Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-27-2019 MinutesSEBASTIAN POLICE DEPARTMENT 1201 Main Street, Sebastian, Florida 32958 Code Enforcement Division CITY OF SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA MINUTES SPECIAL MAGISTRATE CODE ENFORCEMENT HEARING AUGUST 27, 2019 1. The Hearing was called to order at 3:05 p.m. by Special Magistrate Kelley H. Armitage. 2. Present: Special Magistrate Kelley H. Armitage, City Attorney James Stokes, Wayne Eseltine, Director of Sebastian Building Department, Dorri Bosworth, Planner, Administrative Assistant Janickie Smith, Officer Richard lachini, City of Sebastian Code Enforcement, Officer Curtis Bloomfield, City of Sebastian Code Enforcement, and Janet Graham, Technical Writer. 3. Ms. Smith swore in staff and all persons who would be speaking. Mr. Stokes requested that the first item on the agenda, under two initial hearings numbered CE -19-023032 and CE -19-023033, which is Health Systems of Indian River County, be removed from the docket. Health Systems has been working with the City's Code Enforcement officers to remedy the situation. If it is necessary to come back before this Magistrate on the matter, it will be noticed for a future date. So ordered by Magistrate Armitage. 4. Initial Hearing of Code Violation: Magistrate Armitage called on Mr. Stokes to present the first case. Case No.: CE -19-022167 and 19-022175 HAROLD L. BROOKS, JR. 1055 SEBASTIAN BOULEVARD Sec. 54-3-11.2 Soil Erosion and Sedimentation Control and Sec. 66-3 Illustrative Enumeration Mr. Stokes described the violations in question, which is accumulation of trash, litter and debris, and the other is soil erosion. Mr. Stokes called on Officer Bloomfield to present the City's case pertaining to Section 66-3 of the Code, which is the accumulation of trash, litter and debris. PAGE 2 Officer Curtis Bloomfield identified himself and his position with the City of Sebastian. He presented photographs on projection screens of the property in question and the condition of that property. He stated on June 13, 2019 he visited this property based on a complaint that the owner had junk and debris throughout the property. He did find junk and debris, and he cited the property with Case No. 19-022167. He presented some photographs which were viewed on the screens showing the debris. He stated that the photographs had been taken the morning of this hearing. Mr. Stokes interjected that the photos are all in Laserfiche and are identified as being part of the file on this case. Officer Bloomfield stated that while he was at the property this morning, Mr. Brooks showed up at the property and told Officer Bloomfield that he would not be able to be at this hearing but would send his representatives. Mr. Stokes then asked for Officer Bloomfield to present the City's second case, which is pertaining to soil erosion. Officer Bloomfield described that on June 13, 2019 the property was cited for soil erosion, which is 54-3-11.2. The owner had begun to clear the lot, and the lot has been in the same condition for over a year. The permits that were obtained have expired. He presented photographs of the property which were taken the morning of this hearing. Magistrate Armitage inquired how the City wishes to proceed. Mr. Stokes asked for Ms. Bosworth to testify as to some of the issues, as this is part of a subdivision, and this property is in violation of the plat, which also needs to be addressed. (MS. BOSWORTH WAS DULY SWORN.) Ms. Bosworth identified herself and her position with the City Planning Department. She stated this project was actually started four years ago. In October 2015 the property owner received a preliminary plat approval from the City Council. Per the City's Code, preliminary plats are good for 18 months before there needs to be some subdivision construction started and to have the final plat. The property owner's engineer passed away in the process of obtaining the preliminary plat. He did acquire another engineer to complete the construction drawings. The land -clearing permit was issued in November of 2017. The City's Code requires it to be completed within 18 months. So it has been beyond the 18 months. At that point the preliminary plat becomes null and void. The City asks that the property owner finish the subdivision process. It was necessary for this PAGE 3 property to be cleared without a site plan. The property owner went through a one -lot commercial subdivision process to be able to clear the property. The construction of the subdivision needs to be completed. There also needs to have a civil engineer certification letter and an as -built survey. The property owner then needs to put together a final plat for the one -lot subdivision which will be recorded. The City requests consideration for a timeline for all the above matters to be completed. Ms. Bosworth stated for the last two years the condition of the property has been destabilized, there are weeds, the silt fence has been down. The City has gotten quite a few calls from the neighboring residents concerning this property. Magistrate Armitage asked for anyone else wishing to speak on the matter. (SAMUEL BUTLER WAS DULY SWORN.) Mr. Butler identified