CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL

CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD

MEETING MINUTES

FEBRUARY 22, 2007

7:00 PM

 

 

A Regular Meeting of the Code Enforcement Board of the City of Cape Canaveral, Florida was held on February 22, 2007, in the City Hall Annex, 111 Polk Avenue, Cape Canaveral, Florida.

 

Chairperson Mary Russell called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM.  The Board Secretary called the roll.

 

            MEMBERS PRESENT

                       

                        Mary Russell                                       Chairperson

Craig Stewart                                      Vice Chairperson

Charles Biederman

Walter Godfrey

                        James Hale

                        Raymond Viens

                        Edward Ciecirski                                 1st Alternate

                       

            MEMBERS ABSENT

 

Karen Hartley

Lynn Mars                                           2nd Alternate

 

            OTHERS PRESENT

 

                        Duree Alexander                                 Code Enforcement Officer

                        Joy Lombardi                                      Board Secretary

                        Todd Morley                                        Building Official

                        Ed Gardulski                                       Public Works Director

                        Rocky Randels                                   Mayor

                        Bob Hoog                                            Mayor Pro Tem

                        Shannon Roberts                                Council Member

                        Anthony Garganese                            City Attorney

 

The Board members established that the next meeting would be held on March 22, 2007.

 

City Attorney Garganese swore in all persons giving testimony.

 

NEW BUSINESS:

 

1.         Approval of Meeting Minutes: January 18, 2007.

 

Motion by Mr. Biederman, seconded by Mr. Viens, to approve the meeting minutes of January 18, 2007, as written.  Vote on the motion carried unanimously.

 

Code Enforcement Board

Meeting Minutes

February 22, 2007

Page 2

 

 

OLD BUSINESS:

 

1.         Case No. 01-0008 – Violation of Section 94-4(11), Exemptions, of the Cape Canaveral Code of Ordinances, (8050 N. Atlantic Ave.) – Pravin & Jyostna Patel, Property Owner. (Request for reduction or release of lien)

 

Code Enforcement Officer, Duree Alexander, provided a brief overview of the Case history and presented exhibits for the Board’s review.  Officer Alexander testified that the respondent is requesting a reduction of the lien. 

 

Anthony Garganese, City Attorney, explained to the Board Members that the foreclosure action has been filed against Mr. Patel, which has prompted him to apply for the satisfaction or reduction of the lien.  Attorney Garganese further explained that the issue before the Board is to consider whether to recommend to Council to reduce the lien, considering six factors:  1) the gravity of the violation 2) the time in which it took the violator to come into compliance 3) the accrued amount of the lien 4) any previous or subsequent code violations 5) any financial hardship 6) any other mitigating circumstances which may warrant the reduction or satisfaction of the penalty or fine.

 

Attorney Andrew Miniheart, representative for Mr. Patel, stated that they are requesting a release or reduction of the lien.  Attorney Miniheart testified that there are two Mr. Patel’s; Mr. Patel, the property owner, and Mr. Patel, the tenant.  Attorney Miniheart further stated that the property owner did not receive any notification due to the fact that the notice of violation and the lawsuit were sent to the store, which was received by Mr. Patel, the tenant.  In 2001 the tenant received the first notice of violation, removed some of the signs, and was under the impression that was the issue was resolved.  Years pasted before another notice was received in 2006 regarding the relocation of the cashier station, which was promptly addressed by the property owner.   Attorney Miniheart further testified that the property owner has been at this location for many years and has recently made improvements to the property in excess of sixty to seventy thousand dollars.  Attorney Miniheart requested that the Board recommend to Council a reduction in the lien amount to cover the City’s costs and attorney fees not to exceed approximately five thousand dollars ($5,000.00), otherwise Mr. Patel would be forced to sell the property and close the business. 

 

Mary Russell reviewed the six points that the City Attorney talked about and stated that the gravity of the violation is not the aesthetic issue of the signs but the safety factor for our police officers; the time it took to come into compliance was five years, from 2001 to 2006; the accrued amount is seventy thousand dollars, not five thousand; there are no previous violations for this address; the financial status is unknown to the Board; and the mitigating circumstances has been stated that the wrong Mr. Patel was notified.

 

Mr. Patel, property owner, testified that in 2006 when the notice of lien was received, he addressed the issues and spoke to Officer Alexander who told him everything was fine.  He stated that he spent fifty thousand dollars in repairs to the property.

 

Attorney Miniheart stated that there is a serious due process issue that needs to be addressed; if we have to litigate it we will and the property owner has not received proper notification.

 

Code Enforcement Board

Meeting Minutes

February 22, 2007

Page 3

 

 

The Board asked Mr. Patel, property owner, when he had first became aware of the sign violations.

 

Mr. Patel, property owner, testified that the tenant notified him of the sign problem in 2001.

 

Officer Alexander testified that she sent the notices to the property owner and to the business owner and feels confident that the prior Code Enforcement Officer has sent proper notification.  Officer Alexander explained that in the May 17, 2001 Code Enforcement Board Meeting Minutes, Page 7, the testimony of the Code Enforcement Officer was that the notices were properly delivered.  She further explained that a letter was received from Mr. Patel on August 3, 2001, which stated that he was aware of the Violation.  Officer Alexander further stated that she has requested the records from the archives, and will research the notification history further.

 

Officer Alexander respectfully requested that the Board deny the respondents request to satisfy the lien in the amount of $70,075.00 and order the respondent to pay a reduced amount of $10,500.00 for reimbursement to the City of Cape Canaveral for inordinate expenses incurred during the Code Enforcement investigation and processing of the Violation for the last four years.

 

Attorney Garganese recommended that if the Board considers a reduction the lien amount, they should also consider additional fees to include the legal fees and costs associated with the foreclosure procedure.  Discussion followed regarding the lien amount. 

 

Motion by Mr. Stewart, seconded by Mr. Hale, to double the staff’s recommendation from $10,500.00 to the amount of twenty-one thousand dollars ($21,000.00) in addition to the billed amount of the legal fees and costs associated with the foreclosure proceedings.  Vote on the motion carried unanimously.

 

COMPLIANCE HEARINGS:

 

1.         Case No. 05-00101 – Violation of Section 94-11, Maintenance, Notice to Repair, of the Cape Canaveral Code of Ordinances, (6103 N. Atlantic Ave.) – JWL, LLC, c/o Keith Bennett, R.A.

 

Code Enforcement Officer, Duree Alexander testified that this Case is in compliance.

 

2.         Case No. 06-00085 – Violation of Section 82-12, Unsafe building or systems; and Sections 108.1, 108.1.1, and 304.3, International Property Maintenance Code – Unsafe structures & Interior surfaces, of the Cape Canaveral Code of Ordinances, (7554 Magnolia Ave.) – TRSTE, LLC; c/o Joseph E. Seagle, R.A.

 

Code Enforcement Officer, Duree Alexander provided an overview of the Case history and presented exhibits for the Board’s review.  Officer Alexander testified that the respondent is working on the repairs to the roof; however, the damage exceeded the scope of work.  Officer Alexander stated that the units are vacant until the work is complete and that the owner is working with the City to comply.  Officer Alexander respectfully requested that the Board grant a 60-day extension.

 

Code Enforcement Board

Meeting Minutes

February 22, 2007

Page 4

 

 

Robert Benson testified that the roof damage was extensive and that there was a delay in progress in order to obtain the engineering drawings.  Mr. Benson requested a 60-day extension to complete the work on the roof, the electrical work, and the interior repairs.

 

Motion by Mr. Stewart, seconded by Mr. Veins, to accept staff’s recommendation and grant a 60-day extension (March 26, 2007).  Vote on the motion carried unanimously.

 

PUBLIC HEARINGS:

 

1.                  Case No. 06-00074 – Violation of Section 104.1.1, and 105.4, Florida Building Code - Permits & Inspections, of the City of Cape Canaveral Code of Ordinances, (221-223 Columbia Dr.) – The Plaza Owner Association, Inc., c/o Jerry Cravey, R.A.

 

Code Enforcement Officer, Duree Alexander provided an overview of the Case history and presented exhibits for the Board’s review.  Officer Alexander testified that twelve (12) new dryers have been installed without the required permit and inspections.

 

Building Official, Todd Morley, stated that the unpermitted dryer installations were a concern because of improperly installed gas and dryer exhaust venting manifolds; lack of required combustion and make-up air; and that the Building Code requires a permit and inspections for this work.

 

Officer Alexander respectfully requested that the Board find the respondent in violation of Section 104.1.1, and 105.4, Florida Building Code - Permits & Inspections, and be given until March 22, 2007 to come into compliance or be fined one hundred dollars ($100.00) for the first day and fifty dollars ($50.00) per day thereafter until found in compliance. 

 

Motion by Mr. Viens, seconded by Mr. Godfrey, to accept staff’s recommendation and find the respondent in violation of Section 104.1.1, and 105.4, Florida Building Code - Permits & Inspections, and be given until March 22, 2007 to come into compliance or be fined one hundred dollars ($100.00) for the first day and fifty dollars ($50.00) per day thereafter until found in compliance.  Vote on the motion carried unanimously.

