Laserfiche WebLink
Don Adams of the City Building Department suggested that: <br />Paragraph (7) on Page 3 referring to the amendment of Section 105-1 <br />(c) should be changed to reduce the sum of $300.00 to $100.00 and <br />that permits should be required in all cases. County Attorney Smith <br />suggested that the following clause be added: "and provided that this <br />section does not apply to plumbing and electrical work." With regard <br />to (b) of Paragraph 10 on Page 4, it was explained that the intent of <br />the last sentence is that the affidavit may be accepted without <br />examination or inspection of the drawings or plans, not of the actual <br />structure. <br />Page 4, it was suggested that the bond of $5,000.00 mentioned in <br />Paragraph (11) be reduced to $1,000.00. <br />Page 6, Paragraph (15), in place of "and two members shall be <br />active inthe trade that is involved on the appeal of adjustment before <br />the Board: Such trades shall be general contracting, electrical and <br />plumbing." It was suggested that the following be substituted: "and <br />two members shall be active in the building trades." <br />Page 7, Paragraph (18), Mr. Adams suggested that one and two <br />family dwellings should not be exempted from the requirement of .reinforced <br />concrete footings or grillage of steel; and that Appendix D of the <br />Southern Building Code should be made mandatory. <br />On Page 13, Section 11, Line two, it was agreed that the "1959 <br />edition" should read "1965 edition". <br />On Page 25, Paragraph (10), Mr Adams strongly recommended that <br />Section 109.2 not be repealed but be included. <br />Mr. Frank Zorc, representing the Tax Payers Association of Indian <br />River County read the following letter: <br />8OOk 10 PAGE 54O <br />D .0 01967 <br />