Loading...
01-10-17 MinutesCITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD MINUTES 6:00P.M.-JANUARY 10,2017 IN ATTENDANCE Members: Benjamin de Luna, Chair Brenna Durden, City Attorney Louis Keith, Vice Chair Deborah White, Code Enforcement Officer Don Sasser Dayna Williams, Secretary Kirk Hansen Richard Lombardi Lindsay Norman Ellen Glasser Chair Ben de Luna called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m., followed by the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. Secretary Dayna Williams read the roll, finding a quorum was present. 1. Approval of Minutes of the Regular Meeting of November 9, 2016. Motion: Approve the minutes of the Code Enforcement Meeting of November 9, 2016. Moved by Norman, Seconded by Glasser The motion was approved unanimously. 2. Administration of Oath to Defendants/Witnesses Chair de Luna gave the oath to the defendants and witnesses. 3. Old Business *PROPERTY HOMESTEADED CASE ID NAME & ADDRESS VIOLATION 14-00000980 WAYNE DOUGLAS SCOTT IPMC Sec. 108.1.5 1. Dangerous Structure 198 POINSETTIA ST IPMC Sec. 108.1.5 2 Dangerous Structure 2 IPMC Sec. 304.6 Exterior Walls IPMC Sec. 307.1 Handrails & Guardrails IPMC Sec. 304.2 Protective Treatment IPMC Sec. 304.7 Roofs and Drainage IPMC Sec. 305.4 Stair, walking surfaces IPMC Sec. 304.10 Stairway, Deck, Porch, Balco IPMC Sec. 108.1.5 3 Unfit for Human Habitation IPMC Sec. 304.1 Unsafe Conditions Ms. White presented the case, stating the property is no longer vacant, as Mr. Scott has moved back to the property. She read the list of violations and presented photos of the property. She stated this property was brought before the Code Enforcement Board at the last meeting, November 9, 2016, and the Board issued an Order that the respondent was not in compliance and must obtain compliance on or before January 2, 2017. Staff recommends the Board find the property owner in violation ofthe Board Order ofNovember 9, 2016, and orders that a fine of $250.00 per day be imposed commencing on January 3, 2017 and for every day thereafter the violation continues to exist. The property owner is responsible for contacting the City Code Enforcement Officer and obtaining an inspection of compliance. Chair de Luna asked Ms. White if she had been in contact with Mr. Scott. She stated no, explaining the Notice of Hearing (NOH) was posted on the property, so he was notified of the meeting tonight. Mr. Norman remarked that all the actions and proceedings that have been taken on this case have not brought about any meaningful change. He asked if there is any recourse the City could take to expedite the resolution of these situations. Ms. White stated when this patiicular propetiy was initially given a notice, she spoke to Mr. Scott on a couple of occasions and gave him some names and people he could contact if he did not have the means for the repairs. She stated she tried to work with him, but she does not have any other avenue or funds to use to repair the property and put a lien on it. She stated the only means we have at this point is to issue a fme and hopefully he will do something. Motion: The Board adopts the staff recommendation. Moved by Norman, Seconded by Sasser Mr. Lombardi stated he agreed we need to do something more than just issue a fine and never collect it, we have got to move ahead somehow. Chair de Luna stated he felt that would be somewhere down the line, explaining Ms. White would bring this back to us if we don't get any action on the correspondence imposing the fines. The motion was approved unanimously. Chair de Luna addressed Ms. White explaining, if nothing happens, the Board has expressed enough that they would like the matter brought back to them to see if they can act on it, and Ms. White stated she understands. 16-283 KENNETH ALLEN IPMC Sec. 302.8 Motor Vehicle WEATHERBY 351 19TH ST Ms. White presented the case, stating the propetiy is in violation ofiPMC Sec. 302.8 Motor Vehicle. She stated this case was brought before the Code Enforcement Board at the last meeting, November 9, 2016, and the Board found him in violation and issued an Order that the respondent was not in compliance and must obtain compliance on or before January 2, 2017. She presented pictures showing the vehicle was still there and had not been moved. Staff recommends the Board find the propetiy owner in violation and orders the fine of $200.00 per day be imposed for noncompliance commencing on November 22, 2016 and everyday thereafter the violation continues to exist. The property owner is responsible for contacting the City Code Enforcement Officer and obtaining an inspection of compliance. Motion: The Board moves to do what is legally possible to tow the vehicle. Moved by Lombardi City Attomey, Brenna Durden, explained the current City Ordinances only allow the towing and removal of vehicles on public property. Ms. Durden stated there is discussion about bringing an ordinance