10/08/1984 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

II. HISTORIC PRESERVATION (material distributed) -- Mr. Jacobson said staff was bringing this item to the Council to tell why the program was reorganized, to familiarize members with the program, to discuss alternatives that have been proposed, and finally to tell members the direction the Planning Commission has given the staff. The reasons for reorganization include the need to streamline the program's processes and to respond to direction from a subcommittee of the council to reduce the number of boards and commissions. Mr. Jacobson said there were three components of the program: regul atory , incentive, and public information. He explained how these components are handl ed. Mr. Jacobson referred to the matrix that was in the distributed material. He explained how "Alternative B" would expand the Historic Review Board from five to seven people. The HRB would be the only hearing body. The loan program would be handled administratively. "Alternative C" would abolish the HRB and use the Planning Commission as the hearing body. On September 10, the Planning Commission agreed on a tentive recommendation that would retain the HRB ("Al ternati ve B"). Mr. Jacobson explained the process for the reorganization. He said the Citizen Involvement Committee had reviewed the citizen participation process. They concurred with the plan, with the exception of moving the Planning Commission hearing date from October 23, to November 20. The City Council hearing date will be December 10. e Ms. Brody pointed out that "Alternative B" eliminated the City Council's involvement in the process. "Alternative C" maintained the appeal to the City Council. Mr. Jacobson added that under lieu three members of a Historic Preser- vation Committee would provide expertise to counsel and advise the, Planning Commission on historic preservation matters. Ms. Ehrman noted that with the expanded board there should be a person with a background in landscape architecture. She asked if, as one of the duties, they could add historic trees. Ms. Decker said staff had not considered this suggestion. They will be doing a City-wide historic resources survey. One component of the survey is natural features. Ms. Decker said she would take the suggestion back to the Planning Commission. Mr. Rutan told the council the Planning Commission did not want to make judgments in the historic area and they did not have the time to do so. They did want to continue to have a historic preservation program in the city. He said "Alternative B" would have education and citizen involvement. It could involve people who were really interested in historic preservation. After discussion members agreed enforcement capabilities were needed. That "gutting" a building was not historic preservation. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council Dinner Session Oc to b er 8, 1984 Page 3