Loading...
10/24/2007 MUNICIPAL CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD MEETING MINUTES CITY OF CLEARWATER October 24, 2007 Present: Douglas J. Williams Chair Jay Keyes Vice-Chair Kelly Wehner Board Member Richard Adelson Board Member David W. Campbell Board Member Ronald V. Daniels Board Member Absent Richard Avichouser Board Member Also Present: Camilo Soto Assistant City Attorney Andy Salzman Attorney for the Board Mary K. 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, 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 21-07 – Cont’d from 9/26/07 Augustine Patel 1104 Carlton & 1405 N. Martin Luther King Jr. Ave. Property Maintenance, Exterior Storage – Collins This item was continued by staff to November 28, 2007. B. Case 30-07 – Cont’d from 9/26/07 Leeward J & Catherine K Bean 1874 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard Signage w/o Permit & Vehicle Signs – Weaver Development Services Manager Bob Hall said this case was continued in August to obtain an affidavit related to the property owner’s claim that a former employee had approved Mr. Bean’s sign design. In response to a question, Development Review Manager Neil Thompson said contact had been made with the former employee; however, she declined to be involved. He said the Code Enforcement – 2007-10-24 1 Code facilitates changes to signs to accommodate new businesses, but does not permit signs to be enlarged. Assistant City Attorney Camilo Soto said the City cannot be estopped from enforcing its code due to misinformation. Attorney Andy Salzman said the Board could subpoena the former employee if they determine that testimony is crucial. He said an estoppel could result in the City paying damages. In response to a question, Inspector Mary Jo Weaver said the face of the 20-foot high sign was expanded from 64 to 100 square-feet. Discussion ensued and it was commented that property owner Leeward Bean had indicated a willingness to replace the sign after 12 months. Concern was expressed the former employee was not available to provide testimony. Attorney Soto indicated that an affidavit from the former employee was irrelevant. Attorney Salzman said law provides the City can not be estopped even if someone interprets incorrectly; however, there could be other ramifications for the City. He said the City could challenge a decision by the Board. Concern was expressed Mr. Bean may have been mislead by staff. Attorney Soto submitted City composite exhibits. Member Keyes moved that this case came before the City of Clearwater Code Enforcement Board on August 22, 2007 and October 24, 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 sign located on the subject property does not comply with Code. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The Respondent(s) is/are in violation of the City of Clearwater Code Section(s) 4-1002 as referred to in the Affidavit in this case. ORDER It is the Order of the Board that the Respondent(s) shall comply with said Section(s) 4- 1002 of the City of Clearwater Code by July 1, 2008. If Respondent(s) does/do not comply within the time specified, the Board may order a fine of $150.00 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 Mary Jo Weaver 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 Code Enforcement – 2007-10-24 2 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 35-07 - Cont’d from 9/26/07 Florence Panteles 1501 S. Ft. Harrison Avenue Exterior/Parking Lot Surfaces – Ruud This item was continued by staff to November 28, 2007. D.Case 38-07 Hearst Communications Inc. 301 S. Myrtle Avenue Exterior Surfaces/Windows – DeBord Representative Scott Steady admitted to the violations. Mr. Hall said he had discussed compliance issues with Mr. Steady, who requested time to bring this property and property at 815 Pierce Street into compliance. Mr. Steady also acknowledged a violation existed at 815 Pierce Street. Attorney Salzman recommended that the Board’s order include both properties, as the representative had admitted to violations on both and agreed to comply. Attorney Soto submitted City composite exhibits. Member Wehner moved that this case came before the City of Clearwater Code Enforcement Board on October 24, 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 exterior surface of the buildings have not been maintained and windows are boarded up and broken. Code Enforcement – 2007-10-24 3 CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The Respondent(s) is/are in violation of the City of Clearwater Code Section(s) 3-1502.B and 3-1502.C.3 as referred to in the Affidavit in this case. ORDER It