Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03171993 City of Sebastian POST OFFICE BOX 780127 [] SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA 32978 TELEPHONE (407) 589-5330 [] FAX (407) 589-5570 SEBASTIAN CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD REGULAR MEETING MARCH 17t 1993 - 2:00 P.M. AGENDA CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL APPROVAL OF MINUTES - REGULAR MEETING OF FEBRUARY 17, 1993 ATTORNEY'S MATTERS: OLD BUSINESS: NONE NEW BUSINESS: CASE# 92-7475 DAVID A. KOZDRA CASE# 93-7618 JOHN GARVEY CASE# 93-7680 TIMOTHY & BETTY MILLER DISCUSS PROPOSED CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD HEARING PROCEDURE BOARD ATTORNEY REQUESTS AND REPORTS: BUILDING OFFICIAL'S MATTERS: GENERAL DISCUSSION: PUBLIC INPUT: ADJOURN: NOTE: IF ANY PERSON DECIDES TO APPEAL ANY DECISION MADE ON THE ABOVE MATTERS, HE/SHE WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS AND FOR SUCH PURPOSES, HE/SHE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY IN EVIDENCE ON WHICH THE APPEAL IS BASED. COD_~E ENFORCEMENT BOARD REGULAR MEETING MARCH 17~ 199~3 - 2:0____q0 P.M. MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER BY CHAIRMAN DEROBERTIS AT 2.05 P.M. ' ROLL CALL: PRESENT: EXCUSED: MRS. KOSTENBADER MR. METCALF CHAIRM-ANDEROBERTIS MR. NiCOLINI VICE CHAIRMAN FISCHER ATTORNEY LULICH MR. TOZZOLO LATE: MR. GILLIAMS PRESENT: ROBERT N. NiCHOLSON, CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER GREGORY HANSEN, CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE APPROVAL OF MINUTES: A MOTION WAS MADE BY VICE CHAIRMAN FISCHER, SECONDED BY MR. METCALF TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING HELD ON FEBRUARY 17, 1993. MOTION CARRIED. ATTORNEY'S MATTERS: CHAIRMAN DEROBERTIS WELCOMED MR. HANSEN WHO IS FILLING IN FOR RICHARD TORPY. OLD BUSINESS: NONE NEW BUSINESS: MR. HANSEN FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE STATED THAT THE CITY REQUESTED CASE# 93-7618 BE THE FINAL CASE ON THE AGENDA BECAUSE IT WILL TAKE MORE TIME. CASE# 92-7475 DAVID A. KOZDRA ATTORNEY LULICH SWORN iN EVERYONE THAT WILL TESTIFY DURING THIS MEETING. MR. KOZDRA WAS NOT PRESENT AT THIS MEETING. CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD - REGULAR MEETING - MARCH 17, 1993 PAGE 2 MR. HANSEN QUESTIONED MR. NICHOLSON CONCERNING THIS CASE. MR. NICHOLSON WAS NOTIFIED BY THE SEBASTIAN POLICE DEPARTMENT THAT DAVID KOZDRA OF 790 VOCELLE AVENUE, LOT 3, BLOCK 117, UNIT #2 HAD A BURGULAR ALARM AND DID NOT HAVE A PERMIT. THE ORDINANCE NUMBER IS 39-36 FOR ALARM PERMITS. ON 12/2/92, HE CALLED MR. KOZDRA'S RESIDENCE AND LEFT A MESSAGE ON HIS RECORDER ASKING HIM TO COME IN AND GET A PERMIT. WE THEN SERVED HIM A LETTER ON 1/7/93 WHICH MR. NICHOLSON HA-NDCARRIED AND SERVED TO MR. KOZDRA'S SON (ADAM) WHO iS 18 YEARS OF AGE GRANTING 10 DAYS TO OBTAIN THE PERMIT. ON 1/22/93 