Loading...
01/24/1996 (2) ~s:,'A~~; . . 'l: ; ;"; . ~ \: ,>-:. . ~',~ . . . I ,. \1....' , . "', . . :', ' . , ., '~.:;'<" : . '," . .. . " \,", ..' .?,", . I' ~ .. . . :~~~.: ,:: '." ,', . ;}{~ . ~', . (:.:,.... . ,.;' < . 'lrtt~l}~(~:il:"~:. ~:"'~:'(':f\"~:~~' '~r~~".l-~. :' "h~~'~. ~;".' .~ . <. ., ./ ./ > ., ..............,. CEB , ' Municipal Code Enforcement Board' Minutes Date ..Q ;f --C/ 6 io_'~ "I "'" ~ n'> ~ ,", :.,..~.:}: >. ~ . ~ ~t . . ::. " '"~, " . ~.. ' ~~~'~~~::.~..~:~:' ":.'"',. " :~: '::.'. . '-.,..I CBAG1 b96 . 1 1~96 ~~ "' I , ' " . .. 1 I.,lf' ,"" . . . 'I I' ::\~~I.~b'i::.' . ',:- .. 1)\ ':r":~~ : " , .~ I (:J \........../ "";".' , ,'.~ MUNICIPAL CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD CITY OF CLEARWATER January 24, 1996 Present: Stephen D. Swanberg, Chairman Louise Riley, Vice-Chairman Peg Rogers, Member Helen Kerwin, Member Carl Rayborn, Member Leslie Dougall-Sides, Assistant City Attorney Mark Connolly, Attorney for the Board Mary K. Diana, Secretary for the Board Anne Green, Staff Assistant II Absent: Dennis Henegar, Member Faustino Dolores, Member (excused) In order to provide continuity for research, the items will be listed in agenda order although not necessarily discussed in that order. The meeting was called to order by the Chair at 3:00 p.m. in the Commission Chambers at City Hall. He outlined the procedures and advised any aggrieved party may appeal a final administrative order of the Municipal Code Enforcement Board to the Circuit Court of Pinel/as 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 party appealing a decision of this Board to have a record of the proceedings to support such an appeal. 1. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Case 4-96 Labrise Restaurant - William Georgilias 1849 Gulf-to-Bay Blvd, (Life Safety Code) Chairman Swanberg questioned if the violator agreed to the violation as read, Hope Georgilias agreed. She said the building was to be sold, however, the contract fell through. Karl Whittleton, City Inspector, stated as of Monday, January 22, 1996, all the violations had not been corrected. Ms. Georgilias advised him compliance has been reached. Chairman Swanberg requE,Osted the case be continued until the next meeting so Inspector Whittleton could verify compliance. Member Riley moved that Case 4.96 be continued to tl1e meeting of February 14, 1996. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. mcblb.96 January 24, 1996 ~~~;:,.:~:r ;.". ~",--.... i '-")c ........' ',~/ B. Case 6-96 Robert F, Stewart 1 869 Francis Drive (Building Code Chairman Swanberg questioned if Mr, Stewart agreed to the violations as stated. Mr. Stewart stated he did. The Assistant City Attorney questioned Vern Packer, Building Inspector, about his investigation. Mr. Packer reviewed the history of the case. A stop work order was issued 6/3/93 regarding work being done in the backyard; on 6/17/93 permits were issued for an above ground pool. Complaints were received about work being done without permits or inspections. Mr, Packer said he made numerous visits and telephone calls to Mr, Stewart and sent correspondence. During a phone conversation, Mr. Stewart indicated to Mr. Packer he would correct all issues. Mr. Packer advised that permits were pulled for a pool and a fence in 1993 but no electrical and pool construction inspections were done. He also indicated that no permit was pulled for the deck. Mr. Packer was questioned if it was possible to reactivate permits for the pool and fence. He indicated they could be if the pool is moved. He noted a side setback problem exists. A question arose if there was a possibllity of a variance being granted. Mr. Packer beHeved it was not possible as a Florida Power service line extends over the pool. Mr. Packer felt Mr. Stewart had plenty of room to move the pool. Assistant City Attorney Dougall.Sides questioned jf Mr. Packer had taken any photographs. Mr. Packer replied that he had takp.n photos in November 1995, and as of yesterday I the pool was still in place. Exhibits 1-6 (Exhibit 1 - Code sections violated, Exhibit 2 . Composite photos taken 11/8/95 representing existing conditions, Exhibit 3 ~ Letter sent to Violator requesting he contact Inspector dated 5/12/94, Exhibit 4 - Letter and Notice of Violation sent to Violator dated 10/4/95, Exhibit 5 . Affidavit of Violation and Request for Hearing dated 1/16/96, and Exhibit 6 ~ Notice of Hearing dated 1/16/96.) were introduced at this time and shown to the violator. Chairman Swanberg inquired if it were possible the pool did not violate setbacks. Mr. Packer indicated the pool encroached. Mr. Stewart stated he initially thought an above ground pool did not require a permit. He obtained permits and finished the entire deck and pool before a stop work order was issued. Mr. Stewart advised the line extending over the pool was checked and found to be a phone line. He said he is in the process of applying for approvals from the utility companies. Approval from the cable company was received. Mr. Stewart advised he would move his pool in the event of an emergency. He said the plans he submitted were not acceptable to the Building Department. He asked the City to send out an Inspector to show him exactly what had to be done. They referred him to other sources, Discussion ensued regarding whether fencing has been installed according to code and what portion of the fence surrounding the pool was installed by Mr. Stewart. Mr. Stewart indicated he had installed the portion on the west side of the pool. Ray Pabst, a neighbor, complained the pool was too close to the fence and the noises generated from use of the pool were disturbing. He expressed concern regarding the deck towering over his property and asked that it be lowered. It was noted the photos submitted reflected a reed fence installed 011 the deck of the pool that looked to be over 6'. Discussion ensued regarding setback requirements and the need to address the problem. 