Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05191999 CITY OF SEBASTIAN CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING MAY 19, 1999 Chairman Neglia celled the meeting to order at 3:00 pm. The Pledge of Allegiance was said. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: EXCUSED ABSENCE: Ms. Barczyk Chron. Neglia Mr. Schofield Mr. Davis(a) Mr. Cosco ALSO PRESENT: Mr. Cavallo Mr. Connelly Ms. Gdffin Tracy Hass, Growth Management Director Tim Zelinski, Code Enforcement Officer Richard Stringer, Board Attorney Ann Brack, Recording Secretary George Bonacci, Building Official/Building Dept. Director (Mr. Chuck Neuberger, City Councilman, was in the audience.) ANNOUNCEMENTS: Chmn. Neglia announced that Mr. Cavallo was reappointed to the Board for a three-year term, and Ms. Griffin was appointed to regular member Businessman Position. He then noted that Mr. Cosco is absent and Mr. Davis will be voting in his place. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: MOTION by Davis/Connelly Motion to approve the minutes of the last meeting. A voice vote was taken. 7 - 0 motion cerded. OLD BUSINESS: A. VIOLATION HEARING - Case #98-13702 - Ted & Marta Andruski - 573 Palm Avenue - Section 90-87 and Section 90-106(a), Code of Ordinances Mr. Zelinski, Code Enforcement officer, gave staff presentation and noted that the City Engineer established that Mr. Andruski needs a culvert permit and a ddveway permit. He gave information about accompanying Engineering Technician Mr. Franco to the site CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF MAY 19, 1999 to shoot some grades and commented that when Mr. Andruski installs the culvert, he will have a slope into the ditch next door. He also noted that plans for the swales on this street are scheduled for two years from now. Mr. Ted Andruski was present and was sworn in by Attorney Stdnger at 3:05 pm. In response to a question from Mr. Connelly, Mr. Zelinski responded that the City Engineer, Martha Campbell determined that the culvert and ddveway needs to be installed now. There was further discussion. At this point, Attomey Stdnger swore in Mr. Zelinski at 3:07 pm, to include testimony already given and future testimony at this meeting. MOTION by Connelly/Gdffin I make a motion that we continue this until we can have (an) engineer here to go over this with us. Discussion: Mr. Andruski was skeptical about whether the Engineers plan would work. He suggested that he be allowed to follow the code that was in existence in 1994. Mr. Cavallo suggested that an engineer be present to explain the situation and verify whether or not this culvert will work. Mr. Hass explained that this Board cannot waive the requirement for the culvert pipe. If a waiver is needed, Mr. Andruski must go before the Board of Adjustment. He noted that the Code Enforcement Board determines whether or not he needs to install the pipe, or find him in violation of the City Code. Ms. Barczyk commented that this issue should be postponed until this Board can talk with the City Engineer, since Board members have so many questions. Mr. Andruski commented that he won't be in town for the next meeting. Roll call: Mr. Connelly - yes Chmn. Neglia - yes Mr. Cavallo - yes Ms. Gdffin - yes Mr. Schofield - yes Ms. Barczyk - yes Mr. Davis(a) - yes The vote was 7 - 0. Motion approved. There was discussion about when Mr. Andruski could attend a meeting on this issue. Attorney Stdnger indicated that if Mr. Andruski can't be at the next meeting, this Board can go ahead and have the City Engineer present for questioning. CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF MAY 19, 1999 MOTION by Neglia/Connelly I'd like to make a motion to continue this till June 16~h when Mrs. Campbell can be here and we can get the facts on this. Discussion: Mr. Zelinski indicated that there would be no problem if the Board wants to extend the time for Mr. Andruski to be notified of the decision that may be made while he is out of town. NEW BUSINESS: B. VIOLATION HEARING - Case #99-14741 - Herbert & Kathryn Sturm - 549 Saunders Street - Section 20A-5.9.A.1, Land Development Code Mr. Herbert Sturm, 549 Saunders Street, was present and was sworn in by Atty. Stdnger at 3:17 pm. (Officer Zelinski had previously been sworn in.) Mr. Zelinski gave staff report, noted an anonymous call came in on 4/1/99 about Mr. Sturm having installed a fence without a permit. He then noted that Mr. Sturm agreed that he did put this fence up, but indicated that when he installed this fence years ago, there was no fee for going into the easement - forty dollars ($40). He noted that Mr. Sturrn doesn't mind paying the fifteen dollars ($15) for the fence permit, but he doesn't feel that he should pay the forty dollars ($40) because the forty dollars ($40) didn't come into effect until 1998, and he indicated that he put his fence up before that. Mr. Zelinski also noted that sign-offs are required when a fence is placed in an easement. Mr. Sturm suggested that this headng was not legally called and referred to