10/22/1984 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Wooten, to approve option 1, Item #19 (in Revisions and Errata), IIDowntown Development, e Servi ces, and Marketi ngll . Roll ca 11 vote; the moti on carried; 7: 1. Councilors Obie, Wooten, Ball, Holmer, Schue, Bascom, and Hansen voting aye; Councilor Ehrman voting nay. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Wooten, to approve option 2 Item #22, (in Revisions and Errata), "Aggressively pursue additional major retail activity to complement existing retail development downtown." Roll call vote; the motion carried; 7:0. Mr. Hansen abstained. Members requested staff review and evaluate traffic direction changes suggested in the document. Ms. Ehrman moved, seconded by Ms. Wooten, to delete Item #33 (i n Revi si ons and Errata), IIConvert Lawrence Street from one-way to two-way between 6th and 13th avenues. II Ms. Ehrman voiced her concerns with converting Lawrence to two-way traffic. Mr. Ball said the motion was to study a possible street direction change. Ms. Bascom indicated this couid be looked at. Other members said traffic was usually less on a two-way street. Roll call vote; the motion failed; 1:7 with Councilor Ehrman voting aye and Councilors Obie, Wooten, Ball, Holmer, Schue, Bascom, and Hansen voting nay. e Members decided to hold over consideration of Item #36 in Revisions and Errata. Ms. Wooten moved, seconded by Mr. Obie to approve option 2, Item #42 (in Revisions and Errata), IIThis element (Downtown Design) describes a series of projects that should be implemented... II Mr. Hansen and Ms. Ehrman thought Option 1 was a more accurate statement of what would happen. Mr. Obie supported option 2 and said it was a critical issue of commitment to the plan. Mr. Holmer suggested substituting the language on page 3 of the document. Ms. Decker responded that the design elements are not prioritized. Roll call vote; the motion carried; 5:4 Mayor Keller, Councilors Obie, Wooten, Schue, and Bascom voting aye and Councilors Holmer, Ehrman, Ball, and Hansen voting nay. A short break was taken. B. Appeal of Sign Code Board of Appeals Decision Concerning Property Located at 904 West 6th Avenue (memo attached; background informa- tiondistributed) . Mr. Gleason introduced Ms. McDonald, Sign Code Inspector, who explained the Sign Code Board of Appeals had denied the request citing no proven hardship, and no unusual circumstances. Variances for other billboards in the area - had not been granted. Property owners in the area object to this request. Public hearing was opened. MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 10, 1984 Page 4