to the City Commission to take action for towing vehicles from private propetiy, so that is under advisement. After a brief discussion, the motion was withdrawn. Motion: The Board adopts the staff recommendation to move forward with the $200.00 per day fine. Moved by Sasser, Seconded by Keith There was no further discussion. Minutes of the Code Enforcement Board on January 10, 2017 Page 2 of 12 The motion was approved unanimously. Chair de Luna reiterated to Ms. White that as a Board we would like to see this matter resolved and the car moved, so whatever needs to be done should be done. Ms. White stated if she gets that ordinance the vehicle will be stickered and towed. CASEID NAME & ADDRESS VIOLATION 14-1335 C BASS MORTGAGE LOAN SEC. 22.74 Septic to Sewer ASSET BACKED CERTIFICATES 1202 JASMINE ST Ms. White presented the case, stating this case was brought before the Code Enforcement Board at the last meeting, November 9, 2016, and the Board issued an Order giving them until December 12, 2016 to come into compliance or a $250.00 per day fine would commence and everyday thereafter the violation continues to exist. Chair de Luna asked if there was anyone representing C Bass Mortgage Loan Asset Backed Certificates, and there was no reply. Staff recommends the Board find the property owner in violation of the November 9, 2016 Board Order for noncompliance and orders that a fine of $250.00 per day commence on December 13, 2016 and continue every day thereafter until full compliance is achieved. The property owner is responsible for contacting the City Code Enforcement Officer and obtaining an inspection of compliance. Mr. Sasser asked if we are recording the fines so they are part of the record, should someone go to buy the property would they know there are liens against the property. Ms. White answered yes, we record the Order. Motion: The Board adopts the staff recommendation. Moved by Keith, Seconded by Norman Chair de Luna stated this is to impose the fine, as they were found in violation before. The motion was approved unanimously. 16-312 *SMITH EM1, BRUCE L Sec. 24-173(b )(1) Outside storage (resi) 417 SAILFISH DR Ms. White presented the case, stating Mr. Smith was on the docket and appeared before the Board at the November 9, 2016 Code Enforcement Board meeting. She recounted this case is the one she had recommended the Board find in compliance. She presented photos of the property and stated Mr. Smith and his wife are present tonight if the Board wishes to speak with them. Staff recommends the Board find the property owner in compliance. Chair de Luna asked Ms. White if the Board entered an Order against Mr. Smith. She said no, explaining the Board deferred the case to the Janumy 10, 2017 Code Enforcement Board hearing to determine compliance. Chair de Luna questioned the other fines on the property history and Ms. White stated they are not a part of this case. She stated the fines will be addressed at a later date. She explained that she and Mr. Smith will get together and go through the fines, then he will come back to the Board to try and get some relief. Motion: The Board adopts the staff recommendation. Moved by Hansen, Seconded by Lombardi Minutes of the Code Enforcement Board on January 10, 2017 Page 3 of 12 Ms. Glasser stated her only concern was to affirm Mr. Smith understands that finding him in compliance does not absolve him of the prior fines. Ms. White stated yes, he understands. Chair de Luna asked Mr. Smith if he would like to come forward to listen to what Ms. Glasser has said. Mr. Smith came to the podium and Ms. Glasser reiterated her previous statement and Mr. Smith confirmed that he understood. Ms. White reiterated her earlier comments that she and Mr. Smith were going to get together and go through the fines and he knows the fines are not going away. The motion was approved unanimously. 4. New Business CASE ID NAME & ADDRESS VIOLATION 16-476 REGINA ROSENSTEIN TRUST IPMC Sec. 302.4 Weeds 501 MAYPORTRD Sec. 24.160(b) Dumpster Enclosures Ms. White presented the case, reading the violations and showing photos of the property. She stated she has been in discussion with the tenant and he has hired someone to repair the dumpster enclosure. Staff recommends the Board find the property owner in violation and orders that compliance be achieved by February 6, 2017, by installing a new dumpster enclosure and mowing and cleaning the yard and removing all the trash and debris from the premises or a fine of $200.00 be imposed for the first day and $200.00 for every day thereafter the violation continues to exists. The property owner is responsible for contacting the City Code Enforcement Officer and obtaining an inspection of compliance. Mr. Sasser asked if this person is a tenant of the trust and Ms. White said yes, Ms. Rosenstein is the property owner and lives out of state. He asked if a fine is imposed will it go against the trust and Ms. White stated yes. She stated Ms. Rosenstein is the one who was notified and she contacted the tenant who is working to get things taken care of. Motion: The Board adopts the staff recommendation. Moved by Norman, Seconded by Sasser There was no further discussion. The motion was approved unanimously. 