09/28/2005
MUNICIPAL CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD MEETING MINUTES
CITY OF CLEARWATER
September 28, 2005
Present: Sheila Cole Chair
Douglas J. Williams Vice-Chair
Jay Keyes Board Member
George Krause Board Member
Joyce Martin Board Member
Richard Avichouser Board Member
Kelly Sutton Board Member
Also Present: Bryan Ruff Assistant City Attorney
Jenay Iurato Attorney for the Board
Mary K. Diana Secretary for the Board
Brenda Moses Board Reporter
The Chair called the meeting to order at 3:00 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.
1. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Case 25-05
Imt-Lb Central Florida Portfolio, LLC
C/O: Investors Mgt Trust Real Estate Group, Inc.
(MacArthur Park Apts)
2690 Drew St
Permits & Inspections (Fence & Roof) – Coccia
Case 25-05 was continued by staff to October 26, 2005.
B. Case 26-05 (Repeat Violation)
Allison V Thompson
2271 Springrain Dr
Permits & Inspections - Coccia
Secretary for the Board Diana reported service was obtained on the notice of hearing by
posting the property.
Construction Building Inspector Mike Coccia reviewed alleged violations at 2271
Springrain Drive via a PowerPoint presentation. He said a large wooden deck, gazebo, and
retaining wall had been constructed without permits or inspections. He said the original
inspection date was October 7, 2003, and the notice of violation was issued on September 21,
Code Enforcement 2005-09-28.doc 1
2004. The property owner applied for a variance but was denied. The CDB (Community
Development Board) upheld staff’s decision to deny a variance on July 20, 2004.
On October 26, 2004, a notice to appear in court resulted in the property owner pleading
guilty to the violation and paying the fine. Mr. Coccia referred to photographs of the property.
He said the lower portion of the deck extends beyond the rear property line. Staff recommends
30 days to obtain permits and 90 days to complete the work, and a $250 per day fine for each
day the violation continues to exist.
City Exhibits 1 and 2 were submitted.
Assistant City Attorney Bryan Ruff said this is a repeat violation, as this case had initially
gone to County Court.
Allison Thompson, property owner, said she received the notice of hearing regarding a
repeat violation on September 17, 2005. She said she thought the matter had been resolved.
She indicated her neighborhood is experiencing problems with property boundaries and
setbacks due to erosion issues.
Eric Held noted he and Ms. Thompson are married. He said neither of them had
appeared in court, that the fine was paid by mail.
Inspector Coccia said staff held four meetings with the property owner and Mr. Ruff met
with their attorney on March 2, 2005, at which time staff informed them they remained in
violation of the Code.
Attorney Ruff said following the March 2005 meeting, staff again filed with the County
Court to attempt compliance. The case was dropped from the Court docket to provide both
parties more time to sort through the situation. He said based on the inspector’s observations,
the property is still out of compliance.
Ms. Thompson said she informed the City the community was working through these
problems together. She felt the situation was being addressed through both the community and
the City. Ms. Thompson said the community as a whole has the same problems. Mr. Held said
a neighborhood task force is working on many problems related to lake erosion.
Mr. Coccia said when the property owner’s application for a variance to vacate the rear
setbacks was denied, the development order clearly stated what needed to be done. The
property owner was advised to work with the zoning and planning staff if they had any
questions.
Ms. Thompson expressed concern if she removes what the City is requesting, her house
could fall into the lake due to the severe erosion problems. She requested time to address
these problems and that the City provide her with alternative solutions. She said the
neighborhood has hired engineers to work with the neighborhood. She said she has been
asking for help with the situation. Ms. Thompson said she did not understand the next step as
she had not received any specifics from the City regarding removal of the deck, gazebo, etc.
and no timeframes had been determined after their last meeting with the City. She said she has
relied on her attorney’s advice.
Sympathy was expressed regarding the erosion problems.
Code Enforcement 2005-09-28.doc 2
Member Keyes moved to continue Case 26-05 for 2271 Springrain Drive to the October
30, 2005, meeting, to allow the property owner more time to address these problems. The
motioncarried
was duly seconded and unanimously.
C. Case 27-05
Hugo Castro
907.5 N Garden Ave
Unsafe Building – Wright
AND
D. Case 31-05
Hugo Castro
907 N Garden Ave
Unsafe Building - Wright
Mark Wahl, representative, stated Hugo Castro is not contesting the violations at 907.5
N. and 907 N. Garden Avenue. He said Mr. Castro recently informed Inspector Wright
regarding the sale of this property to the abutting property owner, with closing scheduled for
September 30, 2005. Mr. Wahl said the new owner has a contract to demolish the building and
requested 60 days.
In response to a question, Inspector Bill Wright said staff would work with Mr. Castro
and/or the new owner, but recommended razing the structure within 45 days.
