11/25/1974 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Council Bill No. 684 - Levying assessments for special sewer levy on Tax Lot 17-03-30-20- 01003 (Valley River Inn) and Tax Lot 18-03-09-30-02400 (Fir land Boulevard) (74-l008D, read the first time on November 12, '1974 and referred to Assessment Panel for hearing on November 18, ~' was read the 'second time by council bill number and title only, there being no council . er present requesting that it be read in full and no written protests or requests to be heard received. ' Mrs. Campbell moved seconded by Mr. Murray that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17211. VI - Resolutions Resolution No. 2351 - Calling hearing December 9, 1974 re: Abatement of garage building at 1561 Ferry Street (Odell) was read by number and title. Mrs. Campbell moved seconded by Mr. Murray to adopt the resolution. Rollcall vote. All council members present voting aye, motion carried. Resolution No. 2352 - Authorizing payment of bills and claims for period November 12 through November 25, 1974 was read by number and title. Councilman McDonald asked about the $3,635.28 payment to Pacific Hawaiian Wood Products. Manager explained that it was for treated posts for traffic and street signs. _'-campbell moved seconded by Mr. Murray to adopt the resolution. Rollcall vote. All . council members present voting aye, motion carried. ' , VII - Distribution, 1973-74 Audit for review and discussion in committee session in the next couple of weeks. VIII - LCDC Hearing, Proposed Goals and Guidelines Manager noted hearing scheduled for November 13, 1974 at which John Porter, planning director, had been authorized by the Planning Commission to make suggestions for changes in the proposed goals and guidelines for land use plan developed by the Land Conservation and Development Commission. Manager said that he (Manager) had also prepared a presenta- tion raising some questions about wording in the proposal: 'He noted his suggestions for a League resolution directed to the LCDC were stated as a member of the League of Oregon Cities resolutions committee and not as a representative of the city of Eugene. Further- more, that his opposition to elements of the proposed goals and guidelines to be pre- sented by Mr. Porter were concerned about language in which they were couched which made many things mandatory as goals, in many instances requiring things to be done that would not suit local planning processes. Because the Council had not had the opportunity to ~ re~i~w and take an official position, the presentation would be stated as a personal ~ oplnlon. Council President Williams shared the concerns stated and said the general consensus in the League resolutions committee was that the LCDC plan would require a level of planning across the State between now and the end of 1975 substantially greater than Eugene now had, and that neither technical personnel nor funds to support the plan requirements were avail- able. He supported efforts to reach in a reasonable manner the high standards the plan was hoped to attain. Councilweman Campbell noted statements attributed to L. B. Day, director of the LCDC, who commented on legislatien creating the commission but no appropriation of funds to implement the plan. Manager said that unless an extension was granted, the, funds available would not be sufficient to accomplish what was required in the pian under its present worcding. He felt it was a matter of draftmanship, that it should be flexible rather than mandatory for all sections of the State, that it should apply depending on needs of each jurisdiction. However, under the present wording all cities and counties in the State would be required to do the planning set out by Jariuary 1976. There being no further business, upon motion duly made, seconded, and carried, (1095) the meeting was adjourned. e . ~~ H - McKinley City Manager :t1 40~