Loading...
01/25/2012 MUNICIPAL CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD MEETING MINUTES CITY OF CLEARWATER January 25, 2012 Present: Michael Boutzoukas Chair Duane Schultz Vice-Chair Sheila Cole Board Member James E. Strickland Board Member Sue A. Johnson Board Member Michael J. Riordon Board Member Absent: Donald van Weezel Board Member Also Present: Caitlin E. Sirico Attorney for the Board Camilo Soto Assistant City Attorney Nicole Sprague Secretary to the Board – departed at 2:00 p.m. Patricia O. Sullivan Board Reporter The Chair called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. at City Hall, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. To provide continuity for research, items are in agenda order although not necessarily discussed in that order. The Chair outlined the procedures and stated any aggrieved party may appeal a final administrative order of the Municipal Code Enforcement Board to the Circuit Court of Pinellas County within thirty days of the execution of the order. Florida Statute 286.0105 requires any party appealing a decision of this Board to have a record of the proceedings. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES – December 21, 2011 Member Schultz moved to approve the minutes of the regular Municipal Code Enforcement Board meeting of December 21, 2011, as submitted in written summation to each board member. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 3. PUBLIC HEARINGS 3.1 Case 65-11 – Continued from November 30, 2011 Allen A. George 831 Eldorado Avenue Development Code Violation, LMDR Zoning District Regulations – O’Neil & McMahan Attorney Marion Hale, representing the respondent, reported she had filed a lawsuit requesting the Court to declare that the subject property’s short-term rental use had not been abandoned. She denied a violation exists and requested that the hearing be deferred. Assistant City Attorney Camilo Soto requested the item be heard today. Discussion ensued. A motion to continue the item was not seconded. Code Enforcement 2012-01-25 1 Inspectors Corey O’Neil and Janet McMahan provided a PowerPoint presentation. A Notice of Violation was issued on August 23, 2011, following the first inspection. Violations at 831 Eldorado Avenue relate to illegal short-term rentals. A property photograph on January 13, 2012, shows the house. Inspector O’Neil said on August 2, 2011, he spoke with a tenant renting the subject property short-term. Inspectors O’Neil and McMahan and Attorney Soto reviewed the following information: Declaratory Judgment from Allbritton et al v. City case reads in part “. . . continued non- conforming use must comply with the terms set forth in the applicable City Code.” The City’s January 29, 2008, letter to respondent Allen George referenced final action in the Allbritton cases and notified affected property owners intending to rent property on a short-term basis of the need to submit by February 15, 2008, an application for a residential rental BTR (Business Tax Receipt), a fee, plus a copy of a DBPR (Department of Business & Professional Regulations) issued Resort Dwelling License. Of 31 property owners contacted, 28 submitted complete applications. On March 12, 2010, the City received Mr. George’s BTR application, without a DBPR Public Lodging License. On June 22, 2010, Planning and Development Director Michael Delk sent two letters to Mr. George: 1) re staff’s decision to deny BTR issuance due to Mr. George’s failure, for a period in excess of six months, to maintain a short-term rental use and 2) re Mr. Delk’s conclusion that the property did not retain its legal non-conforming status with regard to short-term rentals. In her July 6, 2010, letter to Mr. Delk, Attorney Hale stated Mr. George had continually offered and intended to use the subject property for short-term rentals, claimed he had not lost the ability to rent on a short-term basis for failure to rent within a six-month period, and indicated did not need to appeal Mr. Delk’s decision. The City returned Mr. George second BTR application, dated April 27, 2011, as incomplete. Florida law requires public lodging establishments to obtain a DBPR license and mandates that Clearwater ensure that a public lodging business has a DBPR license prior to issuing a BTR (occupational license). Clearwater Code requires all public lodging establishments to obtain a BTR. Inspector McMahan said DBPR and City records indicate no license or BTR was issued for the George property since April 2007. Staff spent significant time searching for his out-of- state address; staff provided the property manager a copy of the Notice of Violation. Attorney Hale said City correspondence indicated abandonment of Mr. George’s short- term rental use was due to a lack of short-term renters within a 6 month-period, not the BTR issue. She said Mr. Delk never informed Mr. Allen about the license requirement and the lack of a license was a recent staff invention. She submitted Mr. George’s January 20, 2012, affidavit, swearing he continuously engaged in the short-term rental of the subject property since 2007. She