MR. KOZDRA DID NOT APPLY FOR A PERMIT THEREFORE, WE FORWARDED THE CASE TO THE BOARD. ON 2/24/93, HE WAS SERVED BY THE SEBASTIAN POLICE DEPARTMENT. MR. KOZDRA WROTE ON THE ENVELOPE "REFUSED TO SIGN BY DAVID KOZDRA" BUT, HE WAS IDENTIFIED BY THE SEBASTIAN POLICE OFFICER. HE THEN CAME IN AND WAS GRANTED A PERMIT ON MARCH 4, 1993 WHICH WAS AFTER BEING SERVED TO APPEAR BEFORE THE BOARD. MR. HANSEN SUBMITTED THE ORIGINAL VIOLATION LETTER DATED 1/6/93 WHICH WAS HANDCARRIED BY MR. NICHOLSON ON 1/7/93 AS EXHIBIT #1. THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION HEARING WHICH WAS SERVED BY THE SEBASTIAN POLICE DEPARTMENT ON 2/24/93 WAS SUBMITTED AS EXHIBIT #2. THE CITY'S RECOMMENDATION WAS TO FIND MR. KOZDRA IN VIOLATION AND IMPOSE A ONE TIME FLAT FINE OF $25.00. A MOTION WAS MADE BY MR. METCALF, SECONDED BY VICE CHAIRMAN FISCHER IN REFERENCE TO CASE# 92-7475 OF A ViOLATiON OF ARTICLE 2 ALARM SYSTEMS, SECTION 39-36 INVOLVING MR. DAVID A. KOZDRA THAT A VIOLATION DID OCCUR AND THAT MR. KOZDRA CAUSED THE VIOLATION. THE VIOLATION CONSISTED OF INSTALLATION OF AN ALARM SYSTEM WITHOUT A PERMIT AS REQUIRED UNDER THE ABOVE SECTION. THEREFORE AN ORDER OF ENFORCEMENT TO CORRECT THE VIOLATION IS WARRANTED. A FINE OF $25.00 IS IMPOSED TO BE PAID NOT LATER THAN 10 DAYS AFTER RECEIPT OF NOTICE OF THIS MEETING. MR. COOPER ASKED IF THE VIOLATION WAS ALREADY CORRECTED. NICHOLSON STATED THE VIOLATION WAS CORRECTED ON MARCH 4, 1993. MR. METCALF STOOD CORRECTED ON THAT. MR. MR. NICOLiNI SUGGESTED A $50.00 FINE BE IMPOSED iNSTEAD OF $25.00 SINCE MR. KOZDRA TOOK SO LONG TO GET A PERMIT. COD~E ENFORCEMENT BOAR~D - REGULAR MEETING - MARCH ~ .,1993 PAGE 3 MR. NICOLINI AMENDED THE MOTION TO INCREASE THE FINE TO $50.00. MR. METCALF SECONDED THIS AMENDED MOTION. CARRIED. CASE# 93-7680 TIMOTHY & BETTY MILLER MR. & MRS. MILLER WERE NOT PRESENT. MR. MILLER STOPPED IN THE OFFICE A/~D STATED HE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO MAKE THE MEETING. MR. HANSEN QUESTIONED MR. NICHOLSON REGARDING THIS CASE. ON JANUARY 26, 1993, MR. NICHOLSON RECEIVED A COMPLAINT THAT MR. & MRS. MILLER HAD A JUNK PICKUP TRUCK IN THE FRONT YARD (1782 STARFISH LANE, LOT 22, BLOCK 401, UNIT #11 WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS). HE OBSERVED A 1956 FORD PICKUP THAT APPEARED TO BE INOPERABLE WHICH IS A VIOLATION OF SECTION 86-47. AS NO ONE WAS HOME, MR. NICHOLSON SENT A WRITTEN NOTICE OF VIOLATION ON JANUARY 27, 1993 BY CERTIFIED MAIL. THE NOTICE WAS RECEIVED ON 1/28/93 AND THE RECIPIENT WAS BETTY MILLER. A RECHECK ON 2/12/93 REVEALED THAT THE TRUCK HAD BEEN RELOCATED TO THE REAR YARD BUT HOWEVER NOT FROM THE PROPERTY. THE CASE WAS CERTIFIED TO THE BOARD ON 2/23/93. THEY WERE NOTIFIED BY CERTIFIED MAIL WHICH WAS RECEIVED 2/24/93 AND SIGNED FOR BY TIMOTHY MILLER. A RECHECK WAS DONE ON MARCH 9, 1993 AND THE TRUCK HAD BEEN REMOVED. THE ORIGINAL VIOLATION