 

2.         Case No. 06-00121 – Violation of Section 82-221, International Property Maintenance Code Adopted; Section 602.1, Facilities Required; Section 602.2, Residential Occupancies; Section 602.3, Heat Supply; Section 603.1, Mechanical Equipment; and Section 505.4, Water Heating Facilities, of the Cape Canaveral Code of Ordinances, (415 Jefferson Ave.) – Trudy W. Mohme, Trustee.

 

Code Enforcement Officer, Duree Alexander provided an overview of the Case history and presented exhibits for the Board’s review.  Officer Alexander testified that the respondent is in violation of not providing heat, air conditioning, and hot water to the tenant, which is required by the International Property Maintenance Code.  Officer Alexander stated that the respondent requested, and was granted, a 30-day extension.  Officer Alexander presented a letter from the respondent stating that she would be out of town, could not attend the Code Enforcement Board meeting, and requested an additional 60-day extension.

 

Code Enforcement Board

Meeting Minutes

February 22, 2007

Page 5

 

 

Officer Alexander respectfully requested that the Board find the respondent in violation of Section 82-221, International Property Maintenance Code Adopted; Section 602.1, Facilities Required; Section 602.2, Residential Occupancies; Section 602.3, Heat Supply; Section 603.1, Mechanical Equipment; and Section 505.4, Water Heating Facilities, and be given until March 22, 2007 to come into compliance or be fined one hundred dollars

($100.00) for the first day and fifty dollars ($50.00) per day thereafter until found in compliance.  Following discussion, the Board increased the amount to be fined.

 

Motion by Mr. Ciecirski, seconded by Mr. Stewart, to find the respondent in violation of Section 82-221, International Property Maintenance Code Adopted; Section 602.1, Facilities Required; Section 602.2, Residential Occupancies; Section 602.3, Heat Supply; Section 603.1, Mechanical Equipment; and Section 505.4, Water Heating Facilities, and be given until March 22, 2007 to come into compliance or be fined two-hundred and fifty dollars ($250.00) for the first day and one hundred dollars ($100.00) for each day thereafter until found in compliance.  Vote on the motion carried unanimously.

 

3.     Case No. 07-00004 – Violation of Section 34-96(d), Standards Established; and Section 34-122(a)(b), Public Nuisances Prohibited, of the City of Cape Canaveral Code of Ordinances, (8200 Astronaut Blvd.) – Rudolph Hardick, R.A.

 

Code Enforcement Officer, Duree Alexander testified that this Case is in compliance.

 

4.         Case No. 07-00018 – Violation of Section 104.1.1, and 105.4, Florida Building Code - Permits & Inspections; Section 109.3, FLBC - Required Inspections; Section 109.3.3, FLBC - Reinforcing Steel and Structural Frames; Section 109.6, FLBC - Approval Required; Section 110-275, Prohibited Uses and Structures; Section 110-468(a), Accessory Structures, of the City of Cape Canaveral Code of Ordinances, (349 Coral Dr.) – Hans Saurenmann, Property Owner.

 

Code Enforcement Officer, Duree Alexander, provided an overview of the Case history and presented exhibits for the Board’s review.  Officer Alexander testified that the respondent checked with the Building department regarding permit requirements for a patio.  Todd Morley, Building Official, informed Mr. Saurenmann that a minor patio is exempt from permitting but cautioned that nothing could be built on the patio.  Mr. Saurenmann was later contacted by Mr. Morley to inform him that a permit was in fact required due to the fact that plumbing and footers were being installed.  Mr. Saurenmann applied for the permit, which revealed that the structure encroached into the City easement.  Mr. Saurenmann was told to stop work and if he continued it would be at his own risk.

 

Todd Morley, Building Official, testified that he met with Mr. Saurenmann on site and stated that a minor patio with nothing else to it, did not require a permit.  Mr. Morley requested a sketch of the work.  Mr. Saurenmann subsequently provided the sketch and it was then noted that there was an easement encroachment violation.

 

Testifying to the easement encroachment violation, Ed Gardulski, Public Works Director, stated that according to the original plat of Harbor Heights, the 10’ P.U.E. (public utility easement) has not been vacated at this location, and is still a recorded easement for the City; therefore, the encroachment is more than a few feet.

