Laserfiche WebLink
<br />~ <br />111 <br /> <br />4/14/69 <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Mr. McDonald stated further that the Firefighters could, at this time, present a proposal <br />for Council and staff study. <br /> <br />There was further discussion concerning proposed legislatio~ now before the State, and the <br />position taken by the League of Oregon Cities. Mr. Patrick Flynn asked that the Council <br />set a date to resolve whether or not it will endorse a policy to discuss collective <br />bargaining. <br /> <br />A vote was taken on the motion as stated, and the motion carried. <br /> <br />Mrs. Hayward moved seconded by Mrs. Beal to receive and file Item le of the Committee report. Motion <br /> <br />carried. <br /> <br />1 <br /> <br />2. Emerald Baseball Park - At its meeting the Planning Commission questioned whether or not signs <br />on the east fence of the ballpark were in compliance with the Sign Ordinance. They asked that <br />the signs be covered from view of residences to the west on days when no games are regularly <br />scheduled. Subsequently, the Commission recommended a delay in the decision until the signs <br />are up, to see whether or not they affect traffic on Willamette. <br /> <br />Mr. Mohr moved to drop the issue, saying this was not a suitable matter for Council discussion. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Dr. Purdy moved seconded by Mr. Gribskov to approve the staff recommendation, and delay action <br />until the billboards are installed and a determination has been made as to whether or not <br />screening is required. Motion carried with Mr. ~ohr voting no. <br /> <br />: Mrs. Hayward moved seconded by Mr. McDonald to approve Item 2 of the Committee report. <br /> <br />.......,-:-,....._..., <br /> <br />Mrs. Hayward commented that she would not want it thought the Council was <br />would permit signs throughout the city in violation of the sign ordinance <br />, or not they had any affect upon traffic or surrounding property. This is <br />I ~nd the Mayor agreed that this was an unusual situation and that the City <br />: ball club. <br /> <br />establishing a precedent and <br />until it was determined whether <br />'I <br />a special case. Mr. McDonald :: <br />should support the new base- ii <br />'I <br /> <br />I A vote was taken on the motion as stated and motion carried. <br />I <br /> <br />2 , <br /> <br />3. Appeal from Zoning Board of Appeals, Hugh B. Wood - a letter was read from Mr. Fechtel, <br />attorney for Mr. Wood, requesting a waiver of requirements of the zoning ordinance to allow <br />parking stalls to be reduced to 25. The City Council has inspected the property and talked to <br />Mr. Wood. <br /> <br />The Superintende of Building Inspection said a building permit ;had previously been issued on <br />the basis that a third story apartment, which did not conform to code, would not be 'occupied. <br />The Building Department determined that the apartment was occupied, and notified Mr. Fechtel <br />the apartment was to be vacated. The Board of Appeals denied a ,waiver of parking requirements <br />which would require one additional parking space, and thus permit occupancy of the ~partment. <br />They are now appealing this and want to use the apartment without providing the additional <br />space. <br /> <br />, <br /> <br />Mrs. Hayward moved seconded by Mr. Mohr to uphold the decision of the zoning board of appeals <br />int:its recommendation to deny the request of Mr. Hugh B. Wood. <br /> <br />Mrs. Hayward commented that, if the Council continually grants waivers to parking requirements, <br />they will be obliged to do so in each instance. She believes more parking, rather than less, <br />is required in the University District. <br /> <br />A vote was taken on the motion as stated. Motion carried. <br /> <br />Mrs. Hayward moved seconded by Mr. McDonald to approve Item 3 of the Committee report. <br /> <br />Mr. Hugh Wood explained the history of his property and the reason another parking space should not be <br />: required at this location. He said he assigned parking spaces, and at no time required the entire <br />'number he now has. <br /> <br />: There was a discussion about whether the Council could legally act on this request, since it differed <br />: from the matter before the Board of Appeals. The Council asked Mr. Wood if he had done any building <br />without permission to do so, an~ he replied tha.t he had added no apartments withou,t a building permit. <br /> <br />Mrs. Beal moved seconded by Dr. Purdy to table action on this' item until a meeting when the Building <br />Superintendent could be present. Motion carried. <br /> <br />3 <br /> <br />4. Sewer Connection, North Polk (Sande, Loomis and Greenhoot) - Plans haye been completed for an <br />apartment at a location on' Polk Street where connection to a 90" sewer line is required. <br />The City Council approval is required for connection to a 90" sewer, and the user must agree <br />that, when a lateral is built, they will bear the cost of the lateral. The petitioners have <br />agreed to this. <br /> <br />t' <br /> <br />Mr. Gribkkov moved seconded by Dr. Purdy to approve the request. Motion carried. <br /> <br />Mrs. Hayward said she hoped those people on North Polk were aware of the fact that the matter <br />of a new sewer would be coming before the Council. The Director of Public Works said property <br />owners in that area, as well as Bethel-Danebo, had been notified this matter would be on an <br />early agenda. <br /> <br />Mrs. Hayward moved seconded by Mr. McDonald to approve Item 4 of the Committee report. Motion carried. <br />4/14/69 - 6 <br /> <br />..oil <br />