Loading...
08/05/1981 .11" ~; ~ -,'.t.~"'Jl~!?l~Jst~~~.~\l!t~~':t1~~tt~lt.!f~~~~:~S1!~~~!.c'...:::t~~~~~'\Jw..~-:.nf.:':"NI.hJ''''h~:''1..'f',lu'jollN''''1<l.o_______~~~~l.~~~~~~~~' , "- '. , MUNICIPAL CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD o August 5, 1981 Members present: .-----..--..-.......- Lee Regulski, Chairman *John Ehrig, Vice-Chairman, arrived at 1:28 p.m. Paul Carnahan *John F. Gerlach, arrived at 1:58 p.m. Don Winner Raymond Custer Also present: Thomas A. Bustin, City Attorney Frances Sunderland, Board Secretary Sue Lamkin, Assistant City Clerk @" ~ ,', , . , , The meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 1:00 p.m. in the Commission Meeting Room in City Hall. He outlined the procedures and advised any aggrieved party may appeal a ruling or order of the Municipal Code Enforcement Board by certiorari in the Circuit Court of Pinellas County. Any such appeal must be filed within thirty (30) days of the execution of the order to be appealed. He noted that Florida Statute 286.0105 requires any applicant appealing a decision of this Board to have a verbatim record of the proceedings to support such an appeal. CASE NO. 2-81 Hillcrest Villas (Freife1d) The City Attorney advised the case had been appealed to the Circuit Court and once the record is filed with the Court this Board's jurisdiction ceases. He has been notified the appeal is being dismissed and he recommends the Board take no action and allow the Notice of Dismissal of the Appeal to be filed. Mr. Winner moved that a review of this case be set for August 19 and Hillcrest Villas be notified of said review pending court case dismissal and compliance. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously (4 votes). CASE NO. 6-81 George Osterman (Shadow Lawn Mobile Home Park) (Request for continuance.) The City Attorney advised one continuance would be in order if a conflict exists. George Osterman stated his attorney has a court hearing today and cannot be present. @J"'" . 1" '4-~''', . Mr. Custer moved to continue the item to August The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously 19, 1981. (4 votes) " ,-' 'F' , , , . ~_. -' ~ ..,. ';':' . " ' (, '~l\i!.;t,~f.."'~'!:'rt~]'t.a~l}7rt~::'~~~~."':.."!T::.~_~~~~;~::-t~t":::~l:~~~"'.!:.~i~~~~.::r::AtI",~~;,,~""'~'';''~'''r'.L't.I'~~t.....tA';-:.'iWJ~!.1 ..C..""'.."'.I,t.....^ ..:..........,.,"/'.('~~"..",.'t"....____l_""_..~_-.- , " _.__",,~~~~4!~~}~:S: CASE NO. 9-81 Modern Manufacturing of America cO By unanimous consent this item was deferred until later in the meeting to allow time for interested parties to appear. CASE NO. 11- 81 Clearwater Seville, Ltd., Building Code Violation Gary Hewetson, attorney representing City staff, entered as evidence the following exhibits: Exhibit #1 Letter dated May 5, 1981 Director, to Clearwater Seville, B. Albrecht. Exhibit #2 - Copy of City of Clearwater Notice of Violation dated May 4, 1981 (correct date of notice should be May 5, 1981). Composite Exhibit #3 - A series of photographs marked A through Q. from R. J. Ayers, Building Ltd., attention William G Elton Reichardt, Building Inspector, reported a complaint had been received; therefore, an inspection was made of the Seville Apartments, Bldg. 12, on May 5, 1981, at which time it was found the handrails on balconies on all floors were in a deteriorated condition; concrete was cracking and falling off; and the railings were taped in various places. Exhibit #1 was read into the record. On May 12 Inspectors Chaplinsky and Reichardt met with William Albrecht who stated he was doing temporary repairs only because he expected to be involved in litigation concerning the condition of the building. The date of delivery of Exhibit #2 was May 14, 1981. On 5/18/81 Chaplinsky and Reichardt made another inspection and found no barricades had been placed to provide protection. Mr. Albrecht stated he would have this done by 5/19/81. On 5/22/81 the walk- ways were roped off and the temporary walkway cover was in place but was not well braced. This was corrected by 5/27/81. Sub- sequent inspections revealed certain materials on hand to effect repairs. Further inspections during June and July revealed no repair work started, with Mr. Albrecht stating he was having difficulty getting needed materials. The latest inspection was made August 3 with no repairs begun. He reviewed the 17 photo- graphs and stated he had informed Mr. Albrecht that, if a systematic repair project were undertaken, the City would work with him on a time frame for completion. The railings are not currently unsafe for persons on the balconies but could con- ceivably become so if further deterioration takes place. William Albrecht conceded he is aware of the problem, which was first noticed in December 1980. He is in the process of prep~ring a suit on product liability and implied warranty concernlng this situation. His attorney, Bill Jonassen, advised him not to proceed with the remedial repair work because of the (7) 2. 