Loading...
08/23/2000MUNICIPAL CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD MEETING CITY OF CLEARWATER August 23, 2000 Present: Helen Kerwin Chair Franke Huffman Member David Allbritton Member Sheila Cole Member Peter Caffentsis Member Absent: Joyce Martin Member Lawrence Tieman Vice-Chair Also Present: Leslie Dougall-Sides Assistant City Attorney Tony Tuntasit Attorney for the Board Sue Diana Secretary for the Board Patricia O. Sullivan Board Reporter The Chair called the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m. at City Hall. To provide continuity for research, items are in agenda order although not necessarily discussed in that order. The Chair outlined the procedures and stated any aggrieved party may appeal a final administrative order of the Municipal Code Enforcement Board to the Circuit Court of Pinellas County within thirty (30) days of the execution of the order. Florida Statute 286.0105 requires any party appealing a decision of this Board to have a record of the proceedings. ITEM #1 - Public Hearings A1. Case 28-00 (Cont’d from 6/28/00) KVB Corp. 2275 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard (Landscape) - Kurleman Board Secretary Diana read the Affidavit of Violation & Request for Hearing. Service of the notice of hearing was obtained by certified mail. In response to questions from Assistant City Attorney Leslie Dougall-Sides, Inspector Scott Kurleman said he had inspected the property on March 30, 2000, as part of the Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard reinspection program, and observed the landscaping was deficient, violated Code, and was missing 61 shrubs and 5 shade trees from the site’s landscape plan, approved by the City in 1988. Notice of Violation was issued on March 30, 2000, citing the nuisance section of the Development Code, mailed certified, delivered to the address by Development Services Manager Robert Hall, and posted on the property. This property was reinspected on April 21, 2000, and its landscaping was found to be in the same condition. The property representatives have indicated the property is undergoing major renovations, to be completed in late November. Staff requested a landscape plan be presented to the City for approval, indicating changes and a definitive time frame. The new plan should bring the site up to code as much as possible. The City will not require asphalt to be removed. The landscape plan previously submitted did not meet City requirements. Mr. Kurleman identified City Exhibit photographs he had taken of the property on August 16, 2000. The photographs are an accurate representation of current conditions. He recommended the property be found in violation and to provide the property owner 10 days to submit an acceptable landscape plan to the City with a time schedule for its installation or to also require the immediate installation of suitable landscaping to portions of the property not affected by new construction. Ms. Dougall-Sides submitted City Exhibits 1 - 8 and displayed photographs taken August 16, 2000. Pankaj Patel, member of the property’s corporate ownership, reviewed efforts made this year and further plans to renovate the property. He said a firm has been contracted to landscape the property to comply with City requirements. In response to a question, Mr. Kurleman indicated upgrades must be greater than 25% of the property’s value before the City requires a landscape plan when issuing building permits. Discussion ensued regarding landscaping requirements and Xeriscaping. Mr. Kurleman stated staff had delayed bringing this issue forward to the MCEB (Municipal Code Enforcement Board) as the owners, at first, had shown a good effort to comply. Member Huffman moved that concerning Case 28-00, the Municipal Code Enforcement Board has heard testimony at its regular meeting held on August 23, 2000, 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 Scott Kurleman and Respondent, and viewing the evidence, City Exhibits 1-8 (Ex. 1 – notice of violation; Ex. 2 – development standards; Ex. 3 – property owner verification; Ex. 4 – affidavit of violation & request for hearing; Ex. 5 – notice of hearing; Ex. 6 – landscape plan dated 6/23/88; Ex. 7 – photos of present landscaping conditions; and Ex. 8 – letter from Pankaj Patel dated 8/23/00), it is evident the property is in violation of the section(s) of the Code as read into the record. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The Respondent by reason of the foregoing is in violation of Section(s) 3-1204 (B), (I), & (L) 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 shall have an approved landscape plan by September 7, 2000 and the required landscaping and irrigation system installed by December 1, 2000. 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 September 7, 2000, and December 1, 2000, the Respondent 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 beyond the specified compliance dates. 