HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/09/1971 Meeting
""'l
-- ~~ 0
I Council Chamber
Eugene, Oregon
August 9, 1971 I
Ij Regular meeting of the Common Council of the city of Eugene, Oregon was called to order by His I
Honor Mayor Lester E. Anderson at 7:30p.m. on August 9, 1971 in the Council Chamber, with the
I, following Councilmen present: Messrs. Teague, McDonald and Gribskov; Mrs. Beal and Mrs: Camp- ,I
II
II bell; Mr. Williams. Mr. Mohr and Mr. Hershner were absent.
I(
II I. PUBLIC HEARINGS
,I
I, A. Appeal from Conditional Use Permit, Day Care Center, 934 Washington (Postponed from
II
i 7/26/71)
I A public hearing was held July 26, 1971 on an appeal from Carl Lemke to use of a home
I at 934 Washington as a day care center, and was postponed so that Council could view
the property. A tour of the area was taken and Council is ready to take' action.
e II 1
ii Mr. Teague moved seconded by Mr. McDonald that the Planning Commission recommendation II
II
be upheld. Motion carried.
II
!! B. Appeal from Conditional Use Permit, Bmise,Cascade II
II II
II Thirteen families in the
'I The site for this proposal is located on Brewer Lane.
I I, area have objected to the development and have filed an appeal. Their appeal states II
,I that they feel the Planning Commission did not satisfactorily evaluate or consider II
" I
II the concerns and objections of the residents of the area, or follow the recommenda-
I
I tions of staff. They dismissed the problem of over-burdening scpools in the area
, and did not consider the effects of increased traffic flow through this residential
,
I
i area. They did not evaluate the possible change in character of both the specific
I
:1 neighborhood and the area that could come about through this proposed addition to
il existing and proposed low income housing. Because of this, they felt the Planning
I, Commission had not satisfactorily discharged its responsibilities, and appealed
'I
II the decision to the City Council.
II
II Mr. Ed O'Reilly, representing some of the petitioners involved in the appeal, said
II
II residents of the area had appeared at the Planning Commission public hearing and voiced
Ii opposition, but the Planning Commission had approved the petition. Subsequent to
I'
II this, they filed an appeal. Mr. O'Reilly said some matters had not been properly
I
1 considered and there were violations of some prior mandates of the Council. Mr.
i
I O'Reilly felt it was not proper to increase the density to 11 units per acre.
,
, The Planning Commission did not give proper consideration to traffic problems and
"
!'
rl to the fact that the only exit and access was by way of Brewer Avenue. Schools are
not adequate and will become overcrowded. Mr. O'Reilly did not feel the Planning
I,
II Commission had full information on these matters and that the code was therefore viol-
I ated with reference to planning. He referred to the Willakenzie plan and said that
If
I' it sets forth criteria for single family residences in this area. Putting 79
II units onto a ten acre tract was in direct conflict with this plan. He referred to
I II
11 a similar proposal recently before the Planning Commission for R-2 zoning in this
area which was denied by the Planning Commission. He felt this was a similar pro- ,
II posal with the same traffic and school problems, and that it should also be denied. II
i' :/
,I
Ii Mr. George Marx, 1565 McLean Boulevard, spoke in favor of the project. He ,said it
had been underway for thirteen months and was designed to fit a community need. This II
:1 'I
type of project generates community feeling because it is a little different. Sev- II
il eral sites had been analyzed before this was chosen. There is a need for such il
e ;1 projects, and the public must accept them. School and traffic problems can be ironed
Ii II
I' out, and there will be such problems with any site. If this site is rejected, the "
[I il
1\ project will have to be built in the core area, and this may create a ghetto, while
I,
'I here it would have a chance to be something good. ~ I
It II
Ii Betty Niven, Planning Commission member, commented on the property which Mr. O'Reilly II
II
I' had said was similar to this project. She pointed out that phat petitioner had II
:1
'I requested straight R-2 which would have allowed no control. This proposal, under :1
Ii Planned Unit Development, gives the Planning Commission an opportunity to specify
Ii I,
II how it will be built, and to have control over the project, and work out problems. Ii
II II
" She explained the Planned Unit Development with conditional use permit and how it !I
"
:j applied:>lto controlled income and rent housing, and that it would allow up to 14 units
I, q
II per acre in this location. She explained the problems with keeping schools filled II
jj in some of the older areas, and that it was felt children could be bussed to other' II
schools. These must be used to capacity to protect the people's invesfment. She I!
Ii 'I
I discussed the traffic problems, and said these would have to be resolved:-before the 1i
:1
I development could be built. II
I,
"
j ~ Jim Freeman with Boise Cascade, explained FHA requirements and that the number of ;1
I'
il units to be constructed would be in acoordance with these requirements. ii
!:
II Mr. Wendell Rogers, 1630 Curtis Avenue, asked how many units would be allowed on il
I ~ this property under the ordinance. City Manager explained the Planned Unit Develop- II
if ment requirements and that under conditional use additional density is allowed up il
Ii I
e to 75% of the density allowed in the next higher zone. Mr. Roge rs felt citizens ,
" i
'I I
I: - I
i
8/9/71 - 1 ,
,
'I
"
...
,... I
iP~1 -
8/9/71
I II
il I
I were worried about property values and were getting very little consideration 11
II
Devin Duncan, 1965 Brewer, said he owned some of the right of way, and that he had not "
I
II been approached about the project or the need for additional right of way. He felt "
'I
Willakenzie was getting a tremendous number of developments. I:
" "
,
"
I'
:1 A. L. Bailey, 1690 Curtis, said he had lived in this neighborhood several years,
!I had never expected it to be anything but single family residential, and felt it
!I should not be anything but single ~amily residential. He objected to the increased
"
'I traffic on Brewer Lane. He felt the Council had the responsibility to not allow this
:1 to happen.
il
i Gordon Mitchell, 1654 Brewer, said he had lived in the area a number of years and
,
, did not feel staff was aware of the problem with traffic. He pointed out that a number
1
I of children walk on the street, that it is narrow, and increased traffic would endanger :1
" them. Traffic has increased considerably with the advent of Valley River Center and
Ii I:
the K-Mart. !I --
Ii
II I'
I: Ii
Michael Wald, 965 Polk, said he has lived a long time in Eugene, and even though he 1,\
ii did not live in the area, he was in sympathy, since apartments were going up all
Ii around his area.
'I
I,
I'
~ I Mrs. Pat Asay, 1637 Curtis, was concerned about the foot traffic, and did not think
II
Ii it had been given enough consideration. She explained that this was a very narrow I
intersection, and that a few years ago her husband had hit a little boy there. She
'I
II felt the traffic problem should definitely be considered.
i'
Ii
Ii Councilman McDonald commented that the Council had just received the Planning"Commission
Ii memo, and he felt the Council needed more time to study this. He asked about the
Ii
11 street improvement and responsibility for payment.
