HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/11/2012 Work SessionCity of Springfield
Work Session Meeting
MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION MEETING OF
THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL HELD
MONDAY, JUNE 11, 2012
The City of Springfield Council met in a work session in the Library Meeting Room, 225 Fifth Street,
Springfield, Oregon, on Monday, June 11, 2012 at 5:33 p.m., with Mayor 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, City
Attorney Joe Leahy, City Recorder Amy Sowa and members of the staff.
1. Police Special Levy Renewal.
Finance Director Bob Duey and Police Chief Jerry Smith presented the staff report on this item. The
current 5 -year Police Special Levy would expire at the end of the next fiscal year (06/03/13) and
would require a successful vote, most likely in November 2012, to renew the levy for an additional 5
years. Essential services provided by the City relied on the $1.09 per thousand assessed valuation levy
for funding. This levy first passed in 2002, added funding for the municipal jail in 2006 and now
included police and jail services as well as both municipal court and city prosecutor. Staff was asking
Council to consider both service and funding level requirements in establishing the final ballot
measure. Staff was recommending that the Council execute a request for a special levy election and
have it filed with Lane County Elections prior to any summer break. The issue was currently
scheduled to be presented at a public hearing on July 2 prior to final adoption.
Mr. Duey explained the four alternatives presented to Council. The first three alternatives attempted to
maintain service levels. The second alternative of $1.28 /thousand was halfway between the
$1.22 /thousand and $1.34 /thousand. The fourth alternative kept the rate per thousand the same as the
current levy amount that was approved in 2006, but would require some service reductions. He
referred to the draft resolution and ballot title that was included in the agenda packet. Council could
change the language in the ballot title or resolution. Chief Smith was available to answer questions on
services that could be affected.
Mayor Lundberg spoke regarding the revenue projections made before the Jail was built. She asked
how much of those figures they were relying on with the rates presented.
Mr. Duey said the projections for jail bed lease revenue were about $750,000, but the actual revenues
were closer to $250,000. The figure of $1.34 /thousand kept that revenue at about the same level. The
$1.28 /thousand figure would require a couple more jail beds being leased out and the $1.22 /thousand
figure would require about 6 more beds to be leased. At this point, the Jail had plenty of beds for the
City's inmates, but they were not yet sure if the Jail had reached its full potential regarding revenue.
Mayor Lundberg said the figure between $1.28 and $1.34 did not count much on the difference in
those two areas. Those were the biggest unknowns prior to building the jail.
Mr. Duey said the $1.28 /thousand expected a little more in revenues, but not much.
Councilor Moore asked why there was such a large difference, between the projected amount and
actual amount of revenues from jail bed leasing.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
June 11, 2012
Page 2
Mr. Duey said when they first looked at the jail they thought 30 beds would be leased out. Only about
15 had actually been leased out.
Councilor Moore asked if there were other nearby municipalities that would be interested in leasing
jail beds from Springfield.
Chief Smith said the City did have a contract with Oakridge, but Junction City and Cottage Grove had
their own jails. The contract with the City of Eugene was the main one and they had 15 jail beds held
for them. Average usage by Eugene was less than 10.
Mr. Duey said they didn't feel the jail had reached its maximum.
Councilor Pishioneri asked about the average daily population at the jail.
Chief Smith said between 55 and 65 daily; slightly'less over the period of the last 18 months.
Councilor Pishioneri spoke regarding the housing fee and noted that the Springfield Jail had collected
about one -third which was likely higher than the National average. He asked if there was a clause in
the contracts with other cities allowing Springfield to charge the inmate for their stay even though the
other city was being charged for the space.
Chief Smith said there was not such a clause in our contracts.
City Attorney Joe Leahy said he would need to research that to see if it could be added
Councilor Moore asked what it would take for the Springfield Jail to be able to house felons and if that
would increase the number of staff required.
Chief Smith said the facility currently housed some felons that had misdemeanors. One of the biggest
issues with felons included transporting them to and from court and their attorneys. That took more
staff. It would also cause the jail to be over 100% capacity causing release of inmates which
contradicted what the Springfield Jail was trying to accomplish.
