HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991 01 15 Code Enforcement Board Regular Minutes
f'
CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD MINUTES
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS
January 15, 1991
The meeting was called to order by Chairman <ray at 7:00 P.M.
ROLL CALL:
Bob <ray, Chairman, Present
James Dasher, Present
Anne Schneider, Vice-Chairman, Present
Lloyd Anderson, Present
Beverly Fickling, Present
Lurene Lyzen, Present
CITY OFFICIALS:
Code Officer Lt. Ed Taylor
Code Inspector Mary Muse
r
Election of Chairman:
Fick 1 ing moved to naninate Bob <ray
Dasher moved to naninate Anne Schneider
Lyzen moved to close the naninations.
Schneider; Dasher: Schneider; Schneider:
Lyzen: <ray. <ray elected Chairman.
for Chairman. Seconded by Schneider.
for Chairman. Seconded by Lyzen.
Seconded by Fickling. Vote: Gray:
Gray; Anderson: <ray; Fickling: <ray;
Election of Vice-Chairman:
Dasher moved to naninate Anne Schneider for Vice-Chairman. Seconded by <ray.
Schneider moved to naninate Fickling for Vice-Chairman. Fickling declined the
nanination for Vice-Chairman. Lyzen moved to close naninations. Seconded by
Anderson. Vote: All aye. Schneider elected Vice-Chairman.
Approval of Minutes of November 20. 1990:
Dasher moved to approve the minutes as presented.
All aye. Motion carried.
Seconded by Lyzen.
Vote:
Discussion of Closed and Pending Cases:
<ray asked if there is any discussion of the closed and pending cases. Lt.
Taylor stated no.
Gray stated that the Board has received a copy of the Code Enforcement
violations received and corrected summary for 1990.
Muse stated that there were 471 violations for 1990 and out of that number 448
were corrected. <ray stated that this is a good percentage.
r
<ray asked if it was working well with having the Building Department involved
in Code Enforcement. Muse stated that there have been no problems.
Lt. Taylor introduced Lt. Bob Pieper to the Board as his replacement as the
Code Officer, and also the Code Inspector Al White who is replacing Mary Muse.
r'
Code Enforcement Board Minutes
January 15, 1991
Page 2
Gray asked if any of the cases on the agenda have been resolved. Taylor stated
that item 11 has been corrected.
r
Item #8 - Mel Hal 1 (Tenant)/Mr. & Mrs. Rupert Lee Pow(Owner) - Sections 13-26
and 13-33:
Taylor stated that the property is located at 440 Green Spring Circle, in The
Vineyards subdivision. On August 12, 1990, a written warning was issued to Mel
Hall for continually disregarding Code ordinances on noise. The subjects had
been told several times to lower the noise. On August 15, 1990, a notice of
hearing was mailed to the tenant and property owner. August 20, 1990, Mel Hall
received a copy of the hearing notice. August 27, 1990, after receiving no
further CQ11)laints the case was dismissed. On November 17, 1990, a written
not i ce was posted in ref erence to loud no i se and loud ITUS i c . Due to
reoccurrence of noise CQ11)laints an officer turned the case over to the Code
Enforcement Board. On November 21, 1990, a not i ce of hear i ng was ma i 1 ed to the
tenant and property owner; November 24, 1990, the owners received a copy of the
hearing notice. On December 10, 1990, a CQ11)laint form was received by
Christina Madeira, the CQ11)lainant. December 18, 1990, a second written notice
was issued to Mel Hall who refused to sign. The last contact was on December
19, 1990, a notice of hearing was served to Mel Hall by a police officer.
There were three witness sworn in together.
Christine Madeira, resident of 430 Green Spring Circle, stated that fram
approximately mid Apri 1 at various times there has been very loud noise coming
fram 440 Green Springs Circle. She stated that she has been to the residence
and countless times the ITUsic was so loud that no one could hear her knocking.
Gray asked if this happens on the weekends or at other times. Madeira stated
that usually on the weekends but has been during the week days also.
Gray asked if the noise happens after 10:00 P.M. Madeira stated that it has
been at various times fram 10:00 P.M. through 3:00-4:00 A.M. She also stated
that she had been in contact with the property manager, and asked that they do
something about the noise.
Madeira also stated that there has been other complaints fram various
neighbors.
Gray asked how far Madeira's home is fram the house in quest ion. Madeira
stated that her home is about four houses down with a small cammon area between
r-' the buildings.
Madeira stated that there is a concrete wall behind the homes and the noise
reverberates off the wall.
