New Search
~" <br />`, `~ <br />Administrative OrderslRules <br />- Cover Sheet <br />V <br />Administrative Order Number: ~ ~ '" q ~ '°'a ~ ° •• <br />Originating Department: ~• f3t15, ~ ~ ~~-~ - <br />Deparment Contact: j,~i r(.er'"' <br />Checklist of Signatures: <br />Department Head (if applicable): <br />Date: <br />~~~ City 11~tanager (if applicable): . <br />• Date: <br />Please Forward to . ~ +~.~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~' <br />with Original A ' ' trative `Order : ~~ ` ~'~` ~ <br />;This Administrative order amends the -SDC rates to indude a 2.65% annual inflation increase <br />- -: ro-the City's. SDC. charges, and adjusts the capital costs used to establish the Parks SDC <br />`rate, as directed by City Coundl officers. Revisions were madeao Appendix F, of the <br />Methodologies, the Park System Charge Detail, to indude component costs not reflected in <br />the original analysis.. <br />. The public comment period opened-~'une 20; 1995 and .dosed July 19, 1995. Notification <br />- and infommation about the proposed changes were mailed to appro~amately 338 people <br />identified as potential interested parties. The only writterrcorrnnent received was a few lines, <br />handwritten on the bottom of a facsimile copy of the notification letter we mailed. We were <br />unable t© respond to the comment as it was incorr~lete (cut off) and we received no - <br />cesponse to our request for the comment to be resubmitted in its entirety. <br />In addition to the Public Notice published in the Register Guard on June 20th, we extended <br />invitations to the Chamber of Commerce and the-Lane County Home Builders Assodation <br />and hosted an informational meeting to further explain the changes. Reaction from those <br />attending the July 5th meeting was low key to semi-neutral. <br />We have provided additional infomTation to all individuals requesting, and have contributed to <br />greater understanding of the changes through several phone conversations. <br />