Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Code Enforcement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Smyrna Beach code board orders repairs and fines in three property cases
Summary
The Smyrna Beach Code and Compliance Board on Aug. 15 approved staff recommendations to require repairs, set compliance deadlines and impose daily fines (caps at $10,000) for properties with dock, landscaping and vacant-property violations.
Get email alerts on the Code Enforcement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Smyrna Beach Code and Compliance Board on Aug. 15 heard three substantive property-maintenance cases and voted to adopt staff recommendations requiring repairs, setting compliance deadlines and imposing fines if owners do not comply.
At 3144 Sundance Trail, staff presenter Barb Bobolec recommended the board find property owner Tom Dross in violation of municipal code section 26-9-14-6 for accessory improvements after an inspection showed a deteriorated dock. Bobolec said landscaping violations previously cited (26-9-14-8) were corrected by an 08/13/2024 inspection, but the dock remained out of compliance. The board gave Dross until Oct. 30, 2024, to obtain a permit to repair or demolish the dock and approved staff’s recommendation of a $100-per-day fine, capped at $10,000, if the dock is not brought into compliance. "I've contacted eight companies," Tom Dross told the board, adding he had obtained one estimate and was waiting on more.
At 1418 South Riverside Drive, Bobolec told the board an inspection found inoperable vehicles still on the property and that no application had been submitted for the required local business tax receipt. Staff recommended a one-time $250 fine for the local-business-tax violation and daily fines for the IPMC §302.8 motor-vehicle violation, with a total fine not to exceed $10,000. The record includes inconsistent phrasing about the daily fine (staff at one point referenced $25 per day and elsewhere described a $250 amount); board members clarified the fine structure before voting to accept staff’s recommendation.
In a new-business case, Jason Yates presented code-enforcement findings for 907 Hamilton Street (CE-0518-2024), citing vacant-property registration and landscaping violations (sections 26-9-02 and 26-9-14-8). Staff recommended finding Joseph and Bethany Cardillo in violation and giving them until Aug. 26, 2024, to bring the property into compliance, with daily fines of $25 per violation thereafter (cap $10,000). Neighbor and complainant Vicky McCard told the board the property has been vacant and overgrown since last fall and urged enforcement. The board moved to accept staff’s recommendation and voted to carry it.
Each of the motions carried unanimously among members present: Cliff Warren, Albert Szymanski, Aaron Dennis and Kathleen Brown. Two members (Dan Crawford and Ruth Kaczmarek) were excused; Michael Slayton was absent.
The chair reminded respondents they may appeal orders to circuit court within 30 days under Florida Statute 162.11 and warned that a repeat violation within five years can lead to higher fines (up to $500 per day). The board set its next meeting for Sept. 19 and adjourned.
Votes at a glance • 3144 Sundance Trail — Motion to accept staff recommendation to find respondent in violation, permit deadline Oct. 30, 2024; $100/day fine if not corrected (cap $10,000). Vote: 4–0 (present members: Warren, Szymanski, Dennis, Brown). • 1418 South Riverside Drive — Motion to accept staff recommendation to impose business-tax and IPMC-related fines (staff recommended a one-time $250 for the business-tax violation and daily fines for IPMC §302.8, cap $10,000); board accepted. Vote: 4–0. • 907 Hamilton Street — Motion to accept staff recommendation to find owners in violation; compliance deadline Aug. 26, 2024; $25/day per violation thereafter (cap $10,000). Vote: 4–0.
Procedural note: the board recorded standard order language that respondents must contact the code inspector to verify compliance and may appeal within 30 days. The chair also cautioned respondents that a repeat violation within five years may lead to stiffer fines.
