if they had been discussing these center islands with LTD.
Mr. Chickening said that was considered. It was still unclear which corridor would be after the West
Eugene EmX comdor. That wouldn't be constructed for another five or six years at least. He felt it
would be money well spent during this time.
Mr. Coy said LTD had been involved in this whole study.
Councilor Wylie referred to signs warning people when they entered a dangerous corridor. She asked
if they could install signs at each end of the corridor warning drivers that a dangerous corridor for
pedestrian crossings was ahead. This was a wide street and was difficult to cross. It would help drivers
to be aware. .
Mr. Coy said all improvements did include signage.
Mr. Reynolds said the improvements, such as feedback signs and flashing lights, would make people
aware and did more to bring attention to the drivers. This could result in a friendlier corridor for
pedestrians. Then we could go to the speed board and reduce the speed limits.
Councilor Woodrow said there were still people that chose to cross where there was no crosswalk:
Once these were in place, she asked if that type of crossing would occur less frequently.
Mr. Coy said part of the study included where the pedestrians were already crossing, and putting the
crossing at those locations.
Mr. Reynolds said this should help reduce the number of pedestrians crossing where there was no
crosswalk. .
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
January 11, 2011
Page 10
- Mr. Coy said it was important to provide the tools to allow pedestrians to cross safely.
Mr. Reesor said as the improvements got put into place, they would couple that with education for
both drivers and pedestrians. They would work with their partners at Point to Point for that education
piece for both schools and businesses.
Councilor Ralston said this had been a thoughtful and thorough study. He felt that the speed feedback
signs would be instrumental in reducing speed.
Councilor Lundberg referred to a school area that had those signs in Washington that were very
effective. Between night time lighting and flashing lights, the area would be much better. They
couldn't change everyone's behavior. This was a good study.
Councilor Pishioneri asked if there was a speed feedback sign that triggered an LED flasher.
Mr. Coy said if the driver was travelling the correct speed, the feedback sign did not display. The light
only flashed if the driver was exceeding the speed limit.
Councilor Pishioneri said if it could do that, it seemed it could also trigger an LED flasher.
Mr. Chickening said when the signs were installed, they would use the units with the latest ODOT
technology.
Council consensus was to ask staff to bring a resolution back for consideration during a regular
session.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at. approximately 9:28 p.m.
Minutes Recorder -Amy Sowa
Christine L. Lundberg
Mayor
Attest:
Amy S a
City R order