Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes April 3, 2013APRIL 3, 2013 HELD IN THE COMMISSION CHAMBERS ROGER POITRAS ANNEX 2300 VIItGINIA AVENUE FORT PIERCE, FLORIDA I. CALL TO ORDER The Code Enforcement Board meeting was called to order at 9:00 a.m., by Mr. 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-Chairman .................................. ..................................Mi•. Ray Hofmann Board Members .................................. ..................................Mr. Wes Taylor .................................................... ...................................Nh•. Randy Murdoc]< .................................................... ...................................Mrs. Margaret Monahan .................................................... ...................................Mr. Brad Currie Board Attorney .................................. ..................................Mi•. Jack Krieger IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES -MARCH 6, 2012 Mr. Currie made a motion to accept the minutes of MARCH 6, 2013 Mr. Taylor 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 Interim Building Supervisor ................................. ....................Carl Peterson Code Enforcement Supervisor ............................... ....................Danielle Williams Code Enforcement Officer .................................. .....................Melissa Brubaker ................................................................... ....................Lynn Swartzel ................................................................... ....................Monica Vargas Barrios ................................................................... ....................Ed Roseberry Board Secretary ................................................ ....................Deborah Isenhour Monica Graziani, Carl Peterson, Danielle Williams, Melissa Brubaker, Lynn Swartzel, Monica Vargas Barrios, and Ed Roseberry were sworn in. 1 VI. CONSENT AGENDA Satisfaction of Fine and Release of Lien Jai Beharry Case No. 73132 Gerald Andrews Case No. 47226 Request for a Fine Reduction Hearin Auto Clinic FP, lnc. Case No. 7725 Mr. Hofmann made a motion to approve and accept staff s recommendation as presented. Mr. Murdock seconded and the motion carried unanimously. For the Record: Consent Agenda Request for a Fine Reduction Hearing. -Auto Clinic FP, Inc. Case No. 7725 The Board agreed with staffls recommendation to accept the Request for a Fine Reduction Hearing VII. VIOLATION HEARING: The following cases were removed, withdrawn or abated from the agenda: Case No. Location of Violation Confractor/Owner/Violator/Name 74194 241 S. Jenkins Rd, Ft. Pierce Johnny F. Douglas 73167 705 N. 35a` St., Ft. Pierce Raul M. and Mariela Ruiz 74470 7502 Ocala Ave., Ft. Pierce Michael and Catherine Behr 74670 4905 Sunset Blvd., Ft. Pierce Bank of New York Mellon 74668 5712 Myrtle Dr, Ft. Pierce JP Morgan Chase Bank 7SS2S 8733 S US 1, Port St. Lucie Flava Barber Beauty Salon 75524 8735 S US 1, Port St. Lucie St. Lucie Florist 75527 8741 S US 1, Port St. Lucie Arc Angels Caf6' and Catering 74013 5804 Birch Dr., Ft. Pierce Jacqueline L. Russakis 72583 260 Prima Vista Blvd., Port St. Lucie James and Gall Carannante 74710 134 Estia Ln., Port St. Lucie Leo S. Gort 74644 6501 Bayard Rd., Ft. Pierce Federal National Mortgage Association 74449 7802 Palmetto St., Ft. Pierce JP Morgan Chase Bank 73694 186 Liberty Way, Ft. Pierce Carol A. King 74429 6103 Spring Garden Pl., Ft. Pierce Anne M. Hill 74746 8611 S US 1, Port St. Lucie Crowne St. Lucie Associates LP 74751 8611-63 S US Hwy 1, Port St. Lucie Flamingo Signs LLC 74752 8611-63 S US Hwy 1, Port St. Lucie Flamingo Signs LLC 74753 8615 S US Hwy 1, Port St. Lucie Flamingo Signs LLC 74755 8573 S US Hwy 1, Port St. Lucie Killavaney Property Co 74754 8573 S US Hwy 1, Port St. Lucie Flamingo Signs LLC 74693 8757 S US Hwy 1, Port St. Lucie Russell and Betty Hall 74692 8757 S US Hwy 1, Port St. Lucie A & T Telecom and Service LLC 74540 4507 S Indian River Dr., Ft. Pierce Richard L. and Lisa V. Baron 74863 1012 Shorewinds Dr., Ft. Pierce North Beach Complex LLC 74819 1012 Shorewinds Dr., Ft. Pierce Sharkey's/Cindy Rohn Case #16, Case No. 73990 was heard first on the agenda: Case #73990, Location of violation, 6405 Doris Dr., Ft. Pierce, FL, Property Owner, Arthur Zipperian, 6405 Doris Dr., Ft. Pierce, FL 34951 was sworn in by the Board's Secretary. Officer Swartzel submitted six photos, two dated September 27, 2012 and four photos dated April 1, 2013. She noted during her first inspection she found 6405 Doris Dr. to be in violation of 11.05.01, Building and Sign Permits, and issued a Notice of Violation to obtain a permit for the renovations to the house and gave a compliance date of November 3, 2012. She noted she has had contact with the property owner and discussed ways to bring the property into compliance. She stated after no response since their meeting she issued a notice to appear on March 6, 2013. She stated as of April 2, 2013 this property still remains in violation. Ivu. Zipperian stated the windows he was cited for were installed in 2004 in between the two hurricanes, he was in New York and when he came home there were windows broken from the hurricane. He stated he does home improvement work and he replaced the windows. IIe stated the guys came and asked him if he had a permit and he informed them he did not. He stated they told him they would get in touch with