Mr. Towery presented a power point showing the survey results. He noted that the level of support at
the higher figures was actually higher than the lower figures. The conclusion was that people
understood the level of service received and would prefer to pay more than they were currently paying
to continue to receive the services.
Councilor Woodrow spoke on behalf of the Police Planning Task Force (PPTF). She said the PPTF
had looked at the survey results and recommended the $1.28 /thousand rate. This allowed the jail to
continue to provide current services and was more practical in these economic times than the higher
rate of $1.34 /thousand. The PPTF also wanted to get this on board as quickly as possible with no
major delays. They would prefer to have the ballot title determined tonight so it could be ready for the
public hearing and adoption on June 18.
Councilor Woodrow said in her personal opinion, she would like to include the word `renewal' in the
ballot title. The word `renewal' was used in the survey question and she felt that was key to the
support of the levy. She understood they were limited to 10 words so suggested the title of "Five Year
Levy Renewal for Springfield Jail Operations/Police Services ".
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
June 11, 2012
Page 3
Councilor Ralston felt that Alternate 43 pushed things a bit, but he didn't want to go to the highest
amount. He felt the $1.28 /thousand was the best amount. He agreed with Councilor Woodrow that the
title should have the word `renewal' included.
Councilor Pishioneri also agreed with putting `renewal' in the ballot title because it was keeping
something already in place. He noted that the order of the questions in a survey were key and that may
have influenced the outcome. When more information was provided to the participants, they supported
the $1.34 /thousand. He noted the challenge of getting people to listen and said he hesitated increasing
the rate to $1.34 /thousand as it could have backlash. He felt $1.09 was too low, and $1.22 was
workable and the figure he was most comfortable proposing. He could, however, support $1.28.
Councilor Wylie said she wanted to honor the work of the PPTF. She felt $1.28 /thousand was the
outside maximum amount and she supported that amount. She could also support $1.22 /thousand if
Council chose that. option, but wanted to make sure Police had what was needed over the next five
years. She also agreed with word `renewal' in the ballot title.
Councilor VanGordon agreed with $1.28 /thousand. If there were some funds remaining at the end of
the five years, they could be carried over to the next levy. He also felt the word `renewal' was a great
addition to the ballot title.
Councilor Wylie noted that it was also important for Springfield to have a healthy police department
with the unknowns at the County in their public safety department.
Councilor Moore asked if staff knew any more about the County issues.
Mr. Grimaldi said there was a work group discussing the issues and some options. They could possibly
go out for a vote in November.
Councilor Moore said she was fine with $1.28 /thousand.
Councilor Pishioneri said he had also considered $1.25 /thousand. He agreed there needed to be a
cushion and felt that $1.25 didn't put the same amount of pressure on bed leasing as the
$1.22 /thousand, although he would like staff to continue to try to increase the number of jail beds
leased as if the levy was for $1.22 /thousand.
Councilor Woodrow said she would be inclined to stay with $1.28 /thousand. It gave them more room
than the $1.25 /thousand.
Councilor Ralston said he would also like to stay with $1.28 /thousand, but agreed we needed to
continue to be aggressive about getting jail beds leased no matter which figure was chosen.
Councilor VanGordon said there was a good plan in place for providing services at $1.28 /thousand,
but splitting the amount again to $1.25 could put them in a position that was more difficult to reach.
He wanted to make sure they had a figure that allowed services to be provided and $1.28 /thousand
seemed like a solid number that could work.
Mayor Lundberg asked by how much the levy passed by in 2006.
Chief Smith said it was very close, just over 150 votes.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
June 11, 2012
Page 4
Mayor Lundberg said `renewal' was the key as this was not a new tax. She liked the idea of getting
this finalized tonight so they could move forward. She had a lot of respect for Advanced Marketing
(the firm that had done the survey) as they had done a lot of surveys and had done them well. There
would be a lot of hard work no matter what amount was chosen, but wanted a figure that the Council
could all stand behind. She had confidence that people would be supportive of what the Police was
already doing, but the elected officials and political action committee (PAC) needed to get out and
educate the public and the sooner the better. Willamalane would also have a measure on the ballot, but
the survey showed the people could be willing to vote for both and that was commendable. She
supported $1.28 /thousand as it gave them more room, but agreed they had more work to do regarding
use and leasing of the jail beds. She advocated looking at the survey results; that's what the campaign
would be build upon. Staff was looking for direction tonight.