is the Order of the Board that the Respondent(s) shall comply with said Section(s) 3- 1502.B and 3-1502.C.3 of the City of Clearwater Code by February 29, 2008. If Respondent(s) does/do not comply within the time specified, the Board may order a fine of $250.00 per day per property for each day the violation continues to exist. Upon complying with said Section(s) of the Code, the Respondent(s) shall notify Inspector Rick DeBord, 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. E.Case 39-07 John J. Eustace 1252 San Remo Avenue Hauling Trailer - DeBord The Respondent had no representation. Code Inspector Rick DeBord said neighbors had complained that a hauling trailer was parked in the driveway at 1252 San Remo Avenue. Staff has been in contact with the property owner via telephone. The property currently is in compliance. Inspector DeBord recommended imposing a $150/day fine if a repeat violation occurred. Attorney Soto submitted City composite exhibits. Member Campbell moved that his case came before the City of Clearwater Code Enforcement Board on October 24, 2007, after due notice to the Respondent(s), and having heard testimony under oath and received evidence, the Board issues to the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order as follows: Code Enforcement – 2007-10-24 4 FINDINGS OF FACT Based on the testimony and evidence received, it is evident the condition existed; however, it is further evident this condition was corrected prior to this hearing. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The Respondent(s) was/were in violation of the City of Clearwater Code Section(s) 3- 1407.A.2.B as referred to in the Affidavit in this case. ORDER It is the Order of this Board that no fine will be imposed against the Respondent(s). The Board further orders that if Respondent(s) repeats the violation referenced herein, the Board may order the Respondent(s) to pay a fine of $150.00 for each day the violation exists after the Respondent(s) is/are 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. 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. F.Case 40-07 Jose D. Diaz & Margaret R. Smith 1862 Dawn Drive Inoperative Vehicle/Outdoor Display/Storage/Fences – O’Neil This item was continued by staff to November 28, 2007. GCase 41-07 . Apollo O’Neil 2069 Brampton Road Outdoor Display/Storage/Hauling Trailer/Grass Parking – O’Neil Property owner Apollo O’Neil admitted to the violations. Inspector Corey O’Neil said the property currently is in compliance. Attorney Soto submitted City composite exhibits. Code Enforcement – 2007-10-24 5 Member Daniels moved that this case came before the City of Clearwater Code Enforcement Board on October 24, 2007, after due notice to the Respondent(s), and having heard testimony under oath and received evidence, the Board issues to the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order as follows: FINDINGS OF FACT Based on the testimony and evidence received, it is evident the condition existed; however, it is further evident this condition was corrected prior to this hearing. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The Respondent(s) was/were in violation of the City of Clearwater Code Section(s) 3- 912, 3-1502.G, 3-1407.A.2.B, and 3-1407.A.4 as referred to in the Affidavit in this case. ORDER It is the Order of this Board that not fine will be imposed against the Respondent(s). The Board further orders that if Respondent(s) repeats/repeat the violation referenced herein, the Board may order the Respondent(s) to pay a fine for each day the violation exists after the Respondent(s) is/are 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. 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. H.Case 42-07 Morningside East Condo 2 Assn. 2560 Harn Boulevard Parking Lot Surfaces - Franco Representative Doug Burns did not admit to the violation. Inspector Peggy Franco provided a PowerPoint presentation. The violation at 2560 Harn Boulevard relates to potholes in the property’s parking lot, which is shared with Morningside East Condo 1 Association (Case 43-07). The initial inspection was done on March 1, 2007, and the notice of violation was issued on April 3, 2007. Photographs taken March 1, Code Enforcement – 2007-10-24 6 2007, indicate a prior attempt to patch the parking lot surface as well as existing potholes. Ms. Franco said she met with property representatives, Doug Burns and Doug Hilkert, to work out details of the repair, however, no action was taken. Inspector Franco recommended the property be brought into compliance by December 3, 2007, or a $150 per day fine be imposed. Doug