Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07151998 CITY OF SEBASTIAN CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING JULY 15, 1998 Chron. Generazio called the meeting to order at 3:00 pm. The Pledge of Allegiance was said. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Chmn. Generazio VCh. Neglia Mr. Cosco Mr. Schofield Mr. Connelly Mr. Flescher Ms. Men'itt(a) UNEXCUSED ABSENCE: Mr. Cavallo ALSO PRESENT: Tim Zelinsky, Code Enforcement Officer Kathy Brauer, Code Enforcement Officer George Bonacci, Building Official Tracy Hass, Interim City Planner Kevin MacWilliam, Acting City Attorney Jan King, Zoning Technician Rene VanDeVoorde, Board Attorney Ann Brack, Recording Secretary ANNOUNCEMENTS: Chmn. Generazio welcomed the new members of the Board, Mr. Alan Schofield in the sub- contractor position, and Ms. Donna Merritt as an alternate. He then noted that Ms. Merrit will be voting for Mr. Cavallo, who is not here today. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: (6/17/98) Mr. VanDeVoorde noted that on page five (5), in the fifth paragraph from bottom of page, and in the second paragraph from bottom, Mr. MacWilliam's name should be changed to Mr. VanDeVoorde. Mr. MacWilliam and the Board members agreed with this change. (These changes were made.) MOTION by Generazio/Neglia I make a motion that the minutes of June 17th be accepted, as amended. A voice vote was taken. 7 - 0 motion carried. At this point, Chron. Generazio noted that there is a problem with transcription of these meetings CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF JULY 15, 1998 because Board members are talking over one another which makes it difficult to do the transcription and there are unfinished sentences. He asked Board members to wait to be recognized to alleviate this problem. OLD BUSINESS: Case ~98-13684 - Robert Taylor, Angler's Obsession - 1647 Indian River Drive - Land Development Code: Sections 20A-15.4.g & 20A~lS.3B(1); and Standard Building Code, Section 104.6.1 Mr. Robert Taylor was not present. Mr. Neglia asked if Mr. Taylor was notified, and Mr. Hass responded that he was. Mr. VanDeVoorde suggested that testimony in this case should be accepted and a decision made by the Board, even though Mr. Taylor is not present. He also noted that the City has the burden of proving the case. Mr. MacWilliam noted that the violation notice indicated that the case may be processed even if Mr. Taylor decides not to be present. Mr. Zelinsky, Mr. Iq_ass, Mr. Bonacci, and Ms. King were sworn in by thc Secretary at 3:09 pm. Mr. MacWilliam commented that in regard to the notice of violation, the Code Enforcement Dept. has made a determination that they will not proceed under the violation of 104.6.1 of the Standard Building Code because of an ambiguity of what Mr. Taylor intended on his hand-drawn submission, and what the City intended. He explained that the measurements on the drawing for the initial two (2) signs may have been interpreted differently than intended. Ms. King indicated that if Mr. Taylor had applied for a permit for a twelve (12) foot sign originally, it would have been approved. Attorney MacWilliam explained further that there was a permit issued for the first two (2) signs, and it was planned to proceed under SBC Section 104.6.1, but with the ambiguity as to what the applicant meant and what the Zoning division meant, it was determined to proceed only with the point that the signs are in the right-of-way, in reference to the first two signs; and also to proceed with Item #2 that he has not received a permit for all of the additional signs on his property. Attorney MacWilliam then proceeded to question Mr. Zelinsky on this issue. Mr. Zelinsky gave the following information on the events of this issue: First visit to 1647 Indian River Drive - June 2, 1998 at 2:00 pm ~ Notice of violation for a sign from the City of Sebastian, dated June 2, 1998, hand delivered to Mr. Taylor, coveting violations for the location of the existing signs in the right-of-way, and that the new signs were not permitted. Second visit was on June 9, 1998, and no one was there. He checked the signs and they were still not in compliance. (Mr. Zelinsky spoke to no one at this time, but he took a picture of the signs.) He also noted that a time period of five (5) days was given on the violation notice that was delivered on June 2, which gave Mr. Taylor till June 7th to come CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF JULY 15, 1998 into compliance, which he did not. Third visit was on June 17th, 1998, when he took approximately seven (7) pictures