Councilor Pishioneri asked what percentage increase it was from the current level of $1.09 to the
proposed $1.28 /thousand.
Mr. Duey said it was about 20%
Councilor Pishioneri noted that people could bring up that increase and they needed to be able to
articulate why they were proposing that much of an increase.
Mr. Grimaldi said there were multiple variables, but the two main variables were that the jail had only
been operating three of the five years of the last levy and would be operating all five years of the
upcoming levy; and the lower amount of revenue projections for leasing of jail beds.
Councilor Moore asked if there was some way to make it apparent that this new levy would include all
five years of operating the jail.
Councilor Woodrow said the biggest selling point was that we could do this with only this amount of
increase and not make any cuts.
Councilor Wylie said Springfield had experienced a significant drop in property crimes since the jail
opened. She felt the fact the jail was fully operational and there was a reduction in property crimes
were both good selling points.
Mayor Lundberg said the elected officials could make those points to the public. City staff could not
advocate, but could just provide factual information.
Mr. Towery noted that during the survey, those that were asked if they would support $1.34 /thousand
were told that the current amount was $1.09 /thousand.
Mayor Lundberg asked if this could go forward June 18.
Mr. Duey said it could. He referred to the word `renewal' in the ballot title and said the Secretary of
State no longer reviewed ballot titles and provided opinions. Someone could possibly challenge the
ballot title if that word was included.
Mr. Leahy said the ballot title needed to be neutral and the possibility that the word `renewal' could
heighten getting this passed could be challenged. Some members of the public were opposed to this
and would not want public funds spent on anything partisan. The word renewal indicated it was status
quo, but this was not really a renewal as some things, such as the amount and the operations, had
changed. During past discussions with the Secretary of State's Office SOS office, they had noted that
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
June 11, 2012
Page 5
`renewal' meant the continuation of the same thing. With
but the tax amount was not the same. He could talk with s
they had received comment from the Secretary of State's
ballot title pretty neutral. Citizens did look at our ballot tit
City to court. When that occurred, once the judge made th
set up a situation where someone would immediately app(
for the City.
the Police Levy, the benefits were the same,
Taff further. He did note that in the past,
)ffice and staff had been trained to make the
les and had challenged them and taken the
eir decision that was final. He didn't want to
;al the ballot title and cause embarrassment
Councilor Woodrow asked about campaigning and if the PAC could tell people it was a renewal or
continuation. Yes.
Councilor Wylie said they were continuing the police
Councilor Ralston asked about including the word `continuation' instead of `renewal'.
Mr. Leahy said the word `continuation' was included in the summary statement.
Mr. Duey said they would prepare a ballot title for next Monday and would also do more research on
using the word `renewal'.
Councilor Woodrow said she was fine with whatever
Councilor Pishioneri asked that staff come up with two
Mr. Duey said one ballot title would be drafted for the
for Council to consider.
2. Downtown Circulation Study Final Report and Pre
and the City Attorney determined.
three ballot titles.
lic notice, with other alternatives available
on.
Management Analyst Courtney Griesel and Civil Engineer Kristi Krueger presented the staff report on
this item. Staff had been working to progress the adopted 2,010 Springfield Downtown District Urban
Design Plan by moving forward with the Plan recommendation to analyze the two -way conversion of
Main and South A Streets.
Kittelson & Associates' (KAI) completed the sketch -level analysis related to the potential conversion
of Main and South `A' Streets to a two -way configuration. KAI's analysis identified a number of
near -term and long -term trade -offs, including but not limited to, impacts on the redevelopment
potential of key blocks, prioritization of fiscal resources, future EmX along Main Street/South A,
impacts on freight and the local economy, and integrating land south of South A.
