Loading...
09/13/1989 MUNICIPAL CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD September 13, 1989 Members present: Robert Aude, Vice-Chairman William Murray James Angelis Bruce Cardinal William Zinzow Michael Dallman Absent: D. Wayne Wyatt (excused - new member) Also present: Rob Surette, Assistant City Attorney Alan Zimmet, Board Attorney Cynthia E. Goudeau, Secretary for the Board 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 Chairman at 3:02 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 Pinellas 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. PUBLIC HEARINGS Public Nuisance Clearing List 89-9-1 Case No. 1 Joe R. Wolfe about 899 Bay Esplanade N 88' of S 98' MOL of Lot 4 & RIP rights, Sec. 5-29-15 Vicki Neimiller, Sanitation Inspector, stated property ownership was determined through the Property Appraiser's office. City submitted composite exhibit A, a copy of the file of record indicating dates of inspection, posting, notices sent and photographs taken showing the condition of the property. She stated the property is in violation of Chapter 95 due to high vegetation. The property was reinspected this morning and the violation still exists. No one was present to represent the violator. Mr. Angelis moved that concerning Case No. 1 of Public Nuisance Clearing List 89-9-1 regarding violation of Chapter 95 of the Clearwater City Code on property located at about 899 Bay Esplanade, the Municipal Code Enforcement Board has heard testimony at the Municipal Code Enforcement Board hearing held the 13th day of September, 1989, 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, Sanitation 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 at the above address. The Conclusions of Law are: Joe R. Wolfe is in violation of Section 95.04. It is the Order of this Board that Joe R. Wolfe shall comply with Section 95.04 of the Code of the City of Clearwater within 10 days (9/25/89). 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 Joe R. Wolfe. 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, Joe R. Wolfe 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 seconded and carried unanimously. Done and Ordered this 13th day of September, 1989. Case No. 2 Robert D. Hall 1844 Overbrook Sunset Point, 1st Addn., Blk. C, Lot 8 Vicki Neimiller, Sanitation Inspector, stated ownership of the property was determined through the Property Appraiser's office, notice was sent certified mail and a signed receipt was returned. City submitted composite exhibit A, a copy of the record of file depicting dates of inspection, posting, notices sent and photographs taken showing the condition of the property. She stated the property was reinspected this morning and the violation still exists. No one was present to represent the violator. Mr. Murray moved that concerning Case No. 2 of Public Nuisance Clearing List 89-9-1 regarding violation of Chapter 95 of the Clearwater City Code on property located at 1844 Overbrook, the Municipal Code Enforcement Board has heard testimony at the Municipal Code Enforcement Board hearing held the 13th day of September, 1989, 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, Sanitation 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 or the accumulation of debris at the above address. The Conclusions of Law are: Robert D. Hall is in violation of Section 95.04. It is the Order of this Board that Robert D. Hall shall comply with Section 95.04 of the Code of the City of Clearwater within 10 days (9/25/89). 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 Robert D. Hall. 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, Robert D. Hall 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 seconded and carried unanimously. Done and Ordered this 13th day of September, 1989. Case No. 3 Clark W. Mills about 709 Vine Avenue Pinecrest Sub., Blk. 8, Lot 19 Vicki Neimiller, Sanitation Inspector, stated ownership was determined through the Property Appraiser's office. City submitted composite exhibit A, a copy of the file of record depicting dates of inspection, posting and notices sent and including photographs taken showing the condition of the property. No one was present to represent the violator. Mr. Murray moved that concerning Case No. 3 of Public Nuisance Clearing List 89-9-1 regarding violation of Chapter 95 of the Clearwater City Code on property located at about 709 Vine Ave., the Municipal Code Enforcement Board has heard testimony at the Municipal Code Enforcement Board hearing held the 13th day of September, 1989, 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, Sanitation 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 or the accumulation of debris at the above address. The Conclusions of Law are: Clark W. Mills is in violation of Section 95.04. It is the Order of this Board that Clark W. Mills shall comply with Section 95.04 of the Code of the City of Clearwater within 10 days (9/25/89). 