Security-light nuisance dispute at 2414 Tulane Dr.
Summary
A Tulane Drive homeowner was cited under the nuisance code for bright roofline security lights she says have protected her family and food truck since 2015. The city has no lighting ordinance, so the case hinges on the general nuisance definition — the board tabled it a month to give her time to relocate the lights under the soffit.
At a glance
- Total mentions
- 4
- Last 30 days
- 0
Last discussed Aug 20, 2026.
Impact analysis
If the lighting violation isn't corrected, a fine of up to $250 per violation per day could be imposed at the next meeting.
The homeowner keeps her security lighting while working out a compromise, and the complaining neighbor gets relief if the lights are redirected.
If the lights are dimmed or moved before a fix is found, the family says their vehicles, food truck, and cameras lose nighttime protection.
Mentions & discussions (2)
Code Enforcement Board - Aug 20, 2026
A homeowner spent $3,000 moving her security lights as the code officer suggested, but a neighbor says they're still too bright. The case turned heated, with claims of racial targeting, and got tabled a second time.
Code Enforcement Board - Jul 16, 2026
A Tulane Drive homeowner was cited under the nuisance code for bright roofline security lights she says have protected her family and food truck since 2015. The city has no lighting ordinance, so the case hinges on the general nuisance definition — the board tabled it a month to give her time to relocate the lights under the soffit.
We'll email you when it's on an upcoming agenda and when it's voted on, at most once a day.
The weekly brief for Cocoa
What the council decided, in plain English — one email a week.
Free. Unsubscribe with one click any time. We never sell your email.