Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/14/2011 Work Session~ 1 1 r. ~ City of Springfield ~ ' Work Session Meeting , '~' MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION MEETING OF THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL HELD MONDAY, FEBRUARY 14, 2011 The City of Springfield Council met in a work session in the Jesse Maine Meeting Room, 225 Fifth Street, Springfield, Oregon; on Monday, February 14, 2011 5:31 p.m., with l~~ayor Lundberg . presiding.. . ATTENDANCE Present were Mayor Lundberg and Councilors Pishioneri, VanGordon, Wylie, Moore, Ralston, and Woodrow. Also present were City Manager Gino Grimaldi, Assistant City Manager Jeff Towery, . Assistant City Attorney Mary Bridget Smith, City Recorder Amy. Sowa, and members of the staff: 1. 2012-2016 Capital Improvement Program; a Community Reinvestment Plan.. ' r City Engineer Ken Vogeney and Supervising Civil Engineer Jeff Paschall presented the staff report on this item. The City of Springfield's 2012-2016 CIP - A Community Reinvestment Plan had been drafted by staff, reviewed by the Planning Commission (February 1; 2011), and was now being forwarded to the City Council for review and comment prior to a Public Hearing on March 7, 2011. .The Commission unanimously recommended Council approval of the plan. The CIP attempted to balance the use of scarce capital construction funds with the long list of infrastructure needs in the community. Although not a document with budget authority, the CIP was a guide for programming funds and planning the annual capital-related workload for Public Works staff. ~,. There were a few new projects proposed in the next five years of programmed funding, and staff`had completed several projects from previous year's capital plans. Staff was also making significant headway on several of the projects from last year's plan. These items were detailed in the attached Council Briefing Memorandum. In addition, this year the CIP included; as an Appendix, the matrix used by staff to develop recommended priorities for the various projects. Staff used the resulting .prioritization to make recommendations for programming. Mr. Paschall displayed a power, point presentation during the discussion. Mr. Vogeney discussed the project criteria. Staff identified capital needs.by using the Hansen Asset Management System and reviewing the facilities plans, Urban Renewal plans, land use plans, refinement plans, citizen and public requests, and Council goals and priorities. ° ,. Mr. Vogeney said the Springfield CIP was updated annually and notice was provided to the public, City departments, and other local agencies in the form of requests. He discussed the timeline for those requests and some of the types of requests they received. Many of the requests from the public were considered customer service requests (CSR) and were directed to the appropriate division for review and follow-up. Some were ,able to be fixed immediately. ~ ' y Mr. Vogeney said tonight's focus was to look at the capital improvement needs of the City over the next five years and what the City could project to fund. The projects on the new list included about $201M of need for public infrastructure over the next five years. Approximately $30M of actual funding was available to meet that need. In looking at the transportation funding, there was a need of . about, $76M. Included in the document was the Franklin Boulevard project with a current estimate of ,. City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes February 14, 2011 Page 2 about $SOM. In looking at the building~and property funding, there was a need for $44M. That included a future Library and two future fire stations. The need that was identified were big numbers, however, the City didn't have funding sources identified for those large projects. Including the larger projects in the CIP gave the City extra points on grant applications or other funding opportunities by showing they were community needs. The Franklin Boulevard and three large building projects he noted would not move forward until Council approved funding. Mr. Vogeney referred to the next slide showing the breakdown of the funding for the approximately $30M identified for the CIP over the next five years. He discussed the SDC funds. Mr. Grimaldi noted that if the SDCs were reduced, the funding would need to come from one of the other sources outlined in the chart. The projects in-the CIP were all needed projects. Mr. Vogeney referred to an item titled .Developer Contribution on the funding chart in the amount of $175, 000. That was for the ~ developer obligation for a specific future street construction project on South 48~' Street. The rest of the funding needed to build that project had not yet been identified. He also referred to the item titled Gas Taxes. in the amount of $73,000 for a five year projection. That amount included a contribution towards a topographic remapping project which was already set aside in the current year budget. 