Burns said the two condo associations have different management. He reviewed his efforts to obtain a bid and said paving companies will not warrant their work as heavy City waste trucks cause damage when they traverse the parking lot to reach the collection point. He said the residents cannot afford to repave the lot and wish to patch it. He said residents have discussed relocating the collection point but insufficient space exists on either side of the building. He said moving it onto Harn Boulevard would require a pad and would be an eyesore for Morningside residents. He hoped the City would pave a corridor to the collection point. Mr. Hall said the property owner is responsible for providing a surface sufficient to support the weight of City solid waste trucks. Attorney Soto submitted City composite exhibits. Member Adelson moved that this case came before the City of Clearwater Code Enforcement Board on October 24, 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 parking lot surface is not being maintained. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The Respondent(s) is/are in violation of the City of Clearwater Code Section(s) Section 3-1502.K.4 as referred to in the Affidavit in this case. ORDER It is the Order of the Board that the Respondent(s) shall comply with said Section(s) 3- 1502.K.4of the City of Clearwater Code by December 3, 2007. If Respondent(s) does/do not comply within the time specified, the Board may order a fine of $150.00 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 Peggy Franco, 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 Code Enforcement – 2007-10-24 7 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. I.Case 43-07 Morningside East Condo 1 Assn. 2566 Harn Boulevard Parking Lot Surfaces/Fences and Walls/Exterior Surfaces - Franco Doug Hilkert, president of the Morningside East Condo 2 Association, did not admit to the violations. Inspector Franco provided a PowerPoint presentation. Violations at 2566 Harn Boulevard relate to a broken fence, exterior surfaces with mold, mildew, and peeling and flaking paint, and potholes in the parking lot, which is shared with Morningside East Condo 2 Association (Case 42-07). Following a complaint, the initial inspection was done on March 1, 2007, and the notice of violation was issued on April 3, 2007. Photographs taken March 1, 2007, indicate a prior attempt to patch the parking lot surface, potholes, missing bars on a fence, and exterior surfaces with mildew, mold, and peeling and flaking paint. Ms. Franco said she met with property representatives Burns and Hilkert to work out details of repairing the parking lot, however, no action was taken. Inspector Franco recommended the property be brought into compliance by December 3, 2007, or a $250 per day fine be imposed. Mr. Hilkert said he was not properly noticed of today’s hearing. Attorney Soto reviewed Florida Statute 162.12, indicating the City had followed noticing requirements. Mr. Hilkert said Morningside East Condo 1 Association is willing to split the cost of repaving the entire lot with the Morningside East Condo 2 Association. He said his association is willing to relocate its dumpster onto Harn Boulevard. He said he has already contracted to have the fence fixed. He felt pressure washing exterior surfaces would be sufficient and repainting would not be necessary. He requested a two-month continuance. Attorney Soto submitted City composite exhibits. Member Daniels moved that this case came before the City of Clearwater Code Enforcement Board on October 24, 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 – 2007-10-24 8 FINDINGS OF FACT Based upon the testimony and evidence received, it is evident the parking lot surface is not being maintained, the fence has missing slats, and peeling paint and mold is present on the building. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The Respondent(s) is/are in violation of the City of Clearwater Code Section(s) 3- 1502.K.4, 3-808, 3-808.A.6, and 3-1502.B as referred to in the Affidavit in this case. ORDER It is the Order of the Board that the Respondent(s) shall comply with said Section(s) 3- 1502.K.4, 3-808, 3-808.A.6, and 3-1502.B of the City of Clearwater Code by December 3, 2007. If Respondent(s) does/do not comply within the time specified, the Board may order a fine of $250.00 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 Peggy Franco, 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. J. Case 44-07 Nickel Plate Properties, Inc. 2165 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard Public Nuisance/ Buildings/Lot