City of Eugene
7/23/2007 10:15:11 PM
11/2/2006 4:16:45 PM
City Council Minutes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
All rights reserved.
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 plain text
<br /> MINUTES <br /> EUGENE CITY COUNCIL <br /> November 12, 1974 <br />- Regular meeting of the Common Council of the city of Eugene, Oregon - carried over from <br /> November 11, 1974, Veterans Day - was called to order by Council President Torn Williams in the <br /> absence of Mayor Anderson at 7:30 p.m. on November 12, 1974 in the Council Chamber with other <br /> Council members present: H. C. McDonald, Wickes Beal, Beth Campbell, Neil Murray, and Robert <br /> Wood. Council members absent were James Hershner and Gus Keller. <br />(Side 1) I - Public Hearings <br />(1480) A. Appeal, Zoning Code Board of Appeals denial of six-foot high wooden fence at <br /> 2605 Friendly Street - V./ W. Blowers (September 26, 1974) <br /> Council members present declared no ex parte contacts or other reasons for abstaining <br /> from discussion or voting on the appeal. Staff notes and Zoning Code Board of Appeals <br /> minutes were previously distributed to Council members and by reference there to made <br /> a part of this record. <br /> Manager explained that Mr. Blowers requested permission to keep an existing six-foot <br /> wooden fence along the 26th Avenue side of his corner property at Friendly Street. <br /> The fence was located on the property line in violation of front yard setback. The <br /> area enclosed would be considered technically a front yard although Mr. Blowers main- <br /> tained it as a back yard because of the corner lot location. The Board of Appeals <br />-- decision was to require a setback of not less than seven feet from the property line <br /> on that portion of the fence east of an existing concrete slab, the outside to be land- <br /> scaped with plant material to partially obscure the fence. Council members viewed <br /> the site on tour. <br />(1525) Public hearing was opened. <br /> Mr. Blowers presented pictures of the fence and a petition containing signatures of <br /> seven residents on the street who would prefer a curb sidewalk rather than one set <br /> back five feet. He said strict adherence to the regulations would prevent his- enjoying <br /> the same privileges of others in that neighborhood. <br /> Public hearing was closed, there being no fUJrther testimony. <br />U?70) In response to Manager's inquiry about staff's recommendation on location of a walk on <br /> 26th Avenue at Friendly, Don Allen, director of public works, said that although <br /> Friendly Street did have a curb sidewalk, topography would not require it on the 26th <br /> Avenue side. That side of the property, he said, would have a flat parking strip and <br /> a standard setback walk. <br /> In response to Councilman Murray, Mick Nolte, superintendent of building inspection, <br /> said that both street frontages on a, corner lot were considered front yards, therefore <br />-- a IS-foot front'yard setback was required on any structure more than 30 inches high. <br /> There had been no indication in the Board minutes of complaints from neighbors. <br /> Councilman McDonald noted the existence of a six-foot fence at 12th and Alder that was <br /> permitted and asked what the difference was between that situation and this, whether <br /> site clearance for traffic was the problem. Manager answered that the Board's reasoning <br /> supported Code provisions cited by the superintendent of building inspection. There <br /> was additional concern for site clearance for vehicles entering the street from the alley <br /> which was probably the reason for the seven-:-foot setback recommendation. He added that <br /> the 12th and Alder fence was probably not a single-family residential area, so probably <br /> no front-yard requirements. <br /> Councilman Wood noted that pictures presented by Mr. Blowers indicated other fences in <br /> the area higher tha~ 30 inches. He wondered how one could achieve privacy or have suit- <br /> able garden areas iri situations such as this. Councilman Williams said it was his under- <br /> standing th~t the Board of Appeals had not recommended elimination of the six-foot fence <br /> entirely. That was verified by Manager - the six-foot portion of the fence adjacent to <br /> an existing concrete slab in the back yard could remain, that portion east of the slab <br /> would have to be set back seven feet from the property line (IS feet required by <br /> ordin,ance) and the outside landscaped with some 'type of plant material. <br />~- Mr. Murray moved seconded by Mr. 'McDonald to approve the appeal and grant <br /> a variance for the fence. <br /> In answer to Councilman Williams, Stan Long, assistant city attorney, said that findings <br /> supporting: the variance would have to be stated and the Council would be required to <br /> make a decision on the appeal. If no decision was reached the matter would have tobe <br /> held over. <br /> /':': <br /> ~7Ca 11/12/74 - 1 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.