Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995 07 18 Code Enforcement Board Regular Minutes MINUTES CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD JULY 18, 1995 MEETING 1. The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairperson Schneider in the City Hall Commission Chambers. 2. Pledge of Allegiance 3. Roll Call: City Officials. present Anne Schneider, present Bob Gray, present Lloyd Anderson, present Ken Haines, absent Charles Holzman, present Gene Prest era, present Lurene Lyzen, present Captain Bob Pieper, Code Officer Al White, Code Inspector 4. Approval of the May 16. 1995 Minutes: Schneider asked for comments. Lyzen commented that on page 5 the minutes read that the Tuscawilla Realty purchase was three million dollars and on page 6 it read three hundred thousand dollars. Mr. String, of Tuscawilla Realty stated that the correct amount was three hundred thousand dollars. Schneider asked for further comments. Lyzen moved that the minutes be accepted as written. Holzman seconded. All Ayes. Motion Carried. 5. Discussion of Closed and Pending Cases: Schneider asked if anyone had questions on the list of City Ordinance Violations. Lyzen asked if the unattended grass on 417 David Street had been taken care of White stated that it had not been taken care of Proof of delivery was received on July 18, 1995. Now that we have a receipt, we give him 15 days to comply after which we will cut the grass. Anderson asked about McDuff White said McDuff was taken care of Lyzen asked about a goat at 102 Murphy Road. White stated that a goat living in a backyard is not allowed per City Ordinance. The goat went to the Sanford Zoo. Schneider stated that at 107 North Alderwood (page 3) the violation reads "Family". Violation 20-1, Case #95007242. White stated that the people that inquired seemed to think that a boarding house was being run, but the individuals coming and going from 107 North Alderwood were all family. Schneider asked for further comments. Pieper asked that the case # CEB-94-464 from last meeting be discussed. Violation of Section 20- 412 Temporary Building with no temporary use permit. This is the temporary building at the corner of Winter Springs Blvd. and Northern Way presently owned by Tuscawilla Realty, Inc. The board ruled at the last meeting that the temporary building was in violation of20-412, and a relief order was issued giving Tuscawilla Realty a period of sixty days to either remove the building from the property or obtain the temporary use permit from the city commission. After which time ifit was not complied with in the time limit given, a fine of$250.00 would be assessed. Mr. String of Tuscawilla Realty has made efforts to get in front of the commission which have not MINUTES CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD JULY 18, 1995 MEETING PAGE 2 been successful. Mr. String would like to ask the board to reconsider the time limit on compliance. Mr. Alec String, of215 Rolling Wood Trail, Altamonte Springs, asked Don LeBlanc on June 5, 1995 ifhe could come before the commission at the next meeting. LeBlanc replied that there were steps. First step, String would have to get a survey of the property sealed by the surveyor. On June 19, 1995 String received the survey showing all of the improvements. Presented the survey to LeBlanc the same day, and String was told the survey needed to show the concrete sidewalks going to the buildings. On June 27, 1995 String received the survey back and showed it to LeBlanc. On July 11, 1995 the case was reviewed, however, they were not sure if a full engineered site plan was needed which would show stormwater retention and management, or if it could be passed through the way it was done the first two times which the commission approved with a simple engineered stamped survey. String said that ten minutes ago he was informed that he would need full engineering on the site before he would be allowed to get on the agenda to speak to the commission. Pieper read a memorandum as follows: "To John Govoruhk, City Manager; Through John Ketteringham, General Services Director; From Tom Grimms, Community Development Coordinator; Dated July 18, 1995; Referencing Case CEB 94-464 Tuscawilla Realty, 1301 Winter Springs Boulevard, Temporary Building with No Permit. I met with Don LeBlanc, Land Development Specialist, and other staff members and discussed whether the owner, Tuscawilla Realty, Inc., will be required to submit a site plan in application for a temporary permit. It is our view that Tuscawilla Realty is required to submit a site plan in application for a temporary permit for the temporary structure on the 1.4 acres of land in Parcel 61 per Item 14 of the settlement agreement and amendment to annexation ordinance #64, the Tuscawilla planned unit development, master plan for the Tuscawilla planned unit development and related matters. A site plan is required for proposed development activity on property not intended to be divided. Parcel 61 is considered part of the remaining property in the Settle Agreement [referenced at the top on page 4 of the Agreement]. Copies were sent to LeBlanc, City Attorney Kruppenbacher, and Captain Pieper." Two things were unclear: I)What