03/24/1958 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

122 e 3/24/58 "PRESENT: COUNCILMEN HARTMAN, SHISLER, EDMUNDS, LAURIS, MOLHOLM AND MCGAFfEY; CITY MANAGER; CITY RECORDER; DIRECTOR Of PUBLIC WORKS; CITY ATTORNEY; TRAFFIC ENGINEER; ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT; FIVE REPRESENTATIVES Of THE SANITARY ENGINEERS AND THEIR ATTORNEY, MR. BARTLE; CLARENCE HINES; DAN WYANT, EUGENE REGISTER-GUARD; WENDY RAY, KUGN; JACK CRAIG, KERG. I COMMITTEE OF THE WHoLE I. THE CITY MANAGER INFORMED THE COMMITTEE THAT THE 1957 LEGISLATURE HAD CHANGED THE REQUIREMENTS CONCERNiNG PRESSURE RELIEF VALVES ON'ALL TYPES OF' PRESSURE VESSELS WH I CH I S THE REASON THAT A NUMBER OF APARTMENT HOUSE' OWNERS ARE' CON~ CERNEri AT THIS TIME. THIS EX~LANAT~ON ~AS MADE SINCE ~~~M~B.FEAR O~ ~55 8~H AVENUE WEST HAD EXPRESSED CONCERN TO THE COUNCil RELATIVE TO NEW REQUIREMENTS ON PRESSURE RELIEF VALVES. No ACTION WAS TAKEN ON THIS REPORT. 2. DISCUSSION REGARDING' PURCHASE oFAuSTiN-WESTE~N SWEEPER F"ROM' COLUMBIA EQUIPMENT . COMPANY - THE COMMITTEE WAS I NFORMED OF A TELEGRAM FROM COLUMBIA EQUIPMENT COM- PANY CONCERNING THE PROPOSED TESTING OF THE AUSTIN-WESTERN SWEEPER. THE TELEGRAM IS AS FOLLOWS: e "CONFIRMING OUR TELEPHONE CONVERSATION WITH YOUR MR. FINLA~SON OF TUES~AY, MARCH. II, REGARDING AUSTIN-WESTERN MOD~L 60. ~WEEPER:, WE CANNOT AGREE TO OR AUTHORIZE ANY FURTHER TESTS OR TRIALS Of THE . ., , .- SWEEPER IN QUESTION UNLESS BOTH PARTIES REACH SPECIFIC WRITTEN AGREEMENT OUTLI~ING EXACTLY WH~T ~S TO BE DONE AND RESOLVED FROM SUCH fURTHER TESTS OR TRIALS. I LACKING SAME, WE MtiST REQUEST THAT. THE CITY COUNCIL GIVE IMMEDIATE ATTENTION TO THIS PROBLEM AND REACH fiNAL DECISION AS TO THEIR DESIRES AND DISPOSITION. UNT I L' ONE OR. TH.E OTHER' .OF' THE ABOVE HAS OCCURRED TO THE SAT I SFAC- T.ION OF {30TH PARJIES, W~, MUST INSIST THAT THE SWEEPER IN QUESTION NOT BE OPERATED~~ THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION AFTER WHICH THE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED TO THE COUNCIL THAT THE CITY NOT PURCHASE THE AUSTIN-WESTERN SWEEPER FROM COLUMBIA EQUIPMENT . . ~ . . -. . -. COMPANY. IT WAS MOVED BY MR. SHEARER SECONDED BY MR. SHISLER THAT THE COUNCIL FOLLOW THE RECOMMENDATION Of THE COMMITTEE ON ITEM 2. MOTION CARRIED. 3. CONSIDERAT.IONOF" BALLOT .RETURNS ON: PAVING 28TH AVENUE F"ROM HILYARD TO UNI- VE~SITYS1REET, FERRy STREET. F"ROM 32ND JO 34TH AVENUE, AN~ PAVJNG OF',MADISON STREET FROM 6ft'- J08THAv.ENUE ":,,TI;iECOMM.ITTEE RECEIVEDATABULAJION,FROM'THE PUBL IC WORKS DEPARTMENT CONCERN I NG 'THE PAV I NG OF niE' ABOVE' NAMED STREETS,. . W,TH REFERENCE TO THE PAYING OF" 28TH AVENUE FROM HI~YARD TO VNIVERSITY STREET, ON THE BASIS OF' THE BALLOT TAKEN, RESIDENTS OF A ONE BLOCK AREA ONLY, BEING HARRIS T.O POT:TER. STREET., INDICATED T!iEY WIStiED THE STREET PAVED. WITH RE- FERE.NC.E TO THE PAV.I,NG OF' FERR~ STREET F'ROM3~ND TO 34T.H AVENUE, Tt.tERE WAS, NO RETURN. FAVORIN~ PAVING OF' THIS STREET. WITH REFERENCE. TO THE PAVI~G OF' MADISON STREET fROM 6TH TO 8TH AVENUE, THERE WERE 44.95% IN FAVOR Of: PAVING, 43.51% AGAINST PAVING AND NO REPORT F'ROM 11.54%. I THE: COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED THAT THE 6NEB~OCK AREA ON 28TH AVENUE FROM HARRIS TO POTT.ER STREET BE PAVED, THAT MADI SON STRE.ET F'ROM 6TH TO 8.TH AVENUE ,BE. PAVED, AND THAT THE NECESSARY ORDINA~CES INITIA:TING THE PROJECTS BE PASSED. e I T WAS MOVED BY MR. SHEARER SECONDED BY MRS. .LAUR IS .THAT THE NECES.SARY PRO:- CEDURES BE INITIATED TO PAVE 28TH AVENUE FROM HARRIS TO POTTER STREET. MOTION CARRIED. IT WAS MOVED BY MR. SHEARER SECONDED BY MR. MCGAFFEY THAT THE NECESSARY PRO- CEDURES BE INITIATED TO PAVE MADISON STREET fROM 6TH TO 8TH AVENUE. MOTION - ... - CARRIED. 4. CONSIDERATION Of FINANCIAL REPORT REQU,IREMENTS FOR. GARBAGE HAULERSOP.ERA.TING, WITH;IN THE CITY LIMITS :- THE COUN.CIL HEARD A REQUEST .FROM FIVE REPRESENTA.TIVES OF" THE GARBAGE HAULERS AND THEIR. ATT.ORNEY FOR THE REPEAL OF. TtE FI~A~CIAL STATEMENT REQU.lREMENTS AS, CON.TA I NED IN TtiE CODE OF THE C.I TXOF. EUGENE ,UNDER SECTION 22.6 OF CHAPTER 22.CONS)DERABLE DISCUSSION, ~AS H~D AS TO'THtNEEO fOR, USE OF', AND ANTICIPATED USE fOR A FINANCIAL. STATEMENT AS NOW RE~UIRED. AFTER THIS D.lS.CUSSION IN WHICH .ITWAS:BASICALLY'OETERMINED THAT AN ANNUAL STATEMENT IS NOT NECESSARY, THE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED THAT SECTION 22.6 OF CHAPTER 22 OF THE CODE OF THE tlTY OF EUGENE BE AMENDED IN SUCH A MANNER THAT I \ ~\\: e II I: