Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/07/1974 Meeting ..--'" -'., :~ ~'::': M I NUT E S EUGENE CITY COUNCIL COUNCIL CHAMBER JANUARY 7, 1974 Adjourned meeting of tqe Common Council of the city of ~uge~e, Oregon - adjourned from the meeting held on December 17, 1973- was called- to order by His Honor Mayor Lester.E. Anderson at 7:30 p.m. on January 7,1974 in the Council Chamber with the following Council members present: Messrs. Williams, Hershner,. McDonald, ,Mmes. Beal and Campbell, and Messrs. Keller, MurrSlY , and Wood. I -Election of Officers, 1974 Councilwoman Beal announced the election of Tom-W,i-lliams as president and James Hershner as vice president of the Counqil for the year 1974. '. Mayor Anderson commented on the responsibilities, <?f~, president of. the. COUn9il . and ex- pressed appreciation to Mrs. Beal for her service in that capacity during the past year. II - Annual Message Mr. ,Anderson read the Mayor's annual message, copy of which is on file in ..'.the Finance Department. III - Public Hearings A. Vacations 1. Easement south of Spr~ngBourevard.and~east from South Ridge Drive (Hirons). 2. Easement between West 24th and 24th Place, east of Madison and west of Jefferson (Ahre & Root) 3. Portion of Satre Street at Parish St~ee~ (City) Recommendation was made to carry public hearing over ,to the January ~8, 1974 Council ~ meeting because of faulty advertising. Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr.' He~shne.r to hold over public hearing on all three vacation requests to thecTanuary 28, 1974 Council meeting. Motion carried unanimously. B. Withdrawal of Willagillespie annexation from Oakway Water District Annexed by Boundary Commission .Final Order ~06 - November 1, 1973 "'"- Public hearing was held with no testimony presented. Council Bill No. 423 - Withdrawing from .Oakway Water District the Willa- gillespie area annexation was read by council bill number and title only, there being no councilman present requesting that it be read in full. :~~- . .~, "- -"-,. ~ Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner that the bill be read the second time by council bill number only, with unanimous consent of the Council, and that enact- ment be considered at this time. .Motion carried unanimously and the bill was read the second time by council bill number only. Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All councilmen present voting aye, the bill was declared ~assed and numbered 16957. C. Rate Increases 1. Taxicab 2. Airport Limousine iTaxicab/Airport Limousine Rates - Copies of report from-Fina~"c~- Departt;;;:;t:- we~e ' !distributed to Council members recorrunending rate increases for Terminal.J. 'Taxi, I ,Yellow Cab, Eugene Taxi, and Airport Limousine Service. Taxi rates recommended j'were 70<; for the f~rst 1./7 m~le plus 10<; for each add~tiona1 1/7 mi1~; (current r~te 70<; for the f~rst 2/5 nrr1e plus 10<; for each add~tiona1 1/5 mile).' Airport jL~mousine rate recommended was $2.00 each way between the. Eugene Hotel and the IA~rport (now $1.75 each way). Manager explained that a review of the companies' I ~ook~ ~ndicated that cost of fu~l plus problems of competition with bus service 'j lJust~f~ed the recommended rate ~ncreases. The recommendation was brought at I I this time, to allow opportuni ty for public input at the next committee meeting and ~ Comm ~~~~l,action at the January 7 Council meeting. . , 1 /19/73 - - ,_. '- .----. ',-, -- . ..,. .::'ub Hrng .............., ......,,> ./ Finance Department recommended the rate change for taxicabs which will represent about an 18% increase in cab companies' revenues. Manager said it was his understanding that without the proposed increase there was very real danger that the cab companies would no longer be able to operate. ~~~---- " T ./- / r--- ./ -... /../1 ~ - ---1/7/74 - 1 ~ ~-JC",,::1 ~ ,- ., , \\., ~,\. Public hearing was opened. Don Bach, 795 Willamette Street, attorney representing the cab companies, said the requested increase was absolutely essential if the cabs were to continue in business. Both companies, he said, were operating at a loss now. Bill Rogers, president of Teamsters Local 57, arriving after adoption of the rate increase, spoke in favor of it. x Public hearing was closed, there being no further testimony. Resolution No. 2244 - Authorizing increase in taxicab rates to 70~ for the first 1/7 mile, 10~ for each additional 1/7 mile was read by number~and title only. ~r. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner to adopt the resolution. Councilman Murray favored the increase in rates, recognizing the vital importance of cabs as a part of the transportation system. However, he wondered whether there should be consideration of direct subsidization for some people who depend on that type of transportation and cannot afford the high rates they may be faced with. Councilwoman Campbell asked why the City set taxi rates. Manager a~swered that it was possibly because of use of city streets as an area for doing business and it w.as a licensing process somewhat equivalent to a franchising process in recognition of its being a type of commercial activity necessary to serve the general public; it also serves to keep rates at a level where the cab companies could stay in business and provide a stable taxi service without the cutthroat competition which could prevail. He added that setting the rates was required by City ordinance, but that was sub- ject to change by the Council. It was brought out that a review of licensing practices of some other cities indicated a large majority do control taxi rates. Vote was taken on the motion to adopt the resolution. Motion carried unanimously. Resolution No. 2245 - Authorizing increase in Airport Limousine rate from $1.75 to $2.00 each way between the Eugene Hotel and the Airport was read by number and title only. Manager explained that an audit review of the company's books revealed that it operated at a loss in 1971 and 1973. Further, the owner was not paying himself for his services. The change to $2.00 each way was recommended. Public hearing was held with no testimony presented. Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner to adopt the resolution. Motion carried unanimously. 3. Garbage Collection .Garbage Rates:";: Ga.rYla~(/ Bt;ariY-"-recommendecrT;]crease---TIi- ba;-Tc -reiad.entTaT- rate- ror _n ,collection of one. 32-gallon can per week from present $2.35 per month to$2~8~: per ~monthto coverincregsed costs. . :Mrs. Beal moved seconded by Mr. Williams to schedule the proposed increase, as well as the ~recommended increase for taxicab rates (December 19 committee) for public Comm hearing, at the January 7 Council meeting., . Motion carried unanimouslY'1L,2/74 Pub Hrng Request was received from garbage collectors through the Garbage Board for increase in collection rates to meet rising costs of operation. Letter from the collectors was read. Staff found the increases requested were in line with rates in other cities as of June 1973. Public hearing was heldwlth no testimony presented. Resolution No. 2246 - Authorizing increase in garbage collection rates - basic residential rate for one 32-gallon can once a week, $2.85 per.month, was read by number arid title only. Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner to adopt the resolution. Councilwoman Beal inquired about provision for picking up small amounts of trash such as yard clippin&s. Manager reviewed the rates for that type of pickup, charged on an 2 1/7 /74 - 2 ~ \.-.!- -."'- ._, -j~.. .. .- _..~ :- ~. _..~ _ -"J .~ !~ I I j I f- .I ~..'_"'-~'-/ - ~ '-~~~~~ . , ....v.;..Jo' " hourly basis, and the restrictions on the type of material and size of loads. Finance Director pointed out that rates included in the resolution, previously distributed to Council members, included only those which were being changed. Councilman McDonald was concerned about the. number of elderly people not accumulat- ing enough trash to fill the standard can picked up weekly. He wondered whether there was provision for twice-a-month collection. Finance Director answered that the Garbage Board felt there was not enough demand to set a rate for that type collection. He pointed out the rate set for once-a-month pickup. Manager added ~ that the Garbage Board probably would .be willing to consider setting a biweekly rate for pickup if the Council so desired. Chair directed staff to convey to the Garbage Board a request for consideration of a biweekly pickup rate. Vote was taken on the motion to adopt the resolution. Motion carried unanimously. D. Liquor License - Grand Central Station; 846 West 2nd Avenue (RMB-Marion Nixon) OLCC poll of neighborhood of the new location for the .former Watergate Tavern, 2000 West 11th. Avenue, revealed 13 objected to the proposal, 5 did not. City staff report indicated no reason to deny endorsement. :a- Public hearing was opened. Speaking against location of the tavern at the proposed location were: Burton Davis, 196 Monroe Street William Havner,: 191 Monroe Street Marion ~arks, 212 Monroe Street None felt a tavern was needed at that location because of condition of the street and deteriorating effect it would have on the neighborhood. They considered the number of taverns in that vicinity too many at the present time. Public hearing was closed, there being no further testimony presented. ~anager.noted one written objection to the .tavern received from Mr. and Mrs. Frank McCullough, 211 Monroe Street. He explained that the building to house the tavern does not at the present time meet necessary conditions and would ~ave to be brought up to code before a certificate of occupancy was issued. He added that there was some indication that the applicant was unwilling to sign an affidavit of nondis- crimination. t.ii . , :.~ Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner to indicate to the OLCC. that the proposed location is not deemed an appropriate site for a tavern under present circumstances. In making the motion Mr. Williams noted that the applicant made no statement in favor of the application, 13 of 18 contacted were opposed to its proposed location, the building was not satisfactory in.its present condition, and there appear~d to be problems with obtaining an affidavit of nondiscriminatioTh.from the applic~pt. Councilman Hershner wondered whether any Council members had looked at the site and whether the property's zone would accommodate that type of business. Manager replied that the Council had not seen the property. There is residential zoning nearby, he said, but zone lines have not been checked to determine whether they are located in the commercial zone in which the proposed tavern would be located. Vote was taken on the motion to give a negative endorsement. Motion carried, all Council members present voting aye, except Councilman Keller abstaining. E. Bids - Parks Department 1. Lighting Shasta Ballfield - Opened January 7, 1974 :/ /j Mulheim's Clarke Electric, Eugene- Morris Electric, Eugene McPheeters Electric, Eugene Hamilton Electric, Eugene Olson Electric, Vancouver Lyford Electric, Eugene Office Estimate $ 35,673.98 36,400.00 41,300.00 41,542.88 45,541.82 No Bid . $ 58, 940 ~ 90 { 1:. 3 1/7 /74 - 3 Award of contract to the low bidder was recommended. Public hearing was held with no testimony presented. Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner to award contract to the low bidder (Mulheim's Clark Electric - $35,673.98). Councilman McDonald wondered why lights were being installed for recreational activities in view of the energy crisis. Manager recommended going ahead with the project even though some curtailment in lighting might become necessary in the future. He said that with the inability to obtain gasoline the City's recreational facilities were experiencing rapidly increasing demands, particularly softball fields. He added that the present energy crisis was expected to be temporary, in terms of years, and the installation proposed would last for many years to come. Also, unnecessary electrical use was being cut in other areas where it would not affect the overall program. Councilwoman Beal wondered whether funds for the installation were included _ in this year's budget and whether it would be practical to postpone the installa- tion until more information was available on the amount of electrical energy it would call for. Councilman Murray noted that the area in which the lighting was proposed was one which had very minimal recreation facilities and he. favored going ahead. He said there was a lot of community interest expressed in this develop- ment and that he thought there were other solutions to the energy crisis. He added that the gasoline shortage seemed to make an even stronger demand for neighborhood recreational facilities within easy walking distance. Councilman Hershner called attention to the seasonal use of the ballfield, that it would be used more during the summer evenings when other demands on electrical energy would not be so great. Rollcall vote was taken on the motion as stated. Motion carried, all councilmen present voting aye. 2. Sewers, Petersen Park - Opened January 4, 1974 Norm Green and Sons Kenneth R. Bostic Construction Co. Devereaux & Pratt, Inc. $ 6,656.00 10,516.00 10,671. 00 Office Estimate $ 6,410.00 Public hearing was held with no testimony presented. Staf~recommended award of contract to the 20W bidder. Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner to award contract to the low bidder (Norm Green and Sons - $6,656.00). Rollcall vote. All councilmen present voting aye, motion carried. ( IV - Consent Calendar Items acted upon with one motion after discussion of individual items if requested. Previously discussed in committee meetings on December 19, 1973 (Present: Mayor Anderson; Council members Beal, Williams, Hershner, Campbell, Keller, Murray, and Wood) and January 2, 1974~(Present: Mayor Anderson; Council members Beal, Williams, Hershner, Campbell, Keller, Murray, and Wood). Minutes of those meetings appear below in italics. A. . . _ d --.-una.ei~-Fasano- iuling-::copie-5~ orproposecrorCiTria.nceadoptTng-ruies-; counc~l proce ure '1 hearings on zone and land use changes were pre- Comm of procedure for conduct of ~olunc~mb rs Discussion was continued from previous 12/19/73 , 'b t d to Counc~ me e . ' 'viously d~str~ u e, in commission members and city Attorn7y with regard to Approve informal me~t~ng w~th Planno guidelines. It was understood redr~ft of the ordinance ~ implementat~on,o~ th~ Fasan l~ be brought back to the Council for adoption. containing mod~f~cat~ons wou B, . 0 ram _ Copies of a proposed three-year contract between ,contract, Reg~o~al Sewer Pr g previously distributed to Council members. , f Id and Lane County were , . . Eugene, Spr~ng ~e, 'a 'oint cities/county comm~ss~on (Metro~l~tan Sewer The contract ~ou~d establ~sh 0 Juniform operating policies and financ~ng plan for Advisory comm~ss~o~) ~o deve~ ~n service area. Lane County, Springfield, and the . sewerage serv~ce w~th~n the ur t Springfield utility Board have approved the contrac . . 't nt of two nonmembers of councils to the com- B 1 asked about appo~n me Councilwoman ea , t ld be staff people and wh$ther they,sftould . mission - whether those. appcnn ees wou , . ..iI 1 "_. 4:\ 1/7/74 - 4 ..-~ ,~_..... "l,~o , !1- ---. ", ;". / .: 1&--,' ,. . ;;-J , . .J> i have planning expertise.. Mayor Anderson replied that the te~ "no~ember" was mis- ! ! leading. The intent was that the two "nonmembers" would b fo th . e lay people. Qualifications) : r e appo~ntees would be determined by the respective Councils. !Mrs. Real asked how the expense would be met for the c t 1 th '. en ra office proposed for 1 e,comm~ss~on. Councilman Hershner, member of the regional sewer committee pro- lpos~ng the contract, answered that expense of the commission was to b d tween E S. f' e prorate be- : ugene, pn~g ~eld, and Lane County. He added that Springfield peo le had Iq~:lms about crea:~ng another governmental structure, however the inteilt w~s to pro- v~ e a cent~al po~nt ~nd a designated person to whom inquiries and comments could be ! addressed w~t~out hanng to deal with each. agency separately. It was thought some jstaff person ~n one of the governmental units would be delegated that responsibility. 'Mrs. Beal then referred to the provision for hearings to be conducted by the com- 'mission and noted there was no provision for appeal from a commission d ' . ;s~e wonde~ed too whether in the event'of an individual complaint regard;~~s~~~~rty , t e Counc~l would be bound by procedures under the Fasano ruling. Manager replied. .!.~a.t...._t:..~e....!'.asano procedures would .119_~~aRl!~_'!...._since . this woul~ !!.~~.!!.:_land-use type hearin~'J .. .. .... .." '. .... ...... ..'...... .. .. _ "'_. ,. .. ", r..".,.." .:" '::'~'"-'""-~' " jt~as explained that for the individual there is'tne same relationship between :this commission and the Council as exists between the Planning Commission and lCouncil. Two public meetings and two public hearings are held which should give 'adequate protection to the individual against an arbitrary decision. The next step iwould be a court challenge. . Mrs. Beal asked about the type of financial plans to be adopted. Public Works ,Director answered that the contract under discussion would not in itself provide for adoption of any specific financial plan. The contract is an interim agreement to provide for co-ordination in the formulation of plans and policies having to do with a unified regional sewer service. Until regional sewerage regulations are adopted each council will act on recommendations from the commission, and the regular budgeting procedure will be followed. In answer to Mrs. Beal's question about the signature line for chairman of the Springfield Utility Board, Manager replied that approval of the Board is required since it is responsible for Springfield's sewerage treatment; the city of Springfield itself is responsible only for sewer lines. .. ;Councilwoman Campbell asked whether creation of the Advisory Commission would at Bome future time put the cities "out of the sewer business," and if bonds were to be issued how they would be handled. Manager-explained the intent was to provide regional sewer service by the cities through contractual arrangement rather than creating another agency such as a metropolitan sewer district. Lane County could !create a county service district for financing purposes only, and that district coul~ i~pbmit issues to people living within the district. However, it would seem less lcumbersome for the two cities to join together in submitting one bond issue to voters. ~in a single election, the majority to prevail. Manager added that a proposed statute \ ).which would allow that type of bond election is being submitted to the Legislature, Land there is understanding that it would be introduced at the special session. I:" _ _..___~ '.. , ,.,. .. j ~',..-.. - . Icouncilwoman Beal asked whether a bond issue would be prorated on the same basis las provided in the contract for other expenses. She wonder~d too whether areas I Iwanting sewerage service would have to be annexed. She felt it would be unfair to juse Eugene and Springfield bonding capacities to provide service to areas outside Ithe two cities' limits. Public Works Director explained that there is no plan at ithis time for financial arrangements. The purpose of the contract is to set up the [Commission which will make r~Q9mmendations to the several agencies in that respect. ;Councilman Hershner said t~t extension of services to unincorporated areas is one 'of the problems to be faced by the commission. Contractual arrangement is one I' al terna ti ve and it is assumed charges under a contract, wouLd be adfl(JuC!t~.~ cover cost of the extension. - -. _ ' j I _\ Icouncilwoman Campbell asked what the status of the current policy not to extend lsewer service beyond the urban service boundaries would be under the contract. :Councilman Hershner answered that there would be no change. Public Works Director [stressed the importance of recognizing the main points not covered by the agreement iunder discussion. It would. not resolve the present Santa Clara/River Road problem, :nor does it change the present policy calling for annexation in order to havefsewer;- ,service. Neither does it adopt the Bartle Wells report as a financial plan. One !of the main charges to the commission would be to make recommendations on the type I .1 of financial plan to follow. He added that the contract does not change the status i of the East Bank Trunk, nor does it bind the two cities to providing sewer service lin the urban service area. Details of all those situations are to be worked out-; by the proposed cOIr1I!!!ssion. _ Mayor Anderso~ said the contract in reality wou~den=-___J L-._.___~~~___ '. L s 1/7/74 - 5 able- "1mpleimtimtatlon- - of the-~Bartle Weilsre[XJrt'iii; --weITas.