HomeMy WebLinkAboutCEB 102017 Minutes
Code Enforcement Board
Minutes – Final Draft
September 6, 2017 at 9:00 a.m.
Board of County Commissioners
Building and Code Regulation Division
Commission Chambers
I. CALL TO ORDER
The Code Enforcement Board meeting was called to order at 9:00 a.m., by Mr. Ralph Fogg.
II. PLEDGE TO THE FLAG
All those present rose to pledge allegiance to the flag.
III. ROLL CALL
PRESENT
Chairman……………………………………………………….………..Mr. Ralph Fogg
Vice-Chair………………….……………………………….……….......Mrs. Margaret Monahan
Board Members..………………………………………………………...Mr. Wes Taylor
…………………………………………………………………………...Mr. Randy Murdock
…………………………………………………………………………...Mr. Brad Currie
…………………………………………………………………………...Mr. Patrick Campion
Board Attorney…………………………………………………….…….Mr. Jack Krieger
ABSENT: Mr. Ray Hofmann.
IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES – AUGUST 2, 2017
Mr. Taylor made a motion to accept the minutes of AUGUST 2, 2017.
Mr. Campion seconded and the motion carried unanimously.
V. SWEARING IN OF STAFF MEMBERS
STAFF PRESENT
Assistant County Attorney……………………………………………....Katherine Barbieri
Building and Code Regulation Manager……….…………………….….Monica Graziani
Building Official…………………………………………………………Carl Peterson
Code Enforcement Supervisor…………………………………………...Danielle Williams
Code Enforcement Officer ……………………………………………....Melissa Brubaker
……………………………………………………………………………Bea Goycochea
……………………………………………………………………………Dana DiFrancesco
…………………………………………………………………………....Monica Vargas Barrios
……………………………………………………………………………Mirlande Moise
Board Secretary.………………………………………………………….Debbie Isenhour
Monica Graziani, Carl Peterson, Danielle Williams, Melissa Brubaker, Bea Goycochea, Dana DiFrancesco,
Monica Vargas Barrios and Mirlande Moise were sworn in.
VI. PUBLIC COMMENTS: None.
2
VII. CONSENT AGENDA
Rescind Satisfaction of Fine and Release of Lien _____________________________________________
Rescind Satisfaction of Fine and Release of Lien – Agripina Virto & Charles C. Waters – Case No. 41831
Rescind Finding of Fact, Conclusion of Law and Order ________________________________________
Rescind Finding of Fact, Conclusion of Law and Order – PSL Professional Center LLC – Case No. 91570
Satisfaction of Fine and Release of Lien__________________________________________________
Satisfaction of Fine and Release of Lien – Agripina Virto and Charles C. Waters – Case No. 79533
Satisfaction of Fine and Release of Lien – Tarpon IV LLC – Case No. 71533
Request for Fine Reduction Hearing_____________________________________________________
Request for Fine Reduction Hearing – Calvin Richardson – Case No. 40929
Mr. Taylor made a motion to approve and accept staff’s recommendation as presented.
Mr. Currie seconded and the motion carried unanimously.
VIII. VIOLATION HEARING:
The following cases were abated, removed, or withdrawn from the agenda:
Case No. Location of Violation Contractor/Owner/Violator/Name
91142 114 Camelot Dr., Ft. Pierce Cora M. Willis
91011 3803 Avenue I, Ft. Pierce Willie E. and Petrinnia Keith
91545 2805 Carol Pl., Ft. Pierce Lucy Y. Shinn
91158 214 Olson Ave., Ft. Pierce George F. Shotto
Case No. 89463 was heard first on the agenda:
Case No. 89463, Location of violation, 6388 Citrus Ave., Fort Pierce, FL, Property Owner, Joan M. Sells
(LF EST). There was no one present to represent the property owner.
Officer Brubaker addressed the Chairman and Board and stated Staff is asking for a continuance of this case
to the October 4, 2017 Code Board.
Chairman Fogg addressed the Board and stated we are looking for a continuation.
Mr. Murdock made a motion in reference to Case No. 89463 that the Code Enforcement Board
continue this case to the Code Enforcement Board hearing on October 4, 2017.
Mr. Taylor seconded and the motion carried unanimously.
Case No. 90794, Location of violation, 954 Fra Mar Pl., Apt. B, Fort Pierce, FL, Property Owner, Eric C.
Smith (TR). Eric C. Smith (TR) the property owner was sworn in by the Board’s Secretary.
Officer Goycochea addressed the Board and stated for the record she is submitting two (2) photos dated
February 9, 2017, one (1) photo dated July 6, 2017, one (1) photo dated September 1, 2017 and one (1)
photo dated September 5, 2017.
Officer Goycochea stated on February 9, 2017, she inspected the property at 954 Fra Mar Pl. and found it
in violation of Section 8.00.03, Accessory Structure, the cargo container is not permitted and Section
3.01.03, of the St. Lucie County Land Development Code, the cargo container is not permitted in RM -11
Zoning, to please remove it. She issued a letter on February 13, 2017 with a compliance date of February
3
27, 2017. She stated after receiving no compliance, she issued a certified Notice to Appear letter for the
August 2, 2017 Code Board meeting.
