Loading...
Minutes 05-19-99 MINUTES OF THE CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD MEETING HELD IN COMMISSION CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA ON WEDNESDAY, MAY 19, 1999 at 7:00 P.M. PRESENT Christopher DeLiso, Chairman Nicholas Igwe, Assistant City Bob Foot Attorney Mark S. Frederick, Vice Chairman Inspectors: Ralph Barquin Patti Hammer Courtney Cain Dick Lambert Skip Lewis James Miriani Mike Melillo Enrico Rossi Pete Roy Larry Finkelstein, Alternate Willie Webb I. CALL TO ORDER Chairman DeLiso called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF APRIL 19, 1999 MEETING Chairman DeLiso called for a motion to approve the minutes of the April 19, 1999 meeting. Motion Ms. Hammer moved that the minutes of the April 19, 1999 meeting be approved. Motion seconded by Mr. Miriani. Motion carried 6-0 (Mr. Lambert was not present at the April 19, 1999 meeting). III. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA In the absence of Mr. Scott Blasie, Code Compliance Officer, Inspector Pete Roy managed the meeting. Chairman DeLiso asked Mr. Roy if there were any additions or deletions to the Agenda. Inspector Roy said that the following cases should be deleted from the Agenda: A. Page 17 (Case 98-3475), Kathe Woods (complied) B. Page 21 (Case 98-3928), Leon and Gail Jenkins (complied) C. Page 25 (Case 98-4186), W.C. Collins Estate (removed) D. Page 44 (Case 97-3700), Frank & Ada Wallmueller (removed) MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 E. Page 45 (Case 99-0040), Southern Fence (removed) F. Page 63 (Case 99-252), PBC Housing Authority (postponed) G. Page 75 (99-347), Brian Fitzpatrick (complied) H. Page 76 (99-349), Brian Fitzpatrick (complied) Chairman DeLiso called for a motion to approve the Agenda, as amended. Motion Ms. Hammer moved that the Agenda, as amended be approved. Motion seconded by Mr. Miriani. Motion unanimously carried. Chairman DeLiso stated that since an attorney was present this evening, that particular case would be heard first. Also, Chairman DeLiso stated that the agenda was going to be changed to allow for the new cases to be heard first and repeat offenders, lien penalty certifications and lien reductions will be heard last. Beginning next month, this will be the procedure that the Board would follow. Chairman DeLiso stated the reason for the change in procedure was due to the fact that because this Board meets until very late in the evening, that people who are being cited for the first time should not have to wait until 11:30 p.m. to have their case heard. Whereas, repeat offenders have their cases heard earlier. Motion Mr. Lambert moved that the order of the agenda for this evening be changed and for all future meetings in order to allow for new cases to be heard first. All other business will remain in the same order. Motion seconded by Mr. Foot. Motion carried 7-0. IV. SWEARING IN OF WITNESSES AND INTRODUCTION Chairman DeLiso instructed the Recording Secretary to administer the oath to all persons who would be testifying this evening. Chairman DeLiso noted that the first case to be heard was the Leon and Gail Jenkins Lien Penalty Certification Case. Inspector Melillo requested that the Board refer to Page 21, Case No. 98-3928. Chairman DeLiso said that this case was removed from the agenda because it complied. Inspector Melillo said that the case has complied, but there were 77 days of non-compliance. Therefore, Chairman DeLiso stated it was necessary to have a motion to further amend the agenda to allow for Case No. 98-3928 to remain on the agenda and be heard. 2 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 Motion Mr. Foot moved to further amend the agenda by allowing Case No. 98-3928 to remain on the agenda and be heard. Motion seconded by Mr. Miriani. Motion carried 7-0. B. LIEN PENALTY CERTIFICATIONS Case #98-3928 Leon & Gail Jenkins 1860 N. Seacrest Blvd. 16049 Rio Del Sol Delray Beach, FL 33446 Inspector Melillo stated that the notice of violation was dated November 17, 1998 for violations of Code Sections Chapter 15, Article IX-15-120 (D), Inc. and PT. 3 of the LDR, Chapter 20-VIII, Section 2.A. The Code Compliance Board first heard the case on January 20, 1999 and Mr. Jenkins appeared at the hearing. A compliance date and fine was set for March 1, 1999 or $100 per day. The compliance date was today, May 19, 1999, for 77 days of non-compliance plus administrative costs of $826.18. Chairman DeLiso noted that the fine would be $7,700, plus administrative costs. Chairman DeLiso requested to view the photos of the property. Attorney Larry Schner, of 750 S. Dixie Highway, Boca Raton took the podium and thanked the Board for taking his case out of turn. Attorney Schner said he represents Leon and Gail Jenkins. Attorney Schner said that the violation he is addressing is the soffits. Attorney Schner said there were holes in the soffits and further stated that the order in November was not clear what the problem was with the soffits; it did not say that there were holes in the soffits or that the vents had to be changed or replaced. Attorney Schner said that it was only after discussion on other items on the property that have already complied, and after further discussion with Inspector Melillo and Mr. Blasie, it was determined that the violation was due to holes in the vents and they were not massive holes. The screens have now been fixed and the property has complied. Attorney Schner said that during the 77 days of non-compliance, Mr. Jenkins was told he was in compliance except for other areas, but not the soffits and those areas have been fixed. Attorney Schner said that without being directed to what holes in the soffits had to be taken care of, his client could not determine that the area was not in compliance. Attorney Schner requested that his client be relieved of any fines since the property is now in compliance. Chairman DeLiso pointed out that when Mr. Jenkins appeared at the January 20, 1999 hearing, he pled no contest and stated he needed 60 days and the Board gave him 45 days. At no time did Mr. Jenkins state he did not understand the violation. Attorney 3 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 Schner stated at that time the major portion of the violations was refuge around the property, which had been removed. Attorney Schner said around the side of the property there is a fence, which was put up by Mr. Jenkins and said there is another fence, which was put up by Mr. Jenkins’ neighbor, whose property is in a complete state of disrepair. Because of this, Mr. Jenkins has problems with trespassing and vandalism. Attorney Schner said there was a door placed for removal and was moved to that area and Mr. Jenkins was unaware that the refuge the City wanted to remove was a door behind the fence and that has been removed. Chairman DeLiso asked Inspector Melillo that if at anytime after the January 20, 1999 hearing did Mr. Jenkins call his office to discuss that he did not understand why he was being cited. Inspector Melillo read from his notes that he spoke with Mr. Jenkins on March 1, 1999 and he told him to pick up the trash from the door and soffits and on th March 6 trash from the door and soffits was still not disposed of properly. Inspector Melillo said there were holes in the screens and broken windows. Chairman DeLiso asked Inspector Melillo again from the date Mr. Jenkins appeared before the Board to March 1, 1999 did Mr. Jenkins at any time state he did not understand the violation to which Mr. Melillo said no. Attorney Schner said that his client’s notes on that date indicate that the only issue that Inspector Melillo discussed with him was the refuge and Mr. Jenkins felt that refuge was the only issue which needed to be taken care of to bring the property into compliance. This may have been a misunderstanding. Attorney Schner asked Inspector Melillo if he ever discussed the soffits with Mr. Jenkins. Inspector Melillo read from his notes that on March 6, 1999 “trash from soffits and front door not disposed of properly”. Attorney Schner said that his client thought that the trash was the non-compliance and that has been removed. Also, Mr. Jenkins put the trash behind the fence to be picked up and it did not get picked up. Chairman DeLiso inquired why it took Mr. Jenkins 77 days more to meet compliance than what he asked for. Attorney Schner said that Mr. Jenkins did repair work on the soffits, but did not do what was specifically required, which was not in any order of the Board nor was it ever discussed with Inspector Melillo. Mr. Lambert noted that on Page 21A of the agenda, which is a copy of the minutes of the January 21, 1999 meeting, it says under violations “please repair all soffits and vent screens”. Inspector Melillo stated that the letter of November 13, 1998 sent to Mr. Jenkins read as follows: “Please repair all soffits and vent screens, repair or replace front door and all broken windows, install grass where trash hole exists”. Inspector Melillo stated that the photographs submitted showed the trash and material from the 4 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 soffits that had been ripped down and left on the ground. The photographs dating back to February documented this. Ms. Hammer inquired if everything has complied and Inspector Melillo said that everything has been done as of today. Chairman DeLiso inquired if there was a communication problem and Inspector Melillo said there was none as far as he was st concerned. Attorney Schner said there was no trash o the property before March 1 st and the trash discussed before March 1 was trash from repair of the soffits, but the vent screens had holes and those holes may have come later. Attorney Schner said they were present today because of the holes in the vent screens, which have been repaired this week. Chairman DeLiso stated that Mr. Jenkins appears before this Board on a regular basis and is a problem case when it comes to repair of his properties. Chairman DeLiso stated that Mr. Jenkins makes the bare minimum to bring the properties into compliance and the City is tired of repeat offenders coming before the Board asking for lenience. Chairman DeLiso thought Mr. Jenkins should not be given any more lenience than he has already received. Attorney Schner said that this particular property of Mr. Jenkins is located next to a property that is horrendous. Mr. Melillo stated there were already two liens on this property. Attorney Schner said that the next door property hurts Mr. Jenkins’ property. Mr. Jenkins took the podium and stated around the last of February he spoke with Inspector Melillo and asked if he was in compliance. Mr. Melillo told him that everything was o.k. except for the trash from the drywall in the rear of the property and the door in the back of the property. Mr. Jenkins said that Inspector Melillo did not mention the soffits at that time. Mr. Jenkins said that since he did not hear from the Code Compliance Office, he assumed he was in compliance. Mr. Jenkins called Code Compliance around the middle of March and asked Mr. Melillo where his compliance letter was and Inspector Melillo told him that there were computer problems and that it may take some time, but Mr. Jenkins would receive his compliance letter. thth Mr. Jenkins said around the 15/16 of April he received a letter stating he was not in compliance. Mr. Jenkins said upon receipt of this letter he called Inspector Melillo and to him that he thought he was in compliance and at that time Inspector Melillo stated he never told Mr. Jenkins that he was in compliance. Mr. Jenkins said he was never told to remove the door and did not know that the trash was an issue. Mr. Jenkins said he was never told specifically that the trash was a condition of compliance. Because of these conflicts, Mr. Jenkins said he had to hire an attorney. 5 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 Chairman DeLiso stated that this was a matter of word against word. Mr. Jenkins said st that the documentation shows that after March 1 the one thing that is mentioned from thst March 6 until April 21 is that he is out of compliance because of trash and a door that th was not disposed of properly. Mr. Jenkins said that the City has pictures on April 16 st that shows cracked glass that was not present on March 1 . Mr. Jenkins said that the th pictures show the property was not in compliance on April 16, but there are no pictures st to show that the property was not in compliance on March 1. Mr. Jenkins said the th only reason he was not in compliance on March 6 based upon the City’s documentation was a door that was not properly disposed of and trash. Mr. Jenkins thth said that between March 6 through April 16, he has been working on the building and should not have been re-sited. Mr. Jenkins said for what he was re-sited for had nothing to do with the original violation. Mr. Jenkins said he was now being sited for a door on the property and a clump of drywall in the rear of the building. Mr. Jenkins said he took care of all the violations and he took care of the trash hole and replaced the door and repaired all the broken windows. Inspector Melillo stated that the original violation also says “install grass where the trash hole exists”. Inspector Melillo said he had a photo dated May 7, 1999 and there is no grass in the trash hole and the property was not in total compliance. Inspector Melillo questioned that if the code says that a person should replace the soffit, does it mean for the soffit to be thrown and left on the ground? Chairman DeLiso asked Inspector Melillo if he checked the property on March 1, 1999 to determine if it was in compliance and Inspector Melillo stated he was not in compliance at that time. Attorney Schner viewed the pictures taken on March 1, 1999. st Mr. Foot noted that the property was still not in compliance between March 1 and th March 6 and that the violator should be fined for at least five days plus administrative costs. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 98-3928, Mr. Foot moved that this Board find, as a matter of fact, that the Respondents, Leon and Gail Jenkins, were in violation of Code Sections Chapter 15, Article IX-15-120 (D), Inc. and PT 3, LDR, Chapter 20, VII, Section 2.A, subsequent to the date of compliance specified in this Board's Order of January 20, 1999. Mr. Foot moved that this Board find that the Respondents failed to comply with this Board’s Order, and that this Board impose and certify a fine of $100 per day for five days ($500), plus administrative costs in the amount of $826.18, for a total fine of $1,326.18. Motion seconded by Mr. Miriani. 