8/5/81 r.. ~ . .:' ~ ~ .'::~ . :r ,\ " '. ~ ~ .' . ~ . ~~_~:ttflt~~,;tt.'\?":~'f:I;.~~~:~~t~~\:~,l:7.?:.:~~;;~~.l![~~~;[E~.'.1~?t:...-.;.:.:j:;{~t~:,;,:~,~~t'=~::U~~~~'.7':~~:~ -:"'''':~'~:.~~~r: t~'C':"~":!~.~.~:~i..t1.".^'""!::'f~)~"'"J~ 't~C'~~",~':"':":~~''':",,:\;1ti\-l.I~::t:.!:';~~'\'t....,:,~..~~~!t:4!~^''':r.i:''~;''t%,!l-\"C'?':;~~'l:~:"i!~H,,~':~rt'.~~~~l'Je' I I I , I,' '; o o V 0',' ':. ~ "t . , ' "destructive testing doctrine". He stated he intends to complete repairs but requests the Board's indulgence concerning a time frame. He requested his attorney be contacted regarding the time the suit will be filed. He explained why the preparation of the suit has been time consuming. Currently, the Building Department is unable to tell him the proper type of permit to request. In summation, Mr. Hewetson stated he is not unsympathetic with Mr. Albrecht's plight but the fact remains repairs must be effected. The City could be in jeapordy if it fails to do all things possible under the Code to protect the health and safety of the citizens of Clearwater. He requested the Board set a timely date for repairs to commence and impose a fine if they are not begun by that time. In summation, Mr. Albrecht requested time to resolve the many issues involved and asked that the record reflect the handrails, posts, and figure 8's are manufactured items which were purchased by his firm and installed by the manufacturer. He asked that the question concerning the type of permit he needs be answered. He stated Clearwater Seville, Ltd. is not the owner of the building; however, they do own the land. The hearing recessed from 2:25 to 2:35 p.m. The Chairman reviewed the facts presented; i.e., precast handrails are deteriorating, to which Mr. Albrecht agrees. The hazard involved concerns loose pieces of concrete falling as much as 8 stories. The original construction is scheduled to go into litigation. If it becomes necessary to file a lien it would be filed against the owner of the land, Clearwater Seville, Ltd. in accordance with Section 166.059 of Florida Statutes. The owner of Bldg. 12 is Seville Condo 12 Association. Responding to a question concerning the status of the pend- ing law suit the City Attorney advised the Board's order should be based on evidence presented today. Mr. Ehrig moved that based on the testimony given by the City Building Inspector, the testimony of Mr. Albrecht, and Composite Exhibit #3, A through Q, there is an 8-story concrete building with concrete decorative handrails that are cracked and broken in various places and represent a hazard to the health, safety and welfare of the inhabitants and guests at Clearwater Seville Condo #12. Therefore the Board finds that Clearwater Seville, Ltd. is guilty of violations of Chapter 133, Sees. 103.4, 101.6 and 1108.1 of the Standard Building Code. Repairs should commence within 30 days to remedy the situation in violation and immediate steps be taken to secure whatever broken, spalled or cracked portions of handrail, or other structural members of the railings, and that protective walkways 3. ,r--. h, r ~ r",,,,,"""~"'n"'ft~"""'"%"'-""''''''''''"C''''''.",''~'''=",",~'''.>'''''''' <'''''i'''.'''".''"'''.'.''~''.~~''''''<W''''''''''''"''''___'_~1 i i , ' I: o be constructed in the primary entrances and exits to the bui1dinR and remain until such time as the repairs are completed. Installation of work shall be approved by the City Building Official while the repairs are being executed. In the event repairs are not begun within 30 days a fine of $100.00 per day will be levied against the property. The motion was duly seconded. Mr. Winner moved to amend the motion to insert the words "actual physical" before the word "repairs". The amend- ment was duly seconded and the amended motion carried unanimously. (5 votes Mr. Gerlach abstained as he did not hear the complete case.) Responding