exactly did Mr. String have to do to satisfY the city's requirements to get on the Commission Agenda? This question was answered by Mr. Grimms in the memo. 2)Could this board act upon its own relief order, and revisit this case without it constituting an appeal? According to Florida Statute 162 all appeals have to go to circuit court. This board issued a relief order giving a period of time to come into compliance after which time fines would be assessed and a dollar amount was established. Pieper asked the board, If your intent at that time when the sixty days was established was to give what was believed sufficient time to comply, then Pieper suggested that needed to be revisited. Not reversing the finding of fact and not altering the fines to be assessed upon non-compliance, but simply revisiting the amount of time given would not constitute an appeal and this board could revisit the order. Pieper said he asked LeBlanc, How much time it would take for a project from conception through preliminaries through staff review through initial recommendation to the commission through final engineering through the final approval or denial of the city commission. LeBlanc said that an MINUTES CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD JULY 18, 1995 MEETING PAGE 3 average would be six months. Pieper recommended January 31, 1996 as a compliance time. Schneider suggested extending the time period to the end of February or March due to the holiday season. Holzman moved to amend the motion from sixty (60) days to read until March 31, 1996. Lyzen seconded. Prestera asked String ifhe was required to engineer a retention pond. String said there was discussion, but he is still unclear on the issue. Vote: Anderson, aye; Holzman, aye; Prest era, aye; Lyzen, aye; Schneider, aye; Gray, aye. Motion Carried. Schneider asked what the difference was between a temporary permit and applying for a permanent permit because it seemed the steps were all the same. Pieper answered, at the last meeting talk of having this building declared permanent would require it to go through certain other building codes, minimum standards and requirements. Even though this is for a temporary use permit, the settlement agreement in place requires full engineering, site plan and the lengthier time than has previously been required prior to that settlement agreement per Grimm's ruling. Case #95001595, Deborah A. Montevechi, 209 Shore Road, Section 13-2(b) Trash in Yard. Pieper explained that this complaint started January 31, 1995, and was believed to be corrected in February. However, communication with White indicated the problem still existed. March 15, 1995, a written warning was sent certified mail to the owner of record, Deborah Montevechi, and proof of delivery was received in May 1995. Again, under the belief that the problem had been corrected, White had contact with a neighbor who advised that the problem was still in existence. A certified mailing of the "Notice to Appear" before this meeting was sent on May 8, 1995, and proof of receipt by the owner of record is on file. Today, July 18, 1995 White revisited the location and from the neighboring residence of 207 Shore Road was able to take photographs of some of the items which exist in violation of 13-2(b). In addition to the photographs the board members looked at, there was also a copy of the official plat referencing where the items in the photos were located on the property. White stated that in two locations of the yard there were large piles of silver pipe. Shopping carts with unidentifiable objects and building material items were lying about in this residential yard. The items could be seen from the back of the house. Mr. Larry Rod, of209 Shore Road stated that he makes wind chimes out of the scrap materials. Pieper said that he is not convinced that Rod has had the opportunity to read the documentations received by Montevechi. Schneider asked Rod if Montevechi had forwarded any of this information to him before this meeting. Rod stated Montevechi told him she received a letter earlier. Rod and Montevechi both live at 209 Shore Road, but Montevechi is the owner on record. Schneider asked Rod ifhe had ever seen paperwork or warnings. Rod answered, no. MINUTES CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD JULY 18, 1995 MEETING PAGE 4 Schneider read Section 13-2 (b). "It shall be unlawful for any person to cause or permit junk, scrap metal, scrap lumber, waste paper products, discarded building materials or any unused abandoned vehicle or abandoned parts, machinery or machinery parts, garbage, trash, or other waste materials to be in or upon any yard, garden, lawn, out buildings, or premises owned, rented, leased, or otherwise occupied by him in the city unless in connection with a business enterprise lawfully situated and licensed for the same." Schneider asked Rod if he was responsible for the piles. Rod answered, yes. Rod asked if it was okay that the piping was on racks. Pieper said that he did not think the code boards intent was to prevent Rod and Montevechi from continuing in the operation of manufacturing wind pipes, just that it has to be properly maintained in a fashion that is not unwholesome or