his interpretation of several Sections of the Code Enforcement Board Ordinance and Flodda Statutes. He then requested that this headng be dismissed. Atty. Stdnger noted that this is a regularly scheduled meeting, which is scheduled ahead of time with the Chairman's blessing, and special meetings would have to be called by the Chairman. He then noted that under the Code and Statute, the actual notice of violation is sent by the cledcal staff of the Code Enforcement Board, which was done in this case. He indicated that the meeting being a regular meeting is indeed called by the Chairman. Mr. Sturm disagreed. Chmn. Neglia asked Mr. Sturm when the fence was put up. Mr. Sturm responded that he wants to '~ile some charges for false statements on that hearing". Chmn. Neglia commented that he could do that after this headng. Mr. Sturm stated "No, it's got to be done now. If we're not going to play by these rules, then I'm not playing". He also stated "It's the same that happened in '92. The Board did as they damn well pleased". CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF MAY 19, 1999 In response to a question from Board member Mr. Davis, Atty. Stdnger responded that the regularly scheduled meetings are submitted, the Chair accepts them, and they are set at the beginning of the year by the Chair, thus they are called the regularly scheduled meetings. He noted that this is not a special meeting called by staff, but a regularly scheduled meeting. He also commented that as far as the notices of headng, they are sent and the headng is scheduled on what already is a called headng date by the cledcal staff, and that is the way it operates. He indicated that he understands that Mr. Sturm disagrees. Mr. Cavallo noted that if the Board is not in violation, then they need to get on with what is at hand. There was discussion among the Board members. It was clarified that the total fee is $40 for the permit, and $15 for the application, and Mr. Sturm paid the application fee of $15, but never got the permit because he refuses to pay the $40 fee. Mr. Sturm returned to the notice of headng. He went on further with his objection. MOTION by Gdffin/Barczyk make a motion in reference to Case #99-14741, that we find him in noncompliance of the additional permit for being inside the easement. Discussion: Mr. Sturm asked the Chairman if he could try one more time. Chmn. Neglia responded for Mr. Sturm to let the Board finish this motion, and Mr. Sturm commented that he didn't think they wanted to do that. He proceeded to give his interpretations and indicated that he wants to call witnesses. Mr. Sturm called Gerd Kubes, and asked that she bdng the folder for Lot 3, Block 62, and Lot 5, Block 62. He then called on Mr. Zelinski and asked him some questions. At this point, Ms. Griffin withdrew her motion and Ms. Barczyk withdrew her second. Mr. Sturm argues that the easement is not ten (10) feet. He then complained about complaints that are called in anonymously and spoke of harassment. He requested that the City not take anonymous complaints. He proceeded to comment on the issues listed on the complaint, even though several of them did not apply to his address, and were not listed as a violation. At this point, Atty. Stdnger swore in Gerd Kubes at 3:44 pm. In response to questions by Mr. Sturm, Ms, Kubes indicated that there is a fence permit CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF MAY 19, 1999 in the folder for Lot 3, Block 622, but none in the folder for Lot 5, Block 622. She noted that these are neighboring properties next to Mr. Sturm. Mr. Sturm gave further presentation. Chron. Neglia asked Mr. Sturm to keep to the facts. There was more discussion. Atty. Stdnger noted that normally, the person presenting their case does not ask questions of the Chair. Ms. Barezyk asked the Chairman to set a time limit for the presentation. Chron. Neglia agreed. Mr. Zelinski stated that he is not familiar with Mr. Hector Franco's signature. Mr. Sturm submitted Exhibits #1 and 2. Chron. Neglia gave Mr. Sturm five (5) minutes to finish his presentation. Atty. Sthnger made some suggestions to try to help Mr. Sturm. Mr. Sturm then submitted Exhibit #3. Mr. Connelly responded to a question from Ms. Griffin on easements. Mr. Sturm noted that without a recording secretary or stenographer to take the information down, finding-of-fact cannot be accomplished. He referred to an issue in the previous meeting minutes. After several comments, Mr. Sturm rested his case. Mr. Zelinski submitted photos as Exhibit #1, 2, and 3. Mr. Hass submitted a copy of a plot plan depicting the property next to the Sturm Property as it accurately represented the easement that runs behind the Sturm property. Atty. Stdnger swore in Mr. Hass at 4:10 pm, indicating that Mr. Hass swears that all statements already given and will give are nothing but the truth. Mr. Cavallo suggested just taking a measurement, and Mr. Sturm stated that his fence is eight (8) feet from the center line (of the ditch). Atty. Stringer summed up the