'The proposed CIP didn't look at trying to project what the City's revenue might be from the new State fuel tax because they didn't have a good handle on how much, the City might receive, and how much could be used for capital projects. Staff would re-evaluate that revenue next year. . Councilor Moore referred to the General Fund amount of 6%. She asked if that was the same as it had been in the past or if it was an increase or decrease. Mr. Paschall said the General Fund was collected for building preservation citywide. Those funds were used for upkeep and maintenance of City buildings. Starting this year, the need was about $1 M. The revenues had been coming in low. Assistant Public Works Director Len Goodwin said that was a charge that was initiated a few years ago. Prior to that, there was no General Fund allocation for preservation. Mr. Paschall highlighted the five major categories of protects within the CIP. The needs were: 1) Stormwater Capital Needs; 2) Transportation Capital Needs; 3) Wastewater Capital Needs; 4) Building/Property Capital Needs; and 5) Miscellaneous Capital Needs. He discussed some of the projects in each category and how bonds were used for some of the projects. He referred to page 36 of the CIP, the Mill Race Restoration. During the Planning Commission meeting on this topic, the question arose regarding the Improvement SDC Eligibility of 100%. After further investigation by staff, they learned that the Improvement SDC Eligibility was actually 12.7%, so that adjustment would be made for the final document. It would not affect any of the current financing. He also highlighted the over/under channel that was new to the CIP. This project did have funding in the current budget. The project had several failures in the structure of the corrugated metal pipe. Some of the bond money received in October had been designated for that project to start design and investigation and to . determine the extent of repairs needed for the pipe. Councilor Ralston asked where that was located. Mr. Vogeney said it started at the easterly boundary of Silke Field, went through several properties,. and discharged at Moffitt School at the Q Street channel. ._ City. of Springfield Council .Work Session R'Iinutes '. February 14, 2011 ~ ~. Page 3 Councilor Ralston asked about the diameter, and if a smaller pipe could just be put inside to repair it. Mr. Vogeney said the pipe was 54 inches, but had some damage that would not allow a smaller pipe to be put inside. Replacing the pipe would be a better choice. Mr. Pashcall spoke regarding the transportation capital needs. Some overlay and preservation had been _ accomplished through the year, and the City had also received some funding from STIP-U funds for overlay. The City's preservation program was now contingent on funding from outside sources of revenue. He spoke regarding wastewater capital needs. The funds from last year were spread out " among four projects, allowing the City to keep current with Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) requirements. He spoke regarding another bond sale in 2013. Mr. Paschall discussed the building/property capital needs for the next five years. There was also a category for miscellaneous projects. Some of those included projects that were funded by several sources, and others that didn't fit into any of the other categories. He explained how this all fit into our debt service and bonds. - Councilor Moore referred t'o the Cherokee Drive Sewer Line shown in the power point. She asked if the Bancroft loans that the City had approved for financing covered all ofthose-costs. Mr. Vogeney said the project was complete. The photo was just used as an example. IVIr. Grimaldi some the project did require .some City funding and some funding by residents. Councilor Moore asked about the lag time between completion of projects and the ten years when the Bancroft loans are paid. She asked how the City covered those costs during that time. " Mr. Duey said in the past, LID projects were more common and happened more frequently. The projects could then be bundled into a package and the City could sell bonds to reimburse the.City. Now there were so few projects, there weren't enough to package and sell bonds, so he borrowed funds internally, using the Bancroft payments to pay the City back. The interest rate would normally pay for the payments, but the City agreed to charge a lesser rate for the residents on Cherokee Drive so the City would be subsidizing the balance of the interest needed to repay the borrowed funds. Mayor Lundberg asked about the next steps. ~ ~ Mr. Vogeney said staff would make edits to the CIP that Mr. Paschall had shared earlier, and-then bring it to Council for a public hearing-and possible adoption on March 7. ~. Councilor Ralston asked about the Hansen Management System and if it provided information for just _ roads, or for buildings and other capital needs. Mr. Vogeney said it collected data on everything. Councilor Woodrow asked if this CIP included information from the Regional Wastewater. Mr. Vogeney said the regional plan was not included, just that for Springfield. The two would be combined into one document later. t City of Springfield - ~ ~ ' Council Work Session Minutes February.l4, 2011. Page 4 2. Discussion of Springfield Downtown Design Plan and Possible Links to High Speed Rail Development. Community Development Manager John Tamulonis presented the staff report on this item. As a follow up to the Downtown Citizens Advisory Committee. work on the Downtown District Urban Design Plan (Attachment 1 of the agenda packet), John Thomas, Dan Egan and Annie Rommel