--EheDMJM-repor"Eauthor ized by LCOG several years ago. He suggested that new Council members might be interested : in that report for background information leading to the present proposal. .Mrs. Beal moved seconded by Mr. Williams to approve the contract. (unanimously. I Motion carried , Comm l2/ll9/73 AJiprove 'c.:~.., -~' !Councilman Keller, member of the regional sewer committee, commended staff people :who worked with the committee during its deliberations - Public Works Director and (Assistant Director - Don Allen and. Don Gilman. Mayor And~rson expressed apprecia- ttion to Councilmen Hershner and Keller as members of the committee. He also recog- :nized the efforts of the committee's chairman, Leonard Clearwater, Springfield councilman. c. tAppeal, Planning Commission Denial of Rezoning, 2590 pioneer Pike - Planning Com- [mission on December 4, 1973 denied D. A.Larkins' petition to rezone property at ; 2590 pioneer Pike from R-l toRP. Mr. Larkins filed written notice of appeal on December 13, 1973. . Hr. williams llOved seconded by Nr. Wood to set public hearing",on the appeal for iJaT}tjary 28, 1974 Council meeting. Hotion carried unanimously. Comm 12/19/73 Approve I ;/ /" -_..- .__._-~.....- -- ..,." .-.. D. ~Appointments, Budget Commi ttee - counciifJoman Beai' rec6mfuend~ii reappointment of Lee Penny, 2355 Birch Lane, and Councilman Keller recommended appointment of . ~Myron T. Bagley, 2222 willamette Street, as members of the Budget Committee for; terms ending December 31, 1976. I ! .~ :Mrs. Beal moved seconded by Mr. Wood to make the appointments as recommended. ;Motion carried unanimously. / Comm 12/19/73 Approve E. Budget Commi ~tee Appointment - Councilman Murray moved seconded by Councilwoman Beal tO~Ppol.nt Robert Napier, 908 Adams Street, to the Budget Committee for the term,endl.ng December 31, 1976 (replacing Bruce McCracken). Motion carried . .E..nanl.mousl y. 7 I I / Comm. 1/2/74 Approve F. Charter Amendment, Alley Assessment policy ~-Copies-of-resolution were previOUSly furnished Council members which would submit to the voters an amendment to the City Charter which will remove from the Charter front footage as a basis for calculating; ,alley assessments and allow adoption by ordinance of a new assessment formula for. ialley paving. The Council subcommittee (Beal, Hershner, Bradshaw) proposing the :Charter amendment indicated it would recommend that zoning districts be included as . a factor in calculating assessments for alley paving if the voters approve the amendment. :Manager explained that it should be recognized that if an ordinance is adopted as 1 proposed a substantially greater charge will be assessed against multiple-family ; properties wi th access from alleys to parking areas. Therefore, in cases. of more i heavily used alleys not being maintained, the Council may be faced with initiation : of improvement projects because of probable reluctance on the part of rental or : qommercial property owners to petition paving in view of the increased cost. .- : Mrs. Beal moved seconded by Mr. Williams to adopt the resolution submitting proposed i, Charter amendment to the voters. Comm 1'/2/74 In making the motion Mrs. Beal explained that the amendment does not bind the City A~prove to any specific method of assessment for alley improvement. It would only delete . the Charter provision that front footage of abutting properties shall be the . basis for calculating alley assessments, thereby giving the opportunity to relieve : some of the cost against single-family properties for alley'improvement when that rimprovement is primarily for the benefit of apartment or commercial uses. / \Manager explained staff concerns about changing assessment policy, recognizing ~. council's concerns about inequi tabili ty of the present method. Sta.ff feels that ;Changing policy on only alley assessments could raise questions about the policy on street assessments which is felt to be supportable on the basis of past legal :action and the many assessments processed by the Council. Staff is reluctant to , isee method of ass~ssment set by ordinance since it could result in frequent changes :made in response to frequent apparent inequities, whereas the present Charter pro- :vision has been acceptably fair over a period of many years. Manager added that the :subcommittee proposal does meet the Council's concerns and the City Attorney has ex~i pressed the opinion that the hazard of jeopardizing the street paving assessment ~ iprocess is not one which need stan~ i~ the way of proceeding with the amendment. .-.~~~O \ -,D b 1/7/74 - 6 ..~. .,-.~ ~ , - , \ \ : Councilman Murray thought the general direction of the proposal was to open the "\ jassessment ,process to give more latitude. He said the subcommittee had proposed : land use as one factor on which to base assessments which could be discussed if ( 'the amendment is approved. He wondered whether the subcommittee had taken into \ : consideration street assessment policy which the Council had referred to it since \ ' the original charge to study alley aSSessments. Councilwoman Beal answered that :it was Orval Etter's opinion (City Attorney!s office) that there was doubt about ' I the constitutionality of the present Charter provision for assessments because of .~ : inadequate definition of the term "benefit." For that reason he felt streets . ishould not be included in the ch'!-nge. Mrs. Beal said she thought street assessment : policy should be included but that the balance of the subcommittee felt the proposed amendment should 'be limited to alleys since that was the original charge. I Councilman Willia;"s wair.conceriied about the possible inequJ:ty .between assessm~~ts !against commercial properties and rental properties under the proposed change. ;He also expressed concern about going to the voters for approval of a change of /policy without a specific proposal for calculating assessments in the future. . Manag7r read that portion of the Attorney's memo referring to different mode of I.assessment for alley and street improvement should the change be adopted. He said 'there is justification for differentiation since generally a street serves the en- jtire public. It is assumed that all properties at some time will abut a paved street and will have paid its share. Alleys generally Serve a limited amount ofo I the public and are of benefit more directly to the abutting properties than to the I : general public. City Attorney Johnson added that there is no serious constitutional.' 'question with the present Charter provision. The present method of assessment has been approved by the Oregon Supreme Court in recent years. ,In answer to Councilman Murray's request for some indication of why the subcommittee :decided not to recommend a change in street assessment policy also, Councilman 'Hershner said the Council had voiced real concern about inequi ty of alley assess.;.... .ments in .specific instances. The subcommittee found the front.footage basis was .locked into the Charter,and nothing could be done about changing it without the :proposed deletion of that restriction. The committee proposed going ahead'knowing lit had been charged now.with looking into street assessment policy. There seemed 'more .of an urgency on alley assessments because of newassessments~~mi~g along _ . i;';h~;e- .tii~r~- p~obably againwo~ld bei~equi t:ies . ina.sse~~i~g single-family prope;-~ ',Ities the same amJunt as mul tiple-family properti eS having access to allel./s. :Assistant Manager added that al though the question of street ass.essment policy was !raised in subcommittee, it was decided to respond to the first charge of givinlJ a irecommendation on alleys on.ly. Meetings are now being scheduled at which the sub- Icommittee will address the question of street assessments. Mrs. Beal said sne ;felt streets should have been included in the Charter amendmen~ to give an Oppor- . [tunity to consider the entire assessment picture without having to go through the election process a second time. .....1 .1 ,-.