him and he could go down and pay for his permit. He stated uow nine years later he gets a violation in the mail and stated he came in and talked to someone, who told him to get a letter or certificate for what kind of windows and he said he was never contacted again and stated he received the Notice of Violation which is why he is here. Chairman Fogg asked Mr. Zipperian if had ever come in and talked to anyone on what was required to correct the violation. He stated he did come in and showed them paperwork for windows similar to what he had installed and said he was never contacted again and then received the letter by certified mail. Chairman Fogg asked Officer Swartzel what the next step would be for Mr. Zipperian. Officer Swartzel replied that Mi'. Zipperian needs to obtain a permit. She stated that she and Carl Peterson, Plans Examiner had met with Mr. Zipperian and Mr. Peterson had explained the permit process to Ivh•. Zipperian and what he needed to do and that a permit would be required. Mr. Currie asked Mr. Zipperian if he had ever finished the work or has it been like this since 2004 Mr. Zipperian answered in the work is not fmished, that he was going through a modification and was not going to put any more money into it until he knows he is going to keep it. He stated that he wants to put new siding and a new roof on the house as soon as he gets the new modification He stated it did not make any sense to put money into a house he might lose. The board asked him if anyone was living in the home and what he meant by a modification. He answered that he was living in the home and he trying to get a loan modification from the bank. Mr. Fogg asked Nk•. Zipperian if he realized he needed to get a permit and planned to get a permit soon. He answered in the affirmative. Mr. Hofmann made a motion in reference to Case #73990 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 vve 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 June 7, 2013, a fine of up to $250.00 per day may be imposed. A cost of $200.00 leas been imposed as the cost for prosecuting this case. Please tape notice that on the 1'~ 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. Companion Cases Case No. 74690, Location of violation, 8761 S. US Hwy. 1, Port St. Lucie, FL, Property Owner, Russell and Be[ry Hall. Cynthia Friend, Friend Realty Inc., 8737 S US 1, Port St. Lucie, FL property manager for Russell and Be[ty Hall was sworn in by the Board's Secretary. Case No. 74689, Location of violation, 8761 S. US Hwy. 1, Port St. Lucie, FL, Tenant, Master Gym/Leicia Bravo. Cynthia Friend, Friend Realty Inc., 8737 S US 1, Port St. Lucie, FL properly manager for Russell and Betty Hall, and representative for Master Gym/ Leicia Bravo was sworn in by the Board's Secretary. Officer Vargas Barrios submitted dine photos, two photos dated December 11, 2012, four photos dated February 24, 2013 taken by Officer Brubaker and three photos dated March 14, 2013. She noted on December 11, 2012 a Notice of Violation was sent to Russell and Betty Hall to please remove the signs for Master Gym, the tenant fm• the property as these are not allowed, this is a violation of the St. Lucie Land Development Code, Section 9.03.00, Prohibited Signs with a correction date of January 4, 2013. On Sunday, February 24, 2013 Officer Brubaker, who was the officer on call for that weekend, took fom• photos showing the signs are still out on the property, therefore, on February 28, 2013 the Notice to Appear was sent. She noted staff also has confirmation that Master Gym is putting the signs out after 5:00 p.m. She noted on March 14, 2013 the signs appeared to be removed. She stated Staff is bringing this case as a To Have Been in violation as staff has spoken with the owner of Master Gym several times regaeding the signs. Chairman Fogg asked Ms. Friend if she was aware they were in violation. Ms. Friend answered in the affirmative that they knew they were in violatioi. Mr. Currie stated as a business owner in St. Lucie County he felt that the owner of Master Gym must be seeing some kind of benefit from these signs and now we take them away and it is heartbreaking to him to think you have something you think will work and not being able to do it. Mrs. Monahan stated that she believed the issue is getting a permit for said signs, is it not. Mrs. Graziani replied they can obtain permits, apply for a specialty event permit which allows signage, balloons or whatever they like for sixty days per year, so there are avenues they can follow. She stated you just cannot have signage on the right of way on a daily basis. Mr. Currie made a motion in reference to Case #74690 that the Code Enforcement Board makes the following determination: After hearing the facts in this case, the testimony, and the recommendation 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. The violator is hereby ordered to refrain from future violations. Failure to keep the property in compliance may result in enforcement action as a repeat violation, in which case a fine of up to $500.00 per day may be imposed from the date of notice to the violator of the repeat violation. Mr. Taylor seconded and the motion carried unanimously. Case No. 74689, Location of violation, 8761 S. US Hwy. 1, Port St. Lucie, FL, Tenant, Master Gym/Leicia Bravo. Cynthia Friend, Friend Realty Inc., 8737 S US 1, Port St. Lucie, FL representative for Master Gym/ Leicia Bravo was sworn in by the Board's Secretary. Mr. Currie made a