Loading...
12-05-1985 Regular Meeting• • • Miami cfhores99Ilage F l OR ID A COI'E ENFORCEMENT BOARD MEETING December 5, 1985 A regular meeting of the Miami Shores Village. Code Enforcement. Board was held on December 5, 1985, The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m., at the Village Hall, by Chairman, Barry Asmus, with the following members present: Barry K. Asmus, Chairman Angela Daley Santos Rivero William Schroeder Arthur H. Taylor Julie A. S. Williamson Absent: Franklin E. Grau Also present: Frank LuBien, Director of Code Enforcement Jack Wilson, Code Enforcement Inspector 1. MINUTES - November 7, 1985 Minutes of the meeting of November 7, 1985 were approved, as written, by a motion made by Mr. Rivero, seconded by Mr. Shhroeder, and carried unanimously. 2. In the Absence of Sandra Nunez Gallagher the meeting moved to #'3 on the agenda. 3. HEARING, CASE NO. 85-3254-145 ISIDRO & MARIA MERCEDES TORRRES, 1131 N. E. 104th ST, UNLAWFUL FENCE Mr. LuBien read the facts behind the violation as, installation of a fence which is in excess of height limitations, according to Sec 518(a) of the Zoning Ordinance, and not in compliance with approved plans. Members reviewed photographs of the violation taken by Mr. LuBien and Mr. Wilson. Members received in their packets copies of notices sent, copies of approved plans, indicating corrections required and a letter from Mr. Rod Bryson, Attorney for Dr. Torres. Those who were to give testimony were sworn in: Frank LuBien, Jack Wilson, Rod Bryson, Dr. Torres, Manuel Pedron, Frank Rubio, and John Bergacker. Mr. Bryson submitted photographs for the Board to review, which showed measurements taken on the inside of the wall, after the alleged build- up of soil and sod. Mr. Bryson noted that these measurements show the fence height at 31/2', gate measured from asphalt is approximately 3'11" to 3'12". He also stated that while the Code specifies fence height should be 31/2', it is silent as to gate height, and since the gate is separate from the fence,Dr. Torres is substantially in compliance. • CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD MEETING -2 12/5185 In response to query, Mr. LuBien noted that he made a special inspection at the request of the person who took out the permit, which was for the masonry section only, because of the clearly understood corrections which were required on the plans. The contractor advised Mr. LuBien, she had nothing to do with the wrought iron, which was added against her advise to Dr, Torres. In response to other questions Mr. LuBien noted the gate is a portion of the fence. The ground had been altered after the fence was installed. All his measurements were taken on the out- side perimeter of the property, and actual field inspection takes precedence over any contradictions on the plans, Mr. Frank Rubio, 1107 N. E. 104th ST., (1 house West of Torres res), testified, his measurements taken fron the West side of property only, indicate the fence at 3i' and the gate, as measured from the asphalt (411" below grass) to be 3'11". All measurements taken on hLkMk WU inside and outside and on three sides of yard. Discussion followed. Mr. Wilson, testified that he and Mr. LuBien had taken measurements several times and their measurement is correct. The fence exceeds 3'6". In response to query, it was noted it is approximately 6" over height limit. Mr. Bryson called on Manny Pedron, a General Contractor and former inspector for Hialeah Gardens. Mr. Pedron testified his measure- ments of the fence at 3'5" - 3'7", the gate close to 4' from the asphalt, which made the fence and the gate in substantial .compliance. He further stated, he had studied the Miami Shores Village Code and there is no indication as to required gate height, or point of reference to use for measuring a fence. In reply..to Mr. LuBien's query, Mr. Pedron stated that as a contractor and inspector he has approved 11%" tie beam... When Mr. Pedron did..iio.t.irespond to. Mr. LuBien's question regarding provisions of the South Florida Building Code, Mr. LuBien reminded him that the Code specifically requires a minimum of 12". He further stipulated that, in the case of Dr. Torres fence, the maximum height allowed is 3%'. Dr. Torres was then called, and testified that he was present at the time the plhtis were approved and the required height was never mentioned, however the plans did show alterations to indicate the corrections. In reply to query, Dr. Torres stated the contractor was not called because she now lives in Spain. Much discussion continued. Mr. John Bergacker, 1009 N, E. 104th St., registered Engineer and Building Official for Miami Beach, stated that Mr. LuBien is 100% correct in`his measurements and actions, and agreed he would have to do the same. as Frank. He just appeared to state that it is an open fence and attractive. Further that the ground inside is higher than the outside. • • • CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD MEETING -3- 12/5/85 Mr. Taylor moved, that the Board visit the site before making their decision, seconded by Mrs. Williamson. Following much discussion the motion failed by the following roll call vote: Mr. Taylor No Mrs. Williamson Yes Mrs. Daley No. Mr. Schroeder No, Mr. Rivero No Mr. Asmus No. Mr. Schroeder moved to find Dr. Torres in substantial compliance, and ordered that form 4A (Affidavit of Compliance) be issued, seconded by Mrs. Williamson, Mr. LuBien advised the Board that this action would set precedent