My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10/29/1974 Meeting
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Minutes
>
Historic Minutes
>
1974
>
10/29/1974 Meeting
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2007 10:31:48 PM
Creation date
11/2/2006 4:16:37 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Minutes
Meeting_Type
Meeting
CMO_Meeting_Date
10/29/1974
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
17
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br /> considered an undesirable precedent, she said and contrary to provisions of the Code itself <br /> which specifically prohibited use of national standards as a basis for variances. She.,also <br /> reiterated testimony presented to the Planning Commission urging denial of the amendment on <br /> - the basis that the Sign Code as adopted after many hearings was a compromise and any further <br /> amendment would constitute erosion of strong city policy. <br /> Councilwoman. Campbell said she was shocked when the Council voted in favor of making an ex- <br /> ception to the Sign Code. Sheask~d that the Council take the League testimony serious.1Y <br /> because of the League's "crusade" to gain adoption of the Sign Code. She felt a group couldn't <br /> be ignored when it was willing to work for the betterment of the community. <br /> Councilman Murray was in favor of the amendment, although he said he did take the League posi- <br /> tion seriously. However, he felt the proposed amendment would be a very minor change and that <br /> the Council in enacting it would not be retreating from its policy with regard to enforcement <br /> of the Sign Code. Councilman W?od shared that opinion. ,_ <br /> (1324 ) Counci~woman Beal noted her previous vote in favor of the amendment. However, she said she <br /> would vote against it.at this time because it seemed to her the League position made sense. <br /> Mr. Hershner moved seconded by Mrs. Campbell that the bill be read. the second time <br /> by council bill number only, with unanimous consent of the Council, and that enact'i. <br /> ment be considered at this time. .L.ackiI!g unanimous consent -, Cou.!.!cil members ,___ . <br /> Hershner~. McDonalci,. Keller ,Murray, ilnd Wood voting aye; Council members Beal and <br /> Campbell voting n(j~ and <Councilman Williams abstaining - the bill was held over for <br /> - second reading. <br /> Council Bill No. 664 - Amending Section 9.724(3) (b)4 City Code re: Housing dispersal <br /> based on Policy Plan was submitted and read the first tinile by council bill number and title <br /> , only, there being no councilman present requesting that it be read in full. <br /> Al Tussing, 2437 Riverview Street, thought there should be some way of subsidizing land costs <br /> so that low-cost housing could truly be dispersed. He was concerned about the amount of <br /> existing low-cost housing in his nelghborhood and wondered if more would be added under the <br /> housing dispersal policy. He suggested that with adoption of the plan work could proceed <br /> on amending it to ensure dispersal into all neighborhoods. Councilman Williams recogniz~d <br /> the validity of Mr. Tussing's concerns. He reported that the Joint Housing Committee had <br /> decided that a substantial portion of revenue sharing funds would be reserved for the specific <br /> purpose of dispersing low-cost housing everywhere. <br /> Mr. Hershner moved seconded by Mrs. Campbell that the bill be read the second time by <br /> J council bill number only, with unanimous consent of the Council, and that enactment <br /> be considered at this time. Motion carried unanimously, and the bill was read the <br /> second time by council bill number only. <br /> e' Mr. Hershner moved seconded by Mrs. Campbell that the bill be approved and given final <br /> passage. Rollcall vote. All council members present voting aye, the bill was declared <br /> I <br /> passed and numbered 17191.: <br /> Council Bill No. 665 - Calling hearing December 9, 1974 re: Vacation of alleys and ease- <br /> ments between 6th and 7th, Oak and Pearl, and easements between 7th and 8th, Oak and Pearl <br /> (Lane County) was read by council bill number and title only, there being no council member <br /> present requesting that it be read in full. <br /> Mr. Hershner moved seconded by Mrs. Campbell that the bill be read the second time by council <br /> bill number only, with unanimous consent of the Council, and.that enactment be considered at <br /> this time. Motion carried unanimously and the bill was read the second time by council bill <br /> number only. <br /> Mr. Hershner moved seconded: by Mrs. Campbell that the bill be approved and given final passage. <br /> Rollcall vote. All counciLmembers present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and <br /> numbered 17192. <br /> Council Bi'll No. 666 - Levying 1974-75 tax for Downtown Development District ($113,000) <br /> was read the first time by council bill number and title only, there being' no council member <br /> present requesting that it be read in full. <br /> e Mr. Hershner moved seconded by Mrs. Campbell that the bill be read the second time by council <br /> bill number only, with unanimous consent of the Council, and that enactment be considered at <br /> this time. Motion carried unanimously and the bill was read the second time by council bill <br /> number only. <br /> Mr. Hershner moved seconded by Mrs. Campbell that the bill be approved and given final <br /> passage. Rollcall vote. All council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed <br /> and numbered 17193. <br /> 31'3 10/29/74 - 15 <br /> - - "="'- ~ -- . ----...- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.