Loading...
04-19-2005 Regular MeetingCITY OF CLERMONT MINUTES CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD Apri119, 2005 The regular meeting of the Code Enforcement Board was called to order on Tuesday, April 19, 2005 at 7:00 p.m. Members attending were Joe Janusiak, Terry Felder, Jim Purvis, A.D. VanDeMark, Stephen Berlinsky and Bill Banzhaf. Also attending were Betty McMinamen, Code Enforcement Officer, Jason Bulman, Animal Control Officer, James Hitt, Planning Director, Yvette Brown, City Attorney and Leslie Schwartz, Code Enforcement Clerk. Call to Order. The Pledge of AI{egiance was recited. Our new Planning Director, Jim Hitt introduced himself to the Code Enforcement Board members. The minutes from the Code Enforcement Board meeting of March 15, 2005 were approved as written. Chairman, Stephen Berlinsky gave the floor to Code Enforcement Officer Betty McMinamen. All members in the audience who wished to speak at this Code Enforcement Hearing were collectively sworn in. NEW BUSINESS CASE NO. 05-194 Joseph R. & Pamela S. Bonjorn 380 W. Lakeshore Drive Clermont, FL 34711 LOCATION OF VIOLATION: 380 W. Lakeshore Drive, Clermont, FL 34711 VIOLATION: City of Clermont Code of Ordinances No. 318-C, Chapter 10, Section 10- 26. Livestock Prohibited. Animal Control Officer, Jason Bulman presented the case he had compiled regarding roosters and chickens seen on the Bonjorn property located at 380 W. Lakeshore Drive. Mr. Bulman stated that on numerous occasions he had personally seen the chickens on their property but also stated he hadn't seen them recently. • • CITY OF CLERMONT MINUTES CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD Apri119, 2005 Attorney Baird argued that the livestock did not belong to the Bonjorns. Also present to testify were Robin and Pam Bonjorn, who denied ownership but admitted that the livestock have been on their property on numerous occasions. There were 2 witnesses/neighbors who provided testimony that they had seen the livestock on the Bonjorns property on numerous occasions. After extensive discussion by the Board, with assistance from the City Attorney for clarification of re-occurring issues, the Board believes the Respondents are now in compliance (since all testimony indicates livestock have not been seen in a couple of weeks); however, there was sufficient evidence to indicate that the Respondents were in violation on numerous occasions in the past. Therefore, based on the evidence: The Board finds the Respondents in violation of Clermont code of Ordinances number 318, Chapter 10, Section.10-26. The Board moves that this violation is a reoccurring violation. The Board moves that the Respondents correct the violation on or before April 19, 2005. The Respondents are to refrain from repeating the violation If the Respondents do not comply with this order, a fine of $10.00 oer day will be imposed fir date the violation is repeated until the date that it is corrected as observed and • documented by the Animal Control Officer CASE NO. 05-193 Anthony C. Roberts 1600 Second Street Clermont, FL 34711 LOCATION OF VIOLATION: 1600 Second Street, Clermont, FL 34711. VIOLATION: City of Clermont Code of Ordinances No. 232-C, Chapter 34, Section 34- 61. Unlawful Maintenance of Nuisances. Ms. McMinamen presented the Board with pictures taken on April 18, 2005 showing that the property is still not in compliance. Ms. McMinamen read the violation into the record. Ms. McMinamen also stated that a lot of work had been done to clean up the property, but that there was still a lot of work to be done before the property would be in compliance. Ms. McMinamen asked the Board to find the Respondents guilty. Mr. and Mrs. Peter Roberts, the property owner's brother and sister-in-law were at the hearing. They were also represented by Mr. Baird, their attorney. Mr. Baird admitted his clients were guilty of the violation and stated that Mr. and Mrs. Roberts were remodeling the house. Mr. Baird requested an extension of 60 • 2 • CITY OF CLERMONT MINUTES CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD Apri119, 2005 days to bring the property into compliance. Jim Purvis asked Mr. & Mrs. Roberts if 90 days would be better. They agreed it would. Bill Banzhaf made a motion to find the Respondent in violation of the cited City Code. A. D. VanDeMark seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous in favor of the motion. Jim Purvis made a motion to fine Respondent at the rate of $1 D.00 per day if there is no