represented the Committee's interest to pursue the potential for connecting Springfield's Downtown with the proposed High Speed Rail system to serve the Northwest. They requested a lengthier discussion with the City Council regarding future efforts regarding the High Speed Rail system and better connections. The 1995 High Speed Southern Rail Terminus Study (Attachment 3 of the agenda packet) evaluated Eugene and Springfield sites with potential to service trains coming to and going from this area to Portland-Seattle-Vancouver, BC. Based on.1995 conditions, Chapter 6 of the Study recommended picking~Eugene's passenger rail station over building a new one in Springfield's Downtown primarily on overall accessibility to residence and work locations that shortened access time for potential rail passengers. Crandall-Arambula's Downtown District Design Plan (Attachment 1 of the agenda packet) provided a short to long-term mapping for redesigning and redeveloping the Downtown with particular importance given to accessibility and mobility. With two EmX lines to the LTD Downtown Station, the adjacent Union Pacific Main Line tracks, and the yet-to-be developed former site of a passenger rail station about two blocks away. The Design Plan included a HSR passenger station in-the long- term plans. Access to the station for residence and work locations had changed for this Downtown site. Chapter 5 of the 2010 Oregon Rail Study (Attachment 2 of the agenda packet). described current conditions for passenger rail service and why it should be improved over the next 20 years. Substantial efforts now focused on the `intercity passenger rail line and service that linked Portland and Eugene: existing and new route options that would preserve and grow route capacity and services for passengers along what was now a federally designated high-speed rail corridor between Eugene and Vancouver, BC. Brenda Wilson, Eugene Intergovernmental Relations Manager, was present to discuss current activities of what some called `higher speed/ better rail' service in the Northwest and where and how _ Springfield may work on the long-term issues to improve the passenger. rail systems connecting Springfield-Eugene to the Northwest Rail Corridor. Mr. Tamulonis introduced Brenda Wilson, and also Dan Egan, Executive Director of the Springfield . Chamber of Commerce, and John Thomas, member of the Downtown Advisory Committee. He displayed a power point presentation during his part of the discussion. The Downtown. District Urban Design Plan and Implementation Strategy from Crandall and Arambula had recently been approved by the Council. That strategy was focused on a retail hot spot/plaza, redoing Main Street and South A to two-way streets, and building on a link between the EmX center of the Lane Transit District (LTD} in downtown Springfield and a High Speed Rail. Several items in the Downtown Plan included EmX and High Speed Rail as a concept to be added to downtown at a site that was considered in the 1990's. He referred to a picture that showed a possible location for high speed rail near the Springfield Station and LTD's Park-N-Ride. There was an adequate amount of space at that location. He rioted that the downtown plan could take up to 20 years to put in place. City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes February 14, 2011 Page 5 Mr. Tamulonis said high speed rail was trying to satisfy a need for areas between 120-540 miles apart. He noted the speed of the high speed trains that were shown in kilometers per hour. In our area, they were looking at speeds from 80-120 mph. Some rails in Europe went even faster, but that entailed a large expense to accommodate that type of track. Amtrak operated a high speed rail on the east coast with speeds of 90 miles per hour. Another high speed rail on the west`coast was in California. Mr. Tamulonis displayed a,;slide of map showing the network of rail in the U.S. The West Coast had very few routes running north to south compared to the Midwest and East Coast. Only a few of the corridors might be developed into high speed rail in the U.S: He noted the areas that had been targeted by the United States Department of Transportation (USDOT) as high speed corridors. Oregon was making some investments in their trains that would be about a step up from our current trains. Those new trains would be coming in 2012. Mr. Tamulonis noted that the changes in. rail had happened very slowly over time. The key piece for Springfield in the past was +a study done in 1995 for the southern terminus for a high speed rail system. The two locations that were most likely were the Eugene Station and the Springfield Depot's original location: At that time, there was better access for citizens and employees to get to the train from Eugene. Currently, Springfield had the EmX station.and other amenities. The decision of where the line might end was still up 'for discussion. Springfield could fit into that discussion. The Eugene Station had been upgraded,, but was right next to the rail lines that were not passenger lines. Those lines were not able to take higher speeds. He referred to a slide showing the different rail lines throubh Eugene and Springfield. A' high speed rail station would need to be able to pick up passengers. He further discussed some of the issues at the Eugene