Code Enforcement Board - Indian River County

CEB- Approved 1 September 24, 2012 F:/BCC/All Committees/CODE/2012 Minutes/CODE09.24.12.doc

CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD

A meeting of the Indian River County (IRC) Code Enforcement Board (the Board) was held in the Commission Chambers at the County Administration Building, 1801 27th Street, Building “A”, Vero Beach, Florida on Monday, September 24, 2012 at 1:30 p.m.

Present were Chairman Joe Petrulak, Subcontractor Appointee; Vice Chairman Karl Zimmermann, Realtor Appointee; Tony Gervasio Member-at-Large Appointee; Keith Hedin, Businessman Appointee; and Pete Clements, General Contractor Appointee.

Let the record show there are vacancies for an Architect Appointee and an Engineer Appointee.

Also in attendance was IRC staff: Roland DeBlois, Environmental and Code Enforcement Chief; Betty Davis, Vanessa Carter Solomon, Rose Jefferson and Kelly Buck, Code Enforcement Officers; Attorney David Hancock, Attorney for the Board; and Reta Smith, Recording Secretary.

10:48:50 Call to Order

Chairman Petrulak called the meeting to order and led all in the Pledge of Allegiance. The secretary called the roll, establishing that a quorum was present.

10:49:46 Approval of Minutes of August 27, 2012

ON MOTION BY Mr. Zimmermann, SECONDED BY Mr. Clements, the Board voted unanimously (5-0) to approve the minutes of August 27, 2012 as presented.

10:50:03 Attorney’s Overview of Board Purpose and Procedures

Attorney David Hancock, Attorney for the Board, gave a brief overview of the procedures and purpose of the Code Enforcement Board.

Agenda Additions or Deletions, Consent Items

Mr. Roland DeBlois, IRC Environmental and Code Enforcement Chief, reported the following cases had either complied, been rescheduled, or were


recommended by staff for an extension of time on the Consent Agenda. Cases #2012050086, #2012060065, #2012040092, #202010045, #2012050130, #2012070086, #2012040005, #2012040162, #2012020154, #2012010125, #2011120067, #2012040126, #2012050085 and #2012060231- 30 day extension until October 19, 2012. Cases #2012030025, #2012050120, #2012050125, #2012050216, #2012050155 and #2012010073 - 60 day extension until November 23, 2012. Cases #2012050127, #2012050081 and #2012060179 were rescheduled.

In compliance were Cases #2012050129, #2012050182, #2012070054, #2012070007, #2012070110, #2012070106, #2012080067, #2012080089, #2012080091, #2012080075, #2012080025, #2012090055, #2012060023, #2012010122, #2012020009, #2012030009, #2012060235 and #2012050156.

Mr. DeBlois noted there were several Lien Release Requests scheduled and he recommended these be heard no sooner than 3:00 p.m.

Chairman Petrulak announced if anyone present had heard their name or case number called for a Consent item and wanted their case to be heard, they should talk to their Code Enforcement Officer and the Board would accommodate their request.

11:06:26 ON MOTION BY Mr. Zimmermann, SECONDED BY Mr. Hedin, the Board voted unanimously (5-0) to accept the Consent Agenda with the revisions.

11:06:38 Swearing in of Those Who Will Testify

The secretary proceeded to administer the testimonial oath to everyone who would be testifying at today’s hearings.

EVIDENTIARY HEARINGS

11:07:00 Case #2012040148 – Virginia Faye Dillard

Mr. DeBlois related this case involved property zoned CL-Limited Commercial involving a non-conforming mobile home park that was grandfathered back to when the park was originally established. He explained one of the spaces reserved for a mobile home now had a Recreation Vehicle (RV) on the site, and although this was allowed it would still be necessary to get appropriate hook-ups and permits for the change.


Ms. Betty Davis, IRC Code Enforcement Officer, submitted into evidence an Affidavit of Service indicating the property had been posted on September 13, 2012 and two photographs taken on September 13, 2012, along with an aerial picture taken in November, 2011. She indicated on the aerial there were five approved mobile home spots; but one mobile home had been removed and was replaced by an RV. She confirmed the Respondent had applied for permits with the IRC Health and Building Departments, and recommended an extension of 60 days, until November 23, 2012, to comply.

Mr. DeBlois noted the Notice of Violation cited the Respondent with zoning district use violation, no building permit and mobile home tie down violation; however the zoning district use violation had been resolved because the County had recently changed its Land Development Regulations to allow RVs in mobile home parks, so the zoning district use violation was withdrawn.

11:14:02 ON MOTION BY Mr. Hedin, SECONDED BY Mr. Zimmermann, the Board voted unanimously (5-0) to find violations for no building permits and mobile home tie down and grant an extension of 60 days, until November 23, 2012, for compliance or a $100 per day fine.

It is noted for the record Respondent Robert Dillard was present for this hearing.

11:18:18 Case #2012080126 – Minor J. Platt, Jr.

Mr. DeBlois stated this case had to do with property zoned A-2 Agriculture - one unit per ten acres, located in the Unincorporated County, and staff had cited the Respondent for health and safety hazard for residential use of a barn on the property with no septic tank or plumbing approvals and no permits for residential use.

Inspector Davis submitted a photograph taken in November, 2011 into evidence and pointed out the area of the barn presently used as living space. She testified the Respondent had indicated he would be obtaining the necessary permits.