Officer Goycochea stated at the end of July Mr. Smith came into the Code Enforcement Office and
explained that he was a contractor and that he was using the container as a stor age shed. She stated Mr.
Smith was contacting engineers so he can obtain the proper permits to architecturally design the cargo
container into a storage shed. She stated Staff asked the Board at the August 2, 2017 Code Board to
continue the case. She noted as of September 5, 2017 the property is still in violation and Mr. Smith is here
to ask for more time.
Chairman Fogg asked Mr. Smith if he is in violation or are you not.
Mr. Smith stated he does not think so, the shipping container has been there for years.
Chairman Fogg stated it is not allowed in that area.
Mr. Smith stated he thinks the law has changed recently.
Monica Graziani, Building and Code Compliance Manager stated there has been no change in the law.
Mr. Campion asked Mr. Smith do you have an understanding with something to go on.
Mr. Smith answered when you first issued this to me he was told you were not allowed to have shipping
containers on residential property. He stated apparently something happened where somebody over here in
Fort Pierce is now allowed to build a house out of a shipping container on a residential property so
something has changed.
Chairman Fogg stated we are talking about the County it is two different situations here.
Mr. Smith stated it is in the County the address in 4600 Grady, the house is being made out of shipping
containers.
Chairman Fogg stated we are not talking about that we are talking about you.
Mr. Smith stated he understands that but the law has changed since you first issued this to me you plainly
said you have to get rid of it. He stated when he came in to the last meeting he was told he could keep it
but he has to change it to look like a shed. He stated the issue he is having right now is getting the tie
down.
Monica Graziani, Building and Code Compliance Manager stated she did speak to Mr. Smith about this
issue. She stated cargo containers are only a permitted use in industrial zoning they are no t permitted in
residential zoning districts. She stated there is a new fad that is nationwide where folks are building single
family homes using cargo containers and they must meet the Florida Building Code to do so. She stated
they are modified, they still look like a shipping container, it is ultra-modern there are windows and doors
put into the design of these containers so it is kind of oranges and apples there is no comparison between
the use of a cargo container for a storage shed versus a single fa mily structure.
Monica Graziani further stated when Mr. Smith came in and discussed with her his violation she advised
him it is not allowed however she tried to think outside the box and offer him a solution which was if you
can make it where it does not look like a shed which means some time of exterior façade that would be
permitted in compliance with the Building Code, so that we know it would be safe including the tie-downs
and everything else that is required that we would work with him because we really more about the
aesthetics of a cargo container in a residential neighborhood. She stated we allow sheds but do not really
want a proliferation of cargo containers. She stated you can obtain this things very cheaply, we have
commercial districts we are chasing them like crazy, because people are picking them up really cheap and
throwing them on their lots. She stated people are realizing now it is not the method to use for storage you
4
have to do the appropriate other options. She stated so she tried to work with Mr. Smith she offered him a
solution, she believes her Staff told her and Mr. Smith just mentioned now it is very costly, he got some
costs from some engineers. She stated he is a contractor and initially he told her it would not be a prob lem
he would be able to modify it so it did not look like a freight container, so shame on her she tried to offer a
solution and it kind of did not work out because it is too expensive for Mr. Smith to do that.
Chairman Fogg asked Mr. Smith if he understands that.
Mr. Currie stated he has a question. He asked Staff to go back to the aerial why is the container not
showing on the aerial.
Mr. Smith answered it is in the back left hand corner.
Mr. Currie stated to Mr. Smith you are saying it has been ther e forever and he is not seeing it.
Mr. Smith answered it has been there three years at least.
Mr. Currie stated three years is a lot different than forever.
Mr. Smith stated he has been living at the property for a few years, it is a rental property he has owned
since 2000. He stated his intention is to make it look like his house, side it, do whatever he has to do. He
stated right now he is having a problem with the engineer’s getting the tie down situation squared away.
Mr. Campion asked Mr. Smith if that is why he is here today he is asking for more time to get that done.
Mr. Smith answered yes he would like to keep it and make it look appropriate, whatever you guys require,
but it is just taking a little bit more time.
Chairman Fogg asked Mr. Smith so are you thinking maybe in sixty (60) days you can get it straightened
out.
Mr. Smith answered yes that would be fine if not he will remove it.
Chairman Fogg asked the Board if they had any questions on this if not we are looking for a motion.
Mr. Campion made a motion in reference to Case No. 90794 that the Code Enforcement Board makes
the following determination: After hearing the facts in this case, the testimony, and the
recommendations of staff with regard to the existence of a violation that we determine the violation in
fact did occur and the alleged violator committed the violation. An Order of Enforcement is
warranted. If the Order of Enforcement is not complied with by December 5, 2017, a fine of up to
$250.00 per day may be imposed. A cost of $200.00 has been imposed as the cost for pros ecuting this
case. Please take notice that on the 1st Wednesday of the month after the date given for compliance,
at 9:00 am or soon thereafter, as may be heard, a Fine Hearing will be held if the violation is not abated
by the given compliance date.
