CEB Minutes 06/27/2013 CODE
ENFORCEMENT
BOARD
Minutes
June 27 , 2013
June 27, 2013
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE
CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD
Naples, Florida
June 27, 2013
LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Code
Enforcement Board, in and for the County of Collier, having
conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m. in REGULAR
SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex, East Naples,
Florida, with the following members present:
VICE-CHAIRMAN: Robert Kaufman
James Lavinski
Gerald Lefebvre
Lionel L'Esperance
Chris Hudson (excused)
Larry Mieszcak (excused)
Tony Marino (absent)
ALSO PRESENT:
Jean Rawson, Attorney for the Board
Diane Flagg, Code Enforcement Director
Colleen Crawley, Code Enforcement Specialist
Page 1
CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
AGENDA
Date: June 27,2013
Location: 3299 Tamiami Trail East,Naples,FL 34104
NOTICE: THE RESPONDENT MAY BE LIMITED TO TWENTY (20) MINUTES FOR CASE
PRESENTATION UNLESS ADDITIONAL TIME IS GRANTED BY THE BOARD. PERSONS WISHING
TO SPEAK ON ANY AGENDA ITEM WILL RECEIVE UP TO FIVE (5) MINUTES UNLESS THE TIME IS
ADJUSTED BY THE CHAIRMAN.
ALL PARTIES PARTICIPATING IN THE PUBLIC HEARING ARE ASKED TO OBSERVE ROBERTS
RULES OF ORDER AND SPEAK ONE AT A TIME SO THAT THE COURT REPORTER CAN RECORD
ALL STATEMENTS BEING MADE.
ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD WILL NEED A RECORD OF
THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO, AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A
VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE
TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. NEITHER COLLIER
COUNTY NOR THE CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING
THIS RECORD.
1. ROLL CALL
Robert Kaufman, Chair Lionel L' Esperance
Gerald Lefebvre, Vice Chair Tony Marino
James Lavinski Larry Mieszcak
Chris Hudson,Alternate
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. May 23,2013 Hearing
4. PUBLIC HEARINGS/MOTIONS,
A. MOTIONS
Motion for Continuance
Motion for Extension of Time
1. Marth Mendez-Cruz CESD20110014160
2. Anthony DiNorcia Sr., LLC. CELU20100022151
3. Anthony DiNorcia Sr., LLC. 2007100236
B. STIPULATIONS
C. HEARINGS
1. CASE NO: CENA20130003180
OWNER: GOLDIE A.OROSS EST.
OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR DAVID JONES
VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES,CHAPTER 54,ARTICLE VI,
SECTION 54-185(d)COLLIER COUNTY PROHIBITED EXOTIC VEGETATION
INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO BRAZILIAN PEPPER AND EARLEAF ACACIA
LOCATED UPON UNIMPROVED PARCEL WITHIN A 200' RADIUS OF AN ABUTTING,
IMPROVED PROPERTY
FOLIO NO: 75461 120004
VIOLATION
ADDRESS: 808 WIGGINS PASS RD. NAPLES, FL 34110
2. CASE NO: CESD20130001292
OWNER: CHRISTOPHER S. ESENBERG
OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR CRISTINA PEREZ
VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE,04-41 AS AMENDED, SECTION
10.02.06(B)(1)(a)ADDITIONS/ALTERATIONS MADE TO STRUCTURE WITHOUT FIRST
OBTAINING COLLIER COUNTY BUILDING PERMITS
FOLIO NO: 47871280009
VIOLATION
ADDRESS: 3315 GUILFORD RD. NAPLES, FL 34112
3. CASE NO: CESD20130003126
OWNER: JAVIER H& SHERRY L.CASTANO
OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR DEE PULSE
VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE,04-41 AS AMENDED, SECTION
10.02.06(B)(1)(a)AND 2010 FLORIDA BUILDING CODE,CHAPTER 1, SECTION 111.1
PERMIT 2008080465 FOR A CBS 2 STORY RESIDENCE 200 AMPS/POOL DID NOT
RECEIVE A"CO".
FOLIO NO: 62570980009
VIOLATION
ADDRESS: 650 11 1TH AVE N.NAPLES, FL 34108
4. CASE NO: CENA20130001686
OWNER: ROBERT& KATHLEEN DENNISON
OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR DAVID JONES
VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES,CHAPTER 54,ARTICLE VI,
SECTION 54-185(d)PRESENCE OF COLLIER COUNTY PROHIBITED EXOTIC
VEGETATION INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO BRAZILIAN PEPPER AND JAVA
PLUM.
FOLIO NO: 74760760108
VIOLATION
ADDRESS: NO SITE ADDRESS
5. CASE NO: CENA20130001547
OWNER: ROBERT& KATHLEEN DENNISON
OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR DAVID JONES
VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES,CHAPTER 54,ARTICLE VI,
SECTION 54-185(d)PRESENCE OF COLLIER COUNTY PROHIBITED EXOTIC
VEGETATION INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO BRAZILIAN PEPPER.
FOLIO NO: 74760760001
VIOLATION
ADDRESS: NO SITE ADDRESS
6. CASE NO: CESD20130001772
OWNER: LJUBINKA PAVICEVIC
OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR VICKI GIGUERE
VIOLATIONS: BUILDING AND LAND ALTERATION PERMITS,COLLIER COUNTY LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE,04-41 AS AMENDED, SECTION 10.02.06(B)(1)(a)GARAGE
CONVERSION WITHOUT COLLIER COUNTY PERMITS AND PERMIT 2004121935
FOR DOUBLE DOORS AT REAR OF STRUCTURE WITHOUT CERTIFICATE OF
COMPLETION/OCCUPANCY
FOLIO NO: 32483160001
VIOLATION
ADDRESS: 4638 ROBIN AVE.NAPLES, FL 34104
7. CASE NO: CESD201 10017799
OWNER: MARGARITA MALDONANDO& RITA G.VEGA
OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR MARIA RODRIGUEZ
VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE,04-41 AS AMENDED, SECTION
10.02.06(B)(1)(a)A PERMITTED SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING ALTERED INTO A TWO
FAMILY DWELLING UNIT WITH TWO PRIMARY KITCHEN(S)ADDED AND
INTERNALLY ACCESSIBLE OF ROOMS BLOCKED. ALSO AN UNPERMITTED TWO
STORY ADDITION BEING USED AS LIVING SPACE ATTACHED TO THE PERMITTED
SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING UNIT WITH TWO KITCHEN(S)AND TWO THREE
FIXTURE BATHROOMS TO INCLUDE ELECTRIC AND PLUMBING AND A
UNPERMITTED SHED WITH ELECTRIC AND AN ALUMINUM/METAL TYPE FREE
STAND CARPORT ALL INSTALLED WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE
AUTHORIZATION OF THE REQUIRED BY THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE
FOLIO NO: 00056240005
VIOLATION
ADDRESS: 924 MIRAHAM TERRACE IMMOKALEE, FL 34142
8. CASE NO: CEVR20120017538
OWNER: HUNTINGTON LAKES RED ASSOC,INC. % AMERICAN PROPERTY
MANAGEMENT
OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR DAVID JONES
VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE 91-102, SECTION 3.5.7.2.5 REQUIRED LITTORAL
PLANTS ARE ABSENT FROM THE LAKE.
FOLIO NO: 51070000128
VIOLATION
ADDRESS: NO SITE ADDRESS
9. CASE NO: CESD20120010751
OWNER: ANDRES GUTIRREZ III& ELIZABETH M. PINEDA
OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR WELDON WALKER
VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE,04-41 AS AMENDED, SECTION
10.02.06(B)(1)(a)STRUCTURE CONSTRUCTED TO THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY AND
CONVERTED INTO LIVING SPACE AND ROOF OVER/PORCH ATTACHED TO THE
BACK OF THE MAIN PROPERTY WITHOUT FIRST ACQUIRING COLLIER COUNTY
BUILDING PERMITS
FOLIO NO: 51240120003
VIOLATION
ADDRESS: 605 GLADIOLA STREET IMMOKALEE, FL 34142
10. CASE NO: CESD20130003326
OWNER: IL REGALO HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC.
OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR DAVID JONES
VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, 04-41 AS AMENDED, SECTION
10.02.13(F)FAILURE TO SUBMIT ANNUAL PUD MONITORING REPORT
FOLIO NO: 51170000840
VIOLATION
ADDRESS: NO SITE ADDRESS
11. CASE NO: CESD20130006308
OWNER: OSMANI PEREZ
OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR STEVE ATHEY
VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES,CHAPTER 90,ARTICLE I,
DIVISION 1, SECTION 90-6 WELL DRILLING WITHOUT A WELL CONTRACTOR
LICENSE
FOLIO NO: 67281480000
VIOLATION
ADDRESS: 398 RIDGE DR.NAPLES, FL 34108
12. CASE NO: CEVR20130000933
OWNER: JAMES W.ARCHER&JUDY K.ARCHER
OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR DAVID JONES
VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, 04-41 AS AMENDED, SECTION
3.05.08(C)COLLIER COUNTY PROHIBITED EXOTIC VEGETATION INCLUDING,
BUT NOT LIMITED TO BRAZILIAN PEPPER ON PROPERTY
FOLIO NO: 45905720000
VIOLATION
ADDRESS: 1520 21ST ST. SW. NAPLES, FL 34117
13. CASE NO: CEPM20130004926
OWNER: LLOYD L. BOWEIN
OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR DEE PULSE
VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES,CHAPTER 22,ARTICLE VI,
PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE, SECTION 22-231(12)(c)AND(i), SECTION 22-228(1)
AND COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE,04-41 AS AMENDED, SECTION
10.02.06(B)(1)(a)AND(e)SOFFITS AND ROOF IN NEED OF MAINTENANCE. WINDOWS
ARE SCREWED SHUT AND NOT OPERABLE.
FOLIO NO: 62842560005
VIOLATION
ADDRESS: 584 105TH AVE.N.NAPLES, FL 34108
5. OLD BUSINESS
A. Motion for Imposition of Fines/Liens
1. CASE NO: CEPM20100017211
OWNER: LA SALLE BANK NA TR MLMI TRUST
OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR JOE MUCHA
VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES,CHAPTER 22, ARTICLE VI,
SECTION 22-234 BUILDING SUFFERED SEVERE FIRE DAMAGE
FOLIO NO: 36323880007
VIOLATION
ADDRESS: 2592 SANTA BARBARA BLVD. NAPLES, FL 34116
2. CASE NO: CENA20120015339
OWNER: GWENDOLYN GREEN
OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR PATRICK BALDWIN
VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES, CHAPTER 54,ARTICE VI,
SECTION 54-185(b)WEEDS IN EXCESS OF 18 INCHES
FOLIO NO: 41044640003
VIOLATION
ADDRESS: 3675 10TH AVE S.E.NAPLES, FL 34117
3. CASE NO: CESD20120014608
OWNER: PEE-WEE'S DUMPSTERS, INC.
OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR MICHELE MCGONAGLE
VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE,04-41 AS AMENDED, SECTION
10.02.06(B)(I)(a)A DETACHED GARAGE WITH PERMIT 201 1030691 WITHOUT FINAL
CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY ON THE PROPERTY WITHOUT A PERMIT
FOLIO NO: 38280090006
VIOLATION
ADDRESS: 721 LOGAN BVD S.NAPLES, FL 34119
4. CASE NO: CESD20120004892
OWNER: JEFFREY M.STONE& MARDI S. MOORMAN
OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR JONATHAN MUSSE
VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE,04-41 AS AMENDED, SECTION
10.02.06(B)(1)(a)& 10.02.06(B)(1)(e)MULTIPLE STRUCTURES CONSTRUCTED ON THE
PROPERTY WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING VALID COLLIER COUNTY PERMITS
FOLIO NO: 38168960009
VIOLATION
ADDRESS: 5741 PAINTED LEAF LANE NAPLES,FL 34116
5. CASE NO: CESD20120015193
OWNER: MARK&ANNE SHORES
OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR CHRIS AMBACH
VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE,04-41 AS AMENDED, SECTION
10.02.06(B)(1)(a)INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR MODIFICATIONS TO THE HOME
WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING ALL REQUIRED COLLIER COUNTY BUILDING PERMITS
INSPECTIONS AND A CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION/OCCUPANCY.
FOLIO NO: 37544720000
VIOLATION
ADDRESS: 431 12TH AVE.N.W.NAPLES, FL 34120
6. CASE NO: CEPM20120013078
OWNER: JORGE L. MENDEZ
OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR PATRICK BALDWIN
VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES, ARTICLE VI,CHAPTER 22,
SECTION 22-242 VACANT HOME WITH A SCREEN ENCLOSURE AND SWIMMING
POOL HAS BEEN DAMAGED BY A FIRE AND HAS NO ROOF
FOLIO NO: 40935360008
VIOLATION
ADDRESS: 3320 2ND AVE S.E. NAPLES, FL 34117
7. CASE NO: CESD20120008370
OWNER: MARIA C. BENAVIDES
OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR ERIC SHORT
VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE,04-41 AS AMENDED, SECTION
10.02.06(B)(1)(a)NO VALID COLLIER COUNTY PERMIT FOR AN ENCLOSED LANAI,
DECK AND GAZEBO WITH ELECTRIC
FOLIO NO: 39837400006
VIOLATION
ADDRESS: 2748 45TH AVE.NE NAPLES, FL 34120
8. CASE NO: CESD20110000038
OWNER: OLGA CANOVA&REBECCA M. RIOS
OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR WELDON WALKER
VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE,04-41 AS AMENDED, SECTION
10.02.06(B)(1)(a)ENCLOSED PORCH, ADDITIONS AND SHED
FOLIO NO: 63856880000
VIOLATION
ADDRESS: 511 JEFFERSON AVE. W. IMMOKALEE, FL 34142
9. CASE NO: 2005110187
OWNER: STONEGATE BANK
OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR CRISTINA PEREZ
VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE,04-41 AS AMENDED, SECTION
5.06.06(H),9.03.02(F)(3)AND 9.03.03(D)(3)(c)THREE ADVERTISING BILLBOARDS
DAMAGED MORE THAN FIFTY PERCENT OF THEIR REPLACEMENT COST WERE
REPAIRED.
