Loading...
10/24/1990 MUNICIPAL CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD October 24, 1990 Members present: William Murray, Chairman Bruce Cardinal, Vice-Chairman Robert Aude (arrived 3:15 p.m.) William Zinzow D. Wayne Wyatt John McKinney Louise C. Riley Also present: Miles Lance, Assistant City Attorney Andy Salzman, Attorney for the Board 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 3:00 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 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 - Case No. 1 Clark W. Mills about 709 Vine Ave aka Pinecrest Sub, Blk 8, Lot 9 No one was present to represent the violator. Vern Packer, Field Housing Inspector, stated there is excessive vegetation on the property in excess of 12 inches. He first inspected the property September 23rd, verified ownership through the Property Appraiser's tax rolls, posted the property September 24th and sent notice certified mail of which the signed receipt was returned. He stated he did not speak with the owner, that this is a recurring problem and upon reinspection this morning, the violation still exists. Mr. Packer submitted City composite exhibit A, a copy of the file of record including a copy of the legal notice and a photograph. In response to questions, he stated this is a vacant lot and is posted 2-3 times per year after receiving complaints from neighbors. He stated the property was cleared by City contractors in August. In response to a question, he stated the debris in the photograph is from neighbors who put trash there for Sanitation pickup. He stated he does not know if the lot clearing bills are paid by the owner. Mr. Wyatt moved that concerning Case No. 1 of Public Nuisance Clearing List 90-10-2 regarding violation of Section 95.04 of the Clearwater City Code on property located at about 709 Vine Ave. aka Pinecrest Sub., Blk. 8, Lot 19, the Municipal Code Enforcement Board has heard testimony at the Municipal Code Enforcement Board hearing held the 24th day of October, 1990, 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 Vern Packer, Field Housing 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 of weeds, undergrowth or other similar plant materials 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 (11/3/90). 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 Vern Packer, the City Official who shall inspect the property and notify the Board of compliance. Should a dispute arise concerning compliance, either party may request a further hearing before the Board. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Done and Ordered this 24th day of October, 1990. - Case No. 2 Helen L. Russell 1871 McKinley St aka New Marymont Sub, Blk D, Lot 7 No one was present to represent the violator. Vicki Niemiller, Code Inspector, stated there is an accumulation of debris on the subject property in violation of Section 95.04(a). She verified ownership through the Pinellas County Property Appraiser's office. Notice of the violation was sent certified and regular mail and the certified mail came back unclaimed. Ms. Niemiller stated she first inspected and posted the property September 21st. She stated this is a repeat violation which had been before the Board August 22nd for overgrowth. Ms. Russell did comply with the Board's order. Photographs were taken September 21st and this morning at which time the Inspector spoke with Ms. Russell who said she would try to clean it up by 3:00 p.m. today. In response to questions, the Inspector stated the debris is right at Ms. Russell's front door also. She stated complaints received are usually regarding the debris. Ms Russell sorts and bags most of it and turns them over to private organizations. In response to a question, Ms. Niemiller stated she has not received any complaints of rodents breeding. Mr. Swan, a neighbor, stated there is a fenced in area on the property which is full of junk such as buckets, bags of clothing, trash, office chairs without legs, broken toys, etc., and there are many mosquitos. He has phoned Sanitation, the County Health Dept., and other City staff and no one can do anything. He was told they can not remove anything that is under the eaves or enclosed. Discussion ensued regarding what the City can legally do to correct the problem. The Inspector stated you can not see the debris which is fenced in. In response to a questions, Vern Packer, City Inspector, stated he has cited the property previously and in 1987 a City contractor cleared the property; however, at that time, the debris was externally stored. Staff can not legally remove anything that is stored in an enclosed area. Mr. Packer stated he has called the Fire Dept. and County Health Dept. and they will not go on the property. He stated the rest of the neighborhood is relatively clean and cared for. In response to a question, it was stated public nuisance violations can not be cited as repeat violators nor can the Board issue daily fines. It was stated there are no other codes under which to cite these violations. Discussion ensued regarding the need for more extreme sanctions to handle these types of public nuisances, and it was stated an ordinance is being drafted to address the problem. Mr. Wyatt moved that concerning Case No. 2 of Public Nuisance Clearing List 90-10-2 regarding violation of Section 95.04(a) on property located at 1871 McKinley St aka New Marymont Sub., Blk. D, Lot 7, the Municipal Code Enforcement Board has heard testimony at the Municipal Code Enforcement Board hearing held the 24th day of October, 1990, 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, Code Inspector, and Mr. Swan, a neighbor of Ms. Russell, and viewing the evidence, exhibits submitted: City composite exhibit A - a copy of the legal notice and photographs, it is evident that there exists the excessive accumulation of debris at the above address. The Conclusions of Law are: Helen L. Russell is in violation of Section 95.04(a). It is the Order of this Board that Helen L. Russell shall comply with Section 95.04 of the Code of the City of Clearwater within 10 days (11/3/90). 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 Helen L. Russell. 