My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Item A: City Hall Complex Strategic Issues
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Agendas 2006
>
CC Agenda - 04/26/06 Work Session
>
Item A: City Hall Complex Strategic Issues
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/9/2010 1:00:35 PM
Creation date
4/19/2006 3:41:16 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
City_Council_Document_Type
Agenda Item Summary
CMO_Meeting_Date
4/26/2006
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
66
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />City of Eugene City Hall Complex Master Plan <br />Community Forum #1-Summary Report <br /> <br />Project Value I: Plan for the future <br />Votes: 47 <br /> <br />Comments from large group discussion <br />. Use existing EWEB buildings for expansion and allow it to facilitate a connection to the <br />rl ver. <br /> <br />. The City Planning Department needs to be more accountable in its decision-making <br />processes (e.g. massive hole in downtown Eugene). <br /> <br />Comments from small groups and written comments <br /> <br />. 50 years. <br /> <br />. Peak oil. <br /> <br />. Add with compact, multi-story, urban growth. <br /> <br />. More than 25 years-1 OO! <br /> <br />. It should look good! If City Hall is going to represent us, it should be modern and should last <br />a long time! <br /> <br />. All new building should be designed to add upper stories-up instead of out. Avoid urban <br />sprawl <br /> <br />. We should anticipate moving the City Hall into the EWEB administrative building and add <br />additional space along the river-not to the new court house. <br /> <br />. Use a 50-year planning cycle. Think long term. <br /> <br />Additional Values <br /> <br />Votes: 51 <br /> <br />In small group discussions, participants could create new project values, modify existing values, <br />and vote on the additional values they created. These additional project values were not <br />uniformly presented and voted on in the large group discussion due to time constraints. <br /> <br />Additional values recorded on exhibits (votes) <br /> <br />. Value A.A: Recycle existing facilities. (5) <br /> <br />. Value B.B: Close to public transportation and pedestrian routes. (2) <br /> <br />. Value C.C: Decentralized/distributed facilities located in neighborhoods. (1) <br /> <br />. Value D: Reduce, reuse recycle. Build LEED Platinum. (Duck friendly too!) (5) <br /> <br />. Values H.H: A structure that is very modest and low cost because of all of the <br />other human needs that are not being met currently. (2) <br /> <br />. Value J: Retain the connection between the past, present, and future. (1) <br /> <br />. Value J: Don't demolish atrium building. (8) <br /> <br />. Value J: Embody cultural stewardship. Respect history. (4) <br /> <br />. Value J: Meet or exceed existing downtown planning guideline (FAR). (6) <br /> <br />The JD White Company, Inc. <br /> <br />Page 1 0 <br /> <br />April 2006 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.