Loading...
10/10/1990 (2) r- - ......, '. ;F r- " " p ~' .J ,r- ,r- r-. '~ . t'. . I: { , . , . '. 'I ,I' , . \0 I I Mr. Wyatt moved that concerning Case ~o. 1 of Public Nuisance Clearing List 90-10-1 regarding violation of Section 95.04 of the Clearwater City Code on property located at 2054 Ridgelane Road a/k/a Sunset Ridge Unit 3, Lot 70, the Municipal Code Enforcement Board has heard testimony at the Muni cipa 1 Code Enforcement Board hearing held the 10th day of October, 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 Vicki Niemiller, Code Inspector, and viewing the evidence, exhibits submitted: City composite exhibit A - a copy of the file of record including photographs and copy of the legal notice, it is evident that there exists the excessive growth or accumulation of weeds, undergrowth or other similar plant materials and/or debris at the above address. The Conclusions of Law are: William Knuckey Jr. is in violation of Section 95.04. o It is the Order of this Board that William Knuckey Jr. shall comply with Section 95.04 of the Code of the City of Clearwater within 10 days (10/20/90). Upon failure to comply within the time specified, the City Manager may authorize the entry upon the property and such action as is necessary to remedy the condition, without further notice to William Knuckey, Jr. 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 ;n 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, William Knuckey Jr. shall notify Vicki Niemiller, 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 ser.onded and carried unanimously. Done and Ordered this 10th day of,October, 1990. Edmund E. & Therese L. Morrisey 1200 E Druid Rd aka M&B 47/07, Sec 15/29/15 (Public Nuisance) Vicki Niemiller, Code Inspector, stated ownership of the above referenced property was verified through the Property Appraiser's Office. The property was inspected September 4 and posted September 6, 1990. Notice of the violation was sent certified mail which was returned unclaimed. Ms. Niemiller stated she contacted the realtor of the property and was assured it would be cleared. She inspected the property this morning and there has been no change. Ms. Niemiller submitted City composite exhibit A, a copy of the legal notice and photographs. Ms. Niemiller stated there is high vegetation on the property. - Case No. 2 "',~ ! '::::,\ o MCEB 2. 10/10/90 ,r-' r r- ,. , , . " I" .' . . .~ " o "1 o o ' ' Mr. Wyatt moved that concerning Case No.2 of Public Nuisance Clearing List 90-10-1 regarding violation of Section 95.04 of the Clearwater City Code on property located at 1200 E Druid Rd a/k/a M&B 47/07, Sec 15/29/15, the Municipal Code Enforcement Board has heard testimony at the Munici pa 1 Code Enforcement Board hearing held the 10th day of October, 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 Vicki Niemiller, Code Inspector, and viewing the evidence, exhibits submitted: City composite exhibit A - copy of legal notice and photographs, it is evident that there exists the excessive growth or accumulation of weeds, undergrowth or other similar plant materials and/or debris at the above address. The Conclusions of Law are: Edmund & Therese Morrisey are in violation of Section 95.04. It is the Order of this Board that Edmund & Therese Morrisey shall comply with Section 95.04 of the Code of the City of Clearwater within 10 days (10/20/90). Upon failure to comply within the time specified, the City Manager may authorize the entry upon the property and such action as is necessary to remedy the condition, without further notice to Edmund & Therese Morrisey. 