offensive to the neighborhood. Pieper asked even if Rod builds a shed to store his pipe in, is that in violation? Because the ordinance reads in or upon any yard, garden, lawn or outbuilding...Ifthe shed is going to be considered an outbuilding, and the board considers the pipe Rod cuts up to make wind chimes out of as scrap metal, then it will be in violation. The question has to be to the board, Are you going to consider the pipe he is using to make these crafted items as scrap? Schneider said she felt that the man is using the pipe as a supply. Unfortunately, it has caused distress on the neighbors. She suggested to the board that if the man keeps his yard tidy and keeps anything that can be construed as junk out of his yard, then she doesn't have a problem with it. Pieper asked Rod, in relation to the pictures White took today is that a fairly accurate representation of how it exist. Rod said yes, and that he would get rid of the two shopping carts. Prest era asked White regardless of the knowledge of Rod running a business, would you still consider the yard to be unsightly. White answered yes. Schneider said that as long as it looks like junk then it has to be considered a violation. Schneider asked White if you walked into a backyard and there was lawn, a shed, and a house would you cite that person in violation of littering. White said negative. Lyzen asked Rod if he read the written warning sent certified on March 15. Rod said yes, he thought he cleaned up fairly well, then he got another letter and cleaned everything up on the side in the backyard. Pieper showed Rod the written warning mailed in March and the notice of violation that was mailed in July, and asked him if the signature on both was his. Rod answered yes. Schneider moved that in the case#9500 1595 Deborah Montevechi, the owner of record, 209 Shore Road, to be found in violation of Section 13-2(b). Gray seconded. Vote: Schneider, Aye; Gray, Aye; Anderson, Aye; Holzman, Aye; Prestera, Aye; Lyzen, Aye. Holzman stated in the case CEB#95001595 of the City of Winter Springs, Deborah Montevechi having been found by this board to be in violation of Section 13-2 (b). Holzman moved that Montevechi be given four (4) weeks (effective tonight)to correct this violation, and if not corrected by this time, shall be assessed a fine in the amount of $100.00 per day until such MINUTES CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD JULY 18, 1995 MEETING PAGE 5 violation is found to be corrected. This will be determined by an officer of the city. In addition, any repeat occurrences of the same violation, after the time given to correct the violation, as determined by an officer of the city, shall cause the immediate fine of$100.00 to be assessed for each day of violation until the violation is found to be corrected. Lyzen seconded. Vote: Holzman, aye; Prestera, aye; Lyzen, aye; Schneider, aye; Gray, aye; Anderson, aye. Motion Carried. Case#95002452, Vasily Golin, 50-56 Fairfax Avenue, Section 10-26, No Occupational License. Pieper stated that the research into this case revealed that in Maya permit was applied for, paid for, written, and signed by the City Manager for this apartment house. However, there is a requirement within the building department that an apartment house has to have a certified letter on file stating that each unit within the apartment house has a working smoke detector. The reason this permit is not considered issued in the sense that it has not changed hands is because they still require the certified letter. Whether or not they are in compliance for the purposes of this board, we feel they have met the requirements for paying the fine for the permit. An administrative procedure has to be taken care of within the building department. Case #95001917, Charles S. Andrescavage, 219 Morton Lane, Section 4-1 (20.23) Loose Dog(s). This is a repeat violation. Schneider abstained due to personal conflicts, and Gray presided over the case. Pieper stated this case was originally brought before the board on March 1995. In May, the Andrescavages, the complainants, witnesses, and pictures of the dogs off the owners property were presented, and the ruling was that there was a violation. Seminole County Animal Control responded on May 19, 1995 because Max and Natasha were off the property as far away as Winter Springs Blvd. and Tuscawilla Road. They were seized by animal control and impounded. The Andrescavages were fined $50.00 by animal control for the violation of the county ordinance. In addition, they were sent the $100.00 fine letter by the city as violation of the relief order for the two violations. The documentations and statements from Seminole County Animal Control is verification for the city to bring this case back as a repeated violation. White stated that Seminole County Animal Control and Protection Ordinance is adopted by the City of Winter Springs. Gray asked how many calls where received from residents concerning the dogs. White said two or three. Lyzen stated that in the case CEB#95001917 of the City of Winter Springs, the board has read the complaint filed and the written information presented by the code officer and we heard at this meeting "REPEAT VIOLATIONS" on