Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/14/2002 Work Session . . . ~.. '- .~. MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION OF THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL HELD ON MONDAY, OCTOBER 14,2002 The Springfield City Council met in work session at Springfield City Hall, 225 Fifth Street, Springfield, Jesse Maine Meeting Room, on Monday, October 14, 2002, at 5:31 p.m., with Mayor Leiken presiding. ATTENDANCE Present were, Mayor Leiken and Councilors, Ballew, Fitch, Ralston and Simmons. Councilors Hatfield and Lundberg were absent (excused). Also present were City Manager Mike Kelly, Assistant City Manager Gino Grimaldi, City Attorney Joe Leahy, City Recorder Kim Krebs, and members of staff. Guests: LTD Representatives Mark Pangborn and Charlie Simmons; George Crandall and Don Arambula from Crandall-Arambula, PC. 1. Historic Commission Application Interview. Planner II Kitti Gale was present for the staff report on this issue. She said the purpose of this work session was to conduct interviews and review candidate applications for two Historic . Commission vacancies, and select two whose appointments would be ratified at the October 21, 2002 City Council meeting. The Historic Commission has two openings on its seven-member committee due to the resignation of James Gryte and the retirement of Jack Gischel. The recruitment for these two openings began August 13, 2002, and closed September 13, 2002. One candidate, Roxie Metzler, a select recommendation from Springfield School District #19, submitted an application. At the previous vacancy interviews held on September 16, council directed staff to carry forward the Septe!llber candidate applications to the October 14 selection as well. The City Council discussed and selected the interview questions: · Why are you interested in applying for the Historic Commission? · Have you attended any Historic Commission meetings? · What specialty or skills do you have that would benefit the Springfield Historic Commission? (Knowledge oflocal history, architecture or construction experience, design skills, preservation, planning, archaeology, etc.) · What role do you think the Commission should play in the community? And what vision do you have for the Commission? · What if any enforcement do you think should occur in monitoring Historic compliance? The council interviewed Roxie Metzler. After Ms. Metzler's interview, the council reviewed the three applications that were carried forward from the September 16 interview process. They discussed the merits of each candidate. Springfield City Council Minutes of Work Session Meeting - October 14, 2002 Page - 2 . After further discussion, City Council consensus was to appoint Roxie Metzler, and Ted Corbin to the Historic Commission. Council directed staff to prepare the necessary paperwork for the ratification of these appointments to occur on the next regular meeting of the council, which is scheduled for October 21,2002. 2. Bus Rapid Transit Phase 1 and Springfield Station Update. City Engineer Al Peroutka and Planner II Kitti Gale were present for the staff report on this issue. Mr. Peroutka said representatives were present from LTD to provide an update ofthe Bus Rapid Transit Phase 1 site plan timeline, which will include station design, joint development and public art. The City of Springfield is a partner in the development of both of these projects. Council should be informed and may have some feedback for L TD and staff regarding the project development. The City Council has given conceptual approval for the Phase 1 Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) line and the City of Springfield has entered into an intergovernmental agreement (IGA) with Lane Transit District (LTD) regarding the development of the project. Councilor Fitch is a member of the BRT Steering Committee; and therefore has had an active role in shaping the project. The IGA (Attachment A) between LTD and the City of Springfield directs staff of both agencies to work cooperatively to meet the City Council's objectives for the project and to address certain design issues for the project. Staff is now reviewing 30% design drawings and will provide feedback to LTD regarding those objectives and design issues. Councilor Fitch is also a member of the Downtown Station Design Committee. . Mr. Peroutka introduced representatives from LTD Mark Pangborn and Charlie Simmons. Mr. Pangborn said the City Council approved the concept for BRT and the beginning design process in June 2001. He referred to overhead maps displayed and highlighted the information contained. He said there are two key differences from the design that was initially approved by the City Council. These are the locations of the stations in Glenwood and the addition of some design features on South A Street intended to reduce automobile speeds and create more of a downtown environment. Glenwood Stations The original design included stations at Henderson and Brooklyn. The proposed design replaces those two stations with three stations to be located at Glenwood, Lexington, and Old Franklin (McVay). The Henderson Street stop was moved east to Lexington Street in order to address a safety concern resulting from the curve in Franklin Boulevard at Henderson. This created a need for an additional station at Glenwood Boulevard to serve the western portion of the Glenwood area, including the new Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) motor pool. The Brooklyn Street station was moved to the Old Franklin (McVay) intersection because that intersection has an existing median that can easily accommodate a BR T stop with minimal impact on the adjacent property owners. . Mr. Pangborn said this corridor is all a state highway, which means there are actually three players, LTD in terms of doing the design, ODOT in terms roadway, and the City of Springfield in this case having planning responsibility, although some of it is incorporated and some is still unincorporated in terms ofthe county. Springfield City Council Minutes of Work Session Meeting - October 14, 2002 Page - 3 . The proposed stops were moved because of some safety issues and concerns. As LTD met with property owners and traffic engineers, they suggested we find an area or location that would be safer. There were also concerns related to compatibility with the proposed Glenwood Redevelopment Plan. The Lexington Street and Old Franklin BRT stations provide convenient access to the proposed redevelopment. LTD staff has met individually with affected property and business owners in Glenwood to review these new station locations. In addition, an open house was held for the Glenwood businesses and residents on September 17,2002. The general response to the changes has been favorable. Where impacted property owners have voiced specific concerns, L TD is working on design alternatives to address those concerns. Mr. Pangborn higWighted on the overhead maps where the proposed stations would be sited, some with center platforms, buses would be single sided, as the right of way in Glenwood is very limited. - Mr. Pangborn responded to questions of the council related to their concerns regarding turning movement, sidewalk and traffic signal placement. He said there is still a need to acquire additional property for right of way and bike lanes. He said there would be disabled access to all stations. He said when there is any kind of development; there are requirements that handicap or disabled accessibility be made available. Councilor Ballew asked if there were any historical purpose for the curvature of Franklin Blvd. . Mr. Pangborn said he does not know of any historic81 significance. He said as Glenwood redevelopment discussions have taken place, a number of discussions have occurred regarding different options of straightening Franklin Boulevard. Mr. Pangborn described the specific access and design of the stations. Mayor Leiken asked about the LTD buses that service the University of Oregon (U of 0) games, and asked if L TD would still be servicing those through these mini stations. Mr. Pangborn said those discussions have not taken place with the U of 0 Councilor Ralston asked about the reference to "exclusive" bus use only, and asked if cars would be allowed to turn across those lanes. Mr. Pangborn said yes, vehicles will be able to turn across those lanes, they will be designated somehow either by diagonal striping, or diamonds painted that would designate they are for buses only. Councilor Fitch asked how vehicle drivers would know they are able to turn over the BRT exclusive lanes. Mr. Pangborn said L TD staff has discussed that, but have not come to a conclusion. South A Street Design . Springfield City Council Minutes of Work Session Meeting - October 14, 2002 Page - 4 . Mr. Pangborn said South A Street through downtown Springfield has a much different character than its westbound couplet, Main Street. Compared to South A Street, Main Street has on-street parking, slower travel speeds and speed limits, and wider sidewalks. Some changes proposed as part of the BRT Phase 1 project would slow traffic speeds on South A Street and improve pedestrian safety and access. Those changes include 1) curb."bulbouts", additional landscaping, and some on-street parking. Mr. Pangborn referred to the overhead map displayed, and highlighted information related to the engineering drawing of the BRT plan for downtown Springfield. He said existing conditions are depicted in grey and changes are in red on the map. Mr. Pangborn said L TD staff have met and are currently working with some ofthe business owners who may be impacted by the development ofthe station. Mr. Pangborn provided information related to station access. He responded to questions related to park & rides, and on and off street parking. He said L TD would be having discussions with the city related to adding in some landscape planters. He said they have modeled the entire corridor for traffic and that modeling has indicated almost no impact over the course of the project over the next 20 years. He said they haven't modeled block by block, as that is very difficult to do. Councilor Ballew asked how many lanes of traffic are currently available on south A as you cross the bridge, and how many lanes is L TD proposing? . Mr. Pangborn said there are currently three lanes, and it will narrow down to two, but will again open back up to three lanes as you come up to Pioneer Parkway. Mr. Pangborn said it has been really great working with the staff, and L TD is very excited. He said he would make sure council receives diagrams or photographs of what the proposed stations will look like in the very near future. Councilor Simmons said the Booth Kelly District states that a "transit station" cannot be located closer than 200 feet to a residential site, the EA talked merely about the sound impact upon those apartments. Does the 200-foot setback as indicated on the map provided, apply for outside that district? Planning Manager Greg Mott said the District does not identify transit