showing the subject signs. These photos of the seven (7) signs were entered as Exhibit one 1 - A, B, C, D, E, F, and G. Mr. Zelinski then noted that he paid a visit to this site on June 10, 1998 and hand-delivered a notice. for Mr. Taylor to appear before the Code Enforcement Board on lune 17, 1998 He then noted that he has been there on several occasions and the signs are still there. He noted that a couple of small signs are knocked to the ground. The last time that he was at the site was this morning (July 15, 1998), two little signs are on the ground ( one broken off), all the other signs were up and in full view. Attorney VanDeVoorde noteA for the record that the above photographs would be admitted as the City's Exhibit #1, seven photographs, 1 - A,B,C, etc. Chnm. Generazio questioned Mr. Zelinsky about his first visit on June 2nd, and asked for a copy of the notice of violation. The copy was produced and verified. Mr. Zelinsky noted that he hand- delivered the notice and Mr. Taylor refused to sign for it so Mr. Zelinsky noted such on the envelope. It was noted that the very last page of the document was a notice filled out by Mr. Zelinsky noting the date of delivery as June 2, 1998, 2:20 pm, delivered by himself, and noted on the applicant's signature line was his comment that the applicant refused to sign. Attorney MacWilliam asked that this document be entered as the City's Exhibit #2. Attorney VanDeVoorde noted that it would be admitted - five (5) pages. In response to a question from Mr. Cosco, Mr. Zelinski responded that because of the vulgar language that the applicant used at the time he served the notice, he did not want to repeat the statement. He did verify that Mr. Taylor understood the notice, since he visited the City Manager very quickly. In response to a question from Ms. Merritt, Attorney MacWilliam explained that he intended to make cegain issues clear when he continues with Mr. Hass and Ms. King. Attorney VanDeVoorde noted that the Board retains the right to ask questions of any of the witnesses. Attorney MacWilliam questioned Mr. Hass who noted that he had reviewed the location of two (2) signs which abut Indian River Drive on Mr. Taylor's property at 1647 Indian River Drive. It was established that the permit application was received in November, 1997, and he received approval on January 27, 1998. Mr. Hass noted that upon visual observation, the sign on the east side of Indian River Drive sits rather close to the roadway. He noted that shortly alter the sign was placed, it was noticed that the sign was in violation, this was when Mr. Massarelli was still employed by the City, so he wasn't sure of the exact date. Mr. Hass then indicated that yesterday CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF JULY 15, 1998 (7/14/98), he and Mr. Zelinsky went to the site, and through a survey showing a fight-of-way on Indian River Drive to be sixty-six (66) feet, and measuring thirty-three (33) feet from the center of the road, they placed a timber on the property at the right-of-way line and took ora picture of the sign in relation to the right-of-way. He indicated that this was strictly the sign on the east side of the road, and that the sign on the west side is in compliance. This picture of the sign that is in violation was taken yesterday (7/14/98) at 12:30 pm, and the other two pictures were taken June 17~, 1998. Attorney MacWilliam asked that the picture taken yesterday at 12:30 pm by Mr. Hass be admitted as the City's Exhibit #3. For the record, Mr. Hass noted that he was present at the site when Mr. Zelinsky took the · photographs. Mr. Zelinsky verified this statement. Mr. I-lass pointed out objects in the photo that indicate a clear violation. Attorney VanDeVoorde indicated that the photo is admitted into evidence as the City's Exhibit #3. In response to a question from Chnm. Gener~io, Mr. Hass noted that he was not aware of any measurement having been taken before yesterday. Mr. Zelinsky agreed that the measurement was taken yesterday. Mr. Flescher proceeded to question Mr. Zelinsky about the seven (7) photos (noted above as Exhibit #I) and identified each sign and its location. One sign was indicated as "down", and one was indicated as also being "on the ground". Mr. Zelinsky verified that they have apparently fallen down, and have not been removed. Attorney MacWilliam then questioned Jan King, Zoning Technician for the City of Sebastian. She indicated that she reviews site plans for zoning compliance. She gave information on the issue of permit applications for Mr. Taylor. She noted the application for additional signs