In response to a question, it was indicated the future property owner has agreed to
comply within 45 days.
Member Martin moved that this case came before the City of Clearwater Code
Enforcement Board on September 28, 2005, 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 the building structure is
unsafe, abandoned, and uninhabitable. The Respondent’s representative, Mark Wahl, did not
contest the violation.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The Respondent(s) is/are in violation of the City of Clearwater Code Section(s) 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 Code 60 calendar days from the date this Board’s Order is sent certified
mail to the Respondent(s). If Respondent(s) does/do not comply within the time specified, the
Board may order a fine of $250 per day for each day the violation continues to exist. Upon
Code Enforcement 2005-09-28.doc 3
complying with said Section(s) of the Code, the Respondent(s) shall notify Inspector Wright,
who shall inspect the property and notify the Board of compliance. If the Respondent(s) fail/fails
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.
motioncarrie
The was duly seconded and d unanimously.
E. Case 28-05
Gilbert G Jannelli
1871 Douglas Ave
Unsafe Building – Wright
Property owner Gilbert G. Jannelli admitted to the violation.
Inspector Wright recommended compliance by November 6, 2005. Mr. Jannelli
requested until November 28, 2005 to comply. Mr. Wright objected indicating Mr. Jannelli has
had two years to come into compliance.
Mr. Jannelli said three of one building’s five units are habitable and can be rented and
occupied. He said only part of the building is a problem.
Member Sutton moved that this case came before the City of Clearwater Code
Enforcement Board on September 28, 2005, 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, evidence received and admission of guilt by Respondent, it is
evident the property is unsafe and creating a nuisance and is subject to abatement, repair, or
demolition.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The Respondent(s) is/are in violation of the City of Clearwater Code Section(s) 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 Code by November 7, 2005. If Respondent(s) does/do not comply within
the time specified, the Board may order a fine of $250 per day for each day the violation
Code Enforcement 2005-09-28.doc 4
continues to exist. Upon complying with said Section(s) of the Code, the Respondent(s) shall
notify Inspector William Wright, who shall inspect the property and notify the Board of
compliance. If the Respondent(s) fail/fails 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.
motioncarried
The was duly seconded and unanimously.
F. Case 29-05
Mark E & Suellen R Regonini
1630 Eden Ct
Landscape – Franco
Mark Regonini admitted to the violation with reservations. He said he is converting his
property into a Xeriscape project with a fence and birdcaged pool. He said his June 8, 2005,
contract with a fence company had included an August 17, 2005, completion date.
Development Services Manager Bob Hall said the property owner has come into partial
compliance in the front of the property. He said the property owner needs to install vegetation in
the back and on the side of the property. If he cannot obtain a permit to widen his driveway, the
vegetation would be required to be planted in that area. He recommended the property owner
comply by January 6, 2006.
Mr. Hall recommended a $250 per day fine if the property is not brought into compliance
or if the violation reoccurs. In response to a question, Mr. Hall said property owners currently
may water their lawns once a week during drought and the vegetative materials chosen by Mr.
Regonini are drought-resistant.
Member Williams moved that this case came before the City of Clearwater Code
Enforcement Board on September 28, 2005, 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 the landscaping
requirements are not being met.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The Respondent(s) is/are in violation of the City of Clearwater Code Section(s) as
referred in the Affidavit in this case.
Code Enforcement 2005-09-28.doc 5
ORDER
It is the Order of the Board that the Respondent(s) shall comply with said Section(s) of
the City of Clearwater Code by January 6, 2006. If Respondent(s) does/do not comply within
the time specified, the Board may order a fine of $250 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 Peggy Franco, who shall inspect the property and notify the Board of
compliance. If the Respondent(s) fail/fails 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.
motion carried
The was duly seconded and unanimously.
G. Case 30-05
Nicholas J & Russell W. Chachula
605 Maple St
Property Maintenance - Ruud
Ms. Diana reported service on the notice of hearing was obtained by posting the
property.
Inspector Alan Ruud reviewed the alleged violation via a PowerPoint presentation. He
said after certified mail receipts were returned unclaimed, the property was posted on June 30,
2005. He cited Code sections and related violations that include deteriorated exterior surfaces,
i.e. the roof, peeling paint, missing siding, surface mold and mildew, overgrown yard, debris and
trash, and storage of an inoperative vehicle on property. Shingles are missing and only felt
paper covers parts of the roof. His July 18, 2005, inspection report noted violations had not
been corrected. He recommended a $250 per day fine for each day the violations continue and
that compliance be within 30 days. In response to a question, Mr. Ruud said it may be possible
to patch and re-shingle the roof to meet Code.
City Exhibit 1 and 2 were submitted.