stations it talks about bus terminals. He said based on that, staff will be requesting that the district be amended to include transit stations and they are specifically saying that "transit stations" don't have that same setback requirement that bus terminals do. Mr. Peroutka introduced Charlie Simmons LTD Project Manager for the Springfield Station. Mr. Simmons said staff has been working on the design over the last 7-8 months and have made a lot of progress. He said this work session allows an opportunity for council, staff and L TD folks to weigh in on the project and respond to any questions. . The Springfield Station design is currently at a 30 percent completion. The Site Plan was recommended' by the Springfield Station Design Review Committee and approved by the L TD board of Directors in July 2002. He said we have a site plan that freezes the boundaries of the project, as well as taking the different components of the program and find a home for each of those components. He reviewed a larger overhead diagram of the "Springfield Schematic Site Springfield City Council Minutes of Work Session Meeting - October 14, 2002 Page - 5 . Plan" (attachment A of AlS). He said work is progressing toward site acquisition, as well as civil and environmental analysis of the existing soil conditions. He said staff has met with ODOT and they have approved the station access. He talked about the addition ofbio swales that would address storm water run off which would detain and cool the water. Four design concepts were presented to the Design Review Committee and those were narrowed down to one selection. He referred to the model placed on the table and highlighted different areas of the proposed station. He said it is also shown in the Springfield Schematic Site Plan. He said what they hope to do is to create a 5,000 square-foot building and an adjacent 30-space parking lot oriented toward and accessed from South A Street. The building is a one-story design with a tall exterior facade, which would suggest the feeling of a larger building. For operational needs (including restrooms), LTD would require approximately 1,000 square feet of the building. The remaining 4,000 square feet would be available for tenant use. The most prominent spaces and street and parking lot frontage would be reserved for tenant use. More than one tenant would be possible. LID has enlisted the services of a local commercial real estate broker to consult on building design and marketing. The building is being designed to accommodate one or more commercial tenants. The brokerage firm will provide input on building layout and location of signage that works best for commercial uses; the brokerage fIrm also will assist in marketing this space to local and regional businesses. The goal is to have tenants on board prior to the completion of the building and opening of the station. . Mr. Simmons responded to questions of the council related to station designbio swales and public art project, and park & ride availability. Mr. Simmons responded to questions of Councilor Simmons related to bus (traffic) flow and where the public restrooms will be placed. Mr. Simmons said design development is moving rapidly, and the design completion is targeted for early 2003, and hopes that construction would begin in spring of 2003, with construction completion in late spring of 2004. He said there are some crucial projects taking place in the area over the next few years, and coordination between the different agencies will be a key factor in the successes of all of the projects in the vital improvement of the area. Mr. Simmons responded to questions of Councilor Ballew related to the overall financing of the project. He said funding is not totally secure, although LID is proceeding ahead with the design as if this project is fully funded at this point. Mayor Leiken asked Assistant City Manager Gino Grimaldi for an update on the funding issues. He asked if everything stays positive and the funding is secure, when does staff think that might happen. Mr. Grimaldi said congress is in recess now and probably will be through the election in November. He said it could go as late as January 2003, and will continue to review resolutions to keep the budget going forward. He said if everything goes well, funding could happen in this. current federal fiscal year. . Mayor Leiken asked L TD staff if the this station would be designed for all types of buses or primarily for the new aerodynamic buses. . . . ,. Springfield City Council Minutes of Work Session Meeting - October 14,2002 Page - 6 Mr. Simmons said the first phase would be designed primarily for BRT, however, during the follow up phases; it will service the existing transit system and all of Springfield. Mr. Pangborn said as a last comment when you bring BR T IDto a new line, you want to make sure it works with the rest of the community. They hope the next line will be Pioneer Parkway all the way to Gateway. He said as that is planned, L TD will review the feeder loops to determine how best to service the entire. community. Mayor Leiken thanked LID staff and said this council has strongly endorsed the idea of the BRT and hopes to see the next phase ofBRT onto Pioneer Parkway. 