Loading...
07-15-2008 Regular MeetingCITY OF CLERMONT MINUTES CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD JULY 15, 2008 The regular meeting of the Code Enforcement Board was called to order on Tuesday, July 15, 2008 at 7:00 p.m. Members attending were James Purvis, Chairman, Tim Murry, A.D. Vandemark, Les Booker, James Davern, and Alfred Mannella. Also attending were Betty McMinamen and Suzanne O'Shea, Code Enforcement Officers, Yvette Brown, City Attorney, Valerie Fuchs, Code Enforcement Board Attorney, Jim Hitt, Planning Director and Rae Chidlow, Code Enforcement Clerk. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited. Code Enforcement Chairman Jim Purvis read the Opening Remarks. The minutes from the Code Enforcement Board Meeting of June 17, 2008 were approved as written. Code Enforcement Officers Betty McMinamen and Suzanne O'Shea, along with any of the public who may testify, were sworn in. Jim Purvis gave the floor to Code Enforcement Staff and Attorney. City Attorney Yvette Brown stated that Case No. 08-420 is being withdrawn. NEW BUSINESS CASE N0.08-419 Binmatie Rooplall 163 Pitt Street Clermont, FL 34711 LOCATION OF VIOLATION: 163 Pitt Street, Clermont, FL 34711 VIOLATION: Chapter 118, Section 118-39 (a)(b); Traffic Visibility Triangle at Intersection City Attorney Yvette Brown introduced the case. Code Enforcement Officer Suzanne O'Shea exhibited pictures that are a true and accurate depiction of the condition of the property on the date taken and read the violation summary as follows: You are hereby notified that you are in violation of the referenced chapter of the City of Clermont Code of Ordinances due to the hedges in front of your residence that are currently extending onto Prince Edward Ave. Compliance of this violation will be when the above referenced hedges have been trimmed at least 3 feet from the roadway. Chairman Purvis asked if there was a sidewalk at this location. Ms. O'Shea stated there was no sidewalk. Chairman Purvis asked what the setback was for this property or what the right-of--way is for that street. CITY OF CLERMONT MINUTES CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD JULY 15, 2008 Mr. Hitt stated that the road right-of--way is probably 60 feet, so the hedge might actually be in the right-of--way. Board member Booker stated that if you make them cut it back 3 feet, then in effect, they will have to cut it completely down. Mr. Hitt stated that realistically the City could probably go in and remove the hedges because it is in the City's road right-of--way. He stated that typically the property owner is responsible for the maintenance of the soil area between the property and the pavement. Board member Booker asked if compliance would mean removing the whole hedge. Ms. O'Shea stated that 3 feet would eliminate almost the whole hedge. Binmatie Rooplall, 163 Pitt Street, stated that when she received the letter she didn't understand that she had to remove the hedge so she had someone trim the hedge from the roadway. She stated that she bought the house 16 years ago with the hedge and she has never had a problem with the City. She stated that she can't afford to have the hedge removed, but if the City wants to remove the hedge, she does not have a problem with the removal. John Rooplall, Ms. Rooplall's son, stated that they are willing to comply. Board member Booker stated that trimming the hedge is not the answer because it will just grow back up. Chairman Purvis stated that he finds it difficult that now the hedge is an issue after 16 years. He asked Staff how they could address this issue in a fair manner. City Attorney Yvette Brown stated that the Respondent has agreed to allow the City to come onto the property to remove the hedges. Chairman Purvis asked if the City was willing to do that. Ms. Brown stated that being there is an agreement between staff and the respondent, they will withdraw the case. CASE NO. OS-420 Mattie Lee Forehand c/o Ray Childs 482 Chestnut Street Clermont, FL 34711 LOCATION OF VIOLATION: 482 Chestnut St., Clermont, FL 34711 VIOLATION: Chapter 34, Section 34-61 (4); Dilapidated Building Case was withdrawn. 2 CITY OF CLERMONT MINUTES CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD JULY 15, 2008 CASE N0.08-421 Daisy Clark Estate c/o Lucille Deramus 769 E. Montrose Street (also known as 765) Clermont, FL 34711 LOCATION OF VIOLATION: 769 E. Montrose Street (also known as 765), Clermont, FL 34711 VIOLATION: Chapter 14, Section 14-76 (3); Minimum Housing Standards City Attorney Yvette Brown introduced the case and stated that the Respondent was not present. Code Enforcement Officer Suzanne O'Shea exhibited pictures that are a true and accurate depiction of the condition of the property on the date taken and read the violation summary as follows: You are hereby notified that you are in violation of the referenced chapter of the City of Clermont Code of Ordinances due to the following: There is no water or electric service to the residence. Windows to the exterior of the residence are sealed shut with plywood. Windows in the front of the house are not properly secured and sealed. Exterior door is not equipped with properly installed hardware. There are no screens in front windows. Debris, garbage, cans, and miscellaneous items are scattered around property. Compliance of this violation will be when the following occurs: Electric and water service is restored and maintained; windows are properly maintained, installed, and weatherproofed as required; doors are in sound working condition with proper hardware as required; screens are installed in windows as required; garbage, cans, buckets, vegetative debris, etc is removed from the property. Chairman Purvis stated that it sounds like there is a family dispute where one of the family members is a squatter at this point. He asked why has there not been police action to remove him as a trespasser. City Attorney Yvette Brown stated that technically he is not a trespasser if he is family and a legal descendent of the deceased. She stated that it will end up being a civil action because he has a life estate interest in the property, which means he has equal rights to be there like anyone else would be in a family situation. She stated that the police are being advised that this is a civil action, he shows the will and says he has the right to be there and the police walk away. Board member Booker stated if this property is in dispute over ownership, then who is going to be directed to take action on the code issues. Code Enforcement Suzanne O'Shea stated that she spoke to ViAndrea Lowman, who is the daughter in law of Lucille Deramus, executor of the estate. She stated that Ms. Lowman has taken on similar issues with the City for the family. She stated that she has been the legal representative of these estates for the family. She stated that Ms. Cowman's concern is that she does not want to spend $20,000 on the property to bring it into compliance if Mr. Clark is going to be there to tear it up. She stated that being the City can't trespass him and they believe he is living there even though he has been told he can't, the best thing to do is to secure the property. 3 CITY OF CLERMONT MINUTES CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD JULY 15, 2008 She stated that Ms. Lowman does want to take full responsibility for bringing this property into compliance. Board member Davern asked what the staff's recommendation is for this property. Ms. O'Shea stated that it is to have the property secured. She stated the windows have been boarded up for a while. She stated the only entrance is the front door and window that both need to be secured within 10 days or a fine of $250 a day should be assessed. She stated that in addition to that, the Respondent should have 90 days to bring the property in full compliance. She stated there are not that many issues because it has had a new roof in the past few years so the property is not falling down. Chairman Purvis asked if the building could be secured enough to keep people out. Ms. O'Shea stated that she hopes so, but does not know what else to do to keep people from coming in and out of the house. Board member Davern asked that assuming it can be secured, can it also be posted that this is not a livable place? Code Enforcement O'Shea stated that she and the building official went out on two separate occasions and posted the property. She stated that after posting it the first time, the sign was removed, so she reported it, and the sign still remains there now. Board member Murry asked that if the property has been posted and you catch him in the building, can he not be arrested? City Attorney Yvette Brown stated that it is posted to unsafe abatement which is all the staff can do. Code Attorney Valerie Fuchs stated that posting it will give them more power to control the situation, and gives them more power to trespass the people on the property. A.D. Yandemark made a motion to find the Respondent in violation of the cited City code and be med at a rate of $250. DO per day or everv day if the property is not boarded and completely secured by July 25, 2008 and uather ifthe property is not brou h~ t into full compliance b~eptember 1 S, 2008 that a fine of $250.00 per day be implemented. Chairman Purvis asked that this be a two part motion rather than putting them into one motion. A.D. Yandemark made a motion to find the Respondent in violation of the cited Cit~code and be fined at a rate o X250.00 per day for everv day if the property is not boarded and completely secured by July 25, 2008. A.D. Vandemark made a motion to fine the Respondent at a rate of $250.00 per dad for every day if the nronerty is not brought into full compliance by September 1 S. 2008. Chairman Purvis asked if they can implement two $250.00 a day fines on this case. 4 CITY OF CLERMONT MINUTES CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD JULY 15, 2008 Code Attorney Valerie Fuchs stated that the maximum fine for a violation is $250.00. She stated that it sounds like two different fines. Ms. O'Shea stated that the intent was $250 a day until the property was secured, unless secured within 10 days. A D Vandemark made a motion to frnd the Respondent in violation of the cited City code and be med at a rate o $250 00 per day for ever~da,~if the property is not boarded and completely secured by July 25 2008; seconded by Murry. A D Vandemark rescinded first motion and amended the motion to find the Respondent in violation o the cited City code and be fined at a rate of $125.00 per day or every da~if the property is not boarded and completely secured by July 25 2008 • seconded by Tim Murry. The vote was unanimous in favor of • rnding the Re~ondent in violation and