motion in reference to Case #74689 that the Code Enforcement Board makes the following determination: After hearing the facts in this case, the testimony, and the recommendation 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. The 4 violator is hereby ordered to refrain from future violatimrs. Failure to Izeep the property in compliance may result in enforcement action as a repeat violation, in which case a fine of up to $500.00 per day may be imposed from the date of notice to the violator of the repeat violation. Mr. Taylor seconded and the motion carried unanimously. Default Cases: The Hall was sounded and Mr. Hofmann read the name and number of the case of those not present into the record: Case No. Location of Violation Property Owner/Contractor/Violator 70930 1301 Midway Rd., Ft. Pierce Mary and Mariam Seddique 74667 5906 Bamboo Dr., Ft. Pierce JP Morgan Chase Banlz 74184 5714 Silver Oak Dr., Fort Pierce Natalie and Debra Brancaccio 74230 2724 Navajo Ave., Fort Pierce Daniel Cozhte 74736 Next to 6995 Twnpike Feeder Rd, Ft Pierce Eliser Cruz h'. 74145 5100 St. Lucie Blvd., Fort Pierce Guadamonte Inc. 74054 7402 Citrus Park Blvd., Fort Pierce Robert E. Mitchell 7-5095 5415 Fort Pierce Blvd., Fort Pierce Elgin and Leigh A. Hipps 74171 2502 Tamarind Dr., Fort Pierce Seahorse Beach Bungalows 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. Murdoch seconded and the motion carried unanimously. VIIL FINE HEARING: Case No. Location of Violation Property Owner/CmrtractorNiolator 73724 2416 St. Lucie Blvd., Ft. Pierce Joy Chancey 73295 3407 Avenue O, Ft. Pierce Dean Bryan 73432 2706 Walker Dr., Ft. Pierce Elise Bryson 73769 2603 Essex Dr., Ft. Pierce Ida M. McMinns 73755 5213 Bowling Green Dr., Ft. Pierce Ricardo Pellott and Sara Bruzzese 73316 2110 Jacobs Rd., Ft. Pierce Jeny Sauers and Kevin Sauers 74361 170 Bonita Ct., Port St. Lucie James L. Preston (EST) 66140 5201 Sunset Blvd., Ft. Pierce Thomas H. Vinson Case No. 73724, Location of violation, 2416 St. Lucie Blvd., Pt. Pierce, Property Owner, Joy Chauncey There was no one present to represent the property owner. Officer Swartzel resubmitted one photo dated October 29.2012 and submitted one photo dated February 5, 2013 and one photo dated April 1, 2013. She noted that 2416 St. Lucie Blvd. was originally brought to the November 7, 2012 code board and found in violation of Section 13.09.00, Exterior Property Maintenance Code, Article 103.5.1, Unsafe Building or Sttucture, to obtain the proper permits to repair or demolish the unsafe structure due to fue damage. The board gave until of March 9, 2013 to bring the property into compliance. On March 8, 2013 a permit was issued for the demolition of the property and on March 12, 2013 the permit was fmaled. This property was in violation for four days and staff is recommending no fine. Mrs. Monahan made a motion in reference to Case No. 73724 that the Code Enforcement Board makes the following determinatimc After hearing the facts in this case, the testimony, and the report of staff with regard to the existence of a violation, that vve determine the violation have been abated and no fine is imposed. Mr. Hofmann seconded and the motion carried unanimously. Case No. 73295, Location of violation, 3407 Avenue O, Ft. Pierce, Property Owner, Dean Bryan. There was no one present to represent the property owner. Officer Williams submitted one photo dated February 5, 2013 and two photos dated April 1, 2013. She noted on July 23, 2012 she issued a Notice of Violation letter and gave a compliance date of August 6, 2012 for being in violation of Section 1-9-32 (D), Public Nuisance, for having excessive overgrowth of grass and weeds. After getting no compliance, she brought the case before the February 6, 2013 Code Enforcement Board Hearing. She noted that no one was present at the meeting. The Board found the property in default and gave a compliance date of March 8, 2013. She has had no contact with the prope~'ry owner and as of April ], 2013, the property is still in violation. Mrs. Monahan asked if the house is occupied and what is up with the windows that are open in the photo. Officer Williams answered that the home is vacant and the property is abandoned. She stated that Officer Rosebeny has a case on the windows that had just been cited recently. She noted that the property is not in foreclosure. Mrs. Monahan made a motion in reference to Case No. 73295 that the Code Enforcement Board makes the following determination: After hearing testimony, the facts in the case, 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 emrect 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 9, 2013 with a maximum fine not to exceed $5,000.00. Mr. Murdock seconded and the motim~ carried m~animously. Case No. 73432, Location of violation, 2706 Waller Dr., Ft. Pierce, Property Owner, Elise Bronson. There was no one present to represent the property owner. Officer Williams submitted one photo dated August 7, 2012, one photo dated February 5, 2013 and two photos dated April 1, 2013. She noted on August 14, 2012, she issued a Notice of Violation and gave a compliance date of August 28, 2012 for being in violation of Section 1-9-32 (D), Public Nuisance, for having excessive overgrowth of grass and weeds. After getting no compliance, she brought the case before the February 6, 2013 Code Enforcement Board Hearing. She noted that no one was present at the meeting. The Board found the property in default and gave a compliance date