Ms. Jessica Williams, representing the Respondent, stated the septic permit had been applied for and the remaining permit applications would be forthcoming.

Inspector Davis recommended an extension of 60 days, until November 23,


2012, to either obtain the required permits and approvals or cease use of the barn for living quarters, or potentially be subject to a $100 per day fine.

11:25:53 ON MOTION BY Mr. Zimmermann, SECONDED BY Mr. Hedin, the Board voted unanimously (5-0) to find the violations and grant an extension of 60 days, until November 23, 2012, to either obtain the required permits and approvals or cease use of the barn for living quarters, or potentially be subject to a $100 per day fine.

It is noted for the record the Respondent was present for this hearing.

11:26:57 Case #2012080124 – Minor Platt Jr.

Mr. DeBlois outlined this case had to do with property at 13350 122nd Street that was cited for site plan non-conformance and junk, trash and debris violations. He specified the subject property was a 12-acre tract #135 owned by the Respondent, and adjacent to it on the east side was another 12-acre tract #136 owned by both the Respondent and Bonnie C. Platt.

Mr. DeBlois explained in November of 2000 the County issued site plan approval for a gun range on both tracts, with access and the actual gun range facilities being located on tract #135. He showed on the overhead projector and submitted into evidence a plan labeled Attachment #3, which was a depiction of the gun range as it was approved by the Board of County Commissioners (BCC). Mr. DeBlois pointed out under the approved plan the shooting direction was to the east from tract #135 onto tract #136, and showed a shot fall zone of 627 feet radius with a total approved radius of 900 feet, representing the shot fall zone plus an additional safety zone. He submitted into evidence a staff report dated November 7, 2000 that had gone to the BCC with the request for special exception use for the gun range, and noted it had been approved with certain conditions, including an annual report on the property.

Mr. DeBlois continued that subsequently in 2006 the Respondent and Bonnie Platt applied to build a residence on tract #136 and a building permit was issued. He submitted a copy of the permit into evidence and pointed out the attached plot plan of tract #136 indicated the property was a vacant agricultural parcel.

Mr. DeBlois said staff had received a complaint stating the gun range was not


being operated in accordance with the approved plan and the house was built within the safety zone of the approved 2000 plan. Mr. DeBlois confirmed after researching the issue staff had issued a Notice of Violation and instructed the Respondent to immediately cease use of the gun range until or unless there was a revised plan that could be considered for modification of use.

Inspector Davis submitted into evidence an aerial photograph taken in November, 2011 indicating the location of the home and three photos showing Approved shooting stands facing to the north, and described debris on the south boundary of the road right-of-way and on tract #135.

Mr. John McCoy, IRC Senior Planner, confirmed he wrote the memorandum dated November 7, 2000 and testified the attached plan labeled Attachment #3 was the same plan approved by the BCC on November 14, 2000. He explained during the process of special exception use approval there were several depictions or site plan drawings of the plan that were reviewed by staff, then went before the Planning and Zoning Commission (PZC) and finally to the BCC. Mr. McCoy advised the PZC had initially recommended the gun range be denied and the Respondent had subsequently met with staff and revised the plan to correspond with what was shown on Attachment #3.

Mr. McCoy testified to his knowledge the County had not received any operation reports on the gun range. He indicated one of the remedies would be a revised design, and one thing that could be done was to narrow the fan in the cone to exclude where the home was located; however this would require the consent of all the property owners involved.

Discussion followed about which plan had actually been approved by the BCC.

Mr. DeBlois admitted staff did not have a stamped approved version of the plan that went to the BCC; however the recorded minutes of the November 14, 2000 meeting included Attachment #3 in the backup of the minutes.

Mr. Gervasio inquired why there was never a requirement of unity of title. He also had a problem with there not being an approved site plan and the fact nobody had followed up on the operational reports when they were a condition of approval.

Mr. McCoy recalled at the time all the physical improvements were on tract #135 and conceded in retrospect there probably should have been a unity of title.


Mr. DeBlois confirmed a Certificate of Occupancy was never requested or received for the gun range, and six years later the Respondent came in through a separate process and depicted the house on a vacant adjoining tract with no reference at all to the gun range.

Mr. DeBlois submitted into evidence a letter dated August 9, 2012 written by Ms. Bonnie Platt to Code Enforcement staff and reviewed the information therein. Ms. Bonnie Platt testified she lived in the residence on tract #136 and was not aware the shot fall zone was on her parcel. She confirmed shooting had always gone to the north since the inception of the gun range.

Mr. DeBlois maintained testimony had shown the gun ranged had been used contrary to the approved plan and recommended the Board find there had been a site plan approval violation and because of the health and safety issues the Respondent should immediately cease use of the gun range until and unless a revised site plan was approved and he met the conditions of that approval. He clarified at the time the original plan was approved an action letter was sent to the Respondent’s engineer; however all the conditions were not met and the plan was never given final release and approval.

Ms. Jessica Williams, representing the Respondent, contended there were a lot of discrepancies and some things were missing because she had another site plan with a different date that was signed by IRC staff.

Chairman Petrulak asked the Respondent which direction the shooting was going. The Respondent said it was to the north or sometimes north-east.

Discussion ensued about what the Respondent would have to do to keep the gun range in operation.

Attorney David Hancock, Attorney for the Board, advised the members their job was not to find an equitable solution, but to determine if there was a violation of a code or regulation of the County.