"
['
Ii Planning Director explained that abutting property owners would be assessed, but the
I' City at the present time hasn't sufficient right of way. One of the conditions of
,I approval was that the street be improved. Regarding Mr. McDonald's concern with the
il
jl Willakenzie ~lan, Planning Director explained that this was an interim plan which had
I' suggested the area be low density residential. The PUD ordinance has since been adopted
Ii
II which applies to all low density residential zones.
Mr. Williams was concerned about schools and city services in the entire Willakenzie
I,
" area.
il
"
I' Mrs. Niven explained that there is surplus capacity enrollment in the school system,
Ii and that not all the people who will occupy the units being built will have school
,I age children. She was not sure whether the school system could adequately handle all
!I
II the people moving into the Eugene area. In answer to Mr. Williams concerns about the
it
Ii traffic load on Ferry Street Bridge, she said the majority of the people will be using
II the Beltline Road.
I'
,i I
I: Mrs. Campbell explained that one of the city's top priorities is housing, particularly
,\ low income housing, and this is one of the obligations the Council has to the citizens
"
II of Eugene. She explained the urban service boundary and that thls will necessitate
"
" increased density. concerned about the right of way pr9blem, and whether
;i Sh e was
I, this would cause considerable delay. Manager explained that at some time the Council
,I
Ii will probably have to decide whether it wishes to proceed with the paving project.
II
I'
I'
" Mayor Anderson outlined the city's policy on housing and said any reference to creation
II
:1 of ghetto's would be invalid. e
"
Ii
d
H Mrs. Beal moved seconded by Mrs. Campbell that the decision of the Planning Commission
Ii
'I be upheld for erection of' controlled income housing in this area.
I,
I:
" Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. McDonald that on grounds of having significant new
"
"
I' information which the Council had not had the opportunity to read, that this matter
:1 be tabled until the next Council meeting. Mr. Williams, Mr. McDonald, Mr. Gribsko,:",
Ii Mr. Teague and Mrs. Beal voted yes. Mrs. Campbell uoted no. Motion carried. t-~ .
Ii
"
i ~ C. Appeal from Decision of Charitable Solicitation Committee - Oregon Benefit Corporation
:1
II The Charitable Soliciation Commission denied this application in accordance with the '!
II ,I
j) ordinance. This decision was appealed in a letter to the Finance Director dated ,
Ii July 8, which stated that the applicants believed the reasons given for denying the
II license were invalid.
"
" I
I'
il Roy Finch, Rt. 3 Box 364, Springfield, said he was president of Oregon Benefit Corpor-
"
I' ation and named other members of the Board. He felt circumstances,had altered since
,[
" the application was submitted. He explained the misunderstanding regarding the percen-
I:
Ii tage of collection to be paid the solicitor and that they do not have nor do they
,
:1 intend to have a full time solicitor. He said no one would be solicited unless it was
II for a specific project and for a charitable purpose. He explained the debt now owed
I'
I: by the company and that those debts must be paid to become solvent. He explained the
,I goals of the corporation and the services they intend to provide.
I,
I' e
I,
" 8/9/71 - 2
i:
~
""'l
e ~~~
8/9/71
I In answer to Mayor Anderson, Mr. Finch said this was a non-Rrofit corporation, and
that no one is on salary. The only costs would be administrative.
Mayor Anderson said it would seem conditions had changed since the original
application was filed. He asked Mr. Finch if he would object to resubmitting
an application to the committee. Mr. Finch said he had no obj ection.
Mr. Teague moved seconded by Mrs. Beal to ask Oregon Benefit Corporation to
I resubmit an application to the Charitable Solicitation Committee for further review.
I Motion carried.
D. Abatement of dangerous building located at 875 West 26th (Collins)
II I
City Manager explained that he had just learned that this property had been I
sold to Breeden Bros. Builders, and there was therefore no reason to continue
II with the abatement proceedings. Resolution No. 1960 was not acted upon.
e Ij E. Bids, opened by Public Works Department, August 6 and 9, 1971
[i
J
"
11 PAVING OVERLAYS:
Contract Cost
Basic Alternate
,I 1. Blair Blvd. from Van Buren to 1st Avenue
I !, Eugene Sand & Gravel 4,117.50 0
II Wildish Canst. Co. 4,295.00 0
II
Ii 2. ~nd Avenue, Blair to Pierce
)1 Eugene Sand & Gravel 6,056.68 0
I! Wildish Canst. Co. 6 ,361. 00 0
II
II 3. Fairfield, Royal to Highway 99 I
Eugene Sand & Gravel 4,462.90 0 I
I' Wildish Canst. Co. 4,523.00 0
Ii
" 4. 11th Avenue, Charnelton to Tyler I
11
II Wildish Canst. Co.' 13,360.00 12,910.00 II
I' Eugene Sand & Gravel i1..3,960.00 0
II
5. 5th Avenue, McKinley to Conger
:1 Eugene Sand & Gravel 6,120.00 0
11 Wildish Canst. Co. 6 ,480 .00 0
"
I'
I! 6. McKinley, 5th to 11th
il Wildish Canst. Co. ?, 778. /Z5 7,367.00
II Eugene Sand & Gravel 7,556.50 0
q 7. 18th, Willamette to Olive & Pearl to Ferry
I I
1 Wildish Canst. Co. 5,928.50 5,478.00
I Eugene Sand & Gravel 6,199.40 0
I!
8. Willamette, 11th to 20th
"
] Wildish Canst. Co. 13,227.50 12,794.75
II Eugene Sand & Gravel 13,880.00 0
(Approx. cost for16th to 20th only)(6,000.00) - Recommend awarding this
Ii
I' section only I
e Ii
I 9. Garfield, 13th to 18th
II
II Wildish Canst. Co. 6 , 5 36 . 25 6,187.75
II Eugene Sand & Grvel 6,685.65 0
II
II 10. Chambers, 11th to 18th
I' Wildish Canst. Co. 9,085.00 8,688.00
il
Ii Eugene Sand & Gravel 9,597.50 0
(Approx. cost for 11th to 13th only)(2,500) Recommend awarding this section only.
!! .'
