Loading...
08/25/2004 MUNICIPAL CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD MEETING CITY OF CLEARWATER August 25, 2004 Present: Sheila Cole Chair L. Duke Tieman Board Member Douglas J. Williams Board Member Jay Keyes Board Member Richard Avichouser Board Member Absent: Joyce Martin Vice-Chair George Krause Board Member Also Present: Bryan Ruff Assistant City Attorney Andrew Salzman Attorney for the Board Mary K. (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 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. 1. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Case 14-04 North Mandalay Inv Group, Inc. 411 East Shore Dr Development - Phillips Board Secretary Diana reported service on the notice of hearing had been obtained. In response to questions from Assistant City Attorney Bryan Ruff, Code Enforcement Inspector Julie Phillips reported she first inspected the property during a beach sweep on May 28, 2004, and found the vacant building had excessive debris, evidence of transient activity, peeling paint, and the fence was in poor condition. A Notice of Violation was issued on June 2, 2004. Ms. Phillips said she had been in contact with the president of the corporate property owner, Robert Metz, who related his desire to raze the structure. Ms. Phillips reported she inspected the property again on June 15, 2004, as well as several times in July, including today. Work has been done on the property, but it remains out of compliance. While a portion of the north side of the building has been painted, excessive mold remains. Paint around windows on the building’s façade is peeling. The fence is rotten, missing boards, and near collapse. No permits have been pulled to repair the property. Mr. Ruff presented City Exhibit 6, photographs of the property taken by Ms. Phillips. Photographs, dated June 17, 2004, show excessive mold, peeling paint, debris, and missing and rotten boards on a fence. Since then, Ms. Phillips said a large portion of debris has been Code Enforcement 2004-08-25 1 removed, but the fence remains out of compliance. Photographs, dated August 25, 2004, indicate the fence has been painted, but nails are exposed where wood is rotted. Portions of the fence no longer are attached to posts. Plywood and two-by-fours help the fence stand. Mr. Ruff submitted City Exhibits 1 - 6. Development Services Manager Bob Hall recommended the property be brought into compliance within 30 days or a $250 per day fine be imposed. If the building is to be razed, he recommended requiring a demolition permit be obtained within 30 days and demolition completed within 6 months or a $250 per day fine be imposed. Owner Bob Metz submitted photographs (Defendant’s Exhibit 1), showing he had painted the fence and painted over the mold. He said a siphon in the swimming pool has removed the standing water. He said the SWAT team and Fire Department has used the structure as a training facility. Vernon Kearney said he maintains the property, cuts the grass, and regularly picks up debris. He said it is difficult to maintain the fence. He said he has reinstalled outside doors on the building and screwed them shut to keep transients out. Mr. Hall said the City does not require the fence to be painted but to be repaired and feature a uniform appearance. In response to a question, Mr. Metz said he intends to raze the structure and develop the property. He has a meeting scheduled with the Economic Development Department to discuss the property. In response to a question, Ms. Phillips said the Code does not require fences to be painted but does require the replacement of missing and rotten boards. Easy transient access to the structure through the dilapidated fence is a problem. In response to a question, Mr. Hall said fencing may be required for the on-site swimming pool. Discussion ensued with comments that six months may be inadequate to raze the structure, the fence is too deteriorated and needs replacement, and a suggestion that Mr. Metz secure the property and not allow it to be used as a training facility. Member Keyes moved that the Municipal Code Enforcement Board has heard testimony at its regular meeting held on August 25, 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 Julie Phillips and Development Services Manger Bob Hall for City, Robert Metz and Vernon Kearney for Respondent, and viewing the evidence, City Exhibits 1-6 [1) notice of violation; 2) signed return receipt for notice of violation; 3) applicable code sections; 4) property appraiser printout; 5) affidavit of violation & request for hearing; and 6) composite photographs of conditions] and Defendant’s Exhibit 1 – photographs, it is evident the property is in violation of the City code. The fence has missing and rotted boards and does not present a uniform appearance and the exterior portion of the building is in poor condition. Code Enforcement 2004-08-25 2 CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The Respondent by reason of the foregoing is in violation of Sections 3-808.A.6 and 3- 1502.B of the Community Development 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 30 days from the date of the Order (September 24, 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 September 24, 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 September 24, 2004. 