6 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 Motion carried 7-0. Attorney Schner noted that Mr. Jenkins as another case on the agenda and requested that it be heard next. Inspector Webb stated it was a new case on page 78. Case No. 99-358: Leon I. and Gail R. Jenkins 16049 Rio Del Sol Delray Beach, FL 33446 th Property Address: 222 NW 10 Avenue Violations: Chapter 15, Article IX-15-120(D), Inc.; sod required in front and side yard. Remove all loose trash and debris. Inspector Webb stated the property was originally cited on February 3, 1999 and that the trash and debris have been moved, however the property still needs sod. Chairman DeLiso requested to view the photographs. Chairman DeLiso asked the violator what his plea was and he pled was no contest. Chairman DeLiso asked how much time was needed for compliance. Attorney Schner stated his client has xeriscaped the area and has placed mulch and vegetation on the property. Attorney Schner said he could not find anything in the Ordinance that discusses sod as opposed to xeriscape and Attorney Schner said he did not think his client was out of compliance. Attorney Schner said he would like some direction from the Board so that he can instruct his client. Chairman DeLiso requested that Assistant City Attorney Igwe check the Ordinance. After reviewing the Ordinance, Attorney Igwe showed the Ordinance to Attorney Schner who stated he had read the Ordinance. Mr. Lambert said that it looked like mulch was placed on the property and Attorney Schner stated that xeriscape is mulch and vegetation. Mr. Rossi said there are questions that exist as to what constitutes xeriscape. Attorney Schner said his interpretation of xeriscape is vegetation in a mulch setting. Attorney Schner said he read ordinances that state vegetation, xeriscape or sod. Assistant City Attorney Igwe asked Attorney Schner to point out this section to him. Attorney Schner said his client is xeriscaping in order to have properties that look good. Mr. Lambert inquired if the Board chose not to allow the xeriscape, how much time would Mr. Jenkins need to correct the violations. The area that needed to comply was discussed. Motion 7 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 99-358, Mr. Lambert moved that this Board find, as a matter of fact, and as a conclusion of law that Leon I. and Gail R. Jenkins are in violation of Code Sections Chapter 15, Article IX-15-120 (D), Inc. of the City Code of Ordinances. Mr. Lambert moved to order that the Respondents correct the violations on or before June 30, 1999. If the Respondents do not comply with this Order a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day, plus administrative costs shall be imposed. The Respondents are further ordered to contact the City of Boynton Beach Code Compliance Division to arrange for re-inspection of the property to verify compliance with this Order. Motion seconded by Mr. Foot. Vice Chair Frederick said that the pictures of the property do not look bad. Vice Chair Frederick said he believes in xeriscaping and thinks that Mr. Jenkins in on the right track. Vice Chair Frederick said that Mr. Jenkins should determine what needs to be done for xeriscaping his property. Chairman DeLiso noted that this Board cannot tell a respondent what to do. Chairman DeLiso did not agree with this motion and felt a person has the right what they want to do and with their property. Motion carried 4-3. (Chairman DeLiso, Vice Chair Frederick and Ms. Hammer dissenting.) Vice Chair Frederick did not think that the respondent was in violation. Mr. Rossi felt it was a misapplication of the term “xeriscape”. Ms. Roy stated he needed to make another amendment to the agenda and that page 17, Case No. 98-3475, Kathe Woods, be placed back on the agenda. Motion Ms. Hammer moved to place Case 98-3475, Kathe Woods, back on the agenda. Motion seconded by Mr. Lambert. Motion carried 7-0. Inspector Roy requested a motion be made to postpone page 62, Case No. 99- 0210. Motion Ms. Hammer moved to postpone Case No. 99-0210. Motion seconded by Mr. Lambert. Motion carried 7-0. Chairman DeLiso instructed Mr. Roy to call the roll. Mr. Roy requested that all persons who were present this evening to please respond by saying “present”. 8 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 V. NEW BUSINESS Chairman DeLiso explained the plea system to the audience and explained that the Board follows Florida State Statute. The respondent should take the podium, give his name and address and enter a plea of “no contest”, which means the violation exists on the property and the respondent needs additional time for compliance. Usually the Board will grant a reasonable amount of time. A respondent can also plead “not guilty”, which means the respondent does not believe that a violation exists on the property. If a respondent enters a plea of not guilty, the City will put on their case. The respondent will put on his case as well and then the Board determines whether the respondent is guilty or not. If a respondent is found guilty and the Board finds that a violation does exist on the property, the Board will allow the respondent a reasonable amount of time to correct the violation. A. CASES TO BE HEARD Case No. 98-3460: Frederick Rothrock th Property Address: 179 SE 28 Avenue Violations: Chapter 15, Article IX-15-120 (D), Inc., Cut all overgrowth; sod required in yard; remove construction material. Inspector Roy stated that the property was originally cited on September 24, 1998; remove construction material from the property. Inspector Roy said the property was cited through routine inspection and service was made by certified mail and the respondent is in attendance. Mr. Rothrock pled no contest and requested 90 days. The City agreed with 90 days. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 98-3460, Vice Chair Frederick moved that this Board find, as a matter of fact, and as a conclusion of law that Frederick Rothrock is in violation of Code Sections Chapter 15, Article IX-15-120 (D), Inc. of the City Code of Ordinances. Vice Chair Frederick moved to order that the Respondent correct the violations on or before August 16, 1999. If the Respondent does not comply with this Order a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day, plus administrative costs shall be imposed. The Respondent is further ordered to contact the City of Boynton Beach Code Compliance Division to arrange for re-inspection of the property to verify compliance with this Order. Motion seconded by Mr. Lambert. 9 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 Motion carried 7-0. Case No. 98-4036: Eslett Ruiz 7486 Coconut Drive Lake Worth, Florida st Property Address: 2131 NW 1 Street Violations: Chapter 15, Article IX-15-120 (D), Inc., Pick up loose trash and debris; install grass where bare spots occur in the swale; repair or replace driveway and seal it. Inspector Melillo stated that the case was originally cited on November 23, 1998 for violation of the City’s Community Appearance Code. Service was accomplished by . certified mail. Inspector Melillo presented photos to the Board for their inspection Ezlett Ruiz, 7486 Coconut Drive, Lake Worth, Florida took the podium and pled no contest. Ms. Ruiz asked for 90 days and the City agreed. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 98-4036, Vice Chair Frederick moved that this Board find, as a matter of fact, and as a conclusion of law that Eslett Ruiz is in violation of Code Sections Chapter 15, Article IX-15-120 (D), Inc. of the City Code of Ordinances. Vice Chair Frederick moved to order that the Respondent correct the violations on or before August 16, 1999. If the Respondent does not comply with this Order a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day, plus administrative costs shall be imposed. The Respondent is further ordered to contact the City of Boynton Beach Code Compliance Division to arrange for re-inspection of the property to verify compliance with this Order. Motion seconded by Ms. Hammer. Mr. Foot inquired if any of the loose trash was a hurricane hazard. Inspector Melillo said there were none. Motion carried 7-0. Case No. 98-4078: Wallace and Darlene McKinley th Property Address: 10 NE 19 Avenue Violations: Chapter 15, Article IX-15-120 (E) 2A, 120 (D), Inc., PT3-LDR, Chapter 2, Section 4.E, PT3-LDR, Chapter 20- VIII, Section 2.A and Section 2.H; 10 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 Remove bush obstructing view when th exiting NE 19 Avenue; repair walls in kitchen to stop rat infestation; repair windows and screens; repair fence, driveway and porch screens; remove all loose trash and debris; install grass and paint house. Inspector Melillo stated the case was originally cited on November 25, 1998 for violations of the Community Appearance Code and was referred by the Police th Department because of the obstruction when existing NE 19 and looking south, you cannot see because of the trees and bushes. Inspector Melillo said that the property has been painted and the back porch screens have been fixed. However, the all other violations still exist. Ms. Annette Harmon, sister of the respondent took the podium and pled no contest and asked for 90 days. Chairman DeLiso requested to look at the photographs. Inspector Melillo said that the respondents would probably need 120 days for compliance. Mr. Foot asked if there were any health hazards because of the rat infestation. Inspector Melillo said the violation came from the Health Department, but understood this has been repaired, but a great deal of work remains. Mr. Melillo informed the Board that this is the property that borders the Jenkins property. Mr. Foot asked if the motion could be in two parts; one motion for the trash and another motion for the remainder of the violations. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 98-4078, Vice Chair Frederick moved that this Board find, as a matter of fact, and as a conclusion of law that Wallace and Darlene McKinley are in violation of Code Sections Chapter 15, Article IX- 15-120 (E) 2.A and (D), Inc. of the City Code of Ordinances. Vice Chair Frederick moved to order that the Respondents correct the violations on or before June 14, 1999. If the Respondents do not comply with this Order a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day, plus administrative costs shall be imposed. The Respondents are further ordered to contact the City of Boynton Beach Code Compliance Division to arrange for re- inspection of the property to verify compliance with this Order. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 98-4078, Vice Chair Frederick moved that this Board find, as a matter of fact, and as a conclusion of law that 11 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 Wallace and Darlene McKinley are in violation of Code Sections PT3, LDR, Chapter 2, Section 4.E, PT3-LDR, Chapter 20-VIII, Section 2.A and Section 2.H. of the City Code of Ordinances. Vice Chair Frederick moved to order that the Respondents correct the violations on or before October 18, 1999. If the Respondents do not comply with this Order a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day, plus administrative costs shall be imposed. The Respondents are further ordered to contact the City of Boynton Beach Code Compliance Division to arrange for re-inspection of the property to verify compliance with this Order. Mr. Lambert seconded both motions. Mr. Foot inquired if the first motion covered the bush and tree obstruction and was informed that it did. Motion carried 7-0. Case No. 99-495: Judith Clemmons th Property Address: 90 NE 16 Court Violations: Chapter 15, Article IX-15-120 (D), Inc., remove all loose trash and debris from trash hole; fill hole and install grass; please use blue/green cart for trash. Inspector Melillo stated the property was originally cited on March 3, 1999 for violations th of the City’s Community Appearance Code. Ms. Judy Clemmons, of 90 NE 16 Court, Boynton Beach took the podium and pled no contest. Ms. Clemmons asked for 60 days. Inspector Melillo showed photographs to the respondent on what needs to be done to the property. Inspector Melillo stated that 60 days would be sufficient. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 99-495, Vice Chair Frederick moved that this Board find, as a matter of fact, and as a conclusion of law that Wallace and Darlene McKinley are in violation of Code Sections Chapter 15, Article IX- 15-120(D), Inc. of the City Code of Ordinances. Vice Chair Frederick moved to order that the Respondent correct the violations on or before July 21, 1999. If the Respondents do not comply with this Order a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day, plus administrative costs shall be imposed. The Respondents are further ordered to contact the City of Boynton Beach Code Compliance Division to arrange for re-inspection of the property to verify compliance with this Order. Motion seconded by Mr. Lambert. 12 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 Motion carried 7-0. Case No. 99-523: Harvey Cobb th Property Address: 121 NE 17 Court Violations: Chapter 15, Article IX-15-120 (D), 1A, Please remove or register all motor vehicles on your property. Inspector Melillo stated the property was cited through a routine inspection of the neighborhood and service was accomplished by certified mail. th Harvey Cobb, 121 NE 17 Street, Boynton Beach took the podium and pled not guilty. Chairman DeLiso requested to view the photographs. Inspector Melillo showed the photographs to the violator which showed the license plate on the car was 1998, which means the vehicle is not registered. Inspector Melillo stated the respondent had two vehicles on the property; one was partly in the carport and the other vehicle was jacked up behind the house. Inspector Melillo stated the vehicle behind the house has been removed. Inspector Melillo stated the vehicle in the carport is still not registered. Mr. Cobb changed his plea to no contest and asked for 30 days. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 99-523, Vice Chair Frederick moved that this Board find, as a matter of fact, and as a conclusion of law that Harvey Cobb is in violation of Code Sections Chapter 15, Article IX-15-120 D) .1A of the City Code of Ordinances. Vice Chair Frederick moved to order that the Respondent correct the violations on or before June 14, 1999. If the Respondent does not comply with this Order a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day, plus administrative costs shall be imposed. The Respondent is further ordered to contact the City of Boynton Beach Code Compliance Division to arrange for re-inspection of the property to verify compliance with this Order. Motion seconded by Mr. Foot Motion carried 7-0. Case No. 99-0020: Maria Quintana st Property Address: 421 NW 1 Avenue Violations: Chapter 15, Article IX-15-120 (D) 1, Inc., Please mow and de-weed yard. Sod needs to be planted in the front yard to establish a lawn. 13 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 Inspector Lewis stated the property was cited on January 5, 1999 through routine neighborhood inspection and service was made by certified mail. Ms. Maria Quintana, st 421 NW 1 Avenue, Boynton Beach took the podium and pled no contest. Ms. Quintana asked for 90 days. The City agreed to 90 days. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 99-0020, Vice Chair Frederick moved that this Board find, as a matter of fact, and as a conclusion of law that Maria Quintana is in violation of Code Sections Chapter 15, Article IX-15-120 D) 1, Inc. of the City Code of Ordinances. Vice Chair Frederick moved to order that the Respondent correct the violations on or before August 16, 1999. If the Respondent does not comply with this Order a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day, plus administrative costs shall be imposed. The Respondent is further ordered to contact the City of Boynton Beach Code Compliance Division to arrange for re-inspection of the property to verify compliance with this Order. Motion seconded by Ms. Hammer. Motion carried 7-0. Case No. 99-0118: Alain and Phyllis Nadeau th Property Address: 145 SE 9 Avenue Violations: Chapter 15, Article IX-15-120 (D) 1, Inc., Please mow and de-weed yard. Grass needs to be planted to establish a green lawn. Inspector Lewis stated the case was originally cited on January 12, 1999 through routine inspection. Service was made by certified mail. th Mr. Alain Nadeau, 145 SE 9 Avenue, Boynton Beach took the podium and pled no contest. Mr. Nadeau asked for 60 days. Mr. Nadeau stated he had planted grass, but it died because of the draught. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 99-0118, Vice Chair Frederick moved that this Board find, as a matter of fact, and as a conclusion of law that Alain and Phyllis Nadeau are in violation of Code Sections Chapter 15, Article IX-15-120 (D) 1, Inc. of the City Code of Ordinances. Vice Chair Frederick moved to order that the Respondents correct the violations on or before July 19, 1999. If the Respondents do not comply with this Order a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day, plus administrative costs shall be imposed. The Respondents are further ordered to contact the City of 14 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 Boynton Beach Code Compliance Division to arrange for re-inspection of the property to verify compliance with this Order. Motion seconded by Ms. Hammer. Motion carried 7-0. Case No. 99-0257: David P. Penegor 8042 Rose Marie Avenue East Boynton Beach, FL Property Address: 416 S. Seacrest Blvd. Violations: Chapter 15, Article IX-15-120 (D) 1, Inc., Section 13-16 B.B.C. of Ord. th Please fill trash hole on the SE 4 Ave. side and plant grass; Rental duplex requires an occupational license. Inspector Lewis stated the case was originally cited on January 29, 1999 through routine neighborhood section. Service was made by certified mail. Mr. David Penegor, 8042 Rose Marie Avenue East, Boynton Beach took the podium and pled no contest and asked for 90 days. Mr. Penegor stated he had to evict the tenant in order to make repairs before he can obtain the occupational license. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 99-0257, Vice Chair Frederick moved that this Board find, as a matter of fact, and as a conclusion of law that David P. Penegor is in violation of Code Sections Chapter 15, Article IX-15-120 (D) 1, Inc. and Section 13-16 of the City Code of Ordinances. Vice Chair Frederick moved to order that the Respondent correct the violations on or before August 16, 1999. If the Respondent does not comply with this Order a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day, plus administrative costs shall be imposed. The Respondent is further ordered to contact the City of Boynton Beach Code Compliance Division to arrange for re- inspection of the property to verify compliance with this Order. Motion seconded by Mr. Foot. Motion carried 7-0. Case No. 98-3540: Warren Kowalski 630 Boca Marina Court Boca Raton, FL th Property Address: 410 NE 5 Avenue 15 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 Violations: SBC ’94 Edition 104.1.1 and Section 13-16 B.B.C. of Ord. Fuel tanks are not covered by your occupational license, a permit is required for fuel tanks. Inspector Webb stated that the property was originally cited on October 2, 1998 through a citizen’s complaint and service was obtained by hand carry. Mr. Warren Kowalski, 630 Boca Marina Court, Boca Raton took the podium and pled no contest. Mr. Kowalski asked for 180 days. Mr. Kowalski said he needs to lay a 15’ x 22’ slab and cinder blocks in order to contain the liquid gas tanks. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 99-3540, Vice Chair Frederick moved that this Board find, as a matter of fact, and as a conclusion of law that Warren Kowalski is in violation of Code Sections SBC ’94 Edition 104.1.1 and Section 13-15 of the City Code of Ordinances. Vice Chair Frederick moved to order that the Respondent correct the violations on or before November 15 , 1999. If the Respondent does not comply with this Order a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day, plus administrative costs shall be imposed. The Respondent is further ordered to contact the City of Boynton Beach Code Compliance Division to arrange for re-inspection of the property to verify compliance with this Order. Motion seconded by Ms. Hammer. Mr. Foot inquired if there were two issues involved in this case. One would be determining whether a fuel tank is permitted at the location and a second issue, if it is permitted, providing for the proper container for the fuel tanks. Inspector Webb said the fuel tanks were not permitted, but the EPA said the tanks were too small to be regulated. Therefore, the City is asking the violator to build some type of foundation to keep the gas from seeping into the soil. Inspector Webb stated the tanks can remain on the property, but need to be contained. Mr. Rossi asked for the minimum gallonage that would require permits from agencies other than the City. Mr. Kowalski stated he has two tanks, one that is 500 and another that is 250/300 gallons and the EPA deemed it was an unregulated amount. Mr. Foot inquired if it was also a fire hazard. Mr. Kowalski stated it was more of an issue of seepage, than fire hazard. Motion carried 7-0. 16 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 Case No. 99-341: Alpine Seven Company, Inc. Property Address: 1112 N. Federal Highway Violations: Chapter 15, Article IX-15-120(D), 1 Inc.; remove unregistered and inoperable vehicle from property; trim all trees; remove all trash and debris. Inspector Webb stated that the property was originally cited on February 12, 1999 through a citizen’s complaint. Service was made by certified mail and a representative is present this evening. Chairman DeLiso inquired if the business was Alpine Florist and was informed that it was. Mr. Lloyd Powell of Alpine Florist took the podium and asked to separate the two items before entering a plea. Mr. Powell said that at no time did the Code Compliance Officer inform Alpine Florist in person how the trees needed to comply and what needed to be done to the trees. Mr. Powell said he could find no violation with the trees in front of the property. Mr. Powell thought that the violation was for the pine trees to the south of the property, because the landlord of the southern half of the middle block trimmed his pine trees down to a height of 8 feet. Alpine Florist’s trees were quite high and there is difference between 8 feet and 12 feet. Mr. Powell said they cut their pine trees down to 8 feet. The branches were piled out front and it took about two weeks for Public Works to pick them up. During this time Mr. Powell said Code Compliance and Public Works harassed him as to who would pay for the pick up. Public Works finally picked up the cuttings because Alpine Florist had been cited by Code Compliance. Inspector Webb stated that the trees had been trimmed. Chairman DeLiso instructed Mr. Webb to show the violations to Mr. Powell. Mr. Webb stated the only item remaining is the abandoned vehicle on the property and the trees and debris have complied. Therefore, Chairman DeLiso asked the violator what plea he wished to enter regarding the vehicle. Mr. Powell pled no contest, but did not know how much time he needed to comply. Mr. Powell said the vehicle is tied up in a civil law suit in the Circuit Court of Palm Beach County and Mr. Powell said there is a dispute with the insurance company. He is waiting for the case to come to trial. Mr. Powell said he has the vehicle stored in a locked fenced compound and in order to see it a person would have to go up to the fence. Chairman DeLiso asked if the vehicle was registered and Mr. Powell said it was not and that the original tag had been stolen. Mr. Powell said the car is inoperable and would not pass inspection and the vehicle cannot be registered except for obtaining a 30-day tag every month. 17 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 Chairman DeLiso asked if the vehicle could be moved and Mr. Powell said he would have to have the vehicle towed somewhere for storage, which would cost him money and that he may not be reimbursed by the insurance company. Mr. Powell said the only way the vehicle could be seen now is to look over an 8’ fence. Inspector Webb stated the complaint was from the Police Department that someone was living in the vehicle. Mr. Webb stated in order for the vehicle to meet compliance it must either be moved or registered. Mr. Powell was informed that unregistered vehicles cannot be stored on the property. Chairman Frederick suggested that the respondent obtain a temporary tag monthly until the court case gets heard. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 99-341, Vice Chair Frederick moved that this Board find, as a matter of fact, and as a conclusion of law that Alpine Seven Company, Inc. is in violation of Code Sections Chapter 15, Article IX-15- 120 (D), 1, Inc. of the City Code of Ordinances. Vice Chair Frederick moved to order that the Respondent correct the violations on or before June 14, 1999. If the Respondent does not comply with this Order a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day, plus administrative costs shall be imposed. The Respondent is further ordered to contact the City of Boynton Beach Code Compliance Division to arrange for re- inspection of the property to verify compliance with this Order. Motion seconded by Ms. Hammer. Motion carried 7-0. Mr. Powell thanked Chairman DeLiso for placing new business first. Case No. 99-0355: W.J. & Helen L. Millines th Property Address: 219 NW 10 Avenue Violations: Chapter 15, Article IX-15-120(D), 1 Inc.; Install sod, remove trash and debris. Inspector Webb stated the property was originally cited on March 12, 1999 through routine neighborhood inspection and service was obtained through certified mail. th Mr. Wilfred Millines, 219 NW 10 Avenue, Boynton Beach took the podium and pled no contest. Mr. Millines said that he has planted at least four to five different lawns and asked if he did not plant a lawn could he place mulch in its place. Mr. Millines was informed he could not place mulch down in place of lawn. Mr. Millines said he has a great deal of visitors and they have no place to park on his section of the street. 18 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 Chairman DeLiso stated that the City does not want vehicles parking on front yards and swales. The respondent asked for 60 days. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 99-355, Vice Chair Frederick moved that this Board find, as a matter of fact, and as a conclusion of law that W.J. and Helen L. Millines are in violation of Code Sections Chapter 15, Article IX-15- 120 (D), 1, Inc. of the City Code of Ordinances. Vice Chair Frederick moved to order that the Respondents correct the violations on or before July 19, 1999. If the Respondents do not comply with this Order a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day, plus administrative costs shall be imposed. The Respondents are further ordered to contact the City of Boynton Beach Code Compliance Division to arrange for re-inspection of the property to verify compliance with this Order. Motion seconded by Mr. Foot. Motion carried 7-0. Mr. Millines asked to whom he could speak about being allowed to park on the street and was informed to contact his City Commissioner. VI. OLD BUSINESS A. LIEN PENALTY CERTIFICATIONS (Tabled) st Case #98-2394 Robert Silberberg 171 SE 31 Street Inspector Roy stated that the property was originally cited on June 23, 1998 for violation of the City’s Community Appearance Code. No one appeared at the January 20, 1999 hearing. The compliance date was February 15, 1999 or $25.00 per day. The property complied on May 18, 1999, for 91 days of non-compliance. Mr. Robert Silberberg, 171 SE 31st Avenue took the podium. Mr. Silberberg said that th on February 15 he tilled the entire lawn, purchased all new sod and completed the entire job. Mr. Silberberg said the only thing that was not in compliance was the swale. Mr. Silberberg said when he appeared before the Board at the last hearing, the Board gave him 30 days to comply and the case was tabled. Mr. Silberberg said he was told to have the swale completed before this meeting and he complied. Inspector Roy stated the respondent did an excellent job and the properly looks great. Motion 19 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 98-2394, Mr. Lambert moved that this Board find, as a matter of fact, that the Respondent, Robert Silberberg was in violation of Code Sections Chapter 15, Article IX-15-120 (D), Inc. and Section 15-16 of the B.B.C. of Ord., subsequent to the date of compliance specified in this Board’s Order of January 20, 1999. Mr. Lambert moved that this Board find that the Respondent failed to comply with this Board’s Order, and that this Board not impose and certify a fine or administrative costs in this case. Motion seconded by Vice Chair Frederick. Mr. Foot said he takes exception that the fine did not cover administrative costs. Motion carried 6-1. (Mr. Foot dissenting) rd Case #98-3058 Ada L. Homes & 902 NE 3 Street Beverly C. Gagliotti Inspector Webb stated that the notice of violation was dated August 24, 1998 for violations of the City’s Community Appearance Code. At the hearing date on January 20, 1999 a date and fine was set for February 15, 1999 or $25.00 per day and no one appeared. Inspector Webb said the property is now in compliance as of Monday, May th 17 and the respondent is present. rd Ms. Beverly Gagliotti of 902 NE 3 Street took the podium. Chairman DeLiso inquired if all the debris has been cleaned up. Ms. Gagliotti said she did not appear at the January hearing because Mr. Webb got her an extension and that she did not disregard the notice. Chairman DeLiso noted that the respondent has been very cooperative. Chairman DeLiso noted that the Board tabled the case at the last hearing to allow the respondent time to comply. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 98-3058, Mr. Lambert moved that this Board find, as a matter of fact, that the Respondents, Ada L. Homes and Beverly C. Gagliotti were in violation of Code Sections 10-2 and 10-3 of the B.B.C. of Ord., subsequent to the date of compliance specified in this Board’s Order of January 20, 1999. Mr. Lambert moved that this Board find that the Respondents failed to comply with this Board’s Order, and that this Board not impose and certify a fine or administrative costs in this case. Motion seconded by Vice Chair Frederick. Mr. Foot said he takes exception that the fine did not cover administrative costs and that staff has spent a lot of time on the case and it has been an expense to the taxpayers. 20 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 Motion carried 6-1. (Mr. Foot dissenting) CHAIRMAN DeLISO CALLED FOR A FIVE-MINUTE RECESS AT 8:45 P.M. THE MEETING RECONVENED AT 8:50 P.M. B. LIEN PENALTY CERTIFICATIONS rd Case #98-3222 Christopher Nelson 421 NW 3 Street Inspector Cain stated that the property was cited on October 21, 1998 for violations of the City’s Community Appearance Code. Inspector Cain stated that the violator was present at the December 16, 1998 meeting. A compliance date and fine was set for April 16, 1999 or $25.00 per day. The property is still not in compliance. Inspector Cain said that everything has complied except for the vehicle. rd Mr. Nelson, 421 NW 3 Street took the podium. Chairman DeLiso stated that the Board tonight could either certify the fine, which means a lien goes on the property, or the case could be tabled for one month. Chairman DeLiso asked why the respondent has not complied. Mr. Nelson said his wife had surgery and he has had a very busy schedule and needs time. Mr. Nelson said he is repairing the car himself and needs time. Motion Mr. Lambert moved that Case #98-3222 be tabled until the Code Compliance Board Meeting to be held on June 16, 1999. Ms. Hammer seconded the motion. Mr. Lambert reminded the respondent that there is an unregistered motor vehicle that needs to be taken care and that the City has been extremely generous. Motion carried 7-0. th Case #98-3783 Percival Hazel Rowe 240 NE 19 Avenue Inspector Melillo stated that the property was cited on October 29, 1998 for violation of the City’s Community Appearance Code. Inspector Melillo said that no one appeared at the January 20, 1999 hearing and a date and fine of February 15, 1999 or $25.00 per day was set. The property still has not complied, for 93 days of non-compliance. 21 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 th Mr. Rowe, 240 NE 19 Avenue, Boynton Beach took the podium. Mr. Rowe stated he had an emergency in Jamaica in December and he had two sick brothers. (The Recording Secretary was not able to understand what the respondent was saying because of his heavy accent.) Chairman DeLiso asked Inspector Melillo to state what was wrong with the property. Inspector Melillo stated there is a great deal of unregistered vehicles and loose trash and debris in the yard and that nothing has been done. Chairman DeLiso asked Mr. Rowe when he returned from Jamaica and he said in January. Mr. Rowe stated that the vehicles were not his. Chairman DeLiso stated that in looking at the photos he wouldn’t want to be his neighbor and told the respondent that the case has been pending since October 29, 1998. Chairman DeLiso informed the respondent of the fines that were incurring on his property and the expenses incurred by the City. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 98-3783, and having considered the gravity of the violations, the actions taken by the Respondents, and any and all previous violations committed by the Respondents, Mr. Lambert moved that this Board find that Percival and Hazel Rowe have violated this Board’s prior Order of January 20, 1999, and this Board impose and certify a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day which shall continue to accrue until the Respondents come into compliance or until a judgment is entered based upon this certification of fine. Motion seconded by Mr. Rossi. Motion carried 7-0. Chairman DeLiso explained to Mr. Rowe that there is now a lien on his property and Mr. Rowe said he would get the vehicles removed. Chairman DeLiso requested that Inspector Melillo explain the violations to the respondent. st Case #98-3977 Guy Estella 105 NE 1 Street th 212 SW 10 Avenue Boynton Beach, FL 33435 Inspector Melillo noted that the violation date was November 23, 1998 for violation of the City’s Community Appearance Code. The hearing date was January 20, 1999 and no one appeared. A date and fine was set for February 7, 1999 or $25.00 per day. The property complied today. 22 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 th Mr. Estella, 212 SW 10 Avenue, Boynton Beach, Florida took the podium and said he did not know that the violation existed until this morning when he went to the Code Compliance Office to speak with Mr. Roy. Mr. Estella said that he went over to the property today and cleaned up the lot. Chairman DeLiso asked if this was another case where Mr. Estella did not receive notice. Inspector Melillo stated the property was posted because the Code Compliance Department did not have the respondent’s correct address. Chairman DeLiso stated that the Board had been previously informed that Mr. Estella had a post office box, but he didn’t check it very often. Chairman DeLiso inquired if the respondent still has his post office box and he said he did, and his brother checks it for him occasionally. Chairman DeLiso requested that Mr. Estella provide his proper address for the record, which he did. Inspector Melillo showed the Board a picture of the posting of the service, which also showed some of the trash and debris. Chairman Frederick found it hard to understand why the Code Compliance Department was unable to contact Mr. Estella since last November because Mr. Estella is well known in the City and there was a lack on the part of the Code Compliance’s part in trying to get Mr. Estella served. Chairman DeLiso said he would recommend no fine in this case. Mr. Foot stated that the respondent should have recognized that a violation existed on his property and that he should be responsible for the administrative costs. Ms. Hammer questioned why Mr. Estella did not check his properties on a regular basis. Mr. Estella stated that other people throw trash on the property. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 98-3977, Mr. Foot moved that this Board find, as a matter of fact, that the Respondent, Guy Estella was in violation of Code Sections 10-2 of the B.B.C. of Ordinances, subsequent to the date of compliance specified in this Board’s Order of January 20, 1999. Mr. Foot moved that this Board find that the Respondent failed to comply with this Board’s Order, and that this Board impose and certify a fine in the amount of $384.12 representing administrative costs. Motion seconded by Mr. Lambert. Motion carried 7-0. 23 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 th Case #98-3947 Marie C. Brizeus 146 SE 27 Court Inspector Roy stated that the property was cited on November 18, 1998 got violations of the City’s Community Appearance Code. The case first came before the Board on January 20, 1999 and no one appeared. A compliance date and fine was set for February 15, 1999 or $25.00 per day. The property is not in compliance and staff is recommending that the case be tabled until the June meeting because the respondent placed rock where she was instructed to place sod and Ms. Brizeus has agreed to replace the rock with sod. Motion Mr. Lambert moved that Case No. 98-3947 be tabled until the Code Compliance Board Meeting to be held on June 16, 1999. Motion seconded by Vice Chair Frederick. Ms. Bethany Francois stated she was present for Ms. Brizeus and pled no contest on her behalf. Ms. Francois stated they intended to place a driveway instead of the sod and would need additional time. Chairman DeLiso requested that the motion be amended. Motion Mr. Lambert amended his previous motion that Case No. 98-3947 be tabled until August 18, 1999. Vice Chair Lambert seconded the amended motion. Motion carried 7-0. th Case #98-4022 Raymond Mangiacapra 187 SE 27 Avenue Inspector Roy stated the notice of violation was dated November 23, 1998 for violation of the Community Appearance Code. The case came before the Board on January 29, 1999 and the respondent appeared. A compliance date and fine of February 15, 1999 or $25.00 per day was set. The property complied on April 20, 1999, or 63 days of non- compliance. Mr. Raymond Mangiacapra of 1545 Lakeview Circle, Coral Springs, Florida took the podium and stated the property complied by the end of February. Mr. Mangiacapra stated he put in a new sprinkler system and planted new sod and new roof. Mr. Mangiacapra stated he thought his office had called in that the property had been repaired. Inspector Roy said it did not comply by the compliance date set by the Board. th Inspector Roy said he checked the property on February 16 and it did not comply. th Inspector Roy said the notice of non-compliance was mailed on February 14. 24 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 Inspector Roy stated that his records indicate that the property complied on April 20l 1999. Chairman DeLiso requested to look at the photos of the property. Inspector Roy said he only had photos of the property before compliance. Chairman DeLiso said if there was no documentation to prove when the property complied, there is no way to tell when the property complied. Mr. Foot noted that the record indicates that the respondent did not th meet compliance for at least four days because an inspection was made on the 19 and the property did not comply on that date, which Inspector Roy confirmed. Chairman DeLiso indicated there should not be any fine since there is no proper documentation to show when the property complied. Mr. Foot stated it was the respondent’s responsibility to advise the Code Compliance Office that the property complied and Mr. Foot did not think that the taxpayers should be responsible for the expenses incurred in this case, plus the fine for four days. Mr. Mangiacapra said he was not denying that he did not meet compliance and went over maybe four or five days and he did not realize when he was asked for time for compliance that he should have requested more time. Inspector Roy stated that the respondent called him after he received the letter of non- compliance to advise that the property was in compliance. Mr. Blasie who joined the meeting, stated that nothing has been filed on this case and Mr. Lambert asked how the City gets paid. Mr. Blasie stated that the City would send a 30 days notice to the respondent requesting payment. If payment were not received, a lien would be filed. After the filing of the lien, the respondent would then incur the $250 filing fee. Chairman DeLiso felt that imposing a $384.12 fine for a few days of non-compliance is totally unreasonable. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 98-4022, Mr. Foot moved that this Board find, as a matter of fact, that the Respondent, Raymond Mangiacapra was in violation of Code Sections Chapter 15, Article IX-15-120 (D), Inc. of the City Code of Ordinances, subsequent to the date of compliance specified in this Board’s Order of January 20, 1999. Mr. Foot moved that this Board find that the Respondent failed to comply with this Board’s Order, and that this Board impose and certify a fine in the total amount of $384.12. Motion seconded by Mr. Rossi. 25 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 Motion carried 4-3 (Chairman DeLiso, Vice Chair Frederick and Ms. Hammer dissenting.) Case #98-3404 Thomas R. Platt 21-H Crossings Circle st 5921 NE 21 Road Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33308 Inspector Barquin stated that the property was cited on September 23, 1998 for violation of the Standard Building Code, requiring a permit for an air conditioner. Mr. Platt appeared at the December 16, 1998 hearing and a compliance date and fine was set for February 16, 1999 or $25.00 per day. The property complied on May 14, 1999 for 86 days of non-compliance. st Mr. Thomas Platt of 5921 NE 21 Road, Ft. Lauderdale took the podium and said the Board ordered him to obtain a permit on air conditioning work and to comply by th February 16. Mr. Platt said that on January 2, 1999 he made application to the City and paid for a permit. Mr. Platt thought at that point he had complied with the order and there was no communication between the respondent and the City until he received a th letter from Code Compliance on April 12 that stated he was in non-compliance. On th April 13 Mr. Platt said he went to Code Compliance Office to determine the non- compliance and was sent to the Building Department. The Building Department informed him that the permit had not been issued. Mr. Platt said he was sent to the plans and review department and he was told that the City would require a letter from the Condominium Association on obtaining the permit. Mr. Platt said he was unaware th of this requirement, nor was the association aware of the requirement. On April 20 the Association issued a letter approving the permit and Mr. Platt delivered it to the Building Department and a permit was issued on May 14, 1999. Mr. Platt said he was never aware that this was being held up. Inspector Barquin concurred with the order of events and confirmed that the respondent th did apply for the permit on January 2, 1999. Inspector Barquin said that on April 19 the respondent was required to pick up some comments from the Building Department, which means that something had to be changed. Inspector Barquin said the respondent is scheduled for the final inspection on the air conditioning tomorrow, although that is not part of the violation. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 98-3404, Vice Chair Frederick moved that this Board find, as a matter of fact, that the Respondent, Thomas R. Platt, was in violation of Code Sections SBC ’94 Edition 104.1.1 subsequent to the date of compliance specified in this Board’s Order of December 16, 1998. Vice Chair 26 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 Frederick moved that this Board find that the Respondent failed to comply with this Board’s Order, and that this Board impose and certify no fine or administrative costs. Motion seconded by Mr. Foot. Motion carried 7-0. Mr. Foot requested that Mr. Blasie inform the Building Department that they bungled in this particular case. Case #98-3800 Mohan Beepat 621 S. Seacrest Blvd. Inspector Lewis stated that the property was cited on November 3, 1998 for violation of the Standard Building Code and occupational license required. Inspector Lewis stated that at the Code Compliance Board hearing of January 20, 1999, no one appeared and a compliance date and fine was set for February 15, 1999 or $25.00 per day. The property complied on April 28, 1999, or 71 days of non-compliance. Mr. Beepat of 621 S. Seacrest Boulevard, Boynton Beach took the podium. Mr. Beepat rd said that when Inspector Lewis came to his property on March 3 to inspect it for an occupational license, Inspector Lewis gave him some additional items that had to be done to meet compliance. Mr. Beepat said he complied with the first set of violations and then he was given another list of violations. Mr. Beepat said he completed the second list of violations and the property passed inspection on April 28, 1999. Mr. Beepat stated that he did not receive all the notices because the City had the wrong th address where he lives. Mr. Beepat said his address was corrected on April 12 and that is when he received the first letter. Inspector Lewis stated that even if some of the mail was sent to the wrong address, the respondent was aware of the violations and the case has been on going. Mr. Beepat changed a single-family home into a duplex and was renting to people. Inspector Lewis stated the property was cited as the result of a complaint. Mr. Lewis told the respondent that he had to remove the drywall and on the first inspection it was not removed. There was still a stove in the other apartment and people were living there. Inspector Lewis said the property did not comply on the second inspection, but complied on the third inspection. However, Inspector Lewis did not know what the property looked like originally. Mr. Beepat said he is not renting, but Inspector Lewis said he still sees cars outside. Chairman DeLiso asked Mr. Beepat if he was renting the apartment and he replied he was not. He said the property was being occupied by himself and his friend and he receives no money. Mr. Beepat said when he was first informed that he needed a occupational license, he went to the City and paid $75.00 for the permit. Now that he is 27 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 not renting the place, he lost $75.00. Mr. Beepat said when he bought the house it was in the same condition that it was in when the property was cited and there were two stoves at that time. Mr. Rossi inquired if another inspection by the City was necessary to determine if one or two families are using it. Inspector Lewis said he went to the property and spoke to the other gentleman who informed Inspector Lewis that he was paying rent. Mr. Beepat stated that no one is paying any rent and that the second stove has been removed. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 98-3800, Mr. Lambert moved that this Board find, as a matter of fact, that the Respondent, Mohan Beepat, was in violation of Code Sections SBC ’94 Edition 104.1.6 and Section 13-16 of the Boynton Beach Code of Ordinances, subsequent to the date of compliance specified in this Board’s Order of January 20, 1999, Mr. Lambert moved that this Board find that the Respondent failed to comply with this Board’s Order, and that this Board impose a fine or administrative costs. Motion seconded by Ms. Hammer. Motion carried 5-2 (Messrs. Rossi and Foot dissenting). Case #98-2136 Biana H. Jones 221 NW 5t Court Inspector Webb stated the property was cited on June 3, 1998 for violations of the City’s Community Appearance Code. No one appeared at the February 17, 1999 hearing and a compliance date and fine of March 15, 1999 or $25.00 was set. The property still is not in compliance and it has been 65 days to date. th Ms. Biana Jones, 221 NW 5 Court., Boynton Beach took the podium. Ms. Jones said that she did not attend the last meeting because she had the flu and telephone the Code Compliance Department to inform them of this. Ms. Jones said that her car broke down and it took all her money to repair it. She said she is 68 years old and still has to work and has to pay a mortgage of $560 a month. Chairman DeLiso asked Ms. Jones if the case were tabled until next month could she bring the property into compliance. Chairman DeLiso requested that it be put in the record that Ms. Jones is having a hard time financially. Motion Mr. Lambert moved that Case No. 98-2136 be tabled until the Code Compliance Board Meeting to be held on June 16, 1999. Motion seconded by Mr. Rossi. 28 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 Motion carried 7-0. th Case #98-3570 James M. Terry Tr. 961 NW 8 Avenue Inspector Webb stated the property was cited on October 8, 1998 for violation of the Standard Building Code. At the Code Compliance Board hearing on February 17, 1999 and Mr. Terry appeared. A compliance date and fine of April 19, 1999 or $25.00 per day was set. The property is now in compliance and there were 28 days of non- compliance. th Mr. James Terry of 961 NW 6 Avenue, Boynton Beach took the podium and explained it took him longer to comply because he did not want to tear down the shed, since he put a lot of effort into building it and it was full. Mr. Terry stated that the shed originally did not comply because he built it himself and he couldn’t afford to hire anyone. Mr. Terry said he came up with his own drawings, but was told by the Building Department that the plans would not pass. Mr. Terry said Mr. Johnson of the Building Department informed him that since the building never complied, it would be necessary for him to hire an engineer and he said he could not afford that. Mr. Terry said he reluctantly took the shed down. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 98-3570, Vice Chair Frederick moved that this Board find, as a matter of fact, that the Respondent, James M. Terry Tr., was in violation of Code Sections SBC ’94 Edition 104.1.1, 105.5 and 105.6, subsequent to the date of compliance specified in this Board’s Order of February 17, 1999, Vice Chair Frederick moved that this Board find that the Respondent failed to comply with this Board’s Order, and that this Board impose a fine or administrative costs. Motion seconded by Ms. Hammer. Motion carried 5-2 (Chairman DeLiso and Mr. Foot dissenting). th Case #98-3854 Blas H. Leandro 324 NW 7 Court Inspector Webb stated that the property was cited on November 9, 1998 for violation of the City’s Community Appearance Code. No one appeared at the January 20, 1999 hearing date. A compliance date and fine was set for February 15, 1999 or $25.00 per day. The property is not yet in compliance and there has been 93 days to date of non- compliance. 29 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 th Mr. Blas H. Leandro, 324 NW 7 Court, Boynton Beach took the podium and stated that the property is fine. Inspector Webb said there was no grass in the swale. Mr. Leandro said the sprinkler broke and there is no water for the swale. Chairman DeLiso asked the respondent if the Board gave him sixty days for compliance would he plant grass and fix the sprinklers and he responded he would. Motion Mr. Lambert moved Case No. 98-3854 be tabled until the Code Compliance Board Meeting to be held on July 21, 1999. Motion seconded by Mr. Foot. Motion carried 7-0. A. LIEN PENALTY CERTIFICATES (Tabled) Case #98-1571 Crystal L. Simpson 3201 N. Seacrest Blvd. Inspector Cain stated the property was cited on April 9, 1998 for violations of the City’s Community Appearance Code and the Land Development Regulations. The Compliance Board hearing was February 17, 1999 and a compliance date and fine was set for March 15, 1999 or $25.00 per day. The property is still not in compliance and no one appeared at the original hearing. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 98-1571, and having considered the gravity of the violations, the actions taken by the Respondent, and any and all previous violations committed by the Respondent, Mr. Lambert moved that this Board find that Crystal L. Simpson has violated this Board’s prior Order of February 17, 1999, and this Board impose and certify a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day, plus administrative costs which shall continue to accrue until the Respondent comes into compliance or until a judgment is entered based upon this certification of fine. Motion seconded by Mr. Rossi. Motion carried 7-0. B. LIEN PENALTY CERTIFICATIONS Case #98-3095 Christopher & Pamela Slunt 3350 E. Atlantic Dr. Inspector Cain stated that the property was cited on August 25, 1998 for violations of the City’s Community Appearance Code. The Code Compliance Board hearing was 30 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 December 16, 1998 and the respondents appeared. Compliance date and fine was set for April 20, 1999 or fined $25.00 per day. The property is not yet in compliance. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 98-3095, and having considered the gravity of the violations, the actions taken by the Respondents, and any and all previous violations committed by the Respondents, Mr. Lambert moved that this Board find that Christopher and Pamela Slunt have violated this Board’s prior Order of December 16, 1998, and this Board impose and certify a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day, plus administrative costs which shall continue to accrue until the Respondents come into compliance or until a judgment is entered based upon this certification of fine. Motion seconded by Ms. Hammer. Motion carried 7-0. th Case #98-3367 Steven L. Modica 211 NW 7 Court th 8215 NW 49 Street Sunrise, FL 33351 Inspector Cain stated the property was cited on September 18, 1998. The hearing date was December 16, 1998 and a compliance date and fine of February 15, 1999 or $25.00 per day was set. The property is still not in compliance. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 98-3367, and having considered the gravity of the violations, the actions taken by the Respondent, and any and all previous violations committed by the Respondent, Mr. Lambert moved that this Board find that Steven L. Modica has violated this Board’s prior Order of December 16, 1998, and this Board impose and certify a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day, plus administrative costs which shall continue to accrue until the Respondent comes into compliance or until a judgment is entered based upon this certification of fine. Motion seconded by Mr. Foot. Motion carried 7-0. st Case #98-3620 Roger F. Quisenberry 2350 NW 1 Street 5421 S. Flagler Dr. West Palm Beach, FL 33405 31 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 Inspector Cain stated the property was cited on October 14, 1998 for violation of occupational license required. At the Code Compliance hearing on January 20, 1999 a compliance date and fine of February 15, 1999 or $25.00 per day was set. The property is not yet in compliance. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 98-3620, and having considered the gravity of the violations, the actions taken by the Respondent, and any and all previous violations committed by the Respondent, Mr. Lambert moved that this Board find that Roger F. Quisenberry has violated this Board’s prior Order of January 20, 1999, and this Board impose and certify a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day, plus administrative costs which shall continue to accrue until the Respondent comes into compliance or until a judgment is entered based upon this certification of fine. Motion seconded by Mr. Foot. Motion carried 7-0. Case #98-3621 Lucio & Maria Garcia 519 N. Seacrest Blvd. P.O. Box 6972 Lake Worth, FL 33466 Inspector Cain stated the property was cited on October 14, 1998 for violation of occupational license required. At the Code Compliance Board hearing on February 17, 1999 a compliance date and fine was set for March 15, 1999 or $25.00 per day. The property is not yet in compliance. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 98-3621, and having considered the gravity of the violations, the actions taken by the Respondents, and any and all previous violations committed by the Respondents, Mr. Lambert moved that this Board find that Lucio and Maria Garcia have violated this Board’s prior Order of February 17, 1999, and this Board impose and certify a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day, plus administrative costs which shall continue to accrue until the Respondents come into compliance or until a judgment is entered based upon this certification of fine. Motion seconded by Mr. Rossi. Motion carried 7-0. Case #98-3622 Lucio & Maria Garcia 3245 E. Palm Drive 32 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 P.O. Box 6972 Lake Worth, FL 33466 Inspector Cain stated the property was cited on October 14, 1998 for violation of occupational license required. At the Code Compliance Date hearing on February 17, 1999, a compliance date and fine was set for March 15, 1999 or $25.00 per day. The property is not yet in compliance. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 98-3622, and having considered the gravity of the violations, the actions taken by the Respondents, and any and all previous violations committed by the Respondents, Mr. Lambert moved that this Board find that Lucio and Maria Garcia have violated this Board’s prior Order of February 17, 1999, and this Board impose and certify a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day, plus administrative costs which shall continue to accrue until the Respondents come into compliance or until a judgment is entered based upon this certification of fine. Motion seconded by Mr. Foot. Motion carried 7-0. Case #98-3630 David W. Nicholls 2491 N. Seacrest Blvd. 3130 Orange Street Boynton Beach, FL 33435 Inspector Cain stated the property was originally cited on October 14, 1998 for violation of an occupational license required. At the Code Compliance Board hearing on January 20, 1999 a compliance date and fine of February 15, 1999 or $25.00 was set. The property is not yet in compliance. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 98-3630, and having considered the gravity of the violations, the actions taken by the Respondent, and any and all previous violations committed by the Respondent, Mr. Lambert moved that this Board find that David W. Nicholls has violated this Board’s prior Order of January 20, 1999, and this Board impose and certify a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day, plus administrative costs which shall continue to accrue until the Respondent comes into compliance or until a judgment is entered based upon this certification of fine. Motion seconded by Mr. Miriani. Motion carried 7-0. 33 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 Case #98-3839 Willio & Mary Dieujuste 580 Alto Road Inspector Cain stated that the property was cited on December 14, 1998 for violation of the City’s Community Appearance Code and occupational license required. At the Code Compliance Board hearing on February 17, 1999, a compliance date and fine of March 15, 1999 or $25.00 per day was set. The property complied on May 5, 1999 or 50 days of non-compliance. Inspector Cain stated that the respondents had placed wood chips in the swale and had to remove them. Although they were cited for an occupational license, they signed affidavits that they were not renting and family was staying with them in the other half of the duplex. Inspector Cain stated the respondents removed the wood chips and placed sod. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 98-3839, Mr. Foot moved that this Board find, as a matter of fact, that the Respondents, Willio and Mary Dieujuste were in violation of Code Sections Chapter 15, Article IX-15-120 (B) 2, Inc. and Section 13-16 of the Boynton Beach Code of Ordinances, subsequent to the date of compliance specified in this Board’s Order of February 17, 1999. Mr. Foot moved that this Board find that the Respondents failed to comply with this Board’s Order, and that this Board impose and certify a fine in the amount of $480.15, which includes administrative costs. Motion died for lack of second. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 98-3839, Mr. Foot moved that this Board find, as a matter of fact, that the Respondents Willio and Mary Dieujuste were in violation of Code Sections Chapter 15, Article IX-15-120 (B) 2, Inc. and Section 13-16 of the Boynton Beach Code of Ordinances, subsequent to the date of compliance specified in this Board’s Order of February 17, 1999. Mr. Foot moved that this Board find that the Respondents failed to comply with this Board’s Order, and that this Board impose and certify a fine in the amount of $200.00, which includes administrative costs. Motion seconded by Mr. Rossi. Motion carried 7-0. 34 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 th Case #98-3842 Fredericka Dixon 2407 NE 4 Court st 4222 51 Street West Palm Beach, FL 33407 Inspector Cain stated the property was cited on November 6, 1998 for violation of occupational license required. At the Code Compliance Board hearing on February 17, 1999 a fine and compliance date of March 15, 1999 or $25.00 per day was set. The property is not yet in compliance. Inspector Cain stated that the sod has complied, but the house needs to be inspected for the occupational license. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 98-3842, and having considered the gravity of the violations, the actions taken by the Respondent, and any and all previous violations committed by the Respondent, Mr. Lambert moved that this Board find that Fredericka Dixon has violated this Board’s prior Order of February 17, 1999, and this Board impose and certify a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day, plus administrative costs which shall continue to accrue until the Respondent comes into compliance or until a judgment is entered based upon this certification of fine. Motion seconded by Mr. Rossi. Chairman DeLiso questioned certifying a fine where only an inspection of the property remains. Mr. Lambert noted that it has been 65 days of non-compliance. Motion carried 7-0. Case #98-3915 Marc & Valerie Nevel 7018 Chesapeake Circle Inspector Cain stated the property was cited on November 13, 1998 for violation of the Standard Building Code. At the Code Compliance Board hearing on January 20, 1999 a compliance date and fine was set for February 15, 1999 or $25.00 per day. The property complied as of April 22, 1999 or 65 days of non-compliance. Mr. Lambert asked what the case pertained to and Inspector Cain said it had to do with the installation of a fence on the neighbor’s property. Inspector Cain said that the zero lot lines pose a problem when installing a fence. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 98-3915, Mr. Lambert moved that this Board find, as a matter of fact, that the Respondents Marc and Valerie Nevel were in violation of Standard Building Code ’94 Edition 105.5, subsequent to the 35 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 date of compliance specified in this Board’s Order of January 20, 1999. Mr. Lambert moved that this Board find that the Respondents failed to comply with this Board’s Order, and that this Board impose and certify no fine or administrative costs in this case. Motion seconded by Mr. Miriani. Motion carried 6-1 ). (Mr. Foot dissenting th Case #98-3929 Jacob & Shellie Rus 2751 NE 4 Street 552 Sanctuary Point Jupiter, FL 33458 Inspector Cain stated the property was originally cited on November 17, 1998 for violations of the Community Appearance Code and Land Development Regulations. At the Compliance Board hearing on February 15, 1999 a compliance date and fine was set for February 15, 1999 or $50.00 per day. The property is not yet in compliance for 93 days of non-compliance. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 98-3929, and having considered the gravity of the violations, the actions taken by the Respondents, and any and all previous violations committed by the Respondents, Mr. Lambert moved that this Board find that Jacob and Shellie Rus have violated this Board’s prior Order of January 20, 1999, and this Board impose and certify a fine in the amount of $50.00 per day, plus administrative costs which shall continue to accrue until the Respondents come into compliance or until a judgment is entered based upon this certification of fine. Motion seconded by Ms. Hammer. Mr. Foot inquired if this was a safety issue. Inspector Cain said there is no safety issue involved. Motion unanimously carried. rd Case #98-4057 Louis & Arthur Josaphat 2622 NE 3 Street Inspector Cain stated the property was originally cited on November 24, 1998 for violation of the Community Appearance Code. At the Code Compliance hearing of January 20, 1999 a compliance and fine was set for February 15, 1999 or $25.00 per day. The property is not yet in compliance. Motion 36 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 98-4057, and having considered the gravity of the violations, the actions taken by the Respondents, and any and all previous violations committed by the Respondents, Mr. Lambert moved that this Board find that Louis and Arthur Josaphat have violated this Board’s prior Order of January 20, 1999, and this Board impose and certify a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day, plus administrative costs which shall continue to accrue until the Respondents come into compliance or until a judgment is entered based upon this certification of fine. Motion seconded by Ms. Hammer. Motion carried 7-0. Case #98-4176 Inoel & Jeanette Ruiz 3225 E. Atlantic Drive P.O. Box 4644 Boynton Beach, FL 33424 Inspector Cain stated the property was cited on December 8, 1998 for violation of the Community Appearance Code. At the Code Compliance hearing on February 17, 1998 a compliance date and fine of March 15, 1999 or $25.00 per day was set. Inspector Cain said the property complied on May 11, 1999 or 57 days of non-compliance. Inspector Cain stated the case involved sod on the side of the driveway and in the swale. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 98-4176, Mr. Lambert moved that this Board find, as a matter of fact, that the Respondents Inoel and Jeanette Ruiz were in violation of Chapter 15, Article IX-15-120 (B) 1 and (D), Inc. of the City Code of Ordinances, subsequent to the date of compliance specified in this Board’s Order of February 17, 1999. Mr. Lambert moved that this Board find that the Respondents failed to comply with this Board’s Order, and that this Board impose and certify a total fine in the amount of $200.00. Motion seconded by Mr. Rossi. Motion carried 7-0. th Case #98-3475 Kathe A. Woods 261 NE 16 Court Inspector Melillo said the property was cited on September 28, 1998 for violations of the City’s Community Appearance Code. No one appeared at the Code Compliance Board hearing of November 18, 1998. Inspector Melillo stated he received a phone call from Mr. Woods who stated he was sick and said he would try to get the property into compliance. The compliance date was February 15, 1999 or $25.00 per day and the 37 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 property complied on March 4, 1999 or 16 days of non-compliance. Inspector Melillo said he stayed in contact with the violator who had a great deal of unregistered motor vehicles and other violations that had to be corrected. There was a non-permitted structure that needed to be torn down, as well as planting grass. Inspector Melillo said he did a great deal of work, but was sick during this time. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 98-3475, Mr. Lambert moved that this Board find, as a matter of fact, that the Respondent Kathe A. Woods was in violation of Chapter 15, Article IX-15-120 (D), Inc. of the City Code of Ordinances, subsequent to the date of compliance specified in this Board’s Order of November 18, 1998. Mr. Lambert moved that this Board find that the Respondents failed to comply with this Board’s Order, and that this Board impose and certify no fine or administrative costs in this case. Motion seconded by Mr. Miriani. Motion carried 7-0. nd Case #98-3583 Bonita Dames 2000 NW 2 Court Inspector Melillo stated the property was cited on October 8, 1998 for violation of the Community Appearance Code. The Code Compliance Board hearing was January 20, 1999 and no one appeared. A compliance date and fine of February 7, 1999 or $25.00 per day was set and the property still has not complied. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 98-3583, and having considered the gravity of the violations, the actions taken by the Respondent, and any and all previous violations committed by the Respondent, Mr. Lambert moved that this Board find that Bonita Dames has violated this Board’s prior Order of January 20, 1999, and this Board impose and certify a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day, plus administrative costs which shall continue to accrue until the Respondent comes into compliance or until a judgment is entered based upon this certification of fine. Motion seconded by Ms. Hammer. Motion carried 7-0. th Case #98-3618 Maria Claudio 1500 NW 4 Street 1202 South L Street Lake Worth, FL 33460 38 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 Inspector Melillo stated the notice of violation was October 13, 1998 for violations of the Community Appearance Code. No one appeared at the Code Compliance Board hearing on February 17, 1999 and a compliance date and fine was set for March 15, 1999 or $25.00 per day. The property has not yet complied for 65 days of non- compliance. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 98-3618, and having considered the gravity of the violations, the actions taken by the Respondent, and any and all previous violations committed by the Respondent, Mr. Lambert moved that this Board find that Maria Claudio has violated this Board’s prior Order of February 17, 1999, and this Board impose and certify a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day, plus administrative costs which shall continue to accrue until the Respondent comes into compliance or until a judgment is entered based upon this certification of fine. Motion seconded by Ms. Hammer. Motion carried 7-0. st Case #98-4035 Albert T. Hutson 2150 NW 1 Street P.O. Box 2017 Elk Grove, CA 95759 Inspector Melillo stated the property was cited on November 23, 1998 for violation of the Community Appearance Codes Inspector Melillo stated that no one appeared at the February 17, 1999 hearing and a compliance date and fine was set for March 15, 1999 or $25.00 per day. The property is not yet in compliance. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 98-4035, and having considered the gravity of the violations, the actions taken by the Respondent, and any and all previous violations committed by the Respondent, Mr. Lambert moved that this Board find that Albert T. Hutson has violated this Board’s prior Order of February 17, 1999, and this Board impose and certify a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day, plus administrative costs which shall continue to accrue until the Respondent comes into compliance or until a judgment is entered based upon this certification of fine. Motion seconded by Mr. Miriani. Motion carried 7-0. 39 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 th Case #98-4112 Willie and Paula Knowles, Jr. 401 NW 16 Ave Inspector Melillo stated the property was cited on December 2, 1998 for violation of alarm decal required. No one appeared at the Code Compliance Board hearing of February 17, 1999. A compliance date and fine was set for March 15, 1999 or $25.00 per day. The property has not yet complied. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 98-4112, and having considered the gravity of the violations, the actions taken by the Respondents, and any and all previous violations committed by the Respondents, Mr. Lambert moved that this Board find that Willie and Paul Knowles, Jr. have violated this Board’s prior Order of February 17, 1999, and this Board impose and certify a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day, plus administrative costs which shall continue to accrue until the Respondents come into compliance or until a judgment is entered based upon this certification of fine. Motion seconded by Mr. Miriani. Motion carried 7-0. Inspector Melillo stated he had spoken with the respondent, as well as his children and has left his card and they still have not complied. th Case #98-4188 Andre St. Juste 440 NE 14 Avenue 925 Greenbriar Drive Boynton Beach, FL 33435 Inspector Melillo stated the property was cited on December 9, 1998 for violation of occupational license required. No one appeared at the Code Compliance Board hearing of February 17, 1999. A compliance date and fine was set at April 19, 1999 or $50.00 per day. The property has not yet complied. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 98-4188, and having considered the gravity of the violations, the actions taken by the Respondent, and any and all previous violations committed by the Respondent, Mr. Lambert moved that this Board find that Andre St. Juste has violated this Board’s prior Order of February 17, 1999, and this Board impose and certify a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day, plus administrative costs which shall continue to accrue until the Respondent comes into compliance or until a judgment is entered based upon this certification of fine. Motion seconded by Mr. Miriani. 40 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 Motion carried 7-0. st Case #98-3513 Jacob & Shellie Rus 515 NE 1 Street 652 Sanctuary Point Jupiter, FL 33458 Inspector Webb said the notice of violation was dated October 1, 1998 for violation of occupational license required. No one appeared at the Code Compliance Board hearing on January 20, 1999. A compliance date and fine of February 10, 1999 or $25.00 per day was set and the property is not yet in compliance. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 98-3513, and having considered the gravity of the violations, the actions taken by the Respondents, and any and all previous violations committed by the Respondents, Mr. Lambert moved that this Board find that Jacob and Shellie Rus has violated this Board’s prior Order of January 20, 1999, and this Board impose and certify a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day, plus administrative costs which shall continue to accrue until the Respondents come into compliance or until a judgment is entered based upon this certification of fine. Motion seconded by Mr. Miriani. Motion carried 7-0. th Case #98-3556 Ida M. White Est. 414 NW 4 Avenue Inspector Webb stated the notice of violation was dated November 16, 1998 for violation of the City’s Community Appearance Code. No one appeared at the January 20, 1999 Code Compliance Board meeting and a compliance date and fine of February 15, 1999 or $25.00 per day was set. The property is not yet in compliance. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 98-3556, and having considered the gravity of the violations, the actions taken by the Respondent, and any and all previous violations committed by the Respondent, Mr. Lambert moved that this Board find that Ida M. White Estate has violated this Board’s prior Order of January 20, 1999, and this Board impose and certify a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day, plus administrative costs which shall continue to accrue until the Respondent comes into compliance or until a judgment is entered based upon this certification of fine. Motion seconded by Mr. Miriani. 41 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 Motion carried 7-0. th Case #98-3737 J. & Deloris Bell 534 NW 5 Street 115 Peedee Circle Marion, SC 29571 Inspector Webb stated the notice of violation was dated October 22, 1998 for violation of occupational license required. No one appeared at the Code Compliance Board hearing on February 17, 1999. A compliance date and fine was set for March 15, 1999 or $25.00 per day. The property complied on May 5, 1999 for 50 days of non- compliance. Mr. Lambert inquired what the occupational license was for and why it required six inspections. Inspector Webb said it was a single-family rental unit. Inspector Melillo stated in order to obtain an occupational license as a rental, the house must pass inspections inside and outside, must have a smoke detector, minimum housing standards, etc. Mr. Blasie explained what constituted an inspection and why there were so many in a case. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 98-3737, Mr. Lambert moved that this Board find, as a matter of fact, that the Respondents, J. and Deloris Bell were in violation of Section 13-16 of the City Code of Ordinances, subsequent to the date of compliance specified in this Board’s Order of November 18, 1998. Mr. Lambert moved that this Board find that the Respondents failed to comply with this Board’s Order, and that this Board impose and certify a total fine in the amount of $200.00. Motion seconded by Vice Chair Frederick. Motion carried 7-0. Case #98-3740 Courthouse Plaza 109 E. Boynton Beach Blvd. Inspector Webb stated that the property was cited on October 22, 1998 for violations of the City’s Community Appearance Code and the Land Development Regulations. No one appeared at the Code Compliance hearing of February 17, 1999 and a compliance date and fine of April 19, 1999 or $25.00 per day was set. The property is still not in compliance. 42 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 98-3740, and having considered the gravity of the violations, the actions taken by the Respondent, and any and all previous violations committed by the Respondent, Mr. Lambert moved that this Board find that Courthouse Plaza has violated this Board’s prior Order of February 17, 1999, and this Board impose and certify a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day, plus administrative costs which shall continue to accrue until the Respondent comes into compliance or until a judgment is entered based upon this certification of fine. Motion seconded by Mr. Miriani. Motion carried 7-0. nd Case #98-3852 Bhatt Ashish 417 NE 2 Street 3613 Broadway West Palm Beach, FL 33407 Inspector Webb stated the property was cited on November 9, 1998 for violation of the Community Appearance Code. No one appeared at the Code Compliance Board hearing of December 16, 1998 and a compliance date and fine was set for February 16, 1999 or $25.00 per day. The property is still not in compliance. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 98-3852, and having considered the gravity of the violations, the actions taken by the Respondent, and any and all previous violations committed by the Respondent, Mr. Lambert moved that this Board find that Bhatt Ashish has violated this Board’s prior Order of December 16, 1998, and this Board impose and certify a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day, plus administrative costs which shall continue to accrue until the Respondent comes into compliance or until a judgment is entered based upon this certification of fine. Motion seconded by Vice Chair Frederick. Motion carried 7-0. nd Case #98-3856 Ramon Charles & 526 NE 2 Street Marie Luma th 226 SW 13 Avenue Boynton Beach, FL 33435 Inspector Webb stated the property was cited on November 9, 1998 for violations of the City’s Community Appearance Code. No one appeared at the Code Compliance Board 43 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 hearing on January 20, 1999 and a compliance date and proposed fine was set for February 15, 1999 or $25.00 per day. The property is not yet in compliance. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 98-3856, and having considered the gravity of the violations, the actions taken by the Respondents, and any and all previous violations committed by the Respondents, Mr. Lambert moved that this Board find that Ramon Charles and Marie Luma have violated this Board’s prior Order of January 20, 1999, and this Board impose and certify a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day, plus administrative costs which shall continue to accrue until the Respondents come into compliance or until a judgment is entered based upon this certification of fine. Motion seconded by Mr. Rossi. Motion carried 7-0. nd Case #98-3967 Lucio & Maria V. Garcia 503 NE 2 Street nd 501 NE 2 Street Boynton Beach, FL 33435 Inspector Webb stated that the notice of violation was November 20, 1998 for violation of occupational license required. No one appeared at the Code Compliance Board hearing on January 20, 1999 and a compliance date and fine of February 10, 1999 or $25.00 was set. The property is not yet in compliance. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 98-3967, and having considered the gravity of the violations, the actions taken by the Respondents, and any and all previous violations committed by the Respondents, Mr. Lambert moved that this Board find that Lucio and Maria V. Garcia have violated this Board’s prior Order of January 20, 1999, and this Board impose and certify a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day, plus administrative costs which shall continue to accrue until the Respondents come into compliance or until a judgment is entered based upon this certification of fine. Motion seconded by Ms. Hammer. Mr. Foot inquired about the status of 23 men sleeping on the floor. Inspector Webb stated that both sides of the house are vacant. Motion carried 7-0. 44 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 Case #98-4105 June B. Rich 1239 Gondola Lane Inspector Webb stated that the property was cited on December 2, 1998 for violation of alarm decal required. No one appeared at the Code Compliance hearing date of February 17, 1999 and a compliance date and fine was set for March 1, 1999 or $25.00 per day. The property still has not complied. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 98-4105, and having considered the gravity of the violations, the actions taken by the Respondent, and any and all previous violations committed by the Respondent, Mr. Lambert moved that this Board find that June B. Rich has violated this Board’s prior Order of February 17, 1999, and this Board impose and certify a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day, plus administrative costs which shall continue to accrue until the Respondent comes into compliance or until a judgment is entered based upon this certification of fine. Motion seconded by Mr. Foot. Motion carried 7-0. C. LIEN REDUCTIONS (Tabled) th Case #98-3960 Patricia E. Dupras 1205 NW 13 Avenue Mr. Blasie requested that the lien reductions be tabled and the respondents asked if they could remain tabled until next month as they are out of town. Motion Mr. Foot moved that Case No. 98-3960 be tabled until the Code Compliance Board Meeting to be held on June 16, 1999. Motion seconded by Vice Chair Frederick. Motion carried 7-0. D. LIEN REDUCTIONS Mr. Blasie stated that case No. 97-3700 should have been removed from the Agenda. 45 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 VI. NEW BUSINESS: A. CASES TO BE HEARD Case No. 98-3461: Patricia Bowen th Property Address: 175 SE 28 Avenue Violations: Chapter 15, Article IX-15-120 (D), Inc.; restore lawn with sod and maintain weed free. Mr. Roy stated the property was originally cited on September 28, 1998 through routine inspection. Service was obtained by posting and the City recommends 30 days. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 98-3461, Vice Chair Frederick moved that this Board find, as a matter of fact, and as a conclusion of law that Patricia Bowen, is in violation of Code Sections Chapter 15, Article IX-15-120 (D), Inc. of the City Code of Ordinances. Vice Chair Frederick moved to order that the Respondent correct the violations on or before June 14, 1999. If the Respondent does not comply with this Order, a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day shall be imposed. The Respondent is further ordered to contact the City of Boynton Beach Code Compliance Division to arrange for re-inspection of the property to verify compliance with this Order. Motion seconded by Mr. Lambert. Motion carried 7-0. Case No. 98-4181: Mary R. Whipple th Property Address: 136 SE 24 Avenue Violations: Chapter 15, Article IX-15-120 (D), Inc.; re-sod lawn and swale including swale on east side to comply with City Code. Mr. Roy stated the property was originally cited on December 8, 1998 through routine inspection. Service was obtained by certified mail and the City recommends 30 days. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 98-4181, Vice Chair Frederick moved that this Board find, as a matter of fact, and as a conclusion of law that Mary R. Whipple, is in violation of Code Sections Chapter 15, Article IX-15-120 (D), Inc. 46 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 of the City Code of Ordinances. Vice Chair Frederick moved to order that the Respondent correct the violations on or before June 14, 1999. If the Respondent does not comply with this Order, a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day shall be imposed. The Respondent is further ordered to contact the City of Boynton Beach Code Compliance Division to arrange for re-inspection of the property to verify compliance with this Order. Motion seconded by Ms. Hammer. Motion carried 7-0. Case No. 99-0597: Larry A. and Regenia H. Scott th Property Address: 2560 SW 10 Court Violations: Chapter 15, Article IX-15-120 (D), Inc., Sections 13-15 and 13-16 of the B.B.C. of Ord.; Jet skis to be parked behind front plane of house; truck not permitted in residential zone; remove from property; storage trailer not permitted in residential zone, remove from property; sod required south side of driveway; remove all loose items from property; landscaping not covered by license; secure license for Scott’s Landscaping, Genias Cleaning Service license not renewed; secure renewal or sign affidavit with occupational license that you no longer are in business. Inspector Roy stated that the property was originally cited on March 25, 1999 through a complaint from a neighbor and service was accomplished by certified mail. The City recommends 30 days. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 99-0597, Vice Chair Frederick moved that this Board find, as a matter of fact, and as a conclusion of law that Larry A. and Regenia H. Scott are in violation of Code Sections Chapter 15, Article IX- 15-120 (D), Inc., Sections 13-15 and 13-16 of the City Code of Ordinances. Vice Chair Frederick moved to order that the Respondents correct the violations on or before June 14, 1999. If the Respondents do not comply with this Order, a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day shall be imposed. The Respondents are further ordered to contact the 47 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 City of Boynton Beach Code Compliance Division to arrange for re-inspection of the property to verify compliance with this Order. Motion seconded by Ms. Hammer. Motion carried 7-0. Case No. 98-4081: Barry A. Taylor Property Address: 1681 N. Seacrest Blvd. Violations: Chapter 15, Article IX-15-120 (D), Inc.; please remove all loose trash and debris from yard, install grass where bare spots occur. Inspector Melillo stated the case was originally cited on November 30, 1998 as the result of a complaint from City officials and service was made by hand carry. The City is recommending 30 days. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 98-4181, Vice Chair Frederick moved that this Board find, as a matter of fact, and as a conclusion of law that Mary R. Whipple, is in violation of Code Sections Chapter 15, Article IX-15-120 (D), Inc. of the City Code of Ordinances. Vice Chair Frederick moved to order that the Respondent correct the violations on or before June 14, 1999. If the Respondent does not comply with this Order, a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day shall be imposed. The Respondent is further ordered to contact the City of Boynton Beach Code Compliance Division to arrange for re-inspection of the property to verify compliance with this Order. Motion seconded by Ms. Hammer. Motion carried 7-0. Case No. 99-0555 Claude Francois th Property Address: 229 SE 4 Avenue Violations: Chapter 15-IX-15-120 (D) 1, Inc., Section 10-52 of the B.B.C. of Ord., all tires, trash and debris deposited in the swale area needs to be removed; openly stored items in the yard need to be removed; all unregistered inoperable vehicles need to be removed from the property, 48 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 semi-truck and trailer not allowed in private property. Inspector Barquin stated the property was originally cited on March 29, 1999 through routine inspection and service was made by certified mail. The City is recommending 10 days due to the fact that there is a large semi-truck on the property, which had been given a prior verbal order. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 99-0550, Vice Chair Frederick moved that this Board find, as a matter of fact, and as a conclusion of law that Claude Francios is in violation of Code Sections Chapter 15, Article IX-15-120 (D) 1, Inc., Section 10-52 of the City Code of Ordinances. Vice Chair Frederick moved to order that the Respondent correct the violations on or before June 1, 1999. If the Respondent does not comply with this Order, a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day shall be imposed. The Respondent is further ordered to contact the City of Boynton Beach Code Compliance Division to arrange for re-inspection of the property to verify compliance with this Order. Motion seconded by Ms. Hammer. Motion carried 7-0. Case No. 99-0439 James & Thomas J. Capraro Property Address: 511 W. Ocean Avenue Violations: Chapter 10, Article II 10-24 INC., Holly trees and any other trees that were cut behind the house and illegally dumped on the vacant lot behind the house must be removed. Inspector Barquin stated the property was originally cited on March 17, 1999 and the City recommends 30 days for compliance. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 99-0439, Vice Chair Frederick moved that this Board find, as a matter of fact, and as a conclusion of law that James and Thomas Capraro are in violation of Code Sections Chapter 10, Article II 10- 24 INC of the City Code of Ordinances. Vice Chair Frederick moved to order that the Respondents correct the violations on or before June 14, 1999. If the Respondents do not comply with this Order, a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day shall be imposed. The Respondents are further ordered to contact the City of Boynton Beach Code 49 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 Compliance Division to arrange for re-inspection of the property to verify compliance with this Order. Motion seconded by Mr. Miriani. Motion carried 7-0. Case No. 99-0740 Richard & Nancy Klein Property Address: 215 S. Seacrest Blvd. and nd corner of 107 SW 2 Avenue Violations: Chapter 10, Article II-10-24 INC., Chapter 15, Article IX-15-120 (E) 2 and 120 (D), Inc., Sections 10-52 and 13-16 of the B.B.C.; Building needs to be painted; occupational license is required; refuse container must be put out for pickup day only and removed the same day; all trash and debris must be removed from the property and the swale area needs to be kept clean on the SW 2nd Avenue side at all times. Inspector Barquin stated the property was cited on April 9, 1999 through routine inspection, as well as an anonymous complaint. Service was obtained by certified mail and the City recommends 30 days. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 99-0740, Vice Chair Frederick moved that this Board find, as a matter of fact, and as a conclusion of law that Richard & Nancy Klein are in violation of Code Sections Chapter 10, Article II-10-24 INC., Chapter 15, Article IX-15-120 (E) 2 and 120 (D), Inc., Sections 10-52 and 13-16of the City Code of Ordinances. Vice Chair Frederick moved to order that the Respondents correct the violations on or before June 14, 1999. If the Respondents do not comply with this Order, a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day shall be imposed. The Respondents are further ordered to contact the City of Boynton Beach Code Compliance Division to arrange for re-inspection of the property to verify compliance with this Order. Motion seconded by Ms. Hammer. Motion carried 7-0. 50 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 Case No. 98-3953 Raimundo Carpio Property Address: 60 E. Atlantic Drive Violations: Chapter 10, Article II-10-24 INC., Chapter 15, Article IX-15-120 (D), Inc., and Section 10-2 of the B.B.C.; Please install sod in yard wherever dead or bare spots occur, remove vehicle or register it with the State of Florida tag, repair fence, remove all trash and debris from yard, repair driveway. Inspector Cain stated the property was cited on November 19, 1998 through routine neighborhood inspection and the City recommends 30 days. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 98-3953, Vice Chair Frederick moved that this Board find, as a matter of fact, and as a conclusion of law that Raimundo Carpio is in violation of Code Sections Chapter 10, Article II-10-24 INC., Chapter 15, Article IX-15-120 (D), Inc., and Section 10-2of the City Code of Ordinances. Vice Chair Frederick moved to order that the Respondent correct the violations on or before June 14, 1999. If the Respondent does not comply with this Order, a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day shall be imposed. The Respondents are further ordered to contact the City of Boynton Beach Code Compliance Division to arrange for re-inspection of the property to verify compliance with this Order. Motion seconded by Mr. Miriani. Motion carried 7-0. Case No. 99-0579 Clova Daughrity th Property Address: 259 NW 28 Avenue Violations: SBC ’94 Edition 105.6; permit #98- 2474, please obtain required inspections, see copy of red tag dated January 26, 1999. The City recommends 30 days. 51 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 99-0579, Vice Chair Frederick moved that this Board find, as a matter of fact, and as a conclusion of law that Clova Daughrity is in violation of Code Sections SBC ’94 ED 105.6of the City Code of Ordinances. Vice Chair Frederick moved to order that the Respondent correct the violations on or before June 14, 1999. If the Respondent does not comply with this Order, a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day shall be imposed. The Respondent is further ordered to contact the City of Boynton Beach Code Compliance Division to arrange for re-inspection of the property to verify compliance with this Order. Motion seconded by Mr. Miriani. Motion carried 7-0. Case No. 99-0584 Katherine Leigh Property Address: 7008 Chesapeake Circle Violations: SBC ’91 Edition Sec. 103.6.1; permit #98-3280, fence was put on lot #288, see copy of red tag dated July 31, 1999. The City recommends 30 days. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 99-0584, Vice Chair Frederick moved that this Board find, as a matter of fact, and as a conclusion of law that Katherine Leigh is in violation of Code Sections SBC ’91 ED – Section 103.6.1of the City Code of Ordinances. Vice Chair Frederick moved to order that the Respondent correct the violations on or before June 14, 1999. If the Respondent does not comply with this Order, a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day shall be imposed. The Respondent is further ordered to contact the City of Boynton Beach Code Compliance Division to arrange for re-inspection of the property to verify compliance with this Order. Motion seconded by Mr. Miriani. Motion carried 7-0. Case No. 99-0634 Verryl L. Floyd Property Address: 7817 Manor Forest Court Lantana, FL 33462 Violations: SBC ’94 Edition Sec. 104.6.1; permit #97-609, screen enclosure does not 52 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 match plans, see copy of red tag dated January 8, 1999. City recommends 30 days. Ms. Hammer questioned the address being in Lantana and was informed that Lawrence Oaks is in Boynton Beach, but has a Lantana address. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 99-0634, Vice Chair Frederick moved that this Board find, as a matter of fact, and as a conclusion of law that Katherine Dunbar is in violation of Code Sections SBC ’94 ED – Section 104.6.1 of the City Code of Ordinances. Vice Chair Frederick moved to order that the Respondent correct the violations on or before June 14, 1999. If the Respondent does not comply with this Order, a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day shall be imposed. The Respondent is further ordered to contact the City of Boynton Beach Code Compliance Division to arrange for re-inspection of the property to verify compliance with this Order. Motion seconded by Mr. Foot. Motion carried 7-0. Case No. 99-0676 Gertrude Dunbar Property Address: 2451 N. Seacrest Blvd. Violations: SBC ’94 Edition Sec. 104.1.1; permit is required to install fence. Inspector Cain stated the property was cited on April 1, 1999 through routine inspection of the neighborhood and the City recommends 30 days. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 99-0676, Vice Chair Frederick moved that this Board find, as a matter of fact, and as a conclusion of law that Gertrude Dunbar is in violation of Code Sections SBC ’94 ED, Section 104.1.1 of the City Code of Ordinances. Vice Chair Frederick moved to order that the Respondent correct the violations on or before June 14, 1999. If the Respondent does not comply with this Order, a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day shall be imposed. The Respondent is further ordered to contact the City of Boynton Beach Code Compliance Division to arrange for re-inspection of the property to verify compliance with this Order. Motion seconded by Ms. Hammer. Motion carried 7-0. 