|
| |
Caption: Board of Trustees Minutes - 1974 Version B This is a reduced-resolution page image for fast online browsing.
![](https://uihistories.library.illinois.edu/REPOSITORYCACHE/125/9l6k7ngAU4h6u24Qa9588Cz1OSAB56HmZs4V98k02TDJ6IAcDCW7aZOh6j1ZF28AhR5uTS9LZK7tLDD72cr04906Q2n74tD6PMX81j9zR19_6184-451.jpg)
EXTRACTED TEXT FROM PAGE:
444 BOARD OF TRUSTEES [February 20 D. If the City does not deliver a deed and possession of Tract I-A to the University by September 1, 1974, and does not cure that default by September 15, 1974, the University and the Capital Development Board may jointly terminate the agreement. The City may request an extension of the default date for up to 120 days from September 1, 1974, and such extension will be granted unless the University and the Capital Development Board determine that the extended date will unduly delay the University's medical education program by virtue of construction delays, or if they determine that the availability of acquisition or construction funds will be jeopardized. It is recommended that the November 21, 1973, resolution of the Board of Trustees be modified in accordance with the foregoing. In addition, a cooperation agreement between the University and the City of Peoria has been negotiated with respect to the urban renewal area adjacent to the property being acquired by the University, such adjacent area being designated as Tract 2 and colored in green on the attached plat. Under the terms of the cooperation agreement, the parties agree as to the compatibility of the currently designated uses of Tract 2 with the development of the Peoria School of Medicine. No changes in the designated uses would be made by the City until after consultation with the other parties and a public hearing would be held on any proposed change. Prior to any disposition of Tract 2, the University will be given first opportunity to purchase at a price to be determined at that time, either a price approved by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development or, if no price is so approved, at the fair market value for institutional use. In the event Tract 2 is offered to other redevelopers, the City will establish an advisory review committee to review all redevelopment plans submitted. The advisory review committee will consist of a representative appointed by the City, a representative appointed by the University, and a third member appointed by joint agreement of the City and the University. I recommend that the execution of the cooperation agreement be authorized. O n motion of Mr. Swain, these recommendations were approved and authority was given as recommended. Cost Effectiveness Study, Chicago Circle President Corbally called on Vice President Brady, Chancellor Cheston, and Mr. Harlan D. Bareither who presented a report on a cost effectiveness study conducted at the Chicago Circle campus. A copy of the report has been filed with the Secretary of the Board. OLD AND NEW BUSINESS STATEMENT ON THE WILLIAM L. SPRINGER LAKE PROJECT President Corbally called on M r . W a l t e r Keith, Director of Robert Allerton P a r k , for comment on the U . S . A r m y Corps of Engineers "Environmental Statement" which had been given to the Trustees earlier. Following his remarks, on motion of M r . H a h n , the following statement was adopted by the Board. (2) The Secretary of the Board of Trustees received a request from Colonel James M. Miller, District Engineer, Chicago District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, on November 5, to comment on the environmental considerations of the Draft Environmental Statement — William L. Springer Lake, dated September, 1973. On December 19, 1973, the Board acknowledged receipt of the Statement and asked the Director of Robert Allerton Park, who had also received a similar request, to make an appropriate response on behalf of the University of Illinois. The response was forwarded to the Corps of Engineers on January 18 as the Report of the Director, Professor Walter M. Keith, with copies sent to the University Board of Trustees. The Director, in his report, raises several questions of policy arising out of the review of the Environmental Statement. These questions bear upon the
| |