At this time, the conversion of Main and South `A' Street to a two -way configuration was not
recommended based on the current cost estimate of $10 Million, not including right -of -way, for a
Main/South A Street conversion. KAI was recommending a demonstration project to be implemented
in the near term. This demonstration project would meet the current goals of the Downtown Plan by
promoting revitalization while not precluding a two -way conversion in the long term.
KAI's analysis of near and long -term tradeoffs would help to frame the City's future decisions about
the feasibility and policy implications of a Main Street /South A conversion project and/or Downtown
transportation demonstration projects.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
June 11, 2012
Page 6
Staff presented KAI's summary and findings to the Downtown Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) on
May 17'1`. Feedback received from the CAC is included as Attachment 2 of the agenda packet.
Similarly, representatives of the Downtown Main Street Organization had reviewed the report and
provided feedback, included as Attachment 3 of the agenda packet.
City staff supported KAI's analysis and conclusions for Downtown circulation. This report would
conclude the conversion analysis of Downtown circulation at this time. KAI had identified a number
of alternatives for a demonstration project. Should Council wish to investigate further what sort of
project might be appropriate and how it might be funded, they may direct staff to develop further some
of the KAI alternatives for discussion at a future work session.
Ms. Griesel introduced Brian Ray and Julia Kuhn from Kittelson and Associates. There would be
some maps in their presentation, but large paper maps were also available if Council would prefer to
see those during that part of the presentation. She noted two letters of support in the agenda packet; the
first from the Downtown Citizen Advisory Committee and the second from the Main Street Steering
Committee. Both groups, along with other stakeholders, were engaged throughout this process. The
letters of support also supported the concept of a demonstration block, which also addressed many of
the principles identified in the Crandall Arambula work of improving the downtown. She noted that
committee members from both group were in attendance.
Ms. Kuhn said during the presentation, she would be referring to the Downtown Plan done by Crandall
Arambula. The work done by Kittelson and Associates, and that done by Crandall Arambula were
different. Ms. Kuhn noted that she and Mr. Ray started by talking with staff and stakeholders. One of
their tasks was to look in more detail at some of the implementation and trade -off issues of
transitioning Main Street and South A Street into two -way streets, and lay out a path on how the City
could implement that transition. They took a detailed look at the Downtown Plan regarding this two -
way conversion and talked with stakeholders including downtown business owners, members of
various committees, agency staff from Lane Transit District (LTD), the Springfield School District
and others with an interest in downtown. They were looking for the key issues or problems that people
wanted to see addressed.
Ms. Kuhn said one of the things they gleaned from the Downtown Plan was the key concept of a retail
hotspot. As they created the notion of downtown as a true destination point, they needed to focus on
transportation to support that type of activity, including bicycle and pedestrian streets in downtown
along Main Street and South A Street. Reducing truck traffic on Main Street was a crucial element that
came out of the Downtown Plan. They also wanted to capitalize on surrounding neighborhoods such
as the Washburne Historical District, and bringing those people to the downtown. Access to the river
and interaction with LTD were also important aspects.
Ms. Kuhn said she and Mr. Ray interviewed about 15 people from the stakeholder groups over a
period of two days. One of the common points from the interviews was that the City's priorities should
not be on spending a lot of money on transportation, but to focus on economic development. Many
stakeholders felt there needed to be visible progress to the greater community for achieving the goals
in the Downtown Plan. There were variations in how that could be accomplished. The one exception
to the transportation piece was that street lighting for pedestrians was appropriate. Some stakeholders
expressed interest in partnering with local businesses to provide that lighting.
Ms. Kuhn further discussed the interviews. When asked, people's vision of downtown was consistent
with the definition of a "retail hot spot" as outlined in the Downtown Plan. Some stakeholders said
they felt downtown needed stronger standards from the City for building upkeep and maintenance.
They would like to capitalize on the Washburne District to the north and neighborhoods to the south of
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
June 11, 2012
Page 7
South A Street. Those interviewed felt there were no parking constraints today, except there was a lack
of enforcement regarding duration of stay. In the past, City employees had used parking spaces near
businesses for all day parking, but that had been addressed.