 

Code Enforcement Board

Meeting Minutes

February 22, 2007

Page 6

 

Mr. Morley further testified that Mr. Saurenmann had initially stated that he might possibly build on the slab in the future.  Mr. Morley informed Mr. Saurenmann that if a structure was going to be constructed on the slab it would require footings, and Mr. Morley would not allow the work to continue without a permit.  Mr. Morley asked Mr. Saurenmann to apply for a permit to continue, and have the footers inspected so that the location and size would be on file.  Mr. Saurenmann agreed and provided a building permit application and a sketch of the work being done.  Mr. Morley further stated that he went back out to the site the following day and met with Mrs. Saurenmann.  After she agreed to allow him access, he took some photo’s, at which time, he noticed that footings had been excavated, reinforcing steel was in place and plumbing was installed that was not discussed.  Mr. Morley called Mr. Saurenmann and instructed him to not continue without the permit.  Mr. Saurenmann responded that he could not stop the work and he was pouring the concrete the next day.

 

Officer Alexander continued her testimony stating that Mr. Saurenmann applied for the permit on January 11, 2007, and upon review by the Public Works Director, he stated that the concrete would encroach on the easement.

 

Mr. Saurenmann testified that it was never his intention to do work without a permit.  Mr. Saurenmann stated that he went to the building department to find out what was needed for the proposed work on the slab.  Bob Haley, Plans Examiner, told Mr. Saurenmann that drawings were required.  Mr. Saurenmann stated that he was simply repairing an existing structure as shown on the survey.  The issue of the footer came up during a discussion with Mr. Morley and was installed in the slab in case Mr. Saurenmann decided to build on the slab at a later date.  Mr. Morley told him that a permit was not required for the concrete.  Mr. Saurenmann stated that the issue is the P.U.E. that was taken out at a P & Z meeting except his and his neighbor because he would not give the City the 20’ back portion for an easement.  Furthermore, the City’s sewer line is running through his property and he is requesting royalties, costs, or damages from the City.  The City told him that if he signed off to give the City the easement, then he would get the permit.  Mr. Saurenmann stated that he felt like the City blackmailed him and he is filing a complaint against Ed Gardulski to the Attorney General’s office to look into this issue.  Mr. Saurenmann stated that he is not in violation.  He further stated that he only repaired his slab and he only put in the footers as a precaution.  If he intends to expand, he will apply for a permit at that time. 

 

Mr. Saurenmann also explained that he purchased a structure for his wife that has four posts with an umbrella-type top and he is not sure where he will put the structure.  It is a temporary structure that can be moved around.

 

Craig Stewart asked Mr. Saurenmann if he understood what laws are and further stated that the City has laws in the form of Ordinances.  Mr. Stewart stated that Mr. Saurenmann went forth and constructed something when Mr. Morley told him not to proceed.  Mr. Saurenmann replied that that was not correct.  Mr. Stewart continued to state that he should not have installed the slab that included plumbing and footers without a permit.  Mr. Stewart voiced his opinion that he should have to take out the slab.

 

Mr. Saurenmann stated that the form boards were in place and Mr. Morley told him that no permit was required to pour concrete.  Discussion was held regarding the difference between the terms “patio” and “slab”.  The Board explained that a patio is simply concrete without plumbing or footers.  Discussion followed.

 

Code Enforcement Board

Meeting Minutes

February 22, 2007

Page 7

 

Officer Alexander respectfully requested that the Board find the respondent in violation of Section 104.1.1, and 105.4, Florida Building Code - Permits & Inspections; Section 109.3, FLBC - Required Inspections; Section 109.3.3, FLBC - Reinforcing Steel and Structural Frames; Section 109.6, FLBC - Approval Required; Section 110-275, Prohibited Uses and Structures; Section 110-468(a), Accessory Structures, and be given until March 22, 2007 to come into compliance, by obtaining the required permits and inspections and to remove the portion of the slab that is in the easement, or be fined one hundred dollars ($100.00) for the first day and fifty dollars ($50.00) per day thereafter, until found in compliance.

 

Motion by Mr. Biederman, seconded by Mr. Godfrey, to accept staff’s recommendation and find the respondent in violation of Section 104.1.1, and 105.4, Florida Building Code - Permits & Inspections; Section 109.3, FLBC - Required Inspections; Section 109.3.3, FLBC - Reinforcing Steel and Structural Framing; Section 109.6, FLBC - Approval Required; Section 110-275, Prohibited Uses and Structures; Section 110-468(a), Accessory Structures, and be given until March 22, 2007 to come into compliance or be fined one hundred dollars ($100.00) for the first day and fifty dollars ($50.00) per day thereafter, until found in compliance.  Vote on the motion carried by a (5) to (2) majority vote with Craig Stewart and Ed Ciecirski voting against.

 

ADJOURNMENT:

 

There being no further business the meeting adjourned at 9:12 P.M. 

 

Approved on this _____day of_______________________________, 2007.

 

                                                                        _______________________________

                                                                        Mary Russell, Chairperson

________________________________

Joy Lombardi, Board Secretary