An opinion was expressed hiring a roofer may take some time due to recent hurricanes.
Mr. Ruud stated he has had no contact with the owners and violations have been
ongoing for two years. He said the property is sporadically rented. The property owner
previously was cited for allowing people to live in a camper parked in the yard. He
recommended 30 days compliance provided sufficient time to repair the roof.
Member Avichouser moved that his case came before the City of Clearwater Code
Enforcement Board on September 28, 2005, after due notice to the Respondent(s), and having
Code Enforcement 2005-09-28.doc 6
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 the property maintenance
standards are not being met. The Respondent had no representation.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The Respondent(s) is/are in violation of the City of Clearwater Code Section(s) 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 Code 30 calendar days from the date this Board’s Order is sent certified
mail to the Respondent(s). If Respondent(s) does/do not comply within the time specified, the
Board may order a fine of $250 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 Al Ruud,
who shall inspect the property and notify the Board of compliance. If the Respondent(s) fail/fails
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.
motioncarried
The was duly seconded and unanimously.
2. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
A. Case 04-05 – Affidavit of Compliance
Claudio Scipione
822 Eldorado Ave
Short-term Rental – Hall
AND
B. Case 05-03 – Affidavit of Compliance
George L. Sr. & Dolly A. Fulmer
526 S. Ft. Harrison Ave.
Development – DeBord
AND
Code Enforcement 2005-09-28.doc 7
C. Case 06-03 – Affidavit of Compliance
George L. Fulmer Jr.
532 S. Ft. Harrison Ave.
Development – DeBord
AND
D. Case 07-05 – Affidavit of Compliance
Richard D and Vilisity Stow
1874 Ridgeway Dr
Parking Restrictions in Residential - Parra
Member Keyes moved to accept the Affidavits of Compliance for Cases 04-05, 05-03, 06-
motioncarried
03, and 07-05. The was duly seconded and unanimously.
3. OTHER BOARD ACTION/DISCUSSION
– None.
4. NEW BUSINESS
Bob Hall introduced new staff member, Scott Sullivan, Landscape Inspector.
5. NUISANCE ABATEMENT LIEN FILINGS
Lori A Croley PNU2005-01101
710 Ruskin Rd
College Hill Estates Lot 21 $385.25
George A & Augusta M Smith Trust 4/11/78 PNU2005-01451
1733 Algonquin Dr
Clearview Lake Est Lots 81 and 81A $411.75
Randolph Davis PNU2005-01455
315 Orangewood Ave
Glenwood Estates Add Lot 68 & S 15 Ft of
Lot 69 & N 28 Ft of Lot 67 $391.25
055011006 Trust PNU2005-01894
100 S Fredrica Ave
Hibiscus Gardens Blk N, Lot 1 $200
Member Avichouser stated he had ownership in a property and would abstain from
voting.
Member Keyes moved to accept the nuisance abatement lien filings as listed. The
motion
was duly seconded and upon the vote being taken, Members Williams, Krause, Martin,
Motion carried
Keyes and Sutton and Chair Cole voted “Aye;” Member Avichouser abstained. .
6. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
– August 24, 2005
Member Williams moved to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of August 24,
motion
2005, as submitted in written summation to each board member. The was duly
carried
seconded and unanimously.
Code Enforcement 2005-09-28.doc 8
.
.
.
7.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 4:02 p.m.
Code Enforcement 2005-09-28.doc
air
unicipal Code Enforcement Board
9
FORM 8B" MEMORANOUM OF VOTING CONFLICT FOR
COUNT'l MUNICIPAL AND OTHER LOCAL' PUBLIC OFFICERS
LAST NAME-FIRST NAME-MIDDLE NAME NAME OF BOARD, COUNCIL, COMMISSION, AUTHORITY, OR COMMlTl'EE
12-\ 1..3 DE E.'\.J .i:.a '1..c-S ^" -<\..I:""" . '~1 q I
THE BO~, COUNCIL, COMMISSION, AUTHORITY OR COMMITTEE ON
WlDCH I SERVE IS A UNIT OF: '
CITY Q COUNTY a OTHER LOCAL AGENCY
N OF POI1T1CAL SUBDIVISION:
~ l \.::: 1\ fLv-J ~ \~~
MY POSITION IS:
'~--r-
COUNTY
'-:Pi v eU..
Q ELECTIVE
WHO MUST FILE FORM 8B
This form is for use by any person serving at the county, city, or other local level of government on an appointed,or elected board,
council, commission, authority, or committee. It applies equally to members of advisory and non-advisory' bodies who are presented
with a voting conflict of interest under Section 112.3143, Florida Statutes.
Your responsibilities under the law when faced with voting on a measure in which you have a conflict of interest will vary greatly
depending on whether you hold an elective or appointive position. For this reason, please pay close attention to the instructions on
this form before completing the reverse side and filing the form.
INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 112.3143, FLORIDA STATUTES
A person holding elective or appointive county, municipal, or other local public office MUST ABSTAIN, from voting on a measure
E'Ch inures to his or her special private gain or loss. Each elected or appointed local officer also is prohibited from knowingly voting
easure which inures to the special gain or loss of a principal (other than a government agency) by whom he or she is retained
. .uding the parent organization or subsidiary of a corporate principal by which he or she is retained); to the special private gain or
loss of a relative; or to the special private gain or loss of a business associate. Commissioners of community redevelopment agencies
under Sec. 163.356 or 163.357, F.S., and officers of independent special tax districts elected on a one-acre, one-vote basis are not pro-
hibited from voting in that capacity.
For purposes of this law, a "relative" includes only the officer's father, mother, son, daughter, husband, wife, brother, sister, father-
in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, and daughter-in-law. A "business associate" means any person or entity engaged in or carrying on
a business enterprise with the officer as a partner, joint venturer, coowner of property, or corporate sharp-holder (where the shares of
the corporation are not listed on any national or regional stock exchange).
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
ELECTED OFFICERS:
In addition to abstaining from voting in the situations described above, you must disclose the conflict:
PRIOR TO THE VOTE BEING TAKEN by publicly stating to the assembly the nature of your interest in the measure on
which you are abstaining from voting; and
WITHIN 15 DAYS AFTER THE VOTE OCCURS by completing and filing this form with the penon responsible for recording
the minutes of the meeting, who should incorporate the form in the minutes.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
APPOINTED OFFICERS:
You must abstain from voting and disclose the conflict in the situations described above and in the manner described for elected offi-
cers. In order to participate in these matters, you must disclose the nature of the conflict before making any attempt to influence the
decision, whether orally or in Writing and whether made by you or at your direction.
IF YOU INTEND TO MAKE ANY ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION PRIOR TO THE MEETING AT WHICH THE
VOTE WILL BE TAKEN:
Au must complete and file this form (before making any attempt to influence the decision) with the pers~n responsible for
~cording the minutes of the meeting, who will incorporate the form in the minutes.
. A copy of the form must be provided immediately to the other members of the agency.
. The form must be read publicly at the next meeting after the form is filed.
CE FORM 8B - REV, 1/95
PAGE 1
o 0 ... I 0 ~,.. 1 _ ' . 0, -~. o. '.' .
IF YOU MAKE NO A1.vrEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION EXCEPr BY DISCUSSION AT THE MEETING:
· You 'must disclose orally the naiu~ of your conflict in' the measure beio~ participating. . ,
· You must complete the form and file it withi~ 15 days after the vote occurs with the person responsible for recording the .
minutes of the meeting, who must incorporate the form in the minutes. A copy of the form must be provided immediately to the
other members of the agency, and the form must be read publicly at the next meeting after the form is filed.
DISCLOSURE OF LOCAL OFFICER'S INTEREST
I, .~\<.:- \~A n D t1'\./ I' '-- CH1-S..t=: re... . hereby disclose that on
(a) A measure came or will come before my agency which (check one)
inured to my special private gain or loss;
inured to the special gain or loss of mybusiness associate,
inured to the special gain or loss of my relative,
inured to the special gain or loss of
whom I am retained; or
0EPT ~~
,* z.eoS-
,by
inured to the special gain or loss of
is the parent organization or subsidiary of a principal which has retained me.
(b) The measure before my agency and the nature of my conflicting interest in the measure is as follows:
~
, which
.'-\ P Q.C) (J~ rt "\ I t: S \A) e I'LC:
t= 'L., v.J 0> '^J\J ,SA ~ c...C
\~ e; .f'CJ ILE- T \-\ e 6 () q. Q... D
4 M" c /VI. 0"-' T Li~-V...s t :I...
iLE'L"'f ,. l "6 10
'" A V6 .~V
OwAJ el'l~\.--. \\J
1."-l\Eflec;. r
\~
V .-'VG
Of='
TkG
Date Filed
I c:) I L (.;0 /6 ~.
I .
<:'~E~/~..e
Signature ---.....
NOTICE: UNDER PROVISIONS OF FLORIDA STATUTES ~112.317, A FAILURE TO MAKE ANY REQUIRED DISC~'
SURE CONSTITUTES GROUNDS FOR AND MAY BE PUNISHED BY ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWIN.
IMPEACHMENT, REMOVAL OR SUSPENSION FROM OFFICE OR EMPLOYMENT, DEMOTION, REDUCTION IN
SALARY, REPRIMAND, OR A CIVIL PENALTY NOT TO EXCEED $10,000.
CE FORM 8B . REV. 1/95
PAGE 2