Mr. Gervasio noted all the site plans shown today illustrated shooting should go to the east, and photos illustrated and testimony had been given that shooting was going to the north or north-east.


13:07:17 ON MOTION BY Mr. Gervasio, SECONDED BY Mr. Zimmermann, the Board voted (0-5) to find there was a violation in the direction of the shooting and grant 30 days, until October 19, 2012, for compliance. Motion failed.

Chairman Petrulak clarified Mr. Gervasio’s motion was to turn the direction of the shooting to the east.

Mr. Gervasio asserted there clearly was a violation because the site plan never received full approval and a permit was never issued since it did not get approval.

13:12:12 ON MOTION BY Mr. Gervasio, SECONDED BY Mr. Zimmermann, the Board voted unanimously (5-0) to find non-compliance with the site plan and direct the Respondent to cease and desist operation of the gun range until such time as the Respondent received County approval and permitting and inspections.


Chairman Petrulak called a recess at 3:55 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 4:05 p.m.

LIEN RELEASE REQUESTS

13:14:08 Case #2007120001 – Ernest Gay

Mr. DeBlois recalled this case originally came to the Board in April, 2006 for use of an RV as living quarters, commercial vehicle stored on the property, junk vehicles, business use of residential property and junk, trash and debris. He continued the Board found the violations and after giving the Respondent a period of time to comply it came into compliance and the case was closed.

Mr. DeBlois advised subsequently the Board entered an Order Imposing Fine with a start date of January 8, 2008 for a repeat violation of the previous Order for junk vehicles, junk, trash and debris and a land clearing business and accessory storage use on the site. He related a note in the file indicated the property came into


compliance on September 4, 2008, which was 240 days of non-compliance for a flat fine of $24,000.

Respondent Mr. Ernest Gay testified he had been living in Fort Myers and was not aware of the situation. He said he was trying to work things out with his bank and he could not afford the fine.

Inspector Davis stated the property had been cleaned up within a couple of weeks after the Order Finding Violation and the site had been maintained since that time; but a van remained on the property until September 4, 2008, and she could not verify if it was roadworthy or not.

Mr. DeBlois opined since this was a repeat violation the Respondent should have been aware of the situation and recommended $1,700 in administrative costs and $800 for the repeat violation, for a total fine of $2,500.

13:22:32 ON MOTION BY Mr. Zimmermann, SECONDED BY Hedin, the Board voted unanimously (5-0) to find compliance and set the fine at $2,500.


13:22:50 Case #2012050166 – Tobias M. Williams Sr.

Mr. DeBlois recalled this case first came to the Board on June 25, 2012 for overgrown weeds, and came back for a compliance hearing on July 23, 2012 at which time after testimony the Board found non-compliance and imposed a fine of $100 per day with a start date of July 21, 2012.

Ms. Kelly Buck, IRC Code Enforcement Officer, verified a compliance date of August 24, 2012 and confirmed the property had been maintained since that time. Mr. DeBlois computed a passage of 34 days which translated to a flat fine of $3,400.

Respondent Tobias Williams stated he lived out of town and his son was supposed to be overseeing his properties; however this had not been done. He said the address in the Order was wrong and he had no knowledge of the violation until his son told him he saw the property had been posted.

Mr. DeBlois noted this case and the following Case #2012050170 were similar in that they involved adjacent vacant properties that were cited at the same time, and


the fines were imposed at the same meeting and corrected at the same time.

Discussion followed about the discrepancy in the Respondent’s address.

Inspector Buck confirmed the violations had been taken care of the same day the Respondent had contacted her and both sites had been maintained since then.

Mr. DeBlois observed the Respondent resolved the violations in a timely manner and recommended the Board combine the administrative costs of $1,700 and split it between the two properties, which would be $850 for Case #2012050166.

13:36:12 ON MOTION BY Mr. Zimmermann, SECONDED BY Mr. Hedin, the Board voted (2-3) to find the property in compliance and set the fine at $1,000. Chairman Petrulak, Mr. Gervasio and Mr. Clements opposed.

The motion did not pass.

13:36:53 ON MOTION BY Mr. Clements, SECONDED BY Mr. Gervasio, the Board voted (3-2) to find compliance and set the fine at $400 for Case #2012050166. Mr. Zimmermann and Mr. Hedin opposed.


13:37:28 Case #2012050170 – Tobias Milo Williams

13:37:40 ON MOTION BY Mr. Gervasio, SECONDED BY Mr. Clements, the Board voted (3-2) to find compliance and set the fine at $400 for Case #2012050170. Mr. Zimmermann and Mr. Hedin opposed.


13:38:38 Case #2011030126 – George & Ruth Fogarty (PNC Bank)

Mr. DeBlois related this case came to the Board for an evidentiary hearing on April 25, 2011 for an unsecured back door, overgrown weeds and junk, trash and


debris violations. He continued the case came back for a compliance hearing in May, 2012 and upon learning of non-compliance the Board imposed a fine of $100 per day with a start date of May 21, 2011. Mr. DeBlois noted compliance was confirmed on November 8, 2011, which was 171 days of non-compliance for a flat fine of $17,100.

Ms. Vanessa Carter Solomon, IRC Code Enforcement Officer, testified the bank had contacted her in November and maintained the site since that time.

Respondents Mr. Matt Martise and Mr. Mark Titone stated they were the new owners and were trying to improve the neighborhood, and asked for some relief from the Board members.