himself as the builder on this project. He appeared after the hearing had started. Mr. Stokes reviewed the matters that that were discussed prior to Mr. Butler's appearance. He further asked Mr. Butler to set forth the property owner's intentions as far as clearing the trash and debris and getting the property to where it needs to be in order to comply with the plat on that property. Mr. Butler gave reasons why he is behind on the job. He stated that presently they are at the phase where his portion of the work can be done in 30 to 45 days. Mr. Butler stated Dr. Brooks has been pushing to get it done, and Mr. Butler accepted the responsibility for the project not being completed. Ms. Bosworth stated there have been quite a few delays on this property. It has been land cleared for two years. She stated the City would like to see the work that Mr. Butler is responsible for and the final plat recorded in 60 days. Magistrate Armitage inquired of Mr. Butler whether he believes the work can be completed in 60 days. Mr. Butler said he does. Ms. Bosworth reiterated the matters that have to be addressed in order to bring the property into compliance, and Mr. Butler stated he can fully comply within 30-45 days. Mr. Stokes stated it would be acceptable to the City to give 30 days to clear the trash and debris and deal with the soil erosion, and 60 days to get the final plat approval from the City. The City would then ask for a $100.00 fine per day if the deadlines are not met. PAGE 4 Magistrate Armitage called on any members of the public who wished to speak on the matter. Elizabeth Collia, 1430 Tradewinds Way, stated she and her husband have been residents in Sebastian for several years. It has been over a year since Dr. Brooks began his effort to clear the lot on CR 512. She cited the noise from the equipment on the site. Presently, the lot is covered with layers of dirt, a lifeless pond which is no longer hooked up to the drainage system in Sebastian Lakes, increased traffic noise, and the property serves as a dumping ground. This has become a safety hazard. Her community has been described as "the one next to the dump on 512." Dr. Brooks needs to fulfill his permit requirements and finish the site, and she and her neighbors look to the City of Sebastian to ensure that this is done. She does not believe that 30 days is going to be sufficient. Ms. Collia appreciates what has been said. She mentioned that there have been homes for sale in that neighborhood, and when prospective buyers see the situation with this property, they have canceled the meetings. Jean DeBlasio, 1447 Tradewinds Way. She and her husband have lived in Sebastian Lakes for eight years. Her home is right behind the pond on this property. She basically agrees with what Ms. Collia said. She does not feel that Mr. Brooks cares about the situation. She does not think that the necessary work will be done in 30 days. She is very disappointed with the situation, and she thinks Dr. Brooks needs to have some pressure applied. Samuel Butler stated that Dr. Brooks definitely wants to have it finished. He is confident that in 45 days everything will be remedied, and everyone will be happy. Magistrate Armitage asked for City input. Mr. Stokes said, based upon Mr. Butler's statement, he thinks it can be wrapped up and would like to stay with the plan of 30 days for the removal of the debris and to address the soil erosion, and 60 days for the final plat approval or $100.00 -a -day fine beginning on the 61 st day and administrative fees of $150.00 to cover the cost of Code Enforcement and Community Development. Magistrate Armitage inquired of the neighbors if they have been able to contact the property owner regarding their concerns and asked if they have the contact information for the property owner. They said they do. He advised Mr. Butler to do a better job of policing the area and cleaning up debris on an ongoing basis. Mr. Stokes will prepare the order and get it to the Magistrate for his signature. PAGE 5 Magistrate Armitage clarified that the property owner has 30 days to clear the lot and 60 days to finish the project. Mr. Butler inquired when he could get a copy of the order. Mr. Stokes said it would be ready later in the week. Case No.: B18-1021 ON THE INTRACOASTAL LLC/THE CRAB STOP 1550 INDIAN RIVER DRIVE Sec. 26-34.08(f) (6) Unsafe Structure Mr. Stokes read the item into the record. Mr. Stokes called upon Wayne Eseltine, Director of the Sebastian Building Department, to present the case for the City. Mr. Eseltine identified himself and his position with the City. He reviewed the history of the case involving this property. On November 28, 2018, the City had issued a stop work order for doing work without permits for violation of the Florida Building Code and the City Code of Ordinances. It included an outdoorwalk-in cooler, a shed, fence, plumbing to an outdoor sink, an electrical line illegally tapped into an AC circuit that feeds a stackable washer and dryer that was outdoors, decking over a water -retention area to provide additional seating, and additionally a Code Enforcement violation was later written on July 9, 2019 for a roofed -over deck area. The original notice gave them 