Station. Mr. Tamuloni s discussed the Oregon Department of Transportation's (ODOT) 20-year plan for rail, which looked at other ways to transport freight. I-5 carried about 80% of the freight transportation and the rails about 20%. The plan also looked at trying to increase on-time performance, increasing daily round trips, and reducing travel time. He reviewed the Next Steps in the state plan. NIr. Tamulonis said $8B, of American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funding went out in January 2010. Of those funds, $0.6B came to the Northwest, with $8M coming to Oregon. Oregon didn't yet have the items needed to make the decisions to move on high speed rail. Wien people considered high speed rail, they also considered air or auto travel and based their choice on cost and time. A consultant was hired by the State to do some interviews with key stakeholders around Oregon. Some of those locally that 'would be interviewed would be John Thomas, Dan Egan, Gino Grimaldi, Mayor Lundberg,' Sid Leiken, and John Tamulonis. Ms. Wilson said she would discuss what had gone on at the State and Federal level, because they were on two separate tracks. In 2008 when President Obama was elected, it became clear that he had a high interest in passenger rail. Discussions with ODOT were started about some of the. projects Eugene had, including the Eugene Depot. When the State of Oregon realized there would be ARRA funding of $8B for rail, they put together an application. The Northwest comdor was awarded $598M; the State of Washington got $590M and Oregon got. $8M. Oregon's portion would go mainly to the Portland station and for some infrastructure north of Portland. At that time, they realized there was no vision for passenger or freight rail in Oregon. The rails currently in Oregon were privately owned and leased by the State. Part of projects it Oregon's application were infrastructure upgrades to Portland and Eugene Depots, but did not connect any projects together. Many groups around Oregon and Washington started talking about what to do about rail for all in Oregon. They started to have conversations with the key stakeholders and started to narrow down the conversations. They narrowed it down to the I` \ . J City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes February 14, 2011 Page 6 _ Oregon Transportation Commission (OTC). The OTC's rail division was only regulatory and did -not include any planning. After being approached by the group, OTC decided to set up two advisorycommittees for the State, aside from the rail advisory committee. The two committees wo~ald split responsibilities: one would . talk about sustainable, ongoing funding for the passenger rail system in Oregon; and the second would talk about the vision for Oregon. Mayor Piercy was the co-chair of the second committee. It was determined that a lot of stakeholders needed to be involved in that committee. ODOT hired a consultant to travel around the State to interview stakeholders. Through these interview, they hoped to find out what was wanted for Oregon for both passenger and freight rail, and also who they could trust to represent all of the discussions. Those that needed to be involved included those in support, those in opposition, and Union Pacific. Ms. Wilson said- the first round of the $8B was -free money with no match required. The second round would be a 50% match, which the State couldn't afford. Congressman DeFazio, who was the previous Chair of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, wanted information on a plan, what they wanted and how they wanted to build it, and he-would work on it. Following the election, the ~~ House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee shifted leadership, and the leader of the committee did not consider passenger ;rail a high priority, and was not interested in the Federal government giving more for passenger rail. The Chair also wanted to look at the initial allocation and taking it back. President Obama's current (budget included another $8B in passenger rail funding to be split between infrastructure upgrade and building out new systems. The new Transportation Chair was interested in that funding going to a couple of eomdors that made the most sense, which were in the northeast. Ms. Wilson said the State needed to talk about what pieces of our infrastructure were most important: Discussions needed to occur about how to get together as a State to express the importance of this for our State, region, and economic development, and that we supported it wholeheartedly. Without the support from our State, the (Federal government would not consider the northwest for further funding. They also needed to get involved in the conversations that mattered, such as how we would pay for it, . and where we.wanted the rail to go. She. discussed the Union Pacific rail lines and the issues with those lines. _ . Ms. Wilson said a bill had been introduced by Representative Nathanson that would remove all authority from ODOT for the rail system, and create a separate rail authority, with the hope of eventually creating a regional authority bi-state between Washington and Oregon, and a bi-country authority between Canada, Washington and Oregon. Representative Nathanson considered this new authority as building upon the advisory