06/08/1994 (2)
.~~~~;~. ~.~.?~'.:' .' .
~.' .~~ '::". \.. .
. ..." ~~. ....
-:l)' ~
l'
.-::... .'. <
" .
'"
,n,.
.\ \'.-'
..1.
~ .)' . .
.}.,' "c ,c
~ ' .': .
,~.:..": ~ .
. '.' "
~ '. .
, ,
~",,,,,,,,,,,",.,,,,,,.,,~.,~"'''1''''''.~I' ,.. '>.
. . . ,., '.", ' ,., n' ~. \.'. ",' ~.~ ,.' . ,w J. . . . ~.
'.. '. +;. . :~,; ": ..... ,<.J ., . 1'; . .', ',' ..: .: . : '. J ~ ~r' : -':. :1:y
..~-.
........,~ .
CEB
Municipal Code Enforcement Board
Minutes
f........\
'-........I
Date
JJJML ?) I!1qlj
:j-J 3 Lj L/
~ .~".\
I .
V
, ~ ~. , . . .'. ' .
." .,
'f , . '
I"
~IW~t~ ,:.::';,'" ,.'.c
!. ,
, .,
','
" ,
, .. ~
,',
, ,:..,.......;,;~J
,-~
MUNICIPAL CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD
Meeting of June 8. 1994.3:00 p.m.
Agenda
Action
PUBLIC HEARINGS
(At the time a case is heard and date set for compliance the Board shall. at the same time, set
the fee to be assessed in case of non-compliance.)
Case 105-93
L. Connolly & G. Nail
Menna-Digiovanni
2960 Gulf To Bay Boulevard
(Land Development Code - Signs)
Continued from 10/27 & 11/10/93, 1/12,
3/23 & 5/11/94
Continued to June 22, 1994
ft'
,.,.
<:.!t
Case 17 -94
Church of Scientology I Covault
551 N Saturn Ave
(Public Nuisance)
Continued to June 22, 1994
Case 18-94
Heinz & Elisabeth Roeshink I
Dennis Roeshink
1358 Boylan Ave
(Public Nuisance)
Ordered compliance by June 22, 1994
Case 19-94
Roy Cadwell
1910 Overbrook Ave
(Minimum Housing)
Continued to June 22, 1994
Case 20-94
loannis & Eva Tagaras
2241 Nursery Rd
(Land Development Code)
Ordered compliance within 5 days
(6/13/94)
u
Case 21-94
Leonard A McCue
181562US19N
(Land Development Code)
Withdrawn - Complied Prior
CBAc1061l.94
06/08194
.'~ .
. :" ' . "~.,,,'.' ....;0: , i'.;.;" ';:,\:'L.:' ;.~:::;'/:~; } ::. ':, .' ~>." ;'~, ',::; \' ~ : ", . ~': " ::' ;;':' .':.
,~~.;l,t',',j,;. \, ',"",' .,'..' " . ,.," " ..' .' I' .'. " ,'''. .
rIi$:i'(>";<:', l' ,"~ <> "" ':> ~ ': .', '~. ,,:, '.:'" ", ' " " ','
. ','
"
. ".' ."..', ~. ..
. ~ L'" , 'I.
, ", ":' .
,." ':".1",><".
," :,::":': .<'> '.'::"~ ::::~\::;: ~:(~
..
I", ,
,~
r I~~';~~)
Aaenda
Action
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
OTHER BOARD ACTION I DISCUSSION
Case 56-92
D.G. McMullen Properties, Inc.
2870 Gulf-to~Bay Blvd.
(Land Development Code~Sjgns)
Reduced fine to $1,000.00
MINUTES - May 11, 1994
Approved 8S submitted
ADJOURN
4:13 p.m.
~
.
.1
u
CBAc\0611,94
2
06/08/94
.' .
;iif~~'.:;;>, ":.:.':" '..: .,"
~~<',~~~;,:;:: ,:..' ',:" ~
~c\,~';' ,'. . \"
: ; . .
. . .....
