03/24/2004
MUNICIPAL CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD MEETING
CITY OF CLEARWATER
March 24, 2004
Present: Sheila Cole Chair
Joyce Martin Vice-Chair – arrived 3:03 p.m.
L. Duke Tieman Board Member
Douglas J. Williams Board Member
Richard Avichouser Board Member
George Krause Board Member
Jay Keyes Board Member
Also Present: Bryan Ruff Assistant City Attorney
Andrew Salzman Attorney for the Board
Mark K. (Sue) Diana Secretary for the Board
Brenda Moses 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 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.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1.
A. Case #03-04 (Contd from 02-25-04)
Hardees Lease Partners 1980 (4930-0027)
2551 Gulf-to-Bay Blvd.
Development Code – Kurleman
Case #03-04 was continued by staff to April 28, 2004.
B. Case #07-04
Beverly J. Meffert
c/o Donald Schantz
1906 West Barrington Drive
Development Code – King
Board Secretary Diana said service on the notice of hearing was obtained by
certified mail.
In response to questions from Assistant City Attorney Bryan Ruff, Inspector
Janice King said in response to an anonymous complaint, she had inspected the
property on January 16, 2004. Two trailers were parked on the grass between the
structure and the street, bathroom fixtures were in the yard, and vehicles were parked on
the side of the house. A notice of violation to comply by February 3, 2004 was issued.
Code Enforcement 2004-03-24 1
Ms. King said she reinspected the property on February 4, 2004. The bathroom fixtures
had been removed, however, two trailers remained. Ms. King inspected the property
again on February 17, 2004, and found the violations still existed. As of this morning, a
trailer and two vehicles remained parked on the grass.
Mr. Ruff submitted City Exhibits 1-6, which included photographs of the property.
Ms. King recommended the property owner comply within 14 days or pay a fine
of $50 per day for each day the violation continues to exist.
In response to a question, Ms. Schantz said she and Beverly J. Meffert own the
home. She said before her husband passed away, the County told her the trailer could
be parked on one side of the house. She said the items have been removed from the
yard except for the trailer. She said the bathroom fixtures were placed in the yard after
the house flooded. She said all the vehicles were removed and disputed Ms. King’s
allegations vehicles were parked illegally on the property this morning.
The Chair explained Ms. Schantz’s property is in the City, not in the County, and
that the City’s Code is specific regarding these violations.
Member Keyes moved that concerning Case #07-04, the Municipal Code
Enforcement Board has heard testimony at its regular meeting held on March 24, 2004,
and based on the evidence issued its Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order
as follows:
FINDINGS OF FACT
After hearing testimony of Inspector Janice King for City and Mrs. Donald
Schantz for Respondent, and viewing the evidence, City Exhibits 1-6 [Ex. 1 – notice of
violation; Ex. 2 – certified return receipt; Ex. 3 – applicable code sections; Ex. 4 –
property appraiser printout; Ex. 5 – affidavit of violation & request for hearing; and Ex. 6
– composite photographs], it is evident the property is in violation of the City code. A
hauling trailer and vehicles are being parked and or stored on the property, which is not
allowed.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The Respondent by reason of the foregoing is in violation of Sections 3-
1407.A.2.b and 3-1407.A.4 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 by April 15, 2004. 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 April 15, 2004, 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 continues beyond April 15, 2004.
Code Enforcement 2004-03-24 2
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.
motioncarried
The was duly seconded and unanimously.
C. Case #08-04
Michelle and Clayton B. Burton Jr.
1985 Sever Drive
Repeat Violation - Coccia
Board Secretary Diana said service on the notice of hearing was obtained by
certified mail.
Mary Rogero, representing the respondent, said she previously sold this home to
her daughter. She disputed the matter being a repeat violation, as this Board had not
heard the case previously.
Mr. Ruff said a notice to appear in court was sent to the violators. The violators
had the opportunity to plead guilty or not guilty in court. A plea was entered that
indicated an admission of guilt. The fine was paid but the violation continued.
Ms. Rogero said the deck has been part of the property since it was built in 1981.
She said she visited the City several times in an attempt to resolve the matter.
In response to questions from Mr. Ruff, Mr. Coccia said the City issued two
notices to appear in County Court. Staff has the option of attempting to obtain
compliance through the County Court system or the Municipal Code Enforcement Board.
The respondent paid the fines, but did not meet compliance on either notice.
Mr. Ruff submitted City Exhibit A, a case summary from Inspector Coccia.
