My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2/1/1984
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1980's
>
1984
>
2/1/1984
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 11:50:23 AM
Creation date
6/11/2015 3:20:00 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
02/01/1984
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
71
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
r � � <br />Administrator Wright recommended the elimination of the <br />50 -odd zoning fees listed in the above fee schedules which <br />are primarily a -function that can be handled in conjunction <br />with the issuance of a building permit. He pointed out that <br />site plan procedures would not be affected by this.change. • <br />Administrator Wright also recommended that we increase <br />our building fees to the level currently being charged to <br />the municipal residents. We use the same scale, but we <br />use a factor in the unincorporated areas of 75% of total <br />value instead of 100%, i.e., if you live in the unincorporated <br />area, you pay three-fourths as much, but you pay an additional <br />fee to the Zoning Dept., which makes it an almost washout <br />situation. <br />- Ester Rymer, Building Dept. Director, reported that <br />building plan examining fees for both the municipal and <br />unincorporated fees are figured on 75% of total assessment <br />value. <br />Administrator•Wright reported that there were some <br />concerns by the building trades people that they would, in <br />essence, be paying for removal of junk cars and other large <br />items to comply with -the Code Enforcement Board. He stated <br />that was not the intent. The Administrator felt that the <br />Building Dept. should be oriented towards building concerns <br />and stated that he would be glad to get a clear division of <br />revenues and time spent by the Code Enforcement people <br />between now and the end of the fiscal year and then make the <br />appropriate budget amendments in October. <br />Peter Robinson, builder of Laurel Homes, stated that he <br />would have no objections to the proposed change as it would <br />be a real benefit to eliminate one step in the planning <br />process. Their main concern was that right now there are a <br />lot of building permits going through the Building Dept. and <br />there is going to be a lot of money built up in the enterprise <br />fund; they don't want to see this being used for code <br />51 . <br />FEB 1 1984 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.