|
<br />.
<br />
<br />I
<br />
<br />.
<br />
<br />II
<br />
<br />.
<br />
<br />I
<br />
<br />.
<br />
<br />-- -
<br />
<br />/6
<br />
<br />~
<br />567
<br />
<br />- ----- ~~. --~----
<br />
<br />Council Chambers, Eugene, Oregon
<br />F'ebruary 8. 1937 .
<br />
<br />1
<br />
<br />The minutes of the regular meeting of
<br />7:30 o'clock P. M. ~ February 8, 1937, City
<br />the meeting to order., All counc i lmen were
<br />
<br />~ry
<br />~
<br />the cornmo,n counci1 held at the, hour of ;i
<br />Hall, Eugene, Oregon. Mayor Large called .~
<br />present except Mr. Reid.
<br />
<br />2
<br />
<br />The minutes of the meeting held January 25, 1937 were presented and as there
<br />'were no corrections appearing, they were ordered filed.
<br />
<br />\
<br />3
<br />
<br />Mr. Wenda 1 Van Loan introduced.to Mayor Large and members of the common council
<br />Dr. E. L. Gardner, newly-appointed city and county health officer. Dr. Gardner
<br />pre s.en ted a deta i 1 ed report to counci Iman A. C. F'arr ington, chairman of the Heal th
<br />Committee, who in turn is to make whatever recommendations that he might deem
<br />advisable.
<br />
<br />\4
<br />
<br />City Attorney Calkins, on behalf of the Judiciary Committee, reported concern-
<br />ing the claims of the ~outhern Pacific and At~orney H. L. Weinrick, representing
<br />several parties, for refunds due on assessments having been paid for paving of
<br />Franklin Boulevard. It was pointed out that assessments were mad,e in 1920 and on
<br />March 30, 1925 a resolution was passed by the common council granting a 22% .refund
<br />for assessments on said improvement. The Judiciary Committee recommended the pas-
<br />sage of a resolution cancelling the resolution granting said rBfund. It would
<br />merely place the claimants in the position of having to bring suit to establi~h ~hei
<br />rigl1t and the city at that time would attempt to show cause why said refund was not
<br />due. As city attorney, Mr. Calkins could not now advise the council that it was
<br />legal to grant refunds and that the action of 1925 therefore was not right. If
<br />said refunds were granted by the council, payment of same would have to be made
<br />from a special levy and that, further, if these refunds were granted, the council
<br />would undoubtedly be faced with such claims on all other property along said im-
<br />p~ovement. Further) any refunds that had been made under said resolution should
<br />be re-assessed. At tnis time the Recorder presented a resolution rescinding the
<br />former and upon motion made and seconded it was adopted by unanimous consent of the
<br />council.
<br />
<br />RES 0 L UTI 0 N
<br />
<br />BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EUGENE, that that
<br />
<br />certairi resolution passed by the council March 30, 1925, and recorded
<br />
<br />in Book 7~ Page 578, regarding refunding 22% of the paving cost of
<br />
<br />Franklin Boulevard, be and the saILe is hereby rescinded, and set asiae
<br />
<br />~
<br />
<br />and held for naught.
<br />
<br />5
<br />
<br />At this time Councilman A. A. Reid arrived.
<br />
<br />City Attorney Calkins presented a sketch of a proposed apartment house and
<br />business dwelling to be located at 7th and Lincoln Streets. Mr. J. o. Olsen is
<br />contemplating erecting the proposed building. Mr. Calkins pointed out that. this
<br />location was not in an industrial zone and Mr. Olsen h3d appealed t~ the Eoard of
<br />Appeals and Planning Commission and his appeal had been denied in both instances
<br />and that he had been requested to present an ordinance amending certain sections
<br />of the original zoning ordinance so as to permit the construction. Considerable
<br />discussion followed. It was the opinion of the council that the Olsen request. be.
<br />granted. The ordinance was read the first time and passed to its second and third
<br />readings by title under suspension of the rule by. unanimous consent of the council
<br />and was placed on its final passage. The ayes and nays were called, councilmen
<br />voting aye, Lamb, Hendershott, Reid, Eond, Carlson, Hanns, Page and Farrington;
<br />nay, none; absent, none. The ordinance was declared passed and numbered 8501.
<br />
<br />Correction of erroneously segregated assessments on property described as the
<br />north 65 feet of lot 10, block 21, Huddleston's Amended Addition, o0ned by Isaac
<br />and" Jessie Park, was recommended by the Judiciary. Committee. ' Upon motion made and
<br />/7 seconded the recommendation was unani~ously approved.
<br />
<br />The Judiciary Committee recommended that the assessments on the east 142 feet
<br />of lots 1, 2, 3 in Huddleston's Addition remain at the original amount of $22.45.
<br />Upon motion made and seconded the recommendation of the Judiciary Committee was: .
<br />unanimously approved.
<br />
<br />/8
<br />
<br />/9
<br />
<br />The Judiciary Committee was granted power to settle claims brought against '
<br />the" city for injuries received in sidewalk accidents in amounts not to exceed ,the
<br />sum of $100.00 in anyone case. It was pointed out that the city is about to face
<br />three possible suits as a result of sidewalk falls due to^defective sidewalks.
<br />
<br />The JUdiciary Committee was asked to make a search of the costs entailed to
<br />carry insurance for protection of the city against sidewalk claims and to report
<br />/10 at the next meeting.
<br />
<br />.....
<br />
|