New Search
<br /> _ <br /> x1'~ . <br /> ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO. 58-97-09-F <br /> of the <br /> City Manager of the City of Eugene <br /> CONSTRUCTION WITHIN AND USE OF <br /> ABLISHING <br /> ST <br /> THE PUBLIC WAY PERMIT FEES, AMENDMENT OF <br /> RIG T-OF-WAY USE PERMIT FEE SCHEDULE, AND REPEALING <br /> ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO. 58-96-13-F. - <br /> The Ci Manager of the City of Eugene finds as follows: <br /> A. ections 2.020 and 7.300 of the Eugene Code, 1971 authorize the City Manager <br /> to determine a d set fees and charges to be imposed by the City for services, goods, use of <br /> mujnicipal prop rty, licenses and permits. Section 7.300 of the Eugene Code, 1971, which was <br /> recjently amend d, specifically authorizes the City Manager to establish fees for implementation <br /> of the City's p ogram for construction within and use of the public way. <br /> B. rsuant to those provisions, on June 5, 1997 I issued Administrative Order No. <br /> 58-~97-09 prop sing an amendment to the' schedule of fees attached as Exhibit A to Administrative <br /> Order No. 58- 6-13-F to increase excavation permit fees and add new right-of--way cut permit fees <br /> for constructio within and use of the public way, as set forth in Exhibit A thereto. <br /> C. opies of the Notice were provided to the Mayor and City Councilors, posted at <br /> locations t Cit Hall on June 9, 1997, published in the Register Guard, a newspaper of <br /> twb y . <br /> general circula ion within the City on June 9 and 11, 1997, and made available for inspection by <br /> interested pers ns at the offices of the City Manager, 777 Pearl Street, Eugene, Oregon 97401, <br /> during normal business hours (8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, exclusive of <br /> holidays). <br /> D. he Notice provided that written comments could be submitted thereon for a period <br /> was received within the <br /> ne comment <br /> Onl o <br /> ation. <br /> of;15 days fro the date of postmg and public y <br /> tin7e or in the anner required by the Notice, to which I make the following finding: <br /> Comment: One comment was received during the public comment period from <br /> EWEB The basic question EWEB had on the fee schedule concerns the definition of <br /> ~ install two electric conduits in the same trench. <br /> unusual for EWEB to <br /> facile It is not <br /> In thos cases, lines in both conduits effectively tie our system together. Would each <br /> condui constitute a "facility," in which case EWEB would have to pay the fee twice? Or, <br /> would oth conduits be considered one "facility" for purposes of fee assessment? <br /> ~ r 1 <br /> Admmistrativ Orde <br /> <br />