for future non compliance. The motion carried with the following roll call vote: Mr. Taylor No Mrs of the Board replied Mrs. Williamson Yes that each case is judged on Mrs. Daley Yes its facts and is not precedent Mr, Schroeder Yes for cases.with different facts Mr. Rivero Yes presented to the Board. Mr. Asmus No. 4. HEARING, CASE NO. 85-3257 146 KENNETH & CHRISTINA KIRCHER, 10616 N. W. 2nd AVE, PEELING PAINT, MILDEW, ETC. Mr. LuBien read from the Affidavit of Violation, that peeling paint, mildew, and other miscellaneous maintenance violations were observed on 9/13/85. There has been no response nor action to notices sent. Members reviewed photographs of the violation. Further Mr. LuBien noted that since the date the Notice of Hearing was sent Mrs. Kircher called and informed him that she had been a medical student, out of the country and was: unaware of the condition of the house and she promised to correct the situation, now that she has returned. Upon today's inspection, he found some work has been done.. The awnings have been positioned and braced and a new garage door installed, the peeling paint and mildew violation continues to exist, Mr. Ken Kircher was sworn in, and testified that he and Christina were divorced eight years ago. She was given the house as part of the divorce settlement, but since she left the country to attend Med. School, was unable to file quit claim,. She requested that joint ownership continue and that he manage the house as a.rental property. Upon her return from overseas he could no longer handle the responsi- bility. She is working evenings and therefore unable to attend this meeting. He further stated that a second mortgage is needed to complete all necessary repairs and that the Attorney is executing and filing the necessary paper work for the quit claim deed giving Christina full ownership of the property, Mr, Kircher noted that the roof also needs repairs and she has received estimates for same. Further, he could not speak for her as to how long it will take to come into compliance, but felt sure that she will as soon as possible. • • CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD MEETING -4- 12/5/85 Following discussion, Mrs. Williamson moved that Finding of Fact, and Conclusion of Law has been established, and that Administrative fee of $110.00 is assessed for bringing this case to hearing. Further that if there is not compliance in sixty (60) days, a fine of $25.00 per day be levied, seconded by Mr, Taylor. In further discussion Mr. Kircher said he will pay the Adminis- trative fee and call Mr. Wilson to give him Christina Kircher's address and phone number. The vote was called, and the motion carried with a unanimous roll call vote. 2. APPEAL, CASE NO. 84-2453-107 SANDRA NUNEZ GALLAGHER, 360 N. W. 112th TERR, IMPROPER PARKING Members were advised by Mr. LuBien that a copy of the minutes of meeting -of the4November 7, 1985 as they relate to Mrs. Gallagher and a letter advising her of the importance of her attendance at the meeting sent to her. In spite of this she neither called nor was she present for the appeal. Mr. Rivero moved to deny the appeal, seconded by Mrs. Williamson, and the motion carried by a unanimous roll call vote, 5. REPORTS FROM PREVIOUS MEETINGS A. CASE NO, 85-2902-138 60 days Walter E. Furr, Jr., 360 N. E. 97th St. Overgrown and unsightly yard, mildew & peeling paint. west A little work may have been done on thwide of the house. Nothing has been done to the front or the other side. There is no significant change, but he still has 30 days to comply. B. CASE NO. 85-2947-139 30 days Edward Gonczarow, 290 N. W. 92nd St. Inoperative vehicle, improper parking This is a frustrating case because one violation is corrected and another created. The inoperable auto has been removed. Two cars are parked in the right of way. Non-compliance continues. His 30 days will be up on December 9, 1985. C. CASE NO. 85-3137-141 30 days Richard H. Carl, 310 N. E. 99th St. Various violations Mr. Carl has until December the 9th to correct violations; however, Mr. LuBien advised the Board that he observed a van loading from the house. He has been informed through a letter from a neighbor, that the house is still occupied. There could be a mortgage problem in that the Bank may be repossessing the property. Also the house is a designated landmark house. CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD MEETING -5-- 12/5/85 4111 REPORTS FROM PREVIOUS MEETINGS D. CASE NO. 85-3170-142 60 days Martha P. Ruffin, 9700 Biscayne Blvd, Hazardous Partially Dead tree Mrs. Ruffin called Mr. LuBien during the hurricane threat while he was outside preparing his own house for the storm. He was not able to return her call, There has been no change as of today's inspection. Ms. Ruffin does have an additional 30 days to comply. E. CASE NO. 85-3187-143 30 days Marilyn T. Walker, 255 N. W, 111th St. Overgrown and Undightly A very ernest effort is being made to correct the violation, and she is 95% there. She is trying very hard and Mr. LuBien feels sure she will be in compliance by Dec.. 9th, when: -.her 30 days arrives. F. CASE NO. 85-3195-144 30 days Kassim Hosein, 495 N. E. 91st St. Overgrown and Unsightly Mr. LuBien reported that if anything the condition is worse, The house may or may not be occupied. The condition has deteriorated from poor to very bad. Action will be taken on December 9th when the 30 days expires, The meeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m. •