of March 8, 2013. She has had no contact with the property owner and as of April 1, 2013, the property is still in violation. Mr. Hoffman made a motion in reference to Case No. 73432 that the Code Enforcement Board makes the following determination: After hearing testimony, the facts in the case, and the report of staff that the violation still exists, after considering the gravity of the violation, the actions if any talzen 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 9, 2013 with a maximum fine not to exceed $5,000.00. Mrs. Monahan seconded and the motion carried unanimously. Case No. 73769, Location of violation, 2603 Essex Dr., Ft. Pierce, Property Owner, Ida M. McMinns. There was no one present to represent the property owner. Officer Williams submitted one photo dated September 13, 2012, one photo dated February 5, 2013, and two photos dated April 1, 2013. She noted on September 20, 2012 she issued a Notice of Violation letter and gave a compliance date of October 4, 2012 for being in violation of Section 13.09.00, Exterior Property Maintenauce Code, Article 103.5, Unsafe Structure, to repair the broken windows and to paint the wood over the windows the same color as the home. After getting no compliance she brought the case before the February 6, 2013 Code Enforcement Board Hearing. She noted that no one was present at the meeting. The Board found the property in default and gave a compliance date of March 8, 2013. She has had no contact with the property owner and as of April 1, 2013, the property is still in violation. Mrs. Monahmr made a motion in reference to Case No. 73769 that the Code Enforcement Board makes the following determination: After hearing testimony, the facts in the case, and the report of staff that the violation still exists, after considering the gravity of the violation, the actions if any taken by the violatm• 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 9, 2013 with a maximum fine not to exceed $5,000.00. Mr. Mm•dock seconded and the motimr carried unanimously. Case No. 73755, Location of violation, 5213 Bowling Green Dr., Ft. Pierce, Property Owner, Ricardo Pellott and Sara Br'uzzese. There was no one present to represent the property owner. Officer Williams submitted two photos dated February 4, 2013 and two photos dated April 1, 2013. She noted on September 10, 2012, she issued a Notice of Violation letter and gave a compliance date of September 24, 2012 for being in violation of Section 1-9-32 (D), Public Nuisance, for having excessive overgrowth of grass and weeds. After getting no compliance, she brought the case before the February 6, 2013 Code Enforcement Board Hearing. She noted that no one was present at the meeting. The Board found the property in default and gave a compliance date of March 8, 2013. As of April 1, 2013, the property is still in violation, no one lives there and the property is not in foreclosure. Mr. Hoffman made a motion in reference to Case No. 73755 that tite Code Enforcement Board makes the following determination: After hearing testimony, the facts in the case, 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 tine of $250.00 per day shall be imposed for each day the violation exists starting March 9, 2013 with a maximum fine not to exceed $5,000.00. Mrs. Monahan seconded and the motion carried unanimously. Case No. 73316, Location of violation, 2110 Jacobs Rd., Ft. Pierce, Property Owner, Jeny Sauers and Kevin Sauers. There was no one present to represent the property owner. Officer Williams submitted one photo dated December 31, 2012, one photo dated February 5, 2013 and two photos dated April 1, 2013. She noted on July 25, 2012, former Officer Presh•idge issued a Notice of Violation letter and gave a compliance date of August 15, 2012 for' being in violation of Section 8.00.03 (F), Particular Permitted Accessory Sh~actures, for not having the proper regish'ation for the boat, and Section 1-9-32 (D), Public Nuisance, for having excessive overgrowth of grass and weeds. After getting no compliance, Officer Williams brought the case before the February 6, 2013 Code Enforcement Board Hearing. She noted that no one was present at the meeting. The Board found the property in default and gave a compliance date of March 8, 2013. As of April 1, 2013, the property is still in violation, is not in foreclosure, and no one is living there. Mrs. Monahan made a motion in reference to Case No. 73316 that the Code Enforcement Board makes the following determination: After hearing testimony, the facts in the case, and the report of staff that the violation still exists, after cmrsidering the gravity of the violation, the actions if any taken by the violator to correct the violation and mty 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 9, 2013 with a maximum fine not to exceed $5,000.00. Mr. Taylor seconded and the motim~ carried unanimously. Case No. 74361, Location of violation, 170 Bonita Ct, Port St. Lucie, Property Owner, James L. Preston (EST). There was no one present to represent the property owner. Officer Brubaker stated she brought this case before the February 6, 2013 Code Enforcement Board Hearing. The Board found the property in default and gave a compliance date of March 9, 2013. She submitted two photos, one dated October 30, 2012, and one dated April 1, 2013. She noted during her fast inspection on October 30, 2012 she found 170 Bonita Ct. in violation of Sectioh 13.09.00, Article 303.02, Protective Treatment, to