Discussion ensued about why someone would purchase property when they knew there was a lien on it. Mr. Hedin felt the Respondents assumed the Board would automatically reduce the fine and were gambling on that fact.

Mr. DeBlois noted the bank took the initiative to clean up the property before they had full control and recommended the fine be reduced to administrative costs in the amount of $1,700.

13:48:57 ON MOTION BY Mr. Zimmermann, SECONDED BY Mr. Gervasio, the Board voted (4-1) to find compliance and set the fine at $1,700 to cover administrative costs. Mr. Hedin opposed.

It is noted for the record Respondents Mr. Martise and Mr. Titone were present for this hearing.

13:49:13 Case #2008020035 – Chase Home Finance LLC (David & Elinor Feriend)

Mr. DeBlois recapped this case first came to the Board on April 28, 2008 for overgrown weeds and junk, trash and debris when Mr. & Mrs. Feriend owned the property, and no banks were involved at the time. He advised the Board granted until May 16, 2008, and upon finding non-compliance a fine of $100 was imposed with a start date of May 17, 2008. Mr. DeBlois confirmed compliance had been verified as of July 21, 2009, which was 430 days for a flat fine of $43,000.

Attorney Randol Masters, representing the bank, stated once the bank had


control of the property they had cleaned it up and maintained it.

Mr. DeBlois recommended the fine be reduced to administrative costs in the amount of $1,700.

13:53:20 ON MOTION BY Mr. Gervasio, SECONDED BY Mr. Zimmermann, the Board voted (4-1) to find compliance and set the fine at $1,700 to cover administrative costs. Mr. Hedin opposed.

It is noted for the record the bank representative was present for this hearing.

13:53:34 Case #2012020110 – Rodney William Atwood

Mr. DeBlois advised this case originally came to the Board in November, 2011 for an overgrown weeds violation and the Board entered an Order Finding Repeat Violation. He related the Respondent was given until December 23, 2011 to mow the overgrown weeds, and at that time it came into compliance. Mr. DeBlois continued another notice of hearing for a repeat violation was sent out in February, 2012, at which time the Board entered a fine of $100 per day with a start date of February 17, 2012. He confirmed compliance had been verified as of September 12, 2012, which was 208 days after the start of the fine, which translated to $20,800.

Respondent Ms. Kristin Casulino, a realtor representing the Respondent, submitted a letter dated September 16, 2012 from Ms. Raelene Atwood, the Respondent’s mother, into evidence. The letter stated the Respondent had mental health issues and was incapable of understanding the problems involved with maintenance of the property. She clarified Ms. Atwood was originally not aware of the situation; but had since made arrangements to keep the lawn mowed.

Mr. DeBlois recommended the Board acknowledge compliance and rescind the fine.

14:00:59 ON MOTION BY Mr. Gervasio to find compliance and rescind the fine.

The motion died for lack of a second.

Mr. Gervasio wondered why Mr. DeBlois wouldn’t look for administrative costs


in this case. Mr. DeBlois said based on the circumstance and evidence the property would be maintained.

Mr. Zimmermann asked who owned the house. Respondent Casulino stated Mr. Atwood did and she had a listing contract with him for sale of the property.

14:01:41 ON MOTION BY Mr. Hedin, SECONDED BY Mr. Zimmermann, the Board voted (4-1) to find compliance and impose a fine of $1,700 for administrative costs. Mr. Gervasio opposed.

It is noted for the record the Respondent’s realtor was present for this hearing.

COMPLIANCE HEARINGS

14:03:03 Case #2011070009 – Richard Harper

Mr. DeBlois recollected this case came to the Board on May 21, 2012 for an evidentiary hearing regarding a property maintenance violation having to do with a fire-damaged residence. He indicated the Board had found the violation and granted time for the Respondent to apply for the necessary building permits to repair the damaged building or demolish the structure, and per staff’s recommendation a number of extensions had been granted leading to today’s compliance hearing.

Mr. DeBlois explained he had received correspondence from the Respondent’s attorney advising there was ongoing litigation with the insurance company and staff had agreed to postpone scheduling of the hearing pending the litigation; however in the meantime the house had been boarded up and the lawn was being mowed.

Inspector Carter Solomon submitted two photographs into evidence and mentioned the neighbors were complaining about the situation.

Attorney Michael Eister, representing the Respondent, said a lawsuit was filed in 2011 and litigation was still ongoing regarding payment on an insurance policy for the home; however until the matter was resolved the Respondent did not have the means to renovate or demolish the structure. He stressed he was actively seeking to settle the dispute outside of court to move things along; but he did not know when it might be resolved.


Discussion followed.

14:16:35 ON MOTION BY Mr. Zimmermann, SECONDED BY Mr. Hedin, the Board voted unanimously (5-0) to grant a six month extension, until March 22, 2013.

It is noted for the record the Respondent and his attorney were present for this hearing.

14:17:39 Case #2011110090 – Sandra Snow

Mr. DeBlois recapped the Board had entered an Order Finding Violation on January 23, 2012 for a property maintenance violation for a dilapidated mobile home on the property. The Board’s Order gave the Respondent until March 23, 2012 to bring the mobile home into compliance with County codes or remove the structure, with a number of extensions being granted.

Inspector Davis submitted five photographs into evidence and advised the Respondent had removed the mobile home; however there was construction debris, fencing, an abandoned power pole and other items remaining, adding the property had also become overgrown.

