|
<br /> r"" 6 6'
<br /> e
<br /> 10/24/60
<br /> .- - - - --
<br /> I
<br /> MEETING Of THE COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION. MOTION CARRIED. I I
<br /> ,
<br /> Ii
<br /> G. REQUEST BY LILLE HAYES McKAY TO REZONE PROPERTY LOCATED BETWEEN OAKWAY ROAD i
<br /> I AND COBURG 'I
<br /> 'I
<br /> ROAD A~OUNTY ROAD No. 302, fROM RA TO C-3P. THIS ITEM HAD LIKEWISE BEEN RECOMMENpED fOR DENIAL :'
<br /> I
<br /> BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED THE REPORT Of T~ PLANNING COMMISSION BE "
<br /> I,
<br /> UPHELD. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ji
<br /> il
<br /> :i
<br /> IT WAS MOVED BY MR. SHEARER SECON OED BY MRS. ,;
<br /> LAURIS THAT ITEM G Of THE COMMITTEE REPORT ~ II
<br /> APPROVED. Mo T ION CAR R lED. I.
<br /> I
<br /> :'
<br /> MR. AND. MRS. MCKAY APPEARED BEfORE THE COUNCIL AND STATED THEY WISHED THE REZONING Of THIS
<br /> PROPERTY TO ALLOW THEM TO SELL THE PROPERTY fOR A SERVICE STATION SITE. AREA RESIDENTS LIKEWISE
<br /> APPEARED TO PROTEST THE LOCATIO Of A SERVICE STATION IN THE INTERSECTION Of OAKWAY ROAD AND COUNTY
<br /> ROAD No. 302. THEY ALSO POINTED OUT THAT IN THE IMMEOIATE AREA, EIGHT SERVICE STATIONS+ARE NOW IN
<br /> EXISTENCE. I
<br /> 1.- ~. CONSIDERATION OF THE FREQUENCY OF RESUBMISSION Of PLANNING MATTERS - MRS. NIVEN OF THE
<br /> EUGENE PLANNING COMMISSION SUGGEstD THAT SOME RESTRICTION SHOULD BE PUT ON INDIVIDUALS WHO REQUEST e
<br /> THAT PROPERTY BE REZ.ONED,SO THAT THESE MATTERS WOULD NOT. CONT I NUALL Y BE BEFORE THE PLANN ING COMM I S-
<br /> , SION AND THE COUNCIL, WHERE THE REQUESTS ARE DENIED. IT WAS SUGGESTED THAT APPLICATIONS MIGHT BE
<br /> i LIMITED TO ONCE EACH 6 MONTHS, AND THAT IF SUCH ACTION WERE TAKE~, IT WOULD REDUCE THE TIME SPENT ON
<br /> [i THESE MATTERS BY THE COUNCIL, BY THE PLAN~ING COMMISSION, B~ THE STAFf AND BY. ABUTTING OWNERS WHO
<br /> PROTESTS SUCH ACTION.
<br /> THE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED THAT A STUDY BE MADE OF THIS MATTER CONCERNING THE fREQUENCY Of
<br /> RESUBMISSION OF PLANNING MATTERS TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, AND THAT A RECOMMENDATION BE MADE TO I
<br /> THE COUNCIL. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
<br /> "
<br /> I
<br /> IT WAS MOl ED BY MR. SHEARER SECONDED BY MR. MCGAffEY THAT ITEM 3 OF THE COMMITTEE REPORT BE
<br /> APPROVED. MOTION CARRIED..
<br /> j 4. RECOMMENDATION Of THE GAS ADVISORY BOARD REGARDING CERTAIN FEES IN THE GAS CODE - A REPORT
<br /> FROM THE GAS ADVISORY BOARD, RELATING TO PERMIT AND INSPECTION fEES AS CURRENTLY CONTAINED IN THE
<br /> GAS CODE OF THE CITY OF EUGENE, WAS PRESENTED TO THE COMMITTEE. THE GAS ADV I SORY BOARD ~ COMMENDED
<br /> AMENDMENTS TO SECTION 9 OF THE GAS CODE Of THE CITY OF EUGENE, SUBSECTION D, AS FOLLOWS: Ii
<br /> CHANGE THE PERMIT AND INSPECTION FEE FOR GAS HOT WATER TANK, RESIDENTIAL, UP TO 60 GALLONS, :!
<br /> @ $1.50 PER GAL LONG TO THE fOLLOWING: GAS WATER HEATERS UP TO AND INCLUDING 100,000 BTU AT $1.50. ,
<br /> i: CHANGE GAS HOT WATER TANKS, COMMERCIAL OVER 60 GALLONS, FROM $1.50 FEE TO GAS HOT WATER
<br /> ;1 HEATERS OVER 100,000 BTU INPUT, COMMERCII AL, fEE $2.00.
<br /> I'
<br /> :: . .
