Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> their comments before tiildng posJ. ti ve action. He said the staff feels 'if the <br /> traffic cannot be controlled to make Portland a residential street, it would be <br /> better not to increase the density of the area. Manager added tha.t staff believes <br /> the barricade at Crest Drive has not relieved the traffic situation to the extent <br /> that there is no longer any problem with creating a greater density on Portland . <br /> Street. Assistant Manager said the proposition of a cul-de-sac itself is still <br /> ,a volatile subject in the neighborhood. It has been suggested that a cul-de-sac <br /> closer to 30th rather than between 29th and 29th Place may solve the problem. <br /> The major complaint in the area is weekend traffic traveling south on Wil1amette <br /> to 30th and back to 29th and Willamette on Portland. Cars are passing the 30th <br /> and Portland intersection at the rate of about 1000 an hour the entire night <br /> with attendant noise and pollution. Meetings have been held in the neighborhood <br /> but the residents, including those living at Cascade Manor, still do not want <br /> .,:the cul-de-sac. <br /> Mr. Hoffman asked if improvement of the 29th and Willamette intersection will <br /> alleviate the situation. Manager felt it would free movements through that <br /> intersection but would not lower the volume. <br /> Councilman Williams stated his understanding of staff recommendation as being <br /> that rezoning should not seriously be considered, increasing the density, until <br /> action,is taken to improve the livability of the area. Planning Director con- <br /> curred. Manager added the alternative of denying the rezoning, saying the I <br /> petitioner's request was that the condition calling for construction of the cul- <br /> ..de-sac be rerroved. <br /> Comm <br /> ~Mr. Mohr rroved seconded by Mr. Bradshaw to deny the request for deletion of 11/29/72 e <br /> ,:cu1-de-sac construction on Portland Street contingent to rezoning of the Pub Hrng <br /> ;properties under consideration. Motion carried unanimously. <br />Considered at joint session of Planning Commission and Council ,November 29, 1972 (see <br />minutes above). Manager said Mr. O'Connor requested postponement of this item if there I <br />was to be further hearing. No action was taken and the status of the properties remains I <br />as it now is. <br />E. Ordinance Revisions <br /> 1. Disorderly Conduct <br /> 2. Indecent Touching <br /> 3. Public Indecency <br /> 4. Resisting Arrest <br /> Proposed Ordinance Revisions -- -Copies of-proPosed revisions to ordinances having to <br /> do with disorderly conduct, public indecency, indecent touching, and resisting arrest <br /> were previously distributed to Council members. Manager said they were prepared <br /> partially in attempting to respond to interest by some members of the Council in <br /> behavioral problems in public areas and to bring some sections of the Code into line <br /> with the State criminal code where there are ambiguities. Jim Korth, assistant city-, <br /> attorney, said in reviewing several complaints arising from problems in the mall and e <br /> 'at the fairgrounds, it was felt citywide application of the regulations would be de- ! <br /> sirable. These revisions will accomplish that purpose. Police Chief said his de- I <br /> partment- is well pleased with the revisions presented in that they provide further I <br /> ,clarification of intent of some of the existing ordinances. i Comm <br /> 12/6/72 <br /> lIt was understood the ordinances would be presented for public hearing at the I Pub Hrng <br /> ,December 11 Council meeting. <br />Manager explained that the ordinance revisions were discussed with the local chapter of <br />the American Civil Liberties Union to whom copies of the revisions were sent. The ACLU <br />has not had the opportunity to review them nor to take a position and requested post- <br />ponement of action until the December 18 Council meeting. <br />The Chair ruled that hearing would be postponed to the December 18, 1972 Council meeting <br />since there was only one person present for the scheduled public hearing and he preferred <br />to await the ACLU response. <br />IV - Items Considered With One Motion <br />Previously discussed at Committee meetings on November 29 (Present: Mayor Anderson; <br />Councilmen Mohr, Beal, McDonald, Williams, and Bradshaw) and December 6, 1972 (Present: ,,-e <br />Mayor Anderson; Councilmen Mohr, Beal, Teague, Williams, Hershner, Campbell, and Bradshaw). <br />Minutes of those meetings appear below printed in italics. <br />A. Vacation of Easement east of Augusta between 20th and 28th (Weaver) - Planning Comm <br /> Comndssion recommended October 30, 1972. Public hearing to be called. 11/29/72 <br /> Approve <br />B. Trai2er Permit, Wi22amette Graystone, 280 Highway 99 North - Requescedfor Comm <br /> temporary office quarters, M&D Interstate, Neil Monaghan. 11/29/72 <br /> Mr. Mohr J1loved seconded by Mr. williams to approve. Motion carried unanimously. Approve <br />~, ~C.9 12/11/72 - 6 <br />