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 sh4ll constitute a lien against the property until paid. Upon complying, Edmund & Therese Morrisey shall notify Vicki Niemiller, 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 mo~ion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Done and Ordered this 10th day of October, 1990 Keramat Fahari about 906 Hart St aka Park Plaza Sub, Blk E, lots 9 & 10 (Public Nuisance) Rick Rosa, Code Inspector, stated he inspected the property September 10th and found excess ive growth and some debri s. He posted, photographed and sent notice of the violation October 18th. Ownership was verified through the tax rolls of Pinellas County. Mr. Rosa submitted City composite exhibit A, a copy of the file of record. He stated notice was sent certified mail. He reinspected and photographed the property this morning and the violation still exists. - Case No. 3 Mr. Keramat Fahari agreed he is in violation. He stated he usually keeps the property clear but was not able to work for a few weeks. He attempted to mow the property yesterday and his 'lawn mower broke. He phoned the inspector and requested a few more days as he would have it cleared by the end of the week. Mr. Fahari stated a next door neighbor asked to use the property for planting and they would clear it, but they didn-t. MCEB 10/10/90 3 . \.' ,>~;~: :~~~ ~ '<:1<1" ~. . \\~;..:' , , ,r- r- ~ ',' ,:08",:,:: :,.':",:'" ,"." ,.'. '" .' . , ' I. . -., .. , . . . , ' . , '><! , " , ' ~", ~ " ',. Jtf~~~~~~i0~~~il~f~\~~i)l~~i?:!~1;:':!;':}~~!t'rt;"tf;~V'~:r;0;~E;f:i1);f.\f~;~~!~!~~~1~~i~4~~~~~~f~ff~~@ ,. ........' ,~'~.~,~~.:'.. .' ...."';..." ; :1 -''.\ .,' 1 :~:' " " :~ 0 1 I , j o o ", It was explained to Mr. Fahari he would have 10 days to clear the property without a fee being assessed. Mr. Wyatt moved that concerning Case No.3 of Public Nuisance Clearing list 90-10-1 regarding violation of Section 95.04 of the Clearwater City Code on property located at about 906 Hart St a/k/a Park Plaza Sub, Blk E, lots 9 & 10, the Municipal Code Enforcement Board has heard testimony at the Municipal Code Enforcement Board hearing held the 10th day of October, 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 Rick Rosa, Code Inspector, and viewing the evidence, exhibits submitted: City composite exhibit A - a copy of the file of record, it is evident that there exists the excessive growth or accumulation of weeds, undergrowth or other similar plant materials and/or debris at the above address. The Conclusions of Law are: Keramat Fahari is in violation of Section 95.04. It is the Order of this Board that Keramat Fahari shall comply with Section 95.04 of the Code of the City of Clearwater within 10 days (10/10/90). Upon failure to comply within the time specified, the City Manager may authorize the entry upon the property and such action as is necessary to remedy the condition, without further notice to Keramat Fahari. 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, Keramat Fahari shall notify Rick Rosa, the City Official who shall inspect the property and notify the Board of compliance. Should a dispute arise concerning compliance, either pa~ty may request a further hearing before the Board. The motion was duly seconded and ~arried unanimously. Done and Ordered this 10th day of October, 1990. Case No. 37-90 McDonald's Restaurant of Florida, Inc. 1516 U.S. 19 South (land Development Code) In response to a question, it was stated testimony is not needed from the City when the violator does not contest the violation. Ms. Barbara l incourt admitted to the violation at the beginning of the meeting. The Secretary to the Board read the Affidavit of Violation into the record. Barbara lincourt, Area Supervisor for McDonald's Restaurant of Florida, Inc., stated she was found in violation for a flag and banners, and took down the flag the first day of notification. She phoned the inspector to ask what she can do to advertise for the restaurant, but her call was not returned. She stated the banners were removed as soon as the affidavit was received. In response to a question, the Inspector stated he does not know why Ms. lincourt's phone call was not returned. MCEB 4 10/10/90 ,~ r l ' ~ " I. . ' ,I '~1: c ) ~ . ~1 o , . o A ~~ ~' ~' ~ ..' t' ," Mr. Aude moved that concerning Case No. 37-90 regarding violation of Section 134.009(5) of the Clearwater City Code on property located at 1516 US 19 South a/k/a M&B 44/05, See 19/29/16, the Municipal Code Enforcement Board has