made on June 30, 1998, and indicated that it was not complete with information needed to do calculations on the amount of square footage of signage, the location of the signs, and other needed information. She indicated that he provided an additional drawing on Tuesday of this week, (7/14/98), to supplement his application, and she called him on that date to ask for additional information, which he provided verbally over the phone. She noted that the only other conversation she has had with Mr. Taylor was before he brought the applications in - to tell him what information was needed. She then indicated that his application is still not complete, and there are some clarifications needed because the City is trying to accommodate Mr. Taylor in the review process, and different types of signs are reviewed under different criteria, and there will be some structural information needed on one of the existing signs. She noted that there are a number of signs on this one application, and she has a problem with two (2) of them that are not complete. In response to a question by Attorney MacWilliam, she noted that more than one (1) sign is allowed on one (1) application. She also noted that this application is after-the-fact, that the signs were already erected, and now he is trying to justify the signs. She noted that her department is trying to work with Mr. Taylor, and that is the reason there are several signs all on one application. She then noted that the permits have not been issued at this time. She does the review and the Building Official signs off on them, and they have not been signed off as yet. In response to a question from Mr. Neglia, Ms. King indicated that there is no limit on how many 4 CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF JULY 15, 1998 signs can be included on one (1) permit. At this point, copies of Mr. Taylor's application, a location drawing, and some verbiage were passed out and one copy was submitted as the City's Exhibit #4. Ms. King indicated that there were no other documents available in reference to these signs. She also indicated that Mr. Taylor delivered them to the City after hours, and slid the envelope under the door. She did not see him personally. She reviewed this information on July 14th, and called him again and got some additional information over the phone. Ms. King then indicated that the information on the application and on the drawing that is high-lighted (in yellow), is information that she wrote, and the rest was written by Mr. Taylor. Chron. Generazio noted that the only issue that this Board should be considering is the fact that the signs are erected without a permit. Attorney MacWilliam noted that the notice of violation was served on Mr. Taylor on June 2, and the application for additional signs was received on June 30, 1998, therefore he was in violation for twenty-five (25) days before he submitted the application. Attorney VanlDeVoorde asked who is in violation, Mr. Taylor or Mr. Skidmore. Attorney MacWilliam indicated that both Mr. Skidmore and Mr. Taylor were cited for being in violation. (Mr. Skidmore owns the property and Mr. Taylor owns the business.) Both attorneys agreed with this action. It was established that "Angler's Obsession" is the name of the business. Attorney MacWilliam noted for the record that there was a return receipt request with the notice of violation that went to Mr. Skidmore, a copy of which is attached to Exhibit #2. Ms. Merrit asked if thc last pcnmt application would fall under the old regulations or the new ones. Attorney MacWilliam said that they will fall under the new requirements. Attorney VanDeVoorde suggested that a reasonable amount of time should be given for him to come into compliance. Mr. Flescher commended the City staff for their accommodating efforts, understanding, and perseverance involved with this situation, in an attempt to draw this person into compliance. (Chron. Generazio made a motion, Mr. Flescher seconded it, and after discussion on it, both withdrew it and made the following motion in its place.) There was much discussion on the issues contained in the motion. Some members suggested a time limit of twenty-four (24) hours, and others suggested till the next Code Enforcement Board meeting, and four (4) or five (5) days was suggested. Mr. Connelly suggested the City take the signs down. CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF JULY 15, 1998 Mr. Flescher described how the signs are erected, and suggested that twenty-four (24) hours is plenty of time for any signs to be taken down. MOTION by Generazio/Flescher I make a