My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
3/20/1990
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1990's
>
1990
>
3/20/1990
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:02:44 PM
Creation date
6/16/2015 8:53:43 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
03/20/1990
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
and get stuck under there. Well, that was cited in the County's <br />claim against them, and all of a sudden the slab became rubble, <br />and Mr. Heath's report stated that the Brazilian pepper trees <br />encroached on county right-of-way. When he visited the site this <br />morning, he measured it and found that the fence is 24 ft. in <br />from the road itself, so the Brazilian pepper trees did not <br />encroach on county right-of-way. <br />Returning to the matter of the notices of abatement, Mr. <br />Levy noted that Mr. Heath's report also said that he sent out a <br />certified letter to him on September 1, 1989 to 812 8th Court, <br />Palm Beach Gardens, and that it was returned on September 11, <br />1989. Mr. Heath mentions that he checked the property in October <br />and found there had not been any abatement of nuisance. Of <br />course there had not been any abatement, since the letter of <br />notice had not been received, and Mr. Heath knew that. In fact, <br />the certified letter was stamped September 20, 1989 by the Post <br />Office, not September 11, which is a 9 -day difference from what <br />Mr. Heath said. <br />Mr. Levy explained that when he reviewed the cost of this <br />abatement, he began to research the boundaries of the property <br />and it turned out that Lot #14 is approximately 35-40o inside of <br />the fenced -in area, which they had been told was all Lot #1. So <br />the water tank that they had removed at great expense was partly <br />located on Lot #14. He would have liked to ask Mr. Heath if he <br />knew that there was another lot between Lot #1 and Lot #13, but <br />he doesn't see him here this morning. The notice of nuisance <br />abatement was posted on Lot #14 on the chain link fence and not <br />on Lot 12, and the neighbors will verify that. The County's <br />ordinance is fine, and he has no argument with that, but the <br />County posted the wrong property. In fact, he found that Lot #14 <br />is owned by Mr. Charles Coker, who apparently purchased that land <br />at a tax sale for approximately $1,000 from the same attorney who <br />owned 'the franchised utility. Apparently, the attorney would <br />BOOK <br />+ 21 <br />MAR 2 0199 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.