FOLIO NO: 61835000007
VIOLATION
ADDRESS: 2600 TAMIAMI TRAIL E. NAPLES, FL
10. CASE NO: CEVR20110002999
OWNER: SEAN KING TR.
OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR DAVID JONES
VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE,04-41 AS AMENDED, SECTION
3.05.01(B)PROPERTY WAS PARTIALLY CLEARED OF VEGETATION WITHOUT A
COLLIER COUNTY PERMIT
FOLIO NO: 36663400008
VIOLATION
ADDRESS: 4441 5TH AVE.NW NAPLES, FL 34119
11. CASE NO: CENA20120006825
OWNER: GWENDOLYN GREEN
OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR PATRICK BALDWIN
VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS, CHAPTER 54, ARTICLE VI, SECTION 54-181
LITTER CONSISTING OF BUT NOT LIMITED TO, REFUSE,CLOTHES, BOXES,
ASSORTED METALS, PLASTICS AND WOOD, TIRES, ETC.
FOLIO NO: 41044640003
VIOLATION
ADDRESS: 3675 10TH AVE. SE. NAPLES, FL 34117
B. Motion for Reduction of Fines/Lien
C. Motion to Rescind Previously Issued Order
D. Motion to Amend Previously Issued Order
6. NEW BUSINESS
A. Rules and Regulations
7. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Request to Forward Cases to County Attorney's Office as Referenced in Submitted Executive
Summary.
8. REPORTS
9. COMMENTS
10. NEXT MEETING DATE- July 25,2013
11. ADJOURN
June 27, 2013
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. I'd like to call the
Code Enforcement Board to order.
Notice: The respondent may be limited to 20 minutes for case
presentation, unless additional time is granted by the board. Persons
wishing to speak on any agenda item will receive up to five minutes,
unless the time is adjusted by the chairman.
All parties participating in the public hearing are asked to
observe Roberts Rules of Order and speak one at a time so that the
court reporter can record all statements being made.
Any person who decides to appeal a decision of the board will
need a record of the proceedings pertaining thereto and therefore may
need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made,
which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the
appeal is to be based.
Neither Collier County nor the Code Enforcement Board shall be
responsible for providing this record.
May we have the roll call.
MS. CRAWLEY: Mr. Robert Kaufman?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Present.
MS. CRAWLEY: Mr. Gerald Lefebvre?
MR. LEFEBVRE: Here.
MS. CRAWLEY: Mr. James Lavinski?
MR. LAVINSKI: Here.
MS. CRAWLEY: Mr. Lionel L'Esperance?
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Here.
MS. CRAWLEY: Mr. Chris Hudson and Mr. Larry Mieszcak
have excused absences and Mr. Tony Marino is absent.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do we have any changes to
the agenda -- oh, let's do the minutes from the last hearing first.
Can I get a motion to accept the minutes?
MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to approve.
Page 2
June 27, 2013
MR. LEFEBVRE: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second to
approve the minutes.
All those in favor?
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
Let's do the agenda now.
MS. CRAWLEY: Number four, public hearings/motions. We
have one addition under A, motions for continuance. It's number one
from hearings, Goldie A. Oross Estate, Case CENA20130003180.
Motion for extension of time, we have two additions. The first
will be addition number four, which is number seven from imposition
of fines, Maria Benavides, Case CESD20120008370.
And the fifth is number three from impositions, Pee-Wee's
Dumpsters, Inc., Case CESD20120014608.
B, stipulations, we have four additions. The first is number 11
from hearings, Osmani Perez, Case CESD20130006308.
Number two is number two from hearings, Christopher S.
Esenberg, Case CESD20130001292.
Number three is number seven from hearings, Margarita
Maldonando and Rita J. Vega, Case CESD20110017799.
Number four is number eight from hearings, Huntington Lakes
Association, Inc., American Property Management, Case
CEVR20120017538.
Under C, hearings, number three, Case CESD20130003126,
Javier H. and Sherry L. Castano has been withdrawn.
Page 3
June 27, 2013
Number four, Case CENA20130001686, Robert and Kathleen
Dennison has been withdrawn.
Number five, Case CENA20130001547, Robert and Kathleen
Dennison has been withdrawn.
Number 10, Case CESD20130003326, I1 Regalo Homeowners
Association, Inc. has been withdrawn.
Number five, old business, A, motion for imposition of
fines/liens, number eight, Case CESD2011000038, Olga Canova and
Rebecca M. Rios has been withdrawn.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. It has been pointed out to me
by Mr. Lefebvre that we have two cases under imposition of fines.
Number 11, which is Gwendolyn Green, and number two. Can we put
those together?
MS. CRAWLEY: Yes.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, when we -- so looking for a
motion to accept the agenda as modified.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: So moved.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion.
MR. LAVINSKI: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And a second.
All those in favor?
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
Okay, be let's start with the first case.
MS. CRAWLEY: First case is Goldie A. Oross Estate, Case
CENA20130003180.
Page 4
June 27, 2013
(Investigator Jones was duly sworn.)
INVESTIGATOR JONES: For the record, David Jones, Collier
County Code Enforcement.
I would now like to present case evidence --
MS. CRAWLEY: Extension.
INVESTIGATOR JONES: Oh, yes.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do we have a letter asking for an
extension?
INVESTIGATOR JONES: We do.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Do you know how long they would like to
seek continuance for?
INVESTIGATOR JONES: I don't believe -- the letter doesn't
mention it. I mean, I could tell you that she has hired a contractor, and
it appears that he's going to commence shortly on doing the work, so
she shouldn't need a lot of time.
MR. LEFEBVRE: How long should this work take, in your
estimation?
INVESTIGATOR JONES: At the most, I mean, 14 days,
usually.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Why don't we just move it till the
next meeting then?
INVESTIGATOR JONES: Okay.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Give them plenty of time.
INVESTIGATOR JONES: Sure.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion to continue this case 'til the
next meeting.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do we have a date on the next
meeting?
Probably in July.
MS. RAWSON: July 25th.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, till July 25th.
Page 5
June 27, 2013
INVESTIGATOR JONES: Sounds good.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. And do we have
a second?
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor?
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
INVESTIGATOR JONES: Thank you.
MS. CRAWLEY: Motion for extension of time. Number one is
Martha Mendez-Cruz, Case CESD20110014160.
(Veronica Cruz and Investigator Short were duly sworn.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you have permission from the
owner to speak on her behalf?
MS. CRUZ: Yes, I have Power of Attorney for my mom.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, great.
Okay, why don't you tell us -- I was looking at this -- there was
no request letter that I received. How much time are you asking for?
MS. CRUZ: I did send a request letter. This is actually the third
time I come before you. Last year my parents got ill. I came back
from out of the country to try to finish helping them with this home. I
only had two inspections to go.
When I called them in, one of them told me that I needed to put
up two retention walls on the other side of the home, and somebody
drove over the septic tank. So it cost us like $10,000 to finish that
part.
Then I came for an extension for the culvert, which is going to
Page 6
June 27, 2013
cost about $3,000. Well, in between that time I went and got an
extension on my permit.
When I finally called my last drainage, which was the one that I
was missing in order to finish the actual building permit, they came
out last April and told me that now I needed gutters put on the home.
I didn't know that. They never said that to me when they went out.
The gutters are being installed now. So I was going to go ahead,
come in, ask for an extension, a little bit more of a time so that I could
call that permit in. And we found out that two days ago the permit
expired. I did not know that. I've been out of town. We've had a
medical emergency and I've been in Gainesville.
And I'm going to have that -- I'm going to go to the county now,
have them extend me the permit. I think they'll give me a three-month
extension on it so that I can call this inspection in on Tuesday. But
I'm going to need a little bit more time for the culvert.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, this stems back from 2009, if
I read this correctly.
Question for the county. Was the 80.86 paid?
INVESTIGATOR SHORT: It has been paid, yes.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And this had a $250 a day
lien that was supposed to start on August 21st, 2012; is that correct?
INVESTIGATOR SHORT: For the record, Investigator Eric
Short.
If I may, there was an extension of time granted after that.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: After that. And that included the
extending it past the date of August 21st, 2012.
INVESTIGATOR SHORT: Right. Their next compliance date
is July 23rd.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion
that we grant four months to the requested time.
Page 7
June 27, 2013
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I'll second that for purpose of
discussion.
Does four months seem sufficient that you can get everything
done?
MS. CRUZ: Yes. We already had the funds to complete it but
unfortunately my husband was diagnosed with three brain tumors, so
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, so four months would give
you three months that you need for the one and concurrently with that
you could be working on the other --
MS. CRUZ: Well, the only one that I have left, I will pass it on
Tuesday, if everything goes okay, because I already put the gutters in.
And then that way it will give me four months to get up the money to
get the last one. Hopefully we'll get this thing done.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Great.
Does the county have any objection?
INVESTIGATOR SHORT: No objection.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do we have a motion and a
second or any discussion?
MR. LEFEBVRE: Yes, just for discussion, will it be four
months from today or four months from the period of July 23rd when
this expired?
MR. L'ESPERANCE: From July 23rd.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay. So it would be five months from
today.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Correct.
MS. CRUZ: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So if everything is done, we won't
see you. If it's not, we'll see you prior to that to see what needs to be
done.
MS. CRUZ: Thank you so much.
Page 8
June 27, 2013
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor?
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
Thank you.
MS. CRUZ: Thank you.
INVESTIGATOR SHORT: Thank you.
MS. CRAWLEY: Number two, Anthony DiNorcia, Sr. LLC.
Case CELU2010022151 .
(Mr. DiNorcia and Investigator Box were duly sworn.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I see there are two cases, but we'll
hear them separately, vote on them separately but we'll probably
discuss both of them at the same time now.
MR. DiNORCIA: Sure. Well, we obviously -- Mr. Hancock is
not here today, he's on vacation, so he couldn't make it. But he's more
familiar with exactly what's going on. But -- and he could have told
exactly what -- where he's at.
We've been chipping away at this on different problems. And
from what I could see, we resolved the first section that was -- we had
gotten permits sometime '96, '97, for some of the areas that are in
question, so we proved that. We also went over the parking situation
that we finally resolved as of April 18th. That took quite a while for
Mr. Hancock to resolve.
Right now he's dealing with the fire department. We're
questioning because the canopies are not a structure and they're
questioning where the fire hydrant is.
So he's a little more familiar than I am with the whole thing. All
Page 9
June 27, 2013
I know is I've spent about $20,000 already in fees and making
different changes.
The main building has been C.O.'d and approved by fire
department and everything. The only question we have is some of the
areas. But the parking situation took us quite a while to resolve. I
think he's aware of it.
We just need more time to get this done. It's being worked on by
-- we have a landscape architect who is waiting for the parking
situation resolved (sic). He's working on it. We cleared all the exotics.
Like I said, we got most of the permits and the C.O. for the main
building, but we still have some to chip away at.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah, I went through this and I was
a little confused, to say the least. This originally started in 2010. The
swale was filled probably to give you more parking spots, I'm
guessing.
MR. DiNORCIA: No. No, no, that was -- we were supposed to
put this -- to put the sidewalk in, we would have had to fill the swale,
so that took about a year to get the water management to approve it.
Once we got the approval, we were told they didn't want the
sidewalk anymore because it was the only sidewalk in the whole
industrial park that would -- and it would be a sidewalk to nowhere.
So they decided they don't want the sidewalk anymore, so we put up I
think $4,500 cash for some day when they want to put sidewalks, they
have the money, the county has the money for that. We put it up.
So that took about a year and a half to get through. But that's a
long time ago.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And I was looking and it looked like
something happened, because the order wasn't signed until 3/15/12 for
some reason.
There was a stip that was agreed to on October 20th, 2011 .
MR. DiNORCIA: A stip by the fire department?
Page 10
June 27, 2013
MR. LEFEBVRE: A stipulation.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: A stipulation. That was made by the
owner of the property. I guess it was you.
MR. DiNORCIA: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That was signed on October 20th,
2011 .
But then for some reason that was changed to 3/15/12.
And the operational costs for $80.57, I don't know if that was
paid way back when. It was? Okay.
And 128 days was granted at that time.
Now, on April you got approval for -- that's on this case --
MR. DiNORCIA: Correct.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- for the parking spots to be reduced
from I think it's 23 down to 13?
MR. DiNORCIA: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So my question is: On this what's
happened since April?
MR. DiNORCIA: Mr. Hancock has been working with the fire
department trying to iron out -- we have -- the problem that we have is
some canopies that we put up.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's the next case.
On this case the canopies, et cetera, was --
MR. DiNORCIA: That's what he's working with, trying to get
the fire department to approve that they're not structures, they're just
covered areas.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I understand that. That is the second
case.
But on this case, this case had to do, if I'm not mistaken, with the
swale and the -- I don't know if the agreement, the SDP was on both
cases. Is that what I'm seeing here? And that --
INVESTIGATOR BOX: That's correct, the SDP --
Page 11
June 27, 2013
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So they're tying both cases together,
really.
