Loading...
11/12/1997MUNICIPAL CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD CITY OF CLEARWATER November 12, 1997 Present: Helen Kerwin, Vice-Chair Dennis Henegar, Member Lawrence Tieman, Member David Allbritton, Member Frank Huffman, Member Mary Rogero, Member William Plouffe, Member Mary K. “Sue” Diana, Secretary for the Board Brenda Moses, Board Reporter The meeting was called to order by Vice-Chair Helen Kerwin at 3:00 p.m. in City Hall Chambers, 112 Osceola Avenue, Clearwater. In order to provide continuity or 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 49-97 (Cont’d from 9/24 & 10/22/97) Daniel J. Mehler 305 Pennsylvania Avenue (Housing) - Hinson At the last meeting Mr. David Getchell stated he recently purchased the property from Daniel J. Mehler. He indicated he had only received notice of the hearing on the day of the meeting and opted to continue this case to November. Since the property appraiser’s records did not reflect the change of ownership, Mr. Getchell was asked to bring proof of ownership to the next meeting. Secretary for the Board Diana read the Affidavit of Violation & Request for Hearing. The property remains in violation of the Standard Housing Code after notification of compliance time. Ms. Diana noted the City has an affidavit of service dated October 31, 1997. No one was present to represent Messrs. Mehler or Getchell. In response to questions from Assistant City Attorney Leslie Dougall-Sides, City Inspector Fred Hinson stated he initially inspected the property several months ago. The property consists of a single family dwelling and is tenant-occupied. Mr. Hinson noted David Getchell indicated at the last meeting he was purchasing the property from Daniel J. Mehler. Mr. Hinson has attempted unsuccessfully to contact Mr. Getchell or Mr. Mehler. The notice of hearing along with the appropriate attachments were left at the subject property on October 31, 1997. Upon inspection of the exterior of the property, Mr. Hinson said windows are deteriorating, skirting is missing, the front entry and rear entry doors are deteriorated, the roof is a major violation, and there is building debris surrounding the property. He was unable to access the interior of the property. Mr. Getchell was referred to CNHS (Clearwater Neighborhood Housing Services) for financial assistance with roof repairs. Mr. Getchell did not follow up with CNHS. In response to questions, Mr. Hinson said Mr. Getchell was to provide the board with evidence of property ownership but to date has not done so. According to property records, the property remains in Daniel J. Mehler’s name and any judgment of this board must be against the current property owner. Ms. Dougall-Sides introduced City Exhibits 1-4 including photographs of the property. Member Tieman moved that concerning Case 49-97, the Municipal Code Enforcement Board has heard testimony at its regular meeting held on November 12, 1997, and based on the evidence issued its Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order as follows: FINDINGS OF FACT After hearing testimony of Code Inspector Freddie Hinson and David J. Getchell (present only at October 22, 1997 meeting), who indicated he is the new owner of the property (Property Appraiser records reflect Daniel J. Mehler as current owner; he was not present at either meeting), and viewing the evidence, City Exhibits 1-4 (Ex. 1 - notice of violation; Ex. 2 - verification of property ownership; Ex. 3 - affidavit of violation & request for hearing and affidavit of service with attachments; and Ex. 4 - photographs dated 11/12/97), it is evident the property is in violation of the Standard Housing Code. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The Respondent by reason of the foregoing is in violation of Sections 305.3.2, 305.12, 305.14, 305.23, Standard Housing Code, as adopted by Section 49.01 of the Code of the City of Clearwater, Florida, in that the Respondent has failed to remedy the cited violation(s). ORDER It is the Order of the Board that the Respondent is to correct the aforesaid violation within 60 days (January 11, 1998). The burden shall rest upon the Respondent to request a reinspection by the Code Inspector to verify compliance with this Order. In the event the aforesaid violation is found, in subsequent proceedings by this Board, not to have been corrected on or before January 11, 1998, the Respondent may be ordered to pay a fine in the amount of two hundred fifty and no/100 dollars ($250.00) per day for each day the violation continues beyond January 11, 1998. If Respondent 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 Respondent 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. 