- .Councilman Keller felt it would be a waste of time to present theproj?osed Charter iamendment to the voters without at the same time giving them a specific proposal on ia method of assessment. Councilman Wood felt public hearings when consideration was ! given to an ordinance setting the assessment method would provide that information 'to the public. He was not opposed to flexibili ty which would be allo..,.ed by the iCharter amendment in determining alley assessments, but he was opposeci to inclusion iof streets. He asked whether there was knowledge or alternate method~i used~by other :cities. Manager described some methods used ,by other citie!!! but saiei' the main . thrust was to amend the Charter so the Council-could consiaer-methqqs .other than jfront footage basis for alley assessments. I " C.ouncilwoman Campbell asked whether the funds set aside to permit defErral of :assessments in hardship cases were being used, and whether people werE being ad- vised that, the funds were available. Finance Director answered that c document setting up the program and eligibility standards would be ready for Ccuncil con~ JSideration soon. He added that no assessments had been levied since the funds Were appropriated. i~ouncilwoman Beal asked whether it is contemplated that interest on a~sessment de- !ferrals would be compounded. Finance Director answered. that a number ,of methods : will be offered for Council consideration. Councilwoman Campbell com/dented that I the point at this time was to remOVe the restriction from the Charter to allow I flexibility in making assessments for alley improvements; street asse~sment policy I ,would be considered eventually. . Councilwoman Beal said it wa.s her understanding the model cities charter did not .,have the type of assessment restriction contained in. Eugene's charter" that . . .. d j'.he value or! . genf!rally assessments are handled.,through o1;'d~~a~ce...She recog~_:e " .__.:.,....____-' 1....-. - <- ~ _ ~ _______--.::.________.___.____ .~_.__..___.__..._.__._ ___ _ _. ..-..., __._-,-l.-.-.-~'~ _ _ , ~, " 1/7/74 ~ 7 :-certidii ~Ch7:Jrter prov~slons, such .as- That for- nimonst.rance, .-~but--fei t the front--- .:footage basis for assessment was unusual and not necessary in the Charter. She . repeated her concern with the inequity of the present method of alley assessment, I . . saying the subcommittee was asked to make recommendations in that regard. The ,proposal at this time therefore was to remove .the assessment method from the Charter. By so doing future consideration can 'be given to the most equitable . method for calculating assessments. There is no request for change in policy at r this time although there is a proposed schedule, she said, which can be discussed , in public hearing if the amendment is approved by the voters. ~ _'-I"" Councilman Hershner said the subcommittee had proceeded on the assumption that ; method of assessment would better be in ordinance form than a Charter. provision. He hesitated to submit a proposal to the voters without complete Council agreement. He said he had considered the deletion as a housekeeping measure (as it had been referred to) and that he wou.ld not like to go to the voters with the proposal if it was a controversial issue in the Council. Councilman Keller wondered whether 1 Council members would be able to answer voters' questions with regard to the methods' , of assessment to be considered if they are asked .to apprqve that flexibility. : Councilman Williams doubted whether assessing multiple-family properties a larger : portion of alley improvement costs was the proper direction since in his view it fin effect would be assessment because of greater income and subsidization of : lower density kinds of land uses. He thought the assessment deferral program a better way to aid hardship cases. Mrs. Beal took exception to the question of 'subsidization, saying the City is now subsidizing all types of new housing in the installation of any public facility such as sewers, streets, intersections, and the provision of fire and police protection. She argued that single-family prop- erties abutting an alley across from apartments should not be subsidizing. those apartments. . _/-----.~.~-=---~- _____ _..._ ______ ._r _ _" ._.._. _.~ ,.,..j__."-....,,_~ .._~.- ..Councilman Murray had no reservations about taking the proposed amendment to the voters, saying the present method is clearly inequitable and should be changed, although he would prefer unanimous Council action. He saw no intended or accidental secrecy about what could be substituted for the front footage basis of assessment even though the ordinance/under discussion proposing alternate methods had not been distributed. Councilma~ Hershner recalled that when the alley assessment procedure ,was referred to the s6bcommittee there was no controversy - it was a matter only ;of feeling that the/,present method was inequitable. He felt a routine matter was now being turned into an issue. - Mayor Anderson pointed out that the Council should recognize the voters will have ! to be shown actual goals of the city's assessment policy - that of making assess..:...." :ments more equitable in hardship cases - by citing specific cases in past assess~ !.ments. The voters will also have to be informed about the deferral fund set ~p ...' \for hardship cases. Explanation of more facts with regard to the assessment prQ~ : :~gram will have to be brought out, he said, if the measure is to gain voter ,;,apptc>vaL 'Mrs. Beal noted the length of time alley assessment policy had been under ~i~cu~sion ~and the staff's reluctance to make any change in view of workability of the #f~sent !method. She stressed the fact that the proposed amendment would not make any change in any assessment policy at this time. Mayor Anderson made it clear that he was ;speaking neither in opposition nor in favor of the proposal, that he was only point- .ing out that he thought the Council would be faced with a situation similar to the :election on Council compensation when a. specific proposal and sufficient information ,were not presented to the voters. lCouncilman Murray felt it unfortuante that the proposal was discussed as a hardship !relieving measure. He saw it as a much broader issue, principally one of fairness fin applying costs for alley improvements in relation to use, not in relation to income of the property owner. f. . - I.Councilman Keller wondered if there would be I.to Council members. Mayor Anderson answered ,input at the formal Council meeting. ..