06/27/1966 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

~ 33- e 6/27/66 I 1 1. Acceptance of-Howe Pumper - The Assistant City Manager reported that all repairs have been completed. He recommended acceptance at a total price of $26,479.80, this being a net figure after deducting $220.96 for repair of power steering, $81.24 for repair of brakes, $145.00 for miscellaneous items, and $225.00 for elimination of a bumper extension, hose rack, and 4-inch gate valve. Dr. Purdy moved seconded by Mr. Lassen to give tentative approval for acceptance with final report to be made on the value of the gate valve. Motion carried. The Assistant City Manager reported that it had been impossible to obtain a firm price on the gate valve, that each supplier contacted had a somewhat different item at a different price. Mr. Hawk moved seconded by Mr. Chatt to accept the pumper at $26,479.80. Rollcall vote. All counci 1- men present voting aye, motion carried. 2 2. Beautification Program and Application - The Parks and Recreation Director explained e generally the procedure being followed in preparation of an application for Urban Beautification funds. He pointed out that the City and the University are filing separate applications at the same time. More detailed information will be avail- able at the June 23, 1966 Committee meeting. No action was taken. 3 3. Sign, east of Coburg Road south of Ferry Street (Coburg Road) Bridge - Dr. Purdy inquired as to official action for removing a large sign at this location. He I commented that possibly the Council should authorize condemnation of the sign if such is necessary. The Council requested that this item be placed on the agenda for the June 23, 1966 Committee meeting. 4 4. Housing Code - The Superintendent of Building Inspection commented generally on en- forcement of the amended housing code. He stated the ordinance is ready for adoption except that the Housing Code Board of Appeals and other interested persons had not been able to comment on the final draft. The Assistant City Manager stated the ordinance had been reviewed by the Department of Housing and Urban Development and meets their approval. He suggested that the Council delay action until the Code had been reviewed by the Building and Housing Board of Appeals and others who had received copies. It was decided to reconsider this item at the July 7, 1966 Committee meeting. No action was taken on Items 2, 3, and 4, other than to note and hold over. 5 5. Sanitary and storm sewers, paving in Leahy Subdivision - Storm sewer and paving peti- tioned by owners of 100% of property to be assessed, and sanitary sewer petitioned by 45%. Dr. Purdy moved seconded by Mr. Crakes that the petition be approved. Motion carried. 6 6. Curb Sidewalk 11th and City View, McKay - Douglas McKay of McKay Investment Co. requested sidewalk location at the curb on the south side of 11th and the west side of City View adjacent to the Investment Company's property. The Public Works Depart- I ment recommended approval if the sidewalks are 7 feet wide instead of 5 feet, and if the reamining 9-foot strip is planted as approved by the Parks Department. Mr.Crakes moved seconded by Mr. Lassen to approve the recommendation. Motion carried. 7 7. Traffic Signal, 11th and City View - Councilman Lassen requested the staff study the traffic volume at the intersection of 11th Avenue and City View Street to de- termine if signalizatio n is needed." Mr. HawK moved seconded by Mr. Crakes to approve Items 5, 6, and 7 of the Committee report. Motion e carried. Committee meeting held June 23, 1966: "Present: Councilmen Chatt, Purdy, Lassen, Lauris, Crakes, and Anderson; City Manager and staff; and others. 8 1. Air Pollution Control Federal Grant -The Administrative Assistant explained that $3.00 of Federa1 funds for each $1.00 of City funds are available under the Clean Air Act of 1963. To qualify for these funds it is required that (1) a Workable Program be established; and (2) that a schedule of activities for a three-year period be submitted. The schedule for the first year must include a carefully outlined program and detailed budget, but for the second and third years only a generally outlined program and budget are required. The funds would be used to I (l)conduct an inventory of sources of air pollution; (2) employ an engineer to review plans for new installations and to advise regarding the inventory of sources of air pollution; (3) purchase sampling equipment; and (4) purchase laboratory services from the State and University of Oregon to analyze material from the survey. It was also explained that previous activities conc.erning air pollution control had been carried out under verbal agreements between the cities of Eugene and Springfield and Lane County, and it was recommended that such agreements be formalized in writing. Dr. Purdy moved seconded by Mr. Anderson that an applica- tion for Federal funds for air pollution control be approved, and that the City e enter into written agreement with Springfield and Lane County concerning air pollution- control. Motion carried. II 6/27/66 - 3 t~ -