Loading...
06-02-1988 Regular Meeting• 'liami Jhoress iItage F L 0 R 1 D A CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD MEETING June 2, 1988 The Miami Shores Village Code Enforcement Board meeting convened on June 2,. 1988. The meeting was called to order at 7:30 P.M., at Miami Shores Village. Hall by (chairman Gran, with the following members present: Franklin E. Grau, Chairman Charles M. Custin Barry K. Asmus Owen Henderson III John L. Stokesberry Absent: Thomas L. James (Mr. Grau announced he had received a letter of resignation from Dr. James, citing health reasons). William Schroeder Also present: Frank LuBien, Director of Code Enforcement Jack Wilson, Code Enforcement Inspector 1. MINUTES - May 5, 1988 The minutes of the meeting of May 5, 1988 were approved, as written, by a motion made by Mr. Stokesberry, seconded by Mr. Henderson, and gassed by unanimous vote. 2. APPEAL - CASE NO. 88-4759-207 LEON ROLLE,.590 N. E. 96th ST. VARIOUS VIOLATIONS Mr. LuBien stated the facts behind the request for appeal from Mr. Rolle. Mr. Rolle requested continuance on April 7, 1988, stating he would be out of town. The request was denied, and Administrative fee and fine were imposed. A:copy of the letter requesting this appeal was included in Member's packet. Mr. Rolle was not present at the meeting. Mr. Asmus moved to deny the appeal, since Mr. Rolle was not -present. Mr. Henderson seconded the motion. There was discussion concerning the original violation notice. What work has been. done and the work which is not yet completed. The motion to deny the appeal passed by a unanimous roll call vote. There was then continued discussion that Mr. Rolle is still not in compliance. The Board felt that other work needs to be completed. Mr. Asmus made a motion that the property continues to be in violation, Mr. Rolle is not in compliance. Mr. Stokesberry seconded the motion which passedby unanimous roll call vote. Mr. LuBien clarified the motion -- the order of the Board stands. It was his interpretation that Mr. Rolle is in compliance, the Board advised him, this interpretation is wrong, and the fine shall start as of the date of the order of the Board. • • • CODE ENFORCEMENT. BOARD MEETING -2- 6/2/88 3. APPEAL, CASE NO. 87-4279-187 FRANCISCO VARELA, 130 N. W. 97th ST. CONSTRUCTION WITHOUT PERMIT Mr. LuBien indicated that Mr. Varela came into the office: in response to a Final Notice of Lien. At that time he talked with himand explained his right, to appeal. Mr. Varela wrote a not.4requesting appeal,, • a, copy of which Members received intheir packet. Mr. Varela. was not present at the meeting to. speak in his behalf. Mr...Asmus moved to deny the appeal, seconded by Mr. Stokesberry., and passed by a unanimous roll call vote. Members received in their packet a copy of a letter -from Mr. Fenn, Village Attorney, regarding: Sec 501(k) of Ordinance -#270, Miami Shores Village Code. In the letter he clarified the Ordinance. A Village employee may. not enterprivately owned real property>for the purpose.of removing tangible personal property. 4. HEARING, CASE NO. 88-4020-214 N. B. ALDERMAN -HUNT, 1032 N. E. 98th ST. JUNK BOAT Mr. LuBien advised the Board that in spite of numerous notices sent the violation. remains. Certified letters are unclaimed, but regular mail is received. Members reviewed photographs.. He also.noted upon inspection this morning the boat was gone. Mr. Alderman -Hunt was not at the meeting. A motion was made by Mr. Asmus, Finding of Fact and Conclusion of Law, the violation.to Sec 501(k) did exist. Ordered that: an Administrative fee of $110.00 be assessed and form 4A be issued, motion was seconded by Mr -Henderson, and passed by unanimous roll call vote. 5. HEARING, CASE NO. 88-4903-215 JOSEPH ALCIDA, 18 N. W. 110th ST. UNLAWFUL CONSTRUCTION Members reviewed photographs, as Mr. LuBien recited the facts. Unlawful construction was observed on March 29, 1988, and there.had been. -no response to notices. Mr. & Mrs. Alcida and Mr. LuBien and Mr. Jack Wilson were sworn in. Mrs. Alcida stated that the porch was a part of the house when she bought it. The porch is on the rearof the house, she simply enclosed'it, creating a very small hallway. Mr. Alcida, being in construction, also .changed some windows and a door, no:permit was pulled because they did not know one was needed. Mr. LuBien replied to query that inspection must be made, the changes must be brought to code and.a permit obtained. Members reviewed the original plans, and concurred the porch appeared to be a part of the house when purchased by: Mr. & Mrs. Alcida.. Discussion continued and it was requested that Mr. LuBien reinspect. the property. CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD MEETING -3- 6/2/88 Mr. Asmus.moved for Finding of Fact and Conclusion of. Law, there was a violation to. Sec.6-4.;of the Code of Ordinances, no permit was pulled nor inspection made, ordered that $110.00. Administrative costs:be assessed, also a permit pulled and inspection made, and --Ordinance complied with in thirty (30) days:, after which a fine of $25.00 per daygoes into effect, The motion passed by a -unanimous roll call vote. Mr. Grau clarified.the action of the Board to Mr. & Mrs. Alcida. They were advised to be sure to obtain a permit for all. work, and. make an appointment ..for.Mr.,.LuBien to; inspect the room to make sure it is structurally sound. They were further advised to get a permit:and submit a color sample when they paint the house. 