LETTER RECEIVED 1/28/93 WAS SUBMITTED AS EXHIBIT #1. THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION HEARING RECEIVED 2/24/93 WAS SUBMITTED AS EXHIBIT #2. A PHOTO OF THE PICKUP TRUCK IN THE FRONT YARD TAKEN 1/12/93 WAS SUBMITTED AS EXHIBIT #3. THE RECOMMENDATION BY THE CITY IS THERE NOT BE A FINE BUT WE ARE SEEKING AN ORDER OF VIOLATION REGARDING THIS INCIDENT. A MOTION WAS MADE BY MR. NICOLINI, SECONDED BY MR. METCALF IN REFERENCE TO CASE# 93-7680 OF A VIOLATION OF JUNK AUTO, SECTION 86-47, INVOLVING MR. & MRS. TIMOTHY MILLER, THAT A CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD - REGULAR MEETING - .MARCH PAGE 4 1993 VIOLATION DID OCCUR AND THAT MR. & MRS. MILLER CAUSED THE VIOLATION. THE VIOLATION CONSISTED OF A JUNK AUTO ON PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY. THEREFORE AN ORDER OF ENFORCEMENT TO CORRECT THE VIOLATION IS WARRANTED. THE VIOLATION HAS BEEN CORRECTED AND NO FINE SHOULD BE IMPOSED AT THIS TIME SIMPLY TO HAVE THIS ON RECORD IN CASE OF REOCCURANCE OF THIS VIOLATION. CARRIED. CASE# 93-7618 JOHN GARVEY ATTORNEY LULICH ALSO SWORE IN MR. TIM SMITH, CITY ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN WHO WILL BE TESIFYING. MR. & MRS. GARVEY WERE PRESENT. ATTORNEY LULICH READ THE ORDINANCE TO MR. GARVEY. MR. HANSEN QUESTIONED MR. NICHOLSON CONCERNING THIS CASE. MR. NICHOLSON WAS INFORMED ON 1/13/93 BY THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT THAT THE SWALE AROUND MR. GARVEY'S HOUSE HAD BEEN FILLED IN. HE LIVES AT 1673 QUAKER LANE (LOTS 10 & 11, BLOCK 334, UNIT #13. MR. NICHOLSON NOTED THE SWALE HAD BEEN FILLED IN WITH SAND ALL THE WAY AROUND THE CORNER LOT. HE ASKED MR. GARVEY TO REMOVE IT BUT HE WANTED TO GO THROUGH THE FORMAL NOTIFICATION PROCESS. A CERTIFIED LETTER WAS MAILED ON 1/19/93 WHICH HE SIGNED FOR ON 1/20/93. A RECHECK OF THE SWALE WAS DONE ON 2/20/93 AND THE FILL HAD NOT BEEN REMOVED. THEREFORE, ON 2/23/93 MR. GARVEY WAS SENT A CERTIFIED LETTER TO APPEAR BEFORE THIS BOARD. MR. GARVEY SIGNED THE RECEIPT ON 2/25/93. ON 3/15/93 (MONDAY) THERE APPEARED TO BE NO CHANGE ON THE PROPERTY. THE SWALE WAS COMPLETELY FILLED IN. MR. HANSEN SUBMITTED COMPOSITE EXHIBIT #1 WHICH CONSISTED OF FIVE PHOTOGRAPHS WHICH WERE TAKEN ON 1/19/93. THE ORIGINAL VIOLATION LETTER DATED 1/18/93 ADVISING MR. GARVEY THAT HE WAS IN VIOLATION OF 26-2 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES AND THAT HE HAD OBSTRUCTED THE NATURAL FLOW OF WATER WAS SUBMITTED AS EXHIBIT #2. THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION HEARING RECEIVED ON 2/25/93 BY MR. GARVEY WAS ALSO SUBMITTED AS EXHIBIT #3. MR. GARVEY ASKED MR. NICHOLSON IF HE SAW HIM PLANT THE GRASS OR PUT THE FILL IN. MR. NICHOLSON STATED NO. HE STATED HE CONTACTED MR. COOPER, MR. ECKIS AND MR. MCCLARY AND NOTHING HAS BEEN DONE. MR. GARVEY HAD TWO LETTERS FROM MR. MCCLARY STATING HE WOULD TAKE