evidence produced so far. Mr. Connelly commented that staff has said that the easement is ten (10) feet and the fence is only eight (8) feet from the centedine, therefore Mr. Sturm is in violation. Mr. Zelinski verified that the easement at this site is ten feet (10') on each property. CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF MAY 19, 1999 Atty. Stdnger commented that, although both sides have rested, the Board may look at the plat being brought to this meeting by Jan King, Growth Management Manager. Mr. Hass submitted into evidence Sebastian Highlands, Unit 2 plat, and a notation at the bottom of the plat states that there is a ten (10) foot easement on rear, and five (5) foot easement on sides of all lots. These are Exhibits #5A and 5B. MOTION by Gdffin/Barczyk I'd like to make a motion, in reference to Case #99-14741, I find Mr. Sturm in violation of the easement by two feet and give him till the 16th of June to either receive the proper permit or move the fence, or he can be fined up to fifty dollars ($50.00) a day for a first offense. Roll call: Ms. Barczyk - yes Mr. Cavallo - yes Chmn. Neglia - yes Mr. Connelly - yes Mr. Schofield - yes Ms. Griffin - yes Mr. Davis(a) - yes The vote was 7 - 0. Motion carried. C. VIOLATION HEARING - Case #99-14933 - MGB Construction, Inc. - 63 Joy Haven Drive - Section 20A-14.9, Land Development Code Ms. Griffin stepped down because of conflict in the form of a contractual relationship with MCG Construction, Inc., and submitted Form 8B to the secretary. Mr. William Ballough, 955 Starflower Avenue, Sebastian, was present and was swom in by Atty. Stringer at 4:16 pm. George Bonacci, Building Official/Building Department Director, was present and .was also swom in at 4:16 pm. Mr. Hass gave staff presentation and gave a history of the development of the above violation. He then asked Mr. Bonacci to give his recollection of the inspection that he provided on that site on December 16th, 1998. Mr. Bonacci spoke of very heavy vegetation making it difficult to get into the lot. After entering into this lot, he saw one large tree that he determined was not a specimen tree. He noted that the rest of the vegetation was palms and all kinds of vines. He noted that the rear portion was very heavily vegetated with (Brazilian) Pepper trees and vines. He continued with his report and pointed out notations made by John P. Finnegan on 12/17/98. Mr. Bonacci then signed the permit and the lot was cleared except the area near the waterway. Mr. Hass then submitted Exhibit #1, which was the inspection report with a notation CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF MAY 19, 1999 by Mr. Bonacci in the comment section of the form. He then submitted Exhibit #2, a survey of the lot on which Mr. Finnegan wrote notations that Mr. Bonacci just read for the Board. Mr. Hass then spoke of events on 3/15/99 and noted a complaint that came in through the City Manager's office that there was cleadng of large trees on City owned property, on the rear of the subject lot. He noted that the area in question is a City right-of-way that is approximately twenty-five (25) feet between the property line and the water line, and Mr. Bonacci was notified by the City Manager that this cleadng was occurring and it was on City property. Mr. Bonacci noted that when he was informed about the cteadng, he requested a Code Enforcement officer, Mr. Timothy Zelinski, to check it out. Mr. Zelinski went to the site, reported that it was being cleared and the majodty cf the vegetation was gone. Mr. Bonacci then went to the site and saw some debds. He commented that office staff called Mr. Ballough to meet him at the site, which he did. Mr. Bonacci then issued a stop work order on it, but stated that everything that was removed by the waterway was prohibited trees and pepper trees being pulled over by vines. He noted that there was one small oak tree, possibly 7" or 8" in diameter and was dry-rotted because of too much water and heavy vines pulling it.down. He asked Mr. Ballough to put in a silt barder, but because of the vegetation hanging out over the waterway, Mr. Ballough asked if he could pull the vegetation back away from the water and then install the silt barrier. Mr. Bonacci recognized the problem and agreed with Mr. Ballough's proposal, and noted the drought conditions in existence at the time. He noted that Mr. Ballough was very cooperative and sent a letter of apology. He then repeated that there were only pepper trees in that rear area and they must be removed before a Certificate of Occupancy can be issued. Mr. Hass then noted a letter from Mr. Ballough on 3/15/99 that outlined the new erosion control plan and read a paragraph from that letter. He then noted that upon receipt of that letter, Mr. Bonacci agreed with the new erosion control plan and lifted the stop-work order and they continued with their construction. He submitted this letter as Exhibit #3. Mr. Hass went on to speak of a memo of 3/16/99 from intedm City Manager, John Van Antwerp directed to Mr. Bonacci