repair the roof She issued a Notice of Violation letter and gave a compliance date of November 26, 2012. She has had uo contact with the owner and as of Apri12, 2013 the property remains in violation. Mr. Hoffinau asked if a permit had been pulled to correct the roof. Officer Brubaker answered no. Mr. Hoffman made a motion in reference to Case No. 74361 that the Code Enforcement Board makes the following determination: After hearing testimony, the facts in the case, and the report of staff that the violation still exists, after considering the gravity of the violation, the actim~s 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 9, 2013 with a maximum fine not to exceed $5,000.00. Mr. Taylor seconded and the motion carried unanimously. Case No. 66140, Location of violation, 5201 Sunset Blvd., Ft. Pierce, Property Owner, Thomas H. Vinson. There was no one present to represent the property owner. Officer Brubaker stated she brought this case before the February 6, 2013 Code Enforcement Board Hearing. The Bou'd found the property iu default and gave a compliance date of March 9, 2013. She submitted two photos one dated, one dated October 1, 2010, and one dated April 1, 2013. She stated during her first inspection on October 1, 2010 she found 5201 Sunset Blvd. in violation of Section 1-9-32 (D), Public Nuisance, for having excessive overgrowth of grass and weeds. She stated she issued a Notice of Violation letter and gave a compliance date of July 26, 2010. She noted that dw•ing that time the property went into foreclosure and it has recently been dismissed. Slie has had no contact with the owner and as of April 2, 2013 the property remains in violation. Mrs. Monahan asked what dismissed means. Officer Brubaker answered it means the bank gave the property back the owner. Mr. Mm•dock made a motion in reference to Case No. 66140 that the Code Enforcement Board mattes the following determination: After hearing testimony, the facts in the case, and the report of staff that the violation still exists, after considering the gravity of the violation, the actions if any talten by the violator to correct the violation and any previous violations, vve matte the following determination: A fime of $250.00 per day shall be imposed for each day the violation exists starting March 9, 2013 with a maximum fine not to exceed $5,000.00. Mr. Hoffman seconded and the motion carried unanimously. IX. REPEAT VIOLATION: Case No. 75689, Location of violation, 207 Camino St, Port St. Lucie, Property Owner, Edward H, Rogers (EST). Melanie Rogers representative for Edward H. Rogers (EST) was sworn in by the Board's Secretary. Officer Brubaker stated that 207 Camino St. was found in violation on May 2, 2012, of Section 1-9-32 (D), Public Nuisance, for having excessive overgrowth of grass and weeds. She noted on March 5, 2013, 207 Camino St. was again found in violation of Section 1-9-32 (D), for overgrowth and is a repeat violator. She noted for the record she was submitting two photos, one dated March 5, 2013 and one dated March 21, 2013. She stated the property abated on March 22, 2013 and was in violation for 16 days. She stated that the Ms. Rogers is present to explain what happened. Ms. Rogers addressed the board and stated that she had been having a communication problem with her lawn man, who does not speak good English. She stated that he kept giving her excuses on why he could not cut the lawn. She stated during that time she was looking for someone else and has found someone she believes will be more reliable. She noted that this has been the only incident since her fnat violation and that she has been able to keep up with her lawn until recently wheti she has had a communication problem with her yard man. She asked the Board for a second chance. Mr. Murdock asked Ms. Rogers if the grass has been cut. She answered yes and it would be mowed again this weekend. There was discussion among the board and Ms. Rogers as to the how long she has owned the house and the condition of the property. The Board informed her they do not want to fine her, but she has to maintain her lawn. There was discussion among the board on having new photos and whether to continue the case. Nhs. Barbieri informed the Board that the case has been abated and the board could continue it for thirty days and request new photos at that time, but if it gets overgrown again it would be a new case. Chairman Fogg said staff is saying it has abated, but there is still the shrubbery issue. Mrs. Barbieri stated that in the Notice of Violation the property was only cited for overgrowth of grass and weeds, not the shrubbery, and that case has stopped. So the scrubs would have to come as a new case, but it would still be a repeat as slabbery is under the same section as grass and weeds. Mrs. Monahan asked for clarification and asked staff if they would prefer apost-dated fine or continuation Mrs. Barbieri stated staff does not feel that the board can do a post-dated fine as the case has abated, but they can do a fine for the sixteen days the property was in violation or if the Board wants more evidence of the abatement and staff would continue to monitot• the property during that time they could do a continuation also. Chairman Fogg stated that the Board could just charge the prosecution cost at this time, which would be some kind of a deten'ent and charge more if it comes back again. Mrs. Monahan made a motion in reference to Case No. 75689 that the Code Enforcement Board