said Mr. George applied twice for a BTR but the City would not issue one because staff claimed the use had been abandoned due to a failure to rent. Code Enforcement 2012-01-25 2 The board recessed from 2:10 to 2:17 p.m. Discussion ensued. It was noted the City’s January 29, 2008 and June 22, 2010, letters referenced licenses. Attorney Hale said the City did not reference a DBPR license when it returned Mr. George’s last BTR application. She did not know if Mr. George has a DBPR license. She said all City paperwork references abandonment due to an insufficient number of renters and the license requirement is a recent theory. She requested the board delay its decision for 60 days. She said the City did not meet the due process clause, which obliges it to advise respondents regarding the basis of a violation. She said the City did not issue occupational licenses for this use for a lengthy period of time. Attorney Soto reviewed City correspondence, Code, and State law, and noted the lack of a DBPR license and BTR as evidence this short-term rental use had been abandoned. Attorney Hale said City correspondence did not reference State law nor did the City respond to her contention that abandonment resulted from a lack of renters. She said the City never requested a DBPR license and the property owner, who lives in California, did not know about the requirement. She said the owner had not abandoned the short-term rental use and therefore did not lose his grandfathered rights. Discussion ensued with comments that City correspondence referenced the need for licenses and did not cite a failure to rent the property. It was noted Mr. George waited more than two years to respond to the City’s January 29, 2008, letter and then did nothing when the BTR was denied. It was indicated had Mr. George responded to the City’s initial letter and obtained and maintained necessary licenses, no problem would exist today. It was stated that licensing requirement information is easy to obtain online or via phone and 28 of 31 property owners had understood the requirements and obtained necessary licenses. It was felt Mr. George had skirted the law, failed to do his due diligence, and not paid required taxes on his rentals. Member Riordon moved to find the Respondent(s) in violation of the City of Clearwater Code of Ordinances as referred to in the affidavit in this case. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Inspector O’Neil recommended compliance by February 24, 2012, or a fine of $200 per day be imposed. Attorney Hale requested the board delay its decision for 90 days until the court ruling, noting the board’s decision will be subject to litigation. Attorney Soto said Mr. George can comply immediately by offering no more short-term rentals. It was suggested that consideration be given to those who paid for reservations at this property during peak season. It was stated Mr. George had not obtained required licenses for four years and compliance should not be delayed. Code Enforcement 2012-01-25 3 Attorney Soto submitted composite exhibits. Member Riordon moved to enter an order requiring the Respondent to correct the violation on or before April 20, 2012. If the Respondent does not comply within the time specified, the Board may order a fine of $200 per day for each day the violation continues to exist. The motion was duly seconded. Members Schultz, Cole, Strickland, Johnson, and Riordon voted “Aye”; Chair Boutzoukas voted “Nay.” Motion carried. This case came before the City of Clearwater Code Enforcement Board on January 25, 2012, after due notice to the Respondent(s), and having heard testimony under oath and received evidence, the Board issues the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order: FINDINGS OF FACT Based upon the testimony and evidence received, it is evident that short term rentals have occurred without required licenses. A representative of the Respondent(s) was present. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1- The Respondent(s) is/are in violation of the City of Clearwater Code Section(s) 104.B,2-201, 2-201.1, 2-202, 8-102, & 3-919 , as referred in the Affidavit in this case. ORDER It is the Order of the Board that the Respondent(s) shall comply with said Section(s) of the City of Clearwater Community Development Code by April 20, 2012. If Respondent(s) does/do not comply within the time specified, the Board may order a fine of $200.00 per day for each day the violation continues to exist. Upon complying with said Section(s) of the Code, the Respondent(s) shall notify Inspector Janet McMahan or Corey O’Neil, who shall inspect the property and notify the Board of compliance. If the Respondent(s) fails/fail to 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 property owned by the Respondent(s), pursuant to Chapter 162, Florida Statutes. 