Laserfiche WebLink
<br />e <br /> <br />a""'i <br /> <br />5/23/66 <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />tracts on storm sewer construction for 1966 are delayed for 30 days, there will be <br />insufficient time to complete construction before bad weather arrives; Ken Gilbert <br />of the Homebuilders Association indicated that he, and probably other' home builders, <br />would be willing to sign a letter indicating they would abide by any future de- <br />cision by the Council if time could be obtained to study the moethod of assessing <br />storm sewer costs. The City Manager explained the City does not have a budget to <br />pay for the proposed 1966-67 storm sewer projects, therefore the present contracts <br />previously approved by the Council would have to be delayed. The Council and <br />other persons present discussed a number of aspects with regard to assessing storm <br />sewer costs, and it was finally determined there is ill method which would satisfy <br />all parties involved. Mrs~ Lauris moved seconded by Dr. Purdy the Council adopt <br />a policy of requiring'subdividers to pay the cost of storm sewer installation in - <br />new subdivisions up to 24 inches in size. Motion carried. <br /> <br />After a general discussion on the question of assessing storm sewer costs in new subdivisions, the <br />Council indicate it's intent to meet with the HomebuiMers Association again in the 'future on. this <br />item whenever necessary. <br /> <br />Mr. Hawk moved seconded by Mrs. Lauris to establish Council policy of assessing costs of storm sewers <br />in new subdivisions up to 24 inches in size, or the equivalent cost of 24 inches, at a fixed con- <br />tract price for the subdivision. Motion carried. <br /> <br />Mr. Lassen commented that the Council should have further discussion on the policy considered last <br />year with regard to the City's paying their share of the cost of storm sewers in new subdivisions <br />from the $12.8 million bond issue. He further explained that-it was his understanding the original <br />intent in the bond issue was to provide funds for storm sewers in the older section of town, not <br />the new subdivisions. <br /> <br />1 <br /> <br />3. Planning Commission Report - May 3, 1966 <br />a. Rezone to R-l area' on south side 18th Avenue between' Friendly and Tyler, <br />Planning Commission (66-073) - The Planning Commission recommended this area <br />be rezoned from R-3 Multiple Family to R-l Single Family. Mrs. Lauris moved <br />seconded by Mr. Crakes to rezone as recommended. Motion carried. ' <br /> <br />Mr. Hawk moved seconded by Mrs. Lauris to approve Item 2a of the Committee report ;nd concur with <br />Mr. Don Hammar's request that should his multiple-use structure at 980 West 18th Avenue be destroyed <br />by fire, or removed in any other way,' the Council would look with favor upon the structure's being <br />replaced to the extent of the existing use even though now in an R-l zone. Motion carried. <br /> <br />2 <br /> <br />b. Rezone to R-3G area west of Acorn Park Subdivision, east of Bailey Hill Road, <br />north of 18th Avenue, Bonson (66-008) - The City Manager explained that although <br />no action is required of the Council, he felt they should acknowledge the tabling <br />action of the Planning Commission. Mr. McNutt moved seconded by Mr. Chatt to <br />acknowledge Planning Commiss~on action. Motion carried.' <br /> <br />3 <br /> <br />c. Annexation area east of Interstate 5 and south of Judkins Road, Weaver (66-076) - <br />The Planning Commission reported this item had been held over for further study. <br />Mr. McNutt moved- seconded by Mr. Chatt to acknowledge this item had been held <br />by the Planning' Commission. Motion carried. <br /> <br />Mr. Hawk moved seconded by Mrs. Lauris that Items 2b and 2c of the Committee report be approved. <br />Motion carr~ed. <br /> <br />4 <br /> <br />3. Bids Improvement Pro;ects, May 17, 1966 - Tabulation of bids was submitted on two <br />improvement projects. Dr.Purdy moved seconded by Mr. McNutt to award contracts <br />to the low bidders on each project. Motion carried. <br /> <br />Action on this item was taken earlier in the meeting under New' Business. <br /> <br />5 <br /> <br />4. Sidewalk, Friendly and 28th - A report from the Public Works Department was read <br />which indicated a poll of property owners shows that 32% were in favor, 39.5% were <br />opposed, and 28.5% made no reply as to attitude toward construction of sidewalk on <br />Friendly from 22nd to 28th. With regard to tbe sidewalk on 28th from Friendly <br />to Washington, the poll indicated 34% for, 52.5% against, and 15.5% no reply. The <br />committee decided to look at both areas before making a decision. <br /> <br />This item was held over pending the Coupctl's looking at the area. <br /> <br />6 <br /> <br />5. Signals, 6th and 7th - It was explained the Eugene Development Agency recommended <br />mast-arm construction for signalization of 6th and 7th Avenues, since ,the State <br />is participating with the City in the cost of -installation. Dr. Purdy moved seconded <br />by Mr. Anderson that mast-arm signla installation involved in the State program for <br />widening 6th and 7th be approved. Motion carried. <br /> <br />Mr. Hawk moved seconded by Mrs. Lauris that Item 5 of the ,Committee report be approved. Motion car- <br />ried. <br /> <br />7 <br /> <br />6. Property Exchange, McKay - It Mas explained that Miles McKay had deeded a portion <br />of his property adjacent to Ayres Subdivision in error in that he had conveyed more <br />property than intended. ~he City Attorney recommendedtme property be deeded back <br /> <br />Jj <br /> <br />5/23/66 -3 <br /> <br />"J <br />lL.. <br />