committees, There had been indications from the Governor's office that ODOT and the committee had not worked fast enough on this issue. She encouraged the Mayor and Council to look~at how they could support this as a State, and work with Washington. Washington had dedicated planning for rail. ~, Councilor Ralston asked ifrail was something that would be discussed during this year's United Front. Ms. Wilson said it would. One of the problems at the Eugene Depot was the lack of a layover platform, so more rail couldn't be added at that location. The message they wanted to take back to Washington was that Oregon was serious about this, and ask our delegation to continue the commitment to passenger rail. ,~ Councilor Moore asked about the feasibility of building new tracks for faster rail that would be owned by the State rather than private. . City of Springfield . . Council «~ork Session Minutes February 14, 2011 `~ Page 7 Ms. Wilson said when weighing the pros and cons regarding that, there were more pros to doing that because they didn't need to rely on Union Pacific. They could take care of safety considerations better and with less expense on a new rail than on an existing rail. There were some constitutional issues, but Representative Nathanson had also introduced another bill into the legislature that would preserve existing right-of--way owned by local .and state government to allow more room for more alternatives. Councilor Moore said she had noticed large areas .between the north and south traffic on I-5. Mr. Tamulonis said hills and curved nature of our terrain were part of the issue. Union Pacific had talked about having a second line on their same right-of--way. He discussed rail lines in Europe. Councilor Wylie said taking on the railroad was a big job. She was very supportive of this initiative and was interested in Representative Nathanson's bill. 'She agreed we needed two lines and a system to maintain both lines, and improve the freight line. They also needed to encourage efficiency and customer service. Anew system could create efficiency, quality and customer service for both freight and passenger. That should; be the goal. Councilor Ralston asked what the cost would, be from Springfield to Seattle... Ms. Wilson said Oregon would need about $400M, but the total cost would be about $2B total. Councilor Ralston said nobody had the funding, but to have the idea and fortitude to go forward with this they would need a business plan. Those making the decisions would be more open to looking at this if it paid for itself. Mr. Tamulonis said there was a passenger rail business plan that was worked on in 1994. The latest plan was adopted in 2000, so it did need to be updated. Ms. Wilson said it currently cost $9-lOM per biennium to run the two trains in Oregon. The State took in $7M per biennium from ;customized license plates to operate our train system. A bill was going to be presented today, but was killed last week, that would have taken all that money and given it to the .State Police. The reasons Oregon bought two new trains was because the two we had belonged to the State of Washington. Mr. Tamulonis said one of the key pieces in working with Springfield's downtown plan was where we went from here. This was the first step in looking at a station in downtown Springfield. Mr. Egan said this was a tough proposition, but noted that I-5, the airport, and the EmX were also difficult. In 1995, Mr. Egan came before the City Council and asked for the Council support for a high speed rail coalition. At that!' time, Springfield was the only City not to agree to that along our corridor. He sensed that Springfield had come a long way since then. Whereuer.the station went, if Springfield was not at the table, we would not show up on any of the maps. Now Springfield was going to have to .fight to get back into the queue and back into the discussion. We needed to not only represent our station, but also staging and other areas. He was glad to see that some in Springfield were back in the conversation. He urged Council to make sure wherever possible we got the maps changed to show . Springfield. When the com,dor got. built, millions of dollars would be spent on publicity and we wanted Springfield to be part of that. The State of Washington was way ahead of us, but there were many economic reasons for Oregon to catch up. City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes February 14, 2011 -, Page 8 Mr. Thomas said a precursor to all of these discussions was that we needed to have a vision and a plan. High speed rail may not happen right away, but right now we weren't even on the map. There were also micro-issues regarding Springfield downtown. The City had a plan outlined by Crandall Arambula that involved all of the components of a vital downtown footprint, including transportation; siting of businesses, and infrastructure needed. Looking at south Springfield, there was a huge parcel - of ground that was not being .utilized. We did not have EmX in Springfield in 1995, and now we did. The committee was considering some dialogue with Greyhound,' as it .could complement EmX and further complement high speed rail. Looking at logistics, there was no place to park trains in Eugene, there was very~little parking, and the population surrounding the station were not