05/23/1955 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e II r= I~~ .. I-- " (" :0, i1 II I II I' 'I II ,I -Ii II II I! I Ii II il p " ,I 'I It II :1 e Ii i Ii Ii I: I Ii 1,: Ii II II 11 I, Ii Ii II 'I I' , I II I; Ii . 9 Ii Ii 11 I: 'I I, ,I 10 I: Ii Ii I i: " I , il II 11 Ii Ii I, Ii I, :1 e !I ., i' I: II ! ! i I , I! I: H I: 'I I. " I I 1 I I II II II Ii I I I II e II I! II' II I! , "' .----. ~~~- ,3. 'REQUEST-OFMR.:RoBERT STUARi ON,BEHALF OF A CLIENT fOR WaiVER OF AREA REQUIRE- MENTS OF A LOT AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF 22ND.AvENUE AND ARTHUij STREET. THI,S PROPERTY I,S ~. NETSI ZE OF 60,FEET BY 90 FEET. HQWEVER, TI-\E DESCRI PTIOIlj. RE)ADS FROM THE CENTER or ARTHUR STREET FOR A LOT 115 FEET I N D~PTH_''!II TH THE EXCEPTI 0~0r;'25,_ _ FEET. THIS 25 FEET HAS NOT BEEN DEEPED FOR STREET PURPOSES. THE BUYER PROPOSED TO ERECT A THREE BEDROOM HOUSE ON THIS PROPERTY AND THE AREA COVERAGE AND SET BACKS WILL NOT EXCEED THE ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS. THE BOARD FELT THAT THE 5,400 SQUARE FEET OF LOT AREA WAS SUFFICIENT FOR A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE UNIT AND FURTHER AGREED IT WOULD BE A PROPER IMPROVEMENT TO HAVE A STRUCTURE ON THE PROPERTY. THEREFORE THE REQUEST WAS GRANTED. 4. REQUEST OF MR. MARION D. HALE REQUESTING A WAIVER OF THE EAVE OVERHANG INTO THE REQUIRED THR~E F09T SET B~CK FOR THE PURPOSE OF ENLARGING HIS RESIDENCE. ' THE ORIGINAL HOUSE WAS CONSTRUCTED IN 1946 AND THE BUILDING WALL WAS SET BACK THREE FEET WITH A TWO FOOT SIX INCH OVERHANG AND IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN A UNIFORM APPEARANCE TO THE ROOF LINES MR. HALE DESIGNED HIS ADDITION TO MATCH THE EXISTING STRUCTURE. THIS OVERHANG WILL BE ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE HOUSE AND IS TEN FEET REMOVED ~RPM HIS NE.IQHBORS EXISTING GARAGE WHICH PROVIQES AMPLE SPACE FOR LIGHT AND AIR. THE BOARD FELT THAT IT WAS REASONABLE TO MAINTAIN THE APPEARANCE OF THE HOUSE AND GRANTED THE REQUEST.;! A LETTER WAS PRESENTED FROM MR. VIK VOICING APPROVAL OF THE EAVE EXTENSION"BEYOND' THE ALLOWED LIMITS. THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS, MEETlNG WAS ADJOURNED." , I , ' I T WAS MOVED BY MR. KOPPE;, SECONDED BY MR. GODLOVE THAT THE REPORT OF THE BOARD "OF ApPEALS BE ADOPTED. MOTION CARRIED. PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS A PETITION FOR PAVING JACKSON STREET FROM 24TH TO 26TH AVENUE WITH TOTAL FRONT FOOTAGE OF 83.94;% OF THE PROPERTI'ES TQ BE ASSESSED WAS SUBMI TTED. I T WAS MOVED BY M~. GODLOVE, SECONDED BY MR. KOPPE 'THAT THE PETI TI ON BE REFERRED TO THE PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE. MOTION CARRIED. A,PETITION FOR PAVING 24TH AVENUE FROM FRIENDLY STREET TO CHAMBERS STREET WITH TOTAL FRONT FOOTAGE OF 91.7% OF THE PROPERTIES- TO BE ASSE~SED WAS SUBMITTED. I T WAS. MOVED BY MR. KOPPE, SECONDED BY MR. GODL_OVE THAT THE PETI_TION BE REFERRED TO THE PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE. MOTION CARRIED. COMMUNICATIONS DATED MAY 19 AND 23, 1955 FROM EDWARD F. AND CLARICE M. JUDKINS - RE: PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR SEWER IMPROVEMENT WAS SUBMITTED AND READ AS FOLLOWS: "MAY 19TH - I HAVE RECEIVED MY PRELIMINARX NOTIC~ -OF ASSESSMENT CONCERNING MY PROPERTY L~CATED 150 FEET WEST OF THE OLD EAST CITY LIMITS LINE, AND I WISH TO PROTEST TH I S ASSESSMENT BECAUSE I T WAS MY UNDERSTAND I NG THAT" DID HAVE AN -AGREEMENT WI TH .THE CITY ENGINEER; ALSO THE CITY COUNCIL DID TAKE ACTION CONCERNING A RECOMMENDATION BY THE PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE ON AUGUST 9, 1954, AND TH~ MATTER SHOULD BE CLEARED UP B~FORE I AM ACTUALLY FORCED TO PAY THE ASSESSMENT. ALSO, I WISH TO ATTEND THE PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MEETING AT WHICH THIS MATTER, PRESUME, W.ILL BE TAKEN UP AS I HAVE IN MIND THE DEDICA,TION.OF_A ROA,D IN THIS AREAWHI.CH I WOULD VERY MUCH LIKE TO DISCUSS WITH THE COMMITTEE.it _ , " ';1 ?MAY 23RD - I HAVE RECEIVED MY PRELIMINARY NOTICE OF ASSESSMENT CONCERNING MY PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE EA_Sf- SIDE OF AUGUSTA STREET AND COMMENCING AT ,'THE SOUTH LINE OF'THE:.EUGENE SCHOOL DISTRICT NO.4 AND EXTENDING TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE EUGENE CITY LIMITS APPROXI- MATELY~61 I FEET. I WISH TO PROTEST THIS ASSESSMENT BECAUSE I AM ASSESSED FOR A TRUNK SEWER, AND ALSO FOR LATERALS,. THIS IS ALL UNIMPROVED GROUND ANp HAVE NO USE FOR LATERALS. THEREFORE I CONSIDER THIS AN UNFAIR ASSESSMENT, AND ASK JHAT IT BE ADJUSTED BEFORE AM ACTUALLY FORCED TO PAY IT." , , ......