Mr. Coccia said on March 13, 2003, he received an anonymous complaint that a
retaining wall, hot tub, deck, and a fence on the southwest corner of the property had
been installed without permits or inspections. City records do not show a deck or hot tub
permitted for the subject property.
Code Enforcement 2004-03-24 3
In 2001, the property owner submitted a permit application with a survey that did
not show a deck existed. Staff issued a notice of violation on April 28, 2003. Staff met
with the property owners several times and made numerous telephone calls to them.
City records indicate the property owners had amended their application to include a
wooden fence.
In response to questions, Engineer Steve Doherty, stated the outdoor deck
encroaches into a 25-foot drainage and utility easement that was dedicated at the time
the subdivision was created. He said code prohibits permanent structures in easements.
Mr. Ruff submitted City Exhibit B and Exhibits 1-8 which included photographs
taken by Inspector Coccia.
Mr. Coccia recommended the property owner comply within 45 days or pay a
$250 fine per day for each day the violation continues to exist. In response to a
question, he said even if a deck had existed on this property in 2001, it would have had
to be rebuilt according to current code.
Clayton Burton, property owner, said the property has settlement issues. He said
this house had been in a condemnable condition and was sinking. He said he began a
long and expensive process of rebuilding the property according to code. He stated he
pulled all pertinent permits for work to be done and paid applicable fees. Mr. Burton
submitted a photograph from the 1980s that clearly shows the deck. He said he
submitted an application to build the deck as it currently existed, but it was rejected
because it encroached into an easement. He also submitted a formal application to the
Engineering Department to allow the encroachment.
Mr. Doherty said he informed Ms. Rogero he would speak to the Engineering
Director regarding the matter if she provided suitable plans. He said no specific or
accurate drawings indicating the specific location of the encroachment have been
submitted. Therefore the matter could not be properly discussed with the Engineering
Department.
Mr. Burton said a letter addressing the encroachment was submitted. Mr.
Doherty said the letter he received was inadequate, as it did not include precise
measurements of the deck and its location.
Mr. Burton said he is trying diligently to provide the City with proper information
and requested additional time to resolve this issue with the Engineering Department.
motion
Member Williams moved to continue Case #08-04 to May 26, 2004. The
was duly seconded. Members Martin, Williams, Avichouser, Krause, and Keyes and
carried
Chair Cole voted “Aye”; Member Tieman voted “Nay”. Motion .
D. Case #09-04
Brett L. Fisher
699 Bay Esplanade
Repeat Violation – Coccia
Mr. Ruff said the City had pursued this violation in County Court. The fine was
paid but the violation still exists.
Code Enforcement 2004-03-24 4
Inspector Coccia said staff received an anonymous complaint. The first floor of
this two-story house is in a flood elevation zone and is only permitted for use as storage.
The property owner added electrical and mechanical items without permits or
inspections.
Brett Fisher, property owner, admitted to the violations. He said he removed the
partition and living space on the first floor but left the air conditioning unit in place to
address a serious mold problem. He said the air conditioning unit is above the base
flood elevation.
In response to a question, Inspector Coccia said no provision exists for variance
approval for flood elevation violations.
Inspector Coccia said even though the air conditioning unit is above the base
elevation, it services the ground floor space, which must be unfinished and used only for
storage. He noted Mr. Fisher added the air conditioner to the ground floor without
permits.
Mr. Coccia recommended compliance within 45 days or a $250 per day fine for
each day the violation continues to exist. He said Mr. Fisher’s request to obtain a permit
for the mechanical and electrical components on the ground floor was denied.
Member Avichouser moved that concerning Case #09-04, the Municipal Code
Enforcement Board has heard testimony at its regular meeting held on March 24, 2004,
and based on the evidence issued its Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order
as follows:
FINDINGS OF FACT
After hearing testimony of Inspector Mike Coccia for City and Brett L. Fisher,
Respondent, who admitted to the violation, it is evident the property is in violation of the
City code.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The Respondent by reason of the foregoing is in violation of Sections 47.083(2)
and 47.111 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 by May 17, 2004. 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 May 17, 2004, 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 May 17, 2004, 2004.
Code Enforcement 2004-03-24 5
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.
motion
The was duly seconded and upon the vote being taken, Members
Tieman, Williams, Avichouser, Krause, and Keyes, and Chair Cole voted “Aye”; Member
carried
Martin voted “Nay”. Motion .
2. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
A. Case #16-02 – Affidavit of Compliance
Laura J. Porter
1524 S. Prospect Avenue
Public Nuisance – Phillips
AND
BCase #19-02 – Affidavit of Compliance
.
