My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
07/14/1975 Meeting
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Minutes
>
Historic Minutes
>
1975
>
07/14/1975 Meeting
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/24/2007 1:30:41 AM
Creation date
11/2/2006 5:11:59 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Minutes
Meeting_Type
Meeting
CMO_Meeting_Date
7/14/1975
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
16
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br /> future plans along that street that might call for removal of the trees which <br /> he did not want to lose. Assistant Manager said there were no plans to change <br /> street alignment, curbs, etc. The change under consideration would call only . <br /> for new signs and painting directional arrows. <br /> Public hearing was closed, there being no further testimony. <br /> Resolution No. 2420 - Designating two-way traffic on Olive Street between <br /> 11th and 13th Avenues was read by number and title. <br /> Mr. Murray moved second by Mr. Keller to adopt the resolution. <br /> Motion carried unanimously. <br /> C. Code Amendments <br /> 1. Limiting construction to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. <br /> Assistant Manager noted that public testimony had been requested by the Counci~ I-A-l <br /> that a draft of the proposed amendment had been previously distributed, and <br /> that corresondence with regard to the amendment had been received from Oak <br /> Hills Homeowners and Crest Drive Associations. The amendment, he said, would <br /> provide for limiting construction and repair of buildings and streets to the <br /> hours between 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. (now permitted until 10:00 p.m.). It <br /> also provides for extension beyond those hours under certain conditions, <br /> revocable upon complaint of disturbance, and for alternation or repair be- <br /> tween 8:00 and 10:00 p.m. in single- and two-family structures if no dis- <br /> turbance is created. The latter was felt necessary to accommodate basically <br /> indoor type housing rehabilitation by homeowners. <br /> Public hearing was opened. <br /> Thorn Chambliss, 1510 Mill Street, representing West University Neighbors, e <br /> asked that the hour be limited to 7:00 p.m. as originally requested by that I-A-2 <br /> group. He said that research indicated deadlines on construction activities <br /> in most cities was 6:00 p.m. The group was also requesting amendment to ex- <br /> clude developers of new single-family housing from working under permit be- <br /> tween 8:00 and 10:00 p.m. They agreed that occupants should be allowed to <br /> work on their own dwellings between those hours, but that development of new <br /> housing was the source of many noise problems at that time of day. In this <br /> request, he said, they had the support of the Oak Hills Homeowners Associa- <br /> tion and South Hills Neighborhood Association. In addition, they supported <br /> amendment that would strike the words "excluding excavation" in Section <br /> 4.084(2). <br /> Jean Reeder, 1645 Fairmount Boulvard, chairman of the Fairmount Neighborhood <br /> Association, said an overwhelming majority of the executive committee of that <br /> group supported the WUN proposal to restrict the hours to 7:00 p.m. Also, <br /> the provision that would exempt homeowners working on their own residences <br /> after that time limit. <br /> James Britton, 1295 West 22nd Avenue, read a prepared statement objecting <br /> to the proposed ordinance in its present form. He presented a draft of the <br /> ordinance with changes written in which he said would make a better ordinance <br /> for the community as a whole. He cited short construction seasons, unseason- <br /> able weather, equipment breakdown, etc.! as factors that would make it diffi- <br /> cult to work under the proposed regulations. He felt compliance with Federal - <br /> regulations should be sufficient for city requirements. Also, that some in- <br /> dustrial and commercial activities should be exempted from the proposed amend- <br /> ment. Mr. Britton questioned the ability to define noise without decibel <br /> readings. He thought the ordinance would better be enforced by the public <br /> works engineering people rather than the building division because inspectors <br /> 7/14/75 - 2 3(09 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.