in favor of the time period and the amount of the fine. A D Vandemark made a motion tome the Respondent at a rate of $125.00 per day or every day i the propert~is not brow hg t into 11 compliance by September IS, 2008; seconded by Alfred Mannella. The vote was unanimous in favor of the time period and the .amount of the fine. CASE N0.08-422 Floyd Forbes 1020 W. Highway 50 Clermont, FL 34711 LOCATION OF VIOLATION: 1020 W. Highway 50, Clermont, FL 34711 VIOLATION: Chapter 34, Section 34-61 (1); Unlawful Maintenance of Nuisances City Attorney Yvette Brown introduced the case. Code Enforcement Officer Suzanne O'Shea exhibited pictures that are a true and accurate depiction of the condition of the property on the date taken and read the violation summary as follows: You are hereby notified that you are in violation of the referenced chapter of the City of Clermont Code of Ordinances due to the accumulation of high grass and weeds on the property. Compliance of this violation will be when the premises have been returned to a condition met with custom and usual maintenance, clean of all dead, dying, and/or excess vegetation, uniformly trimmed and mowed. Floyd Forbes, 1358 Legendary Blvd., stated that what Ms. O'Shea stated is correct. He stated that he was not receiving the mail, so he did not receive it until the hand delivered at his home address. He stated that the weeds that are still left are the weeds growing up the cable that goes to the pole and on the sands that were removed to place the footings in. He stated they purchased the property a year ago and it is going through engineering. He stated that the bank has put conditions on them because of the economy right now so he is not sure if they are going to start construction right away. He stated that they mow every quarter. He stated that the bricks that are on the property they do not want to remove because it will become part of the construction. 5 CITY OF CLERMONT MINUTES CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD JULY 15, 2008 Chairman Purvis stated the property is not in full compliance. He stated that if you can't mow the weeds down then spray it with weed killer or get a weed eater. James Davern made a motion tofind the Respondent in violation of the cited City code and be fined at a rate of $100 00 per day, or every_day in violation starting August 19 2008; seconded by Tim Murry. The vote was unanimous in~avor o~ndin~the Respondent in violation and in favor o the time period and the amount of the one. OTHER BUSINESS CASE N0.08-407 Church of Our Lord Jesus Christ of the Apostolic Faith, Inc. 792 E. Montrose Street Clermont, FL 34711 LOCATION OF VIOLATION: 792 E. Montrose St., Clermont, FL 34711 VIOLATION: Chapter 14, Section 14-76 (12); Unsafe Building due to Lack of Maintenance City Attorney Yvette Brown introduced the case. Darryl Forehand, 555 Pitt St., stated that he met with Planning and Zoning who explained to him that it would take at least 3 months to go through the process. He stated that he is going to have to have his civil engineering and architects redone. He stated that he spoke to Building Official Mark Grenier, who he asked if they could put a new roof on the building. He stated that he was told he could not put a roof on and that he had to only secure the building at this time. He stated that he is going through the process and he understands the City's responsibility to keep properties in compliance and they will have to accept whatever is necessary. Board member Davern asked if the building has been made safe and secure. Mr. Forehand stated that the building has been secured and the property is being maintained. Board member Davern asked if the tarps were going to be replaced. Mr. Forehand stated that the tarps have been purchased and should be up by Saturday. Chairman Purvis stated that he hasn't been able to keep tarps on the buildings during the dry season. He asked who would be responsible for any damage if a tarp is to blow off during hurricane season. Board member Murry asked what the tarps are protecting. He stated that he knows the roof is gone and the inside has to be damaged. Mr. Forehand stated that the tarps are nothing more than dressing. Board member Davern stated that maybe it is just best to remove the tarps. 6 CITY OF CLERMONT MINUTES CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD JULY 15, 2008 Board member Murry stated that if you are not protecting anything then why put the tarps up Mr. Hitt explained to the Board what process Mr. Forehand was going to have to go through and the time line for that process. City Attorney Yvette Brown stated that there is no reason why they can't move forward with the lien process and if the Board wants an update in a couple of months that is fine, but they need to go ahead and impose the lien. She stated once the property is brought into compliance then they can come back and ask for a reduction or forgiveness. James Davern made a motion to find the Respondent in continuance of the cited violation and to move forward with the lien process and continue the $100 Offer day frne- seconded by Tim Murry The vote was unanimous in moving ~rward with the lien process. Written update of Lien Status Report was presented to Code Enforcement Board There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. ~-, Purvis, Chairman Attes . Rae Chidlow, Code Enforcement Clerk 7