53 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 Case No. 99-0710 Jesus & Carolyn Rodriquez nd Property Address: 2320 NW 2 Street Violations: PT3-LDR, Chapter 20-VIII, Section 1.G and Section 10-2 of the B.B.C. of Ord; House is unsecured and needs to be boarded up; yard is overgrown, please mow. Inspector Cain stated the property was originally cited on April 8, 1999 through routine inspection of the neighborhood. The City recommends 30 days. Vice Chair Frederick inquired about the need to board the building up and Inspector Cain stated that he thinks the Parks Department has boarded it up. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 99-0710, Vice Chair Frederick moved that this Board find, as a matter of fact, and as a conclusion of law that Jesus and Carolyn Rodriquez are in violation of Code Sections PT3-LDR, Chapter 20- VIII, Section 1.G and Section 10-2 ofthe City Code of Ordinances. Vice Chair Frederick moved to order that the Respondents correct the violations on or before June 14, 1999. If the Respondents do not comply with this Order, a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day shall be imposed. The Respondents are further ordered to contact the City of Boynton Beach Code Compliance Division to arrange for re-inspection of the property to verify compliance with this Order. Motion seconded by Mr. Miriani. Motion carried 7-0. Case No. 99-0190 Louise and Sharon Denson rd Property Address: 229 NW 3 Avenue Violations: Chapter 15, Article IX-15-120 (D), 1, Inc., sod all bare spots in yard, remove all loose trash and debris. Inspector Webb stated the property was originally cited on January 21, 1999 for violations of the Community Appearance Code. Staff recommends 30 days. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 99-0190, Vice Chair Frederick moved that this Board find, as a matter of fact, and as a conclusion of law that Louise and Sharon Denson are in violation of Code Sections Chapter 15, Article IX-15- 120 (D), 1, Inc, of the City Code of Ordinances. Vice Chair Frederick moved to order 54 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 that the Respondents correct the violations on or before June 14, 1999. If the Respondents do not comply with this Order, a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day shall be imposed. The Respondents are further ordered to contact the City of Boynton Beach Code Compliance Division to arrange for re-inspection of the property to verify compliance with this Order. Motion seconded by Mr. Foot. Motion carried 7-0. Case No. 99-0192 Bosa Pavlovic rd Property Address: 501 NE 3 Street Violations: Section 13-16 of the B.B.C. of Ord., every rental unit used for residential living purposes in the City must be licensed. This includes rental property of four units or less, including single family residential rentals, condominiums and mobile homes. Inspector Webb stated the property was originally cited on January 22, 1999 through routine inspection. Staff recommends 10 days. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 99-0192, Vice Chair Frederick moved that this Board find, as a matter of fact, and as a conclusion of law that Bosa Pavlovic is in violation of Code Section 13-16 of the City Code of Ordinances. Vice Chair Frederick moved to order that the Respondent correct the violations on or before June 1, 1999. If the Respondent does not comply with this Order, a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day shall be imposed. The Respondent is further ordered to contact the City of Boynton Beach Code Compliance Division to arrange for re- inspection of the property to verify compliance with this Order. Motion seconded by Ms. Hammer. Motion carried 7-0. Case No. 99-0343 J. & Deloris Bell th Property Address: 534 NW 5 Street Violations: SBC ’94 ED 105.6; permit #98-2632 final inspection required, see copy of red tag dated February 2, 1999. 55 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 Inspector Webb stated that the property was originally cited on March 12, 1999 and staff recommends 10 days. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 99-0343, Vice Chair Frederick moved that this Board find, as a matter of fact, and as a conclusion of law that J. and Deloris Bell are in violation of Code Sections SBC ’94 Edition 105.6 of the City Code of Ordinances. Vice Chair Frederick moved to order that the Respondents correct the violations on or before June 1, 1999. If the Respondents do not comply with this Order, a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day shall be imposed. The Respondents are further ordered to contact the City of Boynton Beach Code Compliance Division to arrange for re-inspection of the property to verify compliance with this Order. Motion seconded by Mr. Foot. Motion carried 7-0. Case No. 99-0345 Mary Denson th Property Address: 117 NW 10 Avenue Violations: Chapter 15, Article IX-15-120 (D), Inc.; sod required to cover bare spots, remove trash and debris, and remove inoperable vehicle. Inspector Webb stated the property was originally cited on March 12, 1999 through routine neighborhood inspection and staff recommends 30 days. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 99-0345, Vice Chair Frederick moved that this Board find, as a matter of fact, and as a conclusion of law that Mary Denson is in violation of Code Sections Chapter 15, Article IX-15-120 (D), Inc. of the City Code of Ordinances. Vice Chair Frederick moved to order that the Respondent correct the violations on or before June 14, 1999. If the Respondent does not comply with this Order, a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day shall be imposed. The Respondent is further ordered to contact the City of Boynton Beach Code Compliance Division to arrange for re-inspection of the property to verify compliance with this Order. Motion seconded by Mr. Foot. Motion carried 7-0. 56 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 Case No. 99-0386 Ruby L. Allen th Property Address: 533 NW 10 Avenue Violations: Section 13-16 B.B.C. of Ord., every rental unit used for residential living purposes in City must be licensed. Inspector Webb stated the property was originally cited on March 16, 1999 through routine neighborhood inspection. Staff recommends 10 days. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 99-0386, Vice Chair Frederick moved that this Board find, as a matter of fact, and as a conclusion of law that Ruby L. Allen is in violation of Code Sections 13-16 of the City Code of Ordinances. Vice Chair Frederick moved to order that the Respondent correct the violations on or before June 1, 1999. If the Respondent does not comply with this Order, a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day shall be imposed. The Respondent is further ordered to contact the City of Boynton Beach Code Compliance Division to arrange for re- inspection of the property to verify compliance with this Order. Motion seconded by Ms. Hammer. Motion carried 7-0. Case No. 99-0536 Alton and Ruthie Banks th Property Address: 430 NW 5 Ave. Violations: Chapter 15- Article IX-15-120 (D) 1, Inc.; remove all trash, construction debris, all derelict objects; remove dead tree, unlicensed vehicle. Recurring violation cases may still be brought before the Code Compliance Board even if violations have complied prior to the hearing and may be accessed a $250 fine. Inspector Webb stated the property was originally cited on March 30, 1999 through a citizen’s complaint. Staff recommends 30 days. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 99-0536, Vice Chair Frederick moved that this Board find, as a matter of fact, and as a conclusion of law that 57 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 Alton and Ruthie Banks are in violation of Code Sections Chapter 15- Article IX-15-120 (D) 1, Inc.of the City Code of Ordinances. Vice Chair Frederick moved to order that the Respondents correct the violations on or before June 14, 1999. If the Respondents do not comply with this Order, a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day shall be imposed. The Respondents are further ordered to contact the City of Boynton Beach Code Compliance Division to arrange for re-inspection of the property to verify compliance with this Order. Motion seconded by Ms. Hammer. Motion carried 7-0. Mr. Foot questioned if the fine should be increased to get the attention of the property owners. Motion Vice Chair Frederick amended his motion to increase the fine to $100.00 per day. Ms. Hammer seconded the amended motion. Motion carried 7-0. Mr. Foot inquired if this Board could now assess fines at $2,500.00 per day. Attorney Igwe said that it has not been signed into law yet. Case No. 99-0613 Jeannie Lou Nixon th Property Address: 543 NW 11 Avenue Violations: Chapter 15- Article IX-15-120 (D) .1A, Inc.; storage of unlicensed and inoperable vehicles on residential property is not allowed. Inspector Webb stated the property was originally cited on March 31, 1999 through a citizen’s complaint. Staff recommends 10 days. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 99-0613, Vice Chair Frederick moved that this Board find, as a matter of fact, and as a conclusion of law that Jeannie Lou Nixon is in violation of Code Sections Chapter 15- Article IX-15-120(D) .1A of the City Code of Ordinances. Vice Chair Frederick moved to order that the Respondent correct the violations on or before June 1, 1999. If the Respondent does not comply with this Order, a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day shall be imposed. The Respondent is further ordered to contact the City of Boynton Beach Code 58 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 Compliance Division to arrange for re-inspection of the property to verify compliance with this Order. Motion seconded by Mr. Miriani. Motion carried 7-0. Case No. 99-0614 Luegennie Rivers th Property Address: 515 NW 11 Avenue Violations: PT3-LDR, Chapter 20-VIII, Section 1.G, please secure building to prevent entry by the public. Inspector Webb stated the property was originally cited on March 30, 1999 through a citizen’s complaint and staff recommends 10 days. Also, staff requests that the Board render an order in this case pursuant to the Boynton Beach Code of Ordinances, Chapter 2, Article 5, Section 2-79 to recommend to the City Commission that the City will abate the nuisance by making all reasonable repairs to bring the property into compliance and to charge the violators with the cost of the repairs, along with the fines that accrued in this case. Motion Vice Chair Frederick moved that in Case No. 99-0614, pursuant to the Boynton Beach Code of Ordinances, Chapter 2, Article 5, Section 2-79 that this Board recommend to the City Commission that the City abate the nuisance by making all reasonable repairs to bring the property into compliance and to charge the violators with the cost of the repairs, along with the fines that accrued in this case. Vice Chair Frederick further moved that Luegennie Rivers is in violation of Code Sections PT3-LDR, Chapter 20, VIII, Section 1.G of the City Code of Ordinances. Vice Chair Frederick further moved to order that the Respondent correct the violations on or before June 1, 1999. If the Respondent does not comply with this Order, a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day shall be imposed. The Respondent is further ordered to contact the City of Boynton Beach Code Compliance Division to arrange for re-inspection of the property to verify compliance. Motion seconded by Ms. Hammer. Motion carried 7-0. Case No. 99-0660 Rochelle Steinman th Property Address: A517 NE 5 Avenue Violations: SBC ’94 ED 104.1.1; permit #97-4102 has expired, renew permit and call for inspection, see copy of red tag dated March 3, 1999. 59 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 Inspector Webb stated that the property was originally cited on April 6, 1999. Staff recommends 10 days. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 99-0660, Vice Chair Frederick moved that this Board find, as a matter of fact, and as a conclusion of law that Rochelle Steinman is in violation of Code Sections SBC ’94 ED 104.1.1of the City Code of Ordinances. Vice Chair Frederick moved to order that the Respondent correct the violations on or before June 1, 1999. If the Respondent does not comply with this Order, a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day shall be imposed. The Respondent is further ordered to contact the City of Boynton Beach Code Compliance Division to arrange for re-inspection of the property to verify compliance with this Order. Motion seconded by Mr. Miriani. Motion carried 7-0. Case No. 99-0760 R.B. and Ruby L. Laster th Property Address: 415 NW 9 Avenue Violations: Sections 10-2 B.B.C. of Ord., Remove all loose trash and debris from rear, side and front property. Inspector Webb stated the property was originally cited on April 13, 1999 through a citizen’s complaint. Staff recommends 15 days. Motion Based on the testimony and evidence presented in Case No. 99-0760, Vice Chair Frederick moved that this Board find, as a matter of fact, and as a conclusion of law that R.B. and Ruby L. Laster are in violation of Code Sections Section 10-2 of the City Code of Ordinances. Vice Chair Frederick moved to order that the Respondents correct the violations on or before June 6, 1999. If the Respondents do not comply with this Order, a fine in the amount of $25.00 per day shall be imposed. The Respondents are further ordered to contact the City of Boynton Beach Code Compliance Division to arrange for re-inspection of the property to verify compliance with this Order. Motion seconded by Ms. Hammer. Motion carried 7-0. 60 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 VII. OTHER BUSINESS A. CONSIDERATION TO MODIFY THE HOURS OF THE CODE COMPLIANCE HEARINGS Chairman DeLiso requested that the Board give consideration to begin the Board meetings earlier. Ms. Hammer noted that the City of Delray Beach has a split session and holds a day session and an evening session. Ms. Hammer asked if there would be any more meetings that would go until 11:30 p.m. Mr. Blasie said he did not think there would be any more meetings this late. Mr. Blasie said these late meetings are the result of the backup when the computer was not functioning for two months and there was a delay in sending letters out to the violators and the fine certifications. Chairman DeLiso suggested that the meetings begin at 6:00 p.m. and called for a . There was a show of hands in favor of keeping the meeting time vote at 7:00 p.m. Mr. Blasie said that the time could not be changed for next month’s meeting because the notices have already gone out. The time change would have to take effect for the following month. It was also pointed out that when a violator receives a traffic ticket, they must appear in court at 9:00 a.m. Also, Mr. Rossi questioned what constitutes acceptable xeriscape landscaping. Mr. Blasie stated that the code states that the property must be landscaped and there cannot be more than 100 square feet of non-landscaped area. Mr. Blasie said that the legal department has determined that one area cannot be non-landscaped in excess of 100 square feet. Mr. Blasie stated if a property owner plants a tree in the middle of 100 square feet of dirt, Mr. Blasie said that meets the intent of the code, although landscaping is supposed to be mulch. It was noted that the mulch must be at least two inches thick. There was discussion about the Jenkins case, which was heard earlier this evening. Mr. Blasie said that the Compliance Code Department must use discretion in determining whether a piece of property meets the landscape code. Mr. Blasie said that Mr. Jenkins has a piece of property that has a two foot perimeter of dirt around the building and it is not feasible to plant anything because the area gets water runoff from the flat deck roof and nothing would grow. The Code Department has made a judgment call on that and have allowed him to mulch that two-foot perimeter around the building. Mr. Blasie noted that if you added up all this land, it is over 100 feet. 61 MEETING MINUTES CODE COMPLIANCE BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 19, 1999 VIII. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting properly adjourned at 11:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ____________________________ Barbara M. Madden Recording Secretary (4 tapes) 62