':~
MUNICIPAL CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD
June 8, 1994
Members present:
Stephen D. Swanberg, Chairman
Louise C. Riley, Vice-Chairman
Carl Rayborn
Peg Rogers
Members absent:
Dennis Henegar
E.J. Robinson (excused)
Robert Theroux (excused)
Also present:
Andy Salzman, Attorney for the Board
Lt. Jeff Kronschnabl, Special Assistant to the City Manager/Community Response Team
Mary K. Diana, Secretary for the Board
Gwen J. Legters, Recording Secretary
In o~der 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 Chairman at 3:00 p.m. in the Commission
Meeting Room in 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 PineHas 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.
Case 105-93
L. Connolly & G. Nail
Menna~Digiovanni
2960 Gulf To Bay Boulevard
(Land Development Code - Signs)
Continued from 10/27 & 11110/93, 1112,
3/23 & 5/11/94
In a memo dated June 7, 1994, Inspection Specialist Geri Doherty stated the property
owner has obtained the necessary variance and permit to construct a conforming sign.
She requested this case be continued to the meeting of August 10, 1994.
Member Rogers moved to continue Case 105-93 to the meeting of August 10; 1994.
The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
\....I
mincb6a.94
1
06/08/94
. ," ,'~ ," I ~, ' " , " " ' . .' ". ~ . I , _ " <
't~tj~~.~ I':. '. .' ,
..L, '
f!.1~;I~ I
."
~
Board Attorney Salzman recommended, as a case may be continued for no longer than
31 days, to list this case on the agenda of June 22/ 1994 for further continuances to the
meeting of August 10.
Case 17~94
Church of Scientology I Covault
551 N Saturn Ave
(Public Nuisance)
Janice King, Code Inspector, stated she was requested to inspect Hacienda Gardens and
posted notices of violation on 24 vehicles there. She stated Mr. Covault has requested
a time extension of an expired license tag for a vehicle he brought from Ohio.
In response to questions, Wayne Covault stated he sent away to Ohio for his tag on June
3 and needs four weeks for processing the renewal of the Ohio tag. He stated he has
been a student here for two years and expects to remain as a student for another two
years. He said his home address is still in Ohio.
Discussion ensued regarding a state statute requiring an out of state vehicle to be
registered within six months of being brought to Florida. A question was raised if the
statute applies to vehicles owned by students.
f:'';'I}
"t,m.
Lt. Kronschnabl expressed concern that many owners of out of state vehicles delay
registering their vehicles to delay paying the Florida impact fee. He requested a
continuance to allow time to meet with Mr. Covault to discuss reaching compliance as
he was unaware Mr. Covault was renewing his Ohio license and would be in Florida an
additional two years.
Member Riley moved to continue Case 17-94 to the meeting of June 22, 1994. The
motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Case 18-94
Heinz & Elisabeth Roeshink I Dennis Roeshink
1358 Boylan Ave
(Public Nuisance)
Rick Rosa, Code Inspector, indicated this is an abandoned vehicle violation for a truck for
which the tags expired in August, 1993. In response to a question, Mr. Rosa stated he
advised the vehicle owner the truck could remain on the property if covered by a
commercial vehicle cover; a tarp would not suffice.
City Exhibit A, a copy of the certified mail receipt and a photograph of the truck on the
subject property, was submitted for the record.
Dennis Roeshink, the vehicle owner, explained his truck has a rack containing a ladder;
a standard' vehicle cover will not fit. He stated he is not working and does not have the
money to purchase a custom fitted cover.
u
mincb6a.94
2
06/08/94
, . < . .' '. .... . ~ " . ' . . .. ..'. . . '~ .
,>
r~':> \ ., .
'.-..
Lt. Kronschnabl recommended, within five days, that an appropriate cover or a current
tag be provided, or Mr. Roeshink's vehicle would be towed. Mr. Roeshink requested more
than five days time to bring the vehicle into compliance.
A suggestion was made that the racks be removed from the truck $0 a standard cover
,would fit.
Mr. Rosa expressed concern with allowing more time as the first notice was posted on
April 26, 1994. It was felt that allowing almost 60 days from the date of the original
citation should be enough time to comply.