INVESTIGATOR BOX: Yes.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Well, let's see what the
county has to say right now.
INVESTIGATOR BOX: For the record, my name is Investigator
Heinz Box, Collier County Code Enforcement.
According to our records, the last I checked, which was a couple
of days ago, the permit -- or the Site Development Plan application
had been rejected. And that was done -- the rejection was done on
December 6th, 2012 by our zoning and planning people.
Since then we haven't had any action on this case.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And the last extension that I see that
was -- showed a compliance date of May 24th.
INVESTIGATOR BOX: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And it was a $200 fine that would be
imposed. So that would be 32 days, give or take a day or two. That
would be $6,400 that's due now with the fines still accruing; am I
correct on that?
INVESTIGATOR BOX: Yes.
MR. DiNORCIA: Well, we just got the approval on the parking
and they're working on redoing a site plan.
INVESTIGATOR BOX: We show nothing on approval. Like I
said, the last I checked, which was a couple of days ago, it was
rejected on December 6th, 2012.
MR. DiNORCIA: Yeah, but the parking was just approved. The
change -- and the requirements were changed in April.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I see a letter from the county dated
April 18th that shows that the parking spots were changed from the 23
parking spaces to 13 spaces.
MR. DiNORCIA: I thought it was only required two short
Page 12
June 27, 2013
parking. But, you know, again, Mr. Hancock is not here, he's the one
that's handling the whole thing.
And we're also fighting -- we're in foreclosure too, gentlemen, so
we spent like $20,000 so far, and that's all I could do at this point. We
have hired a landscape architect, a regular architect, but we couldn't
do anything until the parking situation was resolved, according to
Hancock.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, yes, Kitchell?
(At which time, Supervisor Kitchell Snow was duly sworn.)
MR. SNOW: Kitchell Snow, Collier County Code Enforcement.
Gentlemen, the parking provision is just a part of the SDP that's
been submitted. It's not -- there's been no documents officially
submitted back. So there was no negotiation going on between the
client and the county to try to figure out what they were going submit
and when they were going to submit, and that's what the approval was
about.
They haven't submitted anything back to the county from the
original SDP that was submitted in December. There have been again
some negotiations about what the requirements would be, but nothing
official, other than some negotiations, and that's what the parking was.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. DiNORCIA: I would say we're going to need some more
time to get Hancock to work with the county and --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Where is Mr. Hancock now?
MR. DiNORCIA: He's on vacation, unfortunately.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Was he notified of this meeting
today?
MR. DiNORCIA: I would think so. He's the one that's been
dealing with the county more than me. I hired him and I've been
paying him to do it. I'm trying to run the business in the meantime.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: What is the recommendation of the
Page 13
June 27, 2013
county?
INVESTIGATOR BOX: We're going to leave that determination
up to the board.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, I would think if this is as
important as it appears to be that Mr. Hancock would have made other
arrangements for vacation and would have been here if he's the only
one that can answer these questions.
MR. DiNORCIA: Well, unfortunately I can't control him. All I
can do is pay him, which I did.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, pay sometimes has a lot to do
with control. Make him an offer that he can't refuse.
It just seems that this is going on and on and on and it's never
getting resolved.
MR. DiNORCIA: Well, we did resolve quite a few issues.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Not according to the county as far as
the application for the SDP. You may have gotten a letter on the
parking being done, but since that was done, which was 32 days ago,
nothing has been sent to the county as far as the SDP is concerned of
being approved.
MR. DiNORCIA: I apologize for that, gentlemen. But like I
said, I'm dealing with professionals, so called, engineers, architects
and whatnot, and I thought it was being handled.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: What I would consider personally,
and I want to hear from the board, is to give you to our next meeting
to make sure Mr. Hancock is here and that something is sent to the
county for -- to show some progress on this. Otherwise, if nothing is
done between now and if we grant next month's meeting, we're going
to hear the case.
MR. DiNORCIA: I'll make sure he's here. Yeah, there or
somebody else is sent over, because we've been paying him.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: How say the board?
Page 14
June 27, 2013
MR. LEFEBVRE: So you want to continue this until next --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I'd like to continue 'til the next
meeting and give the word that the person who needs to be here,
whoever that person is that can answer the question is here.
MR. DiNORCIA: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We're about compliance, not here
just to --
MR. DiNORCIA: No, no, I understand that.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: But what's happened here, this has
been a lingering thing since 2010.
MR. DiNORCIA: Yeah, but a lot of the things have been taken
care of. Obviously from the 18th of April on they haven't been. And
I'll be honest with you, I thought Mr. Hancock was handling it.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, does the county have any
problem with bringing this back next month?
INVESTIGATOR BOX: No.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to propose a
motion to continue this until our next meeting in July.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Second that motion.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second.
All those in favor?
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
So July 25th we'll look forward to --
MR. DiNORCIA: I'll make sure -- I apologize for not being as
involved. But fighting with the bank and trying to keep the business
Page 15
June 27, 2013
alive has kept me pretty busy.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, well --
MR. DiNORCIA: But I will look into this and take care of it.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, thank you.
MR. DiNORCIA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Don't go away so quickly, we have
the second one that we need to go through.
MS. CRAWLEY: Just to clarify, you are continuing it and not
granting an extension until the next hearing? Because it's under
extension of time. I just want to make sure.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Why don't we do an extension of
time.
MR. LEFEBVRE: If we give an extension then the fine --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah, the fines right now are
approximately $6,400.
MR. LEFEBVRE: I'd rather leave it as a continuance, because
that will put his feet to the fire and show that we want compliance, we
want to see some progress. And hopefully within the next month there
is a re-submittal and it's going to get back on track.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, you're the motion maker, so --
oh, you're the motion maker. Would you like to modify your motion
to that effect?
MR. L'ESPERANCE: That will be acceptable. It will still
remain a continuance.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Correct, yes.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Yes.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Doesn't that answer your
question, Colleen? Okay, great.
Thank you. Now for the next case, which has nothing to do with
parking spots, and again it's the same scenario. The only question I
have on this one goes back to 2007.
Page 16
June 27, 2013
INVESTIGATOR BOX: Correct.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You realize that if a baby was born
in 2007 they'd be in school by now. So I realize things drag on
sometimes with the county, but --
MR. DiNORCIA: Which one is that?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: This is the office, the canopy, the
silos and the other buildings. It's all part of the SDP.
MR. DiNORCIA: Right.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, so we're going to hear this
one. We'll get a motion to do the same thing with this one that we did
with the previous one and hear this on July 25th.
MR. DiNORCIA: According to Mr. Hancock, he's having issues
with the fire department. I don't know what the issues are. He says
he's trying to get because of the fire hydrant, then they were requiring
ADAs, and we don't know how we could put the ADA from the street
to the building.
Mr. Box, are you familiar with that at all?
INVESTIGATOR BOX: I'm very familiar with the case, and I
do know that there was an office building that was permitted in this
case a few years back. I got the case in 2010 when --
MR. DiNORCIA: That was C.O.'d too, wasn't it?
INVESTIGATOR BOX: Yes, the office building was C.O.'d but
we have approximately nine other structures on that property where
there's not -- no application's been made for a permit, nothing. So we
have one building out of say 10, all right, that has been C.O.'d. And
the other ones, I mean, the business is still being run.
And my concern here is the fact that with the canopy structure
that he's talking about, for example, we've got electricity that's running
in there, he's got workers that are on-site. What happens if somebody
gets hurt? Okay, we don't know for a fact that the -- you know, that
the stuff has been -- we know it hasn't been inspected by the county,
Page 17
June 27, 2013
okay. And to me that's a safety issue. And I think that it's something
that has to be dealt with pronto.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is it possible to turn the circuit
breaker off to the electric that's provided in the canopy?
MR. DiNORCIA: Sure.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Well, I'd like to make that
part of any motion that we come up with now.
MR. LEFEBVRE: I think that's almost hearing the case. We
heard the case. I think we should just focus on either continuing this
or granting an extension --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. LEFEBVRE: -- not modifying any orders.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you want to make the motion?
MR. L'ESPERANCE: I move that we also give it the same
continuance as we did the last case. Would that be adequate for your
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes.
MR. LEFEBVRE: I second that motion.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second.
All those in favor?
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
Next time you come back we're going to take action. There will
be no more extensions as far as I'm concerned, and probably the rest
of the board as well. So I would suggest that you hold Mr. Hancock
or whoever is going to be here feet to the fire on this one.
Page 18
June 27, 2013
MR. DiNORCIA: No, I understand that. But whether we could
get permits and everything in 30 days, I don't know if that's possible.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It's not 30 days, it's from 2007.
MR. DiNORCIA: No, I understand.
MR. LEFEBVRE: I want to see progress. So if an SDP is to be
resubmitted or a Site Improvement Plan, whatever it is, we need to see
progress. It seems to be languishing. And I know you have other
issues with a foreclosure and everything, so I don't know if that's
taking up your time or you're having --
MR. DiNORCIA: Well, it's taking up my time and money. And
this has cost about $20,000 already too. I don't want anybody to feel
sorry for me, but things are pretty complicated out there. So I'll do the
best I can.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Thank you very much.
MS. CRAWLEY: Number four, Maria Benavides,
CESD20120008370.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: This was number seven under
imposition?
MS. CRAWLEY: Yes.
(Maria Benavides and Investigator Short were duly sworn.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning.
MS. BENAVIDES: Good morning.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I see that according to our
paperwork that the property is not in compliance at the present time.
And you're asking for?
MS. BENAVIDES: An extension.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: An extension. Can you give us your
reasoning?
MS. BENAVIDES: Well, I just -- I had talked to two other
people that were in the permitting business and they basically left me
hanging.
Page 19
June 27, 2013
Last week I met with Pavio and he's done more progress within a
couple of days than the other people ever did.
So after talking to him, he's already had an engineer and all of
that out there trying to help me with the enclosure of my lanai. So
after talking to him, he asked me to come here and ask for an
extension for at least 90 days. He says that we should be able to
submit by next week for permits and an affidavit.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. This is from January of 2013,
I believe. And the operational costs have been paid. Okay.
Questions from the board?
County? Eric?
INVESTIGATOR SHORT: They have made progress. They've
removed the deck and the gazebo in the rear of the property. The only
thing that remains at this time is the lanai enclosure, which they plan
to permit.
MR. LEFEBVRE: I make a motion that we grant an extension of
120 days.
MS. BENAVIDES: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, we have a motion, do we
have a second?
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second.
All those in favor?
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
MS. BENAVIDES: Thank you so much.
Page 20
June 27, 2013
MS. CRAWLEY: Number five, Pee-Wee's Dumpsters, Inc.,
Case CESD20120014608.
(Investigator Bosa was duly sworn.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning.
INVESTIGATOR BOSA: Good morning, sir.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: As I noticed, this is not in
compliance with --
INVESTIGATOR BOSA: Correct.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let us know what you think.
INVESTIGATOR BOSA: For the record, Ralph Bosa, Collier
County Code Enforcement.
We did get an email from Mr. George, asking for an extension of
time. I know last time he was in front of the board he did mention
something about back surgery and stuff. He says he's hired an
engineer to work on the permit and he's been working with the
investigator as far as trying to get this into compliance, so --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I remember what Mr. Lefebvre said
as he had left at the last meeting. Do you recall that?
MR. LEFEBVRE: I certainly do.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Which had something to do with,
you know, we've come to the end of our rope on this one. This is the
imposition of fines.
Anybody from the board want to comment on this?
MR. LAVINSKI: It's just been going on and on. I make a
motion we deny the extension.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: I'll second that motion.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second to
deny.
Discussion?
MR. LEFEBVRE: Yeah. Was this case going on or are we
Page 21
June 27, 2013
confusing it with working on his property, dumping of materials,
which we had a case too back --
INVESTIGATOR BOSA: There are two other cases, which
extensions of time were given also. But they're still open and
compliance has not been met for those other cases.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Either.
INVESTIGATOR BOSA: Either.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: This one is a detached garage
without final C.O.
INVESTIGATOR BOSA: Correct.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Can he get a C.O. on this even with violations
that are unrelated to this case?
INVESTIGATOR BOSA: I'm not sure. Probably not. Probably
not. So --
MR. LEFEBVRE: So the whole property would have to be in
compliance before he --
INVESTIGATOR BOSA: Exactly.
MR. LEFEBVRE: -- can get a C.O.
INVESTIGATOR BOSA: Yes, meeting setbacks and all that,
yes, this particular structure.
MR. LEFEBVRE: It does not meet setbacks?
INVESTIGATOR BOSA: Yeah, it would have to meet setbacks
and everything. I know there's a case involving a fence, which --
MR. LEFEBVRE: Right.
INVESTIGATOR BOSA: -- which is not in compliance.
There's also other items on the property which are not in compliance.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Right, I know a few years ago, probably three
years, he was here for dumping of-- running his business basically out
INVESTIGATOR BOSA: Correct.
MR. LEFEBVRE: -- of his property.
Page 22
June 27, 2013
Is that still occurring?
INVESTIGATOR BOSA: No, that's not occurring anymore.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I mean, this goes back to I think
2011 . This particular case was signed on March 4th.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: We have a motion, Mr. Chairman. Call
the question.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah, we have a motion and a
second. All those in favor?
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
We'll hear this case -- excuse me, the fines will be imposed.
MR. LEFEBVRE: We still have to impose stuff.
MS. CRAWLEY: It will come back under imposition.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay.
MS. CRAWLEY: B, stipulations. Number one, Osmani Perez,
Case CESD20130006308.
(Mr. Osmani Perez and Investigator Athey were duly sworn.)
