Loading...
05/23/2007 MUNICIPAL CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD MEETING MINUTES CITY OF CLEARWATER May 23, 2007 Present: Douglas J. Williams Jay Keyes Kelly Wehner Richard A vichouser David W. Campbell Ronald V. Daniels Absent: Richard Adelson Also Present: Leslie Dougall-Sides Andy Salzman Mary K. Diana Brenda Moses Chair Vice-Chair Board Member Board Member Board Member Board Member Board Member Assistant City Attorney Attorney for the Board Secretary for the Board Board Reporter The Chair called the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m. at City Hall, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. 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 286.0107 requires any party appealing a decision of this Board to have a record of the proceedings. 1. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Case 76-06 - Cont'd. from 11/23/06, 1/24/07, 2/28/07,4/25/07 Gratoor Investments LLC/First Fed Trust Service Inc, TRE 1512 S. Missouri Avenue Exterior Surfaces, Parking Lot Surfaces - Ruud AND B. Case 77-06 - Cont'd. from 11/23/06, 1/24/07, 2/28/07,4/25/07 Gratoor Investments LLC/First Fed Trust Service Inc, TRE 1508 S. Missouri Avenue Exterior Surfaces, Parking Lot Surfaces - Ruud Cases 76-06 and 77-06 were heard together. The Respondent had no representation. Inspection Specialist Alan Ruud provided a PowerPoint presentation. He said the violations are for deteriorated exterior and parking lot surfaces. The properties have been vacant for years, with no corrective action, and continue to be re-sold. The properties were initially inspected on June 7,2005. The date of the notice of violations was June 7,2006. A notice of violation was sent to the new owner on February 7,2007. Mr. Ruud said due to the sale of the property and applications for demolition of the structures, numerous extensions have Code Enforcement 2007-05-23 1 been granted. He said there is a two-story structure at 1508 S. Missouri Avenue and a single- story structure at 1512 S. Missouri Avenue. To come into compliance, the owner must refinish exterior surfaces and repair and resurface the parking area or complete the permit process to demolish the building and remove the parking surface on both properties. Mr. Ruud recommended compliance by July 1, 2007 or a fine of $250 per day per violation for each property be imposed. Attorney Dougall-Sides submitted City composite exhibits. In response to a question, Mr. Ruud said there is a permit on file to demolish both structures. Development Services Manager Bob Hall said the properties have changed ownership several times and a resolution is desired. Member Keyes this case came before the City of Clearwater Code Enforcement Board on May 23, 2007, after due notice to the Respondent(s), and having heard testimony under oath and received evidence, the Board issues the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order: FINDINGS OF FACT Based upon the testimony and evidence received, it is evident the condition exists in that exterior surfaces and parking lot surfaces have not been maintained. The Respondent had no representation. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The Respondent(s) is/are in violation of the City of Clearwater Code Section(s) 3-1502.B and 3-1502.K.4. ORDER It is the Order of the Board that the Respondent(s) shall comply with said Section(s) of the City of Clearwater Code by July 1,2007. If Respondent(s) does/do not comply within the time specified, the Board may order a fine of $250 per day per violation for each day the violation continues to exist. Upon complying with said Section(s) of the Code, the Respondent(s) shall notify Inspector Alan Ruud, who shall inspect the property and notify the Board of compliance. If the Respondent(s) fail/fails to 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 property owned by the Respondent(s), 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. 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. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Code Enforcement 2007-05-23 2 Member Keyes moved this case came before the City of Clearwater Code Enforcement Board on May 23, 2007, after due notice to the Respondent(s), and having heard testimony under oath and received evidence, the Board issues the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order: FINDINGS OF FACT Based upon the testimony and evidence received, it is evident the condition exists in that exterior and parking lot surfaces have not been maintained. The Respondent had no representation. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The Respondent(s) is/are in violation of the City of Clearwater Code Section(s) 3-1502.B and 3-1502.KA. ORDER It is the Order of the Board that the Respondent(s) shall comply with said Section(s) of the City of Clearwater Code by July 1,2007. If Respondent(s) does/do not comply within the time specified, the Board may order a fine of $250 per day per violation for each day the violation continues to exist. Upon complying with said Section(s) of the Code, the Respondent(s) shall notify Inspector Alan Ruud, who shall inspect the property and notify the Board of compliance. If the Respondent(s) fail/fails to 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 property owned by the Respondent(s), 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. 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. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. C. Case 14-07 - Cont'd. from 4/25/07 George T. Bleasdale - Clearwater Muffler & Brake 1216 N. Ft. Harrison Grass Parking, Parking Lot Surfaces - Collins AND Code Enforcement 2007-05-23 3 D. Case 15-07 - Cont'd. from 4/25/07 George T. Bleasdale - Clearwater Muffler & Brake 1212 N. Ft. Harrison Grass Parking, Parking Lot Surfaces - Collins Cases 14-07 and 15-07 were heard together. Property Owner George Bleasdale did not admit to the violations. Code Enforcement Inspector Cornelius Collins provided a PowerPoint presentation. He said the violations are for grass parking and parking lot surfaces. The property was initially inspected on December 8, 2006. He said the grass parking surface recently was changed to gravel. Code does not permit parking on any unpaved surface. He said to comply with code, the owner must remove the vehicles and other items from the grass parking area. He recommended compliance by July 1, 2007 or a $250 per day fine be imposed. Attorney Dougall-Sides submitted City composite exhibits. Property Owner George Bleasdale said parking has occurred on the grass surface at 1216 N. Ft. Harrison Avenue for 30 years. He said he understood when the code changed, the parking would be grandfathered in. He said he has resolved all the other violations associated with the properties. He questioned why code enforcement never mentioned the grass parking before. Mr. Bleasdale referred to photographs he had taken of the property 2 -3 days ago. Mrs. Bleasdale said gravel was put in the parking area approximately 8 weeks ago. In response to a question, Ms. Dougall-Sides said as there was a change in the parking surface, the parking would no longer be grandfathered in. In response to a question, Development Services Manager Neil Thompson said this property is zoned commercial. He said parking surfaces must have a permanent surface such as asphalt, concrete, or pavers. Gravel can gravitate causing issues in the rights-of-way. He said a permit is required for putting in a parking surface. He said no permit was applied for in this case. In response to a question, Mr. Bleasdale said he did not contact the City prior to changing the parking surface. He said after he placed gravel on the grass area, staff informed him that he was in violation. He said he has improved the property by painting the fence and putting in the gravel surface. In response to a question, he said he purchased the property five years ago. In response to questions, Attorney for the Board Salzman said generally, grandfathering allows a specific use that has been in effect for a long period of time to continue when the code is changed. However, any changes to an area or a use must comply with current code. Mr. Hall said there are multiple issues with both properties, including removal of gas tanks on the parcel at 1216 N. Ft. Harrison, which became a gravel and grass surface. He said the owners must have been aware of issues related to permanent parking surfaces, as an occupational license issued in 1999 indicated that all parking must be on a permanent surface. Mr. Bleasdale said the 1999 occupational license was for a repair shop. He said he purchased a storage license to store vehicles on the property. He said sometimes it takes months to receive automobile parts. He said the original owner had a repair shop, which still Code Enforcement 2007-05-23 4 exists. He said parking has been permitted on the same location for many years and the use is the same as it always has been. He said he could remove the gravel on the parking area. He said as development is occurring around him, he did not feel it prudent to put a lot of money into the property, as it will most probably be sold within the next 5 years. He said developers interested in buying the property have already approached him. Mrs. Bleasdale questioned when the parking became a violation. Mr. Hall said staff thought the parcel to the south had a unity of title. Once staff found it did not, code enforcement issues arose. Mrs. Bleasdale said except for a notice from the City dated December 12, 2006 stating that unenclosed parking lots, spaces, etc. must be free of potholes and debris, staff never mentioned parking issues. Ms. Dougall-Sides said there is no statute of limitations on code enforcement violations, as they can be discovered and cited at any time and nor do multiple violations have to be citied at one time. She said with the reassessment of the vacant lot, staff found the parking violation. Mr. Thompson said the owners were advised of the types of surfaces permitted and the permitting process. Mr. Bleasdale said he would like to construct a new garage but does not feel it would be cost effective if he cannot stay in this location long enough to recover his costs. Discussion ensued regarding the grandfathering provision. Mr. Thompson said a use must be continuous and if abandoned for any length of time, grandfathering no longer applies. Ms. Dougall-Sides said the code states nonconforming uses may not be expanded. She said changing the grass parking surface to gravel is an expansion of a nonconforming use. Mr. Hall said there are two separate parcels being addressed today. He said 1216 N. Ft. Harrison Avenue contains the main building and was the property licensed for storage. The parcel to the south is the vacant lot and is not part of the licensing documentation. Mr. Bleasdale stated he purchased the entire property, including the garage, as one parcel. Mr. Hall said there is outdoor storage and parking occurring on the vacant lot. That is the parcel where the parking surface has been changed. He said parking issues pertain to both properties. In response to a question, Mr. Salzman said he was unable to give an opinion regarding whether any legal nonconforming use exists on the properties without further research. Member Keyes moved to continue Cases 14-07 and 15-07 to June 27,2007. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. E. Case 16-07 Frank & Betty Barlow TRE 1326 S. Madison Ave. Exterior Storage - Ruud Property owner Frank Barlow admitted to the violation and stated the property is now in compliance. Code Inspector Alan Ruud said although Mr. Barlow installed a fence, debris remains on the property and it is not in compliance. Mr. Barlow said there are some plastic storage cases on the property, but he has removed all the other items. He said he is ill and it takes time to get things done at his age. Code Enforcement 2007-05-23 5 Mr. Ruud provided a PowerPoint presentation. Violations are for exterior storage. He said the property was initially inspected on June 28, 2006, the notice of violation was issued July 13, 2005 and the property posted on that date. Mr. Ruud said there is a trailer, debris, and a bathtub on the property. Mr. Ruud recommended compliance within 30 days of the date of the order or a $150 per day fine. He said once the property owner calls him to verify the property is in compliance, he would like the property owner's permission to inspect the back yard. Mr. Barlow said his grandson's bathtub is in the back yard and the fence provides some privacy. In response to a question, Mr. Barlow said he is agreeable to 30 days to comply with code. Member Daniels moved this case came before the City of Clearwater Code Enforcement Board on May 23, 2007, after due notice to the Respondent(s), and having heard testimony under oath and received evidence, the Board issues the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order: FINDINGS OF FACT Based upon the testimony and evidence received, and admission of guilt by the Respondent, it is evident the condition exists in that exterior storage is occurring on the property. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The Respondent(s) is/are in violation of the City of Clearwater Code Section(s) 3- 1502.G. ORDER It is the Order of the Board that the Respondent(s) shall comply with said Section(s) of the City of Clearwater Code by June 29,2007. If Respondent(s) does/do not comply within the time specified, the Board may order a fine of $150 per day for each day the violation continues to exist. Upon complying with said Section(s) of the Code, the Respondent(s) shall notify Inspector Alan Ruud, who shall inspect the property and notify the Board of compliance. If the Respondent(s) fail/fails to 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 property owned by the Respondent(s), 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. 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. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Code Enforcement 2007-05-23 6 F. Case 17-07 Donald C. Brown 2090 N. Keene Rd. Development Code & Business Tax Receipt - O'Neil Property owner Dr. Donald Brown found the violation to be vague and admitted only to a portion of it. Code Enforcement Inspector Corey O'Neil provided a PowerPoint presentation. He said a halfway house is being operated at the subject location which has not been approved and is not permitted in a residential area. He referred to a web site, police reports, and statements by residents at the property that indicate that use. He recommended compliance by June 15, 2007 or a $150 fine per day. Attorney Dougall-Sides submitted City composite exhibits. In response to questions, Mr. Thompson said the property is zoned low medium residential. A community residential home is allowed and must be 1,000 feet from a residential property. The Planning Department has mapping capabilities to ensure community residential homes are properly situated. Mr. Brown said he owns a recovery house business and operates other houses. He said failure to remove an advertisement from the Internet advertising this house as a halfway house was an oversight. He said he had approached the City to apply for a community residential home and was told he could not make application, as he was operating a halfway house on the property. He said the state does not require licensing for community residential homes. He said, as a chiropractor, he is familiar with licensing requirements. He said the home offers no treatment or care for residents and never has. The use is a peer residence for people that need to live in an environment free of drugs and alcohol. He said the residents are unrelated persons living as a family. He said there are no residential homes within 1,000 feet of this property. In response to questions, Mr. Hall said Mr. Brown only has a business tax receipt for rentals. Mr. Hall said the City is asking the property owner to eliminate the advertisements regarding a halfway house at this location. He said he advised Mr. Brown to provide detailed information of what he intended for the subject property. In response to a question, Mr. Thompson indicated a maximum of six unrelated persons are allowed to live in a community residential home. Ms. Dougall-Sides said there is a process to follow when applying for such a residence. Mr. Brown said he would ensure any references to a halfway house would be removed from all advertisements. In response to a question, Mr. Thompson said he reviews community residential housing applications. Member Wehner moved this case came before the City of Clearwater Code Enforcement Board on May 23, 2007, after due notice to the Respondent(s), and having heard testimony under oath and received evidence, the Board issues the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order: Code Enforcement 2007-05-23 7 FINDINGS OF FACT Based upon the testimony and evidence received, and admission of guilt by Respondent, it is evident the condition exists. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The Respondent(s) is/are in violation of the City of Clearwater Code Section(s) 1-104.B and 29.30(1). ORDER It is the Order of the Board that the Respondent(s) shall comply with said Section(s) of the City of Clearwater Code by June 15, 2007. If Respondent(s) does/do not comply within the time specified, the Board may order a fine of $250 per day for each day the violation continues to exist. Upon complying with said Section(s) of the Code, the Respondent(s) shall notify Inspector Corey O'Neil, who shall inspect the property and notify the Board of compliance. If the Respondent(s) fail/fails to 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 property owned by the Respondent(s), 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. 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. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. G. Case 18-07 Dirk Wellbrock 1628 Drew St. Exterior Surfaces - O'Neil This item was continued by staff to June 27,2007. H. Case 19-07 Magdaleno A. Iraheta 1628 Harvard Street Outdoor Display/Storage & Exterior Storage - O'Neil No one was present to represent the owner. Code Enforcement Inspector Corey O'Neil provided a PowerPoint presentation. The violations are for outdoor storage. He said items include buckets, car seat, stock pot, tires, Code Enforcement 2007-05-23 8 drywall, an old sink, an indoor table, pavers, fence posts, etc. The property was inspected on April 24 and 27,2007, and no corrective action has been taken. He recommended compliance by June 30, 2007 or a $150 per day fine. Attorney Dougall-Sides submitted City composite exhibits. Member Avichouser moved this case came before the City of Clearwater Code Enforcement Board on May 23, 2007, after due notice to the Respondent(s), and having heard testimony under oath and received evidence, the Board issues the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order: FINDINGS OF FACT Based upon the testimony and evidence received, it is evident the condition exists in that outdoor display/storage and exterior storage is occurring on the property. The Respondent had no representation. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The Respondent(s) is/are in violation of the City of Clearwater Code Section(s) 3-912 and 3-1502.G. ORDER It is the Order of the Board that the Respondent(s) shall comply with said Section(s) of the City of Clearwater Code by June 30,2007. If Respondent(s) does/do not comply within the time specified, the Board may order a fine of $150 per day for each day the violation continues to exist. Upon complying with said Section(s) of the Code, the Respondent(s) shall notify Inspector Corey O'Neil, who shall inspect the property and notify the Board of compliance. If the Respondent(s) fail/fails to 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 property owned by the Respondent(s), 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. 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. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Code Enforcement 2007-05-23 9 2. UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. Case 06-04 - Affidavit of Non-Compliance- Cont'd. from 4/25/07 Martha A Drain 1361 S. Martin Luther King Jr. Ave. Development Code - Ruud This item was withdrawn. B. Case 06-04 - Affidavit of Compliance Martha A Drain 1361 S. Martin Luther King Jr. Ave. Development Code - Ruud C. Case 16-06- Affidavit of Compliance Patricia & Henry Tucker 2341 Nash St. Ext Surfaces, Roof Maint, & Ext Storage - Franco D. Case 32-06 - Affidavit of Non-Compliance- Cont'd. from 4/25/07 Jozef Bogacki 1451 Cleveland Street Property Maintenance - Espinosa This item was continued by staff to June 27,2007. E. Case 33-06 - Affidavit of Non-Compliance- Cont'd. from 4/25/07 Jozef Bogacki 1455 Cleveland Street Property Maintenance - Espinosa This item was continued by staff to June 27,2007. F. Case 34-06 - Affidavit of Non-Compliance- Cont'd. from 4/25/07 Jozef Bogacki 1454 Park Street Property Maintenance - Espinosa This item was continued by staff to June 27,2007. G. Case 35-06 - Affidavit of Non-Compliance- Cont'd. from 4/25/07 Jozef Bogacki 15 S. San Remo Property Maintenance - Espinosa This item was continued by staff to June 27,2007. H. Case 03-07 - Affidavit of Non-Compliance Real Global Investment Inc 2400 Gulf to Bay Blvd Signs, Exterior Surfaces, Public Nuisance - Franco Code Enforcement 2007-05-23 10 I. Case 09-07 - Affidavit of Non-Compliance Luis Acevedo 1749 Drew Street Exterior Storage, Exterior Surfaces, Inoperative Vehicle & Fences - O'Neil Member Keyes moved to accept the Affidavits of Compliance for Cases 06-04 and 16-06 and the Affidavits of Non-Compliance and Orders imposing the fines for Cases 03-07 and 09- 07. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 3. OTHER BOARD ACTIONIDISCUSSION A. Case 07-07 - Request for Reconsideration of Board's Order of May 2,2007 o & P Investments of Tampa, Inc. 1225 S. Highland Avenue Exterior Surfaces - Franco Mr. Hall said this property was not in compliance on April 6, 2007, as alleged by the property owner. He said the owner did a piecemeal job to attempt to come into compliance. Member Campbell moved to deny the request for reconsideration of the board's order of May 2,2007 which imposed the fine. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 4. NUISANCE ABATEMENT LIEN FILINGS - None. 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - April 25. 2007 Member Daniels moved to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of April 25, 2007, as submitted in written summation to each board member. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Other Business Mr. Salzman reported that due to scheduling conflicts, the July meeting would be cancelled. 6. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 4:34 p.m. 1 r icipal Code Enforcement Board Attest: ~t~ Code Enforcement 2007-05-23 11