heard testimony at the Municipal Code Enforcemen~ Board hearing held the 10th day of October, 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 Rick Rosa, Code Inspector, and Barbara Lincourt, Area Supervisor for McDonald's, it is evident that banners were being displayed at the above referenced address. It is further evident that the condition was corrected prior to this hearing. The Conclusions of Law are: McDonald's Restaurants of Florida, Inc. was in violation of Section 134.009(5). It is the Order of this Board that MCOonald's Restaurants of Florida, Inc. shall comply with Section 134.009(5) of the Code of the City of Clearwater. If McDonald's Restaurants of Florida, Inc. repeats the violation, the Board may order them to pay a fine of $50.00 per day for each day the violation exists after McDonald's Restaurants of Florida, Inc. is notified of the repeat violation. Should the violation reoccur, the Board has the authority to impose the fine at that time without a subsequent hearing. Should a dispute arise concerning compliance, either party may request a further hearing before the Board. 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. Uponoceceipt 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. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Done and Ordered this 10th day of October, 1990. Case No. 38-90 Gulfcoast Cellular Telephone & Automotive Accessories, Inc. 1451 U.S. 19 South (land Development Code) There was no one present to represent the violator. Rick Rosa, Code Inspector, stated on August 28th he inspected the property on which an illegal portable sign was erected. He sent notice certified mail August 29th and the signed receipt was returned. The property was reinspected September 25th and the violation still existed. Mr. Rosa stated he received a call Monday that the violation was corrected. He visited the property yesterday and they have complied. In response to a questions, Mr. Rosa stated there was no permit nor did they meet the requirements for use of a temporary sign. MCEB 5 10/10/90 r ~ ., . 1,' , 'I". '. ' . , ~ " ";. '. 1 ',~ 10 1 , I . 1 I , . , \ ,;l_ , o o I Mr. Aude moved that concerning Case No. 38-90 regarding violation of Section 134.017(a)1 of the Clearwater City Code on property located at 1451 US 19 South aka M&B 32/03, Sec 20/29/16, the Municipal Code Enforcement Board has heard testimony at the Municipal Code Enforcement Board hearing held the 10th day of October, 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 Facts are: after hearing testimony of Rick Rosa, Code Inspector. it is evident that a. portable sign was displayed without meeting the requirements of the City code. It is further evident that the condition was corrected prior to this hearing. The Conclusions of Law are: Gulfcoast Cellular Telephone & Automotive Accessories, Inc. was in violation of Section 134.017(a)1. It is the Order of this Board that Gulfcoast Cellular Telephone & Automotive Accessories, Inc. shall comply with Section 134.017(a)1 of the Code of the City of Clearwater. If Gulfcoast Cellular Telephone & Automotive Accessories, Inc. repeats the violation, the Board may order them to pay a fine of $50.00 per day for each day the violation exists after Gulfcoast Cellular Telephone & Automotive Accessories, Inc. is notified of the repeat violation. Should the violation reoccur. the Board has the authority to impose the fine at that time without a subsequent hearing. Should a dispute arise concerning compliance, either party may request a further hearing before the Board. 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. The motion was duly seconded and ca~ried unanimously. Done and Ordered this 10th day of'October, 1990. Lokey Motor Company 1220 U.S. 19 South (Land Development Code) Mr. Wyatt moved to continue Case No. 39-90 to the meeting of October 24, 1990 due to a lack of quorum because of Mr. Aude's conflict of interest. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Mr. Aude abstained from voting due to a conflict of interest. Case No. 39-90 Case No. 40-90 Nancy Darling 1006 South Prospect Avenue (Fire Code) Complied prior Mr. Wyatt moved to withdraw Case No. 40-90 as the violation has been corrected. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. MCEB 6 10/10/90 r-, ~ ,> d, " F ~-- , \, , ~" .".. ". .. . , ',' o Case No. 41-90 On Top of the World Condo Assoc., Inc. Bldgs. 18, 18A, 34, 36, 37, 40, 42, 44, 45, 50, 53-61, 74, 80, 83, 84, 86, 87, 88 & 89 (Fire Code) The Inspector requested this case be continued as they are in the process of complying. I i I i Mr. Aude moved to continue Case No. 41-90 to the meeting of October 24, 1990. The motion was duly seconded and' carried unanimously. Case No. 42-90 Jesse Montague - Repeat 1721 Ft. Harrison Avenue aka Lesley's Sub, Lot 9 (Land Development Code) Rick Rosa, Code Inspector, stated he inspected the property September 14th and informed Mr. Montague at that time that his outdoor display of items is in violation of the land use allowed by code. Mr. Rosa took photographs of the property September 14th and October 6th showing the display. He stated he sent notice of the violation via certified mail on October 5th. Mr. Rosa submitted City composite exhibit A, photographs of the property. , , I o In response to Mr. Montague's question whether Mr. Rosa had given him the choice of correcting the violation or coming to the hearing, Mr. Rosa stated he did not. John Richter, Development Code Manager, stated staff has spent a considerable amount of time on this case and requested the board consider applying a $25/day fine for each day the violation exists and consider increasing the fine if the violation continues. Jesse Montague stated he has been dealing with the Inspector for a year. He stated he has had to get rid of three vehicles while others in the neighborhood are in violation. He stated there is a double standard working where he is cited and not the neighbors. Mr. Montague questioned from whom the complaints about him were coming, and it was stated it was from a homeowner's association. Mr. Montague stated a day or two after a person across the street would move his motor home which was in violation, he would get a visit from and/or be cited by the City. He stated he is being treated unfairly compared to others in the neighborhood. In response to a question regarding why Mr. Montague waited until now to come before the Board, he stated he was here before but nothing has changed. In response to a question regarding whether Mr. Montague has been in violation since September 16, Mr. Rosa stated he doesn't know as he did not visit the property every day. In response to a question regarding whether there are other violations in this area, Mr. Rosa stated he has another violation scheduled to come before the Board. He stated he has made inspections due to complaints received, one which was from Mr. Montague regarding Moss Marine and he did issue a notice of violation. In response to questions, Mr. Montague stated he is in violation and it is a repeat of a previous violation. .~ \U MCEB 7 10/10/90 . " ,,~, , ' , , , .,' " .' I. ,r- r- " , r-" l: 3~~':?f'i<0:i':~<??~;~::~:-P:iH~g~1':'~;;:\jT:1"':~;:~:';;::.~5~!i'i~;'/::Sf~::"?\~~?fr;:~';:~~:?ri;:~1::?:~:::;':;~n?';:.';:>,\: , ":??~?~~;::;:':,~~~f~{~i:;~;::~~:~?~;+*~~fw~}rt~r~~~~~~).?~t~;}:!~:~I;~~;(tEWfi~~[~:jrj~1~',; , FORM 88 MEMORANDUM OF VOTING CONFLICT FOR COUNTY, MUNICIPAL AND OTHER LOCAL PUBLIC OFFICERS LAST NAME-FIRST NM,m-MmUU: NAME NAME OF BOARD. COUNCIL. COMMISSION. AUTHORITY. OR COMMITTEE Audet Robert ,1) 'NO AUURESS \ '.719 Brentwood Drive Munici al Code Enforceme lilt: IIClARO. COUNCil,. COMMISSION. AUTHORITY. OR COMMITTEE ON WIlI<.'H I SERVE IS A UNIl OF: K ('II Y I , ('OUNl Y , 1 urHr.:R !.OCM A<1ENCY NAME Of POll f1CAl. sunOlVISloN: NA UH COUNTY Pinel1as Clearwater, FL DAlE ON WIIIt'1l VOl I: (X'CURRI'l) 10/10/90 MY POSItiON IS: XI APPOINTIVE \: F.LEnIVE WHO MUST FILE FORM 88 , , I :, ; i. This form is for use by any person serving at the cOllnty, city, or other local level of govcrnment on an appointed or elected