Ms. Kuhn said they asked a lot of questions about truck traffic and found that everyone recognized
that freight to downtown was important to a healthy and diverse economy, but there were differing
opinions about routing of trucks. Some felt that trucks actually slowed the traffic as they were more
cautious about slowing to the speed limit. It was noted that South A Street was not friendly to cyclists
or pedestrians, although there were no safety issues highlighted for any modes in downtown. There
were mixed opinions on whether Main and South A Streets should be one -way or two -way in the long
term.
Ms. Kuhn said from the interviews, she and Mr. Ray determined some of the areas to focus on for their
analysis and review. The first was to develop a phased solution for transportation system investments
in a way that would work for the existing one -way configuration, but would not preclude going to a
two -way configuration in the future. It was also important to add pedestrian -scale lighting on Main
Street and to strengthen pedestrian connections to the north to the Washburne neighborhood. Near -
term transportation investments could be placed near the Wildish Theater and the A3 School to
capitalize on the City's Investments. A demonstration project or block could show visible progress
toward the vision of the Downtown Plan. The Downtown Plan actually included a notion of a
demonstration project and this would simply expand on that idea.
Ms. Kuhn said following the stakeholder interviews, she and Mr. Ray looked further at the Downtown
Plan and found the following key elements for them to focus on for their analysis. On Main Street, the
curbs, sidewalks, on- street parking and sidewalk width could remain how they were today. Doing so
would have no impacts on right -of -way, building locations or parking. Another key element was to
remove the truck route designation. To improve pedestrian accessibility and safety, intersections could
be enhanced and pedestrian scale lighting. In the Downtown Plan, elements for South A Street
included how to accommodate trucks and "through mobility ", and how to accommodate a designated
Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) lane. Another key was to add turn and through lanes through the corridor to
make it easier to make turns and keep traffic flowing. She referred to a picture from the Downtown
Plan and explained the mobility and livability routes.
Mr. Ray noted the passion and enthusiasm of the stakeholders and staff about the community. He
noted that he and Ms. Kuhn worked independently while being fully aware of the Downtown Plan.
During the analysis, they wanted to understand how a couplet would be implemented. The western
terminus of the couplet would include the two bridges on the west. Long -term, the terminus on the east
could include a roundabout or signal at 20'b Street. An alternative transition could occur at 10th Street
to a one -way configuration. Future BRT needs also needed to be taken into consideration and the
extension of the BRT out to Thurston. The alignment needed to be defined to determine right -of -way
and pedestrian impacts.
Mr. Ray said they had also heard there was some weaving that occurred between South A and Pioneer
Parkway. He explained. One of the key elements from the Downtown Plan was to connect the
downtown to the south. That would include the Booth Kelly site, .integrating different land uses and
recognizing the connection to the neighborhoods on the south. During their analysis, he and Ms. Kuhn
looked to understand the opportunities with phased implementation of Main Street as two -way and
South A as one -way. There were physical implementations that needed to be brought to the forefront
so everyone was aware.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
June 11, 2012
Page 8
Mr. Ray said downtown was a very nice street and there was no need to make big changes to the right -
of -way. The road had a nice scale to it and there was the ability to make the change. There were not
only opportunities to change the configuration, but also to improve pedestrian crossings and enhance
the quality at each of the intersection cores. Currently, there were partial bump -outs and those could be
bumped out more to provide more pedestrian space and reduce the crossing width. The concept of
improving Main Street and making South A a mobility street, could actually become a barrier to that
development at Booth Kelly and other development south of Main. Those were things to consider and
they didn't want to simply move the problem or create something the City wouldn't want to address in
the future. The BRT line was and would continue to be a positive experience and that needed to be
addressed. As they looked for turn lanes to and from the Pioneer Parkway extension, the South A area
required more attention and they wanted to be sensitive to that.
