Loading...
06/25/2008 MUNICIPAL CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD MEETING MINUTES CITY OF CLEARWATER June 25, 2008 Present: Douglas J. Williams Chair David W. Campbell Board Member Ronald V. Daniels Board Member Phillip J. Locke Board Member James B. Goins Board Member Absent: Jay Keyes Vice-Chair Richard Avichouser Board Member Also Present: Camilo Soto Assistant City Attorney Fabian Lokenauth Attorney for the Board Mary K. Diana Secretary for the Board Patricia O. Sullivan Board Reporter The Chair called the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m. at City Hall, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. To provide continuity for research, items are in agenda order although not necessarily discussed in that order. The Chair outlined the procedures and stated any aggrieved party may appeal a final administrative order of the Municipal Code Enforcement Board to the Circuit Court of Pinellas County within thirty days of the execution of the order. Florida Statute 286.0108 requires any party appealing a decision of this Board to have a record of the proceedings. 2. PUBLIC HEARINGS 2.1 Case 46-07 – Cont’d from 11/28/07, 1/23/08, 2/27/08, 4/23/08 Paula L. Ross (Status Report) 431 Palm Isle SE Required inspections, fees – Wilson Assistant City Attorney Camilo Soto reported a trial date for declaratory judgment has been set indicating the issue should be resolved by then. He requested the Board continue this case until September. Member Daniels moved to continue Case 46-07 to September 24, 2008. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 2.2 Case 05-08 – Contd from 1/23/08, 2/27/08 Paula L. Ross 431 Palm Island SE Accessory structure installed w/o permit – Brown Code Enforcement – 2008-06-25 1 Attorney Soto said the property is in compliance and requested that the case be dismissed. Member Goins moved to dismiss Case 05-08. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 2.3 Case 10-08 – Cont’d from 2/27/08, 4/23/08 Wells Fargo Bank NA (Status Report) 811 Druid Road Ext. storage, window & door openings - Ruud AND 2.4 Case 11-08 – Cont’d from 2/27/08, 4/23/08 Wells Fargo Bank NA (Status Report) 811 Druid Road Abandoned bldg,health & safety nuisance – Ruud The Secretary for the Board said the potential buyers had reported no progress on their efforts to purchase the property. Attorney Soto recommended noticing the property’s legal owner and proceeding as usual. Member Campbell moved to continue Cases 10-08 and 11-08 to July 23, 2008. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 2.5 Case 20-08 Robert Anthony Meghan Siragusa 1367 S. Michigan Ave. Residential Grass Parking – Ruud No one was present to represent the property owner. Code Inspector Alan Ruud provided a PowerPoint presentation. A notice of violation was issued on March 31, 2008, following the first inspection. Property photographs on March 31 and May 15, 2008, show a van parked on mulch in the front yard and a vehicle and boat parked on grass on the property’s north side. The driveway is on the south side. Mr. Ruud recommended the property comply within 30 days or a fine of $150/day be imposed. He said the property has been in and out of compliance for residential grass parking during the past two years. He had discussed the issue with the property owners to no avail. The property remains out of compliance today. Attorney Soto submitted composite exhibits. Member Daniels moved that this case came before the City of Clearwater Code Enforcement Board on June 25, 2008, after due notice to the Respondent(s), and having heard testimony under oath and received evidence, the Board issues the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order: Code Enforcement – 2008-06-25 2 FINDINGS OF FACT Based upon the testimony and evidence received, it is evident that residential grass parking exists. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The Respondent(s) is/are in violation of the City of Clearwater Code Section(s) 3- 1407.A.4 as referred in the Affidavit in this case. ORDER It is the Order of the Board that the Respondent(s) shall comply with said Section(s) of the City of Clearwater Code by July 25, 2008. If Respondent(s) does/do not comply within the time specified, the Board may order a fine of $150.00 per day for each day the violation continues to exist. Upon complying with said Section(s) of the Code, the Respondent(s) shall notify Inspector Alan Ruud, who shall inspect the property and notify the Board of compliance. If the Respondent(s) fail/fails to comply within the time specified, a certified copy of the Order imposing the fine may be recorded in the Public Records of Pinellas County, Florida, and once recorded shall constitute a lien against any real property owned by the Respondent(s), pursuant to Chapter 162, Florida Statutes. Any aggrieved party may petition the Board to reconsider or rehear any Board Order resulting from a public hearing. A petition for rehearing must be made in writing and filed with the Board Secretary no later than thirty days after the execution of the Order and prior to the filing of any appeal. Upon receipt of the petition, the Board will consider whether or not to reconsider or rehear the case. The Board will not hear oral argument or evidence in determining whether to grant the petition to reconsider or rehear. Any aggrieved party may appeal a final administrative Order of the Municipal Code Enforcement Board to the Circuit Court of Pinellas County within thirty (30) days of the execution of the Order. Florida Statute 286.0105 requires any party appealing a decision of this Board to have a record of the proceedings. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 2.6 Case 21-08 Joseph Nowak Diane Nowak 1259 Fruitland Avenue Development Code Violation – Shed location – Franco Property owner Diane Nowak refuted the violation. Code Inspector Peggy Franco provided a PowerPoint presentation. Property photographs on January 23, 2008, show the back yard shed nearly abuts the fence line where a 10-foot rear setback and five-foot side setback are required. Flexible standards for accessory structures are not permitted in this zoning district. On April 28, 2008, Ms. Franco discussed with Code Enforcement – 2008-06-25 3 Ms. Nowak compliance options to move or remove the shed. A notification of violation was issued on May 1, 2008, followed by further staff discussions with Ms. Nowak. Ms. Franco recommended the property comply by July 31, 2008, or a fine of $150/day be imposed. Ms. Franco said the shed’s foundation slab was poured last year. Staff does not have access to a property survey nor permission to enter the property to determine the exact property line. A new fence blocks views of the shed from the street. Ms. Nowak said City staff inspected and photographed the cement slab and half-built shed on June 7, 2007, but did not bring up setback issues. She said when City staff returned in September 2007, again, setbacks were not mentioned. She said after staff responded to a complaint in February 2008, she spent additional funds to repaint and re-roof the shed and install landscaping. Ms. Nowak said all of her abutting neighbors have signed a petition indicating no objection to the shed or its location. She said many neighborhood sheds encroach on setbacks. She said before beginning construction on the shed she had called the City twice and was not advised of setback requirements. Ms. Novak submitted photos of the shed. Development Review Technician Kyle Wilson said when he visited the property last year, he advised Ms. Novak that a permit was not required but a property survey was necessary to check on the setbacks. Attorney Soto said Ms. Nowak had admitted the shed is located 3 feet from the back and side of the fence. Ms. Novak estimated razing the structure would cost $4,000. She said she relied on City staff to provide her with accurate information. She said she heard nothing from Mr. Wilson after he told her he would get back to her if there were any problems. Charles Hearn, a neighbor, reviewed his construction of the concrete block shed, which he said cannot be relocated. He said when City staff saw the shed half built, staff never mentioned setbacks. He said the homeowner would not have invested more money in the project had she been advised that the shed was improperly sited. Development Services Manager Dan Bates said Mr. Wilson visited the property to determine if a permit was necessary, based on the shed’s size, and verified it was smaller than 100 square-feet. The structure was already under construction and the foundation had been laid. Discussion ensued regarding communication issues between staff and the property owner and options. Concern was expressed allowing the shed to remain would set a precedent. It was believed a precedent had already been set if there were already a number of sheds in the neighborhood that encroached into the setbacks. It was felt the shed was compatible with the neighborhood and the other sheds should be investigated. Planner Scott Kurleman said staff would check if there is a process in the code that would provide a mechanism to allow the shed to remain in its current location. Code Enforcement – 2008-06-25 4 Member Locke moved to continue Case 21-08 to August 27, 2008. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 2.7 Case 22-08 Thomas R. Mitchell Laurie L. Mitchell 708 Edenville Ave. Outdoor Display/Storage – Exterior Storage – Franco Property owner Thomas Mitchell refuted the violation Code Inspector Peggy Franco provided a PowerPoint presentation. Problems at the property date back to 2003. The property owners previously complied within a reasonable time. Mr. Mitchell is a strongman competitor and uses large tires, concrete balls, and kegs for physical conditioning. Ms. Franco inspected the property on January 30, 2008, and issued a notice of violation on February 5, 2008. Following a March 4, 2008 discussion of options with property owner Laurie Mitchell, Ms. Franco issued a notice of violation on May 1, 2008. On May 15, 2008, Ms. Franco discussed options with Mr. Mitchell and faxed him copies of both notices on June 2, 2008. Property photographs on July 25, 2007, show giant tires in a rack, concrete balls and a storage unit in front of the house. Property photographs on June 23, 2008, show the tires and rack remained in the driveway. While storing training accoutrements