Laserfiche WebLink
seconded the motion. Motion was approved. <br /> Ms. warden added that this company had the tom trash contract. The problem is <br /> that they had revoked their permit. <br /> A conversation ensues regarding whether or not Mr. Ball has a conflict regarding <br /> this agenda item. It was determined that Mr. Bal did not have a conflict.) <br /> . Review & Approve 2005 Fee Schedule <br /> Ms. warden had a recommendation for the board members* consideration. She <br /> wondered if they were interested in creating a new permit for failing to submit the <br /> fees timely for the end or the year renal permit. Argy applications that came in <br /> subsequent to December 3 1 t would be subject to a fine of double the fees. <br /> Ms. Grady didn't have a problem with this request if everybody was notified of the <br /> change in the schedule by nail. <br /> Mr. Harrington stated that it would go right on their fee schedule. They would put it <br /> on next renewal letter. He warted to add that in IVIS, warden's review of the policies <br /> she noted that the board of health had previously charged a fee for the wastewater <br /> treatment plant review. The board had the ability to charge a proponent a review fee. <br /> So should the board of health determine that plant was going to go in a sensitive area <br /> and they wanted therm to pay for a consultant on the board's behalf to review it on <br /> the board's behalf, It had been a policy before. But, they would like to re-active it <br /> and have approved for the fee scheduled. They dict have one before there now. The <br /> only thing it was going to affect now because the review had been done. But, it <br /> would affect their actual permit fee. The permit fee would go from S 10 0.00 to <br /> $144.00. He felt that it was worthy enough to have it added to the.current fee <br /> schedule. Before it was a policy and he didn't think that as a policy it was <br /> enforceable. <br /> Mr.-fall made a motion to accept the fee schedule for the calendar year 2005 with <br /> the approved additions and changes. Ms. Grady seconded the motion. Motion <br /> passed. <br /> APPOINTMENT:T: Clover Paving—759 Falmouth Road Commercial 1 err it <br /> Mr. Harrington stated that he didn't think anyone was going to be here. This was the <br /> one that he had called her on. They had been through both of the review boards <br /> namely site planning review. He gave the proponent and the engineer a copy of 56 <br /> Nicoletta's way, which was a similar contractors bay type commercial property. So, <br /> they know what their comments were going to be regarding the commercial <br /> properties. They reviewed the plan. He had one other comment on the plan. He <br /> wanted Ho risers and cast iron frames to grade. That was his only change on the <br /> plan. Again that could be set as a condition of approval. The other standard items for <br /> the commercial property were that they could not do repairs as a business to b <br /> performed on site. There could be no bulk hazardous materials. They had limits that <br /> 2 <br />