6. AFFIDAVIT OF VIOLATION„ CASE NO. 88-4870-216 RICHARD S. BESADE, 1110 N. E. 100th ST. BOAT IN FRONT YARD. Members reviewed photographs of the violation as the factsawere recited by Mr. LuBien. A boat was observed in the front yard. on March•18, 1987. The boat was moved in response to notices sent. On .6/29/87 and on 2/19/88 the same routine was repeated. The boat is back at the present time. Mr. Asmus moved to•proceed :to the next step, seconded.by Mr. Stokesberry, and passed unanimously. 3. Mr.. Varela came in late, and. Mr. Grau .determined, he should have the oppor- tunity to say something for the record. He explained to Mr.. Varela that, the Board had denied his appeal. Mr.,Colliflower, Court Reporter was called back. After being sworn in Mr. Varela stated he had paid.the Administrative cost of $110.00 which had been imposed, and on September- 29, 1987, after return- ing from out of the country, he obtained a permit. He completed some other work and. thought he was in compliance. There was considerable discussion concerning expiration of:the permit. The degree of compliance, the fine as it stands today, and Mr. Varela being remiss in taking care of this business in good faith. Mr. LuBien clarified the record for Members, Mr.. Grau:being the only Member serving at that time. He read the order of the Board from the minutes of May 7, 1987. Further he stated. that, as of •today,, Mr. Varela is still not in compliance so far as the landing from glass,sliding door. Discussion continued. Mr. Grau explained to Mr..Varela.the steps necessary.for compliance. A permit must be obtained, plans submitted and work done, and inspected by Mr. LuBien. Further, he was advised,once he is in compliance, he may appeal to the Board for consideration in reduction of the fine. Fix it and come back:and see us, he was again advised. 7. AFFIDAVIT OF VIOLATION, CASE NO. 88-4938-217 FELIX ATILES-FIGUEROA; 262 N.. E. 103rd ST. OVERSIZE BOAT Mr. LuBien recited the facts behind the violation. Oversize boat was observed. on April 5, 1988. Notices were sent and -the boat was removed. The boat is again stored on the premises as indicated by photographs reviewed by Members. • • CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD MEETING -4- 6/2/88 Mr. Asmus made a motion to proceed to the next step, seconded by Mr. Stokesberry, and passed unanimously. 8. AFFIDAVIT OF VIOLATION, CASE NO. 88-4983-218 WILLIAM E. GILBERT, 2301.N. E. 6th AVE. (9130 N. E. 10th AVE). BOAT IN FRONT YARD Members reviewed.photographs of the boat in the front yard. Mr. LuBien stated, on April. 22,.1988 the boat was observed in the front yard, and notices were sent, but the violation continues. A motion was made by Mr. Asmus to go to the next step, seconded by Mr. Custin, and passed unanimously. .9. REPORTS FROM PREVIOUS MEETING e BY MR. LUBIEN A. CASE NO. 88-4836-210 JOSEPH IORIO, 425 N. E. 93rd ST. HEDGE VIOLATION Administrative fee has not been paid, but the hedge is now in compliance. B. CASE NO. 88-4884-211 JOSE & MARIA GROSS, 130 N. E. 98th ST. VARIOUS VIOLATIONS The Administrative cost has not been paid, Mr. &.Mrs. Gross are in comp liance . C. CASE N0. 88-4872-212 P. HERNANDEZ, 173 N. W. 99th.ST. INOPERATIVE VAN, INSUFFICIENT PARKING SPACES, UNMAINTAINED YARD Mr. Hernandez. is in compliance on all violations, and .has also paid Administrative cost which was assessed. D. CASE NO. 88-4812-213 ANDREW J. KRAFT, 87 N. E. 92nd ST. HEDGE VIOTATION Mr. Kraft is in the process of seeding Administrative relief, and will appeal to Council at their meeting next Tuesday, June 9, 1988 Mr. Kraft's neighbor. fir. Pollock was at the meeting, he indicated he wants permissionto cut,the hedge between the two houses. He can no longer tolerate the stall tactics, Mr...Pollock was advised:this Board has acted, and Mr. Kraft is exercising his rights through the appeal process. He was advised, he may:wish to attend the Council .meeting and voice his opinions at that time. • • • CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD MEETING -5- 6/2/88 There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting adjourned at 9:00 P.M. 7eciltary Approve