15 days to remove the unpermitted work. Mr. Buckner is the proprietor for Crab Stop. He came in and spoke to the Building Department and Community Development a number of times in January, while bringing the property into compliance, removing the unpermitted work, relocating the walk-in cooler, and obtaining necessary permits. Some time went by, as it takes time to put together site plans. On May 17, 2019 Mr. Buckner had submitted and applied for a site plan modification and submitted a site plan, but the cooler wasn't really in place anywhere near where it had previously been discussed. Another plan was submitted later on in July at the same time as Mr. Eseltine sent out a letter, which was a final notice of noncompliance, which was sent to the owner on July 9, 2019. This letter basically stated the facts in the case and demanded valid permits be obtained and to remove all unpermitted items immediately, and failure to comply would result in a special magistrate case in August. PAGE 6 The City also received numerous phone calls and a formal letter from the neighboring property at Oyster Pointe regarding the encroachment of the cooler on their property and the unsightly conditions that their guests are exposed to when they go to the beach there. So those are basically the facts behind it. To date, they don't really have an approved site plan that shows this walk-in cooler. Some of those that were mentioned previously were removed. The items that remained on the property are the cooler and the roof over the deck area, and the decking over the water -retention area. None of those items have been approved, plus the plumbing to the outdoor sink they put in that has never gotten a plumbing permit. They did remove the shed, they removed the fence and did remove the outdoor washer and dryer and corrected the electrical violation associated with that. Mr. Eseltine stated the parties are here today to see if they can get this issue resolved. Magistrate Armitage called on representatives of The Crab Stop to present their case. Todd Smith, the engineer representing The Crab Stop, stated he is not in dispute of anything that Mr. Eseltine said. It has been an interim process. He wanted the Magistrate to be aware that they have made every effort to be diligent in responding to City comments. They submitted a site plan on May 16. It took almost two months to get comments from the City, which they received on July 10. They responded to those comments within seven days. A resubmittal was made on July 17. Another five weeks went by to August 25 to get another set of comments and the City's review. They made a resubmittal this morning before this hearing in response to that. He asked for time to resolve the remaining issues -- the roof over the decking area was replaced, which does need to be permitted after the fact. The cooler issue -- a building permit needs to be applied for tiedowns. They have not applied for a building permit for the cooler yet until the site plan is approved for it. The shape of the cooler is being modified to conform to the comments and issues that have been raised through the site plan review. They have every intention of working with City staff to bring this to a successful conclusion, receive permits after the fact, and get the site plan approved. Magistrate Armitage asked for comments from the City staff. Mr. Eseltine placed a site plan on the projector. He described what that site plan shows. He pointed out where the cooler is proposed to be placed. There are issues with trying to place the cooler where it is proposed. It doesn't meet the setback requirements. There is a new site plan which he saw this morning for the first time. He questions whether that cooler can be placed where it is shown on that plan. He also reviewed the items regarding the deck that still have to be addressed. There is also an outdoor sink that never had a permit. Those are the items that need to be rectified. 9_TC]= Magistrate Armitage asked Mr. Eseltine what a reasonable timeline for would be getting the issues resolved. Mr. Eseltine stated November 1st has been suggested. The City would like by that time to have the permits not only issued but completed and closed -- all the inspections done -- everything by November 1 st. The cooler is the biggest problem. Mr. Smith stated that according to the plan they submitted just before this hearing, they believe the modification to the cooler that has been provided will satisfy the Planning Department's comments. It will meet the required setback. The door that was mentioned swings inward, not outward, so they should have the ADA clearance that is required. They have some after -the -fact permits which they will get. He would like the Planning Department to review the new plan before his client applies for any building permits. Ms. Bosworth clarified the timeline that was entered into the record by Mr. Smith. He is correct that since May there have been some holdups in the Zoning Department. But it was back in November that Mr. Eseltine noticed that there were some unpermitted structures and unapproved seating areas. City staff had meetings with Mr. Buckner, the restauranteur, in January letting him know what