,
I! 11. Oak Street, 11th to 13th I
I Wildish Canst. Co. 2,760.00 2,58>8.00
I Eugene Sand & Gravel 2,704.80 0
I
I
I' 12. ~8th Avenue, Pierce to City View
Ii
Wildish Construction Co. 8,153.50 7,806.00 I
,I . - . . I
Ii Eugene Sand & Gravel 8,632.45 0
TOTAL COST TO CITY $71,514.15 BUDGETED - $69,700.00 I
!I
II
I ~ II
~
- II
II II
[I
:) 8/9/71 - 3 II
it
"
1
,
" ...
r-
t (,3 e
8/9/71
il
. II I
13,~ "polk, 18th to 24th !I
Wildish Const. Co~ 8,155.00 7 ,711. 50
Eugene Sand & Gravel 8,155.00 0
14. Donald, 32nd to 35th
Wildish Const. Co. 4,320.00 4,050.00
Eugene Sand & Grvel 4,704.00 0
Bid opened August 9, 1971
, Laurelwood Golf Course, Storm Sewer
I:
i1 Schedule I Schedule II Schedule III
Ii Wildish Const. Co. 69,476.81. 57,108.14 22,016.73 11,082.88
Ii Shur-way Contractor% No bid No bid 29,338.15 16,162.54
Kenneth R. Bostick No bid No bid 26,011. 35 No bid
I: D-A-Tone Construction Co. 77,873.10 No bid No bid No bid
I: Cost to City - 90,207.75 Budgeted - 135,000.00 e
I'
II COMPLETION DATE: October 1, 1971
Assistant Director of Public Works.explained that 14 overlay projects were bid,
"
!: and that there was enough money budgeted to actually do the first 12 of these.
i
Ii In answer to Councilman McDonald, he explained the bids and alternate bids, and
I! that the basic was a standard asphaltic overlay, while the alternate contained I
jl a higher percentage of asphalt with a ~iber content, which they hoped would be more
I durable than the standard overlay. It could be applied in a thinner layer, which had
Ii advantages, and would be less expensive.
"
Ii On the bid opened August 9, the cost to the city had been budgeted in the 71-,7.2
Ii
" budget, and the bid was less than the amount budgeted. Staff recommends award of
I:
I, the contracts.
II
II Mr. Teague moved seconded by Mrs. Beal to accept the recommendation of staff and
I
II award the contract to the low bidder in all cases. Rollcall vote. All councilmen
I' present voting aye, the motion .carried.
'I
II F. Planning Commission Reports
Ii
II 1. July 13, 1971
II a. Annexation recommended, Ansola and Parks (one acre between Larch and Dillard
II road)
Ii A building permit was granted by the County to permit buildings to be
II
" moved onto this property. A sewer is available, but the developers have
il
I: a choice of putting in septic tanks in an area already considered a
,I health hazard, because of failing septic tanks, or of annexing to allow
II
"
'I connection to city sewer. Planning Commission recommended annexation, due
I
II to health hazard, and will undoubtedly return a recommendation that annex-
1: ation be considered for the entire area. I
Ii 19?1 - Initiating mino~ b~uDd~;Y ~h~apge and,transmitting to Boundary Commission
II Res.
i! ~ reques'Cfor annexati'on" cAns-ol~ 'and Parks)
Ii
'I Motion carried.
il Mr~.Teague moved seconded by Mrs. Beal that the resolution be adopted.
!I
L b. Zone Change, recommended - Gary Bernik, R-l to RG (17 foot strip located
'I
I: east of Oak Street between 26th and 27th)
-
Ii This piece of property was recently quit-claimed to Mr. Bernik. It was
II
an area where survey's did not match in the County records, and a 17 foot
Ii strip of property was released by the City. Rezoning would allow all of
I' his ownership to have the same RG zoning.
Ii C.B. 9q78 - Change of zone, property located east of Oak Street between 26th Avenue and
Ii 27th Avenue (Bernik) was submitted and no councilman requesting that it
!
I be read in full, was read the first time by council bill number only.
I:
:1 Mr. Teague moved seconded by Mrs. Beal that the bill be read the second time by council
Ii
:1 bill number only, with unanimous consent of the Council, and that enactment be considered
Ii at this time. Motion carried unanimously and the bill was read the second time by
council bill number only.
!I
I'
" Mr. Teague moved seconded by Mrs. Beal that the bill be approved and given final passage. I
"
I'
,I Rollcall vote. All councilmen present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and
"
Ii numbered 16277.
I'
!I
I c. Zone Change denial recommended - Douglas Larkins (SW corner Cobung Road
II
" and Pioneer Pike, R-l to RP)
il
I' Planning Commission recommended denial, based on the fact that this would
,I
!\ be inconsistent with the Willakenzie Plan and th~there is an abundance of
I( commercially zoned property in the Willakenzie Area. e
!: 8/9/71 -4
~
"""'Il
e t, ~ ~
8/9/71
I Mr. Teague moved seconded by Mrs. Beal that the Planning Commission recommendation
be upheld. Motion carried.
d. Zone change denial recommended - Ben Smith (South of Cal
roung, north of Woodside Drive, RA to RP)
Mr. Smith wishes to utilize the house on this property for an office.
Planning Commission recommended denial, since this w0uld be inconsistent
with the Willakenzie Plan and development of the area.
Mr. Teague moved seconded by Mrs. Beal that the Planning Commission recommendation
be upheld. Motion carried.
2. July 26, 1971
a. Zone Change recommended, Jack F. Bosse (South of Royal, west of Danebo.
e AG to RA)
RickClevelan9,' 260 East 11th, said he represented Mr. Bosse and could
answer any questions the Council might wish to address.
C.B. 9479 - Rezone a. port~sm of property located south of Royal Avenue and west of
I Danebo Avenue from AG to RA (Bosse) was submitted t:he first time, and no
councilman present requesting that it be read in full, was read the first
time by council bill number only.
Mr. Teague moved seconded Beal that the bill be read the seoond time by council bill
number only with unanimous consent of the Council, and that enactment be considered at
this time.
Mr. Teague moved seconded by Mrs. Beal that the bill be approved and given final
passage. Rollcall vote. ~~l councilmen present voting aye, the bill was declared
passed and numbered 1~278.
b. Zone change, denial recommended - Fred Herbst (896 Coburg Road R-l to R-2)
Mr. Fred Herbst, 2990 Tomahawk Lane, said the Planing Commission had voted
with a 3 to 3 tie. They were concerned with the traffic on Coburg Road.
He recognized that there was considerable traffic on this arterial, but
that it was designed for this load, and had adequate signals and lanes.
Heoutlinedcthe neighboring uses of property, and said a residence had not
been built on Coburg Road for 15 years. He said the house on his property
was at least 50 years old, and that he would like to develop something to
enhance the property.
In answ~r to Councilwoman Beal, Mr. Porter said the staff recommendation
I had been for approval, since their interpretation of the Willakenzie Plan
was that the city would look favorably on reclassification along Coburg
Road to attempt to buffer this arterial from perperties farther away. The
, major p~oblem had been buffering from the properties to the west. The
staff felt a project with site review would be consistent with the Willa-
kenzie plan, and would like to see the Planning ,CommissioI} ,review this
request.
Mayor Anderson said the Council had viewed the property and felt the matter
e should be reconsidered. Mr. Herbst was concerned that this would simply
be a del~y and requested Council action at this meeting. Mayor Anderson
explained that Council action would automatically call for a joint Planning
Commission;Council meeting, and that this would enable members of the
Commission and Council to share their views. This was satisfactory to
Mr. Herbst.