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. B. Case 50-97 (Cont’d from 10/22/97) Leonardo A. Pagnotta 600 Wildwood Way Units 102, 106, 205, 206 & 208 (Housing) - Hinson Ms. Diana read the Affidavit of Violation & Request for Hearing. The property remains in violation of the Standard Housing Code after notification by of compliance time. Violations cited are for Units 102, 106, 205, 206, and 208. No one was present to represent Leonardo Pagnotta. Ms. Dougall-Sides said at the October meeting, Units 103, 104 and 105 were found in violation. Mr. Pagnotta had stated at that meeting he was not aware of violations being cited for Units 102, 106, 205, 206 and 206. He indicated he did not receive a complete housing report, therefore the board continued the case to today’s meeting. In response to questions, Inspector Hinson said he serviced the subject property following last month’s meeting. Mr. Pagnotta was also handed the Notice of Hearing for Units 102, 106, 205, 206 and 208 and the complete housing report at the October meeting. He said Unit 102 had major electrical violations. Electrical wiring from a previous garbage disposal unit under a kitchen cabinet was left improperly terminated; Unit 106 was missing a smoke detector and electrical faceplate covers, receptacles were worn, ceiling cracks and breakage from a previous plumbing leak and leaking bathtub fixtures were evident; Unit 205 had electrical problems under the kitchen cabinet; Unit 206 had missing and damaged switchplate covers, bathtub fixtures and waste pipes were leaking; Unit 208 has an improperly wired water heater and missing cover, a leaky toilet and clogged drains. There are 18 units which are all occupied. Mr. Hinson said Mr. Pagnotta left a message yesterday on his voice mail stating he was sick and could not attend today’s meeting. Mr. Hinson left him a message to call the City’s Legal Department to reschedule a hearing. Ms. Dougall-Sides said to her knowledge no message was received from Mr. Pagnotta. In response to questions, Mr. Hinson said Mr. Pagnotta understands the violations but has made no effort to pull permits and perform the necessary work. Inspector Hinson noted he inspected the violations Mr. Pagnotta indicated at the last meeting were corrected and found that the violations still exist. Due to the severity of the existing problems, he recommended a maximum fine. Member Huffman moved that concerning Case 50-97, the Municipal Code Enforcement Board has heard testimony at its regular meeting held on November 12, 1997, and based on the evidence issued its Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order as follows: FINDINGS OF FACT After hearing testimony of Code Inspector Freddie Hinson (the Respondent was not present and had no representation), and viewing the evidence, City Exhibits 1-7 (Ex. 1 - notice of violation; Ex. 2 - affidavit of service; Ex. 3 - affidavit of violation & request for hearing; Ex. 4 - notice of hearing; Ex. 5 - cited code sections; Ex. 6 - composite photographs dated 9/16/96; and Ex. 7 - notice of hearing re the referenced units given to Mr. Pagnotta at October 22, 1997 meeting), it is evident the property is in violation of the Standard Housing Code. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The Respondent by reason of the foregoing is in violation of Sections 302.1, 302.4, 302.6, 302.9, 303.4, 305.12, 305.16, 305.21, 307.5, Standard Housing Code, as adopted by Section 49.01 of the Code of the City of Clearwater, Florida, in that the Respondent has failed to remedy the cited violation(s). ORDER It is the Order of the Board that the Respondent is to correct the aforesaid violation within 10 days (November 22, 1997). The burden shall rest upon the Respondent to request a reinspection by the Code Inspector to verify compliance with this Order. In the event the aforesaid violation is found, in subsequent proceedings by this Board, not to have been corrected on or before November 22, 1997, the Respondent may be ordered to pay a fine in the amount of two hundred fifty and no/100 dollars ($250.00) per day for each day the violation continues beyond November 22, 1997. If Respondent 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 Respondent 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. 