Mr. Taylor seconded and the motion carried unanimously.
Case No. 90908, Location of violation, 602 ½ S Market Ave., Fort Pierce, FL, Property Owner, William B.
and Martha J. Brown. There was no one present to represent the property owner.
Officer Goycochea addressed the Chairman and stated Staff is requesting a continuation of this case to the
October 4, 2017 meeting.
Mrs. Monahan made a motion in reference to Case No. 90908 that the Code Enforcement Board
continue this case to the Code Enforcement Board hearing on October 4, 2017.
5
Mr. Campion seconded and the motion carried unanimously.
Case No. 91194, Location of violation, 3505 Avenue F., Fort Pierce, FL, Property Owner, Snyfer Partners
LLC. There was no one present to represent the property owner.
Officer Moise addressed the Chairman and stated Staff is requesting a continuation of this case on behalf of
the owner to the October 4, 2017 meeting.
Mr. Currie made a motion in reference to Case No. 91194 that the Code Enforcement Board continue
this case to the Code Enforcement Board hearing on October 4, 2017.
Mrs. Monahan seconded and the motion carried unanimously.
Case No. 88042, Location of violation, 191 SE El Sito Ct., Port St. Lucie, FL, Property Owner, David
Patterson. Mr. Patterson the property owner was sworn in by the Board’s Secretary.
Officer Goycochea addressed the Board and stated for the record she is submitting two (2) photos dated May
17, 2016, three (3) photos dated February 21, 2017, two (2) photos dated September 1, 2017 and two (2)
photos dated September 5, 2017.
Officer Goycochea stated on May 17, 2016, she inspected the property at 191 SE El Sito Ct. and found it in
violation of Section 13.08.01, for roof repair. She issued a letter on May 18, 2016 with a compliance date of
June 1, 2016. She stated on May 24, 2016 Mr. Patterson came into the office and explained he has had
financial issues for the past two (2) years, he really wants to co rrect the violation and asked for a sixty (60)
day extension.
Officer Goycochea stated on July 6, 2016 Mr. Patterson called and asked for another extension because he is
unable to find a roofer. She stated on August 16, 2016 Mr. Patterson came in again and stated he is waiting
on a settlement in order to be able to fix his roof. She stated she did explain to him that she can give him
another thirty (30) day extension, and after that she would have to send him to the November 2016 Code
Board. She stated the case was removed from the November Code Board since Mr. Patterson was in the
process of receiving financial help from Community Services. She stated on January 5, 2017 after receiving
no contact, a certified Notice to Appear letter was prepared and sent for March 7, 2017 Code Board. She
stated on February 22, 2017 the case was removed from the March Code Board per the request of Monica
Graziani, the Department Manager. She stated Mr. Patterson was given an additional ninety (90) days to
repair the roof and he was working with Community Services. She stated on May 10, 2017 Staff spoke with
Jennifer Hance from Community Services and no application was applied for. She sent a certified Notice to
Appear letter for the June Code Board.
Officer Goycochea stated at the June 7, 2017 Code Board staff asked the Board to continue the case to August.
She stated on August 1, 2017, Staff spoke with Chuck Washington, representative from the Self Program and
Mr. Patterson was approved for a loan and the loan has closed as of August 2, 2017 and a roofer has been
contracted. She stated as of August 1, 2017 the property is still in violation and Mr. Patterson is here to ask
for more time.
Chairman Fogg asked Mr. Patterson if he is in violation.
Mr. Patterson stated he is short money that is his situation.
Chairman Fogg stated this started back June 2016 and you keep asking for extensions, somewhere it has to
stop, we cannot keep continuing this. He asked Mr. Patterson what is the solid program you have working
right now that will take care of this.
Mr. Patterson held up a piece of paper and said this was signed yesterday. He stated Andros Roofing came
to his house yesterday. He stated Lloyd Constant of Andros Roofing is a nice man, he is a marine, a veteran
6
he just has a lot of work. He stated Mr. Constant is trying to get to it. Mr. Patterson stated he received the
money as was stated with the Self Program.
Chairman Fogg asked Mr. Patterson if Andros Roofing is licensed.
Mr. Patterson answered in the affir mative.
Chairman Fogg asked Mr. Patterson if Andros Roofing is going to pull a permit for him.
Mr. Patterson answered in the affirmative he is doing the whole thing.
Chairman Fogg stated it is very important that we have found here on the Board to make sure the permit is
proper, we are trying to help you but we cannot keep giving you more time and we are really happy that you
have that. He stated he does not know if anybody else on the Board has any questions or thoughts on this.
Mr. Campion stated he is familiar with the Self Program and is very happy that Mr. Patterson was able to
take advantage of it and get a new roof on there for you. He asked Mr. Patterson if the roofer let you know
what kind of time frame he is working on and where you are on his calendar, did he give you a date.
Mr. Patterson answered no.
Mr. Campion asked Mr. Patterson do you think it would be fair to guess he will be getting to you in the next
sixty (60) days.
Mr. Patterson answered he does not know.