16-391 1411 HIBISCUS ST Sec. 24-173(b )(1) Outside Storage ( comm) Chapter 24 Zoning District Ms. White presented the case, stating this property and the adjacent vacant lot both belong to 1411 Hibiscus, LLC, which is Mr. Thomas Goelz. She read the violations and distributed copies of Sec 24-111 Commercial general districts (CG) to the Board members. She explained it will provide an outline of what can and cannot be done in a CG Zoning District to give them a clear understanding of what we are trying to do. Ms. White read from various highlighted areas of Sec. 24-111 CG Districts, stating the residential character of the city should be retained in a CG district; the pennitted uses shall mean low intensity commercial uses intended to serve the daily needs of residents of the sutTounding neighborhoods. Such uses shall not include manufacturing, warehousing, storage or high intensity commercial activities. She directed the Board's attention to the Uses-by-exception within the CG zoning district, stating limited wholesale operations would be one example, and contractors would be another one. She stated, she is assuming the tenants are contractors. She continued to read from the Uses-by-exception section; contractors, not requiring outside storage, provided that no manufacture, construction, heavy assembly involving hoists or lifts, or equipment that makes excessive noise Minutes of the Code Enforcement Board on January 10, 2017 Page 4 of 12 or fumes shall be permitted. Not more than one (1) contractor related vehicle shall be parked outdoors on a continuous basis. Ms. White presented photos of the property, stating the tenant moved into Mr. Goelz's property and took up shop, but never obtained a business tax receipt. She stated Mr. Goelz is present and would like to address the Board. Thomas Goelz, property owner, stated the tenant is Infinite Communications, they do cabling around the city. He stated he acquired the property six months ago and Infinite Communications became the new tenant six months ago. He stated we are in communication with them through our attomeys to work on an eviction because they are clearly not the right tenant for the property. He stated the tenants are in agreement with that assessment and we are looking for a solution at this point. Chair de Luna asked Mr. Goelz how long it would take and Mr. Goelz said he had never been through it before, but he would guess between sixty to ninety days. Chair de Luna asked what his lawyers are telling him in terms of time and he stated the same kind of thing, we are at the very beginning of it. Mr. Norman remarked on the staff recommendation Ms. White had on the case history report. He noted the date of compliance as February 6, 2017 and asked Ms. White how that might exacerbate the property owner's effmis to try and resolve this situation with his tenant. Ms. White stated if he is working on the eviction and needs more time, she has no problem with that. Mr. Norman stated, if Mr. Goelz is putting forth a good faith effort to resolve this situation, would it be appropriate for the Board to t1y and work with him. Ms. White replied certainly. Mr. Sasser stated one ofthe things we might consider is to have the eviction notice filed by the February 6, 2017 date and stmi taking action. Mr. Sasser added, the Board would also like to be informed on how many days will legally be allowed for a commercial eviction. Mr. Goelz stated he would be happy to keep Officer White apprised of each step along the way. Ms. White stated, if the Board wants to give Mr. Goelz sixty days or any extension of time, they may change the date. Mr. Hansen stated he would prefer to get a status report in thirty or sixty days, rather than put "done" in thirty or sixty days. Ms. White explained, even if they issue an Order and we come back, you do not have to impose the fine. She explained she brings it back to the Board to impose the fine, she does not impose the fine. Discussion ensued. Staff recommends the Board find the property owner in violation and orders that compliance be achieved by ceasing all business activity at this location and remove all items stored outside, including vehicles, by Februmy 6, 2017 or a fine of $250.00 be imposed for the first day and $250.00 for eve1y day thereafter the violation continues to exists. The property owner is responsible for contacting the City Code Enforcement Officer and obtaining an inspection of compliance. Motion: The Board adopts the staff recommendation with the exception that the date of compliance be changed to March 15,2017. Moved by Lombardi, Seconded by Hansen Ms. Glasser stated