I"'""
j
Code Enforcement Board Minutes
January 15, 1991
Page 3
Mel Hall, tenant at 440 Green Springs Circle, stated that the first occurrence
with Ms. Madeira was when she came and asked about the loud music on a Saturday
afternoon. He stated that the first time he received a written warning was in
the afternoon when he was having a birthday party for his mother.
Gray asked if Hall was ever asked to turn down the music after 10:00 P.M. or
anyone else in the apartment. Hall stated he was never asked and not to his
knowledge was anyone else asked to turn down loud music.
Hall stated that he has spoken with Karen Bowes, the property manager, and
stated that Bowes didn't see any problem at the address.
Hall stated that he can honestly say that he has not had parties late at night.
r
Dasher stated that looking over the records that there has been two written
warnings for loud noise at the address. He asked if on both of these occasions
if Hall was having a party or playing loud music. Hall stated no he hadn't.
Lyzen asked if Ha 11 owned a motorcyc 1 e. Ha 11 stated that he does own a
motorcycle but at the time of the motorcycle complaint he did not live there.
Lyzen asked why Hall did not sign the violation the first time. Hall stated
that he was with his girlfriend in the living room listening to music about
11:30-12:00 P.M. when the police officer knocked on the door, and he refused to
sign because he didn't agree that the music was too loud.
Debbie Leepow, 720 Bartholomew Way, Longwoodj property owner, stated that there
was a problem with noise when her brother John lived at the address but since
he has moved there is not a noise problem. She also stated that she has gone
by the residence and asked Karen Bowes and both say there has been no noise
when they have gone by at different times of the evening.
Gray asked if there has been any other complaints besides Medeira. Taylor
stated that no, Medeira is the only oomplaintant.
Anderson asked if Leepow had been to speak with the Code Inspector about the
complaint. Leepow stated that no she hasn't, but had been in contact with
Karen Bowes.
Schneider stated that the first warning was issued on Saturday, November 17,
1990, at 4:09 A.M., the second notice was issued on Tuesday, December 18, 1990,
~ at 12:03 A.M., and the last notice was issued on August 12, 1990, at 6:47 P.M.
Medeira again stated that this has been going on since April 1990.
There was discussion on this item.
r'"
r
t"""
Code Enforcement Board Minutes
January 15, 1991
Page 4
Lyzen moved that Me1 Hall and Mr. & Mrs. Rupert Leepow be found in violation of
Section 13-26 and 13-33. Seconded by Fickling. Vote: All aye.
Relief Order: Dasher moved that Me1 Hall and Mr. & Mrs. Rupert Leepow having
violated Sections 13-26 and 13-33 of the Winter Springs Code, if in the future
in the opinion of an officer of Winter Springs, again violates either of the
two Sections of the Code, shall pay a fine of $50.00 for each violation.
Seconded by Lyzen. Vote: All aye.
Item #9 - Ron & Christina Puterbaugh - Section 6-193:
Taylor stated that the location of the violation is at 624 Locust Court, in the
Walden Terrace Subdivision which is located off of Murphy Road and South
Edgemon Avenue. On December 13, 1990, a written warning was issued to the
owner, Ronald Puterbaugh, infonming him to move the fence so that it is three
inches from the property line. On December 17, 1990, a notice of hearing was
typed for the January 15th meet i ng . On January 6, 1991, a hear i ng not i ce was
hand delivered by a police officer to Ron Puterbaugh. On January 7, 1991,
Puterbaugh contacted the Code Inspector, and informed her that his survey
company indicated that he only needed to move the first post to be in
compliance. The Code Inspector informed Puterbaugh that she believed that it
was the first three posts and should get in touch with his survey company to
find out for sure. The Inspector called Puterbaugh's surveyors, Dudney
Surveyors, to find out what the exact distance was from the post to the
property line. David Dudney informed the Code Inspector that the first post
was on the property line, the second and third posts were 4/100 short of the
property line. On January 8, 1991, A-1 Engineering and Survey called the
Inspector and stated that a copy of Puterbaugh's corrected survey would
suffice. Bill Parham is present to witness.
Taylor showed the Board pictures of the fence and a rope depicting the property
line. He stated that the pictures show the posts have been removed but the
concrete they were set in still exists.
Dasher asked if the property owner refuses to move the posts. Muse stated that
when the property owner was informed of the violation he stated that he was
going out of town and when he returned he would move the posts.
Ron and Christina Puterbaugh and Bill Parham were sworn in for testimony.