CARE OF ALL THE SWALE PROBLEMS. CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD - REGULAR MEETING - MARCH 17~_ .1993 PAGE 5 THE CITY CONTINUED THEIR QUESTIONING. THEY CALLED TIM SMITH, ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN. MR. HANSEN SHOWED THE COMPOSITE EXHIBIT #1 PHOTOS TO MR. SMITH. IT WAS BROUGHT TO MR. SMITH'S ATTENTION THROUGH THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT THAT THERE HAD BEEN FILL UP TO THAT SWALE. HE OBSERVED THAT THE EDGE OF THE SWALE AT THE EDGE OF THE PAVEMENT WAS BUILT UP 3 OR 4 INCHES OVER WHAT THE EXISTING SWALE WAS BEFORE THAT. THE FILL IN THE SWALE WOULD MODIFY THE DRAINAGE. MR. SMITH FILLED OUT A FIELD REPORT STATING WHAT HE HAD SEEN AND FORWARDED IT TO CODE ENFORCEMENT. MR. GARVEY ASKED MR. SMITH IF HE WAS AN ENGINEER. MR. SMITH STATED NO. MR. HANSEN ASKED MR. SMITH WHAT HIS CAPACITY WAS WITH THE CITY. HE STATED HE IS AN ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN AND WAS CAPABLE OF ASCERTAINING MODIFICATIONS OF A SWALE OF THE TYPE THAT EXISTED ON THIS PROPERTY. ATTORNEY LULICH SWORE IN BRUCE COOPER, BUILDING OFFICIAL. JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, MR. COOPER STATED THAT OUR DEPARTMENT IS STRICTLY IN CODE ENFORCEMENT AND IF MR. GARVEY HAS MADE A STATEMENT OR TWO CONCERNING DRAINAGE PROBLEMS, THOSE ITEMS HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED THROUGH THE PROPER CHANNELS, THROUGH THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT OR THE CITY MANAGER. MR. GARVEY REFERRED TO MR. COOPER NOT DOING ANYTHING. THE CODE ENFORCEMENT DEPARTMENT DOES NOT HANDLE DRAINAGE. THIS DEPARTMENT ONLY HANDLES THE ENFORCEMENT OF IT. MR. GARVEY STATED WHEN MR. THOMAS CAME OUT, HE ASKED HIM WHAT HE WAS DOING OUT THERE THE OTHER DAY. THIS IS FOUR YEARS NOW. NOBODY WANTS TO TELL HIM ANYTHING ABOUT DRAINAGE. HE STATED HE HAS DONE NOTHING WRONG. THE SAND WAS BROUGHT IN FOR HIS GRASS. MR. GARVEY ASKED TIM SMITH HOW DEEP A SWALE IS SUPPOSE TO BE. TIM STATED IN MOST AREAS THE SWALE IS 1 FOOT BELOW THE CROWN OF THE ROAD DEPENDING ON HOW CLOSE YOU ARE TO THE HIGH POINT OF THE SWALE OR HOW CLOSE YOU ARE TO THE OUTFALL OF THE SWALE. MR. COOPER ASKED MR. GARVEY IF TIM SMITH COMES OUT AND TELLS HIM WHAT THE SWALE SHOULD BE, WOULD HE BE WILLING TO RECTIFY THE SWALE. MR. GARVEY STATED MR. THOMAS WAS OUT THERE ON 3/16/93 SINCE THE FIRST TIME HE GAVE DRAINAGE MAPS TO HIM. MR. THOMAS STATED THAT THEY WILL TAKE CARE OF IT. MRS. MARY GARVEY STATED THAT THERE HAS NEVER BEEN A SWALE AT THEIR HOME. SHE READ A LETTER FROM MR. MCCLARY, CITY MANAGER. MRS. GARVEY SUBMITTED THIS LETTER DATED JUNE 21, 1988 AS EXHIBIT #1. A SECOND LETTER DATED AUGUST 1, 1988 WAS ALSO SUBMITTED AS EXHIBIT #2. CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD - REGULAR MEETING - MARCH 17~ 1993 PAGE 6 MRS. GARVEY ALSO STATED TO MR. COOPER THAT TO THE BEST OF HER