Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-09-1987 Minutes NUM; QE QE QQQBE QQQB Kt/EMINENT DQ6RQ MIgf lNQ MLR MUM O% HOZ 1. 13Q6 QfiW! PRESENT: Chairman John Linebarier, Vice Chairman Frank Carlsson, Members Gary Carroll, Robert Imes, Cathie Pollack and Bob Sorenson, Attorney John Hatcher, Building Official Cecil Hurst, Sergeant William Gailit and Deputy Clerk Amesbury. ABSENT: Joe Marbais (excused) Chairman Linebarier called the meeting to order at 7:27 p.m. and led everyone in the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag. Mrs. Pollack led everyone in prayer. Chairman Linebarier welcomed Cathie Pollack as a full member and Robert Imes as a new full member. II. MIN fiNQ REIM& QE NINQTK2 Vice Chairman Carlsson moved to approve the minutes of the January 12, 1987 Code Enforcement Board Meeting as printed and distributed. Motion seconded by Mr. Sorenson and approved unanimously. (lbof III. YIQL6IIM2 RURIN A. Albert O'Brien - Case 86-30 Building Official Hurst was sworn in by Deputy Clerk Amesbury. He then stated that after the last Code Board meeting the Police department attempted to serve Mr. O'Brien with the compliance order and were told that he had moved. Building Official Hurst stated that he was not able to locate the property owner. He further stated that after consultation with City Manager Ryan he requested the Shop department to tow away the dunk vehicle located at 328 New Meadows Court. The vehicle is now in the possession of the City at the City Garage. Building Official Hurst questioned the procedure to close this case. Attorney Hatcher stated that the procedure to close the case depended on what the City wants to do next. He further stated that under applicable state statutes the City can put a lien against the vehicle or any property in Orange County the property owner may have. Attorney Hatcher stated that in order to do this the Clerk must prepare a certified copy of the original Board order and have it recorded in the Orange County public records. He further explained that the City must wait a period of time for foreclosure on the lien and then present the Board with a form to initiate foreclosure against assets found. As a matter of record, Mr. O'Brien's violations ceased to exist on February 09, 1987 when the City towed away the vehicle. Attorney Hatcher recommends leaving the case 1 CEB 2/9/87 PAGE 2 open. Building Official Hurst then asked what the City should do with the vehicle. Attorney Hatcher stated that the question should be directed toward the City Attorney. Mrs. Pollack questioned where the towed vehicles would be stored. Building Official Hurst stated that probably a towing service would be contracted by the City to tow, store and access charges for the storing. Attorney Hatcher stated that Florida State Statutes authorize scrapping vehicles after due process. Chairman Linebarier stated that the Board considers their responsibility closed in Case 86-30 and any further action taken would be done by the City. B. Sam E. Murrell, Jr. - Case 86-32 Case 86-32 complied prior to the meeting and was dismissed by the City. C. Dennis Solomon Corp. & Elden L. Ward - Case 87-1 Case 87-1 complied prior to the meeting and was dismissed by the City. toy D. Susan C. Lowe - Case 87-2 As a matter of record, Mrs. Lowe was present to represent herself. Mrs. Lowe was sworn in by Deputy Clerk Amesbury. Building Official Hurst stated that this case began several weeks ago after a neighbor complained about dogs barking and the large number of dogs at 1503 Tangerwood Court. He further stated that when he went to inspect the property he found an odor and a large number of dogs both in the home and in the rear area of the home. He further stated that the yard was in bad need of cleaning up, but that particular problem was taken care of in a timely fashion. He presented photographs to the Board and stated that the area in the rear of the home with pens, a chain link fence and a privacy fence was where the dogs were housed. Building Official stated that the City Ordinance prohibits keeping more than three (3) dogs at a residential home and that it was obvious to him there were more than three (3) at 1503 Tangerwood Court. He further stated that Mrs. Lowe's attorney, Mr. Mark Lang informed him that Mrs. Lowe was down to four (4) dogs and needs an extension to find a home for one (1) more to come into compliance with the City Code. Vice Chairman Carlsson stated that it appeared that Mrs. Lowe has complied with the violation of sections 11-22 and 11-23 of the City Code and that she was only