09/02/1981
r
'~ ' :.: ' .
, , '
r-
~
.'..,.,
i -
, ,.:--.......,....".~jA...l)d~'~.F"I<ft~_....._......;...~~.,;_-,...
..............~..__...#f~__'~....JI:' "4'lo~.I~1~Holr.~,__,"",-___.~~"~~~'1f:<I.-n,ftI.~'t~t~~';m:~~..h~'!~i.jt~i~~.Af.~
':.'
tic;
MUNICIPAL CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD
o
I
1
1
I
I
1
,'I
, 1
i
1
September 2, 1981
Members present:
Lee Regulski, Chairman
John Ehrig, Vice-Chairman
Paul Carnahan
John F. Gerlach
Don Winner
Raymond Custer
;.....~......-'h...-."___.._.__'"__ ~
Also present:
Gary Hewetson, representing City Staff
Thomas A. Bustin, City Attorney
Frances Sunderland, Board Secretary
Sue Lamkin, Assistant City Clerk
Lucille Williams, City Clerk (replaced S. Lamkin at 5:00 p.m.)
@"c
", "
, ,
~
The meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 2:00 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.
6-81
George Osterman
(mailing address
Fl. 33519)
(Shadow Lawn Mobile Home Park)
11 Bayview Avenue, Clearwater,
Gary Hewetson reported an
Mr. Osterman and he expects an
filed within the next 15 days.
hearing be dropped.
agreement
Affidavit
The City
has been reached with
of Compliance to be
is requesting the
Mr. Custer moved
staff legal counsel.
unanimously.
to dismiss the hearing as requested by
The motion was duly seconded and carried
CASE NO.
14-81
Abe Cohen et al
Clearwater, Fl.
(709 N. Ft. Harrison Avenue,
33516)
Entered as evidence by Gary Hewetson:
City's Exhibit #1 Copy of Notice of Violation dated 4/27/81.
City's Composite Exhibit #2 Photographs A thru F.
:~\.:,.,
~
1.
9/2/81
. ,1,
,r
l'
r--.
..:
'71' ;
, .
- .
I
" .
';1.: , '
t' "", ~~~y~t'r~~~~t!R{~;~~~~~'~'~~~:1~...r>~:"'i!JI~1,i~f':~"JY:::"I.r.:l1'!..~'~>:::'I!-:t~~.;::,.t:.,..,..,r,,'m!.'-M.,...,.V..:ry....:.J,-r:,hWll:S'!..t""d~~:'""'V~';'''''';'::~1''''.~':'>'t\..ft..W'!'Wu'''''~'''''~~''''''''-''1':,:':1''#1JM..'\J!~~~.>'(~...&:t.;,'....~~~~l~~~~~~~
~"
",-1
'j, "
o
Jeff Daniels, Fire Inspector, reported he inspected the
l3-unit three story building on 4/27/81 during the normal yearly
fire inspection and the violations noted constitute a life safety
hazard. The owners have installed battery-operated smoke detectors,
use of which has been approved by Pinellas County, and fire
extinguishers.
Inspector John Chester reviewed Exhibit 2, A thru F, taken
8/27/81, which depicted the violations listed in the citation.
He reported he had reviewed the violations with Abe Cohen.
Abe Cohen entered as evidence:
Defense Composite Exhibit #1 - Photographs numbered 1 thru 11.
Mr. Cohen briefly reviewed the Exhibit, pointing out there
is more than one means of egress from each floor. He is willing
to install lighted exit signs but does not wish to enclose the
stairways and enumerated his reasons. The building was erected
in 1915 and he does not believe any previous citations have been
issued. He would agree to investigate installation of a manual
alarm system. He questioned four long-time tenants of the build-
ing, all of whom expressed opposition to installation of stair-
way doors and enclosures.
o
In response, Inspector Chester stated the only alternative
would be the installation of a sprinkler system which would
eliminate need for enclosing the stairways. Vocal warnings of
fire could create panic.
Fire Harsha 1 Buhmeyer ,vas called as a witness by the Board
and stated installation of a sprinkler system as an alternative
would have to meet certain criteria outlined in the code and he
feels the building would not fully qualify.
The Board recessed from 3:30 p.m. to 3:41 p.m.
a."
~. " ,
"'~ :t
Discussion ensued concerning the age of the building, the
different means of egress, City liability, and whether the code
applies to a building of this age.
