Loading...
10/28/1992 MUNICIPAL CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD October 28, 1992 Members present: William Murray, Chairman Bruce Cardinal, Vice-Chairman William A. Zinzow D. Wayne Wyatt Stephen D. Swanberg Louise C. Riley Stephen Gerlach 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 Case No. 76-92 Gerard and Rita Walczak 1963 Magnolia Drive (Land Development Code) Continued from 10/14/92 No one was present to represent the violators. Janice King, Code Enforcement Inspector, stated a boat exceeding 20 feet is parked in the setback area of 1963 Magnolia Drive. Property ownership was verified through the Property Appraiser's Office. Notice of the violation was sent to the owner by certified mail, and the signed receipt was returned October 24. The violation was also communicated to the property owners verbally. She first inspected the property August 17; the property was inspected again October 18 and a photograph taken. City submitted Exhibit A, a photographs of the boat on the property. Another inspection was made this morning, and the violation still exists. The boat is 21 feet 9 inches long; there is a 15 foot right-of-way and 25 foot setback requirement for that property; the boat is only 21 feet from the street. In response to questions, the Inspector stated they could store the boat next to the house, but they are looking at other options. She stated the whole neighborhood is being inspected after receiving one complaint. The boat is required to be 40 feet back from the street. Discussion ensued regarding how much time should be allowed for compliance, and the majority felt they needed enough time to find a storage place or apply for a variance. Member Riley move that concerning Case No. 76-92 regarding violation of Section 136.022(i)(2)a of the Clearwater City Code on property located at 1963 Magnolia Dr. aka Fair Oaks 1st Addition, Lot 28, the Municipal Code Enforcement Board has heard testimony at the Municipal Code Enforcement Board hearing held the 28th day of October, 1992, 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 Janice King, Code Inspector, and viewing the evidence, exhibits submitted: City Exhibit A - a photograph of the property, it is evident that a boat in excess of 20 feet is parked in the setback area in a residential zone. The Conclusions of Law are: Gerard and Rita Walczak are in violation of Section 136.022(i)(2)a. It is the Order of this Board that Gerard and Rita Walczak shall comply with Section 136.022(i)(2)a of the Code of the City of Clearwater by January 1, 1993. If Gerard and Rita Walczak 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 past the compliance due date. If Gerard and Rita Walczak do 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. 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, Gerard and Rita Walczak shall notify Janice King, 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. Case No. 86-92 Warson Road Development 924 Pierce Street (Land Development Code) Request to Continue to 11/18 Member Wyatt moved to continue Case No. 86-92 to the meeting of November 18, 1992. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Case No. 87-92 Ronald A. Hadley Various City Rights-of-Way (Land Development Code) Geri Doherty, Code Enforcement Inspector, stated the Board determined at their June 10th meeting that Mr. Hadley was in violation. At that time, the Board ordered a $50 per day fine if the violation is repeated. Signs were again found in various City rights of way on September 9 and 10. Notice of the repeat violation was issued November 11, giving until the 18 for compliance. On September 21 during a telephone conversation, Mr. Hadley said the signs had been removed. The signs were not removed, and there were at least 13 different dates the signs were cited since that time. In response to questions, the Inspector stated there are approximately ten different locations cited with the signs. They are small real estate signs, referencing for rent or to buy. City submitted composite Exhibit A, photographs of the signs. As of today, the signs have been removed; one has not been cited since October 20. Ronald Hadley stated he has been unemployed for a year; he owns a condominium that is vacant. An acquaintance offered to post the signs for him, and Mr. Hadley told him not to place them in the right of way, referencing the area between the sidewalk and the street. He stated he thought the signs were removed; however, he did not know all the locations. In response to a question regarding the locations of the signs, the Inspector stated she believed they were in the exact same locations as previously. She stated compliance was due September 18; the violation was cited upon inspection September 21 and 13 different times since then. Compliance was obtained by October 21. In response to a question, it was stated if the violation is found again, the violator can be cited again as a repeat violator and brought back before the board. Member Wyatt moved that concerning Case No. 87-92 regarding violation of Section 134.009(2) of the Clearwater City Code on various City right-of-way locations, the Municipal Code Enforcement Board has heard testimony at the Municipal Code Enforcement Board hearing held the 28th day of October, 1992, 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, Code Inspector, and Ronald A. Hadley, and viewing the evidence, exhibits submitted: City composite Exhibit A - photographs of signs, it is evident that signs owned by Ronald A. Hadley were placed in various City right-of-way locations. The Conclusions of Law are: Ronald A. Hadley was in violation of Section 134.009(2); that Ronald A. Hadley was found to have violated the same provision by the Board on June 10, 1992, and that Ronald A. Hadley has committed a repeat violation. It is the Order of this Board that Ronald A. Hadley shall pay a fine of $50.00 per day for 13 days during the period from September 21, 1992 to October 20, 1992. 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 shall constitute a lien against any real or personal property owned by the violator pursuant to Chapter 162, Florida Statutes. A fine imposed pursuant to Chapter 162 continues to accrue until the violator comes into compliance or until a judgment is rendered in a suit to foreclose on a lien filed pursuant to Chapter 162, whichever occurs first. 