CEB_08-22-00_Min
CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD City Commission Chambers . . 175 W. Warren Avenue Longwood, Florida MINUTE S August 22,2G00 Present Roben Lorn, Chair E mie Tolos, Vice Chair Cheryl Melvin, Member
Laura Moehlenkarnp, Member Joe Hartman, Me&r Kevin Waters, Member Amy Goodblatt, Board Anorney Cathy Price, W e Compliance Inspector Dan Sp& Code Compliance Inspector Richard Taylor,
Gty of Longwood Attorney Absent: Lany Moore, Member Chk Bob Lo-called a re@meeting to order at: 7aS p.m. 2. ROLLCALL. 3. APPROVE MINUTES OF LAST MEETING -July 19,2CCO Correction to minutes:
Ernie Tolos is Vice-Chat and Laura Mohlenkamp's name was spelled wrong, correct spelling Moehlenkamp. 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS: Cathy Price advised the board of cases that were in compliance
and cases for presentation. Chair Bob Lomax called for f i t case: CEB CC-28-375: X Stephen and Cathy Negrich 350 Dog Track Road Longwood, FL 32750 City aslung for motion for 6C-day
extension -Ernie Tolos commented that there was no information given on chis case. Cathy Price advised why there ms a motion for continuance. Arcy. . h y Goodblart made A point of information
to the board hat the city could choose not to -present the case but dut once the item is on the henenda people could show<p at hearing e x ~ c t i Lu t~o be heard, ivk. I."lcc ~ ~ v
D c CX: n. iqegrich wds: Dresent to ask foi exe~lsion. Clhman asked for motion Lun Moehlenkamp made moaon to grant 60 dap extension.
Cheryl Melvin seconded Ernest Tolos voting no, The Board found that the and motion. The O abstaining. board voted (c) Respondent was given 60 days extension favor, against with Bob and
CE B 00-08-068 D. Audrey Ranize, Property Owner Robert Covell, Tenant 1237 Hamilton St. Longwood, FL 32750 Qainnan announced in this case the city asked for continuance due to no service.
Laura Moehknkamp made motion to continue item D. and Cheryl Melvin seconded the motion. The board voted all in favor of motion. Case was continued. Secremy advised Chairman that the
city attorney had not sworn in respondents. City attorney swore in all respondenn at this time. CEB 00-08-066 : B. Glen E. Coffiel, Pres. and Jayant Patel d/b/a Cheap Guys Computers
200 N. Hwy V-92 Longwood, FL 32750 Case pias in compliance and not heard. CEB 00-08-067: C Donald R Barber VU Gange Circle Longwood, FL 32750 6 s e %as in compliance and not heard. CEB
00-08-069 E. Jose and Lourdes Ortiz 832 Raven Avenue L O ~ W O On~ , 32750 Case %-as in compliance and nor: heard. CEB X-C8-070 F. M d y " Peru, Property Owner Maria Colon, Tenant 138
Longwood Cirrle Longwood, FL 32750 Cathy Price presented the cicy's case that the respondent was in compliance with rwo citauons Gry Code 12-12-2, sub t . ; h d Development Gde, 24-25.02;
but had not ob&ed a home office liceuse h r ;he buhess. City requiring iicrme if Lusiness sdli operating from the home. Glficiai n ~ ~ c a t i Jounly 3 1 with follow up done hi s afternoon
on license. Amy Goodblaa asked what
mas a discussion at commLsion meeting about commercial vehicles being parked behind fence but no action as wken by commksion and that he would have to research it but did not believe
any action was taken. Respondent advised after being questioned by Ernest Tolos chat he is diabetic and must stop at his home in his commercial vehicle quite often for medical reasons.