would be needed to correct the problems. It was in the middle of the winter season, a very busy season. So there was some leeway with that. The first site plan that came in showing the modifications was not received until May. So there were seven months of timeline that there was no activity on some of the violations that had been noted to Mr. Buckner. Since May there have been some holdups in the Planning Department, but her department is working with Mr. Smith and Mr. Buckner to get the site plan issues taken care of. Mr. Stokes stated that a representative of Oyster Pointe condominiums would like to be heard. (TRACY GOTTER WAS DULY SWORN.) Tracy Gotter, 1570 Highway US 1, Sebastian. She spoke on behalf of the general manager of Oyster Pointe. She stated her company has been working with Mr. Eseltine and others to try to get this issue resolved. The board of directors of Oyster Pointe asked the manager to write a letter to the City regarding the encroachment by On The Intracoastal/The Crab Stop onto their property. They would like to know the status of this matter at this time. They are asking that the equipment be removed, the eyesore condition of the cooler, and the encroachment be remedied immediately. Oyster Pointe did receive a letter back from Mr. Eseltine informing them of the status of the matter. Mr. Stokes clarified that Mr. Buckner is the restauranteur/tenant. The property owner is On The Intracoastal, LLC, but the work is being done by The Crab Stop tenant. PAGE 8 Mr. Stokes requested that the matter be resolved by the November 1st date. If it's not completed by November 1st, he requests that a fine of $50.00 a day be levied. There are also administrative costs to this point of $248.00 which he is requesting as well. Magistrate Armitage inquired if the cooler can be adequately addressed. Mr. Eseltine stated the latest plan shows the cooler being fit in the corner of the property, but he questions if the cooler can be modified and installed according to the timeline as stated. Magistrate Armitage stressed to Mr. Smith and Mr. Buckner that November 1st is the final date. The work must be completed by that date. Mr. Smith stated that on the latest site plan, there will be landscaping and screening around the cooler that will cure the eyesore problem. The modifications to the cooler as shown on the latest site plan will cure the encroachment problem. He asked for a timely review of the site plan so that his clients can proceed as soon as possible. Mr. Eseltine stated the City staff will do a timely review of the site plan, and in the meantime The Crab Stop needs to apply for the necessary permits. Mr. Stokes explained that by the property owner and tenant going over the property line onto the neighboring property it is a civil trespass, and that needs to be dealt with between Oyster Pointe and On The Intracoastal The Crab Stop. Ms. Gotter stated that the timeline of November 1 st will be acceptable to Oyster Pointe. Mr. Ellis Buckner, Jr., 1550 Indian River Drive, Sebastian, apologized to the Oyster Pointe representative. He attempted to meet with the Board of Oyster Pointe. Also, he is a new tenant, and was mistaken regarding where he thought the property line is. He stated he has one cooler now, but he needs the second cooler to address the volume of business the restaurant is doing. He is willing to do whatever is necessary to remedy the situation of the cooler, as he wants to be a good neighbor. Magistrate Armitage will sign the order when he receives it. 5. LIENS Case No.: CE -19-011179 AVCHEN CONSTRUCTION, INC. 932 BARBER STREET U.&BI W7 Case No.: CE -009412 WILLIAM AND PHYLLIS STANLEY 1568 COWNIE LANE Case No.: CE -19-010576 AND 19-10577 PATRICK TREU 709 BROOKEDGE TERRACE Mr. Stokes stated the last three items on the docket are for approval of liens if the properties are not in compliance. Ms. Smith stated all three of the properties are now in compliance. Mr. Stokes is requesting administrative costs be awarded to the City on these three properties. So ordered by the Magistrate. 6. Adjournment The hearing was concluded at 4:08 p.m. 19 CITY OF SEBASTIAN CODE ENFORCEMENT SPECIAL MAGISTRATE CASE NO. B 18-1021 IN THE MATTER OF: ON THE INTERCOASTAL, LLC TENANT: CRAB STOP RESTAURANT MS. ELLEN GRAFF MR. ELLIS BUCKNER 1841 EAST SHELL LANE P.O. BOX 6835 VERO BEACH, FL 32963 VERO BEACH, FL. 32961 RESPONDENT FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW. AND ORDER THIS CAUSE came on for public hearing before the Code Enforcement Special Magistrate of the City of Sebastian, on August 27, 2019 after due notice to the Respondent, and based on the evidence presented the Special Magistrate makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Tenant Mr. Ellis Buckner was given a Notice of Violation at 1550 Indian River Dr. at the Crab Stop restaurant on 11/28/2018 for work performed without building permits in violation of Florida Building Code 105.1 and City Code of Ordinance26-34. The Notice of Violation included: outdoor walk-in cooler, shed, fence, plumbing to an outdoor sink, electrical line illegally tapped into an a/c circuit to feed a stackable washer/dryer that was placed outdoors and decking over a water retention area to provide additional seating. Additionally, a Code Enforcement violation was written on 7/9/2019 for a roofed over d eck area. Per the original notice the tenant was given 15 days to remove all unpermitted work. 2. Tenant Mr. Ellis Buckner, spoke with the Building Official and Community Development Planner in January of 2019 about bringing the property into compliance which would involve removing unpermitted structures and/or providing a revised site plan to relocate the walk-in cooler and obtain the necessary building permits, noting that the current location of the cooler clearly appeared to be encroaching on neighboring Oyster Pointe property. 