in violation of Ordinance 710 and Section 4-4 (c) at this time. He further stated that in light of the testimony so far, the odor does not appear to be a problem at this time either. Attorney Hatcher questioned Building 2 CEB 2/9/87 PAGE 3 Official Hurst as to any reduction in the number of animals. Building Official Hurst stated that at one time there appeared to be a reduction but currently there were more than three (3) dogs at Mrs. Lowe's residence. Mrs. Lowe stated that she has lived at 1503 Tangerwood Court for eight (8) years, has always raised these Australian Shepards and has never had a complaint until now. She further stated that these show dogs are kept in pens during the day while she is working and that she cleans up after them twice a day. Mrs. Lowe stated that in addition to her show dogs she also has a small dog that is twelve (12) years old. Vice Chairman Carlsson asked Mrs. Lowe how many dogs she has in her possession as of this date and Mrs. Lowe answered seven (7) . She stated that six (6) were the show dogs plus the one (1) mutt. Vice Chairman Carlsson asked her if she felt that she could comply by the date listed in the letter from her attorney (February 28, 1987) . Mrs. Lowe answered yes. Chairman Linebarier asked Mrs. Lowe what action she has taken to come into compliance with the City Code since the first Notice of Code Violations was sent to her by the City on December 18, 1986. Mrs. Lowe answered that she complied with the first two (2) items listed on the Violation form right away (i.e. sections 11-22 and 11-23) . She further stated that she has put her home up for sale and talked to numerous people about taking her dogs until she can sell her home and move somewhere that she can keep the dogs. Mrs. Lowe stated that she purchased some property further South in the state and intends to move there by June, 1987 at the very latest. Attorney Hatcher asked Building Official Hurst for his recommendation as to a reasonable amount of time for Mrs. Lowe to come into compliance. Building Official Hurst stated that if she could resolve the problem by February 28, 1987, he would be pleased. Mr. Carroll moved to give Mrs. Lowe until February 28, 1987 to get rid of all but three (3) dogs with a $50.00 a day fine for each day of noncompliance thereafter. Motion seconded by Vice Chairman Carlsson and approved unanimously. Mrs. Lowe stated that she wants to know who complained about her and feels that she has the right to know. Attorney Hatcher stated that the complainant was a matter of public record and Mrs. Lowe could go to City Hall to retrieve this information. As a matter of record, Mrs. Lowe signed and was given a Compliance Order. Chairman Carlsson called for a recess at 8:22 p.m. Meeting reconvened at 8:28 p.m. E. James E. & Meredith I. Moncrief - Case 87-4 (iv Mr. James E. Moncrief was present to represent himself. Mr. Moncrief was sworn in by Deputy Clerk Amesbury. Building 3 CEB 2/9/87 PAGE 4 Official Hurst presented a photograph taken on 2/9/87 of 124 Periwinkle showing a gray 2 door AMC (junk vehicle) . He further stated that on November 20, 1986 Mr. Moncrief was cited for four (4) junk vehicles in his mobile home park residence. Building Official Hurst stated that two (2) of the vehicles have been moved and that two (2) remain, the one (1) in the photograph and a 1976 Blue Ford pickup. He further stated that Mr. Moncrief was the property owner per the tax rolls. Chairman Linebarier stated that it should be entered into the records that Mr. Moncrief was currently in violation with only two (2) junk vehicles vs the four (4) originally cited for. Mr. Moncrief stated that in August and September of 1986 he was sick and that in October, 1986 his wife was in the hospital and has had recurrent health problems. He further stated that these health problems have caused a serious financial burden on him and that the money to tag the two (2) remaining vehicles went to pay hospital bills. He stated that he intended to keep the pickup truck and intends to get rid of the gray AMC as soon as he can resolve a title problem with it. Mr. Moncrief stated that he needs two (2) months to solve these problems. He indicated that he might possibly handle prior to this time frame, but two (2) months is preferable. Building Official Hurst asked Mr. Moncrief if the truck was operable and Mr. Moncrief stated that it just needed a tag. Mr. Sorenson asked Mr. Moncrief if the vehicle would run and Mr. Moncrief answered yes. Chairman Linebarier asked Mr. Moncrief if he was willing to remove the AMC. Building Official