09/09/1974 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

(1280) Councilman McDonald wondered if there were plans to widen Garfield if traffic on that street increased because of its designation as a truck route. He also noted comments received from Westmoreland housing occupants about the truck traffic. Al Williams, A traf~ic engineer, felt the numbers of trucks traveling Garfield would cause no ,., partIcular problem. And he said a request had been received from the University to close Garfield south of 13th to truck traffic because of the University housing there. r O. (Electrical Code Amendment - Copies of June 21, 1974 minutes of Electrical Code jBoard of Appeals action were previously distributed rc~ommending dAletion of ! Section 210-7, paragraph 3, of the National Electrical Code (Eugene Electrical Code). The amendment would delete requirement for installation of ground fault I circuit interrupters, which act like circuit breakers should power tools short out, on construction sites. Public Works Director explained that the provision had been deleted from State law and staff felt the recommendation to delete from the City Code was sound. ; Comm Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mrs. Beal to amend the Electrial Code 8/28/74 as rec:~mrnended. Motion carried unanimously. - Approve E. ,Improvement petitions ,:-1. Paving alley between 4th and 5th from Washington to Lawrence - Peti tioned by i ! owners of 62% of property to be assessed; estimated cost $15/front foot. \ Assistant Manager explained that the petitionin~T properties were commercial, and that there were two single-family dwellings abutting the alley - one a tit r,ental, occupied; the other, vacant. :, ' 2. Paving alley between Pearl and High from 14th to 15th - Petitioned by owners \ of 69% of property to be assessed; estimated cost $l5/front foot. Assistant Manager explained that properties abutting the alley were predominantly com- mercial. Two single-family dwellings would be assessed, one a rental and \ occupied, the other a well-eared-for owner occupied dwelling. Couucilwoman Beal suggested tabling the peti tions until appointment of a replace- \ ment for Ray Bradshaw on the subcommittee studying assessment policy so a new : formula for assessments could be developed. She explained on questioning from I " the Mayor that the subcommi ttee had never reached firm agreement on an assessment I \ formula. It was decided to postpone action until after the election deleting \ it-om the Charter the front-foot basis for assessment calculation, since any I formula would have been dependent upon the success of that Charter amendment. \ Now, she said, the subcommittee could proceed with that work upon appointment of \ a third member. Assistant Manager explained that approval of the petition would I ; allow engineering work to continue while the assessment formula was being resolved. \' : He said that commercially zoned properties were pr_imarily involved in improvements :to these two alleys which carried fairly high volumes of traffic Staff would I be concerned about holding the petitions where there was some concern for traffic A safety, he said, and there was no assuran~e that any formula devised would affect ~ assessments for these two improvements. He called attention to the percentages :~arried on the petitions - 62% and 69%. iCouncilman Williams thought the staff position was sound in view of the percentages represented on the ;;>etitions. He didn't think it proper to ignore improvement petitions while. a new assessment policy was being considered, and he thought delay would also have an impact on the cost to those who would be paying for the improvement Councilwoman Beal mentioned that the subcommittee discussed not only zoning as a basis for assessment, but also actual land use, and she recognized possibility of ; higher costs in delaying the project. But she was concerned about single-family !properties having to pay a substantial portion of the improvement for traffic I i generated by commercial properties. She didn't think it was right, even though . , 'public need was important, to hurt_residential property owners just because they : , lived in a zone that had changed. , Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Wood to approve the peti tion. Comf I 8/28/74 ; Councilmen Murray and Wood were in favor of the motion, although they rec~pro~e nized the inequities a~d hoped the subcommittee would be able to develop a new ;1 . formula soon. , I .. . d 11 C '1 / I Vote was taken on the mot~on as stated. Mot~on carr~e , a ounc~ , 1 members__~r~~e_~_~_ "o.~i_Il.~___aye, exc~I>t Councilwoman Beal voting no. ,I _ ....._ ..~. ".___b__ __ 9/16/74 - 7 "32.. 4}