<br /> I, CHANGE GAS BURNER UP TO 180 ;000 BTU INPUT CAPACITY, @$2.00, TO ALL FURNACES AND BOILERCONVER€
<br /> !: SION BURNERS, CONVERTING fURNACES A~BOILERS TO GAS FROM SOLID FUEL, WOOD, COAL OIL OR SAWDUST,
<br /> II MINIMUM FEE SHALL BE $4.00 INCLUDING 200,000 BTU t,
<br /> 'I FOR EACH CONVERSION BURNER UP TO AND INPUT;
<br /> "
<br /> i'
<br /> I
<br /> " COMMERCIAL BOI~ERS, FIRST 200,000 BTU - $4.00 AND $1.00 fOR EACH ADD I T 10 NAL 100,000 BTU'WITH
<br /> "
<br /> "
<br /> " A MAXIMUM CHARGE Of $25.00.
<br /> 'I
<br /> FURTHER, DELETING THE SECTION: WHEN TWO OR MORE ITEMS CONTAINED IN THE SCHEDULE Of PERMIT
<br /> AND INSPECTION fEES ARE TO BE INSTALLED AS ONE INSTALLATION PROJECT; BUT THE SAME CONTRACTOR, THE
<br /> TOTAL PERMIT FEE SHALL BE THAT SHOWN FOR THE MAJOR ITEM. I
<br /> THE PROPOSED CHANGES WERE DISCUSSED BY THE COMMITTEE AND ON QUESTION, TII: GAS INSPECTOR
<br /> INDICATED THE BASIC REASON FOR THE CHANGES WERE THE TYPES OF INSTALLATION WHICH WERE COVERED AND
<br /> THE NECESSITY fOR MoeE THAN ONE INSPECTION ON THSE TYPES OF INSTALLATION.
<br /> THE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED THAT THE RECOMMENDATI~ OF THE GAS ADVISORY BOARD BE APPROVED.
<br /> MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
<br /> IT WAS MOVED BY MR. SHEARER SECONDED BY MRS. LAUR I S THAT ITEM 4 Of THE COM"' I HEE REPORT - BE e
<br /> , APPROVED. MOTION CARRIED.
<br /> I
<br /> I "
<br /> .- 5. RECOMMENDATION CONCERNING TRAFFIC CHA~ES ON 8TH AVENUES AND BROADWAY fROM PEARL STREET ,;
<br /> EA5TTTO THE HIGHWAY (MILL STREET~. - THE TRAFFIC ENGINEER EXPLAINED TWO PLA~S REGARDING TRAFfiC
<br /> CHANGES ON THE ABOVE DESCRIBED STREETS WHICH WOULD BE NECESSARY WHEN THE NEW Off-RAMP FROM THE
<br /> FERRY STREET OVERCROSSING WAS OPENEO LATE IN OCTOBER OF 1960. :l
<br /> I: ,I
<br /> PLAN I, WHOH WAS RECOMMENDED BY THE TRAFFIC ENGINEER AND THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, WOULD PLACE
<br /> THREE LANES OF TRAfFIC ON 8TH AVENUE WESTBOUND BETWEEN PEARL AND H,GH STREETS, AND TWO LANES Of
<br /> TRAFFIC WESTBOUND AND ONE LANE EASTBOUND BETWEEN HIGH STREET AND THE HIGHWAY, WITH PARKING TO BE
<br /> REMQ~ED ON BOTH SIDES OF THE STREET fROM PEARL STREET TO THE HIGHWAY. THE PLAN ALSO CALLS FOR AN
<br /> EXTENSION OF THE TWO-L~NE EASTBOUND ONE-WAY SYSTEM ON BR~DWAY, FROM PLEAR.STREET TO HIGH STREET.
<br /> THIS PLAN WOULD INTER-CONNECT WITH THE PEARL - HIGH ONE-WAY COUPLET AS WELL AS THE OFf-RAMP RROM THE
<br /> FERRY STREET BRIDGE.
<br /> .. I
<br /> PLAN II WOULD ALLOW TWO-WAY TRAFFIC WESTBOUND FROM PEARL TO THE HIGHWAY, WITH ONE LANE EASTBOUND :'
<br /> BETWEEN HIGH AND THE HIGHWAY, WOULD REQUIRE THE REMOVAL Of PARKING ON THE NORTH SIDE OF BROADWAY fOR
<br /> ONE-HALf BLOCK WEST TO PEARL STREET, DUE TO THE TRAFWIC MOVEMENTS AT BROADWAY AND PEARL, AND THE :[ I
<br /> NECESSITY FOR CHANNELIZATION OF SUCH MOVEMENTS, AND WOULD HAVE CONSIDERABLE MORE TRAFFIC CONFLICTS
<br /> THAN THAT IN PLAN I. PLAN II WOULD FURTHER CREATE CONSIDERABLE PROBLEMS AT THE IN TERSECT I ON OF BROWO- ,I
<br /> "
<br /> WAY AND PEARL STREET. :.I
<br /> II
<br /> THE COMMITT[E RECOMMENDED THAT PLAN I BE IMPLEMENTED AND THAT THE IMPLEMENl,~TION OF THIS PLAN !I
<br /> BE IMMEDIATE WITH THE PLAN TO GO INTO EfFECT AT THE SAME TIME AS THE OPENING OF THE OFF-RAMP EXTENDING I,
<br /> il
<br /> I:
<br /> ,!
<br /> Ii e
<br /> I'
<br /> ~ "
<br /> ,
<br /> I
<br />
|