|
<br />..
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Mr. Williams said he was not pleased when such quasi-public agencies "thI'O~
<br />rocks" when the City has officially endorsed public housing for the commun~t:y. i Comm
<br />It: was underst:ood the Association would be contacted as to why that particular I 8/2~72
<br />. language was used in att:empting to sell the auditorium program. F~le
<br />
<br />4It ,Y.:Noise, Downtown Mall - Councilman Williams reported excessive noi~e resulting ,
<br />from use of amplifiers for a concert in the downtown mall. He ~a~d the co~cert:, Corom
<br />'was at noon, and he asked if t:he amplification level could be .1J.1Tll ted, say~ng 8/2/72
<br />the same level of noise experienced in an industry would be c~ ted as unsafe. File
<br />It was understood theinciqi?!lt. "'1ou)..d lJeiI:we_s,ttgate_d. _ .. _ _
<br />.~~~_...-........._,..,-.. '-_T'" . ....." ~ '.~ ...._ .~_ _ ....,..-."...;., ._
<br />
<br />Z. Dist:r~but~on___ '.
<br />1. Memo addressed to City Council from Manager re: Status H~ghway 126 ProJect.
<br />2. Cumulative report on Transient Room Tax Fund for years 1969-70 through
<br />____ 19.72-73, showiz:.g rece~!'ts___~nd al~_~c:.a~_i~n sfnce the b~ginni_ng o.f th~ ~und. 8/~/n;;
<br />
<br />File
<br />AA.Hearing Procedure, Southridge Appeal - Councilman Mohr suggested prepara J.on
<br />of an outline of contested issues in the appeal on prelimina1l] approval of
<br />Phase I of the Southridge PUD so that public test:imony already on record
<br />could be condensed. Then at: beginning of the hearing those present could be
<br />informed that only statements disagreeing with statements in the summary
<br />would be heard. Planning Director said the appeal did not: specify any of the
<br />findings which the appellant: alleges t:he Planning Commission did not make.
<br />I The appeal is based on a general statement: that the Planning Commission did not Corom
<br />- , meet: the criteria of the ordinance governing PUDs. So it would not be possible 8/2(72
<br />. for t:he ,st:af! t:o make~.respons~ prior t:o t:he hearing. ----J F~le
<br />
<br />BB.Slide Presentation, Historic Buildings - Professor Philip Dole of t:he Universit:y
<br />of Oregon explained the sampling of pictures of buildings in Eugene deemed to be
<br />,of historic value. He said the majority are in threatened posit:ion because t:here
<br />is no recognition by the City or any other public agency of value other than that, ,
<br />'attached to the land for commercial or right-of-way use. He suggested possibility:
<br />,of impact studies which might result in moving rights-of-way rather than buildings.
<br />:Slides of a selection of old buildings were shown - one set showing buildings
<br />:scattered t:hroughout t:he Cit:y, the other focusing on those on the east side of
<br />,Skinners Butte. He said "enemies" of the historic structures are highways, zoning,
<br />byi.~EirHL~~e~LAgno~ap.!;~..~_tQ__<;c!.I]~J;.r.UE~~_I?~C?f e.iJ.!~_'l_ bl1:i}d,in5(s. .
<br />
<br />In response to Mayor Anderson, Mr. Dole said he is serving as chairman of the
<br />I Lane County Historic Preservation Committee, ~~d is working on the State com-
<br />mittee to examine inventories of those buildings submitted for recognition as
<br />I ,National landmarks. Mayor Anderson suggested preparation of a set of guidelines
<br />or standards which may be used by governmental agencies when considering balances
<br />;between preservation of older buildings and greater utilization and economics of
<br />. the land on which they are located. Mr. Dole said an interest in such buildings,
<br />. is t:he necessary ingredient for their preservat:ion. Guidelines and standards :
<br />. . have a tendency to present choices which may become undesirable. An overall en-
<br />- 'vironmental study, he said, taking into account the buildings themselves, views,
<br />ilandscapes~ etc., should be undertaken when considering changes.
<br />
<br />I i Magor Anderson expressed appreciation for the presentation and suggested that a c,/mm
<br />start, at least, could be made in considering the buildings on an individual 8/2,72
<br />'basis if there was some type.!?! inventory at hand whe12-decisions are _!o b.e _.~a,!~....: F~le
<br />I__.__,,~-- ______..._~____.--
<br />
<br />CC. Vacation, Alley between Pearl and High from 11th north, Benjamin Franklin
<br />Savings & Loan - Public hearing is scheduled for Council meeting, August 14,1972.
<br />Through misunderstanding Bob Hazen of Benjamin Franklin Savings & Loan traveled
<br />'from Portland with the idea the vacation would be discussed at today's committee Comm
<br />meeting. He was given time to present a plot plan of the property on which the 8/9/72
<br />fi.~m' s ne_w. bu4~<!'j.ng is to be built. . ' .' File
<br />.. " - '. . T . . - ... .-. "_ ._. . 'V,----
<br />
<br />DD.~Interim Density Plan Reporting - Councilman Mohr reported the first meet:ing of
<br />the committee with staff, Lane County, and School District. He said a procedure; Corom
<br />is underway ~nd it is felt objective reporting can be accomplished within the 8/9/22
<br />l8-month per~od set out in t:he Planning Commission stipulations with regard to File
<br />a Rid~e ~~!le..Park proposal. .
<br />,.-"~ .-. '--.. '-', .. '---'.- -, -...... ''', '-'
<br />
<br />. Mrs. Beal moved seconded by Mr. Teague that Items A th~oug? DD be approved~'. affirmed, and
<br />filed as noted. Rollcall vote. Motion carried, all councllmen present votlng aye.
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />;;J. 4S 8/14/72 - 14
<br />
|