09/12/1988 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e energy consequences. Mr. Moulton could find no reference to balance relative to designation in the proposed ordinance and he said this was indicative of the ordinance's failure to adhere to GoalS. Mr. Moulton said the chamber is also concerned that the board will function in a biased manner because its members must have a demonstrated interest in historic preservation. He said the board should be advisory and decisions relating to the application of Goal 5 should be left to the Planning Commission or City Council. Mr. Moulton referred to the criteria for designation in Section 2.407. He considered words such as integrity and style to be so vague and subjective that it would be impossible to prove the application of the criteria was based on the rule of law and not on the whim of an individual. Mr. Moulton asked for the use of more concrete language in the criteria. Mr. Moulton said the Historic Review Board is permitted to limit the uses that can take place on or in property. He considered this a zoning ordinance limitation that amends the zoning ordinance and said the board is the only body that is allowed to take such action without the usual public hearing process. Mr. Moulton encouraged councilors to read an attached letter from the Chamber of Commerce and said the chamber hoped to work with the council on the ordinance revision. e Dan Giustina, 2821 Spring Boulevard, spoke against the proposed ordinance. As a partner in Broadway and Pearl Associates which owns the Quackenbush Building, Mr. Giustina said he had no quarrel with the City's desire to protect historic buildings, but he felt the proposed ordinance inappropriately outlines procedures for protecting building interiors. He considered this a significant expansion of the existing ordinance which would enable the board to designate interior features without being required to consider economic feasibility. He said interior designation could occur without the building owner's input and consent. Mr. Giustina referred to Federal law which he said requires an owner's consent in exchange for specific economic incentives designed to encourage historic preservation. Mr. Giustina asked the council to consider his remarks and those of Mr. Moulton and to form a committee to address their concerns. Mayor Obie closed the public hearing. At Ms. Ehrman's request, Planning Director Susan Brody responded to the Goal 5 issue. Ms. Brody indicated that further discussion with the DLCD is planned, but it appears that the proposed ordinance is similar to the procedures for designation that are used by other municipalities in the state and that are deemed consistent with Goal 5. Tim Sercombe, City Attorney's Office, said that Goal 5 requires, during the comprehensive planning process, an inventory of assets and their - MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 12, 1988 Page 5 .