likely to be train riders. In looking at the criteria, Springfield .had a lot more to deliver, such as rail repair, layover capability, EmX and accessibility. There were political issues to deal with, so we needed to co-op with. Eugene and vice versa to put forward an integrated plan. Anything that happened in Springfield would benefit both Springfield and Eugene: The downtown advisory committee had been looking at all of these things. We needed Springfield to be involved. Mr. Thomas had talked to Representative Bruce Hanna who seemed pre-disposed to something in Springfield. We also had Springfield residents and representatives Congressman DeFazio and Lee Beyer. We needed to listen and be careful on how we proceeded, but. we needed to proceed. If we thought we. could do it, we would find a way to figure it out. Councilor VanGordon said in thinking about what he would want in high speed rail, he would take . into account the time from his home to his,destination. This would need to be competitive in price and time in the end-to-end picture. The coalition needed to talk about how to use all connections. He also wanted to make sure it was cost effective. The discussions also needed to take into account that if freight was taken off the roads, it could make passenger driving more~efficient. On-time performance was a huge issue. Ms. Wilson said ODOT did some interviews, and when they asked people about more, better, faster . . faster came last. If we went too fast, they wouldn't be able to make stops. Where the southern terminus depot went was pretty controversial. They needed to all support a well.working rail system, not just passenger, but freight as well. If we built a new line, we would have a better chance of efficiency. Councilor Wylie recalled the difficulty LTD had in finding a bus manufacturer who would make the type of bus they wanted for EmX: LTD persisted and found someone to make the bus. It could be difficult when no one would budge, but they needed to have a vision to make it happen. Councilor Woodrow said in the past she rode rail in,Philadelphia, so this was exciting to her. She noted the combination of EmX, parking, and the ability to create the impact of convenience at the Springfield Station. She felt that combination would sell it to members of the community. The environmental impact was also very important for advocating. A vision and image was important. The amenities noted above could create the vision: Councilor Moore said the current train system was not always reliable or convenient. She was very enthusiastic about this. ~ _ Councilor Pishioneri said he was behind this project. The 1995 study by LCOG showed that they would be moving the Lane County Jail parking lot, but that area had changed and that was no longer feasible. He concurred that it wouldn't do any good to mix the Union Pacific line with high speed rail. They should be separate rail beds. City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes February 14, 2011 Page 9 Mayor Lundberg said we had come into this process wondering what happened, and we had a big ,learning curve. She would like to hear more about the European rail system., She asked how Washington got so far ahead of Oregon, and what they did to prepare. She would like to be kept aware of what was going on with this topic. She assumed that when they looked at the corridor, they would look at the best place for the terminus and be open-minded. She hoped Eugene and Springfield could ~' work together to figure it out to the benefit of both communities. Ms. Wilson said Mr. Tamulonis could provide the information on the European rail and why some of the things that worked there, might not work here. The State of Washington partnered with Canada and branded: "Two Nation "Vacation". They got public support, State support and State funding. They had a plan. Their funding did help Oregon as we were part of the corridor.. The Cascadian Institute in Seattle had been working on this comdor and Ms. Wilson had been talking with them about how we could get momentum behind this project. Every option was on the table. Mayor Piercy understood that they needed a well functioning rail system in Oregon, and whatever alternative provided that was the alternative that they needed. Councilor Ralston said Springfield had the space to turn a train around, but Eugene did not have that kind of space. Mr. Tamulonis said he would provide follow-up and would keep in touch with the committee's interest following the interviews. - Mayor Lundberg thanked Ms. Wilson for attending and providing information. 