compliance by July 19 2005 A D VanDeMark seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous in favor of the time limit and the amount of the fine. OLD BUSINESS CASE NO. 05-175 Alice J. Hinton, et a{ 13404 Debbie Lane Clermont, FL 34711 • LOCATION OF VIOLATION: 746 E. Broome Street, Clermont, FL 34711. VIOLATION: City of Clermont Code of Ordinances No. 249-C, Chapter 14, Section 14- 76 (12). Unsafe Bui{ding to Unfinished Renovations. Gase not heard. CASE NO. 05-189 Sharon D. Price 10362 Mississippi Avenue Los Angeles, CA 90025 LOCATION OF VIOLATION: 45-47-49 Sunnyside Drive, Clermont, FL 34711. VIOLATION: City of Clermont Code of Ordinances No. 281-C, Chapter 122, Section 122-344 (a). Building Permit Required. • 3 • CITY OF CLERMONT MINUTES CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD April 19, 2005 Ms McMinamen presented the Board with documents from Ms. Price's contractor, Mr. George Miller showing that all of the proper paperwork has been filed with Lake County and the permits still have not been issued. Ms. McMinamen asked for an extension of time since all the permits have been applied for. Ms. Price flew in from California to attend this hearing and state her case to the Board. Jim Purvis made a motion to find the Respondent in violation of the cited City Code and .give the Respondent 60 days to comply to a date certain of June 21. 2005. Joe Janusiak seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous in favor of the motion. OTHER BUSINESS CASE NO. 05-181 Julius H. Thomas, Jr. 808 W. Gordon Street • Valdosta, GA 31601 LOCATION OF VIOLATION: Lot 1, Blk. O. Bloxam Avenue, Clermont, FL 34711. VIOLATION: City of Clermont Code of Ordinances No. 232-C, Chapter 34, Section 34- 61. Unlawful Maintenance of Nuisances. Ms McMinamen stated that in this case the Respondent is asking for relief. Karen Recinda represented the Respondent and the new owners have escrowed money for prior liens on the property and paid any and all taxes due on the property already. All this was done prior to today's closing. Ms. Recinda stated that she is very serious about getting this property into compliance. Ms. McMinamen stated that in this particular case no lien has been filed and the Board can rescind the fine if it wishes to do so. Ms. McMinamen stated that the Ms. Recinda's clients have proven good faith in this case. Jim Purvis made a motion that the entire fine be rescinded in the amount of $425.00. Bill Banzhaf seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous in favor of the motion. CASE NO. 04-154 Daisy Clark 561 Minneola Avenue Clermont, FL 34711 • 4 • CITY OF CLERMONT MINUTES CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD Apri119, 2005 LOCATION OF VIOLATION: 561 Minneola Avenue, Clermont, FL 34711. VIOLATION: City of Clermont Code of Ordinances No. 232-C, Chapter 34, Section 34- 61. Unlawful Maintenance of Nuisances. Ms. McMinamen presented the Board with pictures taken on April 18, 2005 showing that the property is again not in compliance. Ms. Lucille Duramus represented the Respondent. Ms. McMinamen stated, at this point, she could not recommend relief of this lien or the fine attached to it based on her observation of the property on Monday April 18, 2005. Ms. McMinamen stated that based on the pictures she will show the Board, the violations are starting again and the case will probably be re-instated. Ms. Duramus is asking for relief of the lien fine imposed. Ms. McMinamen stated that the amount of the lien is $276.00. Expenses include 6 mailings for a cost of $28.74 and 21 pictures at a cost of $7.77. Ms. Duramus's mother is Daisy Clark. Ms. Duramus stated that she thought the property was in compliance. She also stated that her mother is in the hospital presently, therefore, she hasn't the time to do anything about to the property. Ms. Duramus stated that this property is a rental. Ms. Duramus says that she • has to pay her son to clean up the property. Ms. Duramus stated that she told the renters they need to keep the property clean. The Code Enforcement Officer agreed to regularly inspect the property with the hope that forgiveness of the lien can be recommended at the next Code Enforcement Board hearing. Jim Purvis made a motion to continue the hearino until a date certain of May 77 2005. Joe Janusiak seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous in favor of the motion. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. ~ 'ti Stephe erlinsky, Chairman Jo~i~is/Code En~dreement Clerk • ~