-~' , & Vote was taken on the T[1otion to adopt the proposed resolution.- _Motion carried, Councilmen Beal, Hershner, Campbell, Murray, and Wood voting aye; Councilmen Williams and Keller voting no. ~ --=-_.. ._~_'>-__ ~. _ ........_._~:-~_:.~_ ~= --=--~__L-:-_~ __ _______ . I'Distribution, South Hills 'Study:" Copies of prelim1.nary'-report- on -lhfi South HiDs G. study were d' t .b t d t ' :, _ ~s r~ u e 0 Counc~l members. Councilwoman Campbell, dhairman of the ;Jo~n~ Parks Co~~ttee, ask~d the Council for adoption of a resolution (copies Iprev~ously furn~shed Counc~l members) which would extend th l' 't t.'.... d 1 , t' , . e ~m~ a ~On on eve op- .men ~n the S~uth H~lls area to April 1, 1974 to allow ti~e for -public hearings ~n the study. ,J~m Sa~l, study co-ordinator, outlined contents of the preliminary re-' : port and .sa~d heanngs. are scheduled before the Joint ~!lrks Corr.r.ni ttc:~ .iJ~d Planning. ~ _ { any change in the resolution distributed/ that that would be determined by public I i /1 ,/'/ .'~ ~ 1/7/74 - 8 J 'Commission during January and Februarr;; after which a final report will be submitted, to the Council. The proposed resolution, he said, would extend the requirententfor ,PUD procedures in the ridge line and density limitations of six units peracr~ while ' the hearings are being conducted. ., Reports of both the Parks Commi ttee and Pla.t:zhihg I 'Commission are to be submitted no later than April 1,1974. I I Mrs. Campbell moved seconded by Mr. Murray to adopt the resolution as submitted. I. 'Mrs. Campbell praised the report, saying the recommendations therein are clearly r spelled out. She said it would provide Council members with the necessary back- j ground information for answering questions and to maintain a pOlicy consistent wi th : that of the original community goals. Hearings are sched~led for January 17 at .the , ,Spencer Butte School, and January 22 at the Crest Drive School. .,.---" , .-- ~. . ,Mayor Anderson expressed the hope that the deadline of April 1 would be firm. - Vq_~e was taken on the motion. toadqpt the resolution. - Motion carried unaniI(lOusl,y:u ., - . .-.~--~-.--,.--,,--~ ~-~....~..,.._,-_. -._,. .J...~. ,'. -.. ..", ---..,. ....... _..~~,~. n ...... . _, '< . '_, _ :__..J'':''-''H~_ ,:;--:"'M' _"."_ . ._ "'. ...,. . I I . : Comm 11/2/74 I Ap,prove Councilwoman Campbell called attention to an article in the Register-Guard in error with regard to the period of time proposed for extension of restrictions in the South Hills. Manager said the error had been corrected to read to April 1,.1974 in a subsequent issue. Comm 1/2/74 Approve I.,Amendment, Free Parking District Ordinances - Provision that employers furnish the I Ci ty wi th license numbers of their employes' cars has proven impractical. Downtown I D~velopment Board recommends that employers be required to keep the C~ty suppl~e~~_ , w~ th ,::urrent list of employes' names. Staff recommends adoption of ordinance,-.. . __ ....J Comm IWhich would achieve the change and delete the license numbei.r~quirement. It was /1/2/74. : understood the ordinance would be presented for consideration at the January 7 1Pprove iCouncil meeting. I / J.: Amendment, Net Revenues 10th and Oak Overpark - Copies of proposed ordinance were f : previously distributed to Council members which would provide clarification of : the method of calculation of net revenues of the 10th and Oak parking structure { as they apply to credit against assessments. It would delete consideration of ' "depreciation" as a factor in calculating net revenues. It waD understood the I o~9.~_1!...a.?'?!:._~?111.~.~.:~=,~-:~~!:~ for considerCition at the January 7 Council meeting. J ......., .,-"P' -"'_'_',""H" -r" -- . - ......._.__~.,...._..~_.,.....,..... ___ ._.....__ __._..,.._.._..~....._" K. DA Liquor License - Merle's Hide-a-way, 796 Highway 99N - Change of ownership I: H : P t 't' . -. " e ~ ~on, Pav~ng Golden Gardens Street from Barger Drive to Jessen Street, owners of .52.9% of properties to be assessed. Mr. Williams moved seconded ; Mr. Wood to approve the petition. Motion carried unanimously. signed by. by e'- 'L. Committee on Mall Commercial Activities - Mayor Anderson asked Councilmen Beal and Keller to attend a meeting of the Mail Commercial Activities Committee with -the.iEugene Downtown Association, tentatively scheduled for January 8, 1974. M. Election, Council Officers, 1974 - Council members agreed to elect officers for the year 1974 in executive session at 7:00 p.m., January 7, 1974, in the Mayor's office. .' N ./ Int~rsection, ,30th and Aga te ,- Some ti"me back peti tlon was received from Oak HillS'.. Ires~dents ask~ng that stop s~gns, an overpass, or traffic signals be placed for :control of 30th Avenue traffic at Agate Street. Since 30th Avenue at that location lis a County road, staff reported at that time on the proposed County project to 'widen 30th Avenue to four lanes with provision for a left-turn lane at Agate. Also prOPOsed was improved sight clearance by moving the intersection farther to the east. 'The Oak Hills Homeowners Association traffic committee was not satisfied with the ~J -~;~~t~ proP6sal and asked Council consideration of their concerns. Copies .of memo ifrom Traffic Engineer were previously distributed to Council stating (1) City staff' ragreement with the County's proposal, (2) there appears to be no justification at this time for traffic signal installation, and (3) should there b~ signalization .in the future it would be the County's responsibility. ..:f.1anager said serious study should be given any traffic signai before installation \at the 30th and Agate intersection because of interference with traffic flow of , '. . ,:."the major arterial. Staff would prefer observation of traffic movement after 'completionof the County project before commitment of pUblic funds to a $20 to 1 '$25,000 investmen.t in signals. He noted that Council had viewed the intersection (~n tour, anp that another route was available for drivers who feel the inte~section' ,1.S unsafe. ~~ 1'.A-. dra,,:,ing of the changes to the intersection proposed by the County was displayed ,:With explanation of the channelization. Traffic Engin/?er said a merging lane was "not pr,o'vided for., since the di viders :were paihted. NEU ther. we:se tbere"counts on the nii.lnber of cars using that inte.Z;pectio]l. ,.' '._ . . , ..........-f-'-_.~._._~;..;....- _"",:- ____._." ~ ~.-"'~- -~-~. .. ~ 1/7/74 - 9 . Comm 1/2/74 Approve Approve Comm j2/l9/73 Affirm .Comm 1/2i74 Afn/rm \ I;.. I I \ \ . _.__..~_-.-!'