Respondent advised afrsr question by Lam Moehlenkamp that his penond vehicle has k e n inoperable for four months. Respondent asked where he could get an extension to go before the coumel
and ask about parking the vehicles behind his privacy fence. Chairman advised the board q ~ u l dno t be ruling on that because of it being unclear. Atty. Goldblatt advised the city
has asked for only 5 days that preceded when fence was put in. Gty attorney advised respondent that he was free to go in front of counsel to ask his question but it did not pertain to
&is hearing. City attorney advised that the noise of the trucks in the residential area may be why the city does not want the vehicles p e d at residences. Kevin Wahers asked question
about previous ruling on adminirrndve fees. Charrman advised that m s for previous violation and did not apply to this hearing. Gty attorney advised administrative fees =re nm-anted
due to effort made by city to prove the case. Ernest Tolos questioned whether the vehicles were coming in and going into response to calls and w t e d respondent to bring in records
to substandate that. Chairman advised respondent knew about violation. Atry. GoldbIatt reiterated order, which had special wording allowing respondent 45 days, which was unusd for the
board to give that many days, but it was a lengthy period of time made for compliance. Arty. Goldblan asked if respondent had tried to call anyme at the city when he wds served with
the order and he said he had not. Motion made to close public hearing. Board voted all in favor. Ems1 Tolos repeated that he thought that respondent should be given time to go through
his records and prove his his trucks were in use at these times. Laura bloehknkamp reiterated this was going on for one ).ear and personal vehicle was not woriang for 4 months now all
of a sudden respondent got a notice and put up ~rivacyfe nce, vehicles never should have been at residence. Both vehicles reported parked at residence at some times. As point of information
Any. Goldblan advised that none of the articles (copies of visits of police findings) were put in as evidence. Chatman advised what copies Ft-ere in packt for. Any. Taylor advised the
city's is that if the vehicles were left 5 minutes before or after actually makes offense even worse because of noise of commercial vehicle, city has shown that the vehicles were there
throughout the evening and was in violation for the time they were there. Any. Goldblatt gave a point of information, if the board is to treat the respondent as a repeat offender specific
f;2ckS h to be ma& &a: his k e n a przvi~usv iclation and an ~ d tk.yr-t he b o ~ idn a q fmding and the penalty for a repeat offender is more subsrand, penalty may be up to $XO per
violation per day. She also advised that if someone is treated as a repeat offender there is no requirement to give him or her time to come into compliance. Motion made by Bob Lomax,
respondent to be treated as repeat offender served 8/6/99 nith 45 days to comply docmznts on record. Seconded by Joe h m a n . Five members voted in favor, one not in favor vote from
E rnest Tolos, C abstalzing. Tne Board found hat (a) Rrspondent m x in violation of (Ch~pt.?+Z3.C8 Ciry Code) (b) These violations were evident in that tow trucks were parkd durig frequent
ins pecuom. (c) Respondent n x $en SlCC h e f or five day and S2CC in ~dmhkrmionfe es. --." me ---LLD =C-UO-U/L H. hr lpl l Le r n b r k~S, . & Reg. &ent 311d Steven P. Lernbrick, Dir.
for
-type of business and what evidence there mas. Ms. Price advised h t it ~s a Smcco business by admission of the resident and that there ruy equipment there. Service 8/16 byLDD.. Chairrrm
asked attorney Goodbkrt ahat are limitations regarding Occupational License? None . . per attorney, standard x number of dap to come into compliance and then fines are imposed. Respondent
called: Maria Colon -admitted they are missing license, wanted to know if cement . mixer had to be put in garage every night, advised by Chairman that it must be out of view. bloved
from Winter Springs and wanted to know where to obtain. Advised Gty Hall. Working long hours unable to get license. Can it be obtained by mail? Please meet with Code Oflicer for license.
Asked by Arty. Goldblatt how much time would be needed for license. Respondent advised by Friday. Motion for hearing to be closed. All in favor. Ernest Tolos made motion to fmd respondent
guilty. Cheryl Melvin seconded the motion. Board voted all in favor. Chairman ad\ised respondent to inform Code Enforcement when license was obtained. The Board found that (a) Respondent
was in violation of (Section24 25.02 Longwood Development Code) (b) These violations were evident in that the respondent was not able to get license in time requested; operating business
in home without license with evidence of Cement mixer. (c) Respondent was given final date (five da).s from notice given after meting) and 525 f i e per day after f d no tice received.