makes the following determination: After hearing testimony, the facts in the case, and the report of staff that the violation previously committed has been repeated 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: There will be no fine imposed today. A prosecution cost of $200.00 has been imposed. Mr. Currie seconded and the motion carried unanimously. Case No. 75716, Location of violation, 110 Solaz Ave., Port St. Lucie, Property Owner, James Duncan. There was no one present to represent the property owner. Officer Brubaker stated that 110 Solaz Ave. was found in violation on June 2, 2010 of Section 1-9-32 (D), Public Nuisance, for junk hash and debris. She noted on March 6, 2013, 110 Solaz Ave. was again found in violation of Section 1-9-32 (D), for junk trash and debris and is a repeat violator. She submitted five photos, two dated March 6, 2013, one dated March 26, 2013, and two dated April 1, 2013. She has had no contact with the owner and as of April 2, 2013, the violation still exists. Mrs. Monahan made a motion in reference to Case #75716 that the Code Enforcement Board makes the following determination: After hearing the facts in this case, the testimony, and the report of Staff that the violation previously committed has been repeated, and having considered the gravity of the violation, the action, if any, taken by the violator to correct the violation and any previous violations, we make the following determination: A fine of $500.00 per day shall be imposed for each day the violatim~ exists starting March 7, 2013 with a maximum fine not to exceed $5,000.00. ~A prosecution cost of $200.00 has been imposed. Mr. Taylor seconded and the motion carried unanimously. X. REFERREL TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Case No. 74504, Location of violation, 2685-2691 Niagara Ave., Pt Pierce, Property Owners, C and S Realty Grp. LLLP (TR). There was no one present to represent the property owner. Officer Williams submitted two photos dated April 1, 2013. She stated this property was cited for being in violation of Section 1-9-32 (D), Public Nuisance, for having excessive overgrowth of grass and weeds, and Section 13.09.00, Exterior Property Maintenance Code, Article 301.3, Vacant Structures and Land. She noted this property has been brought before the Board previously and a fine has been imposed. After getting no compliance, staff is asking the Board to refer this case to the Board of County Commissioners to have the County abate the property. Mr. Currie made a motion in reference to Case #74504 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 condition caused the violation presents a serious threat to the public health, safety, and welfare and Staff is directed to notify the St. Lucie County Board of County Commissions of the conditions. Mrs. Monahan seconded and the motion carried unanimously. Case No. 75945, Location of violation, 206 N. 24°i St., Ft. Pierce, Property Owner, Shelly Zellman. There was no one present to represent the property owner. Officer Williams submitted two photos dated April 1, 2013. She stated this property was cited for being in violation of Section 1-9-32 (D), Public Nuisance, for having excessive overgrowth of grass and weeds. She noted the property is in foreclosure. She stated after getting no compliance, staff is asking the Board to refer this case to the Board of County Commissioners to have the County abate the property. Mr. Currie made a motion in reference to Case No. 75945 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 cm~dition caused the violation presents a serious threat to the public health, safety, and welfare and Staff is directed to notify the St. Lucie County Board of County Commissions of the conditions. Mrs. Monahan seconded and the motion carried unanimously. Case No. 75871, Location of violation, 150 Solaz Ave., Port St. Lucie, Property Owner, Joseph Palopoli, Jr. There was no one present to represent the property owner. 10 Officer Brubaker submitted two photos, one dated March 26, 2013, and one dated April 1, 2013. She stated that 150 Solaz Ave. was cited fm' Section 1-9-32 (D), Public Nuisance, for overgrowth. She noted this property is in foreclosure and the neighbors are complaining about the overgrowth and staff recommends this cast to be referred to the Board of County Commissioners for compliance. Mrs. Monahan asked staff if they could request the pepper ri ee in the photo be removed also. Officer Williams answered in the affirmative. Mrs. Monahan made a motion in reference to Case No. 75871 that the Code Enforcement Board makes the following determination: After hearing the facts in this case, the testimony, and the recommendatimts of staff with regard to the existence of a violation that we determine the condition caused the violation presents a serious threat to the public health, safety, and welfare and Staff is directed to notify the St. Lucie County Board of County Commissions of the conditions. Mr. Currie secmtded and the motion carried unanimously. Case No. 75872, Location of violation, 190 Solaz Ave., Pmt St Lucie, Property Owners, Ra}nnond and Barbara Deck. There was no one present to represent the property owners. Officer Brubaker submitted two photos, one dated March 7, 2013, and one photo dated April 1, 2013. She stated that 190 Solaz Ave. was cited fox Section 1-9-32 (D), Public Nuisance, fox overgrowth. She noted this property is in forecosure and staff recommends this case be referred to the bond of