in a storage box on the side of the house had appeased neighbors, the practice violates code. Attorney Soto said the outdoor storage or display of tires in the front or back yard is not allowed in residential areas. Exceptions cannot be carved out for different types of sport. Ms. Franco recommended the owner comply by July 9, 2008, or a fine of $100/day be imposed. Mr. Mitchell distributed photographs of his strongman activities and reviewed his accomplishments. He said the 1,046-pound tires used for strength training must be stored in a rack. He said he trains approximately 3.5 hours per week and there is nowhere else in the City to train. He said it is difficult to train or carry heavy equipment on a grass surface. Discussion ensued regarding alternative storage opportunities. Attorney Soto submitted composite exhibits. Member Daniels moved to that this case came before the City of Clearwater Code Enforcement Board on June 25, 2008, after due notice to the Respondent(s), and having heard testimony under oath and received evidence, the Board issues the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order: FINDINGS OF FACT Based upon the testimony and evidence received, it is evident that exterior storage of large truck tires exists. Code Enforcement – 2008-06-25 5 CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The Respondent(s) is/are in violation of the City of Clearwater Code Section(s) 3-912 & 3-1502.G as referred in the Affidavit in this case. ORDER It is the Order of the Board that the Respondent(s) shall comply with said Section(s) of the City of Clearwater Code by August 27, 2008. If Respondent(s) does/do not comply within the time specified, the Board may order a fine of $100.00 per day for each day the violation continues to exist. Upon complying with said Section(s) of the Code, the Respondent(s) shall notify Inspector Peggy Franco, who shall inspect the property and notify the Board of compliance. If the Respondent(s) fail/fails to comply within the time specified, a certified copy of the Order imposing the fine may be recorded in the Public Records of Pinellas County, Florida, and once recorded shall constitute a lien against any real property owned by the Respondent(s), pursuant to Chapter 162, Florida Statutes. Any aggrieved party may petition the Board to reconsider or rehear any Board Order resulting from a public hearing. A petition for rehearing must be made in writing and filed with the Board Secretary no later than thirty days after the execution of the Order and prior to the filing of any appeal. Upon receipt of the petition, the Board will consider whether or not to reconsider or rehear the case. The Board will not hear oral argument or evidence in determining whether to grant the petition to reconsider or rehear. Any aggrieved party may appeal a final administrative Order of the Municipal Code Enforcement Board to the Circuit Court of Pinellas County within thirty (30) days of the execution of the Order. Florida Statute 286.0105 requires any party appealing a decision of this Board to have a record of the proceedings. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 3. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 3.1Case 47-07 - Affidavit of Compliance Jason L. Tilley Celia J. Tilley 912 Magnolia Ave. Exterior Storage, Residential Grass Parking, Landscaping – Ruud AND 3.2Case 45-07 - Affidavit of Non-Compliance John W. Gray 204 Pennsylvania Ave. Fences, Exterior Surfaces, Exterior Storage, Grass Cover – Collins AND Code Enforcement – 2008-06-25 6 3.3 Case 01-08 Affidavit of Non-Compliance O’Keefes Inc. 1219 S Ft. Harrison Ave. Grass Parking, Landscaping – Ruud AND 3.4 Case 02-08 Affidavit of Non-Compliance G. Anthony DuQuesnay 1219 S Ft. Harrison Ave. Grass Parking, Landscaping - Ruud Member Daniels moved to accept the Affidavit of Compliance for Case 47-07 and to accept the Affidavits of Non-Compliance and issue the Orders imposing fines for Cases 45-07, 01-08 and 02-08. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 4. OTHER BOARD ACTION/DISCUSSION: None. 5. NUISANCE ABATEMENT LIEN FILINGS: Suntrust Mtg, Inc. PNU2007-02736 c/o Ben-Ezra & Katz 2901 Stirling Rd. Ste 300 09-29-15-25920-000-0120 $600.00 Jan L Delgado PNU2008-00471 1491 Ridgelane Rd. 02-29-15-88182-000-0420 $400.00 Suntrust Bank PNU2008-00512 1008 Grantwood Ave. 08-29-16-99101-009-0190 $400.00 Dariusz Urban PNU2008-00159 336 Midway Island 08-29-15-43344-000-0680 $400.00 Christiane E Spina PNU2008-00381 300 Orangeview Ave. 11-29-15-39870-005-0080 $400.00 Martin Donovan PNU2008-00418 739 Island Way 05-29-15-43458-000-0240 $400.00 Member Campbell moved to accept the Nuisance Abatement Lien filings. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Code Enforcement – 2008-06-25 7 6. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - May 28,2008 Member Goins moved to approve the minutes of the regular Municipal Code Enforcement Board meeting of May 28,2008, as submitted in written summation to each board member. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 7. ADJOURN: The meeting adjourned at 4:39 p.m. /:Bw~'~ Chair Municipal Code Enforcement Board Attest: ~;~-c.4.- Secre the Board Code Enforcement - 2008-06-25 8