Loading...
CEB_04-23-91_MinThe Code Enforcement Board of the City of Longwood, Florida met on April 23, 1991, at 7:30 P. M. . Present: Dr. Fredrick Pearl, Chairman Gloria Latoski Warren Bull Clanci Keith Ernest Tolos Dick Davidson, CEB Attorney Becky Vose, City Attorney Dorothy Fisher, Recording Secretary Cathy Price, Code Enforcement Officer Absent: Pat Corbin, Vice Chairwoman Bob Lomax 1., The Meeting was called to order at 7:35 P.M. 2, The Secretary called the roll and all members were present except Pat Corbin and Bob Lomax. 4, Gloria Latoski made the Motion to approve the minutes of the March 26, 1991 Hearing, as written. Motion was seconded by Ernest Tolos. Motion was carried by unanimous vote. 5. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: A. CONTINUED CASES 11W CEB -1163 W I LL.I AM C. SR, AND MARY DEMETREE Richard O. SKAGGS, Reg. Agent d /b /a HI -TECH MECHANICAL CONTRACTORS, INC. 135 Mango Trail Longwood, Florida 32750 Violation of Zoning Ordinance 495, Section 620.2C The Chairman reopened the Public Hearing previously continued and directed all witnesses to be sworn. All witnesses were duly sworn by the clerk. The Code Enforcement Officer presented her case to the Board. Mr. Skaggs was storing items under a carport in the rear of his business. He had removed a lot of the items. But a trailer with heavy equipment on it remained, which constituted outdoor storage. Mrs Skaggs distributed pictures , he felt were pertinent to the case and Attorney Davidson requested one set of pictures to be marked as Exhibit A, for the City. Mr. Skaggs felt that the trailer did not constitute outside storage. After hearing both testimonies, Mr. Tolos made motion to close the Public Hearing and Ms. Latoski seconded it. Ms. Keith said she believed the trailer was outdoor storage and Mr. Skaggs to be in violation as stated. Mr. Tolos and Dr. Pearl agreed that it was outside storage. He could either put the trailer inside his building, or screen the enclosure, and put a gate on it, so that the trailer could not be seen from the street. Motion was made by Mr. Tolos that if the trailer is not stored inside or screened by a six foot opaque fence, dense hedge or wall by May 7, 1991, the respondents will have to pay seventy five (75.00) dollars a day until the trailer is brought into compliance. Ms. Keith seconded the motion. The motion was carried by unanimous roll call vote. After discussion, upon motion made and duly seconded, it was RESOLVED, that the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law are determined by the Board: FINDINGS OF FACT 1) The City Code Enforcement Officer served a Notice of Hearing on February 21, 1991, Certified Mail # P -260- 046 -529 and # P- 260 -046 -530 2) The Board finds that a unlicensed trailer containing numerous heavy equipment is improperly stored on the property without adequate screening. 3) The materials on the property of the respondents constituted outdoor storage under the cited sections. 4) Respondent, Registered Agent, Richard Skaggs did appear at the Hearing. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Respondents are guilty of violating Zoning Ordinance # 495, Section 620. 2C ISSUANCE OF ORDER Pursuant to the above Conclusions of Law and its power under Florida Statute, Section 162 and local law, the Board issues an order directing the respondents to fully comply and come into compliance with the above sections of law on or before May 7, 1691 and if such compliance is not achieved to the satisfaction of the City of Longwood, a fine of Seventy -Five ( 75. 00 ) Dollars per day is hereby assessed until compliance. The Board further directed that the clerk prepare such order and the order be duly issued with the signature of the Chairman or his designee. B, CEB -1166 TOWNSHIP PLAZA ASSOC. LTD ALVIN LEITMAN, Reg. Agent West SR 434, Township Plaza Longwood, Florida 32750 Violation of City Code, Chapter 12,12-2 ( 2 ) The Chairman reopened the public Hearing previously continued and directed that all witnesses be sworn. The Code Enforcement Officer was previously sworn. The Code Enforcement Officer presented her case to the Board. The Code Enforcement Officer originally cited the respondents for the dumpster area behind the Township Plaza. The trash from these dumpsters has migrated to the drainage area and area around the lake. The Code Enforcement Officer said that the respondents had brought the property into compliance on April 22, 1991. The Code Enforcement Officer requested that they be found in violation, even though the property was brought into compliance before the Hearing so that if it is in violation again, it could come under the repeat violation code. The City has an on going problem with Township Plaza Assoc. LTD, since 1987 Pictures were submitted as Exhibits 1, 2, 3, and 4. Ms. Latoski made a motion to close the Public Hearing. Ms. Keith seconded the motion. Motion was passed by unanimous roll call vote. After discussion, upon motion made and duly seconded, it was RESOLVED, that the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law are determined by the Board. FINDINGS OF FACT 1 The City Code Enforcement Officer served a Notice of Hearing, via overnight mail # 2187 on March 14, 1991, in violation of City Code, Chapter 12,12 -2 (2) 2) The respondents were granted a continuance on March 26, 1991, Code Enforcement Hearing, 3) The respondents did not appear at the April 23, 1991, Code Enforcement Board Hearing. 4) The Code Enforcement officer testified that the respondents were in violation but, had brought the property into compliance before the Hearing. The Board finds the same. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW i ) Respondents were in violation of City Code, Chapter 12,12-2 (2) but, have brought the property into compliance. The Chairman opened the Public Hearing again to allow Attorney Vose to give an opinion on "Repeat Violation ". Mr. Tolos made a motion to reopen the public hearing and Ms. Latoski seconded the motion . Attorney Vase said that in Section 2 -143 , "The Enforcement Board upon notification by the Code Inspector , that a previous order of the enforcement board has not been complied with, by the set time or upon finding that the same violation has been repeated by the same violator may order the violator to pay a fine , not to exceed 250. 00 dollars per day. " The reason she was concerned was because "apparently they did comply within the set time." She said that the respondents would have to in her opinion be given a warning again, if they were repeat violators. Attorney Davidson said he agreed, that the Board in their resolution has to indicate that there was a violation and it has been corrected. Mr. Tolos made motion to close the public Hearing . Ms. Latoski seconded the motion The motion was carried by unanimous roll call vote. 60 OLD BUSINESS: A. CEB -1165 THOMAS AND MARGUERITE SOH AND SAMUEL AND ESA BELLA SOH Baywood Industrial Park Longwood, Florida 32750 Violation of City Code, Chapter 12p12-2 (2) The Code Enforcement Officer said they were to comply by Final Order on April 5, 1991. The respondents requested an inspection on April 1, 1991 and the Code Enforcement Officer said they brought the property into compliance,as of the inspection. 7. NEW BUSINESS: HO'HE Mr. Tolos made a motion to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Ms. Latoski. The meeting was adjourned at 9.30 P.M* . Respectfully submitted, Dorothy Fisher Recording Secretary Dr. Fredrick Pearl