08/27/1973 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Vote was taken on the motion as stated. Motion defeated, Councilwomen Beal and Campbell voting aye; Councilmen.Williams, McDonald, Keller, .. Murray, and Wood voting no; Councilman Hershner abstaining. e Resolution No. 2216 - Transmitting to the Boundary Commission recommendation to annex area at west end of Huntington Avenue between Donald Street and Willamette Street was submitted. Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. McDonald to adopt the resolution. Motion carried, Councilmen Williams, McDonald, Keller, Murray, and Wood voting aye; Councilwoman Beal and Campbell voting no; Councilman Hershner abstaining. . - C. Vacation of Easements 1. North side of Larch Street east of Larkwood (James-Doble) Recommended by the Planning Commission on June 18, 1973. Public hearing was held with no testimony presented. Council Bill No. 374 - Vacating easement on north side of Larch Street east of Larkwood Street was read the first time by council bill number and title only, there being no councilman present requesting that it be read in full. Mrs. Beal moved seconded by Mr. Williams that the bill be read. the second time by council bill number only, with unanimous consent of the Council, and that enactment .- be considered at this time. Motion carried unanimously and the bill was read the second time by council bill number only. Mrs. Beal moved seconded by Mr. Williams that the)bill be approved and given passage. Rollcall vote.; All councilmen present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 16909. I 2. West of Conger Street north of West 10th Place (VanFossen) Recommended by the Planning Commission on June 25, 1973. Public hearing was held with no testimony presented. Council Bill No. 375~ Vacating easement west of Conger 3yreet north of West 10th Place was read the first time by council bill number and title only, there being no councilman present requesting that it be read in full. Mrs. Beal moved seconded by Mr. Williams that the bill be read the second time by council bill number only, with unanimous consent of the Council, and that enactment be considered at this time. Motion.carried unanimously.qnd the bill was read the second time by council bill number only. Mrs. Beal moved seconded.by Mr. Williams that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All councilmen present voting aye, the bill was declared - passed and numbered 16910. D. Abatement, 2560 Chambers Street Public hearing was scheduled for this meeting but postponement was requested because of advertising technicalities. Mrs. Beal moved seconded by Mr. Williams to postpone the hearing to September 10, 1973. Motion carried unanimously. , E. Rezoning area north of Willamette River' west of Valley River Center - From County AGT to C-2 (Valley River Center/Montgomery Ward) Public hearing on. this request was held at the August 13, 1973 meeting, at which time the matter was tabled until this meeting. Communication~fr'9m. .the Planning Commission was read indicating the Commission takes no position with regard to referring the Valley River request back to the Commission. However, the Commission wanted the Council to know that its original recommendation was based on considerably less in- formation than presented to the Council. Assistant Manager said the staff has not completed evaluation of the exhibits presented at the August 13 meeting. Councilman Hershner noted 'that the Commission statement, copies of which were dis- . tributed to Council members, was not signed, and wondered whether the Commission had voted on the language as it appeared in this communication. Planning Director said the motion as stated in the letter was the wording recorded and as will show in the minutes of the Commission meeting. He confirmed Mr. Hershner's statement that the I - last seven lines of the statement were voted upon by the Commission. (The statement: The Planning Commission has no recommendation to make with respect to referral of the Valley. River Center zone change request, but the Commission wishes the City Council to be aware that its original recommendation for denial was b~sed on considerably less information than was presented to the City Council.) 2"0 8/27/73 - 3