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 carried The was duly seconded and unanimously. B. Case 11-04 – Cont’d from 5/26/04 R&R Comfort Suites 1941 Edgewater Drive Development – Ruud This case was continued to September 22, 2004. C. Case 12-04 John & Christina R. Richardson 843 Eldorado Avenue Short Term Rental – Hall Marian Hale, Representative, requested a 60-day continuance as she said the property is to be added to pending litigation seeking declaratory relief from City Code. Mr. Ruff reported the case previously was granted a two-month continuance and the City wants to proceed at this time. Code Enforcement 2004-08-25 3 Development and Neighborhood Services Director Jeff Kronschnabl gave a history on short term rental activity in residential zones on Clearwater beach, which violates zoning regulations. He said a group of owners filed suit against the City, claiming their ability to rent residences on north Clearwater beach for short terms should be grandfathered. The case remains in front of a Circuit Court Judge. Staff continues to enforce the Code on properties not included in the lawsuit. Discussion ensued whether the board should hear this case today or wait until the Court reaches a decision. Attorney for the Board Andy Salzman said at this point, this case has not been added to the pending litigation. Mr. Kronschnabl said the City’s objective is to stop commercial influx into the neighborhood. The City wants to protect the integrity of this residential neighborhood. motion Member Keyes moved for the Board to hear Case 12-04 today. The was duly seconded. Members Tieman, Williams, and Keyes voted “Aye”; Member Avichouser and Chair carried Cole voted “Nay.” Motion . Mr. Hall reported he first inspected the property on April 7, 2004, and found evidence the property was used as a short-term rental. He issued a Notice of Violation on that date. He reinspected the property on May 6, 2004, and again found evidence the property was used as a short-term rental. Mr. Hall took photographs of the property on May 27, June 10, and June 24, 2004, showing different vehicles at the residence. Mr. Hall posted the property on May 21, 2004, and sent a Notice of Violation by certified mail. The certified mail receipt was not returned to the City. A web site for the property advertises weekly rates and negotiable monthly rates though May 28, 2005. Code prohibits advertising residential properties in the City for weekly rentals and renting residential properties for less than 31 days. Mr. Ruff submitted City Exhibits 1 - 10, including photographs of the property taken by Mr. Hall. In response to a question, Assistant Planning Director Lisa Fierce said only legal uses can be grandfathered. She said short-term rentals in residential neighborhoods never have been legal. In response to a question from Ms. Hale, Mr. Hall said the City did not begin enforcement on short-term-rentals until an ordinance was enacted in April 2003. Ms. Fierce stated the subject property is zoned LMDR (Low-Medium Density Residential). Ordinance #7105-03 was enacted to clarify this use is not permitted in a residential zoning district. Mr. Ruff submitted City Exhibits 11 – 13. Ms. Hale admitted short-term rentals have occurred on the subject property since April 2004. Mr. Kronschnabl recommended a finding of guilt and a $250 per day fine be imposed. Member Tieman moved that the Municipal Code Enforcement Board has heard testimony at its regular meeting held on August 25, 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 Development Services Manager Bob Hall and Assistant Planning Director Lisa Fierce for City, and Attorney Marion Hale for Respondent(s), and viewing Code Enforcement 2004-08-25 4 the evidence, City Exhibits 1-13 [1) notice of violation; 2) affidavit of posting; 3 & 4) applicable code sections; 5) property appraiser printout; 6) affidavit of violation & request for hearing; 7) notice of hearing; 8) printout of website advertising weekly rentals; 9) printout of motor vehicle information of vehicles parked at subject location; 10) composite photographs; 11) code enforcement board map; 12) definitions in code; and 13) Ordinance 7105-03], it is evident the home at 843 Eldorado Avenue, Clearwater, Florida, is being rented on a weekly basis which is not permitted in an LMDR (Low Medium Density Residential) zoning district. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The Respondent(s) by reason of the foregoing is in violation of Section 1-104 of the Community Development Code of the City of Clearwater, Florida. ORDER It is the Order of the Board the Respondent is to correct the aforesaid violation within 14 days (September 24, 2004) from the date of this Order unless an Order has been filed to add this property to pending litigation in Case #03-004365-CI-20, David Allbritton, etal vs City of Clearwater, then the fine will be held in abeyance until a decision is made. 