Mr. Ehrig moved the Findings of Fact are: From the evidence
shown in Plaintiff's Exhibit 2A, the stairs from the 2nd to the
1st floor is an open stairway in violation of the Life Safety
Code 101 Sec. 6-1.1.1; the testimony of Fire Inspectors Daniels
and Chester and testimony of Defendant indicates 13 living units
in violation of NFPA 101 Sec. 11-3.3.3.2 which references a
manual fire alarm system; and by testimony of the fire inspector
and Exhibit 2F, which shows the non-illuminated exit sign, there
is a violation of NFPA 101, Sec. 11-3.2.11.1. As shown in
Defendant's Exhibit #1, photos numbered 6 and 11, there is a
secondary means of egress that is a fire escape. Plaintiff's
2.
9/2/81
, "
"
t ,,' .'
, ,
,
, [7""
. .' '
. . . ,.
, ~ . .
r-
~.
I
"
! :
.~..:._.._.... ..
_..__--..~._ ~ .~~___ .._~ .__...__.._________.._.__..~_Y'_8''''",.'\.>'<.;.." ~"':.,.rl.o....~_.". ,.....r,...~_'f'r".. 1'....,...'1 ~'..." ~!l.....,\....,.".....,~ ...;..,'I<'....!I~"r!'~ :...,.~ ~,~p."1'>JI;.r''::'hI""~.,,,(,!-,t,''#'i',;'~''1".n,,'.z.'''~:'''~1l.~~.r.':''~I':::.,'2:'..~{.N.1;:i~ {i:,c".,'l
~~\ /
o
Exhibit #2, photos B, C & D, show two stairways as means of
egress from the 2nd floor. The building was built circa 1915
and has existed in that condition since then; the Conclusions
of Law are: The building located at 709 N. Ft. Harrison,
Whitehouse Apartments, is found in violation of Life Safety
Code 101, Sec. 6-1.1.1, 11-3.3.3.2 and 11-3.2.11.1; the Order
is: The Defendant be given 30 days to comply with the require-
ment in Sec. 11-3.3.3.2 for the installation of a manual fire
alarm system; 30 days to comply with Sec. 11-3.2.11.1 providing
illuminated exit signs, and 30 days to comply with Sec. 6-1.1.1
in conformance with the fire marshal's interpretation of the
Code, and an additional 60 days to comply with the fire marshal's
ruling. If the Defendant does not comply within the time
specified, he shall pay a fine of $50.00 per day for each item
until compliance.
,
" ,
,
,
l
i
i
i
'I :
'I
,
\'
i"
Upon the vote being taken Messrs. Ehrig, Carnahan, Gerlach,
Winner and Custer voted "Aye;" Mr. Regulski voted "Nay." Hotion
carried.
The Board recessed from 4:35 p.m. to 4:45 p.m.
CASE NO. 16-81 Herbert II. Hutner (1200 N. Ft. Harrison Ave.)
0:'
..
Gary Hewetson requested this case be continued as he expects
the property owner to comply. Mr. Ehrig moved to deny the request
for continuance. The motion was duly seconded and carried unani-
mously.
Charles Harris, representing the property owner, stated
Mr. Hutner would comply but requested a grace period of 60 days
to implement repairs.
Mr. Winner moved to set a hearing for 11/4/81. The motion
was duly seconded.
Mr. Harris stated he is a friend of the owner and manager of
the complex and is representing the owner because he has been ill
and cannot be present.
Mr. Hewetson stated the parties have reached an agreement and,
if the agreement is complied with, the case can be dismissed.
Mr. Winner withdrew his motion and moved the Finding of
Facts are: The parties agreed that they were stipulating to
the facts and agreeing that Mr. Hutner is in violation of the
Code sections as charged and that Mr. Hutner will make the neces-
sary repairs; the Conclusion of Law is: Defendant is found guilty of
violationsof the LIfe Safety Code as charged and agrees that he is in
violation as cited: Life Safety Code lOl~ Sees. 11-3.3.1.1, 11-2.2.1.1,
6-1.1.1, and 11-3.3.3.1; and the Order is: Board gives Defendant
60 days to clean up the premises as agreed by the parties and to
@
'F,
~-
-'
, _:,.:r.:
~.