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. 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. In response to a question, it was stated the fine can only run for those days the repeat violation is established. Case No. 89-92 Jerry and Debbie Snouffer 1201 Wellington Drive (Land Development Code) No one was present to represent the violators. Janice King, Code Enforcement Inspector, stated notice of the violation was sent by certified mail, and the signed receipt was returned dated September 30. Ownership was verified through the Property Appraiser's Office. The property was first inspected September 15 with compliance due September 22. On September 24 and October 5, the boats were still there and photographs taken. Upon inspection October 27 and 28, the boats were gone. The boats had previously been removed and moved back; therefore, the Inspector desires to establish this violation in case of a repeat. In response to a question, the Inspector stated the boat on the trailer appears to always be hooked up and ready to go. There are two boats parked 2-1/2 feet away from the street. A question was raised regrading whether the code defines any length of time regarding parking or storage of the vehicles. It was stated there is a zero tolerance except, perhaps, to allow for cleaning of the vehicle. Member Cardinal moved that concerning Case No. 89-92 regarding violation of Section 136.022(i)(2)a of the Clearwater City Code on property located at 1201 Wellington Drive aka Fair Oaks 1st Addn., Lot 67 and Fair Oaks 2nd Addn., Lot 67A, the Municipal Code Enforcement Board has heard testimony at the Municipal Code Enforcement Board hearing held the 28th day of October, 1992, 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 Janice King, Code Inspector, and viewing the evidence, exhibits submitted: City Exhibit A - a photograph, it is evident that boats have been intermittently stored in the right-of-way at 1201 Wellington Drive, that this condition was corrected and recurred. It is further evident that the condition was corrected prior to this hearing. The Conclusions of Law are: Jerry and Debbie Snouffer were in violation of Section 136.022(i)(2)a. It is the Order of this Board that Jerry and Debbie Snouffer shall continue compliance with Section 136.022(i)(2)a of the Code of the City of Clearwater. If Jerry and Debbie Snouffer repeat the violation, the Board may order them to pay a fine of $50.00 per day for each day the violation exists after Jerry and Debbie Snouffer are notified of the repeat violation. Should the violation reoccur, the Board has the authority to impose the fine at that time without a subsequent hearing. Should a dispute arise concerning compliance, either party may request a further hearing before the Board. Any aggrieved party may petition the Board to reconsider or rehear any Board order 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. Case No. 90-92 Andrew and Anna Seech 102 South Comet Avenue (Land Development Code) Janice King, Code Enforcement Inspector, requested this case be withdrawn. In response to a question, she stated there were several violations on the property which are all now in compliance. Member Cardinal moved to withdraw Case No. 90-92. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Case No. 91-92 Chris and Vivian Carassas 1383 Gulf to Bay Boulevard (Land Development Code) No one was present to represent the violators. Rick Rosa, Code Enforcement Inspector, stated he received a telephone message today that John Carassas, representing the owners, implying there was a misunderstanding regarding a continuance. This violation involves obtaining a permit. In response to a question, the Inspector stated it is possible the case could be complied with and withdrawn prior to the next meeting. Member Wyatt moved to continue Case No. 91-92 to the meeting of November 18, 1992. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Case No. 26-92 Leslie and Margaret Duttry 1866 Drew Street Address Board re fine Mr. Duttry stated he believed there was a personality conflict between his tenant and the Inspector. After receiving notice of the problem, he approached the tenant who informed him he had taken care of the problem. He did not pick up the other certified letters, stating the post office on Hercules is a dangerous place. In response to questions, he stated there was more than one violation; he removed the sign on the end of the building. He was the land owner at the time, but has since sold the property. He paid the fine in order to sell the property. He stated he was partially to blame and asked at least half the fine be forgiven. He did not come to the hearing because his tenant said he took care of the problem. He did not speak to the Inspector until after learning of the lien on his property. A chronology of events was reviewed for the Board. Discussion ensued and concern was expressed regarding the property owner's lack of attention to the certified letters sent to him regarding this case. It was stated a sufficient amount of time was allowed in which to comply. General consensus was there is no extenuating circumstance to cause a reduction in the fine. It was felt Mr. Duttry could have avoided the fine if he had picked up the certified letters. Member Riley moved to deny the request for a reduction of the fine. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Case No. 55-92 Nationwide Land Corporation 1822 Drew Street Affidavit of Non-Compliance Case No. 64-92 Peter J. Sapourn, Trustee 415 Mandalay Avenue Affidavit of Non-Compliance Member Cardinal moved to accept the Affidavit of Compliance and issue the order imposing the fine in Case Nos. 55-92 and 64-92. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. OTHER BOARD ACTION This being Member Cardinal and Member Gerlach's last meeting, the Board wished them well. The Board was reminded of the work session scheduled for Wednesday, November 4 at 3:00 p.m. MINUTES - Meeting of October 14, 1992 Member Riley moved to approve the minutes as submitted. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. ADJOURN - The meeting adjourned at 4:15 p.m.