3. Tenant Mr. Ellis Buckner formerly applied for a Site Plan Modification with a revised site plan on 5/17/2019. This site plan modification showed the cooler in an area that was not previously discussed as an option; the site plan was denied on 7/2/2019. Another revised site plan was submitted on 7/9/2019 with a new location shown. This site plan was also recently denied since the cooler location would block the door providing kitchen access. 4. The City has received numerous phone calls, inquiries and a formal letter from the neighboring property at Oyster Pointe regarding the encroachment of the cooler on their property and the unsightly conditions. 5. It was determined that some but not all of the items in violation had been removed from the property. A final Notice of Non -Compliance was sent to the owner and tenant on 7/9/2019 stating the facts in this case and demanding that valid permits be obtained or removal of all unpern3itted items immediately. Failure to comply would result in a Special Magistrate hearing in August of 2019. 6. Any person failing to comply with a notice of violation shall be deemed guilty of a civil infraction on the basis of strict liability. City of Sebastian Unsafe Structures Abatement Code Section 26-34.06 (c) 7. Each day that a violation continues after due notice has been served shall be deemed a separate offense. Provided by Section 26-34.06 (d) of the City's Unsafe Structure Abatement Code. 8. Respondent is responsible for the reasonable costs to the building department associated with these administrative proceedings in the amount of $248.00. WHEREFORE, based upon the aforementioned Findings of Fact, the Code Enforcement Special Magistrate makes the following: CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Respondent is hereby found to be in violation of Sec. 26-34.08 (f)(6) of the Unsafe Structures Abatement Code of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Sebastian for failing to comply w ith Not ice of Violation within the time frames provided. ORDER IIVIPOSING FINE THIS CAUSE came before the Code Enforcement Special Magistrate of the City of Sebastian, on August 27, 2019 for consideration under the FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, AND ORDER entered in this cause August 27, 2019, and it being proved that a violation of the City Code of Ordinances occurred at 1550 Indian River Drive, SEBASTIAN, FL. and in consideration of the circumstances herein, it is ORDER: 1. It is ordered that the Respondent shall bring the property into compliance on or before 111112019. Compliance includes: (a) obtaining an approved site plan from Community Development; (b) obtaining all necessary building permits; (c) obtaining all necessary inspections to complete and close out the permits; OR (d) remove all unpermitted structures from the property. 2. It is further ordered that, should the property not be brought into compliance with the time framed specified that a $50 fine per day shall be assessed until such time as the property is brought into compliance and inspected by the Building Official. 3. An administrative fee shall be paid by Respondent/Tenant in the amount of $248.00 to compensate for the costs of enforcement and shall be paid on or before 111112019. 4. Failure to respond with correcting the violation within the time allowed, or failure to pay the administrative fee and/or the fine assessed, shall constitute a lien upon the real property in favor of the City of Sebastian until such matters are satisfied. 5. Any party aggrieved by this Order may file an appeal with the Circuit Court in Indian River County. Such appeal shall be a hearing de novo, but shall be limited to appellate review of the record in this matter. An appeal shall be filed within 30 days of the rendition of this Order. DONE AND ORDERED this 27thday of August , 2019 CITY OF SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA C-Vrr-', Kelley H. A 'tage, Spe 'al agistrate Ma Petitioner, Hearing Dale: Auaust27.2019 SEBasTiA1� Harold L. Brooks Jr., CODE ENFORCEMENT SPECIAL MAGISTRATE ORDER OF IMPOSITION OF FINE HOME Of PELICAN ISLAND AND CLAIM OF LIEN CITY OF SEBASTIAN, Case No. 19-022167819-022175 a Florida municipality, FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Respondent(s) listed above are the ownen(s) of the above described real property. 2. The Respondent(s) were given proper notice of the violations listed hereupon, and 0 did 0 did not appear before the Special Magisbate, on the hearing date specified to address the violations alleged. Respondenfsoontradorappeared on Respondent's behalf and represented his interests before the Magistrate. 