Charles S. Andrescavage, 209 Morton Lane. Based on these proceedings she moved that this board find Charles and Mary Andrescavage in violation of Section 4-1 (202.23) of the Code of the City of Winter Springs, and that an appropriate relief order be issued at this meeting for a repeat occurrence. Holzman seconded. Vote: Gray, aye; Anderson, aye; Holzman, aye; Prestera, aye; Lyzen, aye. Motion Carried. MINUTES CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD JULY 18, 1995 MEETING PAGE 6 Lyzen stated that in the case CEB#95001917 of the City of Winter Springs, Charles and Mary Andrescavage having been found by this board to be in violation of Section 4-1 of the codes of this city, she moved that the Andrescavages immediately correct this repeat violation and shall be assessed a fine in the amount of$250.00 per violation. This will be determined by an officer of the city. Prestera seconded. Holzman asked if this order applies to any of their dogs. Gray said yes because the order doesn't specifY the names of the dogs. White said the order addresses the owner. Vote: Gray, aye; Anderson, aye; Holzman, aye; Prestera, aye; Lyzen, aye. Motion Carried. Case#95007227, First American RE Tax Service, 733 Woodhaven Drive, Section 13-2 Littering, Stagnant Pool and Trash in Yard. Pieper stated that this violation began in May 1995. Following due process, written warnings were sent certified mail to the mortgage company and the owner of record. This vacant house is owned by Mr. Tom Towner. A certified letter was sent to Towner in Ocala, and proof of delivery was received on July 12 showing that he received his notification ofJuly 10. White described the pool as looking like a oil sludge pan. The house has been empty for a long time and the grass hasn't been mowed since March. According to 13-3 in our code, the city can clean up the yard, but not the pool. (too much liability involved) A lien can be put on the property if cleaned up by the city, but he should have fifteen (15) days from the date he is found in violation to clean it up himself Holzman asked if the property was fenced. Pieper eXplained that entering Wildwood subdivision on Wildwood Drive from Shepard Road, this residence is the corner house that exists within the curvature of the decorative wall that is at the entrance to the subdivision. The front of the house fronts on W oodhaven Drive which is the interior of the subdivision, but the back and side property lines of this residence are the decorative wall that surrounds that subdivision as it enters from Shepard Road to Wildwood Drive. Prestera asked if the city would have any liability in this case for not applying the city codes prior to this if someone gets hurt. Pieper said not prior to our knowledge of the violation. The pool is fenced. A wall exists around the subdivision which forms one side and the rear property line as well as additional fencing which encloses the pool. The only way someone could become inj ured is if they were trespassing. Prestera stated that in the case of CEB#95007227 of the City of Winter Springs, the Code Enforcement Board has read the complaint filed and the written information presented by the Code Officer, and heard at this meeting the sworn testimony of the prosecuting officer and witnesses regarding this case. Based on these proceedings he moved that this board find Thomas J. Towner and First American RE Tax Service of Clearwater, FL both in violation of Section 13-2 of the codes of the City of Winter Springs, and that an appropriate relief order be issued at this meeting. Lyzen seconded. Vote: Schneider, aye; Gray, aye; Anderson, aye; Holzman, aye; Prestera, aye; Lyzen, aye. Motion Carried. MINUTES CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD JULY 18, 1995 MEETING PAGE 7 Prestera stated that in the case of CEB#95007227 of the City of Winter springs, Thomas 1. Towner ofOcala and First American RE Tax Service of Clearwater, FL having been found by this board to be in violation of Section 13-2 of the codes of this city, and a relief order issued, he moved therefore that Thomas 1. Towner and First American RE Tax Service be given seven (7) days after receipt of delivery to correct this violation, and if not corrected by this time as determined by an officer of this city, shall be assessed a fine in the amount of$100.00 per day until such violation is found to be corrected by observation by a city officer. Lyzen seconded. Vote: Anderson, aye; Holzman, aye; Prestera, aye; Lyzen, aye; Schneider, aye; Gray, aye. Motion Carried. Pieper stated that there was one more case to present, however due to an error between White's agenda and the advertised agenda the case can not be presented for the boards consideration with regard to a finding of fact or a relief order. Pieper asked the board if they wanted to hear the case, even though they could not rule on it. The case references another violation of Section 13-2 (b) Littering. The board decided to hold off hearing the case. Schneider announced a special meeting on July 25, 1995 at 7:00 p.m. to hear this case. Schneider adjourned the meeting at 9: 10 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, rflllA~ 1?q.edL~ Martha Jenkins, Deputy City Clerk