she does not support this motion. She would prefer to defer the matter until our next meeting so we do not have to find this owner in violation because of the steps he has taken to resolve the situation. Mr. Lombardi stated he could go along with that suggestion. Chair de Luna explained they have a motion and a second and they are on discussion, so they will need to vote on the motion. Votes: Aye: -5-Hansen, Lombardi, Keith, Norman, Sasser, de Luna Nay:-1-Sasser Motion Carried Mr. Nonnan explained he was compelled in voting for the motion because of the process Ms. White would have to reinitiate if we bring this to a halt and then she has to stmi the clock again. Chair de Luna reiterated to Mr. Minutes of the Code Enforcement Board on January 10, 2017 Page 5 of 12 Goelz that if he does not have it resolved by March 15, 2017 and he has to come back to the following meeting, the Board would want detailed evidence of evetything that he had done to that point, and what is the future plan. Mr. Goelz replied that he understands and will provide that detail. (This item was taken out of sequence.) CASEID NAME & ADDRESS VIOLATION 16-341 RSNS,LLC Sec. 6-16 Florida Building Code RUSSELL STUART FBC Sec. 105 Permits-Required SWO Florida 31 ROYAL PALMS DR Bldg Code Sec. 24-157 Fences No Permit Ms. White presented the case, stating the property owner is RSNS, LLC, doing business as The Seafood Kitchen. Mr. Russell Stuart owns the property and the business. She read the violations and stated she has attached surveys of the property to give them a little background. She stated the small one is an old survey of Mr. Stuart's property and she highlighted items that have been constructed in the back of this shopping center that encroach onto the adjacent property owner. She stated the large survey is a new survey of the adjacent property, 763 Atlantic Boulevard, which is owned by Mr. Handler. She stated the new survey is more updated showing exactly what was there when the property was cited for not having permits. Ms. White pointed out the propetiy line on the large survey and stated there is a freezer, a shed and a fence that clearly encroach on Mr. Handler's property. She stated there were no permits issued for these items and presented photos of the property. She stated Mr. Stuart is present and represented by council and would like to address the Board. Chair de Luna asked about Mr. Handler and Ms. White stated Mr. Handler is a separate case and needs to be handled separately. Zachary Crabtree, Crabtree Law Group, stated he is representing RSNS LLC, The Seafood Kitchen, as well as Mr. Russell Stuart individually, adding that Mr. Scott Thomas is here. Scott Thomas, an Attorney with Rogers Towers Law Firm, is representing the title company. Mr. Crabtree stated Mr. Stuart purchased the propetiy in December 2014, but he has been a tenant for much longer, leasing the property, and had no dealings other than running the restaurant. Mr. Crabtree stated Mr. Stuart purchased this property as a retirement investment and he is now aware that these structures have not been in compliance with the Code, based on the findings Officer White is alleging. Mr. Crabtree stated it is more complicated than what has been presented thus far, and we are actively investigating this matter. Mr. Crabtree stated they would like a motion for a continuance on this matter so there are no findings at all on an actual fine or code enforcement violation at this point in time. Mr. Crabtree stated it is our belief that the Seafood Kitchen building has been there prior to the actual Handler building, which is the adjacent property. He stated we have two issues to deal with. He stated we cannot correct these issues until we deal with the encroachment issues with the adjacent property owner, which we have been in negotiations with for the past three months. Mr. Crabtree stated he could not provide a good faith estimate on the amount of time it will take to fix the issues between the property owners before we can then come back to cure the code violations for the unpermitted structures. It is our intent to apply for permits for these structures in full compliance with the Code. Scott Thomas stated his role in this matter deals with the encroachment between the property owners, he is not really here for the code enforcement issues. Mr. Thomas stated they want to address the code enforcement issues, but they can't really address those until we take care of this encroachment issue between the two owners. Mr. Lombardi asked what brought this issue to legal matters. Ms. White explained there was a shed being constructed in the alleyway (back in August 2016) encroaching on Mr. Handler's property. Ms. White stated the City's position on this is you cannot be issued a permit to build something on someone else's propetiy. She stated there is a five foot setback on his property so there is no way he can keep that (shed), it does not meet the requirements. Mr. Crabtree explained that what Ms. White is presenting to you is this; there is an encroachment onto the property which is why we cannot apply for a permit. He stated, hypothetically, if the encroachment gets cured by way of an easement, our take is then we would come and apply for a permit. He stated Ms. White's objection would be that we can't do that because it does not meet setback requirements. He stated our Minutes of the Code Enforcement Board on January 10, 2017 Page 6 of 12 argument at that point in time would then be coming back and stating that this structure has been there for thirty years, nothing has been done with this structure and we would request that the City work with us so we can apply for a permit. Mr. Norman stated this Board does not deal with encroachment issues, and though we may be sympathetic to your argument, it's not one we can take into consideration. He asked Mr. Crabtree, if the Board were to accept Officer White's recommendation to impose a fine due to non compliance, how does that impact your encroachment discussions. Mr. Crabtree discussed the progress and improvements that have already been undertaken on this issue. He explained that he has applied and paid for a variance application because the shed is going to have to be moved to his client's property. Ms. White stated he may not need a variance, we are waiting for an updated survey of Mr. Stuart's property. She stated, putting the shed in the parking lot is a separate issue from what is before you tonight. Mr. Norman reiterated, why would it not be appropriate for this Board to go on record to say the property is non compliant. Mr. Crabtree said, because he cannot tell you that we are out of compliance at this point in time, which is what our effmis are discovering through our process. He stated there is a lot more at stake and they are not in a position right now where they can accept that, which is why they are requesting a continuance or stay on these issues. Further discussion continued. Ms. White stated the City's position is we just want it corrected, she has no problem giving them more time. She stated she has given him two extensions that he asked for, and when he asked for a third extension she said no, explaining it needs to go to the Board for the Board to decide what is a reasonable time. Chair de Luna asked for their best guess. Mr. Thomas said they understand the Board is not involved in the encroachment business, but their problem is they cannot solve the cooler issue until we solve the encroachment issue. He stated his best guess is that by the time of the next meeting in March, it will either be resolved, or they will be in the middle of a piece of litigation to resolve it. Chair de Luna stated if we extend it to the day before our March meeting, at that point there would be a fine thereafter. He stated if you incur the fine you may come back to the Board, but he would want a very detailed record of what you have done to that point and what the future plan is. He stated we would want records and evidence as to where you are and how much longer it should take with specifics. Mr. Thomas stated he could commit to give them that kind of detail at that time. Ms. White asked if they would like her to read her recommendation and they said yes. Staff recommends the Board find the property owner in violation and orders that compliance be achieved by removing all unpermitted structures and equipment, and remove unpermitted wood fencing by March 13, 2017, or a fine of $250.00 be imposed for the first day and $250.00 for every day thereafter the violation continues to exists. The propetiy owner is responsible for contacting the City Code Enforcement Officer and obtaining an inspection of compliance. Motion: The Board adopts the staff recommendation. Moved by Norman, Seconded by Sasser There was no fmiher discussion. The motion was approved unanimously. (This item was taken out of sequence.) CASEID NAME &ADDRESS VIOLATION 16-432 OSSI KLOTZ LLC IPMC Sec. 302.8 Motor Vehicle 1820 MAYPORTRD 1 Sec. 24-163 (c) Junked Abandoned Veh (co) Sec. 24-173 (b)( 1) Outside Storage ( comm) Sec. 12-1 (b )(3) Rubbish,filth Nuisance Minutes of the Code Enforcement Board on January 10, 2017 Page 7 of 12 Ms. White presented the case, read the violations and stated Mr. Fox is the property manager who has been working with her. She stated whoever the tenant is that moved in did not obtain a business tax receipt. She presented photos of the property noting they have a bunch of dismantled vehicles without tags, assorted junk, an old boat and auto patts. She stated this property is in a CG Zoning District which does not allow this kind of activity; automotive repair, dismantling vehicles, painting vehicles and outside storage of all these items shown in the photos are not permitted. Ms. White stated Mr. Fox is trying to get the items removed and the