Mr. Ray referred to a drawing from the Downtown Plan showing what Main Street could look like
before and after some alterations were made regarding the bulb -outs and other improvements. Those
types of improvements could be made now regardless of whether or not there was a two -way
conversion. He referred to another drawing of South A as it existed and a proposal with additional
turn lanes. With this proposal, there were significant impacts on South A properties to the north. If
additional lanes were added, those properties would be decreased in width from about 80 feet to 60
feet. He displayed a technical drawing showing South A with additional turn lanes and Main Street as
a two -way street. Those things needed to be considered when looking at some of the options. He
displayed a drawing that showed more detail of the above concept.
Council raised concern about decreasing the size of those properties.
Mr. Ray said he was simply highlighting the choices that would have to be made if South A became a
mobility street. Thinning out those properties could make them less feasible for economic
development and that was something the Council would need to consider if they chose to move
forward with expanding South A.
Ms. Kuhn said the purpose of tonight's report was to highlight the opportunities and constraints of
some of these options to help with future decisions.
Mr. Ray said they were not making a recommendation, but rather pointing out the things the City
would need to be aware of as they moved forward. Many of the objectives could be done on Main
Street without changing the footprint.
Councilor VanGordon asked if that was the narrowest point between South A and Main Street. Yes
He asked if lanes. would -need to be added if South A was changed to a mobility street. Yes.
Mr. Ray explained the configuration in the diagram. These were some of the choices the City would
have to make if they moved forward with making South A a mobility street. The community's
priorities needed to be determined as well as any trade -offs with any changes.
Ms. Kuhn said the Downtown Plan included the desire to keep the traffic on Main Street lower to
make more of an inviting environment. In order to do that, more space would be needed on South A
Street to divert some of that traffic.
Mr. Ray said they could continue forward with Main Street and South A as they were configured now
and it would not preclude changes in the future. They were highlighting questions the City would need
to ask at that point:
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
June 11, 2012
Page 9
Councilor Pishioneri said in order to reduce truck traffic along Main Street a dedicated truck lane
going westbound would be needed that would bypass downtown. If not that, than a dedicated through -
lane for trucks and vehicles that wanted to bypass downtown. He didn't feel they could justify
increasing capacity as shown in the diagram.
Mr. Ray said the diagram provided less capacity than was currently in place. He explained the
diagram. The past study didn't provide the mobility.
Ms. Griesel said the Downtown Plan created a vision, but not the engineering and didn't account for
left -hand turns and queuing.
Mr. Ray said Downtown Plan concepts didn't match each other. Kittelson took those concepts and
provided the engineering for those concepts from those diagrams. .
Councilor Woodrow said it seemed the original proposal had enhancing businesses as a priority over
the transportation reorganization. If they were looking at the proposal in the diagram, it appeared they
were considering shrinking properties to re- organize transportation.
Mr. Ray said they were highlighting that this was something they needed to be aware of if they did
choose to move forward with reconfiguring. If they chose to keep the roadways in their current one -
way forms, they could do so without impacting the properties or roadways. Reconfiguring could be a
later phase.
Ms. Kuhn said things could be done on Main Street today that would not preclude changes in the
configuration in five or ten years.
Mayor Lundberg said this was longer term with the dedicated BRT lane
Mr. Ray said this was not a recommendation, but rather highlighting the decisions that needed to be
made if they chose to do something else in the long -term.
Ms. Kuhn said when they costed out this concept it came to $ l OM to convert from one -way streets to
two -way streets. That cost didn't include right -of -way acquisition.
Mr. Ray said they were suggesting that the City move forward in phases. Phase 1 could include a Main
Street demonstration block project by adding enhanced street lighting at a pedestrian scale,
reconfiguring some of the intersections and forming public /private partnerships to improve the
aesthetics of the buildings. Another opportunity was to have consistent branding and wayfinding along
Main Street. There would still be the ability to convert South A to two lanes and provide gateway
treatments to let people know they had arrived in downtown. He explained.
Ms. Kuhn said the three phase implementation was Kittleson's work and may not correspond with
Phase 1 in the Downtown Plan.
