01/26/1976 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

'. I. Appeal from Planning Commission denicll of code a~ndnent to allow ambulance stations in residential zones under conditional use permits (January 6, 1976) Appeal was filed by W. H. Leonard, qregon Emergency Medical Transportation Services. !-Jr., Keller lWved seconded by Mr. Williams to schedule public hearing on the appeal for the February 9, 1976, Council meeting. Motion carried unanimously. J. Liquor License, Change of. Ownership -- Vni ted Seven Corporation dba Rainey's .Thriitway, 2-25 River Road (PS) Formerly McKays Markets. Staff had no objections to the transfer. Mr. Keller lWved seconded by Mr. Haws to recommend approval of the change of ownership. Motion carried unanimously. K. Council minutes - October 27, November 3 and 5 as circulated L. Graham Field Lighting Pr~ject Cominendations -'.P~tks Department December'12 meno has previously been distributed to Council members. Manager said that, if there were no objections, a brief ceremony would be scheduled for the beginning of the February 9 Council meeting to give recognition to people who have done a fine job in developing lighting for Graham Field. M. West University Neighbors..:... .Inter im Development -Mrs. . Beal agreed to serve as Council representative, along with a Planning Commission member and staff rrembers, on a committee to meet with West University Neighbors for purposes of discussing what interim proposals might be undertaken in .that neighborhood: on zoning and other developmental matters, pending adoption in the future of a nore thorough refinement plan. . N. Anima.l Control Tr{-Agency Authority - Task Force menr> and proposed resolution creating a tri-agency authority for animal control have been distributed to Council members. It was explained that the city of Springfield has endorsed ,~h.e. ,pro'Jr:am~,~cept that they wish to retain contr~~a!ld enfor~€!~l}t_ _Ehrough their own Police Department -rathe-r than thrciugfi-iJ t t' i-ag'~'n,,'.I i1lJt~lori ty~ - B~cause of this ,the County. is reconsidering the 1.eSc'J. ut ':0:; wi th the idea that possibly Eugene a.nd Lane CoUnty would form iJ dl.idl a~l1;'ll~-~i dl.d:hodty and Springfield would merely contract with that author it'.). In <in;; event, the task force will be meeting January 15 to cons,ider some l:evisions.. Nr. Bradley, as a member of the task force, wondered what Council's feeling . \'ias on Springfield's participation - shou,Zd Lane County, and Eugene contract to them or should they be included in a tri-agencyauthority, opting.out of the enforcement phase. The distinction is that, if Springfield is part " of a tri-agency authority, they will have policy making input. 'A question was raised on financial implications, Manager respOnding it would be. more economical to have all three in a single agency performing all functions. Should Springfield not be a part of the authority, negotiations will determine how much they will be charged. "'- Mayor Anderson. felt that a comprehensive dog control program was the original goal, to be shared equally by all. If each jurisdiction opted out of one phase, it would result in a fractured program. ,lie therefore feels that"Lane' County and Eugene should proceed, with Springfield participating on a contra.ct, , basis. If, they are unwilling to commit to the total program, th~y'should be ". willing to accept less than full participatiori .in the decision-making processes, he added. It was understood a resolution would be. brought back to. Committee after ,the TaskForce meeting. (' ::..f;b, .4'-~7 1/2~116 ~ '23 . Comm 1/21/76 Approve --./ Comm 1/21/76 Approve Approve Comm 1/14/76 Affirm Comm 1/14/76. Affirm '-./ COInm 1/14/76 Affirm