Jtt....::f$;.\,.':\~~...I,x~.~,j,r;i~'~ )~l<~".~ Q~~:\'~::~~::\..."'\;~\.~~'A~"~t'\~:~#.:'::-":.:" ,~;(;:l:"lt ;~~:-~ ~~~, "",,~~,,,,~--::~;:,:~~~:-'.1~~:'~"::j,:~::~'~ :~~",';;:"":':~"':;;~. :V, '::;::;.,~""~:...!'.7.i~:~':." '::~. ~.~::,).:;"o! :.....:; ,....-.:.,: .,'" tt~ -:t""..' :..:~\ ' :,.r... :'t.t.: ~;,'l..' ,.....~~l\,~:.~~r't.'J'.:.'ru~,.,'.tt,!~t-~..:. ;""M',t:~.J';~":'f5Y~~:'-::.~~~~i"t~tW<::~
I
I
,1
!
I
o
bring into compliance all code violations cited within 60 days of
this date. If he does not comply a fine of $100.00 per day for
each day the violation continues to exist shall be levied. The motion
was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
CASE NO. 15-81 David Gange1hoff d/b/a Gulf Marine of
Clearwater (401 N. Ft. Harrison)
Entered as evidence by Gary Hewetson:
City's Exhibit #1 - Notice of Violation and attachment #1.
City's Composite Exhibit #2 - Slides numbered 2 thru 21
taken 4/17 and 4/21/81 by Inspectors Chester and Daniels.
Inspector Chester reviewed the slides and described what
each depicted. He made a reinspect ion on 9/1/81 and stated some
changes had been made but conditions were worse, if anything.
Mr. Gange1hoff had rearranged the paint supplies and updated
the fire extinguisher. The rear area is hazardous as it contains
combustibles and could be easily fired. Section 16.45 of the
Standard Building Code was read into the record.
Mr. Gangelhoff reviewed the list of violations stating a
firewall would be no protection as the building is all wood.
They do not operate during evening hours so a lighted exit sign
is not needed. He will rearrange the liquids and mount the fire
extinguisher to comply and the aisle will be rearranged. He does
not own the property and the area not enclosed is used by others.
He constantly fights weeds and does clean up during spare time.
He was told by the inspector a firewall was not really necessary,
and he does not store motors with gasoline in them. He is making
an effort to comply but the complete picture has not been shown.
The slides presented are old. He has occupied this site for
13 years and has been cited in the past only for minor violations,
not for failure to have a firewall. He stated he was not told
charges would be filed with this Board. He admitted he signed
I the Notice of Violation but did not read the attachment.
Discussion ensued concerning the need for an illuminated
sign and the fire inspector conceded illumination would not be
required if they did not maintain night hours. ~Ir. Gange1hoff
disputed the findings, but stated he would comply with reasonable
requests.
Mr. Ehrig moved it is a Finding of Fact that on attachment #1
NFPA 101 Secs. 12-2.5.2 thru 12-2.5.3, AlA Sec. 11.1, C, and
NFPA 101 Sec. 12-2.9 are not considered violations of the codes
in view of corrections which have been made. The motion was
duly seconded and carried unanimously.
~
V
Mr. Gerlach moved the Board accept the Finding of Fact
presented by Inspector Chester that there is presently not an
4.
9/2/81
?-')
-' I
'[G'"
, ,
" ,
m'. ""\'
..' "':',/ :~' i;'
" .: '~-,',~'<,; ::" :,.' ::/;: '
'M":'
.. ' , . .
, ' ,
,~ ' .
"', .;,'"
" . "
~'"
. ',' . '
. . ;, ' .
-: '
'i
.f7
I
',r'
, I,;
.__A~'I'i'~.<1't",~,:r~ ~f" ,:~::'At;.,~.:-.""l",,,,,,,,,,""~--'-.~.~~l:.;.o""'''''--H_'''''_~_''''''''_._._.'''''''''''''''''''''''' ~_____...._ ,._,....._ ....____.... ,._...._.~____..~...,~,~..__"' ,,,... - ~."".. .............~..,_,'...__..~n__ ..._,,"_~-:....:t".'~'.i-:~ 'rt...."\tJ"Jlr::"-;'V':...~'--:r..~ ''1~;;;;:.
;..::;'
~ t '
!
I
I
I
10
I
j
acceptable wall under NFPA 101, 12-3.5.1 (wall between work and
storage area and retail area) and Conclusion of Law is:
Mr. Gangelhoff is guilty of NFPA 101, 12-3.5.1 and the Order is:
Mr. Gangelhoff meet the requirements complying with the Code
within 60 days. If Mr. Gangelhoff does not meet specifications
within 60 days that he be fined $20.00 per day thereafter until
said violation is corrected. The motion was duly seconded and
carried unanimously.
o
Mr. Custer moved that it is a Finding of Fact that: Based
on the evidence and Plaintiff's Exhibit 2 (slides) and on the
testimony of Mr. Gangelhoff, Mr. Gange1hoff (Gulf Marine) is in
violation of methods of storage and warehousing of boats and
Conclusion of Law is: Mr. Gangelhoff is guilty of violation of
AlA Sec. 1.5, a., c., e., f. Sec. 28.6 and the Order is: The
Defendant be given 90 days to complete the general cleanup in
the back storage area and, in the event he does not complete in
90 days, a fine of $20.00 per day be imposed until completed;
immediate attention is to be given to cleaning of egress for
fire fighting equipment to enter into area of storage yard.