Clearing/Unmaintained r-o-w – Franco Representative Marianne Hale said the mobile home park is now closed. She reported that evicting the mobile home park’s tenants had taken nine months. She said fencing the property had resolved debris and vandalism problems. She said Pinellas County’s ex parte injunction, which requires an asbestos study of each mobile home before it is removed, has delayed clearing the park. Code Enforcement – 2007-10-24 9 Mr. Hall said the property has been brought into compliance and requested the Board not issue a declaration of violation. The City is concerned that the property be maintained. He requested the property owner provide a status report on clearing efforts every three months. Attorney Salzman disclosed that Marianne Hale is his wife’s law partner. Attorney Salzman said if a problem occurs, the City can bring the case back to the Board. Member Daniel to continue Case 44-07 to January 23, 2008 for a status report. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 2. UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. Case 76-06 – Affidavit of Non-Compliance – Cont’d from 9/26/07 Gratoor Investments LLC. 1512 S. Missouri Avenue Exterior Surfaces, Parking Lot Surfaces - Ruud B. Case 77-06 – Affidavit of Non-Compliance – Cont’d from 9/26/07 Gratoor Investments LLC. 1508 S. Missouri Avenue Exterior Surfaces, Parking Lot Surfaces – Ruud The representative for Gratoor Investments LLC said razing the buildings had been delayed due to asbestos concerns. He presented paperwork indicating that the one-week project to demolish property structures will start on November 5, 2007. Member Keyes moved to continue Cases 76-06 and 77-06 to November 28, 2007. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. C. Case 22-07 – Affidavit of Non-Compliance Alan K & Mona L Wylie 1334 Fairmont Street Vehicle Repair, Residential Zone, Exterior Storage, Residential Grass Parking, Portable Storage Units, Inoperative Vehicle – Collins D. Case 27-07 – Affidavit of Non-Compliance Home Energy, LLC. 415 Island Way Public Nuisance – Brown E. Case 28-07 – Affidavit of Non-Compliance Ocean Breeze, LLC. 21 Somerset Street Nuisance, Overgrown Weeds – Brown Code Enforcement – 2007-10-24 10 F. Case 12-06 – Affidavit of Compliance Frank P. Barlow 1135 Lakeview Road Exterior Storage – Ruud G. Case 29-07 – Affidavit of Compliance Regatta Bay of Clearwater, LLC. 862 Bayway Boulevard Nuisance, Overgrown Weeds – Brown H. Case 31-07 – Affidavit of Compliance Maira I. Contreras 1422 Thames Lane Nuisance, Overgrown Weeds – Brown I. Case 32-07 – Affidavit of Compliance E & A, Inc, 731 Bayway Boulevard Signs – Weaver Member Keyes moved to accept the Affidavits of Non-Compliance and issue the Orders imposing the fines for Cases 22-07, 27-07, and 28-07, and the Affidavits of Compliance for Cases 12-06, 29-07, 31-07, and 32-07. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. J. Case 03-07 – Status Report Real Global Investments LLC (Sweetwater’s) 2400 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard Signs, Exterior Surfaces, Public Nuisance - Franco (Fine - $17,250) Inspector Franco said the property’s overgrowth was cleared and neighbors are pleased with current maintenance practices. She expressed concern the property may fall out of compliance if the fine is reduced. Attorney Salzman said the Board can continue this item until it is comfortable with making a decision regarding a reduction of the fine. Case 03-07 will be agendaed for November 28, 2007, for a status report. Code Enforcement – 2007-10-24 11 3. OTHER BOARD ACTION/DISCUSSION A. Case 74-06 - Request for Fine Reduction Hearing Remzi Dalip 2135 Burnice Drive Carport enclosure w/o permits ($51,000) Member Keyes moved to approve hearing a request for a fine reduction for Case 74-06 on November 28,2007. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. B. Case 12-06 - Request for Fine Reduction Hearing Frank P. Barlow 1135 Lakeview Road Exterior storage ($90,500) Member Keyes moved to approve hearing a request for a fine reduction for Case 12-06 on November 28,2007. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 4. NUISANCE ABATEMENT LIEN FILINGS: - None. 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - September 26,2007 Member Daniel moved to approve the minutes of the regular Municipal Code Enforcement Board meeting of September 26,2007, as submitted in written summation to each board member. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 6. ADJOURN: The meeting adjourned at 4:41 p.m. .. de Enforcement Board Attest: ~1~ Secre t the Board Code Enforcement - 2007-10-24 12