CEB 00-CS-071 G. James and Lori Jo Feny d/b/a C& JTowing 845 Pasadena Avenue Longwood, FL 32750 Cathy Price presented the ciry's case of repeat violation, city responded to it as result
of complaint received Final orders from original m e e ~ wge re a violation of Land Development Code Section 24-23.08. After complaint received on July 14 periodic inspections, on 07/14/CO
3:40 p.m both trucks were there; 520 p.m one truck; on 07/19/00 at 250 p.m no trucks; 4 5 p.m one m k ; on 07/24 no trucks, P.D. did periodic inspections over 3 day period; tow trucks
evident on inspecdon: 07/29/00 10:15 p.m one truck; 31:26 am both trucks; 0253 a.m both trucks; 5fl3 a.m. boih mks; ?:C4 p.i:L on2 truck; 5:14 p.m both truck; i i:X pin. oue iiuck: on
07,30/X 1:08 a.m. both trucks; 05:08 a.m both trucks; 4:45 a.m. both trucks; 1:20 p.m no trucks; 4:37 p.m. one truck Dates and times as result of inspections showing vehicles there when
property was inspected. Photographs put into evidence by Dan Sp& taken this afternoon and no vehicles were eviden~o n O7/14/m at 656 a.m showing two vehicles. Initial order received
on C8/C6/99. Videotape shown of residence no violarion a: that tirre. City asking for fme for five day5 of subswnriatzd proof acd 5ZCC in 1drni.n fees. iby. Goodblan zked about times
trucks parked in drivemy. kspondenr James Ferry advised he has a tmporuuon problem and has been driving only tow mcks because he has only those for transpomuon. Privacy fence put up
rhL aeekend, m c k are completely hidden. .Advised vehicles have been par!!d since last )ear because he has no other vehicle. kspondent showed on photographs &ere privacy fencing %-as
put up on the past weekend. Ekspondent admitted trucks xre parked dl night at residence at &.es and that vehicles come and go ac residence. Commercial vehicle has to be parked in garage
according to code. Privacy fencins does cot ~pplyto commercd vehicles. Ekspondent claims he went before commission over one year go 4 t h JaybGLler u d they said it would be all.'right.
Any. Goldbla~ aavled i t char tin?& there was some quesuon ac t n a~tim e with what ordinances were being used but chat they had not been changed. Dates precede fence per ciry 3137.
Cicy actorney ~dvised& ere
RSK Ventures, Inc. 235 Longwood S t Longwood, FL 32750 Cathy Price presented city's case, complaint received of din stockpiled and moved around on this property. Code went out and saw
that trees were removed and that site plan was required for work being done. b ~writrten 5 13 1/00 to Lembricks advising of non-permitted kndfi and city issued stop work order and site
plan requirement. Requested site plan be done within next two week before 06/16/2W. Several discussions with Planning but no had been done. Reason for the service of hearing was that
the papemork needs to be expedited Video shown of dirt piled on property by Dan Spak. Gty asking site plan application is fded within 30 days. Gty accept 45 days if it could be substantiated.
No fees or fines. Service of notice 08/16/00 6:35 p.m by L o n g g d Police Department. Respondent Ralph Lembrick responded that Charlie Madden, civil engineer, is doing site plan for
him and that he advised it would take 45 days. Respondent responded that he ~ c a sin the site site development business. Photos were induced showing the propeqwas 2 fr low. Respondent
advised he was qing to clean up propeqwhen stop work order was given. In the meantime respondent bought two other parcels of land adjacent and waited till the deal was f i d to go to
the civil engineer for the site pkn. City Planner advised respondent it would take four months. Motion to close hearing made by Cheryl Melvin. Seconded by Laura hfoehlenkarnp. All in
favor. Laura Moehlenkamp made motion 45 days to submit site plan, which was seconded by Joe Harunan. Board voted all in favor. Board found that Respondent was in violation of (Land Development
Code 24-94) (b) These violations were evident in that sire plan not submitted (c) Respondent ma given 45 days to submit site pkn. Chairman gave a 7-minute break CEB 00-CS-073 I. John
and Carol Montaldo 164 Hope St. Longwd, X 32750 Board called back into order. Cathy Price advised the respondent was not served. Mr. Montaldo said he m s served today at 5:lj pm today.
