HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/24/2003 Work Session
.
MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION
OF THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL
HELD ON MONDAY, FEBRUARY 24, 2003
I
I
The Springfield City Council met in work se~sion at Springfield City Hall, Jesse Maine Meeting
Room, 225 Fifth Street, Springfield Oregon, on Monday, February 24,2003, at 5:30 p.m., with
I
Mayor Leiken presiding. i
I
I
I
I
Present were Mayor Leiken, and Councilors ~allew, Burge, Fitch, Ralston, and Woodrow. Also
present were City Manager Mike Kelly, CitYIAttorney Tim Harold, City Recorder Kim Krebs,
Police Chief Jerry Smith, and members of sdff.
I
1. Committee Briefing from the Interg~vernmental Housing Policy Board.
I
ATTENDANCE
Housing Programs Assistant and StaffLiais~n for the Housing Policy Board, Jodi Peterson was
present for the staff report. She introduced h~r guests from the Housing Policy Board (HPB).
They were Bob Doppelt, John VanLandingham (Chair), Roxie Cuellar, Pat Hadley, and
Councilor Ballew (Council liaison). I
.
John VanLandingham, Legal Services Lawybr, and Chair of the Housing Policy Board, said he
was here tonight to give Council an update oh the HPB. The HPB consists of 9 members, one
Springfield City Councilor, one Lane County Commissioner, one Eugene City Councilor and six
citizens, one of whom must be a resident of one of the affordable housing developments that they
sponsor. The three Springfield residents are present tonight. He distributed a list of the current
members ofthe HPB. '
Mr. VanLandingham gave a brief history of the HPB. He referenced their mission which is listed
on the back of the member list. He also refefenced a handout that outlines some of the issues they
have worked on over the last couple of mont~s and issues they hope to work on over the next
couple of months. He appreciates the involvement of Jodi Peterson and the support from
Council. !
I
i
Mayor Leiken commented that he was pleas~d to announce in his State of the City Address there
are more homeowners in the City of Springfield than ever before. More and more young families
are moving into Springfield, and it will be interesting to see how things evolve over the next 20
years. He said this community should feel v~ry good about where we are, and appreciates the
leadership of the HPB. '
Councilor Ralston noted that as it is now, in order to receive funding in Springfield, you have to
be a Springfield resident for a year. He is pr6posing that residency within the Metro area or Lane
County for 1 year would satisfy that require~ent.
I
i
I
Mr. VanLandingham said the people that he works with don't distinguish whether they live in
Eugene or Springfield, it is one metropolitan iarea. The schools can benefit when young families
with children move into the area. I
.
.
Springfield City Council
Work Session Minutes - February 24,2003
Page-2
Councilor Burge asked for clarification. He is very concerned about affordable housing and
certainly homeownership. By the same token, the harsh reality is we don't want to focus
exclusively on affordable housing, to the exclusion of other housing types. That may be part of
what the budget problems are today, as it is based on assessed values of property. The service
demand is still as great or greater, and we've got to understand that commercial, industrial and
higher categories of housing units are just as important in order to have the flexibility and
opportunity to generate affordable housing. He said what he doesn't see in the mission statement,
is support or encouragement of higher household incomes.
Mr. VanLandingham said their focus is on housing, and making sure that it is interspersed
throughout the community and supports economic development where needed.
Councilor Woodrow said he supports Councilor Ralston's ideas of considering the one year
residency in the broader community.
Councilor Ballew said she doesn't want to do anything to encourage lower income people to
move here. We need to increase our higher end housing. She doesn't necessarily have an
opinion one way or another, regarding the one year residency requirement.
Mr. VanLandingham said that by encouraging home ownership instead of rentals, you are
recruiting more of a middle income sector. The housing provided through HPB is very nice
housing.
.
Roxie Cuellar said a couple a years ago, the City of Eugene removed this issue regarding the one
year residency within the city. There is not a lack of Springfield families that were looking
forward to homeownership in Springfield.
Councilor Ralston said that because the HPB's emphasis is home ownership, he doesn't consider
people that have the money to buy a house low-income.
Councilor Fitch said in the past she understands there were exceptions made, and wondered if it
made a difference if two families were trying to qualify, would the Springfield resident be given
preference.
Ms. Peterson said that is difficult to determine because some people may take a look at the
application initially and see that they don't qualify and not apply. She said they do look at the
Springfield resident and as long as they meet all of the qualifications they would receive
assistance under this program.
Councilor Fitch asked if there were funds left over at the end ofthe year.
