07/11/1960 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

r488 e -- T~ - - - - , OPINION WERE THAT THE CITY MAY NOT LEGAlLY;PROHIBIT THE ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS TO PROPERTY I I OWNERS WITHIN THE PROPOSED SPENCER BUTTE EXPRESSWAY RIGHT-OF-WAY AREA, AND PERMITS WOULD HAVE TO BE I ISSUED IF APPLI ED FOR; THAT IF ~N EXPRESSWAY WITH LIMITED ACCESS IS TO BE CONSTRUCTED, IT WOULD BE Ii NECESSARY FOR THE_.o~GON LEGISLATURE TO-PASS ENABLING LEGISLATION; TIi\T IF IT IS THE CITY'S WISH if ~ : TO PROHIBIT OR LIMIT THE ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS WITHIN THE SPENCER BUTTE EXPRESSWAY RIGHT- :1 OF-WAY LINES, LEGISLATION WOULD BE NECESSARY TO AL.LOW THE ESTABLISHMENT OF PLAN LINES OR STREET PLAT- , <, !~G FOR FUTUR~ STREETS WITH T~E AUTHORITY TO CONTROL AND DENY THE ISSUANCE OF BUILDI~~ PERMITS WITH~ I INQSUCH PLAN LINE: OR STREET PLATTING AREA; THAT AT THE PRESENT -TIME, IF THE CITY DESIRES TO ACQUIRE ! PROPERT~ES WITHINTTHE SPENCER BUTTE EXPRESSWAY RIGHT-OF-WAY, IT WOULD HAVE TO DO THIS ON AN ACTUAL PURCHASE BASIS. . " I. " SOME DISCUSSION WAS THEN HELD ON THE 6~IN~ONg~EX~RESSED!B~ THEAC1TY ATTORNEY IN WHICH IT WAS i GENERALLY AGREED THAT THE CITY WILL HAVE TO PROVIDE FUNDS TO ACQUIRE PROPERTY. THE COMMITTEE REC- I OMMENDED THAT THE CITY ATTOR~EY DRAFT A PROPOSED BILL TO-ENABLE CITIES OVER 25,000 , IN 'POPULATION TO .' I i BUILD EXP~ES~WAYS WITHIN THEIR BOUDNARIES. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. I SOME DISCUSSION WAS THENHELD ON THE DENT~ CUNIC BUILDING LOCA-TED AT 16TH AND MILL STREET, i , , I WHICH I~ PROPOSED FOR EX~ANSION, AND WHERE_FUNDS MIGHT BE~CQUIRED TO PURCHASE THE BUILDING BEFORE I II IT WAS EXPANDED. - THE COMMITTEE THEN RECOMMENDED THAT THE~CITY MANAGER BE AUTHORIZED TO NEGOTIATE !, e il I: ON A POSS I BLE - SALE OF REVENUE BONDS, WHEREVER AND WITH WHOMEVER ITIS NECESSARY TO OB!AIN THE NECES- '. SARYLEGAL OP I N:l'(ilN. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. " II II I, " IT WAS ALSO SUGGESTED THAT A DETERMINATION BE MADE AS-~O THE COST OF THE-DENTAL CLINIC-BUILDING I, :, I 'I , AT 16TH AND MILL ST~EET~ FOLLOWING THIS MOTION I IT WAS RECOMMENDED THAT THE ITEM BE HELD OVER. I j CARRIED UNANiMOUSLY~ " Ii I I I' I THE CITY MANAGER REPORTED THAT .THE DENTAL CLINIC LOCATED ON 16TH AND MILL STREET HAS A VALU~TION Ii I I, II OF $120,000, THAT THE CITY'S ACQUISITION COST WOULD BE THIS AMOUNT P~US THE COST or PLANS fOR THE I ~ il PROPOSED ADDITION TO THE BUILDING. THE COST Of PLANS IS NOT DEFINITELY KNOWN, BUT-'S BELIEVED TO f 'I BE $5,000.00. I; !I - - - - -- I: II I IT WAS MOVED BY MR. SHEARER AND SECONDED BY MRS. LAU-R I S THAT ITEM 16 OF THE-COMMITTEE REPORT -BE I !I II I APPROVED. MOTION CARRIED. Ii I I' I r , A REPORT OF THE COMMiTTEE MEETING DATED JULY-7, 1960. I I: I PRESENT: MAYOR CONE; COUNCILMEN SHEARER, LAURIS, MOLHOLM, MCGAFFEY, CHATT, MOYER, WILSON, SWAN- I' i' SON; CITY MANAGERj CITY RECORDER; DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS; TRAFfIC ENGINEER; ADMINISTRATIVE ASSls- \: I /: f TANT; _ PARKS AND RECREATION SUPERINTENDENT; CITY ATTORNEY; MILK INSPECTOR~ MRS. NIVEN OF THE PLAN- ii I NING COMMISSION; MRS. ROBERT Ross; MR.