3. The Code Enforcement Officer(s) of the City of Sebastian appeared and presented evidence of the violation, which is contained in the official record of this matter. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 4. Based upon the evidence presented atthe hearing and otherwise contained in the official record, the property is found to be in violation of the following sections of the City's Code of Ordinances: Code section: I Description: DaIIy Flne: 66.36543-11.2 1, Trash &debris& Soil erosion and SeQQ��'mentationcontrol $100.00 Fail to submit aFinal PatforagorovalwitllCommuniNDevefogment $100.00 ORDER 5. It is Ordered that the Respondentshall, (1) within 30 days, remove trash & debris; resolve soil erosion, and (2) within 60 days, submit a Final Platfor review and approval with Community Development. 6. It is further Ordered that, should the property not be brought into compliance by the date specified, that a fine per -day, in the amount specified above, shall be assessed until such time as the property is brought into compliance and inspected by Code Enforcement Officer or the Community Development Department. Individual violations stated herein may be cured and inspected separately. 7. 0 (if checked): If the property is not brought into compliance by the date specified, the City of Sebastian Is authorized to, but not required to, enter the property for the purpose of bringing the property into compliance, with the cost of such work shall be assessed against the property and a lien being recorded against the property until such time as the costs are repaid to the City. Petitioner, Hearing Dale: Auaust27.2019 V. Harold L. Brooks Jr., 31201900574°1 RECORDED IN THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF Respondent. JEFFREY R SMITH, CLERK OF COURT INDIAN RIVER COUNTY FL Property Address: 11055SebastianBlvd, Sebastian, FL32958 BK:3242 PG:1377 Pagel 01`2101120191:57PM Parcell.D. 31381400004000000000.0 Legal Description: Sebastian Lakes Sub Unit 1PBI 12.11poroftrcmore pail descas—foll:fir ascoroftrc,run s 89 deg 44 min 50 sec w along s line of tr c,10.0, 0 to a pt on rhv line per or bk 1018 p -g 2826; th cont s 89 deq 44 min 50 sec w alonq s line of t FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Respondent(s) listed above are the ownen(s) of the above described real property. 2. The Respondent(s) were given proper notice of the violations listed hereupon, and 0 did 0 did not appear before the Special Magisbate, on the hearing date specified to address the violations alleged. Respondenfsoontradorappeared on Respondent's behalf and represented his interests before the Magistrate. 3. The Code Enforcement Officer(s) of the City of Sebastian appeared and presented evidence of the violation, which is contained in the official record of this matter. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 4. Based upon the evidence presented atthe hearing and otherwise contained in the official record, the property is found to be in violation of the following sections of the City's Code of Ordinances: Code section: I Description: DaIIy Flne: 66.36543-11.2 1, Trash &debris& Soil erosion and SeQQ��'mentationcontrol $100.00 Fail to submit aFinal PatforagorovalwitllCommuniNDevefogment $100.00 ORDER 5. It is Ordered that the Respondentshall, (1) within 30 days, remove trash & debris; resolve soil erosion, and (2) within 60 days, submit a Final Platfor review and approval with Community Development. 6. It is further Ordered that, should the property not be brought into compliance by the date specified, that a fine per -day, in the amount specified above, shall be assessed until such time as the property is brought into compliance and inspected by Code Enforcement Officer or the Community Development Department. Individual violations stated herein may be cured and inspected separately. 7. 0 (if checked): If the property is not brought into compliance by the date specified, the City of Sebastian Is authorized to, but not required to, enter the property for the purpose of bringing the property into compliance, with the cost of such work shall be assessed against the property and a lien being recorded against the property until such time as the costs are repaid to the City. ORDER OF IMPOSITION OF FINE AND CLAIM OF LIEN Page 2 of 2 8. An administrative fee shall be paid by Respondentin the amountof $ 150.00 to compensatefor the costs of enforcement and shall be paid on or before October27.2019 . 9. Failure to comply with oorrecfi ng the violation within the fime allowed, or %I lure to pay the ad min istralve fee and/or the fine assessed, shall constitute alien upon the real property in favor of the City of Sebastian until such matters are satisfied. 10. Any party aggrieved bythis Ordermay file an appeal with the Circuit Court in Indian River County. Such appeal shall not be a hearing de novo, but shall be limited to appellate reviewof the record in this mailer. An appeal shall be filed within 30 days of the rendition of this Order. L DONEAND ORDERED thison August 27.2019 SpJalviag' 7E / 1 Sp dal Magi to v Case No. 19-022167 & 19-022175