motion that the respondent, Robert Taylor, the owner of Angler's Obsession, and Mr. Robert Skidmore, the property owner of 1647 Indian River Drive, Sebastian, at the time of notice of violation, 6/1/98, were in violation of 20A-15.4.g and 20A-15.3B(1), and that they be so notified and given seven (7) calendar days to come into compliance, which would be Wednesday of next week, the twentywsecond (22nd), midnight the twenty-second (22nd), to come into compliance; afterwards, they will be held as repeat violators. If they are not in compliance by that time, that they be held in repeat violation of having multiple signs, one or more signs without permit, or one or more signs in the right-of-way, the fine of two hundred and fifty dollars ($250) per day per violation, to accumulate till such time that they are in compliance. Roll call: VCh. Neglia - yes Mr. Connelly - yes Mr. Coseo - yes Mr. Flescher - yes Mr. Schofield - yes Chmn. Generazio - yes Ms. Merritt - yes The vote was 7 - 0. Motion carried. NEW BUSINESS: B. Case b98-13615 REPEAT VIOLATION HEARING - Wayne Clineman - 922 Laredo Lane - Code of Ordinances: Section 86.47 Mr. Wayne Clineman was not present. Attorney MacWilliam questioned Tim Zelinsky (already swom in). He noted that he delivered a courtesy notice to Mr. Clineman on 5/12/98, giving him five (5) days to clean up vehicle parts and junk, and cut his grass, and license his vehicles. Mr. Zelinskry also noted that the grass was over ten inches (10") high, there was a junk vehicle next to the house with junk inside the vehicle, and boats and a track that were not registered. Mr. Zelinsky returned to this address on 5/19/98 and the grass was cut, the vehicle was registered but it is not operable (so he still considered it "junk"), and the boats were registered, so the problem that remained was the junk vehicle and the junk in the vehicle. He then noted that in a phone conversation, Mr. Clineman said that he needed more time to get rid of his truck and the rest of the stuff. Mr. Zelinsky next visited the site on 5/26/98 and noted that the junk was still there, and Mr. Clineman again asked for more time. He also checked the site on 6/9/98 at 9:00 am, and issued a notice of violation, to clean up the junk, and come into compliance within five (5) days. CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF JULY 15, 1998 He then returned to the site on 6/16/98 at 10:00 am, and there were no changes, and the junk was still next to the house. He noted that he returned on 5/12/98, 6/8/98 and 6/16/98 and took pictures that show the junk truck and tires. Attorney MacWilliam submitted these photos as City's Exhibit 1, 2, 3, on current violations. On his last visit on 6/16/98, he noted that there was no change to the property, and he discussed the issue with Mr. Clineman. On 7/8/98, at 9:45 am, he served a notice of repeat violation, hand-delivered to Mr. Clineman where he works. Mr. Zelinsky then indicated that he went by this address this morning (7/15/98) and noted that the vehicle is gone. He did note that the last time he saw the junk vehicle still on the property was on June 13, 1998. Attorney MacWilliam indicated that this is a repeat violation as there was a previous violation dated February 21st of 1996, generated by this Board ,which found him to be in violation of basically the same violation, which makes a repeat in five (5) years. Chmn. Generazio asked if there were any fire hazards at this site, and Mr. Zelinsky responded that he doesn't remember seeing anything. There was discussion on this violation, and Mr. Zelinsky showed a short video taken of the violation on the subject property. After viewing the video, it was determined that there was another truck cab in the rear of the junk truck, along with other debris. Chron. Generazio noted that Mr. Clineman was fined $50 in February, 1996, which was apparently much less than the accrual rate of the violation. But the Chairman noted that he is now in repeat violation. Ms. Merritt noted that a paragraph on the notice form needs to be made clearer. Attorney VanDeVoorde noted that the Board's responsibility is to deal with fundamental due process, by being fair to the public or respondent. Mr. Flescher complimented the Code Enforcement officer and said that he was glad the respondent had come into compliance, but he also noted the length of time involved, and the hours spent by the Department in getting the respondent to come into compliance. MOTION by Neglia/Flescher I'd like to make a motion that we find Mr. Wayne C. Clineman guilty of a second violation of junk on the property, the original