Mr. Ray said Phase 2 could include continued reconstruction of intersections to improve pedestrian
crossings and pedestrian scale lighting on the north -south blocks. Phase 3 was more long -term and
could include extending the Pioneer Parkway couplet south of South A Street. He explained. The
proposed demonstration block from the Downtown Plan was near Pioneer Parkway. With the energy
and commitment that had gone in around the Wildish Theater and the A3 School, the City may
consider moving the demonstration block away from Pioneer Parkway west towards the Wildish
Theater.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
June 11, 2012
Page 10
Mr. Ray reviewed some of the opportunities from their analysis: keeping the streets in their current
configuration of one -way; doing a demonstration project in the downtown core which would include
looking at the opportunities to get to Booth Kelly and the neighborhoods south of South A; adding
gateway treatments to let people know they had arrived downtown from the west, east and north;
providing connections to the Washburne area; and enhancing connectivity to Booth Kelly. The
rendering in the power point highlighted the opportunities at different locations that could create a
nicer space for downtown visitors. Part of that included bumping out the curbs along Main Street and
making the intersections tighter. This would preserve the on- street parking. Another opportunity could
include removing a lane on South A to provide better pedestrian crossing at that location. He provided
some examples of areas where the curb could be moved for shorter crossing distances.
Councilor VanGordon asked if there would still be truck traffic on Main Street if the curbs were
extended in the short-term. He asked if there would be an impact on those trucks.
Mr. Ray said most of the truck traffic was through traffic. Many of the larger trucks couldn't make the
turns with the current configuration. At each location, consideration needed to be made regarding
turning lanes into businesses that needed the larger trucks.
Councilor Woodrow asked how the demonstration project, if placed near the Theater and School,
would transition to the rest of the downtown. She didn't want to see the demonstration project isolated.
Mr. Ray said the demonstration project should include multiple blocks and would be a starting point
that would spread throughout the downtown. He discussed the Gateway treatment at 10th Street and
how that would signal entrance to the downtown.
Councilor Woodrow asked if the demonstration project was five blocks long.
Mr. Ray said there was potential for that, but it could be any number of blocks. He didn't feel doing
one intersection would work.
Councilor Woodrow said she was thinking of one or two blocks. She asked if part of the
demonstration block project was to get a collective look.
Ms. Griesel said this was the time for staff to come to Council with questions about how they would
define the project and the area. Staff had talked with members of the Downtown Citizen Advisory
Committee and Main Street Organizations about the demonstration project. Those stakeholders had
indicated that there could be more partners in the community that would be willing to integrate fagade
improvements and ways of doing lighting that would allow a larger area. Part of tonight's discussion
was to get these ideas to Council and ask for direction.
Councilor Ralston asked if staff was suggesting the City do a demonstration project. He asked about
the cost.
Ms. Griesel said they were asking Council for their direction on whether or not they wanted staff to
start costing out a demonstration project.
Councilor Ralston said people he had talked to said this would not work and if the cost was $ l OM
without right -of -ways, it was too much.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
June 11, 2012
Page I I
Ms. Griesel said the demonstration block project wouldn't be about making the conversion of
circulation, but would be about integrating pedestrian improvements.
Councilor Ralston said there would still be a cost and the City didn't have funding.
Mr. Grimaldi said staff was trying to give Council an alternative to the two -way and an alternative that
achieved the goals of the Downtown Plan for a lot less cost. They were asking Council if they were
interested in looking at something different and trying some things that were less cost prohibitive.
Mr. Kuhn said they had heard that there was priority on economic investment in downtown and the
role of transportation in that effort. $1 OM was not achievable, but there could be some ways to
judiciously spend scarce resources in the downtown to help foster the environment that could stimulate
economic development.
Councilor Ralston said as long as it didn't impact the transportation system.
Ms. Griesel said the demonstration project concept would not change how transportation was moving
through downtown today, but would give us an opportunity to make improvements through lighting or
bulb -outs at the intersections.
Ms. Kuhn said it would make it an easier environment for walking once people were out of their
vehicles.
Councilor Ralston said if businesses were downtown that were thriving, it could be worth the cost.