board, council, commission, authority, or committee, It applies cqually to mcmbers of advisory and non-advisory bodies who are presented wit h a vot ing conflict of interest under Seel ion 112.3143. Florida Stat utes. The requirements of this law are mandatory; although the use of this particular form is not required by law, you are encouraged 10 us~ it in making the disclosure required by law. !' , Your responsibilities under the law when faced with a measure in which you have a conflict of interest will vary greatly depending on whether you hold an e1cctive or appointive position. For this reason, please pay close allcntion to the instructions on this form before completing the reverse side and filing the form. '..' INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 112.3143, FLORIDA STATUTES O.ECTED OFFICERS: A person holding elective counly, munidpal, or other local public office MUST ABSTAIN frol1l voting on a measure which inures to his special private gain. Each local officer also is prohibited frolll knowingly voting Oil a measure which inures to the special gain of a princi pal (01 her than a governl1lent agency) by whom he is retained. In either case, YOll should disclose the conflict: PRIOK TO THE VOTE BEING TAKEN by publicly stating. tll the assembly the nature of your intercst in the measure on which you are abstaining from voting; alld WITHIN 15 DAYS AFTER THE VOTE OCCURS by completing and filing this form with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the meeting, who should incorporate the form in the minutes. APPOINTED OFFICERS: A persoll holding appointive COUllty, municipal, or olher local public office MUST ABS1A.1 N from voting on a measure which inures to his special private gain. Each local officcr also is prohibited from knowingly voting on a measure which inures to the special gain of a principal (other than a government agcncy) by whom he is retained. A person holding an appointive local office otherwise may participate ill a mailer in which he has a conflict of interest, but must disclose the nature of the conflict before making any allempt to influence the decision by oral or written communication, whether made by the officer or at his direction. IF YOU INTEND TO MAKE ANY ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION PRIOR TO THE MEETING Af WHICH THE VOTE WILL BE TAKEN: ~ou should complctc and file this form (before making any a/lempl to influence the decision) with the person responsible for Ucording the minutes of the meeting, who will incorporate the form in the minutes. · A copy of rhe form should be provided immcdiately to the other members of the agency. · The form should be read publicly al the meeting prior to consideration of the mailer in which you have a connict of interest. 11111\1 ~II lll"~ PAGE I ""'-,"",,:'.~'t._. " , i, I 8" .. , , r- ," ~ " ,~~t<l_.. --~,~~. -- ' IF YOU MAKE NO AITEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION EXCEPT BY DISCUSSION AT THE MEETING: · You should disclose orally the nature of your conflict in thc measure before participating. · You should complete the form and file it within 15 days after the vote occurs with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the meeting, who should incorporate the forlll in t!IC minutes. ) DISCLOSURE OF LOCAL OFFICER'S INTEREST I, Robert Aude hereby disclose that on October 10 , 19 90 (tt) A'measure came or will come before my agency which (check one) _ inured to ~nurcd to my special private gain; or the special gain of ,f11Ltltt/ll5 A-..eC/llrarf3 , by whom I am retained. (b) The mcasure before my agency and the lIalUfe of illY inrcrcsl in Ihe measure is as follows: i I I -__LPhr/f() ! Date Filed I Si NOTICE: UNDER PROVISIONS OF FLORIl)A STATUTES ~112.317 (1985), A FAILURE TO MAKE ANY REQUIRED DISCLOSURE CONSTITUTES G ROUNDS FOR AND MA Y BE PUNISHED BY ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLlOWI NG: !MPEACHMENT, REMOVAL OR SUSPENSION FROM OFFICE OR EMPLOYMENT, DEMOTION, REDUCTION IN )ALARY, REPRIMAND, OR A CIVIL PENALTY NOT TO EXCEED $5,000.