county commissioners for compliance. Mr. Hofmann made a motion in reference to Case No. 75872 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 condition caused the violation presents a serious threat to the public health, safety, and welfare and Staff is directed to notify the St. Lucie County Board of County Commissions of the conditions. Mr. Taylor seconded and the motion carried unanimously. Case No. 75792, Location of violation, 6905 Ocala Ave., Ft. Pierce, Property Owners, Crystal Crews and Gary Roberts. There was no one present to represent the property owners. Officer Swartzel submitted three photos dated April 1, 2013. She noted that 6905 Ocala Ave. is in violation of Section 1-9-32, (D), Public Nuisance, overgrowth, and Section 13.09.00, Exterior Property Maintenance, Article 103.5, Unsafe Building Structure, to please secure the property fi'om unintended entry. She stated that the property has been in foreclosure for over tlu'ee years and after receiving complaints and staff visiting the property, staff is asking the board to refer this case to the board of county commissioners for abatement. Mrs. Monahan made a motion in reference to Case No. 75792 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 vve determine the condition caused the violation presents a serious threat to the public health, safety, and welfare and Staff is directed to notify the St. Lucie County Board of County Commissions of the conditions. Mr. Murdock seconded and the motion carried unanimously. Case No. 75793, Location of violation, 7304 Deland Ave., Ft. Pierce, Property Owner, Judith V. Graziosi. There was no one present to represent the property owner. 11 Officer Swartzel submitted tln•ee photos dated April 1, 2013. She stated that 7304 Deland Ave. was found in violation of Section 1-9-32, (D), Public Nuisance, overgrowth, and Section 13.09.00, Exterior Property Maintenance, Article 103.5, Unsafe Building Sh ucture, to secure the property from unintended entry. She noted the property owner abandoned the house and staff is receiving numerous complaints from the surrounding properties. She stated after visiting the propert, staff is asking the board to refer this case to the board of county commissioners for abatement. Mr. Fogg asked staff if the property is in foreclosure. Officer Swartzel stated the property is not in foreclosure and staff already has a fine on the property for $5.000.00. She stated it was dismissed and the owner walked away. Mr. Currie made a motion in reference to Case No. 75793 that the Code Enforcement Board makes the following determinatimr: After hearing the facts in this case, the testimony, and the recommendations of staff with regard td the existence of a violation that we determine the condition caused the violation presents a serious threat to the public health, safety, and welfare and Staff is directed to notify the St. Lucie County Board of County Commissions of the conditions. Mrs. Monahan seconded and the motion can•ied unanimously. Case No. 75873, Location of violation, 1919 N. Sls` St, Ft. Pierce, Property Owner, Isdelma Simon. There was no one present to represent the property owner. Officer Roseberry submitted six photos, one dated March 8, 2013, one dated March 12, 2013, two dated March 22, 2013, and two dated April 1, 2013. He stated that 7919 515` St. was found in violation of Section 7 -9-32, (D), Public Nuisance, overgrowth of grass and weeds, and Section 13.09.00, Exterior Property Maintenance, Article 103.5, Unsafe Building Structure. He noted that this property has been abandoned by the owners with no foreclosure and there have been numerous complaints on this property and staff recommends this property be referred to the Board of County Conunissioners for abatement. Mr. Hofmann made a motion in reference to Case #75873 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 condition caused the violation presents a serious threat to the public health, safety, and welfare and Staff is directed to notify the St Lucie Comity Board of County Commissions of the conditions. Mrs. Monahan seconded and the motion carried unanimously. XI. EINE REDUCTION HEARING Case #63546 Location of violation, 5606 Pt. Pierce Blvd, Ft. Pierce e, Property Owner, Nicolas J. Antonas. Fine Reduction requested by Restoration America. Jeff Binner representative for Restoration America was sworn in by the Board's Secretary. Mr. Binner stated that this property owner had passed away and the estate donated the property to Restoration America which some kind of a non-profit organization up north in another state. He stated when he obtained the management of the property and saw the state the property was in he hired someone to clean up the property and found a buyer for it in less than a week. He stated the previous owner had paid someone to do restoration work and the conteactor had not completed the work and walked away with their money. He stated he does have a new owner in the home now that is fmishing the work and has cleaned the place up. Fle is asking for a fine reduction for the new owners who he stated could really use the money to complete the work on the home. Mr. Cun•ie asked Mr. Binner how'the home could have been sold and had a closing with a lien on the property. 12 Mr. Binner answered it was a condition of the sale that the new owners were responsible for the lien and $5,000.00 was put in escrow in case they could not get the fine reduced. Mr. Currie made a motion in reference to Case No. 63546 that the Code Enforcement Board makes the following determinatimi: The fine of $5,000. 