Hurst brought up the title problem. Mr. Moncrief stated that he would get rid of the AMC one way or another because he did not want to appear before the Board again. Chairman Linebarier informed Mr. Moncrief that he could retain both vehicles as long as they were tagged and street operable. Mr. Sorenson asked Mr. Moncrief how long he needed, Mr. Moncrief answered sixty (60) days. Vice Chairman Carlsson asked Mr. Moncrief when he could have the Blue Ford pickup tagged. Mr. Moncrief answered thirty (30) days. Vice Chairman Carlsson stated that he felt sixty (60) days was too long and made a motion to give Mr. Moncrief thirty (30) days to have the vehicles tagged and in operable condition or remove with a penalty of $25.00 per day for each day of noncompliance thereafter. Motion died for lack of a second. Building Official Hurst stated that he would recommend leniency in the Ford pickup instance but that the gray AMC should perhaps be addressed differently. Chairman Linebarier asked Mr. Moncrief if he had any place to move the AMC. Mr. Moncrief answered that he could possibly put it on his brother-in-law's property outside the City limits. Chairman Linebarier asked him when he could do this and Mr. Moncrief answered, in a couple of weeks. Attorney Hatcher asked Mr. Moncrief if he needed a 4 CEB 2/9/87 PAGE 5 towing permit for this procedure. Mr. Moncrief answered that he had a dump truck he could use to haul the car away. Attorney Hatcher questioned any salvage value on the vehicle. Mr. Moncrief stated that the title was tied up at Barnett Bank and that he needed to contact them in reference to selling the car for junk and applying the profit towards the balance due on the loan. Mr. Sorenson moved to give Mr. Moncrief until April 09, 1987 to bring the Blue Ford pickup into compliance and until February 23, 1987 on the gray AMC with a fine of $25.00 per day for each day of noncompliance thereafter. Motion seconded by Vice Chairman Carlsson and approved unanimously. As a matter of record, Mr. Moncrief signed and was given two (2) Compliance Orders (one (1) for each vehicle) . F. David G. & Patricia M. Andredne - Case 87-5 As a matter of record, there was no one present to represent the Andrednes. Building Official Hurst stated that the police department issued a Notice to Remove on November 17, 1986 for this junk vehicle violation (signed by the tenant, Patti A. Helms) . Since the vehicle was not removed, he issued a Notice of Code Violation on December 22, 1986, the matter was not resolved so a Notice of Hearing was issued on January 06, 1987. He further stated that he has had no response at all from the Andrednes (property owners per the tax rolls) . Building Official Hurst stated that the vehicle was on City propery. Vice Chairman Carlsson informed Building Official Hurst that if the vehicle was on public property, section 21-39 would be the proper code citation. Attorney Hatcher asked if the tags were run through DMV, Building Official Hurst stated the tags were expired and that they had not been run. Attorney Hatcher stated that it would be appropriate to entertain a motion to dismiss this case. Chairman Linebarier concurred. Sgt. Gailit stated that the Police department would handle the situation since the vehicle was located on a public right-of-way. Mr. Carroll moved to dismiss the case since it was cited under the wrong section and since the City was not sure that the property owner was the vehicle owner. Motion seconded by Mr. Imes and approved unanimously. G. Daniel J. Womack - Case 87-6 Mr. Womack complied prior to the meeting and the case was dismissed by the City. H. Gary L. & Vickie L. Armstrong - Case 87-8 As a matter of record, there was no one present to represent 5 CEB 2/9/87 PAGE 6 the Armstrongs. Building Official Hurst stated that they were the property owners per the tax rolls. He further stated that the case has been going on since November 19, 1986 when the police department issued a Notice to Remove for two (2) junk vehicles. He further stated that there has been no response at all from any of the citations. Chairman Linebarier stated that there have been ninety (90) days plus with no effort to remove these vehicles. Mr. Imes moved to give Mr. & Mrs. Armstrong until February 16, 1987 to come into compliance with a penalty of $25.00 per day for each day of noncompliance thereafter. Motion seconded by Mr. Sorenson. Vice Chairman Carlsson amended the motion to raise the fine to $50.00 per day, seconded by Mr. Imes. Amendment approved by Mr. Imes and Mr. Sorenson. VOTE ON AMENDMENT: The motion passed