My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pf_03708
Roseville
>
Planning Files
>
Old Numbering System (pre-2007)
>
PF3000 - PF3801
>
3700
>
pf_03708
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/29/2014 4:35:21 PM
Creation date
7/3/2013 10:42:35 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Planning Files
Planning Files - Planning File #
3708
Planning Files - Type
Zoning Text Amendment
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
287
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
� o L ach day can be deemed a separate violation (something we have not used in <br />the past - to my knowledge). <br />o If a violator pays a violation penalty, they can't then continue to maintain the <br />violation. This is as it applies today. <br />• Section 107 places professional standards upon the code enforcement officer. <br />It also stops a property owner from selling a property without disclosing <br />enforcement actions being taken at a location, something worthwhile (it does <br />not stop � sal�). <br />Motion #S <br />Delete all of Section 103 (Department ofProperty Maintenance Inspection/ <br />1'his was pr��riorrs/y revrsed to delcte the rc%renee to `deparnnenr'. It merclv re/��rences c/re Codes <br />Coor�lln�rtor as the Code O�ca�il �o cla��i%y i>>hu has enforcement re,�,atiihilr(y. <br />This section creates a new city department. This has not been studied from either an <br />administrative or fiscal perspective, and has not been budgeted. No need has been shown. <br />Leave existing enforcement ordinances and procedures in place. <br />.-. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.