KNOWLEDGE, PUBLIC WORKS HAS NEVER CORRECTED THE SWALE IN THEIR AREA. MR. COOPER ASKED MR. SMITH IF HE KNEW WHEN WAS THE LAST MAJOR OVERHAUL OF THE DRAINAGE SYSTEM IN THAT IMMEDIATE AREA INCLUDING THIS LOT. MR. SMITH STATED ABOUT 5 YEARS AGO ALOT OF WORK WAS DONE IN THAT AREA. MR. SMITH STATED THEY REDID THE SWALE FROM MR. GARVEY'S HOUSE ALL THE WAY TO THE OUTFALL ON STONECROP. MRS. GARVEY STATED NEVER THE SWALE BUT THEY DID THE ROAD. MR. METCALF WAS EXCUSED AT 3:00 P.M. MR. COOPER STATED THE CITY IS RECOMMENDING 15 DAYS TO CORRECT THE SWALE ACCORDING TO THE ENGINEERING SPECIFICATIONS AND WILL THEN SEEK NO FURTHER ACTION ON THIS CASE. MR. HANSEN ASKED MRS. GARVEY REGARDLESS OF CORRECTIVE ACTION THAT YOU DON'T FEEL HAS BEEN TAKEN, SINCE 1988 WEREN'T YOU AWARE THAT IT WAS NOT PROPER FOR YOU OR YOUR HUSBAND TO FILL IN THE SWALE. MRS. GARVEY STATED HOW LONG DO YOU HAVE TO WAIT FOR THE CITY OF SEBASTIAN TO MAKE UP ITS MIND WHAT THEY ARE GOING TO DO. IN THE LETTER FROM MR. MCCLARY IN 1988 IT STATED IF YOU WISH TO DO WORK, YOU SHOULD GET APPROVAL FIRST. MR. GARVEY ASKED AL GOELZ OF 1618 SEAHOUSE, WHAT IS THE WATER SITUATION NOW COMPARED TO WHEN YOU FIRST MOVED THERE. THE WATER SITUATION WAS BAD WHEN HE FIRST BOUGHT HIS PROPERTY IN 1991. THE CITY TRIED TO HELP OUT WITH MY FUNDS OF $5,000.00. THEY INSTALLED A PIPE IN A SIDE SWALE GOING FROM SEAHOUSE STREET EAST. THEY TORE UP THE TWO COLLECTOR PIPES LAYING ON SEAHOUSE AND DUG THEM UP AND REALIGNED THEM. FOR A WHILE IT WAS DOING THE JOB. SINCE THAT TIME, A LOT OF CONSTRUCTION HAS BEEN GOING ON UP AND DOWN SEAHOUSE. THE CITY ALSO INSTALLED A COLLECTOR BOX IN 1991 BETWEEN HIS NEIGHBOR AND HIM. THIS HELPED UNTIL NOW IT IS FILLED WITH SAND BECAUSE OF ALL THE CONSTRUCTION GOING ON. THEY ARE BUILDING TWO NEW HOMES ON QUAKER WHICH ARE FLOODED. ON CORAL REEF THE WATER IS JUST LAYING THERE. HERBERT STURM STARTED READING SECTION 2-105(b) CONCERNING CODE ENFORCEMENT. CHAIRMAN DEROBERTIS ASKED MR. GARVEY IF HE WAS GOING TO QUESTION MR. HERBERT STURM. THE SEBASTIAN POLICE DEPARTMENT WAS CALLED. THERE WAS A SHORT RECESS APPROXIMATELY AT 3:15. CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD - REGULAR MEETING - MARCH 17~ 1993 PAGE 7 MR. GARVEY STATED THAT HERBERT STURM CAME TO HIS PLACE TO LOOK AT THE SWALE AND LOOKED AT IT BEFORE AND WHAT IT IS NOW. HE STATED MR. STURM CAN TAKE IT FROM HERE. ATTORNEY LULICH READ SECTION 2-105(b) "ALL HEARINGS OF THE BOARD SHALL BE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AND ANY PERSON WHOSE INTERESTS MAY BE AFFECTED BY THE MATTER BEFORE THE BOARD SHALL BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD". MR. GILLIAMS ASKED IF MR. STURM'S INTEREST IS AFFECTED. ATTORNEY LULICH STATED THAT IS THE QUESTION FOR THE BOARD TO DETERMINE. MR. STURM STATED HE NEEDED TO ADDRESS THE CREDIBILITY OF THE PREVIOUS WITNESSES, MR. NICHOLSON AND MR. TIM SMITH. MR. STURM