Mr. Williams said he did not disagree this site should have R-2 density,
but he reiterated his concerns with the overall impact on the Willakenzie
area and that he felt this should be considered before further heavy
residential density developments were considered.
Mr. Teague moved seconded by Mrs. Beal that the P~anning Commission recommendation be
rejected. Motion carried.
I G. Discussion of Noise Control Ordinance
(Conmrrttee minutes of 7/28/71) Noise Ordinance, Council Discussion - Copies of the
-proposed ordinance were previously distributed to Council members.
Councilwoman Beal expressed concerns that it had been her understanding the Ci ty
Attorney's office had suggested extensive changes, and she felt discussion should
be withheld until these changes had been made.
Mr. Swanson explained changes suggested for the general section, and said Council
e input might be helpful in making these changes.
8/9/71 - 5
..oil
,...- I
tt5 e
8/9/81
r II I
I Mr. Williams explained the operation of his bakery, and loud noises which accompanied II
the early-morning operation. He was concerned that a business practice of 50 years !I
il nrrght be prohibited by passage of this ordinance.
:,
I, :'
I' "
II Mr. Hershner could see no necessity for a general section preceeding a general#y I:
i!
II comprehensive list of the various kinds of noises. Chief of Police pointed out l!
"
11 the enforcement problems, and that all problems cannot be anticipated. Ii
"
,i I'
Ii I'
" Mr. Williams moved that this document be specifically directed at the willful and
'I
I, unnecessary kinds of noise.
"
!I
i' Mrs. Beal pointed out that, in this case, intent would have to be proved. This would
i:
II create an unnecessary roadblock. She felt the intent of the person was not the i:
Ii
reason for the ordinance, but the effect that the noise had. !i
II : ~
'I Mr.Sw~nson p~intedout that Mr. Williams suggestion would put a great burden on
II the prosecution. It would have to be proven that the person not only knew what he e
I ~ was doing, but willfully violated the ordinance in doing it. He felt there should
Ii be a possibility for warning in such cases, and an opportunity for correction. Mr.
p Williams did not agree, but said he was concerned wi th virtual condemnation of property
Ii without compen~~tion.
,I -
I: "
~ I Mr. Teague agreed with Mr. Williams contention, and said he had experienced some !,
:! "
similar problems in connection with his business. I
I
II Mr. Williams was interested ,in the section concerning animals in the industrial
!I
I: area, and asked about the amendment to the dog control ordinance recently passed,
. . .' .. . .
'I and whether permits WQuld be granted in such instances.
II
:,
Ii Mrs. Campbell suggested that a quiet zone could be created around hospitals and
I, retirement homes. It was pointed out that this again, was a matter which would
'I
II require enforcement, and enforcement is the problem.
It
I' Mrs. Beal asked for exclusion of the muffler provision for spectator sports. She
II
" felt this was a distrubance to many people in the area. Manager pointed out that this
'I had been worded to conform to a recent council decision regarding the automobile racing
:,
"
I' acti vi ti es .
I' "
"
"
,I Mayor Anderso11l suggested that, if ;the Council felt a change was necessary, it ,I
, iJ
,
, "
could be made at a later time. ,
II "
, Commi ttee Meeting, 8/4/71 - Noise Control with Regard to Construction - Councilman
il McDonald has rece,i ved complaints about bulldozer and jackhammer noise and asked if
II the new noise ordinance would have some affect on this. Mr. Swanson of the City
Ii Attorney's office said the office has been revising the proposal presented to the
II Council last week, and studying hours when noise would be particularly disturbing.
II They hav~ 'f::onsid$red changing the hours from 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 a.m.
il I
I, ' '
I, Mrs. Beal was concerned that the Council at times has no opportunity to view the
II
II proposed legislation or changes in proposals before the public hearing. Assistant
I.
Ii City Manager explained that the changes proposed in this ordinance relate to the
"
ii broad general statement. There are no other real changes being proposed. 'i
II
I' "
d i:
II Testimony at regular meeting - Mayor Anderson explained that there have been minor Ii
Ii in the noise control ordinance and asked the City Attorney to explain them. "
changes
"
,I
II Mr. Arthur Johnson, City Attorney, explained various approaches to controlling noise e
Ii
iI through ordinances, and that the legislature had recently enacted l~gislation which
" takes the decibel approach and adoption of standards to establi~h limits to the
Ii amount of noise which can be emitted or allowed at a certain distance and adopt
Ii standards and regulations. It is uncertain whether enactment of this bill would exclude
,I the City from taking that approach. The proposed ordinance will prohibit unreasonable
'I
II and raucous noise. He ,explained sections of the ,ordinance, anq standards set up.
II It ,will prohibit certain activities from 10 :00 ,]'5.m. ,to 7:00 a.,m.
Ii
1
I. Bernice Mobley, 3031 Portland, was very concerned with the noi~e. Portland Street
II
has become almost unbearable because of the noise. In answer to her question about
the curfew, Mr. Martin said that minors must be in by midnight, but this does not
Ii apply to those young adults who are driving on Willamette.,
'I
Ii Emil S. Matson, 751 So. Danebo, said he lives right across from ,Balboa Race Track.
II He was against any excessive noise, and felt it was detrimental and,invaded the right I
I' to privacy. He had hired an industrial testing firm to rate the noise caused by
Ii
:1 races at the track and found them to be extremely excessive.
I'
II
" Mrs. Vernon Whi twer, 1280 Willow Creek Road, asked that the 10;00 limit on noise be
if
II enforced.
:1
Ii Mr. Ray Gilden, 20 East 37th, sug~ested that the city use the decibel method of
"
II determining excessive noise. He felt this was an enforceable method.
\1 e
"
" 8/9/71 -
I' e
'I
~
""'Ill
e ~~ 6
8/9/71
I Mrs. Russell Wheeler, 1310 Willow Creek Road, asked why cars were not stopped with
noisy mufflers. She would like, to see the noise ordinance enforced and a time set
for people toretir~,.
-,
:,O.C. -Be'Cker~ ~resident of Cascade Manor, said he has taken an interest in sound pollu-
tion for some time. Altered cars do create excessive noise, and he felt police
should enforce this law, and he hoped the new ordinance would give them some means
of enforcement.
Mel McDermott, 3625 Willamette, said Willamette is also a drag strip, and there are
ordinances that make this excessive noise prosecutable.
Mayor Anderson agreed that there are noise problems in the city, and said the Council
intent is to devise an ordinance that is enforceable. The Council will discuss the
ordinance further at a subsequent meeting, after perusal of the proposed changes.
e H. Discussion of Collective Bargaining Ordinance
Committee R~port of August 4, 1971 - Copies of the proposed ordinance and related
material were previously circulated to Councilmen. ' Assistant City Manager explained
the purpose of the ordinance and that it was hoped it would c@mpliment the collective
bargaining charter amendment and provide a workable procedure for bargaining. . It was
found by the judge in the court sui t that "questions of construction in regard to
the charter amendment are to be determined by appropriate ordinances..." IAFF Local
I 861 supports the ordinance with the exception of the last part of the definition of
employe rights. AFSCME Local l724A opposes the ordinance, feeling that there is no
evidence that the charter amendment is inadequate. They have voiced specific
opposition to the employe rights definition, feeling that union security is a
condi ti on of employment. The Employe Association and Police ,Benefit Association
support the ordinance.