2 mcblb.96 January 24. 1996 , .' . I ~ ... " I . ~ . ' , ,'~', ~'.( .. ~:~:) There was also discussion regarding a drawing submitted by Mr. Stewart depicting the pool in a different location than its current spot. Mr. Stewart stated the drawing was done after he had been informed the pool had to be moved. The drawing depicted a new location. He said his intent is to apply for a variance. An opinion was expressed the hardship in having to move the pool was self-imposed and would not fall under the criteria for granting a variance. Mr. Packer advised Mr. Stewart to check with Florida Power regarding the service lines. He felt the pool should be moved within 10 days or the permit should be reactivated with the necessary inspections performed. In response to a question, Mr, Stewart indicated the deck could not be easily dismantled. Member Riley moved that concerning Case 6-96 regarding violation of Chapter 47, Article I, Sections 47.002(2) and 47.003(2) and Article IV, Section 47.081 of the Clearwater City Code of Ordinances on property located at 1869 Francis Drive, also known as Montclair Lake Estates, Lot 106, the Municipal Code Enforcement Board has heard testimony at the Municipal Code Enforcement Board hearing held the .2.41h day of January, 1996, and based On t,he evidence, the Municipal Code Enforcement Board enters the following: FINDINGS OF FACT After hearing testimony of Vern Packer, City Inspector, and Robert F. Stewart, and viewing the evidence submitted: City Exhibits 1-7 (Exhibit 1 - Code sections violated, Exhibit 2 - Composite photos taken 11/8/95 representing existing conditions, Exhibit 3 - Letter sent to Violator requesting he contact Inspector dated 5J12/94, Exhibit 4 - Letter and Notice of Violation sent to Violator dated 10/4/95, Exhibit 5 - Affidavit of Violation and Request for Hearing dated 1/16/96. Exhibit 6 - Notice of Hearing dated 1/16/96 and Exhibit 7 - Permit Application issued 6/17/93), it is evident a swimming pool that does not conform to setback requirements has been installed, a deck has been built without permits or inspections, and permits were issued for a pool and a fence, however, expired due to no inspections at 1869 Francis Drive. CONClU~IONS OF LAW Robert F. Stewart, is in violation of Chapter 47, Article I, Sections 47.002(2) and 47,003(21 and Article IV, Section 47,081 of the Clearwater City Code of Ordinances. ORDER It is the Order of this Board that Robert F. Stewart shall comply with said Sections of the Code of Ordinances by 2/21/96. If Robert F. Stewart does not comply within the time specified, the Board may order him to pay a fine of $50.00 per day for each day the violation continues to exist. If Robert F. Stewart does not 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 or personal property owned by the violator pursuant to Chapter 162, Florida Statutes. Upon complying, Robert F. Stewart 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, Any aggrieved party may petition the Board to reconsider or rehear any Board Order resulting .....j from a Public Hearing. A Petition for Rehearing must be made in writing and filed with the Board 3 mcblb.96 January 24, 1996 ~ , ~ , '.. , . . ' "I I . j . ~ . ) . 9!-~"!l7l,{~,d' ~ ~'.. , i~.~~:'~(i. <': :' , ~. . . " '. ..." ,.-;. 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 ~ear oral argument or evidence In determining whether to grant the Petition to Reconsider or Rehear. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 2. OTHER BOARD ACTIONJDISCUSS10N A. Case 45-95 . Affidavit of Compliance Lowell McKee 1333 Byron Drive {Lot Clearing} B. Case 18-92 - Affidavit of Compliance Thomas Floyd 11 21 Fairmont Street (Life Safety Code} Member Kerwin moved concerning cases 45-95 and 18~92 to accept the Affidavits of Compliance, The motion was dulV seconded and carried unanimously. 3. NEW BUSINESS - MONTHLY MEETINGS Discussion ensued regarding the Board meeting only once a month, Special meetings could be called as needed. Member Rogers moved to change the meeting schedule for the Municipal Code Enforcement Board from two meetings a month to one, meeting on the fourth Wednesday of ,',......~, the month at 3:00 p.m., except during the months of November and December when the Board will \-........,J meet on the second Wednesday of the month, commencing in March 1996. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously, 4. MINUTES Member Riley noted her name was not included among the list of attendees. The minutes will be corrected to reflect this. Member Riley moved to approve the minutes of January 10, 1996, as corrected. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously, 5. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 3:55 p.m. Attest: I. "_or' 4 -<..IVI("~ e Board mcb1b,96 January 24, 1996