Mr. Murdock addressed the Board and stated because of the pending weather situation we do not know what
these contractor’s time lines are going to be. He stated he would try to give him as much leeway as we
possibly can.
Mr. Currie stated he has a motion.
Mr. Currie made a motion in reference to Case No. 88042 that the Code Enforcement Board makes
the following determination: After hearing the facts in this case, the testimony, and the
recommendations of staff with regard to the existence of a violation that we determine the violation in
fact did occur and the alleged violator committed the violation. An Order of Enforcement is
warranted. If the Order of Enforcement is not complied with by January 31, 2018, a fine of up to
$250.00 per day may be imposed. The prosecution co st was waived on this case. Please take notice
that on the 1st Wednesday of the month after the date given for compliance, at 9:00 am or soon
thereafter, as may be heard, a Fine Hearing will be held if the violation is not abated by the given
compliance date.
Mr. Campion seconded and the motion carried unanimously.
The Hall was sounded and Mrs. Monahan read the name and number of the case of those not present
into the record:
Default Cases:
Case No. Location of Violation Property Owner/Contractor/Violator______
89802 S 35th St., Fort Pierce Khadijeh R. Grace
90942 115 SE Celestia Ct., Port St. Lucie Jemsellis Inc.
91039 4002 Greenwood Dr., Ft. Pierce Edgar and Nency Perez
90589 13241 NW Harbour Ridge Blvd., Palm City Die Sprossen LLC
91210 1008 N 39th St., Fort Pierce Shirley Ellis
91786 7706 Lockwood Dr., Fort Pierce William B. Ealy
7
90664 3601 Avenue S, Fort Pierce Edith K. Tinapp
90730 Lot behind 2005 N 46 th St., Fort Pierce Ernest N. Foster and Bertha L. Sullivan
90749 Lot behind 1103 N 37th St., Fort Pierce William M. and Brenda G. Brown
91253 5000 Barcelona Ave., Fort Pierce Martini D. Thompson Jr.
91605 102 N 38th St., Fort Pierce Axia Captial LLC
92097 10331 Lennard Rd., Port St. Lucie Family Dollar Stores of Florida LLC
92078 10331 Lennard Rd., Port St. Lucie Family Dollar
91238 5405 Palm Dr., Fort Pierce Craig M. Johnson and Jimmy D. Johnson
Mr. Taylor made a motion in reference to the cases read into the record that the Code Enforcement
Board enter an Order of Finding against the violator finding the violator in default and if the violator
does not appear to contest the violations against him/her that the Board adopt the recommendation of
staff as set forth on the agenda.
Mr. Murdock seconded and the motion carried unanimously.
IX. FINE HEARING:
Case No. 88931, Location of violation, 806 S. 40th Ct., Ft. Pierce, FL, Property Owner, John H. Stamm Jr.
There was no one present to represent the property owner.
Officer Moise addressed the Chairman and stated Staff is asking the Board for a continuance of this case to
the October 4, 2017 meeting on behalf of the owner.
Mrs. Monahan stated a second continuance, why are we continuing it so many times.
Officer Moise answered because they have applied for their permit but there were some issues they have
been dealing with but they are working on it and have kept in contact with her.
Mr. Campion made a motion in reference to Case No. 88931 that the Code Enforcement Board
continue this case to the Code Enforcement Board hearing on October 4, 2017.
Mr. Murdock seconded and the motion carried unanimously.
Case No. 87174 and Case No. 87175 are Companion Cases
Case No. 87174, Location of violation, 8251-8253 Business Park Dr., Port St. Lucie, FL, Property Owner,
FL Holdings 1000 LLC. Jennifer Trent, representative for the property owner, Ms. Rose and Andrea Dixon,
representatives for the tenant/violator were sworn in by the Board’s Secretary.
Officer Brubaker addressed the Board and stated for the record she is re-submitting one (1) photo dated
March 8, 2016 and submitting one (1) photo dated September 1, 2017. She stated this case was heard at the
February 1, 2017 Code Board and found in violation for Section 11.05.00 , operating a church without a
Zoning Compliance and Section 11.05.01, to obtain a permit to bring the space into compliance with the Use
and Occupancy classification. She stated the Board gave a compliance date of September 1. 2017. She stated
on June 27, 2017 the tenant applied for the Use and Occupancy Classification permit and they are working
on it. She stated she has had contact with the tenant and the representative of the property. She noted as of
September 5, 2017 the property does remain in violation and the tenants and representative are here to ask
for more time.
Chairman Fogg asked if this is in a commercial area.
Mrs. Monahan asked where this is.
Mr. Currie answered off of US 1 on the west side.
8
Officer Brubaker stated across from Savanna Club.
Jennifer Trent addressed the Board and stated she is the representative for FL Holdings LLC. She stated this
buyer does live in California, he purchased the property early 2016 and he hired a local management company
to assist with the management of the property. She stated during that time he found out Word of Faith was
in violation due to the use of the occupancy, the then property manager was assisting them through the process
unfortunately that relationship did not work out that property manager was ceased.