Parham of 626 Locust Court, stated that back in August the Puterbaugh's were
given a warning for the same violation. He stated that all he is asking for is
that the Puterbaugh's comply to the City Code. He also stated that the Police
Chief and Building Official has been out to the property and at the time a rope
was stretched from front to back to show the property line.
r-
Code Enforcement Board Minutes
January 15, 1991
Page 5
Parham stated that the posts have been rroved but not rroved far enough.
Ron Puterbaugh stated that this has been on-going. He also stated that he has
received a letter from the City Manager stating that everything was fine at
this time. He stated that with the first and second survey that he had done
shows that the posts were within three inches of the property line. He stated
that he spoke with Muse and asked what was going on, and was told that one post
was leaning on the property line. Puterbaugh stated that he told Muse he was
leaving for vacation and would correct this problem when he returned. Muse
told him to contact her when this was corrected and she would come and inspect
the posts.
Puterbaugh stated that when he returned from his vacation he rroved the posts 4
1/2 inches from the property line, but Muse was no longer with the City and
~. there wasn't anyone to came out and inspect that the fence posts were rroved.
He stated that he met with the Police Chief and told him that they have moved
the posts and wou 1 dl i ke someone to come out and inspect the posts. He stated
that the Police Chief told him that he would have to appear before the Board
and then someone would come out to verify that the posts were rroved.
There was lengthy discussion on the surveys and the position of the fence
posts.
Puterbaugh stated that he feels that the posts are in compliance with City Code
and if not he is willing to rrove the posts if after inspection they are not in
camp 1 i ance.
Gray questioned why an Inspector from the City did not go out and inspect the
posts before tonight.
Dasher stated that it seems that there is something rrore than meets the eye
with this case, it seems that there is anirrosity between the two neighbors.
This case is to a point as to where Puterbaugh moved his fence inches in the
proper place as determined by his surveyor with the proper survey, then there
is no case at this time. There is no violation since the posts were rroved and
it is determined that they have been moved the proper distance.
Dasher mentioned to postpone this case until the next meeting to give the City
time to inspect the posts to see if they are in compliance with the Code.
r
Fickling stated that she would like to see the City get with an unbiased
surveyor and meet with both parties and plot the line and at that time find out
the right measurements.
r"'
Code Enforcement Board Minutes
January 15, 1991
Page 6
Dasher moved that based on the fact that three professional surveyors has
surveyed the property and there is a disagreement between them, but the Board
is here to detenmine if there is a code violation. As a result the case be set
aside and when the City checks to see if there is a violation of the Code then
open the case again. Seconded by Fickling. Vote: All aye.
Item #10 - William & Geraldine Mayhood - Section 20-433:
Taylor asked if this case could be put off until the next meeting. With the
inclement weather the police were not able to verify if the vehicle has a
current tag. Gray stated that this would be fine.
Item #12 - Lewis Tryon(Tenant)/CUmberland Fanms(Owner) - Sections 13-2(b), 9-
349 and 20-232(b):
Taylor stated that on November 13, 1990, a written warning was issued to Lewis
~ Tryon which he refused to sign for. On November 28, 1990, reinspection
revealed that the property was not in compliance and a notice of hearing was
typed. On November 30, 1990, a notice of hearing was mailed to Tryon and the
Owner, curoerland Farms. December 4, 1990, curoerland Farms received a copy of
the hearing notice. December 1, 1990, Tryon received the hearing notice. On
December 17, 1990, a reinspection of the property revealed the property was
still not in compliance with the Code; the property was cleaned but was still
in violation of the site plan. On December 27, 1990, the Code Inspector met
with Jack Davies, Real Estate Representative for Cumberland Farms, and brought
him a copy of the site plan and indicated the Code violations. The Code
Inspector told Davies that any outside storage or display was against the
approved site plan, and if Tryon wished to have outside display or outside
storage then an approved revised site plan was needed. Davies was also
informed that someone was living in the motor home which is parked on the side
of the building.
Taylor stated that on January 8, 1991, Dave Tryon, Lewis Tryon's son, called to
request an extension of time from the Code Inspector. Muse informed him that
she could not grant an extension, that an extension would have to be requested
of the Board. Tryon to 1 d her that they needed more time to rEmOve more i terns .
Taylor showed the Board pictures of the property.
r
Fickling asked about the five violations that were cited on November 13, 1990,
and only three violations on the agenda. Muse stated that the unkept property
portion has been cleaned up. The violations at this time are Section 9-349 and
20-232(b) and also 13-1.