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. Any aggrieved party may appeal a final administrative Order of the Municipal Code Enforcement Board to the Circuit Court of Pinellas County within thirty (30) days of the execution of the Order. Florida Statute 286.0105 requires any party appealing a decision of this Board to have a record of the proceedings. Code Enforcement 2012-01-25 4 DONE AND ORDERED this 25th day of January 2012, at Clearwater, Pinellas County, Florida. The board recessed from 3:45 to 3:54 p.m. 3.2 Case 01-12 Ibrahim Ghobrial & Shahinaz Kladas 1445 S Missouri Avenue Exterior Surfaces, Door & Window Openings, Window Maintenance – Weaver No one was present to represent the owner. Inspector Mary Jo Weaver provided a PowerPoint presentation. A notice of violation was issued on December 7, 2011, following the first inspection. Violations at 1445 S Missouri Avenue relate to exterior surfaces, door and window openings, window maintenance, and paint color. Property photographs on December 7, 2011, showed the rear property wall has chipped paint, three walls are painted a garish green, one window is missing and another is boarded, a prohibited portable sign is exhibited, and non permitted attached signage exists. The business never opened. The City has received neighbor complaints. Staff has spoken with the property’s owners. Member Schultz moved to find the Respondent(s) in violation of the City of Clearwater Code of Ordinances as referred to in the affidavit in this case. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Inspector Weaver recommended compliance by February 25, 2012 or a fine of $100 per day per violation be imposed. Attorney Soto submitted composite exhibits. Member Schultz moved to enter an order requiring the Respondent to correct the violation on or before February 25, 2012. If the Respondent does not comply within the time specified, the Board may order a fine of $200 per day per violation for each day each violation continues to exist. The motion was duly seconded. It was noted that the color may be based on cultural issues. Upon the vote being taken, the motion carried unanimously. This case came before the City of Clearwater Code Enforcement Board on January 25, 2012, after due notice to the Respondent(s), and having heard testimony under oath and received evidence, the Board issues the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order: FINDINGS OF FACT Based upon the testimony and evidence received, it is evident that the rear property wall has chipped paint, the other three walls are painted a garish green, one window is missing and Code Enforcement 2012-01-25 5 another is boarded, a prohibited portable sign is present, and non permitted attached signage exists. The Respondent(s) was/were not present. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 3- The Respondent(s) is/are in violation of the City of Clearwater Code Section(s) 1502.B, 3-1502.C.1, 3-1502.C.3, and 3-911 , as referred in the Affidavit in this case. ORDER It is the Order of the Board that the Respondent(s) shall comply with said Section(s) of the City of Clearwater Community Development Code by February 25, 2012. If Respondent(s) does/do not comply within the time specified, the Board may order a fine of $100.00 per day per violation for each day each violation continues to exist. Upon complying with said Section(s) of the Code, the Respondent(s) shall notify Inspector Mary Jo Weaver, who shall inspect the property and notify the Board of compliance. If the Respondent(s) fails/fail to 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 property owned by the Respondent(s), pursuant to Chapter 162, Florida Statutes. 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. Any aggrieved party may appeal a final administrative Order of the Municipal Code Enforcement Board to the Circuit Court of Pinellas County within thirty (30) days of the execution of the Order. Florida Statute 286.0105 requires any party appealing a decision of this Board to have a record of the proceedings. DONE AND ORDERED this 25th day of January 2012, at Clearwater, Pinellas County, Florida. 3.3 Case 02-12 Circle K Stores Inc 1502 S. Belcher Road Abandoned Signs, Non-Conforming Signs – Weaver No one was present to represent the owner. Inspector Mary Jo Weaver provided a PowerPoint presentation. A notice of violation was issued on September 29, 2011, following the first inspection. Violations at 1502 S. Belcher Road relate to abandoned and non-conforming signs. The business closed in January 2009. Property photographs on June 3 and September 29, 2011 showed the non-conforming abandoned freestanding sign in front of the closed business. Property photographs of the sign structure and closed business on December 28, 2011, showed some sign panels had been removed. Code Enforcement 2012-01-25 6 Member Strickland moved to find the Respondent(s) in violation of the City of Clearwater Code of Ordinances as referred to in the affidavit in this case. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Inspector Weaver recommended compliance by February 25, 2012, or a fine of $200 per day be imposed. Attorney Soto submitted composite exhibits. Member Cole moved to enter an order requiring the Respondent to correct the violation on or before February 25, 2012. If the Respondent does not comply within the time specified, the Board may order a fine of $200 per day for each day the violation continues to exist. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. This case came before the City of Clearwater Code Enforcement Board on January 25, 2012, after due notice to the Respondent(s), and having heard testimony under oath and received evidence, the Board issues the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order: FINDINGS OF FACT Based upon the testimony and evidence received, it is evident that the rear property wall has chipped paint, the other three walls are painted a garish green, one window is missing and another is boarded, a prohibited portable sign is present, and non permitted attached signage exists. The Respondent(s) was/were not present. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 3- The Respondent(s) is/are in violation of the City of Clearwater Code Section(s) 1502.B, 3-1502.C.1, 3-1502.C.3, and 3-911 , as referred in the Affidavit in this case. ORDER It is the Order of the Board that the Respondent(s) shall comply with said Section(s) of the City of Clearwater Community Development Code by February 25, 2012. If Respondent(s) does/do not comply within the time specified, the Board may order a fine of $100.00 per day per violation for each day each violation continues to exist. Upon complying with said Section(s) of the Code, the Respondent(s) shall notify Inspector Mary Jo Weaver, who shall inspect the property and notify the Board of compliance. If the Respondent(s) fails/fail to 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 property owned by the Respondent(s), pursuant to Chapter 162, Florida Statutes. 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 Code Enforcement 2012-01-25 7 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. Any aggrieved party may appeal a final administrative Order of the Municipal Code Enforcement Board to the Circuit Court of Pinellas County within thirty (30) days of the execution of the Order. Florida Statute 286.0105 requires any party appealing a decision of this Board to have a record of the proceedings. DONE AND ORDERED this 25th day of January 2012, at Clearwater, Pinellas County, Florida. 3.4 Case 03-12 – Continue to March 28, 2012 Gilbert G. Jannelli 1411 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard Abandoned Signs, Non-Conforming Signs – Weaver Case 03-12 was continued automatically to March 28, 2012. 3.5 Case 04-12 Karas Group LLC 2525 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard Effect of Comprehensive Sign Approval – Weaver Inspector Mary Jo Weaver provided a PowerPoint presentation. Notices of violation were issued on September 7, 2010 and January 25, 2011, following the first inspection. Violations at 2525 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard relate to signage installed without approval, in violation of Comprehensive Sign Approval requirements. After one year of discussions and no action, the City filed the case in Circuit Court; the respondent entered a guilty plea on August 18, 2011. On October 13, 2011, the property owner submitted a drawing of new face panels, which the City approved. When questioned, the property owners indicated no plans except for having the next tenant pay for the changes. Property photographs on September 10, 2010 and December 15, 2011, showed the sign, which was installed without approval. A sign company indicated installation of a new sign would take no more than 10 days following authorization. Peg Williams, business manager for Karas Group, said she has spoken with Inspector Weaver for more than a year. She said the property has been on the market for more than a year and the owners currently are in deliberation with a buyer. She admitted to the violation. In response to a question, Inspector Weaver said the sign has been in violation of Code for a year and a half. She said the law is designed to ensure that high quality signs are used. Member Strickland moved to find the Respondent(s) in violation of the City of Clearwater Code of Ordinances as referred to in the affidavit in this case. The motion was duly seconded. Concern was expressed that the current sign is not objectionable and forcing its replacement seems to disregard common sense. Upon the vote being taken, the motion carried unanimously. Code Enforcement 2012-01-25 8 Inspector Franco recommended compliance by February 25, 2012 or a fine of $200 per day be imposed. She expressed concern current negotiations may fall through. Ms. Williams requested 45 days to comply. Member Schultz moved to enter an order requiring the Respondent to correct the violation on or before March 9, 2012. If the Respondent does not comply within the time specified, the Board may order a fine of $100 per day for each day the violation continues to exist. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Attorney Soto submitted composite exhibits. This case came before the City of Clearwater Code Enforcement Board on January 25, 2012, after due notice to the Respondent(s), and having heard testimony under oath and received evidence, the Board issues the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order: FINDINGS OF FACT Based upon the testimony and evidence received, it is evident that a sign has been installed that violates Comprehensive Sign Approval requirements. A representative of the Respondent(s) was present. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 4- The Respondent(s) is/are in violation of the City of Clearwater Code Section(s) 1008.E , as referred in the Affidavit in this case. ORDER It is the Order of the Board that the Respondent(s) shall comply with said Section(s) of the City of Clearwater Community Development Code by March 9, 2012. If Respondent(s) does/do not comply within the time specified, the Board may order a fine of $100.00 per day for each day the violation continues to exist. Upon complying with said Section(s) of the Code, the Respondent(s) shall notify Inspector Mary Jo Weaver, who shall inspect the property and notify the Board of compliance. If the Respondent(s) fails/fail to 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 property owned by the Respondent(s), pursuant to Chapter 162, Florida Statutes. 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. Any aggrieved party may appeal a final administrative Order of the Municipal Code Enforcement Board to the Circuit Court of Pinellas County within thirty (30) days of the Code Enforcement 2012-01-25 9 execution of the Order. Florida Statute 286.0105 requires any party appealing a decision of this Board to have a record of the proceedings. DONE AND ORDERED this 25th day of January 2012, at Clearwater, Pinellas County, Florida. 3.6 Case 05-12 – Continue to February 22, 2012 Frances Davis, Ashley Duncan, & Dixie Duncan 808 Spencer Avenue Exterior Surfaces - Ruud Case 05-12 was continued automatically to February 22, 2012. 4. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 4.1 Case 67-11 Affidavit of Compliance Stephen J. Casucci 204 & 208 S. Betty Lane Parking Lot Surfaces - Schaar Member Schultz moved to accept the Affidavit of Compliance for Case 67-11. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 5. NEW BUSINESS: 5.1 Election of Chair/Vice-Chair Member Schultz moved to reappoint Michael Boutzoukas as Chair. The motion was duly seconded and approved by unanimous consent. Member Johnson moved to reappoint Duane Schultz as Vice-Chair. The motion was duly seconded and approved by unanimous consent. 6. NUISANCE ABATEMENT LIEN FILINGS: Organized Confusion LLP PNU2011-01039 3040 Gulf to Bay Boulevard 16-29-16-05292-007-0020 $1149.15 Organized Confusion LLP PNU2011-01573 309 Meadow Lark Lane 16-29-16-05292-006-0010 $392.71 William J. Hallisky PNU2011-01639 904 Palmetto Street 10-29-15-45000-006-0010 $392.35 Code Enforcement 2012-01-25 10 Wendy & Nasser Ayoub PNU2011-01658 1432 Rogers Street 14-29-15-10854-005-0190 $274.00 Melanie Cottle PNU2011-01874 1508 S Prescott Avenue 22-29-15-78498-006-0160 $429.96 Vivian H. Furigay-Dudgeon PNU2011-01913 Dana Dudgeon 2727 Daniel Street $427.84 28-28-16-00036-004-0010 Michael C. Karaphillis PNU2011-01920 2058 Santiago Way S. 01-29-15-14348-000-0400 $280.00 Karen L Carpenter Est. PNU2011-01921 1816 Ridgeway Drive 02-29-15-98964-000-1080 $383.50 Organized Confusion LLP PNU2011-01929 407 Meadow Lark Lane 16-29-16-05292-007-0010 $427.30 Organized Confusion LLP PNU2011-01933 323 Meadow Lark Lane 16-29-16-05292-006-0090 $495.19 Organized Confusion LLP PNU2011-01934 3036 Carolina Avenue 16-29-16-05292-006-0070 $482.71 Organized Confusion LLP PNU2011-01935 3040 Carolina Avenue 16-29-16-05292-006-0060 $345.10 Organized Confusion LLP PNU2011-01937 307 Meadow Lark Lane 16-29-16-05292-006-0030 $696.01 Wanda Baumhardt PNU2011-01966 301 Evelyn Avenue 18-29-16-34560-005-0170 $392.50 Eric M. & Kimberly Rokicki PNU2011-01971 1463 Monte Carlo Drive 19-29-16-59118-000-5530 $301.75 Code Enforcement 2012-01-25 11 Henry Jones Est. PNU2011-01978 798 Jurgens Street 10-29-15-00000-230-0400 $334.82 Rodolfo E. Schefer PNU2011-01995 215 N. Jupiter Avenue 11-29-15-22536-000-0440 $347.80 Bethel Christian Center Church PNU2011-02012 1002 Grant Street 10-29-15-61758-002-0060 $343.48 Bethel Christian Center Church PNU2011-02015 1500 N Martin Luther King Jr. Ave. 10-29-15-61758-002-0080 $326.95 Bethel Christian Center Church PNU2011-02016 1502 N Martin Luther King Jr. Ave. 10-29-15-61758-002-0081 $326.95 Terry W. & Tina J. Tazelaar PNU2011-02036 2523 Deer Run 29-28-16-61626-009-0170 $670.60 Tarpon IV LLC PNU2011-02065 1122 LaSalle Street 10-29-15-33552-005-0440 $320.26 Lisa Lewis PNU2011-02067 1138 Engman Street 10-29-15-33552-004-0520 $320.26 Bethel Christian Center Church PNU2011-02090 1003 Marshall Street 10-29-15-61758-002-0070 $343.48 **************** PNU2011-02099 400 Casler Avenue 11-29-15-32850-000-0920 $524.50 Michelle & James Lathrop PNU2011-02126 1714 Greenhill Drive 02-29-15-99000-000-0920 $398.48 Alexander P. Ayles PNU2011-03037 1858 Feather Tree Circle 12-29-15-27520-000-01110 $200.00 Code Enforcement 2012-01-25 12 Member Schultz moved to accept the Nuisance Abatement Lien filings. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 7. ADJOURN: The meeting adjourned at 4 Code Enforcement 2012-01-25 13