Loading...
09/25/1996MUNICIPAL CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD CITY OF CLEARWATER September 25, 1996 Present: Louise C. Riley, Vice-Chair Dennis Henegar, Member Helen Kerwin, Member Peg Rogers, Member Leslie Dougall-Sides, Assistant City Attorney Andy Salzman, Attorney for the Board Lt. Jeff Kronschnabl, Community Response M. Kathryn Diana, Secretary for the Board Brenda Moses, Board Reporter Absent: Stephen Swanberg Carl Rayborn The meeting was called to order by the Vice-Chair at 3:00 p.m. in the Commission Chambers at City Hall. In order to provide continuity for research, the items will be listed in agenda order although not necessarily discussed in that order. The Vice-Chair 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. She 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. 1. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Case 39-96 MRL #C-III LTD./Key West Grill 2660 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard (Land Development Code/Environmental) Assistant City Attorney Leslie Dougall-Sides stated this is a landscaping violation. Inspector Albee met with the manager for the property today, who is willing to comply with the code if given additional time. The City requests a continuance to the next meeting. Member Rogers moved to continue Case 39-96 to the October 23, 1996 meeting. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. B. Case 42-96 John and Bridgett Tassinari 715 S. Glenwood Avenue (Public Nuisance) John Tassinari agreed to the violation, however, indicated it was brought about by the City. In response to questions from the Assistant City Attorney, Inspector Janice King said she spoke to Bridgett Tassinari on May 15, 1996 regarding complaints about the rights-of-way along Druid Road not being maintained. Mrs. Tassinari complained that Mr. Tassinari damaged their lawn mower while mowing the right-of-way along this road. Ms. King said staff investigated the complaint regarding the damaged mower. She said the property was posted on June 5, 1996 and was to be cleared by June 21, 1996. The property was not cleared. Ms. King submitted photographs of the property taken on June 5, 1996 and on September 24, 1996 (City Exhibit 1). Discussion ensued regarding Mr. Tassinari owning a corner lot and being responsible for maintaining the rights-of-way on both Druid Road and Glenwood Avenue. In response to questions, Mr. Tassinari said his property is addressed on Glenwood Avenue and the vegetation and hedges along the right-of-way serve as a sound barrier from the activity of the hospital and belong to him and the City. Discussion continued in regard to the lawn mower complaint. Mr. Tassinari indicated after City workers resurfaced an area with grass, a gate valve cover was left protruding and damaged his mower. He said the City has denied paying for his mower indicating there is no evidence to prove his claim. Mr. Tassinari pointed out that the right-of-way along Druid Road is dangerous to maintain due to ambulances and police vehicle traffic. In response to a question, Ms. King stated the City code requires the owner of any real property abutting any dedicated right-of-way in the City to maintain it. A question was raised if any photographs were taken of the protruding gate valve cover and Mrs. Tassinari responded none were. She felt when the original complaint had been called in, the City should have said to take pictures before they sent workers to correct the situation. Mr. Tassinari complained the City was picking on certain people. He noted he had a list of 50 properties that he considered to be in violation of the code and had not been cited. He questioned, if he provided the list to the City, would they cite these properties. Ms. King indicated they would if a violation existed. In response to a question, Mr. Tassinari indicated he has mowed the right-of-way along Druid Road for 18 years, however, stopped when he damaged his mower. Mrs. Tassinari felt the City should pay for the damage to the mower. Concern was expressed the gate valve may have been improperly installed. It was questioned whether a work order had been issued regarding its repair. It was noted the damage to the lawn mower is a separate issue and that the Board should concern themselves only with the cited violation. A question was raised if Mr. Tassinari would mow the right-of-way if he was reimbursed for the damaged mower. He indicated he would consider doing so. Member Henegar moved to continue Case 42-96 to the next meeting pending a report from staff that the gate valve was properly installed and damage to the mower was not the City’s fault. The motion was duly seconded. Lieutenant Kronschnabl noted the complaint regarding the damaged mower was not filed until a year after the incident. Concern was expressed if the case was continued until the next meeting the right-of-way would remain overgrown for 30 days. The Board Attorney stated the Board first needs to determine whether a violation currently exists noting Mr. Tassinari has admitted to the violation. Upon the vote being taken, Member Henegar voted “aye;” Members Rogers, Kerwin and Riley voted “nay.” Motion failed. Member Rogers moved that concerning Case 42-96 regarding violation of Section 20.35(2) of the City of Clearwater Code at 715 S. Greenwood Avenue, aka Druid Hills, part of Lots 69 and 70, the Municipal Code Enforcement Board has heard testimony on September 25, 1996, and based on the evidence, the Municipal Code Enforcement Board enters the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order. FINDINGS OF FACT After hearing testimony of John and Bridgett Tassinari, Respondents, and Janice King, Code Inspector, and viewing the evidence, City Exhibit 1 (photos of the condition of the property) it is evident a violation exists, excessive growth of grass, weeds and/or other similar plant materials upon property abutting a dedicated right-of-way in the city. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The Respondents by reason of the foregoing is/are in violation of the Code of the City of Clearwater, Florida, Section 23.5(2) in that Respondents have failed to remedy the cited violation(s). ORDER It is the Order of the Board that the Respondents are to correct the aforesaid violation(s) on or before October 5, 1996. The burden shall rest upon the Respondent to request a reinspection by the Code Inspector to verify compliance with this Order. 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 the Respondents. 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 $200.00 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, Florida, as other liens are recorded. If the owner takes remedial action after the time specified, the City Commission may assess the property the $200.00 administrative cost. Such cost shall constitute a lien against the property until paid. Upon complying, the Respondents shall notify Janice King, City Inspector, 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. C. Case 31-96 (Cont’d from 8/28) Charles E. & John C. Belcher 2 & 4 Highland Avenue (Life Safety Code) City Inspector Rick Rosa said the property is now in compliance and withdrew Case 31-96. D. Case 38-96 E. G. Bradford & Sons, Inc. Earnest G. Bradford R/A 111 S. Belcher Road (Occupational License) Ms. Diana noted staff received a call that Mr. Bradford is currently in the process of renewing his license. This case was continued to later in the meeting to allow Inspector Barbara Sexsmith to follow-up on the status of Mr. Bradford’s renewal. Later in the meeting and after following up on Mr. Bradford’s renewal, Inspector Barbara Sexsmith indicated the licensing office had closed and she was unable to obtain any information regarding Mr. Bradford’s renewal. She noted Mr. Bradford is also required to pay a public service tax. Beginning this year, the public service tax is required to be paid by businesses selling LP gas before renewal of occupational licenses. Letters were sent to businesses engaged in gas sales notifying them of the new policy. In response to questions, Ms. Sexsmith stated, in December 1995, she obtained a printout listing all delinquent licenses and tried to contact each business by phone. There were over 2300 delinquent licenses this year (95/96) causing the delay in Mr. Bradford’s case coming before the Board. In response to a question, Ms. Sexsmith indicated Mr. Bradford has been operating without a license for 8/1/2 months. Assistant City Attorney Dougall-Sides submitted City Exhibit 1 (Affidavit of Service); Exhibit 2 (code section cited); Exhibit 3 (letter dated 3/8/96 re taxes on propane sales); Exhibit 4 (memo dated 3/14/96 re public service tax); Exhibit 5 (letter dated 5/6/96 re violation of Article III, Section 29.871(1) public service tax); and Exhibit 6 (notice of violation dated 5/15/96). In response to a question, Ms. Sexsmith indicated she had contacted the business but no one returned her call. Discussion ensued regarding Internal Audit monitoring the payment of the public service tax and it was indicated this tax is based on the gross receipts from the prior year. Member Kerwin moved that concerning Case 38-96 regarding violation of Sections 22.29 and 29.30(1) of the City of Clearwater Code at 111 S. Belcher Road, Clearwater, Florida, aka Section 18-29-16, M&B 23.03, the Municipal Code Enforcement Board has heard testimony on September 25, 1996, and based on the evidence, the Municipal Code Enforcement Board enters the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order. FINDINGS OF FACT After hearing testimony of Barbara Sexsmith, Code Inspector, and viewing the evidence, City Exhibits 1-6 (Ex. 1 - Affidavit of Service; Ex. 2 - Code section cited; Ex. 3 - Letter dated 3/8/96 re taxes on propane sales; Ex. 4 - Memo dated 3/14/96 re public service tax; Ex. 5 - Letter dated 5/6/96 re violation of Article III, Section 29.871(1) public service tax; and Ex. 6 - Notice of Violation dated 5/15/96) it is evident a violation exists, renewal of an occupational license is delinquent. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The Respondents by reason of the foregoing are in violation of the Code of the City of Clearwater, Florida, Sections 29.29 and 29.30(1) in that the Respondents have failed to remedy the cited violation(s). ORDER It is the Order of the Board that the Respondents are to correct the aforesaid violation(s) on or before October 5, 1996. The burden shall rest upon the Respondents to request a reinspection by the Code Inspector to verify compliance with this Order. In the event the aforesaid violation(s) are found, in subsequent proceedings by this Board, not to have been corrected on or before October 5, 1996, the Respondents may be ordered to pay a fine in the amount of Fifty and no/100 dollars ($50.00) per day for each day the violation(s) continue(s) beyond October 5, 1996. If Respondents 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 Respondents pursuant to Chapter 162 of the Florida Statutes. 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 Border 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. E. Case 40-96 Dina & Bryan Atkins 701 S. Highland Avenue (Land Development Code) Ms. Dougall-Sides requested that Case 40-96 be continued since Mr. and Mrs. Atkins live out of state and proof of service has not been received. The City will post the property. Member Henegar moved to continue Case 40-96 to the meeting of October 23, 1996. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. F. Case 41-96 Remprop Inc., R. Metz, R/A Lessee: Patrick Media Group 2071 Drew Street (Sign Code) Ms. Dougall-Sides withdrew Case 41-96 due to service problems. She also expressed concern there may have been confusion as to whether the case would be continued. Lt. Kronschnabl expressed concern that Mr. Metz has not picked up his mail regarding this case. The Board Attorney advised that the property be posted and a photograph of the posting be taken as proof of adequate notification. The property is to be recited. 2. UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. Request to Reduce Fine Case 13-96 (cont’d from 8/28) Remprop Inc., R/A Richard Metz Goin’ Bananas Produce 1612 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard In response to a question, Ms. Diana indicated the accrued fine is $600. The Board Attorney said there is an appeal pending regarding Case 13-96. The City is holding the appeal process in abeyance dependent upon the decision of this Board as to the reduction of fine. The property is now in compliance. Administrative costs on this property are approximately $150.00. Member Henegar moved that concerning Case 13-96, the fine be reduced to $150.00 if paid within 15 days of receipt of the Order. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. B. Request Hearing regarding Compliance Case 25-96 Gilbert G. Jannelli 1930 Drew Street The Board Attorney stated Case 25-96 has previously come before the Board and a prior request for a rehearing was denied. On September 10, 1996, the Planning and Zoning Board approved a conditional use for a temporary parking area on the property which would bring the property into compliance if the conditions attached to the approval have been met. The Board Attorney indicated it would be appropriate for the property owner to be reheard. Member Kerwin moved to approve the request for rehearing for Case 25-96. The motion was duly seconded and upon the vote being taken, Members Rogers, Kerwin and Riley voted “aye;” Member Henegar voted “nay”. Motion carried. C. Affidavit of Compliance Case 26-96 Samuel J. Castro 601 N. Fort Harrison Avenue Member Rogers moved to accept the Affidavit of Compliance for Case 26-96. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. D. Request to Reduce Fine Case 44-93 G. P. Taliaferro 1402 N. Greenwood Avenue Ms. Diana noted an Affidavit of Compliance was never issued. The property has been in compliance since February of 1995. Inspector Whittleton presented an Affidavit of Compliance for the property. It was noted the accrued fine is $22,950. Member Rogers moved to accept the Affidavit of Compliance for Case 44-93. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Inspector Whittleton stated he issued a violation notice in January of 1993 regarding inspection of fire extinguishers and repair of a ceiling. Ms. Taliaferro said she was unaware of the lien until March of 1996. Her uncle was taking care of the building and became ill. She said she had difficulty evicting a tenant, James R. Nichols. Ms. Taliaferro stated, when the tenant moved out in 1994, she had the roof repaired. The property is currently vacant and secured. Ms. Taliaferro said she was unaware the tenant had signed for one of the hearing notices and had attended a previous hearing. Discussion ensued regarding Ms. Taliaferro’s signature appearing on the return receipts for certified mail regarding this case. Ms. Taliaferro said she did not recall signing the receipts. The Board Attorney noted her signature was not the same on both receipts. He also noted she was out of town during the initial hearing. Member Rogers moved that concerning Case 44-93 to reduce the fine for from $22,950 to $1,180.66 if paid within 10 days of receipt of the Order. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. E. Abatement of Fines Case 20-95 Gary & Phillips Wood/Patrick Media 1556 S. Fort Harrison Assistant City Attorney Dougall-Sides stated there is parallel litigation between the City and Patrick Media regarding the validity of the City’s sign ordinances. In the course of that litigation, questions arose regarding certain billboards located on U. S. Alternate 19 and portions of Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard. Those roads may be part of the Federal and National Highway System and any City enforcement action could affect City liability for removal of the billboard. She said the City is requesting abatement of the accrual of fine previously imposed until further notice. Ms. Dougall-Sides said the City has entered into a letter of compromise to suspend certain fines currently running until a mutually acceptable agreement is reached in regard to Chapter 479 of the Florida Statutes regarding outdoor advertising, or until the status of the signs is resolved by a court of law. In response to a question, Board Attorney Salzman said the intent is to get compliance. Member Henegar moved that concerning Case 20-95 to abate the accrual of fine until further notice. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 3. OTHER BOARD ACTION/DISCUSSION - none. 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - August 28, 1996 Member Henegar moved to approve the minutes of August 28, 1996 as submitted in writing to each member. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 5. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 4:49 p.m. Chairman Attest: Municipal Code Enforcement Board ________________________________________ Secretary to the Board