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. 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. B1. Case 29-00 Bellendorf Enterprises, Inc. 1226 S. Highland Avenue (Occupational License) - Shawen Board Secretary Diana read the Affidavit of Violation & Request for Hearing. Service of the notice of hearing was obtained by hand delivery to Mr. Shannon Fortner. Ms. Dougall-Sides said the violator now is in compliance. Staff recommends a finding of violation to discourage repeat violations. In response to questions from Ms. Dougall-Sides, Inspector Dee Shawen stated she had inspected the business, Pepper Ronis, on June 6, 2000, and found it had not been issued an occupational license since 1997. Another renewal is due October 1, 2000. Also onsite vending machines and amusements machines were not licensed. The Notice of Violation was issued on June 8, 2000, citing the section of the Development Code. Ms. Shawen said all licenses were paid up to date yesterday. Licenses are valid through September 30, 2000. The check is in the process of clearing. Ms. Shawen identified City Exhibit 4 as photographs of the property. She recommended finding the business in violation. Should the licenses become delinquent in the future, the business could be cited as a repeat offender. Ms. Dougall-Sides submitted City Exhibits 1 –6. In response to a question, Ms. Dougall-Sides said staff does not recommend a fine. Discussion ensued regarding repeat offenders. Concerns were expressed the repeat offender process is not streamlined and that a second hearing could be avoided if fines are defined up-front. Board Attorney Tony Tuntasit recommended a repeat violator be cited and the case presented to the board again for a decision regarding the fine. Ms. Dougall-Sides said several months ago, the board had discussed developing a format to allow an automatic fine. It was recommended the fine be levied without a hearing. Staff will review this issue with Mr. Tuntasit. Member Allbritton moved that concerning Case 29-00, the Municipal Code Enforcement Board has heard testimony at its regular meeting held on August 23, 2000, 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 Dee Shawen (the Respondent was not present and had no representation), and viewing the evidence, City Exhibits 1-6 (Ex. 1 – Bellendorf/Shawn letter dated 4/20/00; Ex. 2 – notice of violation dated 6/8/00; Ex. 3 – cited code sections; Ex. 4 – photographs of business; Ex. 5 – affidavit of violation & request for hearing; and; Ex. 6 – notice of hearing dated 8/2/00), it is evident the subject property was operating without an occupational license and was in violation of Section(s) 29.28, 29.30, & 29.40 of the Code as read into the record. It is further evident that the condition was corrected prior to this hearing. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The Respondent by reason of the foregoing is in violation of Sections 29.28, 29.30, & 29.40 of the Code of the City of Clearwater, as referred to in the affidavit read into the record in this case. ORDER It is the Order of the Board that the Respondent is to continue compliance with said Sections 29.28, 29.30, & 29.40 of the Code of the City of Clearwater. If Respondent repeats the violation, the Board may order the Respondent to pay a fine for each day the violation exists after the Respondent is 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. 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. 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. C1. Case 30-00 Manuel Kastrenakes, Tre Evangeline Kastrenakes, Tre 2576 Harn Boulevard (Vehicles Sales/Display on Grass/Unpaved) - Doherty Board Secretary Diana read the Affidavit of Violation & Request for Hearing. Service on the notice of hearing was obtained by certified mail. The previous use of the property was for a Farm Store. In response to questions from Ms. Dougall-Sides, Inspector Geri Doherty said she had inspected the property on August 31, 1999, one day after receiving the initial citizen complaint. She had observed the abutting business was using the vacant Farm Store property to store vehicles. The business, Preferred Auto, previously had purchased the subject property. The Code forbids parking vehicles on grass or unpaved areas for display purposes. A Notice of Violation was issued on August 31, 1999, citing the nuisance section of the Community Development Code. The Planning & Zoning Board subsequently denied the business’ application for a conditional use. A Hearing Officer overruled the Planning & Zoning Board. However, the business did not meet the conditions of approval by the February 29, 2000 deadline. Ms. Doherty said he had worked with the business regarding these compliance issues. When progress stopped, he requested