The Respondent showed some photographs of her own and maintained the property had been cleaned up and she was removing pepper trees.

Inspector Davis advised there were still issues with the decking, the utility pole and skirting for the mobile home.

Mr. DeBlois noted there had been some effort to comply and it was just a matter of final cleanup. He recommended an extension of 30 days, until October 19, 2012, to resolve the final issues.

14:26:47 ON MOTION BY Mr. Zimmermann, SECONDED BY Mr. Hedin, the Board voted unanimously (5-0) to grant an extension of 30 days, until October 19, 2012.



EVIDENTIARY HEARINGS

14:28:18 Case #2012080038 – Leader Tomkins, LLC (Maria Ortega)

Inspector Carter Solomon advised there was no service on the property owner Leader Tomkins, LLC; however she wanted to proceed against the tenant Ms. Maria Ortega because the violation was for home occupation relating to a permit issued to the tenant.

Inspector Carter Solomon summarized Respondent Ortega had a home occupation permit for a seamstress business on residential property; however neighbors had complained chairs and other furniture were being brought into the residence for the upholstery business, which was not allowed. She submitted into evidence a copy of the home occupation permit and two photographs showing what appeared to be upholstery material in the garage.

Respondent Ms. Maria Ortega admitted she had previously brought two chairs into the house; but after receiving the notice she had not done it again. She testified she brought in a recliner with pillows because they had to be measured.

Discussion ensued about the difference between seamstress and upholstery work.

Mr. DeBlois said it sounded as though the Respondent was currently in compliance; however staff had documented past violation. He recommended the Board find there was a violation but it was currently in compliance and if there was a future violation the Respondent would be subject to a fine.

14:44:59 ON MOTION BY Mr. Gervasio, SECONDED BY Mr. Hedin, the Board voted unanimously (5-0) to find the violation was in compliance but enter a Continuing Order so the Respondent understood no furniture could come into the house.


14:45:49 Case #2012060032 – Fountain Towers LLC

Inspector Davis testified the property was posted on September 13, 2012 and submitted four photographs into evidence. She indicated the Respondent had been


cited for site plan non-conformance and landscape maintenance violations because of a drop-off in the parking lot and dead and missing landscape. She recommended an extension of 60 days, until November 23, 2012, for compliance.

14:47:17 ON MOTION BY Mr. Hedin, SECONDED BY Mr. Zimmermann, the Board voted unanimously (5-0) to find the violation and grant an extension of 60 days, until November 23, 2012, for compliance or a $100 per day fine.

It is noted for the record the Respondent was not present for this hearing.

14:47:49 Case #2012070087 – Elizabeth Caldwell & Cynthia Shrader

Inspector Davis submitted an Affidavit of Service indicating the property had been posted on September 13, 2012, and three photographs into evidence. She related she had received a complaint from a neighbor about a yard encroachment violation for a domed structure on the property. She recommended an extension of 30 days, until October 19, 2012, for removal of the structure.

14:48:43 ON MOTION BY Mr. Zimmermann, SECONDED BY Mr. Hedin, the Board voted unanimously (5-0) to find the violation and grant an extension of 30 days, until October 19, 2012, for compliance or a $100 per day fine.


14:49:15 Case #2012070047 – Gia M. Cioffi

Ms. Rose Jefferson, IRC Code Enforcement Officer, submitted two photographs into evidence and testified she had posted the property on September 14, 2012. She described a fence constructed without a permit and recommended an extension of 30 days, until October 19, 2012, for the Respondent to obtain an after-the-fact permit or remove the fence.


14:49:56 ON MOTION BY Mr. Hedin, SECONDED BY Mr. Zimmermann, the Board voted unanimously (5-0) to find the violation and grant an extension of 30 days, until October 19, 2012, for compliance or a $100 per day fine.


14:50:02 Case #2012070091 – Sed Enuff Inc.

Inspector Jefferson submitted an Affidavit of Service indicating the property had been posted on September 14, 2012, and two photographs into evidence. She pointed out overgrown weeds on a vacant lot and recommended an extension of 30 days, until October 19, 2012, for compliance.



14:50:57 Case #2012080103 – Michael & Nancy Rollins (Chase Home Finance)

Inspector Davis submitted an Affidavit of Service indicating the property had been posted on September 19, 2012, and advised the property had been cited previously for an unsanitary pool. She confirmed the lock on the gate had been fixed but the pool was still unsanitary, and recommended an extension of 30 days, until October 19, 2012, for compliance.

14:51:45 ON MOTION BY Mr. Hedin, SECONDED BY Mr. Clements, the Board voted unanimously (5-0) to find the violation and grant an extension of 30 days, until October 19, 2012, for compliance or a $100 per day fine.



14:51:58 Case #2012080104 – Wells Fargo Bank

The case was withdrawn for lack of adequate service.

14:52:52 Case #2012080105 – Paul & Suzanne Key (Branch Banking & Trust)

Inspector Davis submitted an Affidavit of Service indicating the property had been posted on September 13, 2012, and four photographs into evidence. She commented she had received complaints from neighbors about overgrown weeds, swimming pool maintenance and junk, trash and debris; and recommended an extension of 30 days, until October 19, 2012, for compliance.



14:54:06 Case #2012080055 – High Ridge Mobile Park Inc.

Mr. DeBlois said he would reschedule this case due to lack of service.


This case was rescheduled due to lack of service.










14:55:24 Case #2012080006 – 4-J Southern Ranch, Inc.