3. Update on Stormwater Management Plan Activities. ~` Environmental Services Supervisor George Walker presented the staff report on this item: The Stormwater Management Plan (Plan) was the guide for City stormwater activities to maintain compliance. with State and Federal Clean Water Act and Endangered Species Act requirements. The plan, which began with the Council's "7-Key Outcomes for Stormwater" in 1999 had been updated and adapted since first adoption in 2004. Implementation of the full range of activities included in the Plan was a requirement of the City's stormwater discharge permit issued by Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) in 2007. The objectives of the Plan were managed in a manner that adapted to the resources that were available and prioritized the activities to address the overall needs of the community. Each year, in accordance with the permit issued by DEQ, staff submitted an annual report describing the activities accomplished"'.for the year and proposed any adaptive management measures to be incorporated into the Plan.. Those approved changes were, represented in Attachment 2 of the agenda packet, Stormwater Management Plan, in legislative format. This amended plan would be presented for Public Hearing and adoption on February 22, 2011. This past year's accomplishments included finalizing Inter-governmental Agreements (IGA) with Lane County for stormwater services within the Urban Growth Boundary and with DEQ for Automatic ~' Coverage for construction activities under Springfield jurisdiction. The fiscal impact from these . IGA's included receiving annual revenue from Lane County for -staff time reimbursement and a reduced cost :for development within the City for developers as a result of the IGA with DEQ. In addition our education and outreach efforts which had focused on meeting the Council goals as articulated in the Plan had been very productive this past year. City of Springfield Council Work Session iviinutes February 14, 2011 ~ . Page 10 In June the staff would file,for renewal of the City's NPDES MS4 permit, which would complete its five year cycle this year. Statewide, Oregon DEQ had completed its annual report, which recommended improvements in the activities to protect streams. Nationally, EPA was proposing new rule making with goals expanding regulated discharges beyond urbanized areas, additional post- . construction requirements, addressing stormwater discharges from existing development through retrofitting, and developing a single set of consistent requirements,,for stormwater permitting. Mr. Walker showed a power point presentation that outlined the background of the Stormwater program. The programs now in place helped to accomplish the goals of the City's plan. The plan had been a joint effort of the Council, community and staff. The seven key outcomes for stormwater were: 1. Citizens, businesses, and industries understand the need to protect water quality 2. Urban drainage ways become community anienities 3. Improve surface and subsurface waters for aquatic life and other benef cial uses - 4. Preserve and maintain surface waters, wetlands, and riparian areas as functional and attractive for people, fish and wildlife 5. Provide regulatory certainty for the development community while ensuring that growth is not . ' constrained by lack of planning or facilities 6. Protect citizens and property from flooding 7. Ensure compliance with State and Federal requirements to reduce risks of 3rd party lawsuits or enforcement actions ~~ Mr. Walker discussed the Clean Water Act. Currently the City held a National Pollution Discharge Elimination Systems (NPDES) permit. That was the regulatory side that helped the City meet those compliance needs and guided us in the 6 minimum measures: 1. Public involvement (meeting with the public when putting these plans together) 2. Public education and outreach (meeting with people with violations to let them know how to fix problems; outreach to businesses through the Eco business program; enhancement projects and outreach with schools; storm drain markers and interpretative signs; car wash kits for fundraising groups, including a `how-to' video made by the City of Eugene; neighborhood enhancement programs) . 3. Illicit discharge and elimination (the emergency response team from Maintenance responds to spill responses; review of industrial discharges for stormwater) 4. .Construction site runoff 5. Post construction stormwater management (educate contractors during development review) 6. Pollution prevention for Municipal Operations (pollution control manual for employees) The Total Maximum Daily, Load (TMDL) was the second round of this permit and focused stream specific on the Willamette Basin and pollutant specific in the pollutants of concern that were affecting those streams. The three things that affected that were temperature, bacteria and mercury, none of which were visible in the water. The City had a separate implementation plan for that, which was coupled with the regulatory requirements. ~ . ~. Mr. Walker said the City had gotten involved in the Metro Waterways and Cedar Creek projects, which were both clean water goals and management designs that were in the works. The City had also started a cooperative project with Hamlin Middle School to do some planting along the Q Street floodway, which would be an enhancement and meet some TMDL requirements for shading the stormwater. The City would continue to protect our local waterways. . City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes February 14, 2011 Page 11 Councilor Ralston said a huge part of this was education. There were a lot of people that didn't realize drinking water came from the groundwater. While. working on a home for Habitat for Humanity about five years ago, a painter dumped turpentine on the ground after cleaning his paint brush. Education was a huge part of this effort. ' Councilor Moore asked about the building code and runoff from roofs. When her family added to their house about four years ago'', the inspectors wouldn't