a hearing and issued another Notice of Violation on February 7, 2000. As of today, the property complies with Code. Due to the property’s long history of violations, Ms. Doherty requested the board find the property in violation and fine the owner $100/day. The vehicles have been moved off the property and some of the property has been roped off. Ms. Dougall-Sides said staff wishes to have the ability to take action if the vehicles return and the property again violates Code. Ms. Doherty identified City Exhibit 6 as photographs he had taken of the property on February 7, 2000. The photographs are an accurate representation of the property’s previous condition. Ms. Dougall-Sides submitted City Exhibits 1 -6 and displayed photographs taken February 4, 2000. It was recommended the motion order a $100/daily fine for every day the property violates the Code following notification without a subsequent hearing. Mr. Tuntasit recommended the board delay action on imposing a fine. Staff and Mr. Tuntasit will review the issue of requiring automatic fines following future violations. Member Cole moved that concerning Case 30-00, the Municipal Code Enforcement Board has heard testimony at its regular meeting held on August 23, 2000, 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 Geri Doherty (the Respondent was not present and had no representation), and viewing the evidence, City Exhibits 1-6 (Ex. 1 – notice of violation dated 2/7/00; Ex. 2 – cited code sections; Ex. 3 – property owner verifications; Ex. 4 - affidavit of violation & request for hearing; Ex. 5 – notice of hearing dated 8/2/00); and Ex. 6 – photographs of parked vehicles, it is evident the subject property was being used for a vehicle sales/display use and vehicles were parked on a grass surface without approval and was in violation of Sections 1-104.B and 3-1403.B.1 of the Code as read into the record. It is further evident that the condition was corrected prior to this hearing. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The Respondent by reason of the foregoing is in violation of Sections 1-104.B and 3-1403.B.1 of the Code of the City of Clearwater, as referred to in the affidavit read into the record in this case. ORDER It is the Order of the Board that the Respondent is to continue compliance with said Sections 1-104.B and 3-1403.B.1 of the Code of the City of Clearwater. If Respondent repeats the violation, the Board may order the Respondent to pay a fine for each day the violation exists after the Respondent is 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. 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. 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. Discussion ensued regarding automatic fines for future violations. It was felt these fines would streamline the process, inform violators of risks associated with further violations, and avoid the need for subsequent hearings. Concern was expressed some repeat violators may suffer extenuating circumstances which need consideration. ITEM #2 - Unfinished Business – None. ITEM #3 - Other Board Action/Discussion Case 26-98 – Addressing Board re fine at next meeting Bill V. & Sophia Stathopoulos 1975 Drew Street (Building) – Scott Ms. Diana indicated a letter distributed to the board had requested reconsideration of the fine. Member Cole moved that concerning Case 26-98, the Municipal Code Enforcement Board will consider the Respondents’ request for reconsideration of the fine at a hearing to be held on September 27, 2000. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. ITEM #4 – New Business – None. ITEM #5 – Nuisance Abatement Lien Filings Sylvia Williams/Tyrone Mason COD2000-00715 807 Carlton Street $320 Clearwater, Florida 33755-3202 1210 N. Myrtle Avenue aka Palm Park, Blk A, Lot 2 less road Theresa A. Panfili COD1999-05317 901 Cedar Avenue #1301 $320 Niagara Falls, NY 14301-1149 1459 Court Street aka Breeze Hill, Blk A, Lot 6 Rupert J. Hill Sr. COD2000-02028 1131½ Grant Street $320 Clearwater, Florida 33755-2628 906 Palmetto Street aka Pennsylvania Sub, Lot 9 and S10’ of Lot 14 Dorothy W. Strong COD1999-05347 c/o Leonard B. Strong Jr. POA $320 25531 Chaplain Road 1410 Druid Road aka Laguna Hills, CA 92653-5443 Breeze Hill, Blk H, E50’ of Lot 13 Miller M. Cooper COD2000-01096 2727 Ulmerton Road #230 $364.50 Clearwater, Florida 33762 505 Virginia Lane aka Sec 13-29-15, Metes & Bounds 32/05 Member Cole moved to accept the nuisance abatement lien filings. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. ITEM #6 - Approval of the Minutes Member Huffman moved to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of June 28, 2000, as recorded and submitted in written summation by the Board Secretary to each Board Member. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. ITEM #7 - Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 3:58 p.m.