|
<br />~28
<br />_ .::: ~ __..:_~~-_2----~-=- -.'=- _~=-~--=----=. -::-::: - =::-=-- - -~ --....,;:;-:---:: ~~~ ::--- _~~__...,,~-"-__-;:-_---:---::::--_--:;-:::'=T~~~~":"-=:":~-;;;;::~- -~--~~-=-=--:.....:~-~-------=--=:;:--~~---::;:---;-~-~=-=::-=-'-=-~-:= ---:::~~~--:-=---~ -~---=-:.' - ,~-,;.---=--
<br />.: .;:.-_-=----':""'" ---- ~_-----:-=:;:; :..:.:=:.:.~-_--:-~~----- ---=- =-=-=----==---=---=--=--~~~~~-=-..:::=::::=-:- ~~--------:~. -----:-:.-----:-:-::-:. - ~-~-~-=---:-__---:-~ -~~--:-~-- :-.----------:--------- -~~'::;::-::'::':=:::"::--~~~-:---:------'-
<br /> :1 Council Chambers, Eugene, Oregon
<br /> I September 14, 1942
<br />{~.I The minutes of the regular meeting held September 14, 1942, at 7: 30 P. rifT. I
<br />i"q:i
<br />;,. -'" I All Councilmen were present with the exception of Mr. Hawn.
<br />t,....~:, .<
<br /> I An Ordinance amending the Zoning Ordinance, No. 8413 having had its first
<br /> I reading on August 24, 1942, had its second reading at this time. The district
<br /> ,
<br /> .1 affected by this change would be as follows:
<br /> j
<br /> "Beginning at the Northwest Corner of Lot 2, Block 4, West Sixth Street
<br /> I Addition running thence North through Lot 7 and along the West line of
<br /> I
<br /> I Lot 2, Block 5 and Lot 2, Block 4, Walters and Seifferts Addition and along
<br /> 'I the West line of Lot 2, Block 5 and the West line of Lots 9 and 2, Block 4,
<br /> Croner's Addition; thence North to a point 140 feet South of the South line
<br /> I of Second Ave. West which is the South line of the Light Industrial District
<br /> I as shown on the Zoning IvIap of the City of Eugene; thence West to the West
<br /> :
<br /> I City Limits; thence South along the West City Limits to the North line of
<br /> 'I Lot 5, Block 3, Grand Prairie Addition, thence East to the place of beginning"
<br /> A hearing had been advertised to be held at this time on this proposed zoning
<br /> change, and objections were called for by the Mayor. Attorney Whitten Swafford
<br /> was present and presented a petition of protest signed by some eighty citizens.
<br /> Several interesteddcitizens were also present and Mr. Hanson, lvIr. Mack, Mrs. Busey,
<br /> and others spoke objecting to the proposed zoning change, all claiming that they
<br /> had either bought residences or built residences in that location with the under-
<br /> 1 standing that it was a single family residence district, and would not be change~
<br /> to a light industrial district. Councilman Bond stated that this matter had been
<br /> before the Council once or twice before and that they did not seem to be getting
<br /> I anywhere by listening to the discussion~ of interested citizens. He stated that
<br /> he for one believed that they had a legitimate complaint and was not favorable
<br /> .1 to making the proposed zoning change, and that he moved that the Ordinance
<br /> proposing the zoning change be tabled. This motion was seconded by Farrington.
<br /> Fay Bennett, Realtor, stated that the reason the proposed zoning change had been
<br /> asked for was that the Consolidated Freight Lines wished to build a freight depot
<br /> between rl'hird and Fourth Streets and west of Almaden. Councilman Farrington
<br /> i stated that he did not think Mr. Bennett had strengthened his case any by stating
<br /> I that it was the Consolidated Freight Lines that wished to put a depot in there.
<br /> , I
<br /> I He said that anyone living on Sixth Street was familiar with the excess noise
<br /> i
<br /> I made by these diesel freight trucks and this, together with the loading and un-
<br /> I loading all night, he did not consider should be in a residence district~
<br /> Councilman Brownson stated tfha-it he thought there was some merit on both sides of
<br /> the question and he would like to see the Ordinance held over till another meeting.
<br /> The original question was called for and on roll call councilmen voting aye:
<br /> Bond, Farrington, Barette, Stewart, and Pennington. Councilmen. voting no: Koppe
<br /> and Brownson, absent, Hawn. The motion was declared carried 5 to 2 and the
<br /> I proceedings ordered tabled.
<br /> : T. E. Smith, representing the Oregon Motor Stages, asked to be granted the
<br /> I right to make certain changes in the College Crest Loop as follows~
<br /> I
<br /> I Old Route-5th and Willamette to junction of Willamette and Lorane Highway,
<br /> , thence around College Crest Loop to 19th and Jefferson, thence to 19th and
<br /> I
<br /> Willamette and then to town. New Route-5th and Willamette to 17th and
<br />2 Willamette to 17th and Jefferson to 19th and Jefferson to 19th and Willamette
<br /> to College Crest Route back to 19th and Jefferson to 17th and Jefferson to
<br /> .17th and Lincoln to 19th and Lincoln to 19th and Willamette and back to town.
<br /> A motion WcS made by Brownson and seconded by Barette and carried, that this
<br /> , permission be granted.
<br /> I
<br /> : At this time Councilman Hawn appeared in the Council Chambers.
<br /> , The proposed annexation of a small part of Riverwood Addition, now lying
<br /> I outside of the City limits, be annexed to the City was taken up at this time.
<br /> I
<br /> I Mr. L. W. Lindley, one of the petitioners, living at 301 North Adams Street,
<br /> ! was present and gave his views as to why the annexation should be made. While
<br /> ,
<br /> I the petition was signed by nine people it represented only five families and the
<br /> ,
<br /> area was considered very small to hold an election for annexation. The Recorder
<br /> had addressed a letter to Mr. Lindley on August 27th, asking that additional
<br />3 territory be added to the request for annexation, bu t Mr. Lindley stated he had
<br /> i done nothing along this line; that he was waiting for the hearing at this Council
<br /> '1 meeting. It was pointed out to Mr. Lindley that it would be impossible to get
<br /> I it on the November ballot if the matter was not acted on at this Council meeting. I
<br /> A motion was made by Councilman Pennington that the proposed annexation be put
<br /> I on the November ballot but there was no second to this motion. After some discussi n
<br /> i by the Cbuncil, a motion was made by Bond and seconded by Barette that this
<br /> i
<br /> ! proposed annexation be put off until a later date. The motion was carried. It
<br /> i was explained to Mr. Lindley that the Council was very favorable to annexation
<br /> I of outside territory, and that if a larger tract could be considered, the Council
<br /> i would probably be favorahle to holding a special election at that time.
<br /> The Judiciary Committee had no report.
<br /> The finance Committee reported the following propoTty offers: Of'fer of
<br />~ I
<br />
|