00 imposed by the Board is hereby reduced to the amount of $1250.00 with a prosecution cost of $150.00. The reduced fine must be paid within thirty (30) days or the fine will revert back to the m•iginal fine of $5,000.00. The prosecution cost of $150.00 was imposed. Mr. Hofmann secnuded the motion and the motimi carried unanimously. Case No. 72779 Location of violation, 134 NW Airoso Blvd., Port St. Lucie, Property Owner, Samuel B. Lewis (TR). Mr. Samuel B. Lewis was sworn in by the Board's Secretary. Mi•. Fogg asked Mr. Lewis if he lived at this adch•ess. Mr. Lewis answered no that it is occupied by tenants. Mr. Lewis addressed the board and stated he has had problems with the tenants and the violations on this property cumot be seen from the street and are not an eyesore to the public. He also stated that he had been incapacitated and bedridden last year fiom July until mid-November and could not walls or get his mail, so he never received the notice. He stated that once he was aware of the violation he took care of it within ninety days. He stated he was here today to plead with the board to reduce this fine to the prosecution cost of $200.00. Chairman Fogg asked Mr. Lewis how long he had owned this property. Mi'. Lewis answered four or five years. Chairman Fogg asked Mr. Lewis how he was not aware of the condition of his property. Mi'. Lewis answered that he had someone ride by and the properTy looked fine from the front and the violations are in the rear were not visible from the front. Mrs. Monahan asked Mr. Lewis who filled in the pool. Mr. Lewis answered hired someone and paid them $2,000.00 to fill it in with rock and is not a safety hazard. He stated he plans to cover it with sod during the rainy season. Mr. Fogg stated that Mr. Lewis having owned the propeiTy for four years should have been aware of the problems on the property and he felt very strongly about staff s recommendation for this fine reduction. Mrs. Monahan asked staff if they had any problems with how Mr. Lewis filled in the pool. Code Enforcement Supervisor Williams answered in the negative. Mrs. Graziani stated that it not prohibited by code to fill in a pool and is not seen as a safety hazard. She stated it might seem a ]ittle odd, but she had contacted other jurisdictions and only one of them prohibited it in their ordinance. Mrs. Monahan made a motion in reference to Case No. 72779 that the Code Enforcement Board makes the following determination: The fine of $5,000.00 imposed by the Board is hereby reduced to the amount of $1,250.00 is hereby reduced to $0.00 and a the prosecution fee of $200.00 is still active. The reduced fine must be paid within fom•teen (14) days or the fine will revert back to the original fine of $5,000.00. 13 Mr. Murdock seconded. There teas roll call vote: Mrs. Monahan-Yes, Mr. Fogg-No, Mr. Hoffman-Nq Mr. Taylor- No, Mr. Murdock- Yes, Mr. Currie-Yes. There was a tie and the motion failed. Mr. Hoffman made a motion in reference to Case No. 72779 that the Code Enforcement Board makes the following determination: TLe fine of $5,000.00 imposed by the Board is hereby reduced to the amount of $500.00 with the prosecution cost of $200.00. The reduced fine must be paid within thirty (30) days or the fine will revert back to the original fine of $5,000.00. Mr. Currie seconded. There was roll call vote: Mrs. Monahan-No, Mr. Fogg-No, Mr. Hoffman-Yes, Mr. Taylor-No, Mr. Murdoch-No, Mr. Currie-No. The motimt failed. Mrs. Monahan made a motion in reference to Case No. 72779 that the Code Enforcement Board makes the following determination: The fine of $5,000.00 imposed by the Board is hereby reduced to the amount of $300.00. The reduced fine must be paid within fourteen (14) days or the fine will revert baclt to the original fine of $5,000.00. Mr. Currie seconded. There was troll call vote: Mrs. Monahan-Yes, Mr. Fogg-No, Mn Hoffman-No, Mr. Taylor-No, Mr. Murdock-No, Mr. Currie-Yes. The motion failed. Mr. Taylor made a motion in reference to Case No. 72779 that the Code Enforcement Board maltes the following determinatimt: The fine of $5,000.00 imposed by the Board is hereby reduced to the amount of $1,250.00, with a prosecution cost of $200.00. The reduced fine must be paid within thirty (30) days or the fine will revert back to the original fine of $5,000.00. Mr. Fogg seconded. There tvas roll call vote: Mrs. Monahan-No, Mr. Fogg-Yes, Mr. Hoffman-Yes, Mr. Taylor-Yes, Mr. Murdoch-Nq Mr. Currie-No. There was a tie and the motion failed. Mr. Currie made a motion in reference to Case No. 72779 that the Code Enforcement Board maltes the following determination: The fine of $5,000.00 imposed by the Board is hereby reduced to the amount of $400.00 with no prosecution cast. The reduced fine must be paid within thirty (30) days or the fine will revert back to the original fine of $5,000.00. Mrs. Monahan seconded the motion. Mr. Krieger, Board Attorney made a suggestion that after the next motion, the Board could open it up for discussion on everyone's opinion. There was discussion among the board members on their opinions on this case. There was roll call vote: Mrs. Monahan-Yes, Mr. Fogg-Yes, Mr. Hoffman-Yes, Mr. Taylor-Yes, Mr. Murdock-Yes, Mr. Currie-Yes. The motion carried unanimously. XII. OTHER BUSINESS XIII. STAFF BUSINESS 14 XIV. PUBLICCONIMENTS ADJOURN: There was no fiuther business and the meeting was adjourned at 10:35 a.m. 15