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 Clark W. Mills. 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, Clark W. Mills 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 seconded and carried unanimously. Done and Ordered this 13th day of September, 1989. Case No. 4 Anne M. Caballero 1453 Sunset Point Road M&B 32.05, Sec. 2-29-15 Vicki Neimiller, Sanitation Inspector, stated ownership was determined through the Property Appraiser's office. City submitted composite exhibit A, a copy of the record of file depicting dates of inspection, posting, notices sent and photographs taken of the property. She stated the property is still in violation as of this morning's reinspection. No one was present to represent the violator. Mr. Murray moved that concerning Case No. 4 of Public Nuisance Clearing List 89-9-1 regarding violation of Chapter 95 of the Clearwater City Code on property located at 1453 Sunset Point Road, the Municipal Code Enforcement Board has heard testimony at the Municipal Code Enforcement Board hearing held the 13th day of September, 1989, 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, Sanitation 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 or the accumulation of debris at the above address. The Conclusions of Law are: Anne M. Caballero is in violation of Section 95.04. It is the Order of this Board that Anne M. Caballero shall comply with Section 95.04 of the Code of the City of Clearwater within 10 days (9/25/89). 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 Anne M. Caballero. 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, Anne M. Caballero 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 seconded and carried unanimously. Done and Ordered this 13th day of September, 1989. Case No. 5 Keramat Fahari 3274 Beaver Drive Plaza Park Sub., Blk. E, Lots 9 & 10 Vicki Neimiller, Sanitation Inspector, stated Mr. Fahari mowed the front only of the property. The back portion is still in violation with high vegetation. City submitted composite exhibit A, a copy of the file of record depicting dates of inspection, posting, notices sent and photographs taken of the property. No one was present to represent the violator. Mr. Murray moved that concerning Case No. 5 of Public Nuisance Clearing List 89-9-1 regarding violation of Chapter 95 of the Clearwater City Code on property located at 904 Hart Street, the Municipal Code Enforcement Board has heard testimony at the Municipal Code Enforcement Board hearing held the 13th day of September, 1989, 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, Sanitation 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 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 (9/25/89). 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 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 seconded and carried unanimously. Done and Ordered this 13th day of September, 1989. Case No. 6 Lousiana Life Insurance Co. Inc. 1201-1215 Drew Street Padgett Estates Sub., Lot 1 less S 65' Vicki Neimiller, Sanitation Inspector, stated ownership was determined through the Property Appraiser's office. Upon inspection of the property it was found to be in violation of Code Section 95.04 due to high vegetation. City submitted composite exhibit A, a copy of the file of record indicating dates of inspection, posting, notices sent and photographs taken of the property. No one was present to represent the violator. Mr. Murray moved that concerning Case No. 6 of Public Nuisance Clearing List 89-9-1 regarding violation of Chapter 95 of the Clearwater City Code on property located at 1201-1215 Drew Street, the Municipal Code Enforcement Board has heard testimony at the Municipal Code Enforcement Board hearing held the 13th day of September, 1989, 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, Sanitation 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 at the above address. The Conclusions of Law are: Lousiana Life Ins. Co. Inc. is in violation of Section 95.04. It is the Order of this Board that Lousiana Life Ins. Co. Inc. shall comply with Section 95.04 of the Code of the City of Clearwater within 10 days (9/25/89). 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 Lousiana Life Ins. Co. Inc.. 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, Lousiana Life Ins. Co. Inc. 