Amended: IGR Grant Applicat. - Laserfiche WebLink

Metadata

Thumbnails

Annotations

Mr. Yeiter said the second grant would be Used for planning in the Rasor Park mixed-use center. He recalled that the neighborhood had specifically requested the Nodal Development ~ID overlay zone. The funding would be used to determine if new streets or infrastructure were needed, and help establish the appropriate boUndaries for the mixed-use area. The neighbors had questioned the existing boundaries and questioned whether there was more potential for a mixed-use center further north on River Road in an area not currently designated for that purpose. Ms. Bettman said one of the neighborhood's concerns was about the need for connecting the east and west sides of River Road, and asked if that concern would be addressed. Mr. Yeiter said yes. Public Works Department had some pedestrian crOsses planned along River Road, although not in this area. Planning staff would work with the Public Works staff to determine the location of the pedestrian crossings. Ms. Bettman expressed concern about what she termed "definition creep" from the term "nodal" to the term "mixed-use." She said that currently, River Road contained pockets of commercial uses but the residential uses had been preserved. If the City proposed to transition a large area of River Road to commercial use, the result would be strip development all along River Road. Mr. Yeiter did not envision that result. Mr. Pap~ pointed out the result of the grant would be a plan the council could review and adopt. Mr: Yeiter said the study was intended to address neighborhood concerns about where mixed-use development was most appropriate, how large it should be, and what types of uses were desirable. In regard the terms "mixed-use" and "node," Mr. Yeiter said that from a staff perspective, the two terms were interchangeable. He said that "mixed-use" was evolving to become what was most appropriate for each neighborhood. He believed people got a more accurate picture of what the City was aiming for from ~he term "mixed-use." Mr. Yeiter said the third grant would be used to hire outside consultants to do a Land Use Code audit to identify obstacles to mixed-use development. The consultant would be asked to review the code and flag elements of the code that were working counter to nodal development. Ms. Taylor noted her increasing skepticism about nodal development as it did not appear to be working. She thought such an audit was needed and asked Ms. Bettman the reason for her opposition. Ms. Bettman responded that mixed-use centers and nodes were different things. The City had mixed-use zoning west of downtown, which meant that residences, offices, and commercial uses existed side-by-side. She said that the nodal concept was completely different. The council had "bought off" on the nodal concept as a policy approach but had not discussed and compared the mixed use and nodal concepts and made a policy decision to adopt mixed use. Ms. Bettman was alarmed to see the extent to which "mixed use" was being substituted for "nodal" without coUncil discussion. She thought the audit was premature and believed the outcome would be the deletion of regulations that protected neighborhoods against incompatible development. She said the audit "deregulates land use and zoning in neighborhoods." Mr. Pap~ pointed out the council was the only body that could repeal regulations. Ms. Bettman agreed, but said the consultant would spend a great deal of time and money reviewing the code and staff would return to the council with 50 recommendations the council would have only five minutes to discuss. She reiterated the audit was premature, and until the council had discussed the differences between the mixed-use and nodal concepts, she was unwilling to proceed. She saw the audit as a "huge" threat to neighborhoods.