violation Case #95-10784, continuing violation, find him in repeat violation, Code of Ordinance Section 86.47, (Case number 98-13615), I'd like to find him in violation the second time, and fine him a one-time fine of two hundred and fif~ dollars ($250). There was much discussion on this motion CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF JULY 15, 1998 Roll call: Mr. Connelly - yes VC Neglia - yes Mr. Schofield - yes Ms. Merritt(a) - yes Chnm. Generazio - yes Mr. Flescher - yes Mr. Cosco - yes The vote was 7 - 0. Motion carried. ATTORNEY MATTERS: Attorney VanDeVoorde noted that all Exhibit materials need to be returned to the clerk for filing and records in case the City needs to pursue this case further. He noted that the Statute calls for an enfomement order prepared, entered, and signed by the Chairman. The Chairman noted that this procedure is already being followed. Attorney VanDeVoorde then asked if a copy of the order was presented to the Board Attorney before it was sent out. Attorney MacWilliam indicated that the last enforcement order was given to him to review before sending it out. Chnm. Generazio noted very strongly that every Board member here is a volunteer, not bonded, and can be named in a civil lawsuit. His opinion was that all issues should go before a Board Attorney, and he wanted this opinion on record. Attorney VanDeVoorde recognized the Chairman's position, for the record. He then explained his position, and suggested that a policy decision needs to be made with respect to using the Board Attorney or the City Attorney. He explained this position in more detail. Consensus of the Board members was in agreement with Chron. Generazio's opinion, above. At this point, Chmn. Generazio noted that Mr. Hass, Mr. Frame, and Mr. Bonacci le~ the meeting already, and there were points to discuss with them under General Discussion. A five (5) minute break was taken at 4:41 pm, with all members returning at 4:48 pm. The Board Secretary, Doral Bosworth was present. Chmn. Generazio asked Ms. Bosworth about the status of the Carmody Case, and she responded that the City Attorney, Valerie Settles, on the day of the Carmody hearing, came into her office. In response to Ms. Bosworth's questions, Attorney Settles told her to put the order on hold to wait till there was another attorney with Code Enforcement, and she wanted to gather some more evidence so that the hearing could be re-held. Ms. Bosworth further said that Mr. Carmody has never received an order because no order had been done. Chron. Generazio asked Attorney VanDeVoorde what the Board's options are at this time. Attorney VanDeVoorde suggested that Attorney Settles be contacted to obtain an explanation of her position on this case. 8 CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF JULY 15, 1998 Attorney MacWilliam indicated that he reviewed the minutes of that meeting and discussed it with Mr. Frame. He noted that Mr. Frame was not sure why Attorney Settles put a hold on that order. He noted that he will contact her for an explanation and report at the next meeting. Chron. Generazio suggested that the secretary provide copies of the minutes of the meeting of May 20, 1998. There was discussion on getting answers from Attorney Settles, then setting a date for a special meeting to see where to go from here. It was determined to call the special meeting for Thursday, July 23, 1998 at 3:00 pm. Mr. Cosco noted that he will not be able to attend this me~ing. Chron. Generazio reminded all members that if, afar speaking to Attorney Settles, Attorney MacWilliam feels a special meeting is not necessary, all Board members will be notified. Attorney VanDeVoorde will check his schedule. The second choice of dates was Tuesday, July 28, 1998, at 3:00 pm. Mr. Neglia requested that one staff member remain here until each meeting is adjourned, Mr. Hass, or Mr. Bonaeci for items that the Board may want to discuss. Mr. Flescher suggested that if Board members know ahead of time what they want to discuss, staff members could be alerted to stand by. Chnm. Generazio suggested that this be done on an individual basis. Chron. Generazio asked for a motion to adjourn. Mr. Connelly stated "So moved." Chron. Generazio adjourned the meeting at 5:01 pm. (7/16/98 AB) City of Sebastian 1225 MAIN STREET g SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA 32958 TELEPHONE (561) 589-5330 [3 FAX (561) 589-5570 SEBASTIAN CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD MINLrrEs OF MEETING HELD AT MEETING HELD ., ?l'~t(rg~T- I c~ APPROVED DOm i~0~VOI~TH, SECKETAKY E. ANN BRACK, RECORDING SECRETARY