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 seconded and carried unanimously. Done and Ordered this 13th day of September, 1989. Case No. 78-89 Christine Keno 915 Engman St. and 1206 Pennsylvania Ave. (Building Code) Tom Chaplinsky, Building Inspector, stated he determined ownership through the Property Appraiser's records. City submitted exhibit A, a copy of a Personal Representative's Distributive Deed conveying title of said property to Christine Keno. Mr. Chaplinsky stated there is a two story building on Engman St. and a duplex on Pennsylvania Ave.. He stated the structures are vacant and/or unsecured and deteriorated. City submitted composite exhibit B, photographs of 1206 Pennsylvania Ave structure. He stated the windows are broken, there are rotted roof shingles and damage to stud walls. He stated the building is unsafe according to Code section 138.02. He stated he notified Ms. Keno February 16th and reissued the notice on March 1, 1989. City submitted composite exhibit C, photographs of the 915 Engman Street structure. Mr. Chaplinsky stated he sent a letter indicating the nature of the violations including rotted wood, termite infestation, rotted roof rafters and portions of the structure in danger of collapse. The property is in a state of disrepair and in violation of Code section 138.02. In response to questions, Mr. Chaplinsky stated Ms. Keno has been notified of the hearing. The only action she has taken is to authorize the City to secure the structures. She has taken no action to rehabilitate the property. She has been corresponding with the Inspector via fax machine. The Attorney for the Board submitted Ms. Keno's letter to the Board dated August 25, 1989 as Defendant's exhibit A. Letters received by Mr. Chaplinsky via fax machine on September 13, 1989 were submitted as Defendant's exhibit B. In response to questions, Mr. Chaplinsky stated Ms. Keno has denied ownership of the property, has referenced orders preventing her from doing any work on the property or trespassing, but those were prior to the deeding of the property to her. He stated Ms. Keno explained the property is part of the estate of Reuben & Charlie Floyd, both of whom are deceased. The property was disbursed upon probate of the second death, not probated upon the first death and contends the second probate is invalid. Mr. Chaplinsky stated the Property Appraiser's office shows Ms. Keno as the owner of the subject property. He stated he has responded to Ms. Keno's correspondence and informed her of the CDBG programs. In response to questions, Mr. Chaplinsky stated the structures are also in violation of the Electrical Code. Upon boarding up the structures, there is a 180 day period in which to render the structures fit. Discussion ensued regarding the condition of the structures and what type of action needs to be referenced in the order for repair or demolition, in addition to the findings of fact sufficient enough to declare the buildings unsafe. It was stated this problem has been dragging on for some time, and in response to a question, Mr. Chaplinsky stated the carport is in need of immediate attention. A public hearing before the City Commission will be required should the City have to take action to demolish the structures. Mr. Cardinal moved that concerning Case No. 78-89 regarding violation of Section 138.02 of the Clearwater City Code on property located at 915 Engman St. and 1206 Pennsylvania Ave. aka Lot 8, Blk. C, Palm Park Sub., the Municipal Code Enforcement Board has heard testimony at the Municipal Code Enforcement Board hearing held the 13th day of September, 1989, 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 Tom Chaplinsky, Minimum Housing Inspector, and viewing the evidence, exhibits submitted: City exhibits A, B & C - copy of deed and pictures of the property, and Defendant exhibits A & B - letters regarding the subject property, it is evident that the structures are in a state of disrepair and present a hazard to potential occupants, and there is sufficient evidence to declare them unsafe buildings. The Conclusions of Law are: Christine Keno is in violation of Section 138.02 of the City Code. It is the Order of this Board that Christine Keno shall comply with Section 138.02 of the Code of the City of Clearwater within 30 days (10/13/89). If Christine Keno does not comply within the time specified, the Board may order her to pay a fine of 250.00 per day for each day the violation continues to exist or authorize the City Commission to take action to demolish the structures. If Christine Keno 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, Christine Keno shall notify Tom Chaplinsky, the City Official who shall inspect the property and notify the Board of compliance. 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. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Done and Ordered this 13th day of September, 1989. Case No. 91-89 James & Isabella Tracey d/b/a Anchor Mini Mart 207 Coronado Drive (Land Development Code) Geri Doherty, Code Inspector, stated the property in violation is zoned CR-28. She stated the pole sign is in compliance; however, the signage on the building does not have a permit and exceeds the allowable square footage. She referenced Code section 134.010(2)(c)(1) which states a free standing business is allowed 15 sq. ft. of signage on the building and there currently exists 104 sq. ft. City submitted composite exhibit A, photographs of the property. Ms. Doherty stated the codes violated are 134.013(a) - required permits, and 134.017(a)(1) - illegal signs. She stated she checked City records for permits/ applications and there are none for the signs on the building. The Assistant City Attorney requested the Board take judicial notice of the Code sections violated as cited. A request was made to amend the referenced code section on the Notice of Violation to 134.010(2)(c)(1), and it was so noted. In response to questions, Ms. Doherty stated even under the commercial complex allowance of 48 sq. ft., they still exceed that allowed. In response to a question, Mr. Tracey stated if the reference was amended on the Notice of Violation, he would not have had any additional evidence to bring to the hearing. Mr. Tracey stated he bought the hotel in 1969 and, when he installed the mini mart he looked at other signs in the area, noticed signs on City right of way and was aware he had to comply with setbacks. He didn't realize there was a problem with painting over the existing signs. He stated he does have a hotel license. He submitted Defendant's exhibits A & B, pictures of other signs in the area and his property. In response to question, Mr. Tracey stated permits were acquired 12-14 years ago but not for the same signs. He stated he was not aware he needed a permit to paint over the existing signs. It was recommended that Mr. Tracey apply to the Code Administration Division for a variance and go through the proper procedures. Mr. Zinzow moved that concerning Case No. 91-89 regarding violation of Sections 134.013(a) and 134.017(a)(1) of the Clearwater City Code on property located at the S 50' of the W 110' of Lot 1, Blk. B., Columbia Sub. aka 207 Coronado Drive, the Municipal Code Enforcement Board has heard testimony at the Municipal Code Enforcement Board hearing held the 13th day of September, 1989, 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 Geri Doherty, Development Code Inspector, and James Tracey and viewing the evidence, exhibits submitted: City composite exhibit A and Defendant's exhibits A & B - photographs of the property, it is evident that Anchor Mini Mart, owned and operated by James and Isabella Tracey, does not have a sign permit and the signs exceed the square footage allowed. The Conclusions of Law are: James and Isabella Tracey are in violation of Sections 134.013(a) and 134.017(a)(1). It is the Order of this Board that James and Isabella Tracey shall comply with Sections 134.013(a) and 134.017(a)(1) of the Code of the City of Clearwater by September 30, 1989. If James and Isabella Tracey do not comply within the time specified, the Board may order them to pay a fine of 25.00 per day for each day the violation continues to exist. If James and Isabella Tracey do not comply within the time specified, a certified copy of the Order imposing the fine may be recorded in the Public Records of, 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, James/Isabella Tracey shall notify Geri Doherty, the City Official who shall inspect the property and notify the Board of compliance. 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. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Done and Ordered this 13th day of September, 1989. Case No. 38-89 John F. Hurley 32 Leward Isle (False Alarm) The Assistant City Attorney requested this case be withdrawn pursuant to amendments to the Florida Statutes effective October 1, 1989. Mr. Murray moved to withdraw Case No. 38-89. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Case No. 103-89 Antonios Markopoulos 100 Coronado Drive (Building Code) The Inspector requested this case be withdrawn as the violation has been corrected. Mr. Angelis moved to withdraw Case No. 103-89. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Case No. 51-98 Michael/Elefterios Kekllas 1641 Midnight Pass Way (False Alarm - repeat) The Assistant City Attorney submitted City exhibits A & B, a copy of the order of the Board of April 26th and an Affidavit of No Contest signed by Michael Kekllas. Officer Charles Dunn, Clearwater Police Department, stated an additional false alarm occurred July 22, 1989 which was caused by human error. In response to a question, Officer Dunn confirmed Mr. Kekllas as the owner. Mr. Angelis moved that concerning Case No. 51-98 regarding violation of Section 94.02 of the Clearwater City Code on property located at 1641 Midnight Pass Way, the Municipal Code Enforcement Board has heard testimony at the Municipal Code Enforcement Board hearing held the 13th day of September, 1989, 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 Officer Charles Dunn, Clearwater Police Department, viewing the evidence: City exhibit B, an affidavit of no contest signed by Mr. Kekllas and taking notice of prior proceedings at which time the Board issued an order, it is evident that an additional false alarm occurred after