tenant also needs to move. She stated the tenant is operating a business that is not permitted in that district and never came to the City to ask for permission or a business tax receipt. Zachary Crabtree, stated he is here on behalf of Mr. Benny Ossi individually, stating he knows Mr. Ossi is listed as a title manager on Sunbiz.org under Ossi Klotz LLC. He said it is Mr. Ossi's opinion that he has nothing to do with this actual ownership entity, which is what he wanted me to mention to the Board for record purposes tonight. Mr. Crabtree stated he is not here to oppose anything, Mr. Ossi just wanted it on record that he has no dealings with this property any longer. Discussion ensued. Mr. Crabtree reiterated that he is not opposing anything, he is just stating for the record (from what he has been told) that Mr. Ossi has no type of ownership interest in this propetty. Ms. White stated John Fox is here, he works for Mr. Klotz as the property manager and would like to address the Board. John Fox, 4519 Country Club Road, representing Ossi Klotz LLC, stated at the end of November he began assisting and managing these commercial properties and he has been working with Officer White attempting to remedy the situation. The tenant that is occupying the building has overpromised and underperformed as far as removing his vehicles, though he is in the process of doing so. Mr. Fox explained that he went out there today with ASAP Towing and he now understands the process in which he can get these removed quickly without the tenant's compliance, however, he has been doing everything possible to give the tenant the chance to do it himself. Staff recommends the Board find the property owner in violation and orders that compliance be achieved by ceasing all business activity at this location, remove all unlicensed, dismantled vehicles and remove all automobile parts, junk and debris from the premises by February 6, 2017, or a fine of $250.00 be imposed for the first day and $250.00 for every day thereafter the violation continues to exists. The propetty owner is responsible for contacting the City Code Enforcement Officer and obtaining an inspection of compliance. Motion: The Board adopts the staff recommendation. Moved by Lombardi, Seconded by Norman Ms. Glasser stated, when we find the property owner in violation, we find Ossi Klotz LLC in violation and that includes anybody currently listed as an officer. She said she just wanted to respond to the statement made earlier on record that one of the owners claims to have nothing to do with ownership interest in this property. Ms. Sasser stated that should be easy for somebody to determine on Sunbiz.org. He remarked that we are ordering all business activity to cease and questioned, even if we remove the cars, is he (the tenant) in business. Mr. Fox said the tenant claims this is a hobby of his and he can't speak for him other than that. The motion was approved unanimously. CASEID NAME & ADDRESS VIOLATION C QUEST PROPERTIES, LLC Sec. 24-173(b )(1) Outside Storage (commercial) 36 W 61h ST Sec. 24-154(g) Outside Display Commercial Chapter 24 Zoning District Ms. White presented the case, reading the violations and stating the property is located at 400 Levy Road. She stated they are operating a business but never obtained a business tax receipt. She explained they were not cited for not having a business tax receipt, stating the main problem here is the storage of heavy equipment, trailers and vehicles. She presented photos of the propetty, stating the name of the business is Advanced Marine Minutes of the Code Enforcement Board on January 10, 2017 Page 8 of 12 16-390 Preservation (AMP) and they are in the same CG Zoning District that she distributed copies of to the Board earlier this evening. Chair de Luna asked if C Quest Properties, LLC was doing business as AMP. Ms. White stated C Quest Properties is the property owner and AMP is the tenant. Mr. Lombardi expressed confusion on exactly what a CG is, stating the description is in the neighborhood of shops, but these lots are very large with industrial buildings. Ms. White explained CG Zoning is supposed to be transitional, neighborhood shops and such, and this is clearly not the intent of this ordinance. Staff recommends the Board find the property owner in violation and orders that compliance be achieved by ceasing all business activity and all outside storage of construction materials, including vehicles, by February 7, 2017, or a fine of $250.00 be imposed for the first day and $250.00 for every day thereafter the violation continues to exists. The property owner is responsible for contacting the City Code Enforcement Officer and obtaining an inspection of compliance. Motion: The Board adopts the staff recommendation. Moved by Keith, Seconded by Sasser There was no further discussion. The motion was approved unanimously. 