Laserfiche WebLink
MAR 2 0 199 <br />BOOK 79 PAEE <br />lien. Mr. Levy highly recommended that the County take the <br />property back for $4,000 and make a neighborhood park out of it. <br />Commissioner Wheeler wished to hear staff's side of the <br />story on this matter, and Community Development Director Robert <br />Keating advised that Albert Van Auken of Road & Bridge is here to <br />to address some of the issues pertaining to the labor and <br />equipment and what was cleared and what was charged. We are <br />mixing up code enforcement activity with public nuisance <br />abatement. Director Keating didn't know when the utility plant <br />stopped functioning, but he did know that the County established <br />its Code Enforcement ordinance in 1983, that there was a transfer <br />of property in 1985, and that we took code enforcement action in <br />1987 after receiving complaints that the building was a safety <br />hazard. The Code Enforcement Board was successful in getting the <br />safety hazard removed. In 1987 the County adopted the Public <br />Nuisance Abatement Ordinance, which has worked very well. In <br />this case, we got a number of complaints and went through all the <br />procedures. We checked the Property Appraiser's records for the <br />address and that is where we sent the notice, and the property <br />was posted at that time as well. It is obvious from what Mr. <br />Levy has said that a fence appears to have been erected in the <br />wrong place, which means part of the wrong lot was cleared. He <br />felt the only way to keep that from happening is to go out and do <br />a survey. <br />Roland DeBlois, Chief of Code Enforcement, advised that the <br />Code Enforcement staff assumed that the fence was the perimeter <br />of the property and did not do an official survey to determine <br />whether or not that was, in fact, the case. In 1987 when this <br />same property was cited and cleared, there was no reference on <br />Mr. Levy's part of Lot #14 being partially within the fenced <br />boundaries. Mr. DeBlois wished to ask Mr. Levy why Lot #14 was <br />not brought up in 1987 when it came before the Code Enforcement <br />Board from the standpoint of removing the plant. <br />24 <br />