MR. LEFEBVRE: I have a quick question, Mr. Kaufman.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, why don't we --
INVESTIGATOR ATHEY: Good morning.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning.
Have you heard anything from the respondent in this case?
INVESTIGATOR ATHEY: For the record, Stephen Athey,
Collier County Code Enforcement.
I have personally spoken to the respondent on two occasions.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And the respondent has stated?
Page 23
June 27, 2013
INVESTIGATOR ATHEY: Collier County and the respondent,
Mr. Osmani Perez have entered into a stipulation agreement in which
he agrees to pay operational costs in the amount of$80 incurred in the
prosecution of this case within 60 days of the hearing, and abate all
violations by paying a civil penalty of $1,000 for irreversible
irreparable violation of drilling a well without a well contractor license
within 60 days of this hearing.
The respondent must notify code enforcement within 24 hours of
abatement of the violation and request the investigator to perform a
site inspection to confirm compliance. And if the respondent fails to
abate the violation, the county may abate the violation, using any
method to bring the violation into compliance, may use the assistance
of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this
agreement, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property
owner.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, the question I had on this is
the respondent is the owner of the property?
INVESTIGATOR ATHEY: The respondent is not the owner of
the property.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It's kind of unusual. This is a person
-- I just wonder if this belongs here or at the Contractors Licensing
Board.
INVESTIGATOR ATHEY: This case actually is -- because it
deals with well drilling, it's actually heard here and Contractors
Licensing Board has no authority over the well drilling.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Of the well drilling or the person --
INVESTIGATOR ATHEY: The person who drilled the well.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Who has drilled the well.
INVESTIGATOR ATHEY: Yes.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah, I don't remember ever seeing
a case where the respondent wasn't the property owner.
Page 24
June 27, 2013
Jean, do you ever remember seeing one?
MS. RAWSON: Yes, we have had some where the respondent
was actually the lessee on occasion.
MR. LEFEBVRE: There was a pizza place on 41 .
MS. RAWSON: Right. Well, I don't remember exactly. That's
good, Gerald.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Luigi.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you know what kind of pizza?
MR. LEFEBVRE: Just remembered the case.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, I -- that was my only question
on this.
INVESTIGATOR ATHEY: Sign case would be a good
example.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Number three and four really is not relevant
to this, because you're not going to go and abate --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It's done.
INVESTIGATOR ATHEY: It's done. It's actually -- it's done.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Now, what repercussions are there if he
doesn't pay the thousand dollars? Is he a licensed contractor here?
INVESTIGATOR ATHEY: He is not a licensed contractor.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay, so he's not licensed. So what's the
repercussions if he doesn't pay this thousand dollars?
INVESTIGATOR ATHEY: That's something I can't answer.
SUPERVISOR SNOW: If I may, remember, we can put a lien
on any properties and on his personnel properties as well. We have a
collection agency that we employ when folks don't pay these. For
instance, if somebody receives a parking ticket.
Just for an example, not to change the subject, you guys heard the
case on -- remember the single signs that were all throughout the
county and we employed the same method with felt.
Page 25
June 27, 2013
So this is not something the board has not done -- heard before or
done before. It is unusual and we normally don't employ this, but the
board has heard these cases before.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, we have a stipulation.
Any comment from the board?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Anybody want to make a motion?
MR. LAVINSKI: I'll make a motion to accept the stipulation.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second.
All those in favor?
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Just one quick question.
Any reason why he wasn't here today?
INVESTIGATOR ATHEY: Mr. Perez had stated to me that he is
operating out of the state in other capacities. He's no longer residing
here or he's traveling to and from and had no desire to be here. That's
why he signed the stipulation.
MR. LEFEBVRE: So he's drilling wells somewhere else.
INVESTIGATOR ATHEY: Possibly.
Thank you.
MS. CRAWLEY: Number two, Christopher S. Esenberg, Case
CESD20130001292.
(Mr. Christopher Esenberg and Sworn.
INVESTIGATOR SCAVONE: For the record, Michele
Page 26
June 27, 2013
Scavone, Collier County Code Enforcement Investigator.
I've discussed this case with Mr. Esenberg and we've come to a
stipulation agreement.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, you want to read it into the
record?
INVESTIGATOR SCAVONE: It is agreed between the parties
that the representatives shall pay operational costs in the amount of
$80 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of the
hearing; abate all violations by obtaining a required Collier County
building permit or a demolition permit, inspections and certificate of
completion/occupancy within 180 days of this hearing or a fine of
$250 a day will be imposed until the violation is abated.
The respondent must notify code enforcement within 24 hours of
abatement of the violation and request the investigator perform a site
inspection to confirm compliance.
If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may
abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into
compliance, and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs
Office to enforce the provisions of this agreement, and all costs of
abatement shall be assessed to the property owner.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. I have a question on that of
the county. 180 days seems a long time.
INVESTIGATOR SCAVONE: It does seem a long time.
Very quickly, the property was a single-family home built in
1956 and through the years has been converted into a three-unit home.
Mr. Esenberg is working diligently with our building officials in
trying to get the permits to turn it back to a single-family home. And
it is vacant at this time, so we are wanting to give him the time to get
the C.O. completed.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, what's the zoning in that area?
Is it single-family?
Page 27
June 27, 2013
INVESTIGATOR SCAVONE: Yes.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. All righty.
You've agreed to the stipulation. Do you think the 180 days is
sufficient time to get everything resolved?
MR. ESENBERG: I think so, yeah.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Motion from the board?
MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, we have a motion.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And a second.
All those in favor?
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
MS. CRAWLEY: Number three, Margarita Margarita
Maldonando and Rita G. Vega, Case CESD20110017799.
(Ms. Margarita Maldonando, Mr. Rita Vega and Investigator
Maria Rodriguez were duly sworn.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning, Maria.
INVESTIGATOR RODRIGUEZ: Good morning. For the record
Maria Rodriguez, Collier County Code Enforcement.
It is agreed between the parties that the respondent shall pay
operational costs in the amount of$80.29 incurred in the prosecution
of this case within 30 days of this hearing. Abate all violations by
obtaining all required Collier County building permits or demolition
permits, inspections and certificate of completion/occupancy within
120 days of this hearing or a fine of 250 per day will be imposed until
Page 28
June 27, 2013
the violation is abated.
Respondent must notify code enforcement within 24 hours of
abatement of the violation and request investigator perform a site
inspection to confirm compliance.
That if the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may
abate the violation using any methods to bring the violation into
compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs
Office to enforce the provisions of this agreement, and all costs of
abatement shall be assessed to the property owner.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, if I understand this, this was a
single-family that was converted to a two-family, and then the second
story was added to give additional living space?
INVESTIGATOR RODRIGUEZ: Correct.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And the 120 days should be
sufficient time, do you think?
INVESTIGATOR RODRIGUEZ: I believe so. She is working
with a contractor, and they did apply for a permit. They reviewed it.
Of course it was rejected and he's got a lot of rejection that he has to
correct. So it is permit by affidavit, so as soon as they do issue the
permit, they should be able to C.O. it pretty quickly.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
Good morning.
MS. VEGA: Good morning.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You've heard the stipulation, you've
agreed to it?
MS. VEGA: Yes.
MS. MALDONANDO: Yes.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And hopefully the time frame, 120
days, should be sufficient time to get everything done?
MS. VEGA: Yes.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Is there anyone living in the house now?
Page 29
June 27, 2013
MR. REAGAN:
MS. VEGA: Yes.
MS. MALDONANDO: Yes.
INVESTIGATOR RODRIGUEZ: They're all family members.
It's her and her brother and her sister and their whole -- it's just one big
family in there.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is there any problem as far as safety
with electrical?
INVESTIGATOR RODRIGUEZ: The upstair/downstair where
they were living at the time, it was built back in the Eighties, so I
haven't had an issue with it yet, but I don't know.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion to accept the stipulated
agreement.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Second that motion.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All
those in favor?
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
You have 120 days. If you see that it's not getting done before
the 120 days, come back, work with Maria to see what we can do to
get you in a position where fines don't start to accrue.
MS. VEGA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you.
MS. MALDONANDO: Thank you.
MS. CRAWLEY: Number four, Huntington Lakes Association,
Page 30
June 27, 2013
Inc. Case CEVR20120017538.
(Investigator Jones was duly sworn.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning.
INVESTIGATOR JONES: Morning.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I remember this case.
INVESTIGATOR JONES: Oh, do you?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Or one similar.
INVESTIGATOR JONES: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Missing plants from the lake.
INVESTIGATOR JONES: Yeah the littoral vegetation that kind
of grows on the water's edge and the lake, they are missing those.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah, that was it.
You have been in touch obviously and they signed off on the --
INVESTIGATOR JONES: Yes, yes.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Why don't you read that into the
record.
INVESTIGATOR JONES: Sure.
Therefore it is agreed between the parties that the respondent
shall pay operational costs in the amount of$80.86 incurred in the
prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing.
Abate all violations by: Must obtain any necessary permits,
inspections and certificate of completion for the installation of
required littoral plants within 180 days of this hearing or pay a fine of
$150 a day until abated.
Respondent must notify code enforcement within 24 hours of
abatement of the violation and request the investigator perform a site
inspection to confirm compliance. And if the respondent fails to abate
the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to
bring the violation into compliance, and may use the assistance of the
Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this
agreement, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property
Page 31
June 27, 2013
owner.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, the only thing I see, it's
strange, it's six months to plant some plants.
INVESTIGATOR JONES: Yeah, I'll go into detail about that.
Basically littoral plants, the best time to plant them, according to
the research that I've done regarding this, is when the lake is at its
lowest point. And that's called the control elevation of the water line.
And it's basically the lowest point of the water can be to where it will
still exit out of the drainage pipe or culvert.
And the reason why you want to plant them at that time is
because certain species of littoral vegetation require different -- they
have different depths requirements, so you want to start from square
one, plant them according to their depth requirements and then plant
them back to the bank, you know, as the water fluctuates. So that's
how it works.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do their plant thing.
INVESTIGATOR JONES: Yes, do their plant thing, yes.
MR. LAVINSKI: One question on that, because I had an
experience similar to this. You put all the littoral plants in and 60 days
later the grass carp ate them all and we were back to zero.
INVESTIGATOR JONES: Well, hopefully they don't have any
grass carp in those lakes. But that's a very good point and it's
something that that could monitor for sure, you know, after they do
plant them. But they are pretty voracious eaters so it's something to
watch out for.
MR. LAVINSKI: Yeah, that's what we found out.
INVESTIGATOR JONES: Yeah, actually, you can't -- you have
to have a permit to actually even obtain those carp.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Maybe you can import some
fishermen -- oh, well.
Okay, any motion from the board?
Page 32
June 27, 2013
MR. LAVINSKI: I'll make a motion to accept.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion to accept the
stipulation.
Do we have a second?
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Second by Mr. L'Esperance.
All those in favor?
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Will they be at its lowest point within the
next six months?
INVESTIGATOR JONES: Well, I think so. I mean, once the
rainy season subsides and the stormwater management lakes have a
chance to push out that excess water. And they could usually do it
pretty quick, push that excess water out. Pretty hopeful. All right?
MR. LEFEBVRE: Thanks very much.
MS. CRAWLEY: Under C, hearings, we are now on number six,
Case CESD20130001772, Ljubinka Pavicevic.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Colleen, I want to congratulate you
on your pronunciation.
(Investigator Giguere was duly sworn.)
MS. CRAWLEY: Violation of ordinance building and land
alteration permits, Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as
amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a).
Description of violation: Garage conversion without Collier
County permits and Permit 2004121935 for double doors at rear of
Page 33
June 27, 2013
structure without certificate of completion/occupancy.
Location/address where violation exists: 4638 Robin Avenue,
Naples, Florida, 34104. Folio No. 32483160001.
Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation
location: Ljubinka Pavicevic, 4638 Robin Avenue, Naples, Florida,
34104.
Date violation first observed: February 20th, 2013.
Date owner/person in charge given Notice of Violation: March
19th, 2013.
Day on/by which violation to be corrected: April 18th, 2013.
Date of reinspection: April 19th, 2013.
Results of reinspection: Violation remains.
INVESTIGATOR GIGUERE: Good morning. For the record,
Investigator Vicki Giguere, Collier County Code Enforcement.
I would like to now present case evidence in the following
exhibits: Four photos dated March 8th, 2013 taken by myself. And
permit information for 2004121935 for double doors.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Motion to accept the exhibits?
MR. L'ESPERANCE: So moved.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Motion and a second.
All those in favor?
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
INVESTIGATOR GIGUERE: This is just showing the inside of
the garage that has been completed.
Page 34
June 27, 2013
To the left is the wall that they have put up. And I apologize for
the quality, it's a little bad here.
This is looking into the bedroom that they created in the garage.
And this one's a little blurry, but if you look closely on the
left-hand side, there's actually a closet and a bed and then a window as
well.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is this occupied?
INVESTIGATOR GIGUERE: It is.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And you were able to gain access to
this?
INVESTIGATOR GIGUERE: Just once, yes.
On February 20th, a site visit was made by Investigator Michele
Scavone. She observed the garage conversion. I apologize, I actually
went back afterwards.
While researching for permits for the conversion in the garage, I
observed Permit 2004121935 for double doors was canceled due to
expiring.
Met with property owner's son Veljko on March 8th, 2013 and
observed the garage conversion and the double doors. Property
owner's son signed the Notice of Violation on March 19th, 2013.