Ms. Peterson said no, the total money allocated of $140,000 per year that serves approximately
35-38 households, is used each year.
Councilor Fitch said she would recommend that the Board consider the addition of a phrase
stating something to the effect that if there are sufficient funds in a year that the Board would
consider applications from non-Springfield residents for use. That would leave the door open in
order to allow others to apply.
.
.
Springfield City Council . ,
Work Session Minutes - February 24,2003
P age- 3
Mr. Doppelt said the University of Oregon recently extended an invitation to the City of
Springfield to participate in a work group on local sustainable business and job development.
The first meeting of the work group is planned for Thursday, March 6,20038 AM to 12 Noon, at
the Library Meeting Room at Springfield City Hall. He wanted the City Councilors to know that
they are all invited to participate.
Councilor Ballew said she reviewed the list offolks involved, and noted that the Lane Workforce
Partnership is omitted from the list.
Mr. Doppelt said since that list was created, they have been invited.
2. 1-5/Beltline Intergovernmental Agreement.
.
Transportation Manager Nick Arnis was present for the staff report along with Transportation
Planning Engineer Gary McKenney. Mr. Arnis also introduced Jay McCray, CH2M Hill, Tom
Boyatt, Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT), Karl Wieseke, Project Manager from
ODOT, and Bonnie Ullman, GameFarm Neighbors Association. For consideration tonight is the
Intergovernmental Agreement between the City of Springfield and ODOT that outlines and
specifies roles and responsibilities for monitoring traffic at the 1-5 Beltline Interchange. Federal
Highway Administration (FHW A) required this IGA be a part of the Environmental Assessment
(EA) and wanted assurances that when traffic reached unacceptable levels at the interchange, the
City would implement phase 2 of the 1-5Beltline project at the Gateway/Beltline intersection. As
part ofthe compromises at the BDT level, the City assumes responsibility for improving the
intersection. FHW A and ODOT did not want to improve the interchange only to have nothing
happen at the Gateway/Beltline intersection resulting in traffic backing up from the intersection to
the improved interchange ramps. Another part of the BDT compromises was to have the
Gateway Owners for Positive Change (GOPC) review and offer comments on the IGA. City and
ODOT staff met with representatives of GOPC and the IGA was tightened up to include
references about the City using a Steering Committee to help implement improvements at
Gateway/Beltline. The Steering Committee idea is consistent with the EA.
The main points of the IGA are:
· The Pioneer Parkway Extension (PPE) and the interchange flyover must be in place
before monitoring begins.
· Traffic queues and level of service are monitored at the eastbound leg of the
Gateway /Be1t1ine intersection.
· ODOT will monitor the traffic queues and the City will monitor the level of service.
· City initiates the project programming and implements Gateway/Beltline improvements
when queues and level of service standards in the agreement are reached or exceeded.
Councilor Ballew asked if we will have enough lead time and financial resources to make good
on our commitment.
Mr. Arnis said the lead time is close, but funding is a concern. He said they all took the best
possible look, to determine the process and the timeline.
.
Mr. McKenney said the two conditions that are necessary prior to the construction of (PPE) and
construction ofI-5 improvements are still a number of years out. There are still a lot of
unknowns; by the time conditions A and B are met, there won't be as much vacant land. From
.
Springfield City Council
Work Session Minutes - February 24,2003
Page-4
this vantage point it is a much more difficult task to predict, but by the time we get there, they
will be in a much better position to do so.
Mayor Leiken thanked staff and others in GOPC and ODOT who have worked so hard in order to
make this a successful project. He also acknowledged previous and current council leadership for
all of their work.
Councilor Burge said he respected the diverse issues and concerns that were brought up during
the entire process, and the great effort in finding a solution to all of this. This will defmitely be a
significant change. Good job to all.
Councilor Ralston asked if there was a definition of Level D and F.
Mr. McKenney said at D it is,under a minute wait time, about 55-60 seconds. They are related to
traffic flow with A being the least congested to F being the most congested.
There were discussions regarding the comparisons of traffic on Franklin Blvd (Glenwood), versus
Ferry Street Bridge, traveling each of those paths.
Councilor Fitch said the IGA looks good. The City Attorney will give it a final review and then it
will come back for approval at the regular Session.
3. Rivers to Ridges: Metropolitan Regional Parks and Open Space
.
