03-18-1986 Regular Meeting• •
CITY OF CLERAIONT
MINUTES
CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD
March 18, 1986
The organizational meeting of the Code Enforcement Board was
called to order by City Attorney Leonard Baird, acting as Chair-
man, at 7:30 p.m. on March 18, 1986. Members in attendance were
Emma Higgins, Gloria Johnson, William McKinney, Russell Wagner,
Joe Wiebush and Martin Wright. Also attending were City Attorney
Leonard Baird, City Manager Wayne Saunders and Planning and
Zoning Technician Marilyn George. Absent was Marvin Styles.
Mr. Baird asked for nominations for Chairman. Mr. McKinney
declined to accept after being nominated by Mrs. Higgins. Mr.
Wagner was elected to the office by consensus.
Mr. Baird asked for nominations for Vice Chairman. Mrs. Johnson
was elected to the office by consensus.
MINUTES of the meeting held March 19, 1985 were approved as
presented.
HEARING NO. 86-001. City of Clermont vs. Andrew Morris, Sr.
Mr. Saunders explained, under oa
forming duplex in the R-1-A zone
and that any change in a nonconf
Use Permit (CUP). He went on to
granted a CUP in April 1983 for
already begun with neither a
January, 1984 it was noted that
the porch, again without permits
Official ordered him to cease
request by Mr. Morris for a CUP
The minutes of the Counci 1 meeti
show that Mr. Morris was told t
in the future, until the duplex
status. In December 1985 it w
enclosed said porch, with a wall
and windows above it, thereby vi
and ignoring the action of City
quest in April 1984. Two letter
regard to these violations.
th, that Mr. Morris has a noncon-
considered to be grandfathered,
orming use requires a Conditional
explain that Mr. Morris had been
a screened porch, which he had
building permit nor a CUP. In
Mr. Morris had begun to enclose
, and a letter from the Building
construction. In April 1984 a
to enclose the porch was denied.
ng at which the request was heard
hat there was to be no expansion
was converted to single-family
as observed that Mr. Morris had
to a height of about three feet
olating the conditions of his CUP
Council in denying the CUP re-
s have been sent to Mr. Morris in
Speaking under oath, Andrew Morris, Jr. explained that his father
was out of town because of a death in the family and could not
appear. He asked that the matter be tabled until his father
could attend. At Mr. Baird's request Mr. Morris described the
room as enclosed with windows and screens, but unfinished on the
inside, and claimed that it has been enclosed to protect his
father's exercise equipment. He further stated that the duplex
is used for the convenience of visitors, not for rental.
Mr. Baird stated that Andrew Morris, Jr. could not legally ask
for continuance, and that the history of the case seemed to
preclude continuance.
After a brief discussion, a motion was made by Mr. Wright,
seconded by Mrs. Higgins and carried by unanimous vote THAT MR.
MORRIS BE GIVEN THIRTY DAYS TO RETURN THE PORCH TO ITS SCREENED
CONDITION.
1
CITY OF CLERIIIONT
MINUTES
CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD
March 18, 1986
HEARING NO. 86-002. City of Clermont vs. Tony Lord.
Mr. Saunders explained that telephone calls from three different
neighbors had been received regarding the barking of Mr. Lord's
dogs. Section 4-21 (c) of the Clermont Code of Ordinances states
that it shall be unlawful for any person to allow an animal to
become a public nuisance. He also stated that the dogs are
unlicensed.
Mr. Lord did not appear. After a brief discussion a motion was
made by Mrs. Higgins, seconded by Mr. McKinney and passed by
unanimous vote THAT MR. LORD BE GIVEN THIRTY DAYS TO OBTAIN
LICENSES FOR THE DOGS. IF THERE ARE ADDITIONAL COMPLAINTS DURING
THAT 30 DAY PERIOD, MR. LORD WILL BE CALLED BEFORE THE BOARD AND
FINED.
At this point Mr. and Mrs. Lord appeared. Mrs. Robin Lord
stated, under oath, that she had obtained licenses for the dogs
in February, and that her dogs are in the house all night.
During the day they are in a fenced yard. She announced that
they had purchased property in the country and would be moving in
thirty days.
HEARING NO. 86-005. City of Clermont vs. Don Coxe, dba Chain O'
Lakes Auto Parts.
Mr. Saunders explained that the auto parts store had had a
sign which was nonconforming because of its size and because it
extends above the highest point of the building. (Ordinance No.
207-C, Article I, Section 26-50) The Sign Ordinance (Article
VII, Section 26-79) requires such signs to be brought into con-
formance if repair or replacement cost exceeds fifty percent of
the current value. Their sign had been replaced without a
permit, and there may be a problem with the size. Two letters
had brought promises to supply specifications for the new sign.
This had not been done. He recommended that the new sign be
brought into conformance.
Ken Norquist appeared with Mr. Coxe, and, under oath, stated that
the square footage of the new sign is equal to or less than that
of the original sign. He explained that a parapet wall will be
added to increase the square footage of the face of the building
so that the sign will be below the permitted maximum of fifteen
percent of the building face. He stated that the sign would be
brought into conformance within about two weeks. He then cited
several examples, supported with photographs, of other signs in
violation of the Sign Ordinance.
Mr. Saunders explained that other sign vioaltions are being
investigated and will be brought before the Code Enforcement
Board if necessary.
A motion was made by Mr. Wagner, seconded by Mr. Wiebush and
unanimously approved THAT MR. COXE BE GIVEN THIRTY DAYS TO BRING
THE SIGN INTO CONFORMANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SIGN
ORDINANCE.
2
•
CITY OF CLERA/ONT
MINUTES
CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD
March 18, 1986
•
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at
8:35 p.m.
Russell Wagner, Chairman
ATTEST:
Marilyn G. George, P & Z Technician
3