Inspector Buck reported there was no service on this case.

14:55:36 Case #2012080094 – Fox Run of Vero Beach LLC

Inspector Buck confirmed service on September 10, 2012 and submitted four photographs into evidence. She explained this case had to do with a subdivision that was approved by the County but never got final plat, and people were dumping various types of junk, trash and debris on the site. Mr. DeBlois recommended the Board find the violation and grant an extension of 30 days, until October 19, 2012, for the Respondent to clean up and secure the property.

14:57:29 ON MOTION BY Mr. Clements, SECONDED BY Chairman Petrulak, the Board voted unanimously (5-0) to find the violation and grant an extension of 30 days, until October 19, 2012, for compliance or a $100 per day fine.


14:57:53 Case #2012080079 – April Denise Demmon

Inspector Jefferson submitted an Affidavit of Service indicating the property had been posted on September 14, 2012, and two photographs into evidence, and described assorted junk, trash and debris on the property. She recommended an extension of 30 days, until October 19, 2012, for compliance.




14:58:38 Case #2012070119 – Eric Gonzalez (BAC Home Loans)

Mr. DeBlois summarized this case involved overgrown weeds and junk, trash and debris. Inspector Jefferson submitted an Affidavit of Service indicating the property had been posted on September 14, 2012, and three photographs into evidence. She verified service on the bank on September 11, 2012, and recommended an extension of 30 days, until October 19, 2012, for compliance.

14:59:35 ON MOTION BY Mr. Hedin, SECONDED BY Mr. Clements, the Board voted unanimously (5-0) to find the violation and grant an extension of 30 days, until October 19, 2012, for compliance or a $100 per day fine.


14:59:42 Case #2012080009 – John Vetter

Mr. DeBlois related this property had also been cited for junk, trash and debris; however the violation had been resolved and what remained was a swimming pool maintenance violation. Inspector Jefferson submitted an Affidavit of Service indicating the property had been posted on September 14, 2012, and two photographs into evidence. Mr. DeBlois noted the Respondent was present earlier at the meeting and he had been advised staff would be recommending an extension of 30 days, until October 19, 2012, for compliance.


15:00:26 ON MOTION BY Mr. Zimmermann, SECONDED BY Mr. Hedin, the Board voted unanimously (5-0) to find the pool maintenance violation and grant an extension of 30 days, until October 19, 2012, for compliance or a $100 per day fine.


15:00:35 Case #2012080090 – Tobias Milo Williams

Inspector Carter Solomon submitted an Affidavit of Service indicating the property had been posted on September 14, 2012, and three photographs into evidence, and described overgrown weeds at a vacant residence. She confirmed she had made the Respondent aware of the violation when he was at the meeting earlier today, and recommended an extension of 30 days, until October 19, 2012, for compliance.

15:01:44 ON MOTION BY Mr. Hedin, SECONDED BY Mr. Gervasio, the Board voted unanimously (5-0) to find the violation and grant an extension of 30 days, until October 19, 2012, for compliance or a $100 per day fine.


15:01:49 Case #2012060181 – Mello Jackson

Mr. DeBlois advised this case had to do with three unsecured vacant structures and junk, trash and debris on the subject property. Inspector Buck testified she had posted the property on September 11, 2012 and submitted three photographs taken on September 24, 2012, and an aerial picture into evidence. She stated she had talked with a family member who was present at the meeting earlier today and was told the house on the furthest west side was not actually on the property; however the IRC Property Appraiser’s office confirmed all three houses were on the subject property.

Inspector Buck said she had told the family member to contact the IRC Sheriff’s office and sign a no trespass warrant. She recommended an extension of 60 days, until November 23, 2012, for the Respondent to clear up the discrepancy


concerning the westernmost house and properly board up the structures and clean up the junk, trash and debris.

15:04:27 ON MOTION BY Mr. Zimmermann, SECONDED BY Mr. Clements, the Board voted unanimously (5-0) to find the violation and grant an extension of 60 days, until November 23, 2012, for compliance or a $100 per day fine.


15:05:03 Case #2012080076 – Roland & Penny Merritt (Fifth Third Mtg. Co.)

Inspector Carter Solomon submitted an Affidavit of Service indicating the property had been posted on September 14, 2012, and two photographs into evidence. She confirmed service on the bank on September 13, 2012, and described overgrown weeds at a vacant residence; and recommended an extension of 30 days, until October 19, 2012, for compliance.

15:05:56 ON MOTION BY Mr. Zimmermann, SECONDED BY Mr. Clements, the Board voted unanimously (5-0) to find the violation and grant an extension of 30 days, until October 19, 2012, for compliance or a $100 per day fine.


15:06:06 Case #2012080049 – Richard B. Burgess

Inspector Carter Solomon submitted an Affidavit of Service indicating the property had been posted on September 14, 2012, and three photographs into evidence. She indicated the front yard had been mowed when she was at the site on September 11, 2012; however there was junk, trash and debris on the property and the back yard was extremely overgrown. Inspector Carter Solomon recommended an extension of 30 days, until October 19, 2012, for compliance.




15:07:06 Case #2012070104 – David A. Smart

Inspector Carter Solomon submitted an Affidavit of Service indicating the property had been posted on September 14, 2012, and two photographs into evidence. She indicated the cited violation was no building permit for a shed and a fence; but it turned out there was a fence permit issued in 1991 and all that would be required was for the Respondent to replace the boards, so she would withdraw the fence part of the violation. Inspector Carter Solomon noted the illegal shed was a site-built shed and recommended an extension of 60 days, until November 23, 2012, for compliance.