Planning Manager Greg Mott was present for the staff report. He introduced Jeff Krueger from
Lane Council of Governments. Mr. Krueger said he would be showing a brief Power Point
Presentation that highlighted the Metropolitan Regional Parks and Open Space Study for Rivers
to Ridges. Regional Planning'has been done by the local parks and recreation organizations: City
of Eugene, City of Springfield, Willamalane, River Road Park District, Federal agencies, State
Parks, BLM, U.S. Fish and Wildlife have all done their own planning. This is an effort to try to
coordinate those planmng efforts. November 2000 elected officials from Eugene, Springfield,
Lane County and Willamalane initiated and funded this project which has been underway for
about 18 months.
.
The power point presentation included the following:
· Steady Goals - Create a regional vision or framework that can be used for future park and
open space planning, funding documents, development of a set of long and short range
strategies for implementation.
· Study Areas which were noted on the map.
· Landscape context different than other regions in country.
· Map showing that Springfield was historically prairie land.
. Description of open areas.
· Map showing current parks and open spaces in our area.
· Map showing growth trends of community.
· Policy direction, including the seven guiding principles.
o Variety - natural areas, active recreational parks, working landscape
o Scenic quality
o Good activity and proximity
o Rivers as key connectors
o Habitat
Springfield City Council
Work Session Minutes - February 24,2003
Page-5
.
o Recreation and education
o Community separation
. Impacts
o Property values
o Economic developments
o Tax revenue
o Tourism
Many organizations have endorsed this vision including the Springfield Planning Commission
who recommended they come forward to the Council for an endorsement. Essentially they are
requesting Council's continued sponsorship ofthis multi-jurisdictional study in the form of a
letter of support to be drafted by staff at Council's direction for the Mayor's signature.
Mr. Mott said he would like to point out that Willamalane is the provider of Parks and Recreation
in Springfield. Lane County has land use authority outside their boundary. We obviously can't
interact with property owners directly, but this is the sort of thing that is a cut above what you
normally would expect to occur. He doesn't see a down side to making sure we have areas where
water purification goes on and parks are close by. He believes it is a positive thing.
Councilor Ballew said she likes the amount ofvolunteerism involved in this project. This looks
fine to her, but wants to make sure this wouldn't conflict with anything that Willamalane is doing.
Mr. Krueger responded to questions ofthe Council related to his power point presentation and the
tax base.
.
Greg Hyde from Willamalane also responded to questions from Council regarding the Citizen
Advisory Committee on their CompPlan and how it ties in with this project.
Councilor Burge asked if they were completed with Phase 2. He referenced a letter from
Willamalane Parks and Recreation District in which Willamalane supports only Option 1. He
said the City of Springfield is not a parks & recreation district or business. He discussed his
concern about Option 3 which proposes a special parks district. He asked if there was an
underlying goal for a special parks district to be formed by Eugene/Springfield/Lane County
which would shed from the general funds of Eugene and Lane County their parks & recreation
obligation. He felt that would be the ultimate and immediate demise ofWillamalane Parks
District. He is very concerned, not about the concept or vision, but the underlying political
motivation. He thinks very highly of Willamalane and will not do anything to put their existence
in jeopardy. He cannot see how this Council can endorse and become a partner. Willamalane
should be their partner, not the city of Springfield.
Councilor Woodrow asked if this presentation was made to the McKenzie Watershed Council.
Mr. Krueger said some representatives attended a presentation and overall their response was
favorable, but they were not asked and did not offer a letter of endorsement.
.
Mayor Leiken said that Councilor Burge's comments are appropriate. It is important that this is
presented to Willamalane. If the Willamalane Board Chair signs and endorses this than that is
fine. At this point he would like to defer this to Willamalane. When we hear back from
Willamalane, and defer to Mike Kelly, we will determine whether or not the city would make this
symbolic jester.
Springfield City Council
Work Session Minutes - February 24,2003
Page-6
.
Dave Ralston said the vision is good, but he doesn't want to support this unless Willamalane
supports it.
Bob Keefer, Superintendent of Will am alane, said their full board will be receiving this
presentation by Jeff Krueger on April 2. In his professional judgment, Willamalane has a lot of
partnerships with the city that are very beneficial. If the Willamalane Board endorses this, he
would encourage the Springfield City Council to endorse it as well. If the City and Willamalane
can work together, we will have a much better vision. The power of a United Front is a collective
vision. He compares this conception with the United Front concept.
Councilor Ballew asked why LCOG wants the endorsements.
Mr. Krueger said having the consensus for this vision assists when pursuing funding. He will
notify Council in a Communication Packet item after Willamalane has seen the presentation and
endorsed the proj ect.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 6:50 p.m.
Minutes Recorder - Kim Krebs
.
Attest: /i l
vv~( x~r/)-un.-
City Recorder U
.