16-335 VALDA HECTOR Sec. 24-157 Fences, walls etc. Fence Maintenance 387 SKATERD Sec. 24-173(b )(1) Outside storage (resi) Ms. White presented the case, read the violations and presented photos ofthe property. She stated Ms. Hector has an excessive amount of items stored on her carport and front area, and has broken and missing pieces on her fence. Ms. White stated Ms. Hector is present and would like to address the Board, but she has not been sworn m. Chair de Luna invited Ms. Hector to the podium and was given the oath. Ms. Hector stated the reason her place has not been completely cleaned is because she fell ill about two or three years ago and it has been hard for her to do things. She stated her son has just moved from New York and he is going to help her put the place together once and for all. Chair de Luna asked how long she thought it would take to complete the work and she stated by the end of this month, January 2017. Ms. White stated they also need to either repair the fence or take it down. Ms. Hector stated the fence has a lifetime warranty and she has the missing pieces and can glue the pieces back. She stated she is also going to get a permit to get a new fence. Staff recommends the Board find the property owner in violation and orders that compliance be achieved by removal of all items stored in the yard and in carport/porch area and repair or remove the fencing in front by February 6, 2017 a fine of $100.00 be imposed for the first day and $100.00 for every day thereafter the violation continues to exists. The property owner is responsible for contacting the City Code Enforcement Officer and obtaining an inspection of compliance. Chair de Luna asked Ms. Hector if she understood the staffs recommendation and she replied yes. Ms. Glasser wanted to question Ms. Hector's son to ensure he has agreed to help with this work. Ms. Hector stated she had no concerns about him helping her. Ms. White added that her son doesn't have anything to do with this case, but Ms. Glasser wanted him involved to ask if he had agreed to help. Her son stated he was going to help, and he asked questions about removing or replacing the fence in order to come into compliance. Ms. White stated she can only require that they repair or remove it, she cannot require them to replace it. Chair de Luna asked the witness to state his name. The witness stated Hartson Hector, and Chair de Luna gave him the oath. Minutes of the Code Enforcement Board on January 10, 2017 Page 9 of 12 Motion: The Board adopts the staff recommendation. Moved by Sasser, Seconded by Hansen There was no fmther discussion. The motion was approved unanimously. CASEID NAME & ADDRESS VIOLATION 16-437 ROCK GARDEN ENTERPRISES, Sec. 24-173(b )(1) Outside Storage ( comm) INC IPMC Sec. 302.8 Motor Vehicle 248 LEVYRD Chapter 24 Zoning District Ms. White presented the case, stating the property owner is Rock Garden Enterprises, the Registered Agent is Charles Crabtree, and the property is being used by DBA RPC General Contractors. Ms. White read the violations and presented photos of the propetty showing a trailer and storage of construction materials. She stated this is zoned CG and contractors have to have a Use by Exception (UBE). She stated they are licensed so they probably obtained the UBE, however, they cannot store all these materials outside. Chair de Luna asked if there was anyone representing Rock Garden Enterprises or RPC General Contractors and Ms. White stated yes, they are both present. Daniel Rodriguez, President of RPC General Contractors and Robert Perrett, managing partner of Rock Garden Enterprises. Mr. Perrett stated they understand the violation. He explained the trailer was deemed unroadworthy and was sold by the rental company to them and they have used it for storage on the property. Mr. Perrett stated he was a prior owner of RPC and now Mr. Rodriguez is the owner and they lease from him. He stated they keep their property in great shape, but he understands Officer White's role in this and he intends to comply. Mr. Penett stated they would like to get a variance or an exception to keep the trailer for valuable storage. They would be willing to remove the landing gear and wheels and bring it to the ground. Ms. White stated they would need to take the wheels off and get a permit to keep it there as a permanent structure. Chair de Luna asked they understood the procedure to do that with the City, and Ms. White stated Mr. Rodriguez understands, as he is a contractor. Mr. Rodriguez affirmed that he understands the process and estimated a time frame of four to five weeks. Discussion ensued regarding the date to use for compliance in Ms. White's recommendation. Staff recommends the Board find the property owner in violation and orders that compliance be achieved by removing all outside storage and cease future outside storage of construction materials by March 13, 2017 or a fine of $100.00 be imposed for the first day and $100.00 for every day thereafter the violation continues to exists. The propetty owner is responsible for contacting the City Code Enforcement Officer and obtaining an inspection of compliance. Ms. White stated ifthey want to keep the trailer they will need to have a permit for it. Motion: The Board adopts the staff recommendation. Moved by Norman, Seconded by Lombardi There was no further discussion. The motion was approved unanimously. 