In the event this is not complete in 30 days a fine of $20.00
per day shall be levied against the Defendant until such work
is completed. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Mr. Ehrig moved that Finding of Fact is: Based on the
testimony of Fire Inspector Chester and the Defendant there are
amounts of paint stored improperly within the store and lack of
an appropriately tagged, inspected, and wall-mounted fire extin-
guisher; the Conclusion of Law is: Defendant is in violation of
AlA Standard Building Code Sec. 16.45 g.l, 2, 3 and 4 and the
State Fire Marshal's Rules and Regulations 4A-2l.37 and NFPA
Pamphlet 10; and the Order is; Mr. Gangelhoff shall comply with
these sections of the Cede of the City of Clearwater by installing
the properly inspected, tagged, and wall-mounted fire extinguisher
in a place designated by the Fire Inspector. The Fire Marshal
shall, within 7 days of this meeting, supply to Mr. Gangelhoff,
in writing, the specific quantity of paint that may be safely
stored (based on the actual size of his store). Once he obtains
the appropriate information he shall comply with same. If
Defendant does not comply within 30 days he shall pay a fine of
$20.00 per day for each day the violation exists. The motion
was duly seconded.
. ,-' "
, . .'~ '
i
1
I
I
"
'i
.. \,
;
I
. "!
:' .':
',"
Discussion ensued concerning lack of adequate testimony
regarding paragraphs 2 and 4 of Sec. 16.45. Mr. Ehrig accepted
deletion of paragraphs 2 and 4. The motion was duly seconded
and carried unanimously.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS - The Chairman presented for signature
the amendments to the Rules and Regulations which had been
previously approved.
e
5 .
\ '
r
[, :".,,;',
r-..
.',
"
r-
'..
,
~l
j-...-,.,,---'-....--
, , ,
. . , ' .." , ,':
_ __ ~....______~ _...__............. ~"""'''' ..._,____.~._______~~~~~\..."t~fi.C.~.t(il':"~Y.~~~:'.!1e!1~i1"1J~'l~~;
--1.,-
...!,..-.
...~.' ..-'
CASE NO. 4-81
Leroy Mitchell (Mai Tai Motor Inn)
(100 Coronado Drive)
o
An Affidavit of Compliance has been filed. Two letters from
the Mai Tai were read into the record. The Fire Marshal reported
the 4th floor will not be used by the public until compliance is
achieved, and the Fire Department has accepted this condition.
The 1st floor is not used for storage and will not be until
requirements are met. The fire alarm system is almost ready for
use. The stairs have been sealed and basic compliance has been
met. The premises will be reinspected at a later date. The
Board secretary reported a fine of $3300 has been imposed as of
this date.
CASE NO. 18-81
J-M.A.T.
Apache Apartments,
Corporation, Joseph Tessier
1731 Apache Trail
The Affidavit of Violation of NFPA 101 was reviewed. The
Notice was not sent by certified mail. Mr. Carnahan moved to
set hearing for October 7, 1981. The motion was duly seconded
and carried unanimously.
@.",:,
" '
..':"
NEW BUSINESS Julianne Holt, representing Clearwater Sands
(formerly the Mai Tai Notor Inn), requests the fine be held up
and a lien not be filed. The new owners took possession on
June 30, 1981, and have tried to correct the violations. There
is no willful intent to violate.
The Assistant City Attorney reported the lien is
property, not the person, and the new purchasers were
the violations prior to the transfer of ownership.
against the
aware of
The representative conceded they knew of the violations but
were not aware of the fine and ask the Board to modify the order.
The Board took no action.
MINUTES The Chairman presented the minutes of the meeting
of August 19, 1981, for consideration. Mr. Winner moved the
minutes be approved as submitted. The motion ,vas duly seconded
and carried unanimously.
Meeting adjourned at 8:18 p.m.
iI~~
~
V
d
L ~ ,,"-__- ~~
e-Lt.____
City Clerk
6.
9/2/81