10/07/1974 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mr. Obie explained that his company has agreed with the City Manager's office to conform over a period of time. They have drafted a legal document stat~ng how they Ie will perform. He felt it was important for Council not to make a decision.on the proposed amendments based on whether Obie is conforming or not because that is not the issue at hand. Mrs. Beal stated she would not vote in favor of easing code restrictions but, in this case, it is a minute detail which is causing a businessman great difficulties. Vote was taken on the motion as stated, which carried, all Council members pr~sent voti~g aye except Mrs. Campbell voting no and Mr. Williams abstaining. '" 'l:, Regarding the amendment on separation of signs, Mr. Torrey said that, because of the abundance of growth of business in highway-oriented areas, the outdoor advertising billboard has in many dases had to come down because the property owner had requested the right to have an identity sign over 32 square feet in size. This trend has taken away sign site locations and forced Obie to limit all signing to specific areas. The intent six years ago of providing that billboards could be placed in highway oriented areas was to prevent ~n abundance in clustered areas. The company would like to be able to have distribution of signing throughout the city, the reason being that they are a medium of communication as well as a sign company. They are in the business of presenting a message that causes circulation much like the newspaper or radio. e Mr. Torrey concluded by saying they would not violate in any way existent controls with regard to total square feet of signing and, if council so desired, they would be willing to agree to a stipulated number of signs in Eugene so that there would be assurance that they would never be in a position of having people say they "have signs allover the place". Distribution is more important to them than simply having an abundance of signs, Torrey said. There was some discussion regarding the intent of the proposed amendment and whether it would actually accomplish what Obie wanted it to accomplish. Because of some possible confusion regarding the proposal, Mr. Torrey withdrew the request for the code amendment, saying they would come back at a later Qate to submit an additional request. D. Code Amend~ent re: Housing Dispersal Policy Pla~- Planning Commission recom- ~C . . omm . mended amendment to Section 9.724(3) (b)4 oE the Code whenever the Counc~l a!OV2/74 adopts the Joint Housing Committee's Housing Dispersal Policy Plan. The amen - Approve ment would change basis for dispersal from "Council housing resolution" to the ~. "Housing Dispersal Policy Plan." -" .... ....". E. ,Code Amendment re: . Personal Property and Impounded Vehicle Sale P~oc;;dure Recommended to ~ring city conformance .with recent State law changes. 'The amendment.,; e would provide for disposition of lost property thus: I l. lIf found by' a private citizen the citizen is to be informed of the State ! ;statutes ,governing disposition of lost property and referred to the I (County Clerk. I 2. !If the pr:operty is found by a ci ty employe, the dispo.si tion will be in i i 'accordan/ce wi th the following: " . I, ' a:'All personal property appraised' at less than $25 and all motor vehicles . ) val,~ed at $100 or less will be junked if theC?w!!er .~a~ot_be found- ;a~~e~ diligent inquiry. b. iNLl impounded motor.Y!W.kles.-no.t;. redeemed within 30 days after impound- I' .- ,_"~ lpnent shall be sold._ _ ----- ,/ ~.. . .~. - c. ~All personal property valued at $25 or more shall be advertised once a / iweek for four consecutive weeks and, if not claimed. within six months /. (from the date of finding, sold at public auction. Comm I 10/2/74 . ;, ;Mr, .William~ moved ~econded by Mr. Wood to adopt the ordinance. Approv,e .Mot~on carr~ed u~a!l~.l!Iousl_!l._,,___,.._____n,-_... ..-.--'" . .--- ..._,- -.-.-..-...-------.-'......... '. \.\ ~ " .. , ... .-~ .... - ... --., --.- --.... ~~:. e 10/7/74 - 9 352..