Mr. Roeshink said he has not worked for weeks and did not have the funds to purchase
a cover. He again requested additional time to comply.
Member Riley moved that, concerning Case 18-94, regarding violation of Section
20.35(1) of the Clearwater City Code on property located at 1358 Bovlan Ave a/k/a
Boylan Sub, Lot 1 7, the Municipal Code Enforcement Board has heard testimony at the
Municipal Code Enforcement Board hearing held the 8th day of June, 1994, 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
Dennis Roeshink, lessee representing Heinz & Elisabeth Roeshink, and viewing the
, "'-) evidence, exhibits submitted, City Exhibit A, a photograph of the vehicle and copies of
~" the certified mail receipts, it is evident an inoperable vehicle exists at 1358 Boylan Ave.
The Conclusions of Law are: Heinz & Elisabeth Roeshink and Mr. Dennis Roeshink are in
violation of Section 20.35( 11 of the Clearwater City Code.
It is the Order of this Board that Heinz & Elisabeth Roeshink and Dennis Roeshink shaH
comply with Section 20.35( 1) of the Code of the City of Clearwater by June 22, 1994.
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 Heinz & Elisabeth Roeshink and Dennis Roeshink. 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 $200.00 administrative cost. Such cost
shaH 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, Florida as other liens are recorded. If the owner takes remedial action after tIle
time specified, the City Commission may assess the property the $200.00 administrative
cost. Such cost shall constitute a lien against the property until paid. Upon complying,
Heinz & Elisabeth Roeshink and Dennis Roeshink 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 party may request a further hearing before the Board. The
motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
v
mincb6a.94
3
06/08/94
I . '" .... ,.' '.' . .' . . I, . . I . ,.'
'l,~'f~:' '.
~. ~ . .
"
"'""'\
Case , 9-94
Roy Cadwell
1910 Overbrook Ave
(Minimum Housing)
Vern Packer, City Housing Inspector, stated he received the first complaint from a tenant
of the subject property on July 12, 1993. The tenant complained of vermin and decayed
wood in the building. Mr. Packer stated he inspected the property the same day, took
notes and mailed the housing report to Mr. Cadwell at his residences in Clearwater and
Canada. The mail to Canada was registered. Mr. Packer stated Mr. Cadwell did not
agree with the housing report and appealed to the Building/Flood Board of Adjustment and
Appeals. He stated the Board upheld the housing report.
David Griffin, attorney representing Mr. Cadwell, stated he recently became involved in
the case and had not talked with the inspectors. He said Mr. Cadwell hired an electrical
contractor to begin correcting the violations; however , the contractor did not follow
through with the work. Mr. Griffin stated, due to some disabilities, Mr. Cadwell needed
more time to work with City staff. In response to questions, he stated the building is
occupied and the tenants do not wish to relocate. He requested the case be continued
for one month.
In response to questions, Mr. Packer stated an application for a building permit to repair
the stairs and landing was received June 6, 1994. He was in favor of allowing extra time
to work with Mr. Cadwell. Outlining staff's concerns regarding the violations, Mr. Packer
f~'li,\ stated a qualified person is needed to ensure the stability of the foundation, built in 1925.
",,~f There is documented e'lidence of decay in the floor joist system and the narrow wooden
stairway needs to be brought up to code. He said if this were a life safety code issue,
it would be enforced by the Fire Department.
Mr. Griffin stated work was started before the contractor pulled out. He requested time
to meet with staff to solve the problems. Mr. Packer agreed.
Member Riley moved to continue Case 19-94 to the meeting of July 27, 1994 to allow
time for staff to work with Mr. Cadwell to bring the property into compliance. The
motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Citizens were present to speak to the issue and the general consensus was to revisit the
case to allow their input.
Arthur Cammer, 1146 Sunset Point Road, stated he is familiar with the subject property.
He felt it is a disgrace to the neighborhood and there has not been sufficient effort to
correct the problems.