Councilman Mohr asked why this was in ordinance form, rather than a resolution. It
was explained that there were no c;i;rirninal penal ties and that it described the
procedure process for collective bargaining.
Testimony at regular meeting - City Manager explained that the Council had requested
a public hearing on this ordinance at this time to allow testimony, but did not
propose to take action until it had sufficient time to weigh the testimony.
Mr. Frank Jackson, member of the Firefighters Local 851, stated the position of the
executive board ~hat the ordinance, while not totally pleasing, is a workable
piece of legislation, with the striking of one section, and that is the section which
prohibi ts employe groups from negotiating a union shop. He said it w~s the opinion
of the local that this was a matter for the bargaining table, and not the legislative
process.
Red Smith, 3095 Floral Hill Drive, said he was spokesman for Local 1724A AFSCME,
and that correspondence had been circulated to the Council at the Committee meeting.
I He said their position is that the ordinance is completely unnecessary because the
city of Eugene has already declared itself a public employer, and all these things are
covered by the PERBV The firefighters negotiated their contract with no problems
at the bargaining table. Local 1724A is in complete accord with the firefighters
request for union security.
Mr. Smith went over objections to the ordinance section by,section, and reiterated
the Local stand that an ordinance was unnecessary.
e Mr. Pat Langan, chairman of the Eugene City Employes Association, said that group went
along with the ordinance as written. They have not at the present time petitioned
the City Council for recognition as a bargaining unit, ?ut feel they will do so in
the near future.
Chris Brui?, 524 East 17th, said she was a delegate to the Lane County Labor Council
of the University Employes Union. She was very surprised the city was contemplating
this type of ordinance and felt PERB was competent to handle these things. She
questioned the necessity of drafting such legislation.
In ,answer to Mrs. Beal, City Manager said it was felt the charter amendment left
a great many unsaid possibilities for arriving at agreement between labor and
management that need to be spelled out so that there may be orderly procedures to
attempt to arrive at an agreed-upon contract prior to having to resort to compulsory
arbitration, and that development of a bargaining ordinance which sets forth these
I procedures and time limits will provide some preliminaries to the 30 day deadline.
Councilwoman Beal felt the charter amendment was brief and to the point and that
the ordinance was complicated and appeared to be ammore difficult document to
understand and interpret. She asked to have the legal question answered whether or
not the ordinance may restrict a charter amendment in the way that this ordinance
restricts this charter amendment. The inclusion or exclusion of union security as
a subject of collective ba~gaining and other matters which restrict the bargaining
e process in any way do not appear to be intended by the charter amendment.
8/9/71 S 7
I ....
t~ 7 e
8/9/71
'I City Manager said it was his understanding there was no legal reason an ordinance could Ii I
I 1,
not be developed which enhanced the positions on which the charter amendment was silent. "
II
If it was directly in conflict the Council could not adopt it. So far as he was "
I ':
aware, there was no legal reason this could not be done. i;
II "
,;
"
Ii I'
Mrs. Beal asked the City Attorney if the ordinance did not limit the powers of the I:
II :1
1/ arbi trator beyond what was set forth in the chart en:. City Attorney replied that he ; ~
II ,
" did not think it proper to answer this question at this time. The ordinance cannot
I,
!( be inconsistent with the charter. To further answer Mrs. Beal, he explained that
Ii
il Judge Allen had suggested that an ordinance be drafted to implement the charter.
I He did not give many guidelines what the content of the ordinance would be, but
Ii
j: did give suggestions in comments at the conclusion of the trial.
I'
II
I! In answer to Mrs. Beal's comment that firemen were able to come to an agreement under "
II
II the charter amendment, Manager said the Firefighters Um~on felt the ordinance was "
"
desirable after their experience with the charter. They disagree on only one item. "
Ii I
"
" e
There was discussion concerning the item of closed shop. which staff and firefighters "
Ii Ii
disagreed on. This will be a matter for the Council to decide what it feels is
desinable in the public interest. ,I
Ii "
Ii ,
II I,
!, Mayor Anderson suggested that the matter be scheduled on the agenda of a subsequent Ii
II meeting to allow Council time to deliberate on questions brought up this evening. :1
,I I
Ii The;e was no motion, as this item will be scheduled for the next regular meeting for
I actlon. I:
'i
II II. Items to be considered with one motion, after discussion of individual items if requested. !'
I Items were previously discussed at committee meetings of July 28 and August 4.
II A. County-City Contract, Landfill - City Manager requested direction on the matter of
I 7/28/71 use of city property for landfill regarding 1) desirability of allowing county to
II develop the east-west waterway on the ci ty' s portion of the property at Alton
II Baker Park, and 2) whether the ci ty should proceed wi th the already scheduled "
':
. conditional use request on use of city-owned property for landfill purposes with i:
Ii the conditions as discussed at the meeting with the County, recognizing if conditional "
II
1\ use is allowed, this would be firmed up with a signed contract between the City and
: County.
I
I Mr. Gribskov moved seconded by Mr. Hershner that the City Manager be requested to
I! proceed with drawing up a contract with the County on sanitary landfill, including
permission to create a waterway, subject to amendments which might be considered
Ii at the time filling operations would begin on city-owned property.
I, I'
Ii Mrs. Beal suggested that the contract include proposed operational standards,
Ii clarification as to points brought up by the Mayor and action to be taken in event
the contract is not complied wi th. A definite time limit should be set. approve
II
II B. Lane County Government Application for Recognition as Lane County Community Action I
Ii 7/28/71 Agency - In connection with its application for recognition as a community action
agency for Lane County, notification must be given poli tical subdi visions that appli-
Ii cation is being made for such recognition. Unless the City Council acts to request
11 that the city be excluded, it will be included in the area served.
I' Mayor Anderson said Councilman Mohr has been Council representative on the previous
,I
!I OEO program. Mayor Anderson said he would certainly urge the Council to cooperate
I, with this effort. e
Ii
II Mrs. Beal moved seconded by Mr. Gribskov that the Eugene city Council request
II inclusion in the area served by the Lane County Community Action Agency. Motion carried.
approve
I'
'I
II C. Christmas Decorations, Central Business District - The Downtown Association is
" 7/28/71 attempting to amend a decoration contract so that more effective and suitable
II
11 decorations may be provided for the Christmas season. Members of the Mall Arts
II Commi ttee and ci ty staff have met wi th them. A more tradi tional Christmas theme has
I, been proposed and the association has asked that the city assist the program by
II assuming the responsibility for installation, removal and storage'. Labor cost could
II be absorbed in the city's operating budget.
