08/27/1973 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Manager noted that the County Sanitarian testified at the Commission hearing that there will be increased septic tank failure in the area and public sewers would - .be the only long-range solution. Manager added that the most uniformly negative :attitude is in the newly developed area at the northerly extension of Russet ,Drive, subdivided in the County, where people are just now starting to use new homes. This area lies between the existing City limits and the area most solidly in favor of the annexation so excluding it from the annexation would be impractical. Councilwoman Beal wondered why the County Sanitarian, in view of his testimony with regard to need for sewers, issued septic tank permits for the new subdivision. Manager said that until recently State law provided for septic tank approval on any individual property where the soil would accommodate it. The Sanitarian doesn't have the legal authority to deny. Discussion of procedure for allowing septic tanks, Manager said, would be a significant portion of the discussion of conditions under which Eugene and Springfield hopefully will make a contractual :arrangement~_for regional sewers. He noted it very likely that both cities may 'be put in the position of providing sewers outside the incorporated areas where ,the cities' best---J.-nteres.ts----are--served by not annexing and where sewers are needed :for health purposes. " ~--=---. - - Councilman Keller suggested developers Qfthe new area opposing the annexation might be persuaded to lay lines now in anticipation of sewers to lessen the ex- pense and inconvenience at a later date. Manager explained that streets are '.: already paved and some yards are in, however owners of the few remaining un~ developed lots might be alerted. Comm .8/22/73 Mrs. Beal moved seconded by Mr. Hershner to set public hearing on the annexation ,Approve at the September 24~ 1973 Council meetin~~ Motion carried unanimously. .. .. - ,. -- ------ (The September 24 hearing date was set because of anticipated opposition and , \ because of possibility of procedural discussion on August 27 carrying the -\ Valley River rezoning request to the September 10 meeting.) \ I. Non-conforming Signs - Manager announced a meeting to be held Tuesday, August 28,1973,j 8:00 p.m., in the downstairs portion of the Black Angus Restaurant. It is being I called by some of those objecting to details in the Sign Code and to the requirement i r ,for conformance with the Code by September 10. Staff and Council representation was suggested. Councilmen McDonald and Keller said they would attend. Mayor Anderson had strong reservations about any attempt to make major changes in : the Sign Code. He noted many hearings on the Code and information published about i .it at the time of adoption. He felt a small group trying to change the provisions after others had altered their signs or taken them down would be unthinkable. i 1 Manager noted voluminous document received from Obie Outdoor Advertising citing I .~ I statistics about the effect of billboard regulations on their installations in the ! City and proposed changes in the Code which would suit their needs. Also a'legal opinion on the City's authority to proceed with enforcement of this Code. He said the correspondence has been sent to various staff people and the Attorney's office 'for review and response before it is brought to the Council. He didn't see any way to have thorough analysis of the problem before the September 10 deadline. ..'- ~~"~'--"'-- ~ .~._"-- +.--- .---_. -', --- ~;-_.o-._.__hr-,..-.,.....~._~___.___.-___ _,,'__ .___ ..,__, ,......__..._M.._..____.... _. _ __ "_._"' ..'<'.._..,.~ __.__.__,_<..~-,....-. . In connection with the September 10 deadline for conformance, Eugene Renewal Agency ;'a.sked consideration for some tenants occupying ERA buildings in the downtown area /;cheduled lor demolition in the next two to six months. About 14 or 15 of these , i . tenants will move out and the Agency is requesting a variance on their signs which ! 1 .would permit them to remain until the tenants change locations. A list of ..businesses ! involved was read. Manager said it seemed a reasonable request because it would be difficult to carryon a business without a sign and it would seem inappropriate to install a new sign for the short period of time. He displayed a map showing the 'buildings involved. And added that a recommendation was hoped for from the Sign jCode Board of Appeals but the request came in too late to appear on that agenda~ ; ICouncilman Hershner thought it would be a reasonable variance if private businesses ,. ,under similar circumstances were granted the same leeway. Manager said if the Council were to accommodate the Renewal Agency the Board of Appeals would have some v ,direction in acting on extension requests from private operators who because of their ;own choosing might be planning to move wi thin a six-month period. He added that !tenants of those ERA buildings not yet scheduled for demolition should be aware ~that there would be no recommendation for delay in conformance to the Code beyond a :six-month period from the deadline. , '-.-.......- ,. -.-,;----:.-- ..----_._~--.......:..,_._-~-.....-- - - ---.- ---.----.-.--- .------.- 270 8/27/73 - 13