Saturday, July 9, 2016

I've Been Taken To Task. Again.


(BP Resident)  I’m offended by your blog. I’ve lived here for 20 years and never had a problem with code enforcement until recently. I have been a target of 4 summons to comply! This is getting out of hand. Everyone has their own concept of what “charm” is. Stop imposing your views on the rest of us.

Please remove me from your mailing list. 

__________________



(Me)   Hi,________________,

I'm sorry you're offended by the blog.  You wrote to me to tell me about it, but you should have felt free to have left your impressions as a comment with the post.  Maybe you're not the only one who feels that way.

It seems to me you might be talking about two different things when you express your frustration and difference of opinion.  I don't know what the "summonses" were for, so I can't comment on them.  As for "charm," the summonses were not about that, I'm sure.  I was mostly describing where many of us see the Village now (and in the past), and where some of us would like to see it go in the future.  Part of that has gotten codified into the Codes, or it's very clearly in that direction, so it will in the future be part of what someone could get cited for.  Where that could affect you in particular is that I think you don't have parking on your property.  You use the swale.  The new Code as proffered would require you to create an approved parking surface on your actual property (the swale is not your property).

Everyone who lives in an incorporated area is imposed upon by his or her "neighbors."  Every municipality, and County, and State, has rules, and those rules impact everyone.  It's too much to ask that the views of some people, who represent some kind of majority, not be imposed on everyone else.  If you're saying that if you were on the BP Commission, you would either not share the vision of those who currently are, or you would choose not to impose your vision on your neighbors, and if that's important to you, then you should be on the Commission.  If there are enough people who view the neighborhood, and the concept of not imposing visions on neighbors, as you do, you will get elected.

I have removed your name, as you requested.

Fred

PS: Please do consider placing your views and opinions as a comment below the relevant blog post.  Others would want to know what you think, and as I said, they might agree with you and write in to say so.



(Same BP Resident)   I don’t know who’s in charge of this new code but it’s a huge financial imposition to many of the residents here. If we are not allowed to park on the swale, where do you suggest we park 2 cars? This is outrageous. Biscayne Park was never like this. 


(Me)  The new Code requires that an "approved parking surface" be created on the actual property (not the swale).  We have been informed of one necessary exception, which is a duplex with two septic tanks, each in half of the front yard.  So there is no place to create an approved parking surface on the actual property.  In that case, we will have to make an exception, and parking will have to be permitted primarily (only) in the swale.

Yes, we know it's a financial burden.  As I said, I don't know for what you were cited four times.  If it was something like a roof that needs cleaning, or paint that needs redoing, those cost money, too.  But those requirements are in the Codes we already have.

This is what Codes, and neighborhoods, are about.  We are more demanding and restrictive than some communities, and less than others.  People who don't want to be imposed upon have to live in areas where there are no Codes.  Probably this means out in the country, in some unincorporated place.

I don't know whether Biscayne Park was ever like this.  I know that there was a time that homeowners and property owners generally kept their properties in good condition, with proper paint and presentable landscaping.  Maybe we've slid down since then.  We would like to work our way back up.  Not all of us, to be sure.  I don't know what else to tell you.

We have Commission elections this year.  Run for Commission.  Or vote for someone who feels the same way you do.

Fred




4 comments:

  1. Hi Fred - I also encourage the resident in question to post their responses here. Agree or disagree, we can't have the conversation without it...and as a reader I have learned that Fred has thick skin.

    While I can't comment on the specifics of their case either, the real problem I have with all these ordinances is that they do not allow for the exception. As we have extremely irregular plots of land, one size does not fit all...it may fit most, but exceptions should be granted. Of course the question is who approves exceptions? I would like to think that the commission or a board could address these issues, but realistically realize it would likely become a biased decision making process.

    Maybe another way to tackle it would be more smartly worded ordinances that set minimum standards rather than strict compliance with explicit requirements. You know I think the boat storage is an issue and I think there should have been a minimum standard that each household could store one boat, even if it is not in complete compliance with the explicit requirements.

    ReplyDelete
  2. H,

    I'm sorry to the person we're discussing. I didn't mean for that person to be recognizable. Maybe the person is to you, because you had other contact.

    All laws/ordinances have that potential problem. We have to try to anticipate as much as we can, to draft the ordinance to accommodate problems, and the rest is usually left to variances. But I don't like variances for this, because they are trouble and expense for homeowners. I would rather find a way to handle this administratively. We've done that with some other matters, and maybe we can with this one. Of course exceptions must be granted for unusual situations.

    I agree in part with your third paragraph. You always try to get the wording right. Often, we succeed. As for boats, I really think we were very fair there. We said that if you already had a boat when the Ordinance was passed, or even if you acquired one within a year after (!), and it was not possible to store it out of sight, then you could (continue to) store it in front. But we were still looking to make the neighborhood look nicer, so we preferred, as do almost all municipalities in the County, that boats be stored out of sight. Less convenient for the boat owner maybe, but better for the overall look for everyone else.

    It might interest you to know that some people "store" boats they never use and boats that are not even registered. Some are in obviously poor repair. One Village resident has what remains of a boat, and he says it's partially buried. He told us he considers it like an outdoor sculpture. That's the kind of stuff you get when you relax the standard.

    Fred

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hi Fred - We passed the boat ordinance and it is on the books...why are residents allowed to flout it??? Why does the above mentioned neighbor have a boat/sculpture in his yard and I can't have one boat??? This is the kind of stuff you get with weak enforcement, not relaxed standards. I am all for making the neighborhood nicer and being respectful and considerate of neighbors.

    Just for background, my house has two 10 foot side yards. One is not usable because of the septic and the other because of the power lines. My position is simply that if a property does not allow for side storage, exceptions should be made.

    Hope you are well. I see I have another three piece to look forward to reading :-)

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hi Fred - We passed the boat ordinance and it is on the books...why are residents allowed to flout it??? Why does the above mentioned neighbor have a boat/sculpture in his yard and I can't have one boat??? This is the kind of stuff you get with weak enforcement, not relaxed standards. I am all for making the neighborhood nicer and being respectful and considerate of neighbors.

    Just for background, my house has two 10 foot side yards. One is not usable because of the septic and the other because of the power lines. My position is simply that if a property does not allow for side storage, exceptions should be made.

    Hope you are well. I see I have another three piece to look forward to reading :-)

    ReplyDelete