My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06/26/1978 Meeting
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Minutes
>
Historic Minutes
>
1978
>
06/26/1978 Meeting
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/24/2007 2:06:30 AM
Creation date
11/2/2006 5:29:18 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Minutes
Meeting_Type
Meeting
CMO_Meeting_Date
6/26/1978
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
16
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 /> R. G. Atwood, 520 Antelope Way, noted in regard to a delay, the <br /> building season is approaching and he was looking forward to estab- - <br /> lishing his new home. He entered into the record an exhibit and asked <br /> Council to r~ ect the appeal. <br /> Mr. Saul reiterated when Council passed the ordinance establishing <br /> moratorium on panhandles, it specifically directed staff that appli- <br /> cations filed prior to the effective date be reviewed under existing <br /> standards. He noted also the ordinance establishing the moratorium <br /> for six months at a minimum also allows for an extension of an addi- <br /> tional six months if necessary. <br /> Mr. Haws wondered if Council had the option of delaying. Joyce <br /> Bendamin, City Attorney's office, advised it would not be in Council's <br /> best interest to take such action. <br /> In rebuttal, Mr. Voas, said the group opposing the panhandle lot was <br /> not concerned about the size of the lot, but felt the biggest problem <br /> to be the actual policing of the area, i.e., screening and paving. He <br /> felt the review under way would lead to better enforcement. Thus, the <br /> reason for asking for the delay. <br /> Public hearing was closed, there being no further testimony <br /> presented. <br /> Mr. Bradley moved, seconded by Mr. Delay, to deny the appeal, <br /> to uphold the approval, and to adopt findings of fact. - <br /> Mr. Hamel said he would stay with his previous convictions regarding <br /> opposition to panhandle lots, especially in established neighborhoods. <br /> Mr. Delay did not think this was a case where Council could go by the <br /> way i t fel t. He noted Council was in a quasij udicial position <br /> dealing with existing code. He felt it irresponsible to seek out one <br /> individual case and apply different rules to a particular case, in <br /> view of the existing code. <br /> Vote was taken on the motion, which carried with all Councilors <br /> present voting aye, except Hamel and Obie voting no. <br />Mr. Bradley left the meeting. <br />D. Federal and State Revenue Sharing Budgets <br /> Manager noted this was a requirement by State law, and the income <br /> received would be assigned to various departmental budgets and treated <br /> as part of the overall city budget. Loren Stubbert, Finance Depart- <br /> ment, said the funds would be used as a property tax offset in the <br /> general fund. <br /> . <br /> 6/26/78--12 <br /> LfU <br /> - ---------' <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.