Laserfiche WebLink
<br /><xmhl be called a mixed.-usc ct:n.ter ;;H' a node. Me Lowe respondcd thM an cmploy'ment center <br />had daily activity '.:vith th;r: peopte \vho work there, I.e., rcst<1UX;;lnL'(, b;;lnks, He com.mented that ;'1 <br />hroadplan to include ernpluyment, shopping, and entertaimnent environments w{}uld result in <br />divt:ndty (.Jef services. 'Mr. Lowe added. that discussions ~trnund ::>uch a plan would then ensue to <br />dehate t.hc pros and c{',ns,~.h. Taylor argued that ~mch an area should not h,;) laheled a mixed. use <br />center. <br />ML Lowe noted the City Council had asked tk1t the program. be "fixt:'<l" and that ::>taff interpreted <br />that direction hroadly. It reviewed, and \viH eon.thmc to' review, all the dements nf the program to' <br />as<~ertain what W;;lS not h)nabk and craH i;nlution~-l and/or approaches kl 1rnp:rovc aceO'rdingI:y\ He <br />added that one of thost": comtxments tmder review was in the "nan1in.g" of tb;: various dements <br />and st~drcreated technique", todifferenti.ate between diffen:~nt types of areas. Ms, Taylm <br />concnITtxl thcre should be <litle-rencei.'> in nodes.; however, she reiterated that an empk)yment <br />ccntf:r W{lS not a mixe.d"l..we center. She suggested that the City Council take action on stairs <br />proposed plan regarding the:..;e center~.:;, <br />Mr. Foling stated that when done correctly, mixed..use ,;h;~vek"fplnt:'nt WH~; a vi.abk product fIe <br />}Joint.ed out that residents WGC fighting to save thdr ncighborhoodi>. An increase in d~'Hj:My was <br />the right i:tpp:mach at this timc and will protel::t the integrity of the v<lrim.l.s neig,hborhoo<ts. <br />tv1L Papi ;;-ommenkd that the iir:..;t rule W<.t:.-l "do no hann" whkh he said th{~ (\ty Vlas Dttempting <br />to accOinp1i:..;lL He thanked the Planning Commission. m{~mbcrsin the audienee for the o.emphny <br />work they put t()rth toward this pro.lecLMr, P;'lp~S recognized that there w~~rem.any wrique m'eas. <br />thn.mghom.Fll.gcne and customizin.g tlK mixed-use conccpt wHi result in a tine product. He noted <br />that the West Unh.'ersity neighbO'rhood hai; densi1ied with renter~.;, studer"b, conversion::;, and <br /><:partments and hot>ed thatfi,lture densiflcation wilt he lwndled in a different manner. My- Pape <br />pointed out that opportunity siting was one a:;;pect of m:ixed-usc zoning" hut a bmadcr direction <br />was requirl.->{.1 Hnd urgz.>{l strJfto move the project in the direction the .Planning Com.mission <br />rccommcnds, <br /> .Ms. Bci1rnan, seconded hy, Mr. Poling, moved to dirl?ct the City I\Janager to <br /> ineorporatc oPPO'rt\mity siting ai; de~Krib(d in the Jdy 19, 2005, emait to the <br /> ~.hyor and City ('oundi w., H primary ~.;trakgy for achieving density targeti; in <br /> mixed.use l;;enter~.;, <br />'Ms. HeUman thanked the Planning Commi~.:;sion, staff. and colleagues for thci.r wiHingnes:;; to <br />cmbrac~:- innovation and. look f~lr!h"'.;V ways to ai..:comp1i~h the gnal~ set forth, <br /> Mr. Kelly, in agreemt:nt with Ivk Poling, oHered. a h:iendly amendment to <br /> reque;;;t that opportunity siting he combined wit.h citywide e::;timatcs ()ff:hture <br /> popul.ation whic.h will. he approximately alkK:awd to mixcd usc districts ,wd O'ther <br /> areai; in the city. <br /> 'rhe m.otkm passzxl ummimously. <br /> Ms. Be.tlman. s(:<)orH;kd by l\.-ts, Ortiz, moved to d.ir(:ct the City fvhn.age:r to <br /> ~.:;(:hedu!e ajointwork session with the Planning Commis;,:ion in October 20G5 .for <br /> l:n.orc pol.ky di.scussion. <br />\-HNUTES------Eugene City Cmmdl July 20, 2005 Page 7 <br /> ViOl;k Session <br />.............. ....................................... <br />.. . . <br />. . <br />