Laserfiche WebLink
Ms. Taylor also endorsed the testimony to delete commercial and employment centers from the definition. <br />At the request of Mr. Kelly, Mayor Torrey asked the council to indicate if it wished to delete commercial and <br />employment centers from the definition. Ms. Taylor indicated support for the deletion. <br /> <br />Mayor Torrey noted his support for renaming "nodal development centers" to "mixed-use areas." Mr. Fart <br />agreed with Mr. Meisner that the City was already using mixed use in another context. Mr. Meisner <br />suggested that the City investigate what terminologies other cities use, and pointed out that as specific areas <br />are identified, an area may "choose its own name" or have a name assigned it by the neighborhood. Ms. <br />Childs observed that Portland used "mixed-use area." She indicated staff would follow-up. <br /> <br />Mr. Rayor proposed that ratios for housing be increased in the employment and commercial centers. He <br />believed that unless the ratios were higher the areas would be less dense than desired. He suggested that the <br />City Council recommend 25 percent residential for both commercial and employment centers. There was <br />general council concurrence. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner reiterated his interest in seeing FARs included in the nodes. <br /> <br />Mr. Rayor said that nodes were crucial to the implementation of TransPlan. He asked if Hyundai, for <br />example, was included in a node, or did it skirt the node? He said that when a facility was fenced for security <br />purposes, he had a hard time considering it part of the node. <br /> <br />Ms. Nathanson asked what common threads existed between node types; was it a minimum percentage of <br />housing or was it the transit hub aspect of the node? She questioned whether it was necessary to describe the <br />range of percentage of housing in a node or if it was better to establish a minimum percentage housing for a <br />node to be healthy. Ms. Childs said that the list of fundamental characteristics and a minimum percentage of <br />housing made an area work as a nodal development area. <br /> <br />Mr. Lee reminded the council it would discuss implementation of TransPlan on March 13. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor questioned why three categories of nodes were needed given the shared fundamental <br />characteristics and minimum housing percentage, rather than just varied proportions of different uses. Ms. <br />Childs said that initially, it was to demonstrate that there was no "one size fits all" approach to nodal <br />development. She was unsure how important it was to Springfield to have more than one category of node. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly said that testimony indicated that the map in Appendix A was not understood, and said that it <br />needed to be tied to text in the document. He said the fact that some of the "blobs" on the map were larger <br />than a node could be needed to be explained as well. He also asked that the map be refined with one or two <br />sentences explaining what each area was doing on the map. <br /> <br />Mr. Rayor indicated that he was not opposed to labeling a node as employment or commercial center if a <br />minimum percentage of housing was included in each node. <br /> <br />Ms. Childs noted that the memorandum recommended that the first sentence in Land Use Policy 1 be revised <br />with the text suggested by FOE for a definition of a node: "Apply the nodal development strategy--living, <br />shopping, and employment areas concentrated in an area where walking and transit services are <br />emphasized--in areas selected by each jurisdiction that have identified potential for this type of <br />transportation-efficient land use pattern." Mr. Kelly said that was an improvement. He understood that the <br /> <br />MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 14, 2000 Page 4 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br /> <br />