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. C. Case 53-97 (Cont’d from 10/22/97) Todd F. Hertzberg 1013 Magnolia Drive (Housing) - Hinson Request to Cont. to 12/10/97 In a memo dated November 6, 1997, staff requested this case be continued. The owner is working with staff toward compliance. Member Tieman moved to continue Case 53-97 to the December meeting. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. D. Case 55-97 Scott A. Swisher 5 S. Highland Avenue (Land Development Code) - King Ms. Diana read the Affidavit of Violation & Request for Hearing. The property remains in violation for failure to maintain a fence in a vertical position. A fence shall not be allowed to sag or lean more than 10 degrees from vertical. No one was present to represent Mr. Scott Swisher. In response to questions, City Inspector Janice King said the property was inspected due to an anonymous complaint. She noticed the concrete wall was cracked and believed it to be leaning more than 10 degrees from vertical towards the road. She said it is unknown how far down the footer extends. Ms. King said certified notices of violation were sent to Scott Swisher at 1501 Cleveland Street and at his place of business. Inspector King said the notice to the business address was signed by someone other than Mr. Swisher and she was told he was no longer employed at the business address. The notice to the Cleveland address came back unclaimed. Upon further research, Inspector King discovered an address in Dunedin for Mr. Swisher. She discovered Mr. Swisher had an injury preventing him from working and from removing or repairing the fence. Additional time was extended to Mr. Swisher, but to date the fence has not been repaired. She said she spoke to Mr. Swisher on May 23, 1997, regarding a door to a bomb shelter which has since been bolted shut. Ms. King said she had no recent contact with Mr. Swisher. The property has become overgrown and requires mowing. Calls were placed to Mr. Swisher on July 11, 1997, and October 9, 1997. Ms. Dougall-Sides introduced City Exhibits 1-6, including photographs of the property. In response to a question, Inspector King indicated she estimated the degree to which the wall was leaning. A request was made to physically measure the exact degree of the wall from vertical. Member Henegar moved to continue Case 55-97 to the December meeting. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. E. Case 56-97 Ilhan M. Bilgutay 608 Spruce Avenue (Housing) - Hinson Request to Cont. to 12/10/97 Staff requested this case be continued to give the recently hired contractor time to address the cited violations. Member Huffman moved to continue Case 56-97 to the December meeting. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 2. UNFINISHED BUSINESS - None. 3. OTHER BOARD ACTION/DISCUSSION A. B. P. Horizon, Inc./Greg A. Nowak Request to address board re: reduction of fine Cases 14-92 & 80-93 - 1384 Pierce Street Ms. Diana noted the board, at their meeting of September 24, 1997, authorized foreclosure on the subject property. The new owner has obtained the property through a tax deed sale. Ms. Dougall-Sides said the property was in violation in 1992 and 1993 for an activity or use on the property without conditional use approval. Mr. Greg Nowak, representing B.P. Horizon, Inc., said he was not aware of the amount of the fines when he purchased the property. The property was purchased with two Municipal Code Enforcement Board liens totaling $86,900. A request has been made by the City for $14,995.33 in surplus funds from the tax deed sale. Ms. Dougall-Sides asked that the fine not be reduced below this amount. In response to a question, Ms. Diana estimated City administrative costs to be approximately $300 for each case, for a total of $600. Lt. Kronschnabl indicated his department also had costs involved with these cases. Member Henegar moved to reduce the fines from $53,200.00 and $33,650.00, a total of $86,850.00, to $16,900.00 payable to the City with $14,995.33 of this amount coming from surplus funds from the tax deed sale of the above referenced property. The Respondent is responsible for $1,904.67, the balance of the reduced amount, if paid within 120 days from the date of today’s hearing. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - 10/22/97 Member Tieman moved to approve the minutes as submitted in writing to each member. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 5. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 4:04 p.m.