My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2/5/1986
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1980's
>
1986
>
2/5/1986
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 11:53:00 AM
Creation date
6/12/2015 11:28:28 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
02/05/1986
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
79
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).
View images
View plain text
E E B 5 1966 <br />BOOK 6 59 <br />unless Mr. Berlin should identify that building as uninhabitable. <br />We have done what we can through the Building Code. <br />Mr. Berlin advised that he does have the DER coming down to <br />investigate. He believed the most serious point is that the <br />people on this Board were "had;" this was presented without the <br />necessary papers; it is against the -law to offer these units for <br />sale without condo papers; and he did not feel the County <br />Attorney had a right to make his own laws. <br />Chairman Scurlock wished to make it clear that Mr. Berlin is <br />not alluding to our present County Attorney, and Mr. Berlin <br />agreed. <br />Commissioner Bird asked Attorney Vitunac what the county's <br />responsibility is in regard to a condo being permitted and sold. <br />and also re checking out documents to be sure they comply with <br />state law. <br />Attorney Vitunac stated that our concern is not so much the <br />form of ownership as to see if the building codes, which are <br />different for condos as opposed to other types of units, are <br />complied with. Our only interest is in the health, welfare and <br />safety of the people using the building; whether the documents <br />are correct or not is a private legal matter. <br />Chairman Scurlock believed we did have a question arise re <br />the form of ownership when we were talking about Mr. Zorc's <br />situation re septic tanks in Indian River Heights. <br />Commissioner Bird agreed there was some question re the form <br />of ownership, but not the actual condo documents. <br />Discussion continued re ownership, documents, etc., and <br />Attorney Vitunac reiterated that the County's responsibility <br />wou'Id not pertain to the condo document but only to the <br />difference in building codes. <br />Chairman Scurlock noted that our process puts great faith on <br />the engineer's seal, and he had a question as to where the county <br />should draw the line in regard to accepting that seal as carte <br />blanche. <br />38 <br />s <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.