Loading...
05/23/1990 (2) '", "R" , '< '. .' .' . ' . . , " . .' . . '. ,. "I', , ':; . , ',',)' " .: ~ : 1 ' "-"':' .r-.. :"n', , ' . ,', ,;" " ,,' '.:' . .:\ r--.-' " , .- r- ~ " . . ;c:;. " ' . " r-- ~' r- r- ~ I " , , i. :') ,-j 1 1 1 I I I j o o " .~ '(.;J No one was present to represent Katherine Bie. In response to a questions, Mr. Packer stated the property is the strip of land along the bay and the violation recurs several times a year. The City owns right-of-way to the south of the subject property, and City staff is mowing more than just the right-of-way. He stated Ms. Bie owns the parcel near the radio station and the parcel across the street, which was also cited but cleared. Mr. Cardinal moved that concerning Case No. 1 of Public Nuisance Clearing List 90-5-2 regarding violation of Section 95.04 of the Clearwater City Code on property known as that vacant strip of land on S Pierce Blvd aka M&B 24.03, Sec 16-29-15, the Municipal Code Enforcement Board has heard testimony at the Municipal Code Enforcement Board hearing held tIle 23rd day of May, 1990, and based on the evidence, the Municipal Code Enforcement Board enters the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of law, and Order. The Findings of Fact are: after hearing testimony of Vern Packer, Code Inspector, and viewing the evidence, exhibits submitted: City composite exhibit A, it is evident that there exists excessive growth or accumulation of weeds, undergrowth or other similar plant materials at the above address. The Conclusions of law are: Katherine B. Bie is in violation of Section 95.04. It is the Order of this Board that Katherine B. Bie shall comply with Section 95.04 of the Code of the City of Clearwater within 10 days (6/4/90). Upon failure to comply within the time specified, the City Manager may authorize the entry upon the property and such action as ;s necessary to remedy the condition, without further notice to Katherine B. Bie. The City Commission may then adopt a Resolution assessing against the property on which remedial action was taken by the City the actual cost incurred plus $150.00 administrative cost. Such cost shall constitute a lien against the property until paid. A Notice of Lien, in such form as the City Commission shall determine, may be recorded in the Public Records of Pinellas County as other liens are recorded. If the owner takes remedial action after the time specified, the City Commission may assess the property the $150.00 administrative cost. Such cost shall constitute a lien against the property until paid. Upon complying, Katherine B. Bie shall notify Vern Packer, the City Official who shall inspect the property and notify the Board of compliance. Should a dispute arise concerning compliance, either party may request a further hearing before the Board. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Done and Ordered this 23rd day of Mav, 1990. Case No. 28-90 Penguin Palace, Inc. 7 Rockaway (Bu i ldin'g) Tom Chaplinsky, Construction Inspection Supervisor, stated Penguin Palace, Inc. is the lessee of the property, who he believes caused the violation. He stated the violation consists of a wooden deck on Rockaway extending west toward the gulf and another deck constructed over a 20 x 40 patio area immediately west of the building. Both decks are seaward of the Coastal Construction Line and the one on the north side encroaches into the street right-of-way. Both decks were constructed without permits or inspection and have not been issued certificates of occupancy. MCEB 2 5/23/90 ,'-;\..,..........."...\-.-~~, '. ~ .r- ~ . ' , ~. r-~ I . i' , '~ ~ o o (~ v City submitted composite exhibit A, three photographs of the property - #1 looking south from Rockaway, #2 looking westward from the sidewalk of Rockaway and #3 from the west side deck looking south. City submitted exhibit B, a photocopy of a zoning map of the area including the subject property. Mr. Chaplinsky stated the Coastal Construction Control Line (CCCL) runs through approximately the westerly one third of the property. He stated in photograph #3 the deck is entirely seaward of the CCCL and in violation of Section 136.009(b) of the City code. The Assistant City Attorney requested the Board take judicial notice of the code section cited. City submitted exhibit C, a copy of a survey of the property which was submitted to the Building Dept. in February of 19B8 for permitting purposes for the deck. The north side deck is shown encroaching into the street right-of-way and is in violation of Section 112.27(b) of the City code. The Assistant City Attorney requested the Board take judicial notice of this cited section of the code. '<-I, Mr. Chaplinsky stated he visited the property recently and the violation still exists. Application was made in previous years for building permits but no permit or certificate of occupancy had been issued. In response to questions, he stated to his personal knowledge the violation has existed for approximately one year, however it was indicated the deck has been in existence for a number of years. Discussion ensued regarding how long the violation has existed and whether or not the proper party is being cited. John Babin, Director of Penguin Palace, Inc., stated he purchased the business in March of 1989. At that time a variance was granted allowing the existing deck and an extension to that deck. A DNR (Dept. of Natural Resources) permit expired prior to pulling the building permit. The deck on the north side existed since the building was built. Mr. Babin stated he has not altered or repaired either deck since he purchased the business. In response to questions, it was stated the CCCL had been established about 1961, prior to construction of the original deck. It was stated a variance was granted by the Development Code Adjustment Board on September 22, 1988 to permit an existing deck to remain seaward of the CCCL and State approval was obtained. However, the time expired in which to obtain the necessary perMits. Mr. Babin submitted Defendant's exhibit A, a copy of the action agenda from the Development Code Adjustment Board meeting of September 22, 1988. Discussion ensued regarding who is responsible for the violations as the decks were already in place when Mr. Babin took over the business. Mr. Randy Milne, agent for Mr. Babin, stated an extension of the time in order to obtain a permit was denied by the Development Code Adjustment Board on October 12, 1989. In response to a question, he indicated he was not an agent for the previous owner. Mr. Babin stated he has a 12 year lease and the owner has given permission for construction of a new deck. MCEB 3 5/23/90 'P' . , , . .i, .p-: '~ <': . ,'...... -.-,...., ','- .