to a question the City Attorney stated this order addresses conditions as they currently exist, not what may occur in the future. If subsequent violations occur a new violation notice would have to be issued. CASE NO. 9-81 Modern Manufacturing of America, Sign Ordinance Violation Submitted as evidence by Sign Inspector Stuart Williams: Composite Exhibit #1 - Drawing by Nodern Manufacturing of America showing dimensions of sign and sign inspector's drawing showing dimensions. Composite Exhibit #2 - Two photographs taken 5/26/81. ~ 'V It was noted for the record the violator, Modern Manufacturing of America, is not present but received notice of this hearing on July 20, 1981. The inspector sent a letter to Nick's Auto Repair on March 10, 1981, stating a sign permit had not been obtained. He spoke with Mike and Deeme Garvey on 4/27/81 and they stated they would correct the sign. He has been unable to locate the Garveys since that time. He inspected the site today and there have been no changes in the sign nor have they applied for a permit. His computation indicates the sign covers 243 sq. ft. and only 150 sq. ft. are permitted. For the record, it was noted the sign ordinance has been in effect since 1972, and all sign contractors are aware of the provisions in the sign ordinance. The Inspector reported the sign company had been informed they had two options; one, either correct the sign or; two, obtain a variance from the Sign Board. Modern Manufacturing has erected three signs in Clearwater in the last two years and the Inspector has had problems with them before. Nick Kostopoulos, owner of the property, reported he had requested the sign company obtain a permit from the City. He has tried to call them many times to no avail. The sign is made of a foam product glued onto the shingles. He would like to keep the sign because it is an attractive sign. ~ V 4. 8/5/81 'r , I H' " ~-- ~ ~' .\ " , , ',~\hf:.....:;;t';.~~~e:'1.t:~1..TIf~zm~'t~~lf.;;i1'~~!:r.~(':-jt.~Y~'1':'f.1;:,;';~'\I"';;'~~::::;-:;..r:~I~J."".':',":.":;::::mCn'!:":~,f~l~::"~-",~JC:.".':":~'J,""'~ '1'~' ''''''i'P''''';I-""~,..~...,;t;1''''7''''1''''''":'MMf;:;,~.,w.m:r~~,,,,;m<lll.~~ol::li'.lItllc'''ll<:U'''W'I' , )!.. I 'l' o Mr. Gerlach moved that based on the testimony received from Stuart Williams, a sign ,vas erected without a permit and the sign exceeded the 150 sq. ft. maximum allowed by the City of Clearwater and that Modern Manufacturing of America is guilty of erecting a sign without a permit under Sec. l43.21(a)(1). Therefore Modern Manufacturing of America shall have 45 days to receive a permit from the City of Clearwater which conforms to all City Ordinances. The motion was duly seconded. Mr. Ehrig moved to amend the motion to provide a fine of $10.00 per day be assessed in the event the permit is not obtained within 45 days, which will continue until the permit is obtained. The amendment was duly seconded, and the amended motion carried unanimously. CASE NO. 14-81 Abe Cohen and Paul Welch et ux The Chairman Life Safety Code. September 2, seconded and reviewed the Affidavit Mr. Ehrig moved to set 1981 beginning at 2:00 p.m. carried unanimously. of Violation of a hearing for The motion was the duly CASE NO. 15-81 David Gangelhoff d/b/a Gulf Marine of Clear'vater r"\ V The Chairman reviewed the Notice of Violation which involves numerous sections of the fire code. Mr. Custer moved to set a hearing for September 2, 1981. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimousJy. CASE NO. 16-81 Herbert Hutner The Chairman reviewed the Affidavit of Violation of the Life Safety Code. Mr. Winner moved to set a hearing for September 2, 1981. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. NEW BUSINESS Changes in Rules and Regulations. Article VI Order of Business The proposed changes call for elimination of the roll call and relocating "Minutes of previous meeting" to immediately precede Adjournment. Article VIII Hearings It sections "a" and lib" under Section is proposed to 1. delete sub- Mr. Winner moved to make the changes the Rules and Regulations. The motion was carried unanimously. as outlined above in duly seconded and CASE NO. 4-81 Leroy F. Mitchell (Mai Tai Motor Inn) cr3"" ~ ~ ''. ... , , The City Attorney reported one of the new owners had requested the Board reconsider certain cited violations. The individual was informed there was no procedure established for reconsideration. 5. "