04/22/1974 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

'e . -- . ... ~~ ~'-~~ Discussion was also held as to the County's involvement, should a school be located :outside the city. The county at this point has expressed a. reluctance to become involved ;as they would not have available funds; also, their responsibility extends to the .entire county, not just the area around Eugene. Discussion also was held on the fact that it would be useful to define roles when a community school and neighborhood iorganization are operating side by side. I Mr. Keller asked about potential growth in the next two years. Mr. Pompel asserted .that the City's share for 74-75 is esti~ated at $45,000 and that, if the program is successf~l, he sees .it easily doubling or tripling in the next two tb three years. He :also stated the schools' cooperation with the city and use of the facilities has been :'excellent. He believes a key factor is not simply getting into the facili ties but I.establishing better usage wi th less red tape; there should be more' invoivement of the community and an opportunity for the community to voice its desires. Mrs. Campbell moved seconded by' Mr. Murray to direct the staff to prepare a joint resolution between the City and the school district. .It was pointed out that the City'smo~etary share is included in the proposed city i '. fUdget and that the city's contribution would be subject to budgetary approval. \ I ,) Vote was taken on the motion, which carried unanimously, all council members present voting aye. Comm I 4/J.7/74 ! Approye . E~ Assessment Policies - Copies of a proposed resolution were previously distributed to Council. Assistant City Manager explained that the thrust of the proposed change was basically to provide relief to property owners from the rising cost of assessments. , The existing policies would not be affected as regards commercial streets or storm .\ sew~rs. The policy would be changed only on streets adjacent to existing single-family residential developments. \ The resolution provides that the City shall pay the costs of street construction in ,excess of that required for a standard street, which is: 1. Residential street, 28 : feet wide, abutting existing single family dwellings, duplexes or vacant properties lin R-l, R-A or AG districts; 2. Residential street, 36 feet wide, abutting lots in.a new or undeveloped residential subdivision, new residential development or multiple. family district; 3. Commercial or industrial street, 44 feet wide, abutting property in a commercial or industrial district. Some changes Were recommended in the proposed ordinance, and reference was made to a section of the proposed ordinance outlining conditions under which collection of ,assessments may be deferred: Council may defer collection representing cost in excess of that for a 28-foot street if all the following conditions exist: (a) underdeveloped . property, (b) existing use requires no more than a 28-foot street, (c) property is in !R-l, R-A, or AG district. I Staff wishes council to consider including in the. proposed new policy some streets which pave been constructed and are ready for assessment. For some years, there have Inot been major improvements to roads in the classifications referred to in the proposed \ordinance. However, this past summer several have been constructed, including Echo jH01low, Norkenzie, Bailey Hill, West Amazon Drive, Oakway Road, Oak Patch Rpad and lNorth Polk. The cost to include these roads would be $103,000. This loss should be able to be supplanted because of some joint projects with the County. IMrs. Bea1 stated that, in arriving at a decision for the City to assume part of the costs in residential areas, the philosophy was that there was a benefi.t to the general public when the street became a collector or arterial street. Therefore, this benefit Ito the general public should be absorbed by the City rather than by the resident. Mrs. Beal moved seconded by Mr. Hershner to schedule the resolution for Coun~il consideration and that it apply to projects now being completed and ready for assessment. Motion carried, all council members present voting aye. Comrn 4/17/74 Approve Abatement - 2420 University Street Mrs. Beal moved seconded by Mr. Keller to schedule a hearing on the abatement. 'Motion carried, all council members present voting aye. . Comri:J U,/17174 Appr0ve ''----.. .-.-. ..'--~ ------~P-....~.. \\~ 4/22/74 - 7