__. Mrs. John Ruddy, 3614 Agate Street, said that County studies indicated 100 ca~s an hour were passing through the intersection, and the average speed on 30th Avenue was 58 mph. She added that residents of the area felt the County project was not the 'ideal solution and that it was a City responsibility. She wondered whether something could be done to make the 32nd and Hilyard intersection more efficient if that was the route which was to be used for people avoiding the 30th and Agate intersection. _--..A....... ~ In answer to questions from the Council, Traffic Engineer said he had no knowledge 'of the type of traffic count the County conducted to arrive at the 100 cars per :hour. Assuming it was an approach count, he said, there were many intersections in the city with higher volumes needing signalization for which no funds were available. : 1 . There being no opposition, the Chair ruled the matter deferred ',information wi th regard to the County's traffic count and wi th 'Q~,iI}lf!rovement Qf _ the 32nd and Hilyard intersection. Comm . 1/2/74 unt~l sta.ff brought .ff' d ... P .... A ~rm regar tu oss~b~l~ty , .{,.:/-!;-.'/. Copies:i."6f report on traffic volumes through the 30th and Agate and the 32nd and Hilyard intersections were distributed with agenda to Council members. Traffic Engineer reviewed results of the studies and said there was nothing to indicate any more substantial problem as it relates to delay times than is experienced on other arterials in Eugene. There was no change in staff's opinion that the County proposal for modification of the 30th and Agate intersection was acceptable. Mrs. Ruddy wondered whether the studies took into account the class changes at Lane Com- munity College resulting in "peak" hours about every hour of the day. TrafficEngineer answered that peak hours considered for delay times were 7:00 to 9:00 ~.m. and 4:00 to 6:00 p.m. which were judged the periods of heaviest travel.on 30th. He agreed there could be delays because of peaks occurring upon class changes. -8 O. ~CaiiIe TV Rates; APar-tinents--=- Monthly charge for apartment cable TV service here- !tofore has been a pooled rate to apartment buildings and included in individual apartment monthly rental charge. . Teleprompter TV is now billing each apartment individually; however apartment owners are not deducting the charge from the rent for individual partments. Councilwoman Campbell asked whether this situation would come under the City's franchise jurisdiction inasmuch as it constituted a rate increase for the TV service. --, Comm i 2/'19/Z3 1 File Manager replied that staff is aware of the situation and that the city Attorney's .office had been asked to determine whether there is a violation of rent setting authority. An opinion will be ready in the near future. P. ,Joint City/SchooL Committee - Councilman Wood reported on the joint city/school Comm ,committee appointed to consider concerns of the School District with regard to ~2/l9/73 ~areas subjected to large increases of school children. He said the LCOG Committee: --File on Education has been asked to define the purpose of the committee and report back)_ to the respective governmental agencies. :. Q. ~All.";;;;;.A-~~~ssment Policy - Manager said a resolution proposing a Charter amendment -: with regard to method of assessing for alley improvements would be brought to the Corom ;January 2 committee, formal action to be taken at the January 7 Council meeting. ~2/l9/73 ! One change 'Nas to be made in wording which would have no effect on the recommended) File ';'policy itself. R. Land Use Legislation, Submission of Plan - In answer to Councilman Murray, Plan- ning Director said the 1990 General Plan had been submitted to fulfill require- ments of recent land use legislation calling for submission to county governments . cities' plans for citizen participation in land use planning. Comm 1/2/74 File Councilman Murray noted there was some confusion with regard to the citizen participation plans to be submitted to counties under recent State land use legislation. He asked for further clarification. Planning Director said that County indicated they are working with LCOG in setting up a citizen participation element as reported by the ,League of Oregon Cities. He added that the 1990 Plan does comply with requirements of the legislation at this time and is considered adequate until guidelines and goals are set up by the State. Councilman Murray wondered whether LCOG's work would include elements aside from the 1990 Plan which would affect citizen participation in Eugene~ He asked that the City's representatives in LCOG keep the Council informed as the citizen participation plans were worked out. Mayor Anderson said he would take the matter up with LCOG at the first opportunity. ~ -.-;. \0 1/7/74 - 10 ~ a- _c. _r- t ,_. , S.Register-Guard Representation - Mayor Anderson recognized the presence of . Don Floyd, Register-Guard reporter, who will be replacing Ed Kenyon in covering City Hall. Mr. Kenyon has been assigned to a special investigative writing team for the paper. . J Corom . 1/2/74 File T. : Law Suitsre: Sign Code - City- Attorney Art Johnson reported that the validity of : ; t~e . Denver, Colorado sig~ code was upheld by the Circui t Court of Appeals, thereby': ,~~v~ng str;ngt~ to the c~ty of Eugene's defense in cases recently filed 'challeng- ' ~ng Eugene s s~gn code. He also reported that a show cause hearing is set for Corom .January 14 on the original suit brought by {3everal plaintiffs. At that hearing 1/2/74 :consider~tion was to be given to whether the ordinance would be stayed pending File ,outcome of the Colorado case. The second suit, filed by Pape Bros., also Ichallenges the validi ty of the sign code and motion in that .case will be filed jlater this week. . __I -..' ~~ . '........~. - -----------..- .... . Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner to approve, affirm, and file as noted' items A through T. Rollcall vote. Motion carried, all councilmen present voting aye. iRMB LiquOrL~Ce~se, Grand Central Station, 846 West 2nd Avenue (MarionP. Nixon) _ ,GLCC report ~nd~cates that of those contacted 13 owners of properties near the Iproposed location object, three do not object. .In view of the neighborhood interest Corom :public hearing was suggested. ' 12/19/73 Pub Hrng I Mrs. Beal moved seconded by Mr. Williams to set public hearing on the license appli- ~.~~!..~.~!!_.!...or..~~~_~~.::~~.?, 1974 Council meeting. Motion carried unanimously. ... ---.-.. .--.-..... .-...... ~..._,. .-.. . ..-.-...- .. .... ....-...