Lewis and Dave Tryon and Jack Davies were sworn in for testimony.
I"'"
Code Enforcement Board Minutes
January 15, 1991
Page 7
Jack Davies, representative of CUmberland Farms,
contact with Tryon and Tryon has retained council
statement at this time.
stated that he has been in
and is prepared to read a
Lewis Tryon, 531 East state Road 434, Winter Springs, asked for a continuance
until the paper work is done to file for a Special Exception. He stated that
is has been detenmined by his Attorney and the City Attorney that there exists
a potential legal issue in the interpretation of a zoning ordinance. He
stated that his Attorney was not able to attend this meeting and can not
proceed without legal advise.
Tryon stated that his request for a continuance is in good faith.
Taylor stated that on December 1, 1990, Tryon received a copy
notice and as of this date, January 15, 1991, the time lapse is
the City feels is sufficient time to prepare for this hearing.
that no more time is needed.
of the hear i ng
six weeks which
The City feels
r
Tryon stated that he is not prepared to give testimony until he has legal
council present.
Dasher asked about the motor home that is on the property.
Tryon stated that he uses the motor home for his business and he and his wife
live in the motor home to keep an eye on the equipment he has stored in the
back. He stated that he is staying there until he can get the equipment that
is stored in the back properly housed.
Schneider asked Tryon how many feet is the lawn equipment is from the highway.
Tryon stated that it is 400 feet from the highway.
Schneider asked Muse if she is satisfied that the violation for unkept property
is taken care of. Muse stated that she was and that the violation right now is
for the site plan and outdoor display. The site plan needs to show the storage
area for the equipment and approval for outdoor display.
Muse told Tryon what exactly was needed. She stated that he needed to make
request for outdoor display area, and for the storage area, and also request a
special exception to park the motor home on the property for use in his
business.
Lyzen asked that at this time the equipment is behind the store and is not
~. visible from the highway. Tryon stated that was correct.
There was discussion on this item.
Gray stated that it would be reasonable to continue this case to see if a
Special Exception is granted.
r
Code Enforcement Board Minutes
January 15, 1991
Page 8
Gray asked what are the plans for the rrotor hane. Tryon stated that he does
use the rrotor hane to travel for his business but as soon as he gets a place to
house the equipment in the rear of the business, he will rrove the rrotor hane
from the property.
Schneider rroved to continue this case to the next meeting. Seconded by Lyzen.
Discussion. Vote: Lyzen: aye; Gray: aye; Dasher: nay; Schneider: aye;
Anderson: aye; Fickling: aye. Motion carried.
Item #13 - Kenneth & Marjorie Edelen - Section 20-431(f):
Taylor stated that the location of the property is 307 Birch Terrace, which is
south ofS.R. 434, off of Murphy Road. On November 12, 1990 the City denied a
request to allow a recreational vehicle over 28 feet to be parked at 307 Birch
Terrace. On November 26, 1990, a statement of violation and notice of hearing
was typed to send to the property owners. November 29, 1990, the statement of
r violation and notice of hearing was mai led to the Edelen's. On December 1,
1990, the Edelen's received the hearing notice. On December 28, 1990, the
Police Chief advised the Code Inspector to bring this case before the Code
Board even if the recreational vehicle is removed so the Board can put in an
order that if the recreational vehicle is brought back to the residence,
without approval fram the City Commission, the owner will be fined. This way
it will not have to be brought back before the Board.
Taylor mentioned that the recreational vehicle has been rroved as of January 7,
1991.
Lyzen stated that if the property owner is not in violation now, then there is
nothing the Board can do at this time.
Muse stated that the Police Chief wanted this to cane to the Board in case the
recreational vehicle is back on the property then a relief order would already
be written up.
There was discussion on the case.
It was established that the owner went before the Commission a year ago and got
an approval to park the vehicle on his property, in November 1990 Edelen went
before the Commission for approval for another year to park the vehicle on his
property, the approval was denied because there was a complaint about the
vehicle being parked on the property.
r
Gray stated that until this is established as a reoccurrence then the Board
could not act on the case.
r-.
r
~
Code Enforcement Board Minutes
January 15, 1991
Page 9
Gray moved to dismiss the case. Discussion. Dasher stated that the Board get
the opinion of the City Attorney as to what constitutes a continuing violation.
Vote: All aye. Motion carried.
The meeting was adjourned at 10:00 P.M.
Respectfully Submitted,
Margo Hopkins
Deputy City Clerk