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, Helen L. Russell 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 24th day of October, 1990. Case No. 39-90 Lokey Motor Company 1220 U.S. 19 South (Land Development Code) Mr. Aude refrained from participating in this public hearing due to a conflict of interest. Mr. McFarland, Attorney for Lokey Motor Company, asked if anyone else had a conflict of interest and the response was negative. Rick Rosa, Code Inspector, stated he received a complaint August 28th regarding cars parked on the grass at the above referenced location. He inspected the property and sent notice of the violation via certified mail on September 5th giving until September 7th to correct the violation. He reinspected the property on the 10th and today and the violation still exists. Mr. Rosa submitted City exhibits A & B, photographs taken October 24 and September 10 1990, respectively. Mr. McFarland stated he reserves his right to object to the photographs until he gives his testimony. In response to questions, the Inspector stated since cars are parked there, it is considered a parking lot. It is unenclosed and, therefore, needs to be surfaced according to code. He stated he sent a copy of the code section with the notice of violation, and has received no calls or questions from the violator. Mr. Rosa stated the area in question is considered a parking lot because the vehicles are parked in an unenclosed area. In response to a question, he stated he received the complaint from a Mr. Jonson. Discussion ensued regarding the violation for which Lokey Motor Company was cited the last time, and it was stated that citation was for parking in an area not designated and so approved on the site plan. Discussion also ensued regarding what constitutes parking as opposed to display. Mr. McFarland stated Lokey is displaying the vehicles for sale and there is no prohibition in the code. Mr. McFarland submitted defendant's exhibit A, a letter from Assistant City Attorney Rob Surette stating Lokey was in compliance regarding the prior violation with parking as noted on the revised site plan. He submitted defendant's exhibit B, the revised site plan on record in the City Clerk Department, pointing out where the vehicles were to be displayed. He stated Lokey was given a special exception to use lot 2 entirely for the auto dealership, and there is nothing on the site plan that says they can't display vehicles in the area in question. In response to questions, Mr. McFarland stated the site is currently under construction. Cars are being moved around during the construction, and the area in question will be paved as quickly as the phases of construction allow. In response to a question, John Richter, Development Code Manager, stated even though the site is under construction, until the area is paved it is a violation to park vehicles there. He stated they need to make arrangements to park the vehicles in another area consistent with the code; there are some provisions for parking in green space, however, it has not been followed here. Hank St. Jean, of Williams Architects, stated the cars aren't parked in the right of way; the sidewalk was put on private property to accommodate pedestrians. He stated the moat for backflow was approved by the City which later realized a mistake was made in location. He stated it took three months to move the moat, delaying paving of the lots. Mr. St. Jean stated he is working with staff to move cars to the north lot. In response to questions, Mr. St. Jean stated it would take three weeks to have the occupational license modified to allow the use of the north property for car sales. He stated the vehicles are displayed 24 hours a day. In response to a question, it was stated there is no intent to park vehicles in grassy areas once construction is complete. Discussion ensued regarding the length of time needed before the lot was paved, and it was stated 30 days may be sufficient provided the City cooperates and there aren't any other unexpected problems. Mr. McFarland stated they have not ignored the City; they have proceeded without construction financing in order to expedite the job. Mr. Wyatt moved that concerning Case No. 39-90 regarding violation of Section 136.022(e) of the Clearwater City Code on property located at 1220 US 19 S aka Lokey Sub., Blk. A, Lot 2, the Municipal Code Enforcement Board has heard testimony at the Municipal Code Enforcement Board hearing held the 24th day of October, 1990, 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, John Richter, Development Code Manager, Donald McFarland, Attorney and Henry St. Jean of Williams Architects, and viewing the evidence, exhibits submitted: City exhibits A & B - photographs of the property and Defendant's exhibit A - a letter from City Attorney Rob Surette, it is evident that Lokey Motor Company is parking vehicles on an unenclosed parking lot which does not meet surfacing requirements, as designated in City exhibits A & B. The Conclusions of Law are: Philip E. Lokey is in violation of Section 136.022(e)1. It is the Order of this Board that Philip E. Lokey shall comply with Section 136.022(e)1 of the Code of the City of Clearwater within 60 days (12/24/90). If Philip E. Lokey does not comply within the time specified, the Board may order them to pay a fine of $200.00 per day for each day the violation continues to exist. If Philip E. Lokey does 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. If the violation concerns real property, the recording of a certified copy of this Order shall constitute notice to any subsequent purchasers, successors in interest or assigns of the violation and the findings in this Order shall be binding upon any subsequent purchasers, successors in interest or assigns of the real property where the violation exists. Upon complying, Philip E. Lokey shall notify Rick Rosa, 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. 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. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Done and Ordered this 24th day of October, 1990. Case No. 41-90 On Top of the World Condo Assoc., Inc. Bldgs. 18, 18A, 34, 36, 37, 40, 42, 44, 45, 50, 53-61, 74, 80, 83, 84, 86, 87, 88 & 89 (Fire Code) continued from 10/10 Mr. Cardinal moved to continue Case No. 41-90 to the meeting of November 14, 1990 as the violation is being corrected. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Case No. 90-08-2 #2 Richard Lennon Lakeview Hgts, Blk A, Lot 1 Affidavit of Compliance Case No. 90-09-1 #2 Dimmit Car Leasing, Inc Magnolia Park Sub, Blk 7, Lots 4 & 5, Lots 6 & 11 less E 15 ft & Lot 12 less W 12 ft Affidavit of Compliance Case No. 90-09-1 #3 Seaboard System Railroad Inc Magnolia Sub, Blk 7, Lots 7-10 & E 15 ft of Lots 6 & 11 Affidavit of Compliance Case No. 90-09-2 #2 Joseph & Miriam S Jackson Pinebrook Highlands, Blk E, Lot 3 Affidavit of Compliance Mr. McKinney moved to accept the Affidavit of Compliance in Case Nos. 90-08-2 #2, 90-09-1 #2, 90-09-1 #3 and 90-09-2 #2. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. OTHER BOARD ACTION - None NEW BUSINESS - None ADJOURN - 5:35 p.m.