I've attempted contact with him since then with no success and
the violations remain, no permits have been applied for.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And you notified them that you were
going to bring this to the --
INVESTIGATOR GIGUERE: Yes, I actually personally handed
the Notice of Hearing to the property owner's son who signed the
Notice of Violation.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Did he have any comment at that
time?
INVESTIGATOR GIGUERE: No comments at all.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
Page 35
June 27, 2013
MR. LEFEBVRE: I make a motion that a violation exists.
MR. LAVINSKI: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second that
a violation exists.
All those in favor?
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
INVESTIGATOR GIGUERE: And the recommendation is that
the Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all
operational costs in the amount of$80.29 incurred in the prosecution
of this case within 30 days and abate all violations by: Obtaining all
required Collier County building permits or demolition permit,
inspections and certificate of completion/occupancy within blank days
of this hearing or a fine of blank dollars per day will be imposed until
the violation is abated. And that the respondent must notify the code
enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order
to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement.
If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may
abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into
compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs
Office to enforce provisions of this order, and all costs of abatement
shall be assessed to the property owner.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any comments from the board?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: My first comment is there is
obviously electric that was put in this room.
Page 36
June 27, 2013
INVESTIGATOR GIGUERE: Yes.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That was probably not inspected.
INVESTIGATOR GIGUERE: No.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's one big safety problem.
Plumbing in there or just electrical?
INVESTIGATOR GIGUERE: Just electrical.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Anybody want to try to fill
out the blanks on that? If not, I will.
MR. LAVINSKI: Yes.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Go ahead.
MR. LAVINSKI: I'll give it a shot.
I make a motion that the operational costs of 80.29 be paid within
the 30 days. That the respondent be given 120 days to correct the
violation or a fine of$200 a day would be imposed.
Can we add that this -- the electricity be turned off to this and the
unit vacated?
INVESTIGATOR GIGUERE: Sure.
MR. LEFEBVRE: What time period?
MR. LAVINSKI: That should be done within the next five days.
INVESTIGATOR GIGUERE: Okay.
And the fine for that?
MR. LAVINSKI: For not? The same. Use the same.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: I'll second that motion.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second.
All those in favor?
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
Page 37
June 27, 2013
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
Thanks, Vicki.
INVESTIGATOR GIGUERE: Thank you.
MS. CRAWLEY: Number nine, Case CESD20120010751,
Andres Gutirrez, III and Elizabeth M. Pineda.
(Investigator Walker was duly sworn.)
MS. CRAWLEY: Violation of the Collier County Land
Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a).
Description of violation: Structure constructed to the rear of the
property and converted into living space and roof-over/porch attached
to the back of the main property without first acquiring Collier County
building permits.
Location/address where violation exists: 605 Gladiola Street,
Immokalee, Florida, 34142. Folio No. 51240120003.
Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation
location: Andres Gutirrez, III and Elizabeth M. Pineda, 605 Gladiola
Street, Immokalee, Florida, 34142.
Date violation first observed: July 12th, 2012.
Date owner/person in charge given notice of violation: April
22nd, 2013.
Date on/by which violation to be corrected: May 6th, 2013.
Date of reinspection: June 4th, 2013.
Results of inspection: Violation remains.
INVESTIGATOR WALKER: Good morning. For the record,
Weldon J. Walker, Jr., Collier County Code Enforcement.
I would like to enter the four photos I have here as exhibits.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Motion to accept the --
MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion to accept the county's exists.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion.
MR. LAVINSKI: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And a second.
Page 38
June 27, 2013
All those in favor?
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
INVESTIGATOR WALKER: To provide you with an idea of
what the photos have, that's the actual structure that was erected at the
rear of the property.
This is a reflection of a roof-over that was attached to the rear of
the main structure on that property.
This is a photo that I actually was able to take by -- through the
window actually without it being open. And as you can see, it's
finished off. You'll also see a switch and a receptacle there which
suggests there is electrical in there, as well as I believe that's a fan on
the roof, or a fan on the ceiling.
And that's just another shot of the roof-over, just a different angle
of that particular photo.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Now, that whole structure is the
structure in question?
INVESTIGATOR WALKER: Yeah, the whole structure -- the
actual structure that was first shown to you was that enclosed structure
in the back of the property. This is attached to the main structure, the
living quarters. So you have a roof-over coming off the back of the
house.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So you have two things.
INVESTIGATOR WALKER: Two things that are addressed,
that's correct.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And the one in the back, that looks
Page 39
June 27, 2013
like it was built quite a while ago, or am I --
INVESTIGATOR WALKER: My records re -- I think it was
prior to 2000 -- I believe it's 2000, or before 2000. 2000. So there
was actually -- there was no permits for that particular structure.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
INVESTIGATOR WALKER: The case was initiated by myself
as a field observation. I observed the structure to the rear of the
property that was converted into living space. And of course the
roof-over, which was attached to the main property.
After researching the old permit books WHIPS, aerials and CD
Plus, I determined there was no record of permits for structures for the
roof-over or porch.
Further research revealed that the property at the time was in a lis
pendens status as of 10/20/2011 . The case was therefore forwarded to
the foreclosure team who monitored the case at that point.
On 11/6/2012 the foreclosure team identified Chase Morgan, J.P.
Chase Morgan Bank as the holder of the lis pendens.
Initiated an email, which they sent to them.
Chase did not respond, and on 12/4/2012 another email was sent.
And there was still no response.
They followed up with -- on 12/19/2012 with stronger email,
which suggested escalation if nothing was done.
And as of 1/17/2013 there was no response from the bank.
The foreclosure team therefore turned that case back over to me
as the investigator and I proceeded to bring the case forward to a
formal hearing.
The foreclosure team, again, as -- they gave it back to me, there
was no response. And because there was none, we brought the case
forward to you.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Is anybody living in that --
INVESTIGATOR WALKER: No, actually the house has been
Page 40
June 27, 2013
vacant since the time we actually identified it as being in violation.
There was actually a couple of violations on the property. One
had to do with weeds, which we abated, the county. And of course the
two that are attached there.
There was one that was also had to do with the actual structure
being secured, which someone secured.
So at this point the only violations that are outstanding for us is
the fact that there are structures there and no response from the bank.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, any discussion from the
board?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Anybody want to make a motion as
to whether they're in violation or not?
MR. LEFEBVRE: I make a motion that a violation does exist.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion.
MR. LAVINSKI: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And a second.
All those in favor?
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
INVESTIGATOR WALKER: Recommendation: The Code
Enforcement Board -- recommend that the Code Enforcement Board
orders the respondent to pay operational costs in the amount of$20.86
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Twenty?
INVESTIGATOR WALKER: Excuse me, 80.
Page 41
June 27, 2013
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We're having a sale this month.
INVESTIGATOR WALKER: It's my writing, excuse me.
$80.16 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and
abate all violations by: Obtaining all required Collier County building
permits or demolition permits with inspections and certificates of
completion/occupancy within X amount of days of this hearing or a
fine in the amount of X amount of dollars will be imposed until the
violation is abated.
The respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator
when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final
inspection to confirm abatement.
If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may
abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into
compliance and may use the assistance of Collier County Sheriffs
Office to enforce the provision of this order, and all costs of abatement
shall be issued to the property owner.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: I'm a little surprised that Chase
didn't at least respond to say that they don't own the property yet,
that's why they can't do anything. But they've chosen not to respond
at all.
INVESTIGATOR WALKER: Yes, according to the
documentation that was entered into our system by our foreclosure
team, records indicate that there was no exchange of any kind from
Chase with us from that point.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I wonder if Chase knows that they're
holding the paper on it. Well, they submitted a lis pendens, right?
INVESTIGATOR WALKER: Yes.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So I would tend to want a
short leash on this, because they need some motivation to do
something.
Any motion from the board?
Page 42
June 27, 2013
MR. LAVINSKI: Yeah, I'll take this one. Especially after seeing
the article this morning in the paper about the lack of housing there,
I'm afraid someone's going to end up with this with a lot of problems.
So I'd like to make a motion that the administration cost of 80.86
be paid within 30 days; that the violation be completed within 30 days
or a fine of$250 a day be imposed for each day.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, we have a motion. Do we
have a second?
MR. L'ESPERANCE: I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And a second.
All those in favor?
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
INVESTIGATOR WALKER: Thank you very much.
MS. CRAWLEY: Number 12, Case CEVR20130000933, James
W. Archer and Judy K. Archer.
(Mr. James Archer and Investigator Jones were duly sworn.)
MS. CRAWLEY: Violation of ordinance Collier County Land
Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 3.05.08(C).
Description of violation: Collier County prohibited exotic
vegetation, including but not limited to Brazilian pepper on property.
Location/address where violation exists: 1520 21st Street
Southwest, Naples, Florida, 34117. Folio No. 45905720000.
Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation
location: James W. Archer and Judy K. Archer, 1520 21st Street
Southwest, Naples, Florida, 34117.
Page 43
June 27, 2013
Date violation first observed: January 24th, 2013.
Date owner/person in charge given Notice of Violation: January
30th, 2013.
Date on/by which violation to be corrected: March 1st, 2013.
Date of reinspection: May 13th, 2013.
Results of reinspection: Violation remains.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning, David.
INVESTIGATOR JONES: Good morning. For the record,
David Jones, Collier County Code Enforcement.
I'd like to present case evidence in the following exhibits which
Mr. Archer has reviewed and he's aware of.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We got a motion to accept
the --
MR. L'ESPERANCE: So moved.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And a second?
MR. LAVINSKI: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor?
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
INVESTIGATOR JONES: Thank you.
As Colleen stated, my initial inspection on January 24th I
observed Brazilian pepper on his property. Property was built in 1992
which would require exotic removal in perpetuity in this case.
Notice of Violation was subsequently issued to Mr. Archer on
January 30th, allowing 30 days for abatement. And I'd like to make
note, within that time he's really worked pretty hard to remove as
Page 44
June 27, 2013
much as he can. He's doing the work himself and I believe with some
family members.
But I do also have a couple other photos of the work he's done so
far that he's also aware of, and I'd like to show you those as well.
Since the issuance of the Notice of Violation, this is some of the
work that Mr. Archer's done on the property. He's removed quite a
bit.
I'd like to add that this was a very dense strand of Brazilian
pepper on this property. I mean, it's like an impenetrable wall, just
about. So he's picking away at it best he can. And that's where we're
at today.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Was this on a corner lot?
INVESTIGATOR JONES: It is on a corner lot, yes.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I remember this from I guess
January where they couldn't see around the corner. I guess that's how
this began.
INVESTIGATOR JONES: Yeah, it began as a complaint which
I responded to and the complaint, you know, focused on that corner as
well as another corner, but the other corner was unimproved and
exempt from the exotic ordinance. But since there was a house on this
one, a house built in 1992, exotic removal in perpetuity is required.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Question for the county.
What percent of the vegetation has been removed?
INVESTIGATOR JONES: In my opinion I would say -- it's very
dense, and I would say at this point he's removed probably 40 to 50
percent of the Brazilian pepper on that corner property.
MR. LAVINSKI: Since January?
INVESTIGATOR JONES: Yes.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning, Mr. Archer.
MR. ARCHER: Good morning.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You're getting in good shape I guess
Page 45
June 27, 2013
from removing all of that.
MR. ARCHER: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Are you looking to get some
additional time to resolve this situation or --
MR. ARCHER: Personally I think I'd like to have it removed -- I
mean withdrawn.
This case started, a guy down the street owns a rental property
and he had pepper hedges over the fence. The neighbor there called.
He got mad because he had to remove his. Drives up the street and
calls on this corner and the corner across the street. He has no legal --
I mean, he's not even a neighbor. That's where the complaint started.
And this stuff has been growing -- some of the trees in there, sir,
are this big, at least 18 to 20 inches in diameter. That stuff has been
there for years. Like he said, you can't even walk through it.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Unfortunately, but that's the
ordinance that exists today.
MR. ARCHER: I understand, sir, but it's an extreme hardship on
me. I'd have to have -- you know, what we've been doing is I have to
get help running the chain saws, and then we're pulling them out. You
know, what we've done, pulled out with a pickup truck to get the
stumps out. And then --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do the stumps have to be removed
or can they be treated in place?
INVESTIGATOR JONES: They can be treated.
MR. ARCHER: They can be treated, but I understand it's
extremely expensive.
INVESTIGATOR JONES: Well, I don't know the exact cost. I
can say that's definitely an option is to treat the stumps instead of
physically removing them.
MR. ARCHER: But then we still have -- you know, you saw the
pictures. I mean, there's a mound. And there's still -- like he said,
Page 46
June 27, 2013
there's more than what we've already taken out still there.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: If you had an additional year to pick
at this, do you think that would help?
MR. ARCHER: Yeah, if that's what I have to do, you know.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Mr. Chairman, let me ask the county one
other question.
The property where these plants are present, is that adjacent to
any other property?
INVESTIGATOR JONES: Yes, he does have surrounding
neighbors there, yes.
MR. ARCHER: One neighbor to the back that was visible in that
one picture, but they're not the ones complaining.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: No, my question is, is there anybody else
besides this gentleman who might be responsible for removing that
plant?
INVESTIGATOR JONES: No, the Brazilian pepper in question
here lies solely on his property.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is it in the right-of-way?
INVESTIGATOR JONES: No.
MR. LAVINSKI: The area that's been removed, has that
eliminated the visibility corner traffic?
INVESTIGATOR JONES: No, he's actually started from the
inside out so he hasn't addressed the visibility corner traffic yet.
And visibility in my opinion may not be so much of an issue at
this point, but he started inward and he's moving outward to the edge.
MR. ARCHER: I didn't know there was a visibility problem.
