01/07/1974 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

able- "1mpleimtimtatlon- - of the-~Bartle Weilsre[XJrt'iii; --weITas.--EheDMJM-repor"Eauthor ized by LCOG several years ago. He suggested that new Council members might be interested : in that report for background information leading to the present proposal. .Mrs. Beal moved seconded by Mr. Williams to approve the contract. (unanimously. I Motion carried , Comm l2/ll9/73 AJiprove 'c.:~.., -~' !Councilman Keller, member of the regional sewer committee, commended staff people :who worked with the committee during its deliberations - Public Works Director and (Assistant Director - Don Allen and. Don Gilman. Mayor And~rson expressed apprecia- ttion to Councilmen Hershner and Keller as members of the committee. He also recog- :nized the efforts of the committee's chairman, Leonard Clearwater, Springfield councilman. c. tAppeal, Planning Commission Denial of Rezoning, 2590 pioneer Pike - Planning Com- [mission on December 4, 1973 denied D. A.Larkins' petition to rezone property at ; 2590 pioneer Pike from R-l toRP. Mr. Larkins filed written notice of appeal on December 13, 1973. . Hr. williams llOved seconded by Nr. Wood to set public hearing",on the appeal for iJaT}tjary 28, 1974 Council meeting. Hotion carried unanimously. Comm 12/19/73 Approve I ;/ /" -_..- .__._-~.....- -- ..,." .-.. D. ~Appointments, Budget Commi ttee - counciifJoman Beai' rec6mfuend~ii reappointment of Lee Penny, 2355 Birch Lane, and Councilman Keller recommended appointment of . ~Myron T. Bagley, 2222 willamette Street, as members of the Budget Committee for; terms ending December 31, 1976. I ! .~ :Mrs. Beal moved seconded by Mr. Wood to make the appointments as recommended. ;Motion carried unanimously. / Comm 12/19/73 Approve E. Budget Commi ~tee Appointment - Councilman Murray moved seconded by Councilwoman Beal tO~Ppol.nt Robert Napier, 908 Adams Street, to the Budget Committee for the term,endl.ng December 31, 1976 (replacing Bruce McCracken). Motion carried . .E..nanl.mousl y. 7 I I / Comm. 1/2/74 Approve F. Charter Amendment, Alley Assessment policy ~-Copies-of-resolution were previOUSly furnished Council members which would submit to the voters an amendment to the City Charter which will remove from the Charter front footage as a basis for calculating; ,alley assessments and allow adoption by ordinance of a new assessment formula for. ialley paving. The Council subcommittee (Beal, Hershner, Bradshaw) proposing the :Charter amendment indicated it would recommend that zoning districts be included as . a factor in calculating assessments for alley paving if the voters approve the amendment. :Manager explained that it should be recognized that if an ordinance is adopted as 1 proposed a substantially greater charge will be assessed against multiple-family ; properties wi th access from alleys to parking areas. Therefore, in cases. of more i heavily used alleys not being maintained, the Council may be faced with initiation : of improvement projects because of probable reluctance on the part of rental or : qommercial property owners to petition paving in view of the increased cost. .- : Mrs. Beal moved seconded by Mr. Williams to adopt the resolution submitting proposed i, Charter amendment to the voters. Comm 1'/2/74 In making the motion Mrs. Beal explained that the amendment does not bind the City A~prove to any specific method of assessment for alley improvement. It would only delete . the Charter provision that front footage of abutting properties shall be the . basis for calculating alley assessments, thereby giving the opportunity to relieve : some of the cost against single-family properties for alley'improvement when that rimprovement is primarily for the benefit of apartment or commercial uses. / \Manager explained staff concerns about changing assessment policy, recognizing ~. council's concerns about inequi tabili ty of the present method. Sta.ff feels that ;Changing policy on only alley assessments could raise questions about the policy on street assessments which is felt to be supportable on the basis of past legal :action and the many assessments processed by the Council. Staff is reluctant to , isee method of ass~ssment set by ordinance since it could result in frequent changes :made in response to frequent apparent inequities, whereas the present Charter pro- :vision has been acceptably fair over a period of many years. Manager added that the :subcommittee proposal does meet the Council's concerns and the City Attorney has ex~i pressed the opinion that the hazard of jeopardizing the street paving assessment ~ iprocess is not one which need stan~ i~ the way of proceeding with the amendment. .-.~~~O \ -,D b 1/7/74 - 6