Laserfiche WebLink
Ms. Ballew reiterated the need for flexibility, pointing to the Mohawk area, which was surrounded <br />by housing but which was largely older commercial development. She said that at this point <br />there was little interest in redeveloping the commercial areas, and it would require both creativity <br />and flexibility to induce private developers. Mayor Weathers said that the challenge was to <br />improve pedestrian and transit service in that area. <br /> <br />Ms. Nathanson said that it was her expectation that an employment center would be served by <br />transit so that people working there could take the bus. She had previously questioned the need <br />for keeping the definitions in question as they were not prescriptive, but had subsequently <br />concluded that they had an educational benefit and helped communicate the vision in TransPlan <br />to the citizens. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly asked if the Department of Land Conservation and Development's definition of mixed <br />use included housing. Ms. Childs said yes. Mr. Kelly perceived a potential conflict between <br />Springfield's intended use of mixed use and the State definition. Mr. Hatfield clarified that <br />Springfield intended to have nodes to reduce VMT that would simply not be nodes for <br />bureaucratic purposes. Mayor Weathers added that it did not mean Springfield could not do the <br />right thing, but it would not get credit for it from the State because of the approach it chose. She <br />expressed frustration about the fact that Springfield intended to do the right thing but was being <br />hampered by definitions. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly asked what meaning the bullet regarding housing had in the definition in a node that did <br />not require housing. Mr. Mott responded that Springfield was preparing a mixed-use overlay <br />ordinance with a subset of nodal development sites. Where the council determined the nodal <br />development sites would occur, they would be overlaid with the nodal development requirements <br />of the ordinance, which would include residential. He said that to this point, Springfield has had <br />other sites that have been designated mixed-use, but had not been able to effectively implement <br />the designation because it was limited by its existing zoning districts. Mr. Mott said that <br />Springfield needed a more effective way of zoning those properties, which were not intended to <br />be nodes, although they may be located in transit corridors and served by bus. Springfield <br />intended to maintain those sites as mixed-use sites, and would have other sites that were <br />designated as nodal development sites consistent with the transportation planning rule (TPR) <br />definition. <br /> <br />Bob Cortright of Department of Land Conservation and Development assured the Springfield <br />council that it would receive credit for its approach, pointing out that reducing reliance on the <br />automobile was the larger goal. He said that the department recognized mixed use as an <br />appropriate strategy for reducing VMT. <br /> <br />Mr. Leiken concurred with the remarks of Mr. Hatfield and Mayor Weathers, saying he envisioned <br />self-contained employment centers served by transit. <br /> <br />Mr. Simmons found the definition of nodal development adequate and agreed that the definitions <br />of neighborhood, commercial, and employment centers should be struck. A majority of the <br />elected officials agreed. Mr. Kelly recommended that the paragraphs be placed elsewhere in the <br />plan as educational examples. <br /> <br />Issue #1: Land Use Policy <br /> <br />MINUTES--Eugene City Council/Springfield City Council September 13, 2000 Page 5 <br /> Joint Work Session <br /> <br /> <br />