January 2004 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

1 The van returned to the HPC offices at about 1:05 p.m., accompanied by both TV 2 crews and one other car of people. Waiting at the office for the second part of the meeting to 3 begin were about 25 people, several of whom signed the attached attendance list. The second 4 part of the meeting was moved from HPC offices to a CSAP classroom of the second floor of 5 the same building, because the people in attendance would not all fit within HPC offices. 6 Jerry Ujdak called the second part of the meeting to order at 1:27 p.m. Roll was 7 called, and all the staff members and HPC -members who were present at 10:00, with the 8 exception of Mary Jane Chase, were present. 9 Julie Schutte gave the newly arrived members of the public a synopsis of the tour 10 route and observations. 11 John Livingston briefly explained to the public the legal purpose — and limitations — 12 of the legal role of Consulting Party played by the HPC, making clear that HPC comments 13 and consultation is limited to the subject of historic preservation. 14 Public comments were received from all of the individuals who signed the attached 15 list. Several of those present voiced concerns about the affect of proposed routed C and C -s 16 upon their new homes in Whispering Hills subdivision. Three families present live on Kern 17 Road, and are concerned about the affect on their homes of route E -s, or, to a lesser extent, the 18 routes that would entail widening the present US 31 near Kern Road. One family present 19 lives in a historic schoolhouse that has been declared an honorary local landmark, and which 20 may be eligible for the national Registry of Historic Places, as well. This home would be 21 affected by proposed route G or G -s. All concerned citizens, including those who do and 22 those who do not have historic properties, were encouraged to present their comments to Carl 23 Camacho, the Project Manager for the US 31 Highway Department study. 24 25 1. APPARENT HISTORIC IMPACT OF THE DIFFERENT US 31 ROUTE PROPOSALS. 26 After hearing and considering all public comments offered, the HPC members 27 discussed the probable historic impact of the various proposed routes. The chair polled each 28 HPC member in turn regarding which of the proposed alternatives would have the least 29 detrimental historic impact. Opinions were as follows: 30 Martha Choitz: Said that proposed route G is very bad indeed, in that it would clear 31 out and wreck a lot of rural land, and impact several significant historic farms and homes, 32 while going far out of the way of the present line of travel. All of the other routes impact other 2