I' Mrs. Beal questioned the validity of expenditure of city money for something which
Ii
,I was primarily the responsibility of the merchant. I
'I
Ii Mr. Hershner felt that the mall area was public area and that the city had some
II
Ii responsibility r~garding its decoration during the Christmas season, as well as
II responsibility through9.ut thf!' year, for i ts ne~5!s,
I Mrs. Beal agreed with that, but felt the Council should have some input into
I selection of suitable decorations.
\ Mr. Drapela pointed out that, if it was the Council's wish, it could have representa- e
I[
\; 8/9/71 - 8
II
,
~
.....
e ~~?
.
8/9/71 ;
I tion on the selection co~ttee.
Mr. Williams agreed with Mrs. Beal, that involvement would be moving into an
area the Council is trying to move away from, that of payment for services in
the mall.
Mrs. Beal suggested that young artists could be engaged to make decorations more
in the tradition of Christmas.
Mayor Anderson pointed out the question was payment for service. He felt hers
was a good recommendation, and perh~ps staff could take it under advisement. He
felt there were some services which the city could provide without cost to the
taxpayers.
Mrs. Beal moved that the city adopt a policy of not putting funds into decoration
e of the downtown area. Motion died for lack of a second.
Mr. Williams moved that the ci ty work wi th EDA to decorate the mall by pro vi ding
storage space', and labor that is not otherwise committed to productive labor.
Mrs. Campbell did not see how the Council could fund this matter when it chargE;d
for extra police service for mall dances. Manager explained that the ci ty would
I not be spending money but using personnel time. The difference wi th regard to
mall dances is that e~tra people are brought in and paid overtime. This. is
out of pocket money.
Mr. Williams clarifJ..ed his motion that some ci ty employes are on standby, basically
waiting for something to happen. They could be used for this project.
Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner that the city work with Eugene Downtown
Association to erect decorations and that it offer personnel and storage space that
is- not otherwise commit~ed, and that would not result in any cost to the taxpayer,
and would not result in productive jobs being left undone that might otherwise have
been done.
vote taken on motion. Motion carried, with Mrs. Beal voting no. approve
Testimony from Councll meeting - City Manager said that, since the agenda was
written, he had received further commUnication from the Eugene DBwntown Association.
The Board of Directors of that association met August 6 and somewhat changed their
approach to the previous Christmas decoration request. They voted to accept the
least expensive proposal of the company, if the City Council would give assurance
that' -installation and storage would be done with city forces, and that the city
would assume the cost for replacement of vanaalism occuring during the five year
period of the contract. Replacement costs would_be, equally shared by the City and
Valley Decorating Company. Motion at the committee meeting provided such help
I available without actual out of pocket costs to city, and that the city would provide
storage space as possible without costs. The powntown Association has proposed that,
unless city help is forthcoming, the contract will be cancelled, and that there be
no organized effort at decoration for the five years it will take to payoff the
'contract.
D. Contract, Mas~er Plan, Airport - Subsequent to r~ceipt of the planning grant, a
8/4/71 s ubcdmmi ttee of L-COG 'sT rans portati 011-- Commi ttee screened cons ul tan t fi rms, in ter-
e viewed four and recommended, two. Based upon these recommendations, Arnold Thompson
and Associates was selected for negotiation of the work program. L-COG and city staff
worked with representatives of the consulting firm and developed a proposed work
program and a price agreement of ,$52,000. 'The Airport Advisory Commi ttee met and voted
to recommend the contract be awarded to Arnold Thompson and Associates. Following
the Commission meeting, city staff met with FAA officiail.s and reviewed the proposed
contract. It was agreed that the elements of a master plan required by FAA would
be covered, and that successful completion of the project w@uld provide an adequate
master plan. There were no ,elements in the proposal which would exceed FAA's
requirements. Staff recommends that Council authorize execution of a contract with
Arnold Thompson and Associates.
Mrs. Beal moved seconded by Mr. Mohr that the Council authorize execution of a contract
with Arnold Thompson and Associates for a planning study for an airport master plan.
Motion carried. approve.
I E. Improvement Petition, Monroe Street from 28th Avenue 550' to south - 56%
8/4/71
Mr'. Mohr moved seconded by Mr. Gribskov to accept the petition. Motion carried. approve
F. Liquor License, approved by Police Department
8/4/71 Package Store Class B - Miller's Grocer, 1065 East 20th - Change of ownership.
Mr. Mohr moved seconded by Mrs. Beal to approve this request. Motion carried. approve
e 9
8/9/71 -
I ....
"..-
~~f e
8/9/71
~G . Segregati on of Sewer Assessment, McKenzie River Motors I! I
II 8/4/71 ii
II Mr. McDonald rroved seconded by Mrs. Beal to approve this request. Motion carried. ,I
I' I!
11 H. Deferral of- Collecti on-, Sewer Assessment - Mr. Albert Jagger is unable to proceed
II: 8/4/71 with development of his proprty at this t~.'me, and has requested deferral of collection it
'I: of assessment until such time as he can proceed. Staff recommends approval. !!
"
II "
Ii Mr. Gribskov moved seconded by Mrs. Beal to approve this request. Moti on carri ed.
'I
ii I. Implementation, Report and Recommendations of Mayor's Committee to Review Criminal
I; 7/28/71 Ordinances of Eugene - CouncLhman Mohr has expressed concern that recommendations of
Ii the Mayor's Committee had, not been implemented, and he was anxious for them to be
Ii put into practice. Staff has been exploring possibili ties for means to put the recom-
II mendation into practicE!, It ,was felt a person was required who had good legal know- '~
i ledge, knowledge of police <iepartment operation and operation of the courts, jail
I and attorney's office. It was felt Pierre Van Rysselberghe could fulfill all these II _
II requirements, since he has been Ass.t.:~City At"torne!] and,in that: po'$j'tio!!- bec.~~ familiar" .,
Ii wi th police department and court::;, and he is now Assistant Municipal Judge. It has
II been discussed that he and another member of his law firm could work with Andy Jordan,
i Administrative Assistant in the City Manager's office, on a program for implementation.
I It has been suggested that a contract arrangement be entered into. This has been
II discussed wi th the Ci,ty Attorney's office and they are in agreement. He explained
I that much of the material is operational rather than legal, yet legal knowledge is 1
II essential 'to make it workable. For this reason, it 'should not be the direct responsi-
Ii bility of the City Attorney, but his office will review the Ir!aterial. ' .
Ii -
III' It was the Council consensus that this was an acceptable proposal. affirm
; J. Appointments, Human Rights Commission, Zoning Board and Charitable Solicitations
I' '
I 8/4/71 Committee, Minority Relations Specialist Specifications
,: Mayor Anderson announced resignations from the Human Rights Commission of Arthur
'I 'lh '
'I M~ aupt, Larry Carter, Arthur Johnson and George Dersham. He has appo~nted Mr.
