05/14/1984 Meeting (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

- e e In response to a question on the installation of the raised crosswalk, City Attorney Tim Sercombe stated that the administrative order only covered the removal of the diverter. Mr. Hanks explained that no action by the council was required on the crosswalks because that power had been delegated to the City Manager. For the record, Ms. Wooten said she assumed that the City would proceed with the implementation of the alternative plan even though it was not included in the motion. Roll call vote; the motion carried unanimously, 7:0. Councilor Hansen suggested that a memorandum be forwarded to Bill Hamel. For the benefit of the public, Councilor Smith explained that Mr. Hamel had opposed the diverters for a number of years. B. Outdoor Cafe Ordinance (memo, ordinance distributed) City Manager Micheal Gleason introduced the agenda item. William Sloat of the Business Assistance Team presented the staff report, reviewing the May 14, 1984, BAT staff memorandum to the City Council. In addition to a $30 application fee, Mr. Sloat stated that the ordinance would require the applicant to meet certain conditions, including permission from the property owner for the cafe and submission of a diagram for the proposed cafe. He added that the revocable permit would be granted for a one-year period. Mr. Sloat said the proposed ordinance was a "Shaping Up '84" action to assist the City's tourism activities. Councilor Hansen said he supported the program, but he questioned how the concerns of the adjoining neighbors would be addressed. Mr. Sloat said the diagram to be submitted by the applicant would be reviewed by the City. He explained that any problems identified with the cafe could be addressed when the cafe operator applied for renewal of the one-year permit. He added that there were existing City ordinances for complaints to be filed if there were problems with a cafe's operation. In response to another question, Mr. Sloat stated that the permit application did not require permission from the adjoining property owners. Councilor Holmer questioned the proposal to rent public property to adjacent property owners in return for a permament application fee. He asked if consideration had been given to an annual fee for the permit or if some fee calculation based on the cafe's square footage could be used. Mr. Sloat responded that staff had discussed the issue but had decided that the issue be deferred to a more comprehensive review of the use of public right-of-ways. He said the proposed ordinance included the requirement of a $30 per year revocable fee. In response to another question, Mr. Sloat said he did not know of any time frame for the comprehensive review. Councilor Wooten said she was concerned that the proposed ordinance limited the number of individuals to be seated to 20. Mr. Sloat said the number was arbitrary and was based on maintaining a five-foot wide public right of way. Seating for more than 20 people could be allowed but would require additional parking spaces for the restaurant. MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 14, 1984 Page 3