15:08:41 ON MOTION BY Mr. Zimmermann, SECONDED BY Mr. Gervasio, the Board voted unanimously (5-0) to find the violation for an illegal shed and grant an extension of 60 days, until November 23, 2012, for compliance or a $100 per day fine.


15:09:01 Case #2012080088 – Christina O’Keefe

Inspector Carter Solomon submitted an Affidavit of Service indicating the property had been posted on September 14, 2012, and three photographs into evidence, and described overgrown weeds and junk, trash and debris on the subject property. She recommended an extension of 30 days, until October 19, 2012, for compliance.




15:10:02 Case #2012090029 – William E. Ruetemann

Mr. DeBlois related this was a repeat violation of a Board Order of January 23, 2012, involving a boat repair business on the property and an unpermitted structure. He referred to page 173 of the backup material where the Order Granting Extension stated the Respondent would immediately cease any boat work on the subject property and provide proof of ownership of the boat on the property or remove the boat on or before April 2, 2012; and on or before April 20, 2012 obtain permits for the pole barn or remove the structure. Mr. DeBlois confirmed the Respondent had provided information the boats were registered to him and the boat violation was considered complied; but in the meantime the boat business had started up again.

Inspector Davis confirmed service on September 20, 2012, adding she had also posted the property on September 13, 2012, and submitted two photographs into evidence. She testified she had continuously received complaints about fumes, painting and sanding of boats since the case was originally heard, and submitted into evidence an e-mail from the IRC Tax Collector’s office verifying the tag on a boat observed on the property by an IRC Sheriff’s deputy was registered to Lucky Devil LLC. Inspector Davis also submitted into evidence a copy of the deputy’s report confirming the boat was on the property at the time of the report.

Mr. DeBlois noted there was one day of verification by the Sheriff’s office of the boat being on the property on August 30, 2012, and based on that fact he recommended a $100 fine be imposed for the one day the violation was verified.

15:15:43 ON MOTION BY Mr. Zimmermann, SECONDED BY Mr. Hedin, the Board voted unanimously (5-0) to impose the fine in the amount of $100 for one day of repeat violation.



COMPLIANCE HEARINGS

15:16:43 Case #2011110096 – William E. Ruetemann

Mr. DeBlois summarized this was a case related to the previous one regarding compliance with the initial Order of January 23, 2012 when the Board gave the Respondent until March 23, 2012 to obtain permits for the unpermitted pole barn structure. He noted Orders Granting Extension were granted leading to September 21, 2012 as the compliance date specifically relating to the pole barn.

Inspector Davis submitted a photograph taken September 21, 2012 into evidence and pointed out the pole barn was still on the property and no permit had been applied for. Mr. DeBlois recommended the Board find compliance had not been attained and impose the fine of $100 per day with a start date of September 22, 2012.

15:18:27 ON MOTION BY Mr. Gervasio, SECONDED BY Mr. Clements, the Board voted unanimously (5-0) to find non-compliance and impose a fine of $100 per day with a start date of September 22, 2012.


15:18:38 Case #2012050044 – Charles Bragg

Inspector Carter Solomon submitted two photographs into evidence and related this case initially came to the Board on July 23, 2012 for an unpermitted shed and roosters on the property. She reported a permit had not been applied for and the Respondent told her the rooster had been removed; however she had since determined it was still on the premises. Inspector Carter Solomon recommended the $100 per day fin be imposed with a start date of September 22, 2101.

15:19:46 ON MOTION BY Mr. Zimmermann, SECONDED BY Mr. Gervasio, the Board voted unanimously (5-0) to find non-compliance and impose a fine of $100 per day with a start date of September 22, 2012.



15:19:56 Case #2012030042 – Glyn & Dane Evans

Inspector Carter Solomon stated this case first came to the Board on May 21, 2012 for property maintenance violation, and after extensions being granted nothing had been done. She recommended the Board find non-compliance and impose a fine of $100 per day with a start date of September 22, 2012.

15:21:04 ON MOTION BY Mr. Gervasio, SECONDED BY Mr. Zimmermann, the Board voted unanimously (5-0) to find non-compliance and impose a fine of $100 per day with a start date of September 22, 2012.


15:21:12 Case #2012060028 – John Almeida (J.P. Morgan Chase Bank)

Mr. DeBlois recapped this case originally came to the Board on July 23, 2012 for overgrown weeds, junk vehicles and health/safety issues for a dilapidated fence. He stated a bank representative had attended the evidentiary hearing and requested time to move towards compliance during the foreclosure process, and a 60 day extension was granted until September 21, 2012.

Inspector Davis submitted three photographs into evidence and reported the overgrown weeds had been taken care of but the remaining violations were still not in compliance, and she had not heard from either the bank or the owner. Mr. DeBlois recommended the fine be imposed with a start date of September 22, 2012.

15:22:50 ON MOTION BY Mr. Gervasio, SECONDED BY Mr. Zimmermann, the Board voted unanimously (5-0) to find non-compliance and impose a fine of $100 per day with a start date of September 22, 2012.


