Laserfiche WebLink
<br />~ <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />Public hearing was opened; there being no testimony presented, public <br />hearing was closed. <br /> <br />Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, to forward this <br />application to OLCC with recommendation for approval, subject to <br />conditions, if any. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. <br /> <br />C. <br /> <br />Construction Permit Fee Increases--Mr. Henry stated that this item is <br />a continuation of the hearing from last week. He further stated that <br />they would like to approve this matter with an effective date of <br />March 15, in order to have the increase apply to building that will be <br />going on at that time. Mr. Henry noted that a presentation was given <br />last week by Larry Reed and that the increases are generally quite <br />moderate. Mr. Henry further stated that the average new house would <br />be affected about $60 in permit fee increases; the fees that now are <br />approximately $310 will be about $370. <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />Public hearing was opened. <br /> <br />Speaking in favor of the increases: <br /> <br />John Bennett, Director of Planning of Governmental Affairs of the <br />Home Builders' Association of Lane County, 3282 Gateway, Springfield, <br />read a letter from the Board of Directors of the Home Builders' <br />Association which stated that at their March 5 meeting, they voted to <br />support the building fees increases as outlined in the February 14, <br />1980, memorandum. He further stated the Home Builders' Association <br />has supported a well-trained and professional staff in the Building <br />Division. He stated the support given is with the following reserva- <br />tion: The building permit fees or any other fees should not be used <br />for generating revenues above what is needed for the operation of the <br />Building Division. He further stated the appreciation of the associ- <br />ation for the extension of time given for review of these proposed <br />resolutions and expressed hope that in the future more time would be <br />given prior to consideration of such matters. He further stated that <br />attached to this letter was a copy of a memorandum regarding possible <br />staffing cuts in the Building Division and noted that the association <br />encouraged the City to keep the staffing level they pres~ntly have. <br /> <br />There being no further testimony presented, the public hearing was <br />closed. <br /> <br />Res. No. 3320--A resolution establishing fees in connection with the <br />Plumbing Code of the City of Eugene; repealing Resolu- <br />tion No. 2487 adopted by the City Council on March 22, <br />. 1976; and providing an effective date. <br /> <br />Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, to adopt the resolu- <br />tion. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />Res. No. 3321--A resolution establishing fees in connection with the <br />Electrical Code of the City of Eugene; repealing Resolu- <br />tion No. 2488 adopted by the City Council on March 22, <br />1976; and providing an effective date. <br /> <br />3/5/80--3 <br />