John Bouchard, the adjacent property owner at 1874 Overbrook Drive, stated he was a
building contractor for seven years and agreed the integrity of the floors and building was
at stake. He felt the contractor pulled out because it would cost too much to correct the
problems. In response to a question from the Board, he doubted if a credible contractor
could do the repairs in 30 days and felt the building should be taken down.
y
mincb6a.94
4
06/08/94
..' . . ~ ~ " -,' , . .. . . '. . . , .
~,.",\,.",,,:.
I' ' '
Ci'I/y ': ;," .
~::' I- . ") > -
.:.~~. .<'
.. ~,
, .' ~
f-:J
In response to a question, Mr. Griffin stated he had not visited the property and was not
aware the structural integrity of the entire building was in question. He felt one month
was sufficient time to determine whether or not the additional repairs are economically
feasible.
Discussion ensued regarding the foundations and structural supports.
Mike Hurley, City Electrical Inspector, agreed with allowing 30 days to bring the property
into compliance. He wished to state for the record the extremely serious electrical
hazards present on the property. He noted the extensive use of zip cords and extension
cords passing across metal door jambs create a fire hazard in the wooden structure. He
stated Mr. Cadwell was notified there is inadequate service for the two dwellings and the
entire structure needs rewiring. He stated he became aware of the scope of the electrical
problems during a routine electrical inspection of work done by the contractor. Mr.
Packer indicated there was a problem with some of the contractor's work and a complaint
was filed ~vith the Pinellas County Construction Licensing Board.
Attorney Salzman suggested continuing discussion until the evidence is received for this
case. The Board, having previously voted to continue the case, deferred further
discussion to the meeting of July 27. 1994.
~.A-"Iri~,
'~-.....)
Case 20.94
loannis & Eva Tagaras
2241 Nursery Rd
(Land Development Code)
Mr. Tagaras agreed to the violation, stating he is working to correct it. He stated the sign
was put up by an employee. He requested one month to move the sign, stating it will not
be put up again.
Janice King, City Code Inspector, stated the portable plywood sign advertises produce.
She said she has explained why it is not allowed; however, the sign continues to be
displayed, frequently on weekends. She stated this is a recurring violation. A verbal
warning was issued on April 6 and she said she observed the sign being displayed on April
9, 24 and 25. Staff recommended removing the sign immediately and imposing a fine of
$150.00 for each day if it continues to be displayed.
Mr. Tagaras stated he will remove the signs and they will not be exhibited on the
weekends.
Member Riley moved that, concerning Case 20-94, regarding violation of Section
44.57(7) of the Clearwater City Code at 2241 Nurserv Rd alkla M & 8 33~03 in Section
19.29- 16, the Municipal Code Enforcement Board has heard testimony at the Municipal
Code Enforcement Board hearing held the 8th day of June 1994, and based on the
evidence, the Municipal Code Enforcement Board enters the following Findings of Fact,
Conclusions of Law, and Order.
l..",,)
mincbGil.94
5
06/08/94
. ... . '" . , .. l . ..... . . '..' I . .' . _
. ~. .
;K:~(,l"'",
....:, '
1 . ':'.
. "1'
,~
i
The Findings of Fact are: after hearing testimony of Janice King. Code Inspector;, and
loannis Tagaras. it is evident Mr. Tagaras has portable signs he continues to exhibit at
2241 Nursery Road on the weekends, this condition was corrected and recurred. It is
further evident that the condition was not corrected prior to this hearing.
The Conclusions of Law are: loannis & Eva Taaaras are in violation of Section 44.57(7),
It is the Order of this Board that loannis & Eva Taaaras shall comply with Section
44.57(7) of the Code of the City of Clearwater within five days.
If loannis & Eva Taaaras repeat the violation, the Board may order them to pay a fine of
$150.00 per day for each day the violation continues to exist after they are 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
re'sulting 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 BeheaT. The
motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
<)
Case 21.94
Leonard A McCue
181562 US 19 N
(Land Development Code)
In a memo dated June 8/ 1994, Code Inspector Janice King withdrew Case 21-94,
stating an application for a conditional use for outdoor sales/displays has been processed
and is scheduled for the Planning and Zoning meeting of June 14, 1994.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
None
OTHER BOARD ACTION / DISCUSSION
Case 56-92
D.G. McMullen Properties, Inc.