and Mr. Hass, and addressing this issue. He gave information on the contents of the memo. He also noted that staff found that there were no large trees, and the exotics were required to be removed anyway. He then noted that the only problem wes that Mr. Ballough did not meet with staff with an erosion control plan pdor to cleadng the property. He then noted that on 3/17/99, he accompanied Jan King, Growth Management Manager, and Timothy Zelinski, Code Enforcement officer to this site and took several photographs of the subject property and adjacent properties. He submitted these photos as Exhibits #4, 5, 6, and 7. Board members asked clarifying questions which Mr. Bonacci responded to. Mr. Hass then submitted a photograph of the silt screen that was installed at this site on 3/18/99 at 1:30 pm, and showed the erosion control plan. Mr. Zelinski took the photo. CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF MAY 19, 1999 Mr. Bonacci made a point of explaining the Elkcam drainage canal, and noted that the strip of property in question is a right-of-way. He cladfied that this is not City owned proper'b/, but it is a right-of-way, but the City does own the canal. He also noted that most people who buy lots along this waterway pay a little more for these lots and want to be able to see and enjoy the water view. Mr. Hass reminded Board members that a Certificate of Occupancy would not have been issued with pepper trees (exotics) on the property. He then noted that after the new erosion plan was in place, staff felt that no further action was necessary, and the problem had been addressed. However, he indicated that staff was directed by the City Manager to bdng this issue before the Code Enforcement Board for their decision. He stated that the Building Department and the Code Enforcement Department tries to work with people to correct violations, and noted that this would have been a policy violation, not a code violation. He also noted that MGB Construction has never had a code enforcement violation against them, and considering the number of lots they have cleared, this appears to be a simple mistake that they forgot to contact the Building Department before cleadng this lot. Mr. Connelly had comments about after the fact violations and passed around an article from the Florida Today newspaper about the clearing of an island in the Easy Street Lake. He spoke of the lack of a turbidity barder, and mentioned a level playing field. MOTION by Connelly/Davis I would wish to make the following motion, regarding Case #99-014933, MGB Construction, Inc., Mr. Batlough, and Rex and Polly Clifford, property owners, and the charge of condition of land cleadng permit not propedy followed, etcetera, I would move that this case be dismissed with prejudice. Roll call: Mr. Cavallo - yes Ms. Barczyk - yes Mr. Schofield - yes Chmn. Neglia - yes Mr. Connelly - yes Mr. Davis(a) - yes The vote was 6 - O. Motion carded. At this point Mr. Ballough asked to say a few words, and proceeded to explain his actions and comment on the erosion control plan that he teit would have been impossible to follow in the normal fashion. He then thanked the Board. ATTORNEY MATTERS: MEMBER MATTERS: None Mr. Connelly noted that he will be absent for the next meeting on June 16, 1999. He then proceeded to explain his previous statement that Mr. Hass was "unskilled". He indicated that his comment needed to be completed, and indicated that Mr. Hass defends his employees, and apologized to Mr. Hass. CODE ENFORCEMENT bOARD MINUTES Of REGULAR MEETING OF MAY 19, 1999 Ms. Barczyk'asked if everyone received a copy of the letter from Ms. Shaw. Mr. Bonacci proceeded to give details of the issue of Ms. Shaw's letter about an incomplete subdivision cleared by Cornerstone Builders. At the time, Mr. Koford was City Manager, and upon recommendation from the City Engineer, it was determined that this property would be clear-cut. A permit was issued, the land was cleared, and nothing further took place. He noted that Cornerstone is now out of business. Mr. Hass noted that there is a contract pending on this property with a new developer. There was more discussion on subdivision requirements and tracking their progress. Ms. Gdffin referred to a comment by Mr. Fred Wininger at the previous meeting, about Veto Beach having only one (1) code enforcement officer. Ms. Gdffin indicated that through a phone call, she was told that there is one (1) certified officer, and there are three (3) planners who are code enforcement officers also, and they use the citation system. Ms. Barczyk mentioned certification for Sebastian code enforcement officers. Mr. Hass commented that code enforcement officers are not required to be certified to issue citations, and the City of Sebastian will determine if it's in their best interest to have certified officers. He noted the expense involved with this process. PUBLIC INPUT: Mr. Clifford, 63 Joy Haven Ddve, thanked everyone for the consideration and determination in Case #99-14933. Mr. Herb Sturm asked who is