HomeMy WebLinkAboutNotes, Meeting PLANNER 7/17/2008
,
-
Development Issues Meetrng
ZON2008-00028 ArlIe & Company Plan Amendment
July 17,2008
Response to "Questions and Issues #1"
Mixed-Use ZOning vs Nodal Overlay ZOning
The City ofSpnngfield has formally rmplemented three node sItes WIthrn ItS planmng
JUTlsdlctlOn
The Mohawk Nodal Development Area was rmplemented through the applIcatlon of
Metro Plan Nodal Development Area deSignatIOn The zonrng WIthrn the node was
changed from Major Retarl CommercIal (MRC) to Mixed-Use CommercIal, and from
MedIum DensIty ReSidentIal (MDR) to Mixed-Use Resldentlal (MUR)
The Nodal Development Area deslgnatlon IS descnbed ill the Metro Plan as the
appropnate tool for Implementmg nodal development as descnbed ill TransPlan The
llllXed-use commercial and rruxed-use reSidentIal distrIcts were Judged to be the proper
zomng to rmplement the Metro Plan Nodal Development
OptIOn #2, If modIfied to add the Metro Plan "Nodal Development Area" deslgnatlon
would appear to result ill the outcome that the CIty IS lookIng for a formally deSignated
nodal plan deSIgnatIOn With al'l'>Vl'uate mixed use zonrng standards applIed With ill the
node
The Nodal Development Overlay DistrIct has the effect oftransformmg the underlymg
base zone to a rruxed-use zonrng dIStrICt OptIOn #2 proposes to apply Commumty
CommercIal (CC) and High DenSIty Resldentlal (HDR) zonrng With a nodal overlay The
nodal overlay would convert the CC and HDR to MUC and MUR In the Mohawk
example, Startillg With the rruxed-use zones aclneved the same obJectrve As such OptIOn
#2 would probably be approved If the Nodal Metro Plan deSignatIOn were added
Date Received
Planner MM
Iln I D(
, I
\