Ms. Trent stated she was brought on August 1, 2017 she is with NAI Southcoast and she has a lot of
experience with code enforcement and building codes and rules and regulations, she has stepped in to assist
the property owner who again is an absentee owner but is very much in support of the tenants we actually
have had many conference calls with them in regards to the situation. She stated with her experience in this
department she will be assisting with them.
Ms. Trent stated they have applied for their permit, they have a lot of comments they have to go through.
She stated there are some issues with having a church, firewalls, and those type of things that they are working
through. She stated we have stepped in, we are helping them, the landlord wants to have these type of
church’s come into compliance and they are good tenants, they run a very worthy business in this location so
we would like to keep them. She stated on behalf of the property owner as well as the tenants we would like
to ask for more time at least for NAI Southcoast to step in assist them with the permitting process and get
their use permit and zoning application completed.
Chairman Fogg asked Ms. Trent what time frame she was thinking.
Ms. Trent answered they have received the last round of comments from the County, so she is going to be
assisting with them and their architect to respond to those comments so we can move this on a little bit faster.
She stated we are talking about a church here they are not experienced in building codes and regulations and
unfortunately the people who were helping them before were not experienced as well. She stated we are very
experienced in this in our company that is part of the reason they were hired August 1, 2017 and have been
diving into this immediately. She stated at this point she can only ask for time.
Chairman Fogg asked Ms. Trent what does she thing the time frame would be.
Ms. Trent answered the tenants would like to ask for six (6) months, she is pretty sure they can get this
resolved much sooner than that.
Andrea Dixon addressed the Board and stated they have had several meeting with Joe Cicio and he is very
helpful in educating us. She stated the last meeting they had was about three (3) weeks ago with him, her
director at the church, the architect and another representative from the church and he really provided a wealth
of information based upon the reviews that the County gave back to us. She stated we are right now in the
process of getting the electrician. She stated Joe Cicio was very helpful to us and we are working together
with him so we are asking for a good six (6) months. She stated as a non-profit organization funds are another
issue that we have to consider.
Chairman Fogg asked the Board if they have any questions on this.
Mrs. Monahan stated she has a motion.
Mrs. Monahan made a motion in reference to Case No. 87174 that the Code Enforcement Board makes
the following determination: After hearing the facts in the case, the testimony, and the report of staff
that the violation still exists, after considering the gravity of the violation, the actions if any taken by
the violator to correct the violation and any previous violations, we make the following determination:
A fine of $250.00 per day shall be imposed for each day the violation exists starting March 30, 2018
with a maximum fine not to exceed $5,000.00.
Mr. Murdock seconded and the motion carried unanimously.
9
Case No. 87175, Location of violation, 8251-8253 Business Park Dr., Port St. Lucie, FL, Tenant/Violator,
Word of Faith and Praise Ministries. Jennifer Trent, representative for the property owner, Ms. Rose and
Andrea Dixon, representatives for the tenant/violator were sworn in by the Board’s Secretary.
Officer Brubaker addressed the Board and stated for the record she is re-submitting one (1) photo dated
March 8, 2016 and submitting one (1) photo dated September 1, 2017. She stated this case was heard at the
February 1, 2017 Code Board and found in violation for Section 11.05.00 , operating a church without a
Zoning Compliance and Section 11.05.01, to obtain a permit to bring the space into compliance with the Use
and Occupancy classification. She stated the Board gave a compliance date of September 1. 2017. She stated
on June 27, 2017 the tenant applied for the Use and Occupancy Classification permit and they are working
on it. She stated she has had contact with the tenant and the representative of the property. She noted as of
September 5, 2017 the property does remain in violation and the tenants and representative are here to ask
for more time.
Chairman Fogg asked if this is in a commercial area.
Mrs. Monahan asked where this is.
Mr. Currie answered off of US 1 on the west side.
Officer Brubaker stated across from Savanna Club.
Jennifer Trent addressed the Board and stated she is the representative for FL Holdings LLC. She stated this
buyer does live in California, he purchased the property early 2016 and he hired a local management company
to assist with the management of the property. She stated during that time he found out Word of Faith was
in violation due to the use of the occupancy, the then property manager was assisting them through the process
unfortunately that relationship did not work out that property manager was ceased.
Ms. Trent stated she was brought on August 1, 2017 she is with NAI Southcoast and she has a lot of
experience with code enforcement and building codes and rules and regulations, she has stepped in to assist
the property owner who again is an absentee owner but is very much in support of the tenants we actually
have had many conference calls with them in regards to the situation. She stated with her exper ience in this
department she will be assisting with them.
Ms. Trent stated they have applied for their permit, they have a lot of comments they have to go through.
She stated there are some issues with having a church, firewalls, and those type of things that they are working
through. She stated we have stepped in, we are helping them, the landlord wants to have these type of
church’s come into compliance and they are good tenants, they run a very worthy business in this location so
we would like to keep them. She stated on behalf of the property owner as well as the tenants we would like
to ask for more time at least for NAI Southcoast to step in assist them with the permitting process and get
their use permit and zoning application completed.
Chairman Fogg asked Ms. Trent what time frame she was thinking.