The county maintains that. They come by with that vertical whatever
you call it, bush hog, and they trim it. It's been going on like this
since -- well, I've been there since '89.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Unfortunately it's not that a neighbor
Page 47
June 27, 2013
reports it or whatnot, a violation is a violation.
So I'd like a motion from the board.
MR. LAVINSKI: Yeah, I'd like to make a motion that a
violation does exhibit.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, we have a motion.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Second it.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And a second.
All those in favor?
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, a motion (sic) exists.
I would love to see an extended period of time granted to resolve
the situation. And if it's not completely resolved by that time, then I
would suggest come back to the board to ask for additional time.
Would the county have a problem with that?
INVESTIGATOR JONES: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Anybody like to make a
motion?
MR. LAVINSKI: What are the operating costs on this one?
INVESTIGATOR JONES: Operating costs for this case are
$80.29.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You have a suggestion in front of us.
INVESTIGATOR JONES: I do.
Okay, the recommendation on behalf of the Code Enforcement
Board: That the Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent pay
all operational costs in the amount of$80.29 incurred in the
prosecution of this case within 30 days and abate all violations by:
Page 48
June 27, 2013
Must obtain any necessary permits, inspections and certificate of
completion for the removal of all Collier County prohibited exotic
vegetation within blank days of this hearing or a fine of blank dollars
per day will be imposed until the violation is abated.
The prohibited exotic vegetation base/stump must be treated with
a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency approved herbicide and a
visual tracer dye shall be applied. When the prohibited exotic
vegetation is removed but the base of the vegetation remains within
blank days or a fine of blank days will be imposed.
The respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator
when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final
inspection to confirm abatement. If the respondent fails to abate the
violation, the county may abate the violation, using any method to
bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the
Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this order,
and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. Anybody like to take a shot
at it? If not, I will.
MR. LAVINSKI: I'll make one.
Make a motion that the operational costs be paid, $80.28 be paid
in 30 days.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: 80.29.
MR. LAVINSKI: 80.29?
INVESTIGATOR JONES: 80.29, yes.
MR. LAVINSKI: Yeah. And that the respondent be given 'til
this time next year, 365 days, to abate the situation and a fine of$50 a
day after that.
I'm trying to be as lenient -- I notice it is a violation, but under
the circumstances, trying to be as lenient as possible, but getting it
established so here again, someone may not in the future inherit this.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. I'll second that.
Page 49
June 27, 2013
And I think that 365 days, a little bit each day, the old joke how
to eat an elephant, you know, one bite at a time. Brazilian pepper is
tough.
We have a motion and a second. All those in favor?
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
Thank you, Mr. Archer.
MR. ARCHER: Thank you.
MS. CRAWLEY: Number 13, Case CEPM20130004926, Lloyd
L. Bowein.
(Mr. Lloyd Bowein and Investigator Pulse were duly sworn.)
MS. CRAWLEY: Violation of ordinance Collier County Code
of Laws and Ordinances, Chapter 22, Article 6, Property Maintenance
Code Section 22-231(12)(c) and (i), and Section 22-228(1), and
Collier County Land Development Code 10.02.06(B)(1)(a) and (e), as
amended.
Description of violation: Soffits and roof in need of
maintenance. Windows are screwed shut and not operable.
Location/address where violation exists: 584 105th Avenue
North, Naples, Florida, 34108. Folio No. 62842560005.
Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation
location: Lloyd L. Bowein, 10021 Gulfshore Drive, Naples, Florida,
34108.
Date violation first observed: April 5th, 2013.
Date owner/person in charge given Notice of Violation: April
17th, 2013.
Page 50
June 27, 2013
Date on/by which violation to be corrected: May 16th, 2013.
Date of reinspection: June 6th, 2013.
Results of reinspection: Violation remains.
INVESTIGATOR PULSE: Good morning. For the record, Dee
Pulse, Collier County Code Enforcement Investigator.
I would like to present case evidence in the following exhibits:
Four photos taken by me, one April 10th, 2013, two taken April 12th,
2013, and one taken on June 6th, 2013.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Has the respondent seen the --
INVESTIGATOR PULSE: Yes.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you have any objection?
MR. BOWEIN: No.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Motion to accept the --
MR. L'ESPERANCE: So moved.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Motion and second.
All those in favor?
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
INVESTIGATOR PULSE: I have observed at this property
soffits and roof in need of maintenance, windows are screwed shut and
are not operable. I have and am in contact with the owner and repair
work was started on the soffits. I have observed, with all the rain we
are getting, there is now visible ceiling damage in the structure, as
shown in the photo taken on June 6th, that would be that one, 2013.
Recently the owner has installed a tarp over the entire roof, but as
Page 51
June 27, 2013
of today the violations remain.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Is this property occupied?
INVESTIGATOR PULSE: Yes.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Is this a rental property or --
INVESTIGATOR PULSE: Yes.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: -- his primary residence?
INVESTIGATOR PULSE: Rental.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Mr. Bowein?
MR. BOWEIN: Okay. Yeah, when they notified me of the
problem, I had a carpentry contractor go and repair the damage on the
soffits and rotten wood around the edge.
He in May contacted and contracted with a roofer to do a
complete reroof. I'm in the schedule to have that roof done next week.
And that's -- you know, it should be resolved next week. I mean, it's
got a tarp over the whole roof now so there's no leakage at this point.
So all the rotten wood on the perimeter is taken care of. When
the roofer does the work, part of the bid is any four-by-eight plywood
will be replaced prior to putting the new roof on. The existing roof
will be completely taken off.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you have any problem with the
ceiling that's in the interior?
MR. BOWEIN: Well, once that's done then I'll send somebody
in. But this house was probably built back in the Fifties. Back when I
bought it at -- in the ceiling, why they did it that way, the heat for the
house was actually wires through. It wasn't drywall, it was rock wall.
So it's -- there some damage, but it's not falling. But that will be
replastered and repaired once the new roof is on.
And then as to the windows, I have an issue with their
interpretation of the ordinance. Because the windows have been
screwed tight and shut for over 25 years. We used it to make it
weather tight and people couldn't break in.
Page 52
June 27, 2013
The ordinance, as I read it, says every window required for light
and ventilation for habitable roofs shall be capable of being opened
easily and secured in a position by window hardware.
These windows are neither needed for light nor ventilation.
There's light in there and it's fully air conditioned.
And like I say, the windows have been that way for 25 years.
And at that time I actually contracted the building department because
I was a contractor at that time. And they had no problems with me
doing that. I did it shortly after I purchased the property in '87.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. What is the county's position
on that as far as the windows?
INVESTIGATOR PULSE: The windows were installed and
permitted as fully functional windows and should be maintained that
way.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. I guess our first --
MR. BOWEIN: Well, I would like to see that permit. I mean,
this house was built in the Fifties.
Do you have a copy of the permit?
INVESTIGATOR PULSE: No, sir.
MR. BOWEIN: Then how do you know it was permitted that
way?
INVESTIGATOR PULSE: Well, I'm assuming. It appears that
they are original windows with the construction of the house.
MR. BOWEIN: Right. But again, the ordinance doesn't require
them to open or close.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Kitchell, you want to be sworn?
SUPERVISOR SNOW: She already swore me, do I need to
swear again?
MS. RAWSON: Yes. New case.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It wears off.
(Supervisor Snow was duly sworn.)
Page 53
June 27, 2013
SUPERVISOR SNOW: Also within the property maintenance
code it specifically says that the windows have to be functional, be
able to open.
And it also says if there's a desire for the change to be made from
a window, a functional window, then they have to get permission and
a permit from the building department.
Obviously the windows were intended and installed to be
functional when opened. The relevance of a permit is if it was built in
the Fifties we didn't have any building codes until 1959.
So the installation of the windows, the function of the windows
was to be opened. They've been sealed. That's a property maintenance
issue. That's a serious health and safety issue. If there was an
accident or something, the people couldn't open the windows to get
out, they couldn't exit the windows.
If he desires to change that, then he needs to get permission from
the building department and get a permit to do that.
Specifically it says in the ordinance, if you want to change an
opening, an ingress and egress, then it is to be bricked up. That's what
you do, you apply for that application, you do that.
I -- and I'm sure that Investigator Pulse will insist that these need
to be opened and functional. They're windows, that's what they're for.
MR. BOWEIN: Could I respond to that?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Sure.
MR. BOWEIN: Well, number one is they're awning windows, so
you can't get out of them -- in and out of them anyway.
And number two is I did get permission from the building
department at that time saying that I could do that. They did not issue
permits for that at that time.
SUPERVISOR SNOW: Do you have any documentation, sir,
that would suggest that?
MR. BOWEIN: No, I don't.
Page 54
June 27, 2013
SUPERVISOR SNOW: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, any motion from the board as
to whether a violation does exist?
MR. L'ESPERANCE: I move that a violation does exhibit.
MR. LAVINSKI: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second.
All those in favor?
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
Okay, violation exists.
Now, you said they're going to be putting the roof on --
MR. BOWEIN: Next week. I'm supposedly in the schedule for
next week, he said, at the latest. I've already recorded a notice of
commencement, so he said he was going to go in and get the permit
next week and initiate it next week or the following week.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And you have a suggestion?
INVESTIGATOR PULSE: Yes. We recommend that the Code
Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs
in the amount of$81 .15 incurred in the prosecution of this case within
30 days and abate all violations by: Obtaining all required Collier
County building permits or demolition permit, inspections and
certificate completion/occupancy within blank days of this hearing or
a fine of blank per day will be imposed until the violation is abated.
The respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator
when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final
inspection to confirm abatement.
Page 55
June 27, 2013
If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may
abate the violation, using any method to bring the violation into
compliance, and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs
Office to enforce the provisions of this order, and all costs of
abatement shall be assessed to the property owner.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It looks like the roof, the soffits, that
will all be resolved probably within the next 30 days or so?
MR. BOWEIN: Right.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So the only sticky wicket here is the
windows. And if sufficient time is granted by the board, that will be
up to you to duke it out with the permitting folks or whatever to get
whatever needs to be done to satisfy the violation.
MR. BOWEIN: Okay. Well, my question is, though, so you're
saying that the windows are in violation of the ordinance?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I'm not saying that. Code
enforcement is saying that.
MR. BOWEIN: But they came to you. So you're saying that's a
violation?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's part of the violation that has
been opposed.
MR. BOWEIN: Okay. Can we break those out? Because I
would like to appeal the portion on the windows. I'd have to see
whether it should go through a court procedure or appeal procedure of
the board.
Because to me the ordinance is clear, it was in absolute
compliance with the building code at the time this was done. I
thought things that were in compliance when the house was built or
when a house was repaired was grandfathered in. I didn't realize that
this house built in the Fifties with the work being done in the Eighties
has to comply with 2013's Building Code. I don't know how long that
particular ordinance has been in effect. But I don't believe that it
Page 56
June 27, 2013
should apply to the windows in this case.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, from my own experience, I
did some renovation on my own house and I was replacing the
windows. And they had to comply size-wise so that you could get out
the windows. I was bigger at that time, but the windows needed to be
a sufficient size to get out of the window, should there be a fire or
whatnot.
I think given the amount of time, I think it might be easier and
certainly less expensive -- once you're working on a property, it all has
to be in compliance -- that you try to work with the building
department and see if you can resolve that.
SUPERVISOR SNOW: Mr. Chair? I'm sorry for interrupting,
sir. We'd like to put the property maintenance code up for the record
and submit it as evidence, please.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Sure.
MR. BOWEIN: And can I respond to that as well? What was
the date of that property maintenance code?
SUPERVISOR SNOW: It is the most recent one. I don't know, I
know it came from 2004-58. I don't know.
MR. BOWEIN: So for the record, this code was not in effect
when I installed these windows. The windows, even if I make them
work properly, you would not be able to get in and out of them.
They're awning windows.
SUPERVISOR SNOW: Yes, sir, but --
MR. BOWEIN: It was my understanding in talking to the
building department, I could actually replace those with fixed pane
windows, because -- and then they wouldn't have to open and shut
because they're fixed panes and they would have been installed as,
you know, required.
SUPERVISOR SNOW: As fixed pane windows, sir, if you want
to get permission from the building department to do that. But they
Page 57
June 27, 2013
are designed to be open, they were installed in the home and to be
used to be open, and they've been sealed up and that is not the intent
of that window.
MR. BOWEIN: But that is not what the ordinance says.
SUPERVISOR SNOW: If you want to get them permitted -- yes,
sir, it is. It says they need to be functional, and they are not
functional.
MR. BOWEIN: Where does it say that? Because you put in one
of the notices you gave me, all windows are to function as intended.
That is not part of the ordinance.
SUPERVISOR SNOW: It says every window required for light
and habitable home shall be capable of being opened easily; is that not
correct?
MR. BOWEIN: That's correct. But none of these windows need
to be --
SUPERVISOR SNOW: Can you open these windows easily?
MR. BOWEIN: No.
SUPERVISOR SNOW: Can you open these windows at all?
MR. BOWEIN: No.
SUPERVISOR SNOW: Thank you.
MR. BOWEIN: But it says if they're required for light or
ventilation. They're not required for light or ventilation, there's
electric lights in the room and there (sic) is fully air conditioned.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, we've heard the case. We've
come up with the motion. This argument that you're making, probably
best suited to argue with the people in the building department.
Could you provide Mr. Bowein a copy of that paper that you
have?
THE COURT REPORTER: It has not been admitted into
evidence.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, make a motion to add the
Page 58
June 27, 2013
Building Code --
MR. LEFEBVRE: So moved.
SUPERVISOR SNOW: It's on his Notice of Violation. It's the
same. We just want it submitted as evidence.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So it's already part of our package.