Councilor Pishioneri said he understood it didn't preclude changing the traffic flow, but he felt
downtown businesses would continue to struggle unless truck traffic could be moved off Main Street
through, a detour of some kind. He would support this to make it more pedestrian friendly, but felt the
truck traffic needed to be moved. It could be difficult to determine which intersections to select for the
demonstration project and treat all downtown businesses equally. They needed to be able to explain to
those other businesses why improvements were not made at their location. He liked the idea of making
the improvement that would make parking and walking safer.
Mr. Ray said they were looking at taking the concept of the Downtown Plan which Council adopted
and advance it forward. They were trying to break this down into pieces that could be affordable.
Councilor Pishioneri said he supported moving forward with small steps.
Mr. Griesel said staff wanted to facilitate the process with members of the Downtown CAC and Main
Street Organizations to help them self select from those businesses ready to partner. There would be
maintenance and commitment once it was built out.
Councilor Pishioneri said he was supportive.
Councilor Wylie said a lot of people were working hard to improve downtown and she felt it was the
responsibility of the City to support that effort. She was not sure where the funding was coming from,
but there could be some options. She felt the City should support those that were trying to improve
downtown and proceed one step at a time.
Councilor Woodrow said the businesses in downtown were very much encouraged and had more
collective thinking than had happened in the past. There was a willingness on the part of the
City of Springfield
Council. Work Session Minutes
June 11, 2012
Page 12
businesses to meet some of the expenses for some of the planning. There was a lot of excitement and
an encouraged attitude downtown that hadn't been there for awhile. The City need to work with that
and make sure that was not lost.
Councilor Moore asked what the alternative was if they did not move forward. She appreciated them
bringing this broken down in smaller chunks and having staff look at the costs and what needed to be
done to proceed. She was impressed with the City of Redmond that had made banners for downtown
and the difference it made. Lighting was also crucial. She was enthusiastic the City had a plan that had
been broken down in small pieces. She liked the idea of the demonstration block project and getting
things started.
Ms. Griesel said the letters of support included in the agenda packet expressed excitement about the
demonstration block project.
Mr. Kuhn said they were encouraged during their interviews by the recognition of people of the
positive changes and realization that they were making progress towards something bigger. There was
a lot of energy and they also wanted to look at how transportation could enhance that.
Councilor Pishioneri asked if they could lose trucking capacity by expanding the bulb -out curbs. It
was noted that it would not. He noted that parking was an issue and if they moved forward on a
demonstration block project, he would like to see parking addressed.
Councilor VanGordon said he was comfortable going forward with a demonstration block project
similar to what had been presented. He asked who would be involved. The more people involved the
better. The demonstration block project needed to be highlighted as to what could be done in
downtown. He had more questions than ever on South A in the long term, but felt that was a separate
conversation.
Mayor Lundberg said she was looking at where we wanted to be long -term and saw lots of potential to
go north to the Washbume Neighborhood. Residents in the Washbume Neighborhood saw downtown
as their neighborhood. She loved the idea of going north and making it more oriented towards taking a
stroll downtown. South A Street was also a dilemma because Booth Kelly had a lot of potential, as
well as the neighborhoods south of South A. She agreed truck traffic on Main Street changed the
dynamics of what was trying to be accomplished so they needed to look at how to address that in the
future. She liked the bulb -outs because it provided a shorter distance for walkers to cross the street.
Schools were being encouraged downtown and it would help give the students a sense of safety. She
never looked at the money in and of itself as an issue because there were grants available for things
like the demonstration block project. She noted the benches and planters that were put in downtown
through a partnership between Rotary and businesses. She was very much in favor of pedestrian
lighting. They needed to look at how they could do the simple things.
Councilor Ralston said if they were going to do a demonstration block project, they needed to do all
four corners at four different intersections and he wanted to know what that would cost. It was a great
dream and could be beautiful, but spending that type of money needed to be justified. The City and
businesses didn't have a lot of money and he wanted to know where the money would come from.
Mayor Lundberg said this was the big picture. Staff would bring back information on what could be
done and at what costs.
ADJOURNMENT
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
June 11, 2012
Page 13
The meeting was adjourned at 7:45 p.m.
Minutes Recorder — Amy Sowa
Christine L. Lundberg
Mayor
Attest:
"X ofulva,
Amy Sow
City Recorder