Ii William Wolfe, Mike Phillips and Mrs. Jay Jones as rplacements.
I: To replace James Korth, who has resigned from the Zoning Board of Appeals, Mayor
Ii Anderson appointed Bllluce Bmi th .
: II
'I "
il Mr. James Butler, Chari table Solici tation Commi ttee, will be replaced by Mr. Don
I: Dickover, as Chamber of Commerce representative. Mayor Anderson announced that there
Ii have been resignations from the Committee on Aging of Mrs. Muriel Cook and from the
i: Mall Arts Commission of Mr. Phil, Gilmore, and asked for suggestions for replacements.
I
II~ To a committee to write specificati'ons and screen applicants for the position of
! minori ty relat~ons spec~al~st, Mayor Anderson appo~nted Mr. Dean Owens, Ann Woeste,
i Harold Adams, Bobby Edwards and staff members Robin Cushman and Lon Mills. Ci ty
I: Manager will act as ex-officio member. file
': I:
!I K. Sonic Boom - Mrs. Campbell has received complaints about sonic booms and asked if
ii 8/4/71 anytbing can be done by the city to stop this disturbing noise. Mr. Mazany pointed
I: out that this problem was investigated a year or two ago, and that it was found to I -
,1
:: be difficult to pinpoint the exact cause of the noise, or of any way to prevent it.
11 Mrs. Beal felt the complaints should be investigated, and the Assistant City Manager
I: said the matter will be pursued. file
I'
I
!! L. Standards for Decision on Zoning Requests - Mr. Mohr expressed concern regarding a
It! 8/4/71 presentation made at the Planning Commission meeting by Mr. Korth of the City' e
I Attorney's office. Mr. Martin pointed out that the opinion was rather restricti ve as
I: to its application. ,City Attorney agreed that a specific question was answered, and
~: that this could be misinterpreted. He suggested a copy of the opinion be made
Ii available to the Council. file
I'
1'1 '
! M. South Willamette Noise Meeting - Assistant City Manager outlined plans for a meeting
Ii 8/4/71 with residents of the South willamette area to discuss possible changes in traffic
I: patterns in an effort to eliminate some of the noise problems in that area. He
III requested Ci ty Councilmen to attend.
! Mr. McDonald, Mr. Mohr, Mrs. Campbell ,and Mrs. Beal said they will attend. Mr. Martin
Ii requested that 'Mr. McDonald act as chairman of the meeting. He agreed. file
I,
1'1 N. Appeal from Zoning Board of Appeals Denial, Dean C. Ing
I Set hearing date August 23, 1971 approve I'
I:
!i O. Minutes of meetings of June 28 and 30, July 12 and 26, as circulated to councilmen approve ,
i Mr. Teague moved seconded by Mrs. Beal that Items A and Band D through 0 be approved,
, affirmed or filed. Rollcall. All aye. Motion carried.
"
,I
"
, I '
I: There was further discussion of Item II C.
I'
II, O. Mayor Anderson said the EDA proposal put the Council on very awkward ground, particularly e
8/9/71 - 10
~
-----.....
e ~ 10
8/9/71
I with reference to assumption of liability. He felt the Council motion at the
committee meeting could be construed as an act of good faith with regard to
maintenance of decorations in the downtown area,'but to put the Council in a
position of liability might put the Council in a position it would find impossible
to fulfill.
Mr. Richard Schimmel, representing the Downtown Association, said cancellation of
the contract would mean the,EDA would have to borrow the money and pay it back
within a year. The city would be without ehristmas decorations, and the EDA does
not have the money. If they accepted th~ new contract, they could not amford to
finance the installation costs.
Mayor Anderson commented t~at if the EDAwould accept the Council motion as an act
of good faith,th~at theyw0uldput up the decorations with volunteer help, that this
should be sufficient for-them to accept the risk. As far as replacement and
e vandalism, he felt this should be the responsibility of the EBA. To put the city
in a position of firm commitment as far as liability is concerned, was perhaps a
little more than should be asked.
Mr. Schimmel felt this would be satisfactory. He did feel they needed to know
this as clearly as possible.
Mrs. Campbell and Mrs. Beal were concerned about the artistic aspects of the' decora-
I tions. Mayor Anderson pointed out that the discussion concerned principle and
poli cy .
Mr. Teague moved seconded Mr. Gribskov to affirm the Council action taken at the last
committee meeting.
Motion carried with Mrs. BeaJ., and Mrs. Campbell voting no.
ORDINANCES
COUNCIL BILL NO. 9478 - Change of zone, property located east of Oak Street between
26th Avenue and 27th Avenue ( Bernik ) . See Page 5 of these minutes for Council action on this
Council bill.
COUNCIL BILL NO. 9479 - Rezone a portion, of property located south of Royal Avenue
and west of Danebo Avenue from AG to RA (Bosse). See Page 5 of these minutes for Council
action on this council bill.
COUNCIL BILL NO. 9~76 - Levying assessments for sidewalk on Donald Street adjacent
to Tax Lot 18 03 19 3602 was submitted and read in full the first time on July 12, 1971
and held over to this meeting to allow proper notice of assessment to be given owners
of affected property and is brought back for consideration with no protests on file.
I Mr. Teague moved seconded 1y Mrs. Beal that the bill be read the second time by council
bill number only, and that enactment be considered at this time. Motion carried unanimously
and the bill was read the second time by council bill number only.
Mr. Teague moved seconded by Mrs. Beal that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall
vote. All councilmen present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 16279.
COUNCIL BILL NO. 9777 - Levying assessments for sanitary sewer in area from 160' west to
160' east of Sweet Gum Lane from Harlow Road to south boundary of Sweet Gum Park was submitted
e and read the first time on July 12, 1971 and held'over to this meeting to allow proper notice of
assessment to be given owners of affected property and is brought back for consideration with
no protests on file.
Mr. Teague moved seconded by Mrs. Beal that the bill be read the second time by council bill number
only, and that enactment be considered at this time. Motion carried unanimously and the bill was
read the second time by council bill number only.
Mr. Teague moved seconded by Mrs. Beal that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall
vote. All councilmen present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 16280.
COUNCIL BILL NO. 9480 - Concerning license bond requirements for certain businesses and
amending Section 3.010 of the Eugene Code and declaring an emergency was submitted, and no council-
man present requesting that lit be read in full, was read the first time by council bill number only.
I Mr. Teague moved seconded by Mrs. Beal that the bill be read the second time by council bill number
only, with unanimous consent of the Council, and that enactment be considered at this time.
Mr. Gary Bader, representing the electrical contractors, asaid he felt it inadvisable to reduce the
surety bond now required because of the financial responsibility information which is required.
City Manager said the proposal was made after a study made by the finance department which disclosed
the citizens would be protected by the reduction in bond and the cost of doing business could be
reduced for contractors. He felt action on this ordinance should be postponed until staff has
e further information.