3. Gateway MDR Site Nodal Development "Quick Response" Scenario Review. Planner II Colin Stephens was present for the staff report on this issue. Mr. Stephens said as,a component of the review process for pending Peace Health Metro Plan and Gateway Refinement Plan amendment applications, the City obtained the consultation services of Randall-Arambula through the State's Transportation and Growth Management (TGM) Quick Response program. The intent of the project was to analyze the viability of having at the Gateway MDR site both a functional commercial residential node, as directed by the council and identified in TransPlan, and a regional hospital campus as proposed by Peace Health. The property that was considered extends beyond the Peace Health holdings to include property owned by Arlie & Company who have indicated a desire to undertake nodal development. Additional private properties are identified as potential development areas that can be examined further when and if those property owners wish to develop. A stakeholder group comprised of property owners and interested neighbors were convened on two occasions where issues were identified and draft scenarios presented and critiqued. Based upon input from the stakeholders and from city staff, Crandall-Arambula assembled a preferred scenario with various components ranging from land use and circulation to development standards. While the scenario is conceptual only, the exercise confirms that nodal development can be implemented at the Gateway MDR site with or without Peace Health Plan amendments. It also provides a framework that allows staff to review applications for consistence with this concept and contains components thatcan and should be retained if and when Peace Health submits a Master Plan application. This demonstration is in no way intended to influence the City Council on their decision on whether or not the hospital should be allowed to locate at the GatewayMDR site. Mr. Stephens said he would like to make it clear that this exercise is for council's information only, and is intended to answer the question of whether a viable nodal development and a hospital campus can occur together at the Gateway MDR site. The council is not being asked to make any decisions, or chart any course of action, and should be aware that this is only one scenario. Ifthe council approves Peace Health's plan amendments, Peace Health would then be submitting a Master Plan and which would probably contain their own nodal scenario for the City Council's review. Springfield City Council Minutes of Work Session Meeting - October 14,2002 Page - 7 . Mr. Stephens introduced representatives George Crandall and Don Arambula from Crandall- Arambula, PC. A copy of the power point presentation was circulated for council information. The council received a briefmg during the presentation "Springfield Gateway/Peace Health Nodal Development". The information contained in the presentation included: The objectives of the Gateway/Peace Health Nodal Development - Quick Response Project are: . OBJECTIVES . Land Use o Create a compact mixed-use node o Create a viable neighborhood serving community center o Provide for a full range of housing products o Provide an open space amenity for high density housing . Peace Health o . Accommodate existing space needs o Accommodate future expansion . Circulation o Create a pedestrian friendly circulation system o Promote BRT ridership o Reduce traffic volumes on Game Farm Road o Provide street connectivity . . Other o Transition building sizes down to adjacent neighborhoods o Do not compete with adjacent businesses o Provide public visual and physical connections to the river Councilor Simmons said one of the difficulties he has with this is that when we design the transit components, that the buildings should be placed closer to the transit station. He referred to the issues at the Valley River Center where the bus has to penetrate into the parking lot, etc. The circulation in this component would be critical. The pedestrian should have immediate access . into and out of the building. He mentioned the riders that are physically limited, and the need to have a fluid movement pattern occur. He said the pedestrian needs to be the priority. He said he would like to see the transit facility closer to the primary entrance to the facility. Ifnodal development is proposed, then there needs to be some compromises. He cautioned that the compromises ought not to be compromises that cause failure. He said the report was done very well, and commended staff for the work. Representatives from Crandall Arambula responded to questions of the council related to parking structures, vehicular traffic, walking paths, waterfront trails, BR T alignment and emergency access. After the presentation, concerns of the council included what works best for this community as Springfield is not a wealthy city, it will be important to be creative and to establish public/private partnerships as much as possible, as well as other alternatives. Conceptually this is very . . impressive. . . . , . , ... Springfield City Council Minutes of Work Session Meeting - October 14,2002 Page - 8 Mayor Leiken said he agreed with the need to be cautious about what fits best for Springfield. He said not to take anything away from the presentation; the important thing to remember is that the council needs to continually be educated on nodal development, and try to determine exactly what nodal development is. He said each person may have a different definition. As new development is proposed for the city now and in the future, it will be important to constantly evaluate what is best for Springfield and the community. He thanked Crandall-Arambula and city staff for the presentation. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 7:36 P.M. Minutes Recorder - Kim Krebs