2870 Gulf-to-Bay Blvd.
(Land Development Code-Signs)
To Address Board regarding fine
'...../
rnincb6a.94
6
06/08/94
" . . .' .. :' .. . . ~ . . ' , .
. - . <
~~t(. .
. I ~ .~.
". ~ I
r'\ John LeRoux, attorney representing the property owner, gave a brief background of the
I I property. He stated J & M Detailing, the business on the subject property, was found to
have built four signs, in violation of the code and without the proper permits in 1992.
The tenant said he would correct the violation and applied for partial permits; however,
did not remove the excessive signage. A Municipal Code Enforcement Board hearing was
held on August 12, 1992. Mr. LeRoux stated no one attended the hearing because the
tenant assured the property owner the signs were in compliance. He stated the property
owner was not aware a fine was accruing at the rate of $25.00 per day until she received
a letter in February, 1993, stating the fine was in excess of $4,000. She contacted the
tenant who remedied the situation on February 25, 1993. The Affidavit of Compliance
was issued and the fine was fixed at $4,175.
Mr. LeRoux stated the violation was not willful on the part of the property owner and
requested the fine be reduced to administrative costs. .
Linda Davidson, the property owner, stated she did not recall receiving a copy of the
Board's order. Attorney Salzman stated the record reflects the certified mail was received
by a person on behalf of D.G. Properties in August, 1992. Mr. LeRoux agreed the record
indicates notification was sent.
@
{l~.
In response to questions, Ms. Davidson stated she lives and owns other properties in the
area; however, does not drive in the direction of the subject property. She indicated she
believed the signs had been brought into compliance and she did not check to see
whether or not the violation had been corrected.
While it was agreed a property owner may not be aware of conditions on a leased
property, concern was expressed with this violation being allowed to continue 167 days
after notification was sent. Mr. LeRoux stated Ms. Davidson was told the matter had
been taken care of and that misinformation caused the fine to accrue.
Member Riley moved, concerning Case No. 56-92, to reduce the fine from $4,175.00 to
$1,000.00. The motion was duly seconded.
Discussion ensued regarding the motion. It was felt a $1,000 fine was excessive
because the violation was not caused by the property owner. However, it was believed
she should have made sure the sign was in compliance.
Upon the vote being taken, Members Riley, Swanberg and Rayborn voted "aye"; Member
Rogers voted t'nay". Motion carried.
Other Board Discussion
Attorney Salzman stated the Board's policy does not allow a case to be continued for
longer than 31 days. He suggested cases needing to be continued more than 31 days be
agendaed within the 31 day window and continued again, if necessary.
1..,1
mincb6a.94
7
06/08/94
. ~ . ,.'. : . . . - . ' , . , .
;l:~>~'" !," ~
, 'n
\
,
.'.
,.
\ .
~. -
. ~e(,;\,;;; 'rii':r,;:;,:'i<), :':,~;;/.:; ;};;~i:i!',;c' :y:>':i; \}i'.'!\. '::>, '}'!:d;:\'!,;.: :;.::\:,;.; '.". <:,' '; . ';'.;' .... . "'\'. .'. ': '\':!,'i: '.i'~
.~
. . . J
'-...,..,..."
Chairman Swanberg submitted far review a letter recommending Lt. Kranschnabl for
permanent assignment to'the Community Response Team. Consensus was to forward
the letter to the Mayor and the City Commission.
MINUTES - May 11 t 1 994
.1'.
Member Riley moved to approve the minutes of May 11. 1994, in accordance with copies
submitted to each board member in writing. The motion was duly seconded and carried
unanimously.
.f':
ADJOURN
The meeting was adjourned at 4:13 p.m.
,.
~ ".!(~~--
'Chairman C
MUNICIPAL CODE ENFO~CEMENT-B
ATTEST:
/~,
"-.-fI
~~~
Secretar#
,
I
I
I
I
I
v
mincb6a.94
8
06/08/94