with Chairman Linebarier, Vice Chairman Carlsson, Members Sorenson, Pollack and Imes voting YEY and Member Carroll voting NEY. VOTE ON MOTION: Motion passed unanimously. I. Mrs. S.A. Reeves - Case 87-9 As a matter of record, there was no one present to represent Mrs. Reeves. Building Official Hurst presented three (3) photographs of the property at 501 W. Franklin Street taken on February 09, 1987. He then explained that Mrs. Reeves was an old time citizen with long standing violations of sections 11-22 and 11-23 of the City Code. Building Official Hurst stated that these violations have lasted through six (6) Building Officials and four (4) City Managers with each one unsuccessfully trying to get Mrs. Reeves to clean up the property. He further stated that Mrs. Reeves has appeared before the Commission in the past with nothing ever really being done (based on his review of the Commission minutes) . Building Official Hurst stated that this twelve (12) year old problem needed to finally be resolved. Mrs. Pollack stated that the pictures indicate to her that there has been an improvement in the problem. Building Official Hurst stated that she has managed to cut some of the tall grass but that there was much more. He further stated that the tall grass was actually hiding the cattle grazing in the back of her property. Mr. Sorenson questioned the condemnation possibility. Building Official Hurst stated that this option was not a real answer to the problem. Mrs. Pollack asked if the property has regular inspections by the Ocoee Fire Department. Building Official Hurst answered that he did not know. Mrs. Pollack stated that she felt the property was a potential danger. Chairman Linebarier asked Building Official Hurst for his recommendation on a time frame allowing Mrs. Reeves to properly clean up her property. Building Official Hurst stated that it could probably be done 6 CEB 2/9/87 PAGE 7 in a couple of days if she had some help. Mr. Carroll asked what would happen if the Board ordered her to clean up the property with a fine for noncompliance and she did not comply. Attorney Hatcher stated that the Clerk would give a certified copy of the original order to Orange County to be recorded in the public records, which would lead to a lien on her property. Building Official Hurst stated that in his opinion Mrs. Reeves would comply with a fine hanging over her head. Mr. Imes asked if the Board could instruct Mrs. Reeves to erect a fence around the property. Attorney Hatcher stated that there were a variety of ways for a respondent to come into compliance with the code. He further stated that the Board should limit their action to ordering compliance and letting the respondent solve the violation their own way. Vice Chairman Carlsson moved to cite Mrs. Reeves with noncompliance of sections 11-22 and 11-23 of the City Code and give her until March 09, 1987 to clean up all junk, trash, debris and excessive growth of grass and weeds to include rusted vehicle frames, rusty iron racks and fabricated metal between the road frontage and opaque fencing with a fine of $25.00 per day for each day of noncompliance thereafter. Motion seconded by Mr. Carroll. Chairman Linebarier moved to amend the motion to a fine of 850.00 per day instead of $25.00. Motion died for a lack of a second. Mrs. Pollack moved to amend the motion to access a fine of $100.00 per day vs $25.00. Motion died for a lack of a second. Original motion passed unanimously. J. James R. & Ouida Meeks - Case 87-10 Mr. & Mrs. Meeks complied prior to this meeting. OMB BuIP122 MUM A. City Manager - not present B. Fire Inspector - not present C. Building Official - Building Official Hurst stated that in reference to the Murrell Case (Case #86-32) he located the personal representative and was informed the property was sold to Junior Crawford. Upon contact of Mr. Crawford the property was cleaned up. He further stated that a lesson in probate carefulness was learned here. D. Board Attorney - Attorney Hatcher stated that the photographs presented by the Building Department were quite helpful in the Board weighing testimony. He further stated that he was working on a memorandum to update the Board members on recent changes to Florida State Statutes regarding 460, Code Enforcement Boards. E. Citizens - None 7 CEB 2/9/87 PAGE 8 F. Board Members - None MINIMUM Mr. Sorenson moved to adjourn, seconded by Mr. Carroll and approved unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 9:58 p.m. ok.11ietfiel#1.4:__GP#44441/44 hn Linebarier, Chairman ATTEST: ll)Deputy Clerk Ameabur 8