Admin Order 58-03-19-F - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO. 58-03-19~F of the City Manager of the City of Eugene AMENDING CONSTRUCTION WITHIN AND USE OF THE PUBLIC WAY RULE R-7.302 AND REPEALING ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO. 58-00-13-F. The City Manager of the City of Eugene finds that: A. Pursuant to the authority of Section 2.019 of the Eugene Code, 1971, Administrative Order No. 58-00-13-F was issued on September 27~ 2000, amending and adopting Construction Within and Use of the Public Way Rule R-T302. B. Based on the findings set forth in Administrative Order No. 58-03-19-F issued on November 18, 2003 ~ proposed amendments to Rule R-7.302 and the Utility and Right-of-Way Permits Construction Within and Use of the Public Way Manual attached as Exhibit A thereto, as set forth in finding B of that order. C. Notice of the proposed amendments was published in the Register Guard for five consecutive days, to-wit, on November 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 2003. The Notice was also made available for persons who had requested such notice, and provided that written comments would be received thereon for a period of 30 days from the first date of publication. D. Written comments were received from Comcast of Oregon~ to which I make the following specific findings: Comment 1: An objection was raised to the phrase "amount established" in R- 7.302-C-1.3.3 in reference to the fee for an exception permit, as being vague, and Comcast suggested it be revised to "an amount to cover City's actual cost." Finding: No amendments were proposed to be made to this subsection, which remains the same as in the prior Rule~ It would be inappropriale to amend substantively a portion of the rule that was not proposed for amendment in the Notice without providing a new opportunity for public comment. (This finding applies also to Comments 2, 3 and 4.) The use of the phrase in the subsection is a direction that the fee be established by the City Manager following the procedures of EC 2.020, which requires a public comment period. No changes were made as a result of this comment. Comment 2: Comcast objected to the requirement of building and paying for excess capacity that would not be under its control and could be used by a possible competitor, and also objected to being liable for the condition offacilit/es it was not using as required by R- 7.302-E-2. Administrative Order - 1 C \WINDOWSXTemporary ln~emet Files\OLl<kB202',03ro;vrl2a0 (00k)68460)1 WPD{01/07/04)