My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CEB 08/11/2011 Minutes
Laserfiche
>
City Clerk's Public Records
>
Minutes
>
Advisory Board Minutes
>
Code Enforcement Hearing Minutes
>
CEB Minutes Archives
>
2011 CEB Minutes
>
CEB 08/11/2011 Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/7/2012 6:45:55 PM
Creation date
2/7/2012 6:45:39 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
Meeting Type
Regular
City Clerk - Doc Type
Minutes
City Clerk - Date
8/11/2011
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
3~Page <br />MOTON: Mr. Herron moved to find that Respondent(s) in this case failed to correct the violation by <br />the time specified in this Board's prior order in this case and the fine will be imposed as set forth in that <br />Order and will continue to run until the property is brought into compliance and an affidavit of compliance <br />has been filed by the Code Inspector. Respondents shall notify the Code Compliance Officer to verify <br />compliance. Mr. Smith seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. <br />CONTINUE® CASE <br />No building permit City Code Section 1-4.3 <br />® CE-11-01105 1099 SR 436 <br />Ms. Broman, Code Compliance Officer, advised that the above case has come into compliance and <br />will not be heard tonight. No motion was made. <br />NEIL/ CASES <br />Land clearing/filling, ULDR Section 3-10.6 <br />® CE-11-00423 123 Triplet Lake Dr <br />Mr. Rivera, Code Compliance Officer, gave testimony for the above case. <br />MOTION: Mr. McKernan moved to find Respondent(s) in this case in violation of the City Code as <br />charged and that Respondent(s) correct the violation before 1:00 p.m. on 08/25/2011. In the event <br />Respondent does not comply by this date, a fine in the amount of $100.00 per day will be imposed for each <br />day the violation continues past the aforestated date. The Respondent(s) is/are further ordered to contact <br />the Code Compliance Officer to verify compliance with this Order. Ms. Hale seconded the motion. The <br />motion passed unanimously. <br />Trash & debris City Code Section 70-2(c) <br />® CE-11-01367 123 Triplet Lake Dr <br />Mr. Rivera, Code Compliance Officer, advised that the above case was now in compliance and asked for a <br />standing order. <br />MOTION: Mr. Henson moved to find Respondent(s) in this case was/were in violation of City Code as <br />charged; that the violation(s) was/were corrected and recurred; and that any violation of the same code by <br />Respondent(s) within FIVE (5) years from the date of this Order shall be treated as a repeat violation, for <br />which a fine of up to $500.00 per day may be imposed. Mr. McKernan seconded the motion. The motion <br />passed unanimously. <br />Overarown property City Code Section 70-2(C) <br />® CE-11-00894;,1406 Lakeshore Dr <br />Ms. Broman, Code Compliance Officer, gave testimony for the above case. The City also asked that this <br />case be recognized as a serious threat and asked that the property be mowed if compliance is not met. <br />MOTION: Mr. Smith moved to find Respondent(s) in this case in violation of the City Code as charged <br />and that Respondent(s) correct the violation before 1:00 p.m. on 08/25/2011. In the event Respondent <br />does not comply by this date, a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day will be imposed for each day the <br />violation continues past the aforestated date. I find that the violations constitute a serious threat to the <br />public health, safety and welfare and in the event the Respondent does not correct the violation by the date <br />set in this order, the city commission shall be notified and appropriate action should be taken by the City to <br />bring the property into compliance. The City is entitled to recover its reasonable costs of such services. Mr. <br />Henson seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.