Ms. Trent answered they have received the last round of comments from the County, so she is going to be
assisting with them and their architect to respond to those comments so we can move this on a little bit faster.
She stated we are talking about a church here they are not experienced in building codes and regulations and
unfortunately the people who were helping them before were not experienced as well. She stated we are very
experienced in this in our company that is part of the reason they were hired August 1, 2017 and have been
diving into this immediately. She stated at this point she can only ask for time.
Chairman Fogg asked Ms. Trent what does she thing the time frame would be.
Ms. Trent answered the tenants would like to ask for six (6) months, she is pretty sure they can get this
resolved much sooner than that.
10
Andrea Dixon addressed the Board and stated they have had several meeting with Joe Cicio and he is very
helpful in educating us. She stated the last meeting they had was about three (3) weeks ago with him, her
director at the church, the architect and another representative from the church and he really provided a wealth
of information based upon the reviews that the County gave back to us. She stated we are right now in the
process of getting the electrician. She stated Joe Cicio was very helpful to us and we are working together
with him so we are asking for a good six (6) months. She stated as a non-profit organization funds are another
issue that we have to consider.
Chairman Fogg asked the Board if they have any questions on this.
Mrs. Monahan stated she has a motion.
Mrs. Monahan made a motion in reference to Case No. 87175 that the Code Enforcement Board makes
the following determination: After hearing the facts in the case, the testimony, and the report of staff
that the violation still exists, after considering the gravity of the violation, the actions if any taken by
the violator to correct the violation and any previous violations, we make the following determination:
A fine of $250.00 per day shall be imposed for each day the violation exists starting March 30, 2018
with a maximum fine not to exceed $5,000.00.
Mr. Taylor seconded and the motion carried unanimously.
Case No. 87178 and Case No. 87180 are Companion Cases
Case No. 87178, Location of violation, 8243 Business Park Dr., Port St. Lucie, FL, Property Owner, FL
Holdings 1000 LLC. Jennifer Trent, representative for the property owner and Petal Pike representative for
the tenant/violator were sworn in by the Board’s Secretary.
Officer Brubaker addressed the Board and stated for the record she is re-submitting one (1) photo dated
March 8, 2016 and submitting one (1) photo dated September 1, 2017. She stated this case was heard at the
February 1, 2017 Code Board and found in violation for Section 11.05.00 , operating a church without a
zoning compliance and Section 11.05.01 to obtain a permit to bring the space into compliance with the Use
and Occupancy Classification that part has abated. She stated the Board gave a compliance date of September
1. 2017. She stated on August 8, 2017 the permit was issued for the Use and Occupancy classification and
once that permit is finaled they can obtain the Zoning Compliance. She stated she has have been in contact
with the representative of the property and the tenant and as of September 5, 2017 the property does remain
in violation.
Jennifer Trent addressed the Board and stated this is a very similar situation to one we just heard before again
the same history we went in on August 1, 2017 to help with this. She came in to assist with the situation
back on August 1, 2017 jumped in head first fortunately at United Pentecostal and Pastor Pike have
significantly more experience at the Building Department than the prior church. She stated they are well on
their way, they have received their permit, we have been watching them very closely, their contractor is
licensed and insured, has been working 24/7 to try and get this resolved. She stated they actually were trying
to shoot for September 1, 2017 but knowing contracting that does not always work they are well on their way
and again on behalf of the landlord and the tenant we ask for some more time for them to finish out this build-
out since they are clearly in process and close this case.
Chairman Fogg asked Ms. Trent looking here and it is back in March 2016, how long has the church been
operational.
Ms. Trent answered the church was operational in their current spac e for just for a few months prior to the
code violation coming about this property owner purchased the property unaware of the assembly usage and
the requirements. She stated the requirement mainly was they needed a back door because they are an
assembly use and there current space did not have a back door. She stated they are relocating to the next
door space, they applied for their permits, she is not quite sure of the history prior to her taking over August
1, 2017.
11
Ms. Pike stated since our meeting on February 1st she believes we have begun the process of obtaining plans,
drawings, getting them approved and reviewed by the Building Department. She stated we were issued our
permit on August 8, 2017, immediately we began demolishing and renovating the other side, ho wever with
the previous church we are well on our way. She stated funding is an issue but we really do need more time
because we are required to put up two (2) firewalls on both side of the space which is pretty big deal.
Mrs. Monahan asked how much time.
Ms. Pike answered she would say to December would be fine for us.
Chairman Fogg asked if there were any other comments from the Board or questions.
Mr. Murdock stated he says give them until January just in case.
Mrs. Monahan stated she was thinking that too.
Chairman Fogg stated we are looking for a motion.
Mrs. Monahan made a motion in reference to Case No. 87178 that the Code Enforcement Board makes
the following determination: After hearing the facts in the case, the testimony, and the report of staff
that the violation still exists, after considering the gravity of the violation, the actions if any taken by
the violator to correct the violation and any previous violations, we make the following determination:
A fine of $250.00 per day shall be imposed for each day the violation exists starting March 30, 2018
with a maximum fine not to exceed $5,000.00.