15:23:01 Case #2012080117 – Eagle Trace Estate Homes LLC (Violator: Southern Waste Systems)

Mr. DeBlois recalled this was an issue of unauthorized oversized commercial dumpsters in a development at various locations on a construction site, and there


existed a Continuing Order with a $250 per day fine for each container against Southern Waste Systems for a previous violation. He specified staff had verified one container was on the site for two days after notification and three containers for five days, which translated to $4,250. Mr. DeBlois confirmed Southern Waste Systems had paid the fine amount and requested the Board ratify the fine at this time.

15:25:19 ON MOTION BY Mr. Zimmermann, SECONDED BY Mr. Gervasio, the Board voted unanimously (5-0) to ratify the fine in the amount of $4,250.

Mr. DeBlois clarified the Continuing Order would remain in effect for five years. In the event there was a recurrence of the violation.


15:25:50 Case #2012050217 – Timothy Johns (U.S. Bank National)

Inspector Jefferson submitted two photographs into evidence and related this case came to the Board for an evidentiary hearing on July 23, 2012 for junk, trash and debris, with one extension being granted. She confirmed nothing had been done and recommended a $100 per day fine be imposed with a start date of September 22, 2012.

15:26:36 ON MOTION BY Mr. Zimmermann, SECONDED BY Mr. Hedin, the Board voted unanimously (5-0) to find non-compliance and impose a fine of $100 per day with a start date of September 22, 2012.


15:26:47 Case #2012060063 – KMP Properties of Vero Beach LLC

Inspector Jefferson submitted two photographs into evidence and recapped the case initially came to the Board on July 23, 2012 with one extension; however nothing had been done. She recommended a $100 per day fine be imposed with a start date of September 22, 2012.




15:27:32 Case #2011110048 – Jennifer Ware

Mr. DeBlois advised this case first came to the Board on January 23, 2012 and had to do with health and safety issues related to an abandoned structure and junk, trash and debris violations. He continued the Board initially gave the Respondent until March 23, 2012 to obtain permits and complete reconstruction of the structure or obtain a demolition permit and remove the structure and remove construction debris and miscellaneous junk, trash and debris from the property. Mr. DeBlois observed there had been a number of extensions until September 21, 2012.

Inspector Davis reported demolition had not been completed and there was construction and lawn debris on the site. Mr. DeBlois recommended the Board find non-compliance and impose a $100 per day fine with a start date of September 22, 2012.

15:29:51 ON MOTION BY Mr. Gervasio, SECONDED BY Mr. Clements, the Board voted unanimously (5-0) to find non-compliance and impose a fine of $100 per day with a start date of September 22, 2012.


15:29:59 Case #2012070067 – WTH Oakmont Mortgage

Inspector Carter Solomon submitted two photographs into evidence and related this case initially came before the Board on August 27, 2012 for overgrown weeds. She confirmed nothing had been done and requested a $100 per day fine be imposed with a start date of September 22, 2012.


15:30:46 ON MOTION BY Mr. Hedin, SECONDED BY Mr. Clements, the Board voted unanimously (5-0) to find non-compliance and impose a fine of $100 per day with a start date of September 22, 2012.


15:30:55 Case #2012020039 – National Oil & Gas Distributor (Mobil Gas Station)

Inspector Carter Solomon advised this case originally came to the Board on April 23, 2012 regarding a U-Haul business established on the property without site plan approval and dead and missing landscape. She confirmed the Respondent had applied for site plan approval but had not followed through with it, and extensions had been granted to allow them to address the issues. Inspector Carter Solomon continued some landscape had been installed; however it had died and she had told them it needed to be replaced. She stated she had heard nothing further from the Respondent and recommended a $100 per day fine be imposed with a start date of September 22, 2012.



15:32:02 Case #2012060166 – Elsa Reyes

Inspector Carter Solomon recapped this case first came to the Board on July 23, 2012, at which time the Board granted seven days, until July 30, 2012, for compliance of the pool enclosure violation. She advised an extension was granted because it looked as though the Respondent would be working on compliance; but nothing had been done and she recommended the Board impose a fine of $100 per day with a start date of September 22, 2012.




LIEN RELEASE REQUEST

15:32:54 Case #2010090113 – Residential Fund Manager, 76 LLC (Previous Owner: Jeffrey E. Boutwell)

Mr. DeBlois summarized this case had initially been to the Board in October, 2010 for overgrown weeds and junk, trash and debris, and the Board granted Respondent Mr. Jeffrey Boutwell until November 19, 2010 to resolve the violations. He continued it eventually came back for a compliance hearing in January, 2011, and finding non-compliance the Board entered a $100 per day fine starting January 22, 2011.

Mr. DeBlois indicated the foreclosing bank was now looking to resolve the lien and sell the property, and the records indicated the property came into compliance as of July 29, 2011 and had been maintained since that time. He computed this represented 188 days of non-compliance for a flat fine of $18,800, and recommended the Board acknowledge compliance and set the fine at $2,500 for administrative costs.

15:36:14 ON MOTION BY Mr. Zimmermann, SECONDED BY Mr. Hedin, the Board voted (4-1) to find compliance and set the fine at $2,500 for administrative costs. Mr. Clements opposed.


15:36:29 Authorization for Notices to Appear

ON MOTION BY Mr. Zimmermann, SECONDED BY Mr. Hedin the Board voted unanimously (5-0) to authorize the Notices to Appear for cases leading up to the October 22, 2012 meeting.


Other Matters

There were none.

Adjournment

There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 6:28 p.m.

Documents

Code Enforcement Board - Indian River County