Chuck Broadhurst
1112 Palm Bluff Street
Building – Coccia
Member Tieman moved to accept the Affidavits of Compliance for Case #16-02
motioncarried
and Case #19-02. The was duly seconded and unanimously.
3. OTHER BOARD ACTION/DISCUSSION
A. Request to address board re fine
Case #14-02 Menna-Pinellas
20788 U.S. Highway 19 N
Development – Kurleman
(Lien Amount: $23,350)
Ghouse Ghovaee, Northside Engineering, admitted to the violation. He stated
the current owner felt it best not to install landscaping as the restaurant on the site was
to be demolished and a hotel constructed.
In response to a question, Ms. Diana said the lien amount is $23,350. Official
Records and Legislative Services administrative costs are estimated at $500.00 and
Code Enforcement 2004-03-24 6
Development Services costs at $1,192.50. Board Attorney Andrew Salzman said the
structure on this property was demolished and the site is being redeveloped.
Inspector Scott Kurleman said in May 2002, staff met with the tenant regarding
landscaping issues. The tenant was found in violation of the code and on May 24, 2002,
the tenant agreed to install landscaping; however, two weeks later the restaurant was
closed. The property could not be brought into compliance until the restaurant was
demolished so the fines continued to accrue. Staff has no objection to a reduction of the
fine.
Member Tieman moved that concerning Case #14-02, the Municipal Code
Enforcement Board has considered the Respondent’s request for reconsideration of fine
at a hearing held on March 24, 2004, and based upon the evidence presented, enters
the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order.
After considering the request for reduction of fine filed by the Respondent and
considering the Affidavit of Compliance issued on October 3, 2003, it is evident that a
reduction in fine is appropriate in the above referenced case.
It is the Order of this Board that the fine previously imposed in the Order of the
Board dated July 24, 2002, as recorded on August 7, 2002, in O.R. Book 12152, Pages
557-559, and amended as recorded on January 15, 2004, in O.R. Book 13298, Pages
500-501, of the public records of Pinellas County, Florida, is hereby reduced from
$23,350.00to two thousand and no/100’s dollars ($2,000)payable to the Petitioner
within thirty days from the date of today’s hearing. If the reduced fine is not paid within
the time specified in this Order, a lien in the original amount of $23,350 shall be recorded
in the public records of Pinellas County, Florida.
motioncarried
The was duly seconded and unanimously.
4. NEW BUSINESS
– None.
5. NUISANCE ABATEMENT LIEN FILINGS
Norman L. Enzor Tre PNU2003-02768
1673 Laura Street (Ford Econoline Van)
(PAID 03-24-04)
Keystone Manor, Blk F, Lot 11 $200
Chuck Broadhurst PNU2003-02720
906 Pennsylvania Avenue
Pine Crest Sub, Blk 2, Lot 3 and E1/2 $308
vacant alley on West
Russell W. Chachula PNU2003-00176
508 Blanche B Littlejohn Trail
Hart’s Addition to Clearwater, Blk 2, Lot 2 $370
Willy J. Wallace Estate PNU2003-01308
913 Seminole Street
Pine Crest Sub, Blk 8, Lots 8 and 9 and $350
N1/2 vacant alley on South
Code Enforcement 2004-03-24 7
.
Richard M. Lennon
1101 Lakeview Road
Lakeview Heights, Blk A, Lots 1 thru 5 & 15
William Donovan
602 Engman Street
Enghurst Addition to Clearwater, S86' of Lot 26
Joseph C. Smith
3000 Prestige Drive
Forest Wood Estates 1st Addition, Lot 83
PNU2003-02316
$525
PNU2003-01607
$325
PNU2003-02348
$321
Member Tieman moved to accept the nuisance abatement lien filings, as
submitted, less Cases PNU2003-02768 and PNU2003-02720. The motion was duly
seconded and carried unanimously.
6. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - January 28.2004 and February 25.2004-
Member Williams moved to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of
January 28, 2004, as submitted in written summation to each board member. The
motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
.
It was noted the February minutes did not reflect Member Tieman's absence
from the January meeting. Member Williams moved to approve the minutes of the
regular meeting of February 25,2004, as amended. The motion was duly seconded and
carried unanimously.
Other
Mr. Salzman reviewed reasons why the City takes some cases to County Court
rather than to this Board.
7. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 4:09 p.m.
Attest:
~
Secret the Board
.
Code Enforcement 2004-03-24
~dL
C~ir
Municipal Code Enforcement Board
8