Gry -korney offered a continuance. Mr. Monwldo agreed and asked for continuance. Motion made by Ernest Tolos for continuance till next meeting seconded by Cheql Melvin. Board voted all
in favor. Respondent was given date of Tuesday September 26,2CCO for next hearing. Arty. Goodblan advised she would send an order. Any. Goodblan advised she wodd send order on earlier
cases, which were continued LO. The Board found that (c) Respondent was given J. continuance. ~ i~ ( 3j 4 4 7 4 J. Scott Oc u n 426 Longwood Circle
Longwood, FL 32750 . . GthyPrice presented ciry's case of citation on Ob/C9/00 to be resolved. by C6/14/00 for inoperable vehicle. He a= cited again on C6/30 -07/14. Vehicle gone today.
History of this property with inoperable vehicles and because of that city aanted board to hear and fmd violation so if it occurs again so it a d d be found in violation. Ongoing for
inoperable vehicles for one year. Because of the time it took on this last citation the respondent showed no desire to cooperate. Respondent advised car was sold, he had no place to
keep vehicle. Respondent promised vehicle would not be seen at his house again. Laura Moehlenlnmp made a motion to close the public hearing seconded by Cheryl Melvin., Board voted al!
in favor. City looking for guilty verdict so there would be no repeat offenses. h.Io6on made by Laura hloehIeG to find respondent guilty of Land Development Code 24-23.07, and that he
was found in violation and that if the Vokmgen shows back up that it comes under a $25 a day fine. Gty would request any inoperable vehicle. Motion amended to include any inoperable
vehicle. Seconded by Cheryl Melvin. Board voted all in favor. The Board found that (a) Respondent m;is in violation of (Land Development Code 24-23.07 Gqyj (b) These violations were
evident in that ongoing problem (c) Respondenr was given warning if repeated, will be fined $25 per day. OLD BUSINESS: None NEW Bb5INESS: Arcy. h yGo ldblart a couple of quick things
for the board regarding concerns about -motions, she has motion copies and she can assist anyme in making motions. Also for the chairman to ask for other witnesses because the respondent
may have other wimesses, so there is no due process violation. Packets of information the board gets contain evidence for example the police notifications in packets tonight; she is
concern that the board sits as a judicial body and is supposed to come unbiased. If you review all that evidence before you get here some of that evidence was not introduced by the city
and even though its not a formal court of law the city aeeds to & xxx ,C:~ciiogbse cause the re:porder,: does nc.t get a c h c e t o revie~tki r evidence. Doesn't want board to be put
in situation that it could be appealed because of being in violaaon of some law. Chairman advised the police evidence was all read at the podium and that would have put them into evidence.
Arty. Goldblart is concerned that the board is not considering Sunshine Law issues. The board shouldn't be looking at anydung that would persuade the board before they get here. Chairman
voiced concern on Item A that board got no infomuon on it; if c s e is on apnda sorrii infomuon should be 6ive to he bod. Chairman feels that is wrong and h r if it is on the agenda
there should be some mfomtion in the packet on the case. i\rcy. Goodblan advised m many cities all you get is the agenda, so that p u c ome in ~ i t ah c lem slate, it =odd be the morne).s
job to review the evidence and be familiar with it and that rhe board should comider any evidence before they get into the meeting and it is presented to them Board should be provided
with no informacion cvcept for agenda and notice of service. Arty. Goodbla~ga ve her legd opinion chat information should not be entertained from one side and the other side not be ;ive
the oppormnity to give information. City attorney advised J. courtesy notice could be put Ln p~cker~ dvisingc hmges to agenda. U-airmans uggested more sulls md less video, as the stills
ix;c &cuve. Elnest Tdos 3siced 2 GaodbLiils suggestions on Ic;d poLis ol p a c k ,