MS. CRAWLEY: It's an ordinance, so we wouldn't need to
present it as evidence.
MR. BOWEIN: I have a copy of it, so --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Would someone like to fill in
the blanks on this?
MR. LAVINSKI: Yeah, I'll take a shot at it.
I make a motion that the operational costs of$81 .15 be paid
within 30 days, and that the violations be corrected within 60 days or a
fine of$150 per day be imposed.
And I think 60 days would probably give you time to debate it
with whomever you need to debate it with.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: I'll second that, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and second. All
those in favor?
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
Should you not have your argument completed by 60 days, I
suggest you come back and we can take it up at that time.
MR. BOWEIN: Okay. And I can get the appropriate paperwork
to appeal the decision?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah, as we read it initially, it
Page 59
June 27, 2013
would be your responsibility if you want to appeal our decision.
MR. BOWEIN: Right.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you have a copy of our statement
that you can provide to Mr. Bowein?
MS. CRAWLEY: Yes. And the rules and regulations are
located outside.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, thank you.
INVESTIGATOR PULSE: Thank you.
MR. LAVINSKI: Mr. Chairman, can we take a short break here
before we go on?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We'll be back in 10 minutes.
(Recess.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I'd like to call Code Enforcement
Board back to order.
Which brings us to?
MS. CRAWLEY: Number five, old business. A, Motion for
Imposition of Fines/Liens.
Number one, Case CEPM20100017211, LaSalle Bank NA TR
MLMI Trust.
(Investigator Bosa was duly sworn.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, Ralph, you're on.
INVESTIGATOR BOSA: For the record, Ralph Bosa, Collier
County Code Enforcement.
This is in reference to violations of Collier County Code of Laws,
Chapter 22, Article VI, Section 22-234.
Location: 2592 Santa Barbara Boulevard, Naples, Florida,
34116. Folio number 36323880007.
Building suffered severe fire damage.
On November 18th, 2010, the Code Enforcement Board issued a
findings of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was
found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct
Page 60
June 27, 2013
the violation. See the attached Order of the Board, OR 4626, Page
296 for more information.
The property is in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board
orders as of January 21st, 2011 .
The fines and costs to date are described as the following: Order
item number one and three, fines at a rate of$250 per day for the
period between November 29th, 2010 to December 30th, 2010, total
of 32 days. The total amount of$8,000.
Order item number two and four: Fines at a rate of$250 per day
for the period between January 3rd, 2011 to January 21st, 2011, 19
days, for the total of 4,750.
Order item number seven: Operational costs of$81 .72 have been
paid.
Total amount to date: $12,750.
The county recommends full abatement of fines as the violation
is abated and operational costs have been paid.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Get a motion from the board?
MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion to abate the fines.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion.
MR. LAVINSKI: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And a second.
All those in favor?
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
MR. LEFEBVRE: This house was knocked out, correct? Is that
what happened?
Page 61
June 27, 2013
INVESTIGATOR BOSA: Yes, sir.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Yeah, it was demolished.
MS. CRAWLEY: Number two, Case CENA20120015339,
Gwendolyn Green.
(Investigator Bosa was duly sworn.)
INVESTIGATOR BOSA: Again, Ralph Bosa for code
enforcement.
This is in violation -- reference to violation of Collier County
Code of Laws, Chapter 54, Article VI, Section 54-185(B).
Location: 3675 Tenth Avenue Southeast, Naples, Florida, 34117.
Folio number of 41044640003.
Description of violation: Weeds in excess of 18 inches.
Past orders: On February 28th, 2013 the Code Enforcement
Board issued a findings of fact, conclusion of law and order. The
respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and
ordered to correct the violation. See the attached Order of the Board,
OR 4895, Page 2438 for more information.
The property is in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board
orders as of May 1st, 2013.
The fines and costs to date are described as the following: Order
item number one and two, fines at the rate of$50 per day from the
period between March 8th, 2013 to March 1st, (sic) 2013, 55 days, for
the total of$2,750.
Order item number four, abatement costs of$30 have not been
paid.
Order item number five: Operational costs of$80.57 have not
been paid.
Total amount due to date: $2,860.57.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Who abated the problem?
MS. CRAWLEY: County.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Was it the --
Page 62
June 27, 2013
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: County.
INVESTIGATOR BOSA: That was the county, correct.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Abatement cost, $30?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, you would think that the
respondent would be here today, pay the $30 and the operational
costs, which have not been paid; is that correct?
INVESTIGATOR BOSA: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And then have the 2,750 abated.
INVESTIGATOR BOSA: Correct, sir.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: But they're not here.
INVESTIGATOR BOSA: No. We've tried making contact with
them, and nothing at all.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Our hands are tied then, because if
the operational costs have not been paid then we always impose.
INVESTIGATOR BOSA: So get a motion from the board?
MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion to impose.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second.
All those in favor?
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
Thanks, Ralph.
MR. LEFEBVRE: And then we have another.
MS. CRAWLEY: Case Number 11, which is
CENA20120006825, Gwendolyn Green.
(Investigator Bosa was duly sworn.)
Page 63
June 27, 2013
INVESTIGATOR BOSA: This is in reference to violations of
Collier County Code of Laws, Chapter 54, Article VI, Section 54-181 .
Location is 3675 Tenth Avenue Southeast, Naples, Florida,
34117. Folio number 41044640003.
Description of violation: Litter consisting but not limited to
refuse, clothes, boxes, assorted metals, plastics and wood, tires, et
cetera.
Past orders: On August 23rd, 2012 the Code Enforcement Board
issued a finding of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent
was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to
correct the violation. See the attached Order of the Board OR 4853,
Page 1144 for more information.
The property is in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board
orders as of May 1st, 2013.
Fines and costs to date are described as the following: Order
item number one and two, fines at the rate of$500 per day for the
period between August 31st, 2012 to May 1st, 2013, 244 days, for the
total amount of$122,000.
Order item number four: Abatement costs of$1,500 have not
been paid.
Order Item number five, operational costs of$80.29 have not
been paid.
Total amount to date: $123,580.29.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The only reason this is in
compliance is because the county abated the situation.
Was this a grow house?
INVESTIGATOR BOSA: No, not that I'm aware of, sir.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Let me ask you: Since May 1st when it came
to compliance, has it been maintained since then?
INVESTIGATOR BOSA: Yes, sir.
Page 64
June 27, 2013
MR. LEFEBVRE: By the owner?
INVESTIGATOR BOSA: Not by the owner. This particular one
here was litter. So once we abated the litter, the litter was completely
gone.
As far as the weeds, when the weeds do come back then, you
know, we will -- if we don't get any response from the owner, then the
county will abate.
MR. LEFEBVRE: The county then will have to come back
again?
INVESTIGATOR BOSA: Correct.
MR. LEFEBVRE: And then we can fine them up to $1,000 a
day, which we see that $500 didn't get their attention.
Is this in a lis pendens situation?
INVESTIGATOR BOSA: Yes, it is. As of 5/2/2012, as of last
year, May of last year.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Which bank?
MR. LEFEBVRE: Have they been contacted?
INVESTIGATOR BOSA: The bank, yes. We have tried -- the
foreclosure team has attempted to contact the bank and the bank has
not responded to them.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Well --
MR. LEFEBVRE: I mean, this fine is probably going to be more
than what the house is worth.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Mr. Chairman, I move that we impose the
fines.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion to impose.
MR. LEFEBVRE: I have to second it.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second.
All those in favor?
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
Page 65
June 27, 2013
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
MR. LEFEBVRE: I think it's one of the largest fines I've
imposed in my 11 years.
MS. CRAWLEY: Number three, Case CESD20120014608,
Pee-Wee's Dumpsters, Inc.
(Investigator Bosa was duly sworn.)
INVESTIGATOR BOSA: This is in reference to violations of
Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section
10.02.06(B)(1)(a).
Location: 721 Logan Boulevard South, Naples, Florida, 34119.
Folio No. 38280090006.
Description of violation: A detached garage with Permit No.
2011030691 without final certificate of occupancy on the property
without a permit.
Past orders: On February 28th, 2013 the Code Enforcement
Board issued a findings of fact, conclusion of law and order. The
respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and
ordered to correct the violation. See the attached Order of the Board
OR 4895, Page 2444 for more information.
The property is not in compliance with the Code Enforcement
Board orders as of June 27th, 2013.
The fines and costs to date are described as the following: Order
item number one and two, fines at the rate of$150 per day for the
period between April 30th, 2013 to June 27th, 2013, 59 days, for the
total of$8,850. Fines continue to accrue.
Order item number five: Operational costs $81 .43 have been
paid.
Page 66
June 27, 2013
Total amount to date: $8,850.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Pee-Wee is not here. I don't
know if he's -- he did say he had an operation, from our last meeting
when he was here.
INVESTIGATOR BOSA: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It's not in compliance, so --
MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to impose.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Motion and a second to impose.
All those in favor?
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
MS. CRAWLEY: Number four, Case CESD20120004892,
Jeffrey M. Stone and Mardi S. Moorman.
(Supervisor Perez was duly sworn.)
SUPERVISOR PEREZ: Good morning. For the record, Cristina
Perez, Collier County Code Enforcement Supervisor.
This is in reference to Case No. CESD20120004892.
Violations: Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as
amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a), and Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(e).
Location: 5741 Painted Leaf Lane, Naples, Florida, 34116.
Folio No. 38168960009.
Description: Multiple structures constructed on the property
without first obtaining valid Collier County permits.
Past orders: On January 24, 2013, the Code Enforcement Board
issued a finding of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent
Page 67
June 27, 2013
was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to
correct the violation.
See the attached Order of the Board OR 4883, Page 3235 for
more information. The property is not in compliance with the Code
Enforcement Board orders as of June 27th, 2013. The fines and costs
to date are described as the following:
Order item number one and two: Fines at the rate of$200 per
day for the period between May 25th, 2013 through June 27th, 2013,
34 days, for the total of$6,800. Fines continue to accrue. Order item
number seven: Operational costs of$80 have not been paid. Total
amount to date: Is $6,880.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Is this occupied?
SUPERVISOR PEREZ: Yes.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: On the order -- let me get the right
page. On the stipulation agreement it says unpermitted living space
must be unoccupied and utilities turned off. Has that been complied
with?
SUPERVISOR PEREZ: There is a note in the case that they did
shut off the electricity to the guest house.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Is it occupied?
SUPERVISOR PEREZ: I did not have access to the rear yard to
see if it was occupied. There's no permits that have been applied for in
the system.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Because if it is occupied, then we
may need the assistance of the Collier County Sheriff to make sure it
becomes unoccupied.
SUPERVISOR PEREZ: Okay, we will look further into that.
There was a lis pendens that was recorded on the property on
February 12th, 2013 by J.P. Morgan Chase Bank.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion to impose.
MR. LAVINSKI: Second.
Page 68
June 27, 2013
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second to
impose.
All those in favor?
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
Thank you.
MS. CRAWLEY: Number five, Case CESD20120015193, Mark
and Anne Shores.
(Mr. Mark Shores and Investigator Ambach were duly sworn.)
INVESTIGATOR AMBACH: Good morning.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning.
INVESTIGATOR AMBACH: Mr. Shores is here today to
explain what he's done to date and request an extension.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. My first question is have the
operational costs of$80.29 been paid?
MR. SHORES: Chris brought that to my attention today. And I
just -- it was an oversight, and I'm paying that today as soon as I leave
here.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
MR. SHORES: It wasn't purposely, it's just trying to get all this
taken care of
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Because ordinarily -- not ordinarily,
every time those have not been paid, we impose the fine. So make
sure you pay it today.
MR. SHORES: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And why don't you let us know
Page 69
June 27, 2013
what's going on.
MR. SHORES: I've got into contract with my engineer. I gave
him $500 down. We have since had the AC system in our house go
out. That had to be repaired. So I didn't have the monies to continue
paying the engineer to get the permits going.
I'm going to be paying him in two more weeks an additional 600
for the first phase for the permits fees and then the rest following.
I have a copy of that, if you'd like, of the contract.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: How much time are you requesting again?
MR. SHORES: Same amount of time if I could, 120 days.
INVESTIGATOR AMBACH: I will add that he -- as part of the
stipulation agreement on the 24th of January, he was to shut off the
power to that area, and that was done. It was confirmed my myself.
So he has complied partially.
MR. LAVINSKI: Has anything else been done with regards to
the interior and exterior modifications?
INVESTIGATOR AMBACH: Nothing's changed since the
stipulation was signed.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: What are the modifications on the
exterior that was done?
MR. SHORES: Well, we bought the house, and they said they
had some issues but I didn't do enough investigating to realize how
many things weren't permitted.
The front walkway, front room addition that used to be a porch
and then an elevation in the back room. So all that's going to be all
drawn up. And I haven't done anything more because I have to get the
drawings to find out to make sure everything's been built to code.
That's my next step.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And this originally was January, so
it's six months.
MR. SHORES: Yes, sir.
Page 70
June 27, 2013
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And nothing's been done.
MR. SHORES: Like I said, I had some financial hardships. I
have a family of six and my wife doesn't work.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: This is a commercial for doing the
code inspection before you purchase a house. Are you aware of that
now?
MR. SHORES: Yes, sir.
INVESTIGATOR AMBACH: I'd like to also add if I may, Mr.
Shore's provided me with a copy from Lockhart Engineering, Inc.,
their letter that they will be doing the work, and spelled out pretty
much step-by-step what they're going to do.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Are there time frames listed on that?
INVESTIGATOR AMBACH: There are not, sir.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And do you think 120 days
would be sufficient?