-WRiGHT OF THE UNIVERSITY Of OREGON; MR~ HOWARD BUfORD; MR. I: !I NEIL BROWN; DAN WYANT OF THE EUGENE REGISTER-GUARD; AND A LARGE NUMBER OF INTERESED CITIZENS fROM :, il II THE W,LLAKENZIE AREA. I' :1 ;1 II I ! I . RECONSIDERATION OF AN APPLICATION fOR RETAI L MALT BEVERAGE CLASS A LiCENSE BY ROBERT'Ross ii !: DBA THE SPORTSMAN'S STEAKHOUSE TAVERN, 50 COBURG ROAD - IT WAS STATED THAT THE COUNCIL, AT THEIR :[ LAST MEETING, HAD APPROVED AN APPLlCAT-,ON FOR -ANRMBALICENSE FOR THE ABOVE CITED TAVER, AND THAT I, I I' I FOLLOWING THIS APPROVAL A NUMBER OF CITIZENS HAD REQUESTED THEY BE ALLOWED TO BE HEARD CONCERNING I: 1 Ii SUCH A LICENSE. BASED ON THIS CONCERN, THE LICENSE APPLICATION WAS_REQUESTED TO BE RETURNED FOR I, I ,. I REAPPRAISAL. JT WAS fURTHER_STATED THAT FO~ SOME TIME THE COUNTY COMM~SSIONERS ~AD BEEN REFUS)NG II II APPLICANTS IN THIS AREA ON THE CONSIDERATION THAT THE AREA WAS PRINCIPALLY A RESIDENTIAL AREA, AND d ! II I THAT THERE WAS NO URGENT REASON WHY A TAVERN LICENSE SHOULD BE GRANTED. II il , MR. Ross APPEARED BEFORE THE COMMITTEE, INDICATED THAT HE HAD HAD A_NUMBER OF REQUESTS fROM I: i INDIVIDUALS IN THE AREA FOR A-TAVERN OPERATION. MR. RUSSELL TOMPK)NS, PRINCJPAL or THE-WILLAKENZIE :j I SCHOOL, APPEARED ON BEHALF Of A NUMBER OF RESIDENTS OF THE AREA- AND STATED THAT THE AREA WAS GROWING RAFU,~ty, THAT IT WAS AN AREA OF HOMES, THAT THERE WAS NO NECESSITY fOR A TAVERN, THAT IT WAS BAsl- II II CALLY A YOUNG COMMUNITY, AND THAT NEITHER HE NOR THE PEOPLE HE REPRESENTED COULD UNDERSTAND'WHY A II I' i TAVERN OPERATION SHOULD_ BE FORCED.UPON THEM. MR. TOMPKINS FURTHER STAIEDTHAT HE RECOGNIZED THAT ,I II I ,I THE AREA IN-QUESTION WAS ZONED fOR BUSINESS AND THERE WAS PROBABLY NO LEGAL wAY FOR T~EM TO PROHIBIT I, I II AN OPERATION OF THIS TYPE. HE AGAIN REITERATED THAT THERE WAS NO NEED FOR A"TAVERN, THAT IT DOES " e " I' I NOT ADD ANY NECESSARY F.EATURES TO THE COMMUNITY AND IS NOT NECESSARY TO THE COMMUNITY WELFARE. MR. :1 I I' TOMPKINS ALSO PRESENTED A -GROUP OF PETITIONS FROM RESIDENTS OF THE -AREA OBJECTING TO-THE STARTING 'I 1, !I Of A TAVERN OPERATION. THESE PETITIONS WERE SIGNED BY 153- RESIDENTS WHO REPRESENT THE WESLEY I, 'I II METHODIST CHURCH AT OAKW~Y AND CAL YOUNG ROAD, TH~-WILLAGILLESPIE COMMUNITY AND THOSE PEopLE WHO !I " II LIVE NORTH Of FERRY STREET BRIDGE. 'I II II II REVEREND WHITE OF THE WESTMINSTER PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH APPEARED BEFORE THE COMMITTEE AND STATED II 'I THAT HIS CONGREGATION WAS OPPOSED TO A TAVERN IN THE AREA, AND FURTHER STATED THAT DURING THE ANNEX- II II ATION MEETINGS, SOME CONCERN WAS EXPRESSED ABOUT TAVERNS BEING ALLOWED IN THE A~EA- AND AT THIS TIME " II Ii IT WAS GENERALLY AGREED THAT THE CITY WOULD NOT BE MORE SUSCEPTIBLE TO APPROVING LICENSES FOR THE " I AREA THAN THE COUNTY HAD BEEN IN. THE PAST. i: I ,I I MR. TRUMAN CHASE,'WHO LIVES APPROXIMATELY ONE-THIRD Of A MILE FROM THE PROPOSED LOCATiON OF-THE I II TAVERN, STATED HE DESIRED THAT THE AREA REMAIN AS IS. I MR. Ross AGAIN -SPOKE AND QUEST-IONED THE ABILITY OF THE CITY TO HAVE A'DRY AREA AND- SUGGESTED I r II :1 I THE CITY,DESIRES TO" BE A DRY AREA, THAT A CITY VOTE FOR DRY ZONES BE- HELD. OTHERS APPEARED BEFORE 11 THE COMf.fj TTEE TO INDICATED THAT THE AGE GROUP WITHIN THE- AREA IS PREDOMINATELY 6-- II YEARS OF AGE, 'I I I THAT THE QUESTION WAS BASICALLY ONE OF MORAL OBJECTION. COUNCILMAN SHEARERINDICATE6 THAT THERE II !\ APPEARED TO BE SUBSTANTIAL OBJEctIONS TO_THE OPERATION OF A TAVERN. !I ON QUESTION, THE -CITY ATTORNEY INDicATED THAT" THE ACTUAL LICENSES ARE GRANTED BY THE OREGON STATE Ii II L,QUOR CONTROL COMMISSION AND THAT THEY MAY TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE RECOMMENDATION OF A COMMON " II COUNCIL. 'I I II I II FOLLOWING THIS, IT WAS RECOMMENDED_ THAT THE APPLICATION BE HELD UP fOR FURTHER-CONSIDERATIQW BY it THE COUNCIL AND THAT IT-BE REFERRED TO A JOINT-COMMITTEE OF THE COUNCIL AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION. I \ !J MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. e I " I I! I i: " ~:, "