03/12/1973 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

tv, Mrs. Beal moved seconded by Mr. Williams to authorize the lease/purchase agreement on propert at 301 North Lincoln for $50,000. Rollcall vote. All councilmen present voting aye, motion carried. D.Mobile Home Sales Lot Office, 4675 West 11th Avenue, Nix - Morris A. Nix requested, juse of a llObi1e home structure for office use at his mobile home sales lot, 14675 West 11th Avenue. Manager said this request raises again the question now un- :der study of use of buildings which do not meet building code standards for other tthan watchman purposes or in locations other than llObi1e holl}S parks. Staff ~ecom- ,mended granting permission for such use with the underst~di~g that should C~ty. ':policy change with regard to temporary structures for this k~nd of use, perlRl.ss~on 'would be cancelled. IMorris Nix described the type of mobile structure he proposes to use and the sales I [lot now urder construction. He asked favorable action on the request. . :Mrs. Beal moved seconded by ifuture change in policy with unanimously. , Mr. Williams to approve the request subject to any regard to IOObile structures. Motion carried Comm 2/28/73 ir:pprove I I :Deferment of Storm Sewer Assessment, Tax Lot 300 (17-04-21) w*:st ~f Echo Hollow E. l?oad south of Barger Drive (Trans Western Investors) -Author~zat~on was ~e~uested ' :to defer the payment of this assessment in the alOOunt of $3,400 as a condi tion of fobtaining easement for the storm sewer., . Mr. Williams IOOved seconded by Mr. Wood to approve the deferment. unanilOOus1y. 'Right-of~Way to Lane County, Greenhill Road - Authorization was requested to deed F. 10 feet on each side of Greenhill Road across Amazon Channel north of Royal Avenue ,to Lane County to allow their widening the road. Easement is being retained. Motion carried Comm 2/28/73 ~prove i 'Mrs. Beal moved seconded by Mr. Williams to authorize the deed. Motion carried : unanilOOus1y. Comm 2/28/73 Apprf've .~ 5 1973 (pr sent Councilmen Hershner & williams) G.Assessment Hearing Panel Report - MarCH , e: 1. ,C. B .194 ~ Levying assessments for, paving north/south alley between Oak Street and ,. High Street from 27th Avenue to 270 feet north (72-41) :No wri tten protests on file. :A1bert Cheever, 135 East 27th Avenue, objected to paying any of the assessment ~his property on the basis that it served only the adjacent apartments and that .not use it for access to his property. He presented a map showing location of iproperty in relation to the apartments and the alley. agai~st t, he d~d :.' I' his . ;Councilman Hershner explained that the Council at the time of contract award for the ~alley paving viewed the area and decided the improvement should be made. This deci- ision was based on long standing policy of proceeding with a' project when owners of ,more than 50% of abutting properties petition the improvement. Mr. Hershner said it ,was his understanding that all properties involved, including Mr. Cheever's,are zoned i for mul tiple- family Ii ving. Ci ty Engineer confirmed that the properties are zoned 'RG (Garden Apartment Residential), and in answer to Councilman Williams said that : there is enough area in Mr. Cheever's ownership,. access, etc., which wo'uld allow :multip1e-family development should it be desired. Some discussion followed with re- : gardto development of adjacent properties and Mr. Cheever's contention that he, 'should not have to pay the entire assessment against his property if he does not _; use the alley. , I. Councilman Hershner explained further that although the improvement may not be of ibenefit to Mr. Cheever's property at this time, his property could be used for ;multiple-family living because of its being zoned for that purpose. Also, that be- 'yond its being the Council's policy to assess on front foot basis, that basis of 'assessment is directed by C.ity Charter. Mr. Hershner added that although a Council' subcommittee is now reviewing the City's assessment policy, no conclusion has been reached ~ Advice recei ved by the subcommi ttee to this point is tha,t probably any change in present procedure would require an amen'dment to the Ch'arter, thereby call- ing for a vot~. So there appears no alternative to assessing on the footage basis even though alternatives are being explored. Councilman Williams concurred, saying that at some future time another owner of that property may recei ve the benefi t of the improvement even though it is not being utilized at this time. He explained the complex accounting system which would be necessary were each assessment to be held until benefit is derived. Mr. Hershner. added that even though the, suhcommi ttee on assessment _policy has considered changes" it is probable that it would not affect this particular assessment because. of .the ~J multiple-family zoning on the property. _3~NJ ~ '~'" 0.. Recommendat~~n: Levy ~~~essments 'as PEop?sed. :\\ -- '---- -3(1-Z(73~j -Approve "