2022-05-12-TREE-rpt3 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

system needs to have a place to reflect this and then the Tree Warden needs to enter the tree information once those discussions have taken place. As stated this can be after the demo permit is issued and the structure is removed. • Agreed that mistakes were made in assessing fees and mitigation payments (#3 & #4). As those sites are still open, he intends to try and collect the money owed. • Does not know the result of the Tree Warden’s conversations (which Dave committed would occur) with builders of 19 Locke Lane, 198 Bedford Street and 82 Spring Street who owed permit fees and mitigation payments from closed projects as discussed in our previous report. The Director is looking into this. • Stated that he would "agree to disagree" that anything was wrong in the execution of the enforcement of the bylaw -- or that the DPW had not followed through on commitments. • When false information has been provided by an applicant (#5), if the permit is still open the DPW will correct the situation. • Permit fees are sent to the building department for deposit; tree fund checks are deposited by DPW. (#6 & #7) • There was no explanation of why mitigation payments and fees have been waived (#8). The Director will look into this. • Agreed to: o Require developers who haven't submitted and completed Tree Permits to do so and to ensure that removed trees are documented, along with the amount of fees and required mitigation. o Expedite implementation of spreadsheet attachments to the Tree Permit. When Tim Goncalves, IT Director, and the Tree Committee decide that the spreadsheet is ready for release, Tim will train builders on how to use it. o Also agreed that this is still a work in progress and the goal is to put the systems in place to capture the information accurately. We need to move forward and work together.