responsible for the accuracy of the notice of violation headng. Atty. Stdnger explained the process and some of the wording in the hearings held by the Code Enforcement Board, and the role of cledcal staff. Mr. Sturm commented that Section 20A-5.9.A. 1. does not deal with fences in the easement. Atty. Stringer responded that this Board's finding of fact is that the fence is in the easement, and Mr. Sturm can argue this in court. MOTION by Connelly/Cavallo I make a motion we adjoum. Chmn. Neglia adjourned the meeting at 5:10 pm. (5/24/99) FORM 8B MEMORANDUM OF-VOTING CONFLICT FOR COUNTY, MUNICIPAL, AND OTHER LOCAL PUBLIC OFFICERS NAME OF BOARD, COUNCI COMMIBBION, AU HOBITY, OR COMMITTEE THE BOARD. COUNCIL., COMML~.SION, AUTHORITY, OR COMMITTEE ON NAME OF POLITICAl. SUBDIVISION: ! MY POSITION IS: L~LECTtVE ~"/APPOINTiVE WHO MUST FILE FORM 88 This form is for use by any person serving at the county, city, or other local level of government on an appointed or elected board, council, commission, authority, or committee. It applies equally to members of advisory and non-advisory bodies who are presented with a voting conflict of interest under Section 112.3143, Florida Statutes. The requirements of this law are mandatory; although the use of this particular form is not required by [aw, you are encouraged to use it in making the disclosure required by taw. Your responsibilities under the law when faced with a measure in which you have a conflict of interest will vary greatly depending on whether you hold an elective or appointive position. For this reason, please pay close attention to the instructions on this form before completing the reverse side and filing the form. INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION t'12.3t43, FLORIDA STATUTES ELECTED OFFICERS: A person holding elective county, municipal, or other local public office MUST ABSTAIN from voting on a measure which inures to his special private gain. Each local officer also is prohibited from knowingly voting on a measure which inures to the special gain of a principal (other than a government agency) by whom he is retained. In either case, you should disclose the conflict: PRIOR TO THE VOTE BEING TAKEN by publicly stating [o the assembly the nature of your interest in the measure on which you are abstaining from voting; and WITHIN 1.5 DAYS A J- tI:R THE VOTE OCCURS by completing and filing this form with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the meeting, who should incorporate the form in the minutes. APPOINTED OYF1CERS: A person holding appointive county, municipal, or other local public office MUST ABSTAIN from voting on a measure which inures to his special private gain. Each local officer also is prohibited from knowingly voting on a measure which inures to the special gain of a principal (other than a government agency) by whom he is retained. A person holding an appointive local office otherwise may participate in a matter in which he has a conflict of interest, but must disclose the nature of the conflict before making any attempt to influence the decision by oral or written communication, whether made by the officer or at his direction. IF Yal~ INTEND TO MAKE ANY ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION PRIOR TO THE MEETING AT WHICH TH~DTE WILL BE TAKEN: · You should complete and file this form (before making any attempt to influence the decision) with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the meeting, who will incorporate the form in the minutes. · A copy of the form should be provided immediately to the other members of the agency. · The form should be read publicly al the meeting to consideration of the matter in which you have a of interest. 1F YOU MAKE NO A 1 1 i::MPT TO.INFLUENCE THE DECISION EXCEPT BY DISCUSSION OR VOTE AT THE MEETING: · You should disclose orally the nature of your conflict in the measure before participating. · You should complete the form and file it within 15 days after the vote occurs with the person responsible for recording the minu of the meeting, Who should incbrp0rate the form in the minutes. DISCLOSURE OF ,,~'ATE OFFICER'S INTERE~' (a) A measure came or will come before my agency which (check one) i//inured to my special private gain; or inured to the special gain of , by whom I am retained. (b) The measure before my agency and the nature of my interest in the measure is as follows: Date Filed NOTICE: UNDER PROVISIONS OF FLORIDA STATUTES §112.317 (1985), A FAILURE TO MAKE ANY REQUIREDi DISCLOSURE CONSTITUTES GROUNDS FOR AND MAY BE PUNISHED BY ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING: IMPEACHMENT, REMOVAL OR SUSPENSION FROM OFFICE OR EMPLOYMENT, DEMOTION, REDUCTION IN SALARY, REPRIMAND, OR A CIVIL PENALTY NOT TO EXCEED $5,000. City of Sebastian 1225 MAIN STREET [] SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA 329.58 TELEPHONE (561) 589-.5.537 O FAX (561) 589-2566 CITY OF SEBASTIAN CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF MEETING ltELD /~/~ l°/~ l~ APPROVED AT MEETING HELD E. ANN BRACK