Mr. Murdock seconded and the motion carried unanimously.
Case No. 87180, Location of violation, 8243 Business Park Dr., Port St. Lucie, FL, Tenant/Violator, United
Pentecostal Fire Ministries Trinity International. Jennifer Trent, representative for the property owner and
Petal Pike representative for the tenant/violator were sworn in by the Board’s Secretary.
Officer Brubaker addressed the Board and stated for the record she is re-submitting one (1) photo dated
March 8, 2016 and submitting one (1) photo dated September 1, 2017. She stated this case was heard at the
February 1, 2017 Code Board and found in violation for Section 11.05.00 , operating a church without a
zoning compliance and Section 11.05.01 to obtain a permit to bring the space into compliance with the Use
and Occupancy Classification that part has abated. She stated the Board gave a compliance date of September
1. 2017. She stated on August 8, 2017 the permit was issued for the Use and Occupancy classification and
once that permit is finaled they can obtain the Zoning Compliance. She stated she has have been in contact
with the representative of the property and the tenant and as of September 5, 2017 the property does remain
in violation.
Jennifer Trent addressed the Board and stated this is a very similar situation to one we just heard before again
the same history we went in on August 1, 2017 to help with this. She came in to assist with the situation
back on August 1, 2017 jumped in head first fortunately at United Pentecostal and Pastor Pike have
significantly more experience at the Building Department than the prior church. She stated they are well on
their way, they have received their permit, we have been watching them very closely, their contractor is
licensed and insured, has been working 24/7 to try and get this resolved. She stated they actually were trying
to shoot for September 1, 2017 but knowing contracting that does not always work they are well on their way
and again on behalf of the landlord and the tenant we ask for some more time for them to finish out this build-
out since they are clearly in process and close this case.
Chairman Fogg asked Ms. Trent looking here and it is back in March 2016, how long has the church been
operational.
Ms. Trent answered the church was operational in their current space for just for a few months prior to the
code violation coming about this property owner purchased the property unaware of the assembly usage and
12
the requirements. She stated the requirement mainly was they needed a back door because they are an
assembly use and there current space did not have a back door. She stated they are relocating to the next
door space, they applied for their permits, she is not quite sure of the history prior to h er taking over August
1, 2017.
Ms. Pike stated since our meeting on February 1st she believes we have begun the process of obtaining plans,
drawings, getting them approved and reviewed by the Building Department. She stated we were issued our
permit on August 8, 2017, immediately we began demolishing and renovating the other side, however with
the previous church we are well on our way. She stated funding is an issue but we really do need more time
because we are required to put up two (2) firewalls on both side of the space which is pretty big deal.
Mrs. Monahan asked how much time.
Ms. Pike answered she would say to December would be fine for us.
Chairman Fogg asked if there were any other comments from the Board or questions.
Mr. Murdock stated he says give them until January just in case.
Mrs. Monahan stated she was thinking that too.
Chairman Fogg stated we are looking for a motion.
Mrs. Monahan made a motion in reference to Case No. 87180 that the Code Enforcement Board makes
the following determination: After hearing the facts in the case, the testimony, and the report of staff
that the violation still exists, after considering the gravity of the violation, the actions if any taken by
the violator to correct the violation and any previous violations, we make the following determination:
A fine of $250.00 per day shall be imposed for each day the violation exists starting March 30, 2018
with a maximum fine not to exceed $5,000.00.
Mr. Taylor seconded and the motion carried unanimously.
X. REPEAT VIOLATION: None.
XI. REFERRAL TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS: None.
XII. FINE REDUCTION HEARING:
Case No. 89431, Location of violation, 110 Banyan Dr., Port St. Lucie, FL, Property Owner, Yakut Properties
LLC. Fine Reduction requested by Yakut Properties LLC. Vivian Gonzalez, representative for the property
owner was sworn in by the Board’s Secretary.
Ms. Gonzalez addressed the Board and stated our property is updated and everything is fixed. She stated it
takes time for each permit to be fixed but now everything is abated.
Chairman Fogg asked Ms. Gonzalez this is property that you purchased.
Ms. Gonzalez answered in the affirmative.
There was discussion among the Board, Staff and Ms. Gonzalez on the case and the fines.
Mrs. Monahan asked Ms. Gonzalez why no one showed up to the Fine Hearing on April 5, 2017.
Ms. Gonzalez stated she does not know why she just knew about this one and she is here now.
13
Mrs. Monahan stated it bothers me that you made no effort since February to address this situation and asked
Staff if they have had any contact with this lady prior to the fine.
Officer Goycochea answered she has never had contact with this individual, she has had contact with the
owner which is a gentleman from out of the country. She stated he was applying for the permit and then he
just never did and it took him this long to get a permit or get a contractor to pull the permit for him.
Mrs. Monahan asked is this a rental house.
Ms. Gonzalez answered it is our property and we rent the house.
