Laserfiche WebLink
$E P 21 1993 <br />soK 5;4 Fac€ 7-ts . <br />Rymer is in full agreement that we need a provision in our <br />ordinance similar to the Vero Beach Code which has wording <br />that clearly specifies when a project has commenced <br />construction and when it is necessary to go back through the <br />whole process. <br />Commissioner Lyons asked if Building Director Rymer had <br />any record of the last time they were called for an <br />inspection, and Mrs. Rymer stated inspections were made as <br />follows: <br />elevator footing inspection...... 1/6/83 <br />foundation walls..... ....... 1/7/83 <br />footings ......................... 1/18/83 <br />observation tower ................ 4/8/83 <br />temporary electrical ............. 4/14/83 <br />party wall ....................... 7/20/83 <br />Mr. Blume, who lives immediately adjacent to the <br />subject property, asked if it is not required that a <br />building permit for a development be displayed on site the <br />same as a home owner permit, and Mrs. Rymer replied that <br />they do display the construction card, not necessarily the <br />permit. Mr. Blume stated that no card of any kind has been <br />displayed. <br />Attorney Eugene O'Neill appeared on behalf of Arthur <br />Wilson, developer of Indian Lakes Condominiums, in Attorney <br />Cooksey's absence, and stated his belief that this is a <br />travesty the other way around; Mr. Wilson has been bad <br />mouthed and harrassed beyond the ordinary point of decency <br />by the neighbors, and, in fact, accused of many slanderous <br />things. Attorney O'Neill emphasized that while the project <br />is going slowly, it is being done legally and in full <br />compliance with the law. It appears the only question is <br />whether construction may have been abandoned. In answer to <br />that question, the bookkeeper from Edwards Berger & Harris, <br />