16-397 HANDLER FAMILY Chapter 24 Zoning District PARTNERSHIP Sec. 24-157 Fences No Permit 763 ATLANTIC BLVD Sec. 6-16 Florida Building Code Minutes of the Code Enforcement Board on January 10, 2017 Page 10 of 12 Ms. White presented the case, stating this is the property adjacent to the Seafood Kitchen. She read the violations and stated Mr. Handler was sent a Notice of Violation (NOV) because he has encroachments that have been put upon him by the adjacent property owner. She stated she has spoken to Mr. Handler numerous times and he is actually the victim here. She stated none of this stuff was put there by his request, nor did he give petmission to the adjacent property owner to encroach onto his property. Ms. White stated she would like to recommend that we readdress this issue at the March meeting, and see what happens with the Seafood Kitchen. She stated she did not feel that he should be punished because of the acts of others. She explained she was bound to send him the NOV because he does have structures on his property that were not properly permitted. Motion: The Board moves to defer this case to the March 14,2017 Code Enforcement Board meeting. Moved by Glasser, Seconded by Keith The motion was approved unanimously. 16-420 SHARPE FAMILY Sec. 24-173 (b )(1) Outside storage (resi) INVESTMENTS, LTD IPMC 301.3 Vacant Structures and Land 374 SKATERD Ms. White presented the case, read the violations and stated the property was not being properly maintained. Staff recommends the Board find the property owner in violation for the time in violation and now in compliance. Motion: The Board adopts the staff recommendation. Moved by de Luna, Seconded by Sasser There was no further discussion. The motion was approved unanimously. 16-372 KEVIN LUNNEY Sec. 24-163 (b )(2) Heavy Vehicle Store 322 EAST COAST DR Ms. White presented the case, stating this property is a duplex and was originally cited for two boats on the property, but one was removed after he was cited. She presented photos of the property, explaining she posted the property with the Notice of Hearing and got his attention. Staff recommends the Board find the property owner in violation for the time 111 violation and now 111 compliance. Motion: The Board adopts the staff recommendation. Moved by Sasser, Seconded by Hansen There was no fmiher discussion. The motion was approved unanimously. 5. Miscellaneous Business Ms. Glasser asked if it would help for the Board to make a recommendation on the towing ordinance. Ms. White said if they see a Commissioner on the street it would be okay to mention that you think it is a good idea, but that is not something the Board would do. Minutes of the Code Enforcement Board on January 10, 2017 Page 11 of 12 Ms. Durden stated she could relay the desires of the Board to see that the towing ordinance is adopted . She stated she believes we will be bringing that for a first reading on February 13 , 2017. Ms. Durden stated the Commission gave direction to the staff at last night's meeting to move forward with preparing an ordinance for their review. Ms. Durden mentioned the City is going to have a showing of an Ethics Training video that is about four hours long. She said it is prepared by The Florida League of Cities and it covers public records , Sunshine Law, voting issues and ethical issues. She stated this is a video that has been prepared by the League for appointed and elected officials, as well as some key staff members who will be invited to attend. She explained they do not have a date yet, but she wanted to mention it so we will know it is coming . She stated it is a good video, very comprehensive and there will be times for taking breaks . She stated, once we have set a date, she would urge eve1yone on the Board to attend . Chair de Luna announced that he has been invited to a group meeting with regards to procedures for the Review Board . He explained that Commissioner Stinson has been charged with looking at procedures, how members are selected, the recruitment and retention process and so fmih. He stated this is going to go on for about a year and he asked the Board members to give it some thought and if they have any ideas regarding this subject matter to let him know at the end of our meetings . Mr. Norman wanted to commend Officer White for a thorough, professional presentation and Mr. Lombardi concurred. Adjournment Chair de Luna adjoumed the meeting at 8:21p.m. Minutes of the Code Enforcement Board on January 10, 2017 Page 12 of 12