Monica Graziani, Building and Code Compliance Manager, addresse d the Board and stated she also spoke
to the owner multiple time because we did have a neighbor complain about the pool that was unsecured and
the high grass. She stated he did immediately address all of the issues. She stated he has just acquired the
property she believes earlier this year and he did work with Staff. She stated one of the issues was the fence
the other issues were we did an emergency order that the County Administrator signed to get the pool
addressed and he took care of that before we actually had to do it ourselves, so the owner has actually been
very cooperative in getting the property cleaned up.
Mrs. Monahan stated to Ms. Gonzalez so you are not the owner.
Ms. Gonzalez answered she represents the company.
Chairman Fogg stated if there is no other questions from the Board we are looking for a motion.
Mr. Campion made a motion in reference to Case No. 89431 that the Code Enforcement Board makes
the following determination: The fine of $5,000.00 and prosecution cost of $200.00 imposed by the
Code Enforcement Board is hereby reduced to the amount of $1,250.00 if paid within thirty (30) days
of this hearing or it will revert back to the original fine of $5,000.00 and a prosecution cost of $200.00 .
Mr. Murdock seconded and the motion carried.
Case No. 80398, Location of violation, 5138 Margaret Ann Ln., Ft. Pierce, FL, Property Owner, Jean R.
Deyerle. Fine Reduction requested by Gwendolyn Jabs. Gwendolyn Jabs and Delores Maynard were sworn
in by the Board’s Secretary.
Delores Maynard addressed the Board and stated she is Ms. Jab’s aunt and will be doing most of the talking
for her because she is familiar with the property. She stated we spoke with Jean the lady that owns the
property, she does not want it and she has agreed to sell it for what is owed on the property. She stated there
is $5,678.00 owed for taxes that excludes this year and Code has two (2) large fines against it. She stated the
property right now needs to be maintained the grass is way, way, wa y up, it has a shed on it that has to be
taken off, and the electrical box is no good she is going to have to put a .new electrical system in. She stated
it is going to cost her a lot of money to live on it.
Chairman Fogg stated we are sitting here as a Board and you are here requesting a fine reduction. He stated
this fine has been going on since February 2015. He stated the County has expenses no one has taken care
of it for all this year’s whomever has owned. He stated all the other things you have going on with it are no
in our situation we are only here for the fine reduction part.
There was discussion among Ms. Maynard on the fine reduction request and issues on the property and their
request for a $2,500.00 reduction in the fine.
Mrs. Monahan made a motion in reference to Case No. 80398 that the Code Enforcement Board makes
the following determination: The fine of $5,000.00 and prosecution cost of $200.00 imposed by the
Code Enforcement Board is hereby reduced to the amount of $1,200.00 this reduced fine must be paid
14
within thirty (30) days of this hearing or the fine will revert back to the original fine of $5,000.00 and
a prosecution cost of $200.00.
Mr. Currie seconded and the motion carried.
XIII. MOTION FOR REHEARING OR RECONSIDERATON: None.
XIII. OTHER BUSINESS: None.
XIV. STAFF BUSINESS:
Resolution No. 17-166 Ex Parte Communications Policy (Informational Only )
Resolution No. 95-236 Ex Parte Communications Policy (Informational Only )
Katherine Barbieri, Assistant County Attorney addressed the Chairman and the Board and stated she just
provided these recent resolutions because it is on the Ex Parte Communication and the Code Board is
Quasi-Judicial and the last time the resolution was done was 1995. She just thought it might be of interest
for you to read so you have the updated resolution and the 1995 one because it did not change very much.
Mr. Currie asked so what does it mean for us.
Katherine Barbieri answered it means as Quasi-Judicial if you do have any outside communications or
anything you are supposed to disclose them. She stated as Staff we discourage it because this is Quasi-
Judicial you are kind of like a judge. She stated if you do you have to disclose them and i t has an actual
procedure in the 1995 one on the disclosure.
Mrs. Monahan asked is that amongst ourselves.
Katherine Barbieri answered amongst yourselves you are not allowed it is a Sunshine Law violation, you
cannot talk amongst yourselves about anything that might come before you that is the Sunshine Law. She
stated this is if you go out and some property owner was to approach you outside and see you in the grocery
store and try to talk to you about something that is to come before you, you would disco urage it and just so
no but if you did not there is an actual procedure in there to disclose so we would know what has happened.
Mr. Currie stated that is not illegal though you can talk with an applicant you just have to tell it.
Mr. Krieger, Code Enforcement Board Attorney stated just be careful if somebody for instance came up to
you and said hey Mrs. Monahan I have this case in front of the Code Enforcement Board it has to do with
my lawn you might want to discourage them from talking with you further , but the fact of the matter is
when the matter comes before the Board Mrs. Monahan and this is just an example you have to say that you
were approached by that applicant about that. He stated and if an applicant said to you I want you to take a
look at my property it is not as bad as Staff says it is, you can do that, they are discouraging you from doing
that but you can do that, you can inspect the site but then you have to disclose that before a vote is taken.
He stated so you will have to say I went out there, I drove by there, I saw this and you can share that with
the Board in public, do not share anything with the Board privately it is a totally different thing. He stated
Sunshine Law is criminal keep that in mind.
ADJOURN: There was no further business and the meeting was adjourned at 10:15 a.m.