Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Bali asked if Mr. Kogut was going to be moving forward with ServSafe <br /> to get everyone certified. <br /> Mr. Kogut replied that he had already called therm. He called ServSafe in <br /> Chicago and they faked biro a request for a certificate. He was trying to <br /> get this information the fastest way he could. He faxed that back and he <br /> got the phone number. They were sending him information and rates and <br /> to when they could do it. <br /> Mr. Ball asked Mr. Kogut to keep Mr, Harrington informed so that he in <br /> turn could keep the board informed. He felt that that could be completed <br /> within the next two weeks. <br /> Mr. Kogut felt that that was reasonable as he was expecting a package <br /> from them any day to complete this task. <br /> Mr. Ball made a motion to continue until next meeting to provide schedule <br /> for servsafe training and floor repair. Mr. Santos seconded the motion. <br /> Motion passed. <br /> APPOINTMENT:TMENT: Cobert Bateman - Title V Violations Hearing Continued <br /> Mr, Ball asked lir. Darrington to re-cap the previous meetings events for <br /> Mr. Santos, as he was not present for the last meeting. <br /> Mr. Harrington began by stating that he had been notified by animal , <br /> control that there was a kennel being operated at 96 Algonquin Avenue. <br /> Mr. Bateman owns the property. They had dealt with Mr, Bateman over a <br /> nitrogen aggregation plan. He had purchased another property and set it <br /> in conservation to obtain the credit to build on the 5,500 square foot <br /> property at gg Algonquin. Ultimately there was a restriction on the <br /> property to be limited to a t o-bedroom flow, At 220 GPD with Title V <br /> kennel requirements being 50 GPD. That kicked him over what the hone <br /> was restricted to. He sent Mr. Bateman a letter saying that he was in <br /> violation of Title V because the Kennel put him over the easement and <br /> restrictions, which was recorded. They noir have a copy of this material. <br /> They didn't have it before. But, they did have a copy now of the recorded <br /> easement. What the board made the decision on two weeks ago was to <br /> reduce the number of dogs to below the definition of a kennel, At that <br /> point they had the definition a little muddied. ITL states that if there are <br /> four dogs or more and during the meeting he was saying that it was four <br /> dogs. The board said that they would have to reduce to four dogs. In <br /> reality they would have to drop it down to three. That way they no longer <br /> qualify as a kennel. In the meantime, building issued them a letter <br /> basically stating that they had a commercial business not in a residential <br /> zone. Mr. Wheeler, building inspector, had issued a cease and desist along <br /> i 1 <br /> i <br /> i <br />