sign off until they had a buried runoff from the roof out to the street. In Eugene, she had seen rain gardens and she thought they were being done here. She asked if the Development Code had changed to allow rain gardens. Mr. Walker -said the code they had run up against was the Plumbing Specialty Code that inspectors had to follow. The City had developed a work around with our plumbing inspectors that as long as the water was routed to a rain garden or other facility that would clean and recharge the ground water before it went into the system, it could be approved. The City had a pilot rain garden in their maintenance yard. A rain garden handout was available, as well as a handout flyer that had been distributed to all paint stores in town to be handed out to contractors educating them on the proper way to dispose of paint and other materials. Public Works Director Susie Smith said she tried to do a rain garden in Eugene at her home. She learned that the State Code° required that if you had a rain garden, it had to be a sealed system with an overflow. Rachael Chilton `from ESD had been the division's public information and education person, and had done an excellent job getting flyers out to businesses. She had been having a hard time keeping stock of the flyers ;on the rain gardens. She started a program to award prizes for those doing this well.. Councilor Moore asked about pervious and impervious materials, which was also a building code issue. She asked if this was something that could be addressed as a building code. Mr. Grile said that was part of the stormwater requirements. Councilor Moore said while on the Planning Commission, they talked about requirements for pervious materials needed for parking. The impervious materials had been perfected and she wondered if there was any movement towards changing our building codes that could Help that situation. Mr. Walker said staff had collected data and information on that subject. Public facilities and pervious pavement were dictated, in part by the uses, durability, life span, etc. Pervious pavement was not for everything in the public infrastructure. In private infrastructure, there were other means that were better than pervious pavement. It was a newer technology and in Oregon it had some drawbacks. Pavers with a pervious area underneath and around them were very effective in our area and they had been approved in the MountainGate subdivision. He described other surfaces for low traffic areas. The place and use of application was critical so there were no failures. Catching up with the code was a . task they had on their slate. ~ . Councilor Pishioneri commended Mr. Walker for his work. He referred to the Q Street waterway and Goa13, which was to maintain open waterways. He asked if they had made any headway in controlling invasives that affected our waterways to allow better access for fishing. He understood there were property owner issues in some situations. He hadn't seen much headway in taking care of the invasives. City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes February 14, 2011 Page 12 Mr. Walker said it was a difficult area for staff to make headway. Staff had put together an extensive group of pamphlets on invasive species and natural plants that were good replacements. Many areas - were on private property where the City had little to do in a regulatory way. The education tool was very good for those situations. The support the City gave the local watershed groups had been affective as it got into the areas that were the source of some of the invasives in the outlying areas. Staff was looking at ways to handle the in-town issues. The Portland area had taken on invasives by . acquiring the properties. Councilor Pishioneri said the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) put out grants to water - conservation .districts. There was a lot of work being done in the rural areas. He asked if there was an opportunity for Springfield to seek funding sources from USDA. Mr. Walker said .he recently attended a seminar regarding grant funding, in particular the Meyer Memorial Trust and BPA settlement where Bonneville Power was funding habitat restoration projects. There was .opportunity to do a lot of work in that field. . Ms. Smith said they did have staff that looked for grants. Some of the funding was available to cities of our size. There were some invasive grants available, but staff had not found one that fit a niche that the City had and that we were eligible for. The Mill Race Restoration project had done a lot with removing invasives and the re-vegetation in that project~would be a benefit. Councilor Pishioneri said maybe the City should send a representative to soil water conservation districts and asserting our interest to be serviced by those organizations. Councilor VanGordon asked if the flyers were available on the website.` Mr. Walker said they had-been before the website was updated. He will check to see if they had been re-posted. Mayor Lundberg said she saw the rain garden brochure and it was very encouraging. Part of that was looking at. stormwater in a different way. She felt it was exemplary what staff was doing. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at approximately 7:34 p.m. Minutes Recorder -Amy Sowa Attest: Crt,~J~.. Amy So City Rec der