-,.,. .,_..._--.1 v - Adoption of findings of fact - Denial of appeal of Robert Meltebeke for use of property at 2136 Rocky Lane for storage of building construction materials Denial of Zoning Board of Appeal for use of property at 2136 Rocky Lane for storage of building construction materials was upheld by the Council on November 26, 1973. Final action was to include findings of fact upon which the Council based its decision. Copies of the findings were distributed to Council members with recommendation that they be adopted. Councilman Hershner asked whether. Mr. Meltebeke had been advised the findings would be consider'ed at this meeting. It was learned that the item had been discussed with Mr. Meltebeke through the Public Works Department and that he was aware it was on the agenda. Councilwoman Beal wondered whether it would be better to postpone action, saying she wasn't sure proper procedures had been followed. Stan Long,. city attorney's office, said there was no anticipation that the Council would entertain additional testimony; that Mr. Meltebeke's presence would seem only to serve the purpose of answering questions. In legal practice; he said, there would not be that opportun~ty. Councilwoman Beal asked whether she was obligated to vote with the majority of the Council on adoption of the findings of fact in view of her having voted against the decision to deny the appeal. Or whether .inabstaining reasons for so doing would have .to be given. "Mayor Anderson replied that an affirmative vote on adoption of the findings would s~em in order if one agreed with them, but that he felt if one abstained and was challenged by another member of the Council then there would be an obligation to give the reason. Councilman Williams commented that the action to deny the appeal when the issue was previously considered included the instruction for staff to prepare findings of fact for adoption by the Council. Consideration of those findings at this meeting was in. conformance with that action; there was no change in the decision, he said. Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner to adopt by reference thereto findings of fact as presented by staff. Motion carried, Councilmen Williams, McDonald, Campbell, Keller, Murray, and Wood voting aye; Councilmen Hershner and Beal voting no. \~, Copies or the findings of fact are on file in the Finance, Planning and Public Works-Building Division-Departments. VI - Ordinances Council Bill No. 424 - Adopting rules of procedure for conduct of quasi-judicial hearings was submitted and read by council bill number and title only, there being no councilman present requesting that it be read in full. \\ 1/7/74 - 11 Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner that the bill be read the second time by council bill number only, with unanimous consent of the Council, and that' _; __ _ -... be considered at this time. Motion carried unanimously and the bill was read the second time by council bill number only. Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All councilmen present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 16958. ~ Council Bill No: 425 - Amending Sections 5.233 and 5.990 of City Code re:. Downtown. Free Parking, requiring current lists of employes names rather than auto license numbers, was submitted and read by council bill number and title only, there being no councilman.l'>resentrequesting that it be read in full. Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner that the bill be read the second time by council bill number onlY2 with unanimous consent of the Council, and that enactment be considered at this time. Motion carrled unanimously and the bill was read the second time by council bill number only. Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner that the bill be approved and given ~inal passage. Roll call vote. All councilmen present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 16959. Council Bill No. 426 - Amrending Sections 7.540 and 7.545 .and adding Section 7..541 to Cit0 Code re: Method of calculation of net revenues of 10th and Oak Overpark as .they apply to credit against assessments; deletes consideration of "depreciation" as factor in calculating net revenues was submitted and read by council bill number and title only, there being no councilman present requesting that it be read in full. -~ Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner 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 number only. Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner that the bill be approved and given final passage. call vote. All councilmen present voting aye, the bill was declared passed anq numbered 16960. Council Bill No. 427 - Amending Se~tions 4.105 and 4.190 of City Code re: Alcoholic beverages in picnic areas of City parks was submitted and read by council bill number and title only, there being no councilman present requesting that it be read in full. Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner 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 number only. Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All councilmen present voting aye, except Councilmen Hershner and McDonald voting no, the bill was declared passed and numbered 16961. Council Bill No. 428 -Paving Golden Gardens Street from Barger Drive to ,Jessen Drive was submitted and read by council bill number a~d title only., there being no counctlman present re- questing that it be read in full. .,. Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner 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 thi~ time. Motion carried unanimously and the bill was read the second time by council bill number only. . J' . Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner that the bill be appro~ed and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All councilmen present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 16962 . Council Bill No. 429 - Adopting plans and specifications for paving Golden Gardens Street from Barger Drive to Jessen Drive was submitted and read by council bill number and title only, there being no councilman present requesting that it be 'read in full. Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner 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 number only. Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All councilmen present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 16963. .. VII - Resolutions Resolution No. 2247 - Submitting to'-voters Charter amendment deleting front footage as basis for calculating alley assessments was submitted and read by number and title. Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner to adopt the resolution. Rollcall vote. Motion car- ried, all councilmen present voting aye, except Mr. Williams and Mr. Keller voting no. ,1. Resolution No. 2248 - Extending requirement for PUD procedures and six-units-per-acre density limitation in South Hills area to April 1, 1974 was submitted and read by nubmer and title. . Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner to adopt the resolution. Rollcall vote. Motion carried unanimously, all councilmen present voting aye. Resolution No. 2249 - Authorizing payment of bills, claims, and progress payments for period December 17, 1973 through January 7, 1974 was submitted and read by number and title. Mr. Williams mov~dseconded by Mr. Hershner to adopt the resolution. Rollcall vote. Motion carried unanimously, all ~ouncilmen present voting aye. VIII - Liquor License- Moose Lodge, 168.5 West 13th Avenue (DB) R~quested for change of location to, new building at same address. Council was asked to consider approval, subject to affirmative report from the Police Depart- ment., OLCC report not required. Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner to recommend approval of the kpplication, subject to affirmative report from the Police Department. Motion carried unanimously. a Upon motion duly made, seconded, and carried, the meeting was adjourned to Monday, January 28, 1974. -'~"">.. '" c.' ~p:?/t ugh McKinley City Manager '- -- ..--. -. -,- I'!> ""