MR. SHORES: Yeah, because with the money I'd given him
already, he's already researched the property and all that. Now he just
has to come out and do the drawings and submit it to the county.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So you're doing this by affidavit?
MR. SHORES: Yes.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Or attempting to.
MR. SHORES: That's the attempt.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Mr. Chairman, I move that we grant the
extension of 120 days.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, we have a motion.
MR. LAVINSKI: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And a second.
All those in favor?
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
Page 71
June 27, 2013
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
120 days. You'll be hard pressed if you come back in 120 days
and nothing's been done, I'll let you know that up front. Good luck.
MR. SHORES: Thank you.
MS. CRAWLEY: Number six, Case CEPM20120013078, Jorge
L. Mendez.
(Investigator Bosa was duly sworn.)
INVESTIGATOR BOSA: Again for the record Ralph Bosa,
Collier County Code Enforcement.
This is in reference to violations of Collier County Code of Laws
and Ordinances, Article VI, Chapter 22, Section 22.242.
Location: 3320 Second Avenue Southeast, Naples, Florida,
34117. Folio No. 40935360008.
Description of violation: Vacant home with a screen enclosure
and swimming pool has been damaged by a fire and has no roof.
Past orders: On November 29th, 2012 the Code Enforcement
Board issued a finding of facts/conclusion of law and order.
Respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and
ordered to correct the violation. See the attached order of the board
OR 4685, Page 2617 for more information.
The property is not in compliance with the Code Enforcement
Board orders as of June 27th, 2013.
The fine and costs to date are described as the following:
Order item one and two: Fines at a rate of$150 per day from the
period between May 30th, 2013 to June 27th, 2013, 29 days, for the
total of$4,350. Fines continue to accrue.
Order Item number five: Operational costs of$80.29 have been
paid.
Page 72
June 27, 2013
Total amount to date: $4,350.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is this a structure that's going to be
torn down, in your estimation?
INVESTIGATOR BOSA: Yes. He's been in contact with the
investigator. He got the demo permit but it still remains. It's not
completely demoed. He's out of the country right now, the owner, but
he's been advised of this imposition of fines and everything, so --
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, it's in violation.
Can we get a motion from the board?
MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to impose.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. Do we have a
second?
MR. LEFEBVRE: Second.
CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: We have a motion and a second.
All those in favor?
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
Thank you.
MS. CRAWLEY: Number nine, Case 2005110187 Stonegate
Bank.
(Supervisor Perez was duly sworn.)
THE COURT REPORTER: May I have your name, please.
MR. GARRY: Sure. It's Shaun Garry. S-H-A-U-N. Last name
is Garry, G-A-R-R-Y. And I'm the attorney representing Stonegate
Bank today.
SUPERVISOR PEREZ: Good morning. For the record, Code
Page 73
June 27, 2013
Enforcement Supervisor Cristina Perez.
This is in reference to Case No. 2005110187, CEB case number
2006-64.
Violations: Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as
amended, Section 5.06.06(H), Section 9.03.02(F)(3), and Section
9.03.03(D)(3)(c).
Location: 2600 Tamiami Trail East, Naples, Florida. Folio No.
61835000007.
Description: Three advertising billboards damaged more than 50
percent of their replacement costs were repaired.
Past orders: On October 26th, 2006, the Code Enforcement
Board issued a finding of fact, conclusion of law and order. The
respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and
ordered to correct the violation. See the attached Order of the Board
OR 4132, Page 0999 for more information.
The property is in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board
orders as of January 9th, 2007.
The fines and costs to date are described as the following:
Order item one and four: Fines at the rate of$250 per day for the
period between December 26th, 2006 through January 9, 2007, 15
days, for a total of$3,750.
Order item number two and five, fines at the rate of$200 per day
for the period between December 26th, 2006 through January 9, 2007,
15 days, for the total of$3,750.
Order item number seven: Operational costs of$409. 13 have
been paid.
Total amount to date: Is $7,500.
The county recommends full abatement of fines as the violation
is abated and operational costs have been paid.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thanks, Cristina.
I have one question that just seems to jump out at me. I'm sure
Page 74
June 27, 2013
we're going to abate the fine, but December of'06 to '07 and it's here
now?
MS. CRAWLEY: We just needed to formally finish out the
process, and there was never a lien brought before you, so we just
wanted to finish the formalities.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion to abate.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion.
MR. LAVINSKI: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And a second.
All those in favor?
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
Thank you, Counselor. Sorry you had to wait so long.
SUPERVISOR PEREZ: Thank you, gentlemen.
MR. GARRY: I'll take that.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Go back to the bank and tell them
you're a hero now.
MS. CRAWLEY: Number 10, Case CEVR20110002999, Sean
King Trust.
(Mr. Dan Garcia and Investigator Jones were duly sworn.)
THE COURT REPORTER: This is Dan Garcia.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And Dan, you are?
MR. GARCIA: The owner. My wife and I. Sean King, who is
the respondent, there's actually -- it's a land trust and he's the attorney
of record, so I think he was named as the respondent.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay.
Page 75
June 27, 2013
INVESTIGATOR JONES: Okay, allow me to read the
description here.
Violations, Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as
amended, Section 3.05.01(B).
Location: 4441 Fifth Avenue Northwest, Naples Florida, 34119.
Folio No. 36663400008.
Description of past orders: Property was partially cleared of
vegetation without a Collier County permit.
On March 22nd, 2010 the Code Enforcement Board issued a
findings of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was
found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct
the violation. See the attached Order of the Board OR 4784, Page
1819 for more information.
An extension of time was granted on November 29th, 2012. See
the attached Order of the Board OR 4865, Page 2615 for more
information.
The property is not in compliance with the Code Enforcement
Board orders as of June 27th, 2013.
The fines and costs to date are described as the following:
Order items number one and four: Fines at a rate of$150 per day
for the period between May 30th, 2013 and June 27th, 2013, 29 days,
for the total of$4,350. Fines continue to accrue.
Order item number nine, operational costs of$81 .15 have not
been paid.
Total amount to date: $4,431 .15.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Could you repeat that total amount
again?
INVESTIGATOR JONES: Total amount to date, $4,431 .15.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Am I looking at something wrong
that says 42,000?
MS. CRAWLEY: You have an updated in your packet.
Page 76
June 27, 2013
MR. LAVINSKI: Yeah, there was an update.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So the operational costs have
not been paid?
INVESTIGATOR JONES: That's correct, sir.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Sir?
MR. GARCIA: Yeah, I was informed yesterday, I believe, that
the $81 was not paid. I believe we paid it, but in any event, I'm going
to leave and go over. And if it hasn't been paid then I'll just pay it
today right now. I do apologize, I think that was purely an oversight.
The extension that we got, which expired last month, was to --
there's only two ways to abate this violation: One, to do a renovation
plan to the environment and replant. We removed all the Brazilian
peppers and the melaleuca.
The issue was we did it the proper way, the right way, but there
was a bobcat on the site and that's what triggered this event from
happening.
We hired Grady Minor, a civil engineering firm, and we went
and did a restoration plan, which included installing -- it may be in the
record, I think I heard that, 150 trees.
INVESTIGATOR JONES: They did submit a restoration plan.
However, according to the records the restoration plan was not
sufficient for approval by code enforcement staff.
MR. GARCIA: Well, it was actually approved by Andrew
Kelly. The problem is that there's nobody, including us, the civil
engineer, realized that we can't plant 150 trees in the dry season.
They'd be dead in a few weeks. There's no water on the site, it's an
unimproved site.
So we got the continuance so that we could get into the rainy
season or apply for a building permit. And as I indicated yesterday to
him, our architect, Brad Schiffer, is probably two to four weeks away
from submitting for the building plan.
Page 77
June 27, 2013
Pelican Engineering is wrapping up the MEP drawings now and
we'll be in for a full building permit, which it abates the violation and
it pretty much makes the restoration plan unnecessary as well. So
we've got to record the building permit with the county and that abates
this violation.
MR. LEFEBVRE: That would give you the right of the clear one
acre of land, correct?
MR. GARCIA: Exactly. And put the cart before the horse by
bringing a bobcat on the site. And that's something that -- we had a
foliage permit, I believe, but we didn't have technically the building
permit which lets you bring mechanical pieces of equipment on the
site.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You have a bobcat machine, not a
bobcat with four paws.
MR. GARCIA: Yeah, you got it. Probably some of them out
there too.
So, you know, if I could, respectfully, we can make this all go
away by recording the plans with the building department, which -- a
couple weeks away.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Let me cut to the chase.
So you're looking for an extension then?
MR. GARCIA: Yes, sir.
MR. LEFEBVRE: What would be your time from for an
extension?
MR. GARCIA: Well, I think realistically if we get them in in say
the next three weeks. I don't know how long it takes the building
department. I guess if the architect's good, first shot. If not, revision.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Brad's good.
MR. GARCIA: So, you know, I would think in 60 days, maybe,
90 days? We'll hold his feet to the fire.
But I would think 60 to 90 days we should have everything
Page 78
June 27, 2013
cleared up.
MR. LEFEBVRE: I think we should grant an extension for 60
days. Knowing Brad, he's very familiar with Collier County being
that he was on the Planning Commission, so forth. I think 60 days
would be sufficient.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Is that a motion?
MR. LEFEBVRE: Yes, I make that motion.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second.
All those in favor?
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, 60 days.
If you find that unlike the last time that you can't meet that date,
I'd suggested that you come back ahead of time.
MR. GARCIA: I'll be here. There shouldn't be a reason, but I'll
be here 30 days and let you know.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, great.
MR. LAVINSKI: Does your motion provide that the 81 .15 is
paid?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes.
MR. GARCIA: I'll go do that right now. Thank you.
MR. LEFEBVRE: You said you're going to be here next month?
MR. GARCIA: No, hopefully not.
MR. LEFEBVRE: You're going to be here to give us an update
at the time?
MR. GARCIA: Well, if we're not in for permit or if I see, you
Page 79
June 27, 2013
know, that we're, you know, encroaching on that 60 days, which
would be August, I'd like to come back at least next month, 30 days,
and say we may need another 45 days.
MR. LEFEBVRE: And if you notice that the extensions were at
the beginning of the meeting. So you won't have to stay for two
quarter plus hours.
MR. GARCIA: That's fine. Thank you.
MR. LEFEBVRE: It would be much quicker.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, we've finished the imposition
of fines?
MS. CRAWLEY: Uh-huh.
Under six, new business, A, rules and regulations. I had emailed
an updated copy. I just wanted to get your approval on the updated
rules and regulations.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, I make a motion that we
approve the rules and regulations as submitted.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Second.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. Okay, third.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor?
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
That means next meeting we're going to start out the agenda will
be changed to show the Pledge of Allegiance right at the beginning.
We have a flag. Well, the planning board and the county
commissioners have the pledge also, so --
Okay, that brings us to reports. Requests to forward the cases to
Page 80
June 27, 2013
the County Attorney, we have none.
Reports?
MS. FLAGG: Good morning.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: For the last time.
MS. FLAGG: For the last time.
Just a quick report on the department statistics. Since November,
2008 through June 23rd, banks have expended $3.2 million, and
they've abated 2,857 violations.
Since July, 2009, $12,858,000 in fines have been waived due to
compliance by property owners.
Just since October 1st, which is this current fiscal year, banks
have expended $252,950, and they've abated 232 violations.
Since October 1st, which is this fiscal year, there's been 4,280
code cases opened and 2,860 educational patrols which have resulted
in 14,529 property inspections.
The code enforcement teams have completed just since October
1st, 74 meet and greet events, cleanup events and vacant home sweeps
in service to the community.
And just this year so far, $4.4 million in fines have been waived.
We're seeing a continued increase of bankruptcy cases. Since
October 1st there's been 286 bankruptcy documents filed. There's
been 5,840 lien searches completed since October 1st. And of those
5,840, 268 identified open code cases. So that saved 268 buyers --
like this gentleman here that purchased a property and didn't realize
that there was a code issue on the property.
And I just wanted to say it's been a pleasure to work with you all
this last five years. I'll be retiring after 32 years, and July 1st, 2008 is
when I joined with your team to become the Code Enforcement
Director. So it will be five years July 1st.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The pleasure has been all ours. We
thank you for your service for the county and all the different
Page 81
June 27, 2013
positions that you've held. And I think that things haven't run
smoother any time that I can remember on the Code Enforcement
Board until your arrival here. So we thank you very much.
MS. FLAGG: Thank you.
MR. LAVINSKI: I'd like to say that in addition, to coin an old
phrase, often imitated but never duplicated.
MS. FLAGG: Well, you're getting a wonderful gentleman in Jeff
Wright who will be coming in as the code enforcement director, and
there's a wonderful team of code enforcement investigators and staff
members that will be working with him so I don't think you'll miss a
beat.
MR. LAVINSKI: Good.
MS. RAWSON: We may not miss a beat, but we will miss you.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes.
MS. FLAGG: Thank you, thank you.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Could we get a picture maybe with Diane up
in front?
I know we're very short on the board, but it would be neat to get
a picture, if you don't mind.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You can probably end the video?
MS. CRAWLEY: Would you like to adjourn first?
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes.
MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to adjourn.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Second.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All
those in favor?
MR. LAVINSKI: Aye.
MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye.
MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?
Page 82
June 27, 2013
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously.
We are adjourned.
*****
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 11 :23 p.m.
C,P ' _ NFORCEMENT BOARD
,. s
tai , _
B' ' • iFMAN, Vice Chairman
These minutes appro ed by the Boa d on al 2a5, aq 3 ,
as presented or as corrected .
Page 83