the compliance date set by the Board and within one year of issuance of the first courtesy warning. The Conclusions of Law are: Michael/Elefterios Kekllas have not complied with the Order of the Municipal Code Enforcement Board of April 26, 1989. It is the Order of this Board that Michael/Elefterios Kekllas shall pay a fine of $100.00 for the additional false alarm occurrence. If Michael/Elefterios Kekllas do not pay the fine, a certified copy of this Order shall be recorded in the Public Records of the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court in and for Pinellas County, and once recorded shall constitute a lien against any real or personal property owned by the violator pursuant to Chapter 162, Florida Statutes. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Done and Ordered this 13th day of September, 1989. Case No. 64-89 Landmark Towers Condominium Association 1230 Gulf Boulevard (False Alarm - repeat) The Assistant City Attorney submitted City exhibit A, a copy of the order of the Board of May 24, 1989. In response to questions, Jeff Daniels stated he is Custodian of Records for False Fire Alarm cases. He stated the first courtesy warning was issued March 7, 1989, and subsequent to the Board's order of May 24th, another alarm occurred on August 3, 1989. He stated the system was silenced prior to the arrival of the Fire Department. He was told by the guard that there are numerous problems, however there was no evidence of conditions to cause the alarm. Doug Byer, representing Landmark Towers, stated he is aware of the notice and response by the Fire Department. He was before the Board in May and it was concluded the previous alarms were caused by smoke detectors. Heat detectors were then installed, one in the elevator room. The fan shorted out causing the false alarm. In response to a question, he stated the change was made within 30 days of the first order. Mr. Byer stated the heat detector did what it was suppose to do. The Assistant City Attorney asked Jeff Daniels if he was aware of the heat detector in the elevator room and he stated he went to the elevator room and noted no problems. Discussion ensued regarding the few number of alarms with regard to the number of heat detectors installed. The Attorney for the Board stated if the alarm went off due to heat in the room based on Mr. Byer's testimony, there was no malfunction, therefore it would not fit the definition of a false alarm. Mr. Cardinal moved to dismiss the repeat violation charge with regard to Case No. 64-89. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Case No. 66-89 Crossland Savings Bank 1831 N. Highland Avenue (False Alarms - repeat) City submitted exhibit A, a copy of the Board's order of May 24, 1987. In response to a question, Officer Charles Dunn, Clearwater Police Department, stated he is custodian of records for false alarms. He stated another alarm occurred on July 21, 1989, it was a holdup alarm and there was no evidence showing cause for the alarm. He stated the first courtesy warning was sent January 27, 1989. Brenda Johnson, representing Crossland Savings Bank, stated she agrees there was another false alarm. She has retained a new alarm company this year and she is in constant contact with the company. In response to a question, Ms. Johnson stated the modification was not made after May 26th, the date of compliance ordered by the Board. Mr. Dallman moved that concerning Case No. 66-89 regarding violation of Section 94.02 of the Clearwater City Code on property located at 1831 N. Highland Ave., the Municipal Code Enforcement Board has heard testimony at the Municipal Code Enforcement Board hearing held the 13th day of September, 1989, 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 Officer Charles Dunn, Clearwater Police Department, and taking notice of prior proceedings at which time the Board issued an order, it is evident that at Crossland Savings Bank an additional false alarm occurred after the compliance date set by the Board and within one year of issuance of the first courtesy warning. The Conclusions of Law are: Crossland Savings Bank has not complied with the Order of the Municipal Code Enforcement Board of May 24, 1989. It is the Order of this Board that Crossland Savings Bank shall pay a fine of $100.00 for the additional false alarm occurrence. If Crossland Savings Bank does not pay the fine, a certified copy of this Order shall be recorded in the Public Records of the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court in and for Pinellas County, and once recorded shall constitute a lien against any real or personal property owned by the violator pursuant to Chapter 162, Florida Statutes. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Done and Ordered this 13th day of September, 1989. Case No. 68-89 Consolidated Southern Security, Inc. 520 Howard Court (False Alarms - repeat) City submitted exhibit A, a copy of the Board's order of May 24, 1989. Officer Charles Dunn, Clearwater Police Department, stated another alarm occurred July 21, 1989, it was an intrusion alarm and there was no evidence to show cause for the alarm. Upon talking to the subscriber, it was stated the alarm was caused by human error. Officer Dunn stated the first courtesy warning was sent February 15, 1989. Lisa Wonsley, representing the violator, stated she is in agreement with the testimony given. Mr. Murray moved that concerning Case No. 68-89 regarding violation of Section 94.02 of the Clearwater City Code on property located at 520 Howard Court, the Municipal Code Enforcement Board has heard testimony at the Municipal Code Enforcement Board hearing held the 13th day of September, 1989, 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 Officer Charles Dunn, Clearwater Police Department, and taking notice of prior proceedings at which time the Board issued an order, it is evident that one additional false alarm occurred after the compliance date set by the Board and within one year of issuance of the first courtesy warning. The Conclusions of Law are: Consolidated Southern Security, Inc. has not complied with the Order of the Municipal Code Enforcement Board of May 24, 1989. It is the Order of this Board that Consolidated Southern Security, Inc. shall pay a fine of $100.00 for the additional false alarm occurrence. If Consolidated Southern Security, Inc. does not pay the fine, a certified copy of this Order shall be recorded in the Public Records of the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court in and for Pinellas County, and once recorded shall constitute a lien against any real or personal property owned by the violator pursuant to Chapter 162, Florida Statutes. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Done and Ordered this 13th day of September, 1989. The meeting recessed from 5:15 - 5:19 p.m. Case No. 29-89 S & A Restaurant Corp. dba Key West Grill Inc. 2660 Gulf to Bay Boulevard (False Alarms) Case No. 109-89 Roger Hayden 783 Bay Esplanade (False Alarms) Case No. 118-89 Office Products Warehouse, Inc. 2010 State Road 60 (False Alarms) Case No. 119-89 David A. Bernstein, M.D, P.A. 2424 Enterprise Road, Suite C (False Alarms) Case No. 120-89 Stuart Rose dba T.V. and Stereo Town 1928 Gulf to Bay Boulevard (False Alarms) Case No. 121-89 Sun Services of America, Inc. dba Clean Care Coin Laundry 504 Eldridge Street (False Alarms) Case No. 122-89 Lokey Motors Company 2340 Gulf to Bay Boulevard (Land Development) The Assistant City Attorney requested the above listed cases be withdrawn. Mr. Angelis moved that Case Nos. 29-89, 109-89, 118-89, 119-89, 120-89, 121-89 & 122-89 be withdrawn. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Case No. 115-89 Subway Capital Partners, Inc. or T & M Development, Inc. dba Subway Sandwiches & Salads 2569 Countryside Boulevard, #10 (False Alarms) The Board Attorney stated the incorrect corporation was listed as operator of this particular location and requested the Board correct their order of August 23, 1989. Mr. Angelis moved to correct the corporation name from Subway Capital Partners, Inc. to T & M Development, Inc. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Case No. 88-89 Richard E. Owens 300 Venetian Drive (Fire Code) Affidavit of Non-compliance Mr. Angelis moved to accept the Affidavit of Non-compliance and issue the order imposing the fine in Case No. 88-89. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Case No. 89-7-2-1 Dimmitt Car Leasing, Inc. corner of Pierce St. & Greenwood Ave. Affidavit of Compliance Mr. Murray moved to accept the Affidavit of Compliance in Case No. 89-7-2, #1. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. OTHER BOARD ACTION The Attorney for the Board reviewed amendments to the Florida Statutes regarding Code Enforcement Boards to take effect October 1, 1989. Consensus was for the secretary and Attorney for the Board to present proposed changes to the Rules and Regulation at the first meeting in October. The Assistant City Attorney stated the City's ordinance making amendments to the City Code regarding the Code Enforcement Board passed first reading September 7, 1989 and should be in effect October 1, 1989. Election of Chairman and Vice Chairman Mr. Angelis nominated Robert Aude as Chairman. Mr. Aude stated he will accept for remainder of the year. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Mr. Angelis nominated Mr. Murray as Vice Chairman. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. NEW BUSINESS - None. MINUTES - Meeting of August 23, 1989. Mr. Cardinal moved to approve the minutes of the meeting of August 23, 1989 as submitted. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Mr. Aude informed the Board that Mr. Dallman is taking a new position and will not be able to accept reappointment. ADJOURN - 6:04 p.m.