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 by the specified date, 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 the specified date. 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. Members Tieman, Williams, Keyes, and Avichouser carried voted “Aye”; Chair Cole voted “Nay.” Motion . D. Case 13-04 John & Christina R. Richardson 739 Eldorado Avenue Short Term Rental – Hall Code Enforcement 2004-08-25 5 Mr. Ruff stated John and Christina R. Richardson had purchased this property in 2003, after the City’s short-term rental ordinance was adopted. Marian Hale, Representative, admitted a violation existed. Member Tieman moved that the Municipal Code Enforcement Board has heard testimony at its regular meeting held on August 25, 2004, and based on the evidence issued its Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order as follows: FINDINGS OF FACT After an admission of guilt by Attorney Marion Hale for Respondent(s), it is evident the home at 739 Eldorado Avenue, Clearwater, Florida, was being rented on a weekly basis which is not permitted in an LMDR (Low Medium Density Residential) zoning district. It is further evident the condition was corrected prior to this hearing. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The Respondent(s) by reason of the foregoing was in violation of Section 1-104 of the Community Development Code of the City of Clearwater, Florida. ORDER It is the Order of this Board that the Respondent(s) shall continue compliance with said Section 1-104 of the Community Development Code of the City of Clearwater. If the Respondent(s) repeats the violation, the Board may order a fine for each day the violation exists after the Respondent(s) 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. 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 carried The was duly seconded and unanimously. 2. UNFINISHED BUSINESS A.Case 27-98– Affidavit of Compliance Carlton McCray/Estate of Maggie Bridges 1012 N. Betty Lane Building - Coccia AND Code Enforcement 2004-08-25 6 B. Case 05-04 – Affidavit of Compliance Northwood Plaza 3023 Eastland Boulevard #103 Development – Kurleman AND C. Case No. 08-04 – Affidavit of Compliance Michele & Clayton B. Burton Jr. 1985 Sever Drive Building – Coccia AND D. Case No. 09-04 – Affidavit of Compliance Brett L. Fisher 699 Bay Esplanade Building – Coccia AND E. Case No. 10-04 – Affidavit of Compliance Paul Vonfeldt 849 Bruce Street Building – Wright Member Tieman moved to accept the Affidavits of Compliance for Cases 27-98, 05-04, motion carried 08-04, 09-04, and 10-04. The was duly seconded and unanimously. 3. OTHER BOARD ACTION/DISCUSSION A. Request to address board at future meeting re reduction of fine Case 09-04 Brett L. Fisher 699 Bay Esplanade Lien Amount - $14,500 – Coccia Member Williams moved for the MCEB to hear the fine reduction request for Case 09-04 motion carried on September 22, 2004. The was duly seconded and unanimously. B. Request to address board at future meeting re reduction of fine Case 19-02 Chuck Broadhurst 1112 Palm Bluff Street Lien Amount - $49,500 - Coccia Mr. Hall reported staff is opposed to any reduction in this fine. There also is a demolition lien on this property. Ms. Diana said the fine stopped accruing as the lien reached the assessed value of the property. In response to a question, Mr. Hall said the City could take over the property if foreclosure is authorized. Current violations exist on this and other property owned by Mr. Broadhurst. Code Enforcement 2004-08-25 7 . . . Member Keyes moved to deny the request for a fine reduction hearing on Case 19-02. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 4. NEW BUSINESS - None. 5. NUISANCE ABATEMENT LIEN FILINGS: Don Connolly Tre. Connolly Family Land Trust 1325 Tioga Avenue Lakeview Heights, Blk B, Lot 9 PNU2004-00864 (Buick 4-Door) $ 200 Arturo & Norma Anover 315 South Pegasus Avenue Skycrest Unit C, Blk B, Lot 3 PNU2004-01131 (Dodge Van) $ 200 Alan R. & Marion R. Lovell 1470 Crestview Street Hillcrest No.2, Blk J, Lots 8-9 less rd PNU2004-00638 $ 268.50 PNU2004-01181 Hoke S. Russell 916 Plaza Street Plaza Park, Blk G, Lot 9 $ 277.50 Joseph C. Smith 3000 Prestige Drive Forest Wood Estates 1st Add, Lot 83 PNU2004-01307 $ 330.45 PNU2004-00495 Gulf Point Ltd. 1936 Springtime Avenue Sunset Point 2nd Add, Blk G, N51' Lot 50 $ 358.60 Member Tieman moved to accept the nuisance abatement lien filings, as submitted. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 6. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - May 27,20004 Member Williams moved to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of May 27, 2004, as recorded and submitted in written summation to each board member. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 7. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 4:26 p.m. /(J~&/ /~ Municipal Code Enforcement Board ~ Code Enforcement 2004-08-25 8