- I
Mr. .~eague move:d secon~ed by M:r;s. Beal that C. B. ~480 be held over until further ~,9$J7fa!ion is ,
, j
, obtq~ned ~ - !:1ot~on ca;rrJ",ed unanJ,]JloUS ly " . 11
,
..oil
,...- I
& 7/ e
8/9/71
, '1
II I
COUNCIL BILL NO. 91J:8111 - Concerning license bond requirements for charitable Solicitation creden-il
tials and amending Section 3.610 of Eugene Code and declaring an emergency was submitted, and no !I
, councilman present, requesting that it be reaEl-in full, was read the first time by council bill number:!
I only. :1
II "
II ii
II Mr. Teague moved seconded by Mrs. Beal that the bill be read the second time by coUncil bill number
II 'I
Ii only with unanimous consent of the Council, and that enactment be considered at this time. Motion "
II
I' carried unanimously and the bill was read th~ second ti~e by council bill numb~r only. "
It Ii
II Mr. Teague moved seconded by Mrs. Beal that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall \1
II
II vote. All councilmen present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 16281. "
II Ii
Ii i
II
Ii COUNCIL BILL NO. 9482 - Vacating ,a portion of Onyx Street at 35th Avenue East was submitted, "
"
'I and no councilman present requesting that it be read in full, was read the first time by council
II
Ii bill number only.
Ii Mr. Teague moved seconded by Mrs. Beal that the bill be read the second time by council bill number e
I! only with manimous consent of the Council, and that enactment be considered a t this time. Motion
" carried unanimously and the bill was read the second time by council bill number only. :1
~ i "
"
I'
Ii
I' Mr. Teague moved seconded by Mrs. Beal that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall
Ii vote. All councilmen present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 16282.
Ii
"
I! COUNCIL BILL NO. 9483 - Vacating West 4th Avenue between Washington Street and Jefferson I,
iI I
il Street was submitted, and no councilman present requesting that it be read in full, was read the first
. I,
II time by council bill number only.~: ':
J1 "
" :!
I: Mi>. Teague moved seconded by Mrs. Beal that the bill be ~ead the second time by council bill number
'I ,:
il "
" only with unanimous consent of the Council, and that enactment be considered at this time. Motion I'
:1 i
'I carried unanimously and the bill was read the second time by council bill number only. Ii
I,
II 'I
I: Mr. Teague moved seconded by Mrs. Beal that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall I'
I: vote. All councilmen present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 16283.
"
II "
" *A petition was received signed by customers of a lapidary supply house, objecting to vacation of
Ii "
this street, based upon expressea problem with access to this business. The city agreed to this I'
I' :'
I vacation several years ago, and a change now would have an adverse affect on the proposed park under :'
II "
'I the structure. The State is ready to go to bid on this project.
!I
I, Ted Igl, 499 West 4th, said he had been unaware of the vacation proposal until recently. "
11 Mr. He felt'
I 4th Avenue at this location was important to commercial traffic. He had a trucking firm and felt "
"
Ii "
there would be no access to the structure except by way of 6th Avenue. He suggested that Council ,
II
d at least hold over the matter until the project oould be viewed.
I'
II
11 Mr. Teague asked what affect it would have on the park if 4th Avenue was not closed.
"
!i
Ii City Manager explained that the plan had been accepted by the State Highway Commission and Bureau of ,
Ii
II PHblic Roads and included a federal commitment to build concrete trails in the park, including those !: I
"
'I between 5th and the railroad track. It was felt desirable to eliminate traffic, and the Traffic
"
" Engineer had been in agreement that this vacation would not create traffic problemss
il
I:
I
il Councilman Gribskov explained that vehicular traffic departing 1-105 could not exit until 6th
Ii Avenue, so 4th Avenue would not make that much difference for freeway traffic. He felt extension
'I of the Washington-Jefferson Bridge would eliminate a lot of traffic and the 4th Avenue closure would
I'
"
II not be that critical.
II
II .- - e
it COUNCIL BILL NO. 9484 - Vacating a portion of 'Concord Street west of 99N north of Fairfield "
,
Ii was submitted, and no councilman present requesting that it be read in full, was read the first
Ii time by council bill number only.
"
Ii
II I:
ji Mr. Teague moved seconded by Mrs. Beal that the bill be read the second time by council bill number
II only with unanimous consent of the Council, and that enactment be considered at this time. Motion i
"
carried unanimously and the bill was read the second time by council bill number only. "
II
II Mr. Teagge moved seconded by Mrs. Beal that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall
I'
"
Ii vote. All councilmen present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 16284.
\;
I' COUNCIL BILL NO. 9485 - Initiating vacation of a portion of Firland Boulevard 200' west of
I
:'
" Aga!e and calling a public hearing September 13 was read, and no councilman requesting that it be
Ii
Ii read in full, was read the first time by council bill number only.
'I
I,
II Mr. Teague moved seconded by. M JS . Beal that the bill be read the second time by council bill number I
d
Ii only with unanimous consent of the Council, and that enactmennebe considered at this time. Motion
I: carried unanimously and the bill was read the second time by council bill number only. "
"
Ii Mr. Teague moved seconded by Mrs. Beal that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall
" vote. All councilmen present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 16285.
ii COUNCIL BILL NO. 9486 - Initiating vacation of a portion of West 13th Avenue between Acorn
II
I' Park Street West and Buck Street and calling public hearing September 13, 1971 was submitted, and
II no councilman present requesting that it be read in full was read the first time by council bill e
1\ number only. Motion carried unanimously and the bill was read the first time by council bill
I: ~
.... 8/9/71 - 12
"""l
e ~ 1L.
8/9/71
I number only.
Mr. Teague moved seconded by Mrs. Beal that the bill be read the second time by council bill number
only with unanimous consent of the council, and that enactment be considered at this time. Motion
carried unanimously and the bill was read the second time by council bill nudEr only
Mr. Teague moved seconded by Mrs. Beal that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall
vote. All councilmen present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 16286.
RESOLUTIONS
RESOLUTION NO. 1961 - Annexation, Ansola and Parks was submitted~ See Page 4 of these minutes
for action and discussion.
RESOLUTION NO. 1962 - Approving Arnold Thompson and Associates as consulting firm to negotiate
e work program for Airport Master Plan, approving agreement and authorizing City Manager to execute
said agreement was submitted, and no councilman present requesting it be read in full, was read
by number only.
Mr. Teague moved seconded by ~rs. Beal that the resolution be adopted. Motion carried.
RESOLUTION NO. 1963 - Approvingbllls, claims and progre~s payments, and authorizing payment
was submitted.
I Mr. Teagge moved seconded by Mrs. Beal that the resolution be adopted. Rollcall vote. All councilmen
present voting aye, the motion carried unanimously.
Upon motion duly made, seconded and carried, the meeting was adjourned to August 23, 1971
Ci ty Manager
-I
e
J
e
! 8/9/71 - 13
.011I