Loading...
CEB Minutes 08/05/1991 1991 Code Enforcement Board Minutes August 5, 1991 CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY DATE: August 5, 1991 TIME: 2:30 P.M. PLACE: 3rd Floor Boardroom, Building "F", Collier County Government Center, Naples, Florida CEB STAFF PRESENT ANDREWS CONSTANTINE VARIE LAZARUS PEDONE STRAIN WILLIAMS x X "--->-"'-'~~-""-"-"-,"--' .. ABS X X ------ X ABS CLARK WILSON VALCARCEL NINO X ^--_._.__._--._~- X X X MINUTES BY: Annette Guevin, Deputy Clerk CALLED TO ORDER AT: 2:30 P.M. ADJOURNED: 4:00 P.M. "to. PRESIDING: Monte Lazarus, Chairman ADDENDA TO THE AGENDA: None -'^--"--'-'-~.- -'~._.~..-.,->-'----_.~.,--,---,~-- Page 1 ~ ~ CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY. FLORIDA l!Ql;tl.Ql! Date: AUGUST 5, 1991, at 2:30 o'clock P.M. NOTE: 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. l. ROLL CALL 2.. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES June 10, 1991 and June 21, 1991 (IF AVAILABLE) f 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS N/A 5. OLD BUSINESS N/A 6. NEW BUSINESS N/A Continuance of request from First Assembly Church of God Church of Naples, to consider granting a rehearing on the Order of the Board on case CEB #91-013 7. REPORTS N/A 8. NEXT MEETING DATE August 19, 1991 9 . ADJOURN -.... CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY AUGUST 5, 1991 *** ITEM: MOTION: Agenda for August 5, 1991 Made by Mr. Strain to approve the agenda as pre- sented. Seconded by Mr. Pedone. Carried 5/0. *** ITEM: Minutes of June 10, 1991 MOTION: Made by Mr. Andrews to approve the Minutes of June 10, 1991, as presented. Seconded by Mr. Strain. Carried 5/0. *** ITEM: MOTION: Minutes of June 21, 1991 Made by Mr. Andrews to approve the Minutes of June 21, 1991, as presented. Seconded by Mr. Strain. Carried 5/0. *** NEW BUSINESS: Continuance of request from First Assembly of God Church of Naples, to consider granting a rehearing on the Order of the Board on Case CEB #91-013 COMMENTS: Assistant County Atto~ney Wilson asked for clarifi- cation from the parties if they are waiving any objection to her serving as Counsel to the Board from this point forward. She recalled at the last meeting, Messrs. Kramer and Anderson both stipu- lated to the County Attorney's Office being per- mitted to counsel the Board on this rehearing and on the content of the Board's Order. Attorneys Anderson and Ornowski both noted their assent to Ms. Wilson's participation. Attorney Ornowski said from her recollection and ...!~ the minutes, shp d,)p~"3 Lot bplieve t'-Ie o~ Fact. She added her belief that the Findings of Law that were outlined in the Order were not Findings of Order made by the Board; in fact, she does not believe Findings of Law were made other than the Church was in viola- tion of three violations. Further, she said, the Page 2 CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY AUGUST 5, 1991 Order does not reflect that two of the violations were consolidated, one of the violations was dropped and that this in no way impairs or inter- feres with the designation of First Assembly of God Church as an emergency cold weather shelter. She mentioned another concern is the validity of the Order, in that it was signed on a Sunday and case law suggests that doing so makes the Order invalid. Attorney Anderson agreed that from his review of the minutes, the Board may have neglected to make Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. He added had the Board received benefit of Counsel, they would have been advised to do so before the conclu- sion of the hearing. He said all matters which he included in the Order he prepared for the Board have foundation either in the minutes from the meeting or the memorandums of law that were sub- mitted by the parties. He reported County Staff's request today is for the Board to make the Findings of Fact and Conclusion of Law as set forth in the earlier signed Order. He added if the Board finds it is in disagreement with something contained in that Order, this would be the appropriate time to modify it. Chairman Lazarus called attention to the motion made by Mr. Andrews in the June 21st meeting to consolidate Items #2 and #4, and stated he has dif- ficulty understanding the Respondent's concern with regard to that consolidation. Ms. Ornowski clarified that the Order does not reflect the consolidation. Chairman Lazarus noted on June 27th, Mr. Anderson circulated a proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Order to a number of par- ties, including Mr. Kramer and Ms. Ornowski, asking for comments on the draft Order. He asked if Mr. Anderson received any comments from Respondent's counsel, to which Mr. Anderson replied in the nega- tive. Ms. Ornowski commented that Mr. Kramer was una- vailable during that time and she did not feel she had the authority to proceed over his head. She added she was also relying on the customary five days' leeway. Page 3 CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY AUGUST 5, 1991 Dick Clark, Code Enforcement Supervisor, pointed out a request was made of the Respondent's counsel to prepare a suggested Order. Chairman Lazarus inquired if that has been done? Ms. Ornowski indicated Mr. Kramer prefers not to be put in a position of drafting an Order for the CEB. Mr. Clark called attention to Respondent's request that the Order show the existence of a homeless shelter during cold weather. He asserted the Order is intended to show what is in violation, not what is not, therefore, he is not certain that issue should be included. Ms. Ornowski explained the concern is that finding the shelter in violation would impair their designation as a cold weather shelter. Chairman Lazarus commented that Ms. Ornowski is not using that designation as a lever on this pro- ceeding, rather to preserve the rights under a pre- vious designation, to which she agreed. Attorney Anderson and Mr. Clark both noted their objections. Assistant County Attorney Wilson asserted that issue is not before this Board for consideration. Chairman Lazarus asked that the minutes reflect that the CEB takes official notice of the prior designation, and that designation will stand for whatever the Board of County Commissioners said it would. Chairman Lazarus, in response to Ms. Ornowski, indicated the Board must revisit and make final Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, and issue a new Order which will take effect from the date on which the new Order is signed. Assistant County Attorney Wilson interjected that according to her review of the minutes, there was a waiver of the objections that had been raised because Mr. Kramer stipulated to the results of those Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. She said he stipulated to the 18 conditions on the record. She commented that could be found by this Page 4 CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY AUGUST 5, 1991 Board to have been a waiver of any objections to Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. She encouraged the Board in an abundance of caution, to ratify the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law included in the previously signed Order. She explained the Board can ratify the Chairman's action in signing that Order without having to revisit each of the issues. Chairman Lazarus indicated his preference to revi- sit each of the allegations and make whatever fin- dings are necessary on each one, so that the Order is clear and will withstand judicial scrutiny. Mr. Pedone commented when the Order was issued on June 21st, the Church was given 45 days to conform. He said one of the reasons was because of the opening of school. He stated if they are given