Laserfiche WebLink
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 />