STATED HE WAS SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF MR. GARVEY. ATTORNEY LULICH ASKED MR. STURM WHAT HIS INTEREST WAS SPECIFICALLY. HE STATED THAT MR. NICHOLSON AND MR. SMITH DO NOT KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A DRAINAGE AND A SWALE. ATTORNEY LULICH ASKED HOW THAT AFFECTED HIS INTEREST. MR. STURM STATED IT WOULD AFFECT THE OUTCOME OF THIS CASE. ATTORNEY LULICH ASKED MR. STURM HOW FAR HE IS FROM MR. GARVEY' LOT. MR. HANSEN STATED THAT MR. GARVEY OR HIS COUNSELOR CAN GIVE EVIDENCE. IF THERE IS NO PERSONAL INTERST TO MR. STURM, HE SHOULD NOT SPEAK. MR. GARVEY HAD NO MORE QUESTIONS OF MR. STURM. iN SUMMATION, MR. HANSEN STATED WHAT WE ARE DEALING WITH REALLY RELATES TO WHETHER THERE HAS BEEN EVIDENCE THAT THERE HAS BEEN AN UNLAWFUL BLOCKING OR OBSTRUCTION OF NATURAL DRAINAGE OF WATER BY ANY MEANS INCLUDING FILL. ALSO, HAVE 5 PHOTOS SHOWING THE SWALE HAD BEEN FILLED. THE CITY RECOMMENDS THAT MR. GARVEY BE FOUND IN VIOLATION. HE SHOULD BE GIVEN 15 DAYS TO REMOVE OR MODIFY IN ACCORDANCE WITH ENGINEERING'S SPECIFICATIONS. IF THIS HAS NOT BE CURED WITHIN THE 15 DAYS, A $50.00 PER DAY FINE SHALL BE IMPOSED. A MOTION WAS MADE BY MR. GILLIAMS, SECONDED BY MR. NICOLINI IN REFERENCE TO CASE #93-7618 OF A VIOLATION OF ALTERING DRAINAGE OF SWALE, SECTION 26-2, INVOLVING MR. JOHN GARVEY, THAT A VIOLATION DID OCCUR AND THAT MR. JOHN GARVEY CAUSED THE VIOLATION. THE VIOLATION CONSISTED OF HAULING FILL iNTO THE DRAINAGE SWALE. THEREFORE AN ORDER OF ENFORCEMENT TO CORRECT THE VIOLATION IS WARRANTED. GIVE 15 BUSINESS DAYS TO CORRECT THE PROBLEM AND AFTER THE 15TH DAY THAT A FINE BE IMPOSED OF $50.00 AND THE VIOLATION AMOUNT SHOULD NOT EXCEED $50o.0o. MR. GARVEY ASKED FOR MR. MCCLARY TO BE QUESTIONED BY HIM. WE HAVE THE LETTERS AS EVIDENCE. MR. GARVEY REFUSED TO CORRECT THIS BECAUSE HE DID NOT DO ANYTHING WRONG. HIS WIFE SPREAD THE FILL ON THE GRASS NOT INTO THE SWALE. CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD - REGULAR MEETING - MARCH 17, 1993 PAGE 8 MR. GILLIAMS AMENDED HIS MOTION TO 30 BUSINESS DAYS INSTEAD OF 15 BUSINESS DAYS. MR. NiCOLINI SECONDED THE AMENDED MOTION. MOTION CARRIED. BOARD ATTORNEY REQUESTS AND REPORTS: THE BOARD DECIDED TO POSTPONE THE DISCUSSION OF CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD HEARING PROCEDURES SINCE MR. TORPY WAS NOT PRESENT AT THIS MEETING. BUILDING OFFICIAL'S MATTERS: NONE GENERAL DISCUSSION: MR. NICOLINI STATED THAT A WORD WAS MISSING ON THE VIOLATION FORM LETTER THAT IS SENT OUT. PLEASE ADD THE WORD UNLESS TO THE BEGINNING OF THE LAST PARAGRAPH. STAFF WILL MAKE THE CORRECTION. PUBLIC INPUT: NONE ADJOURN: A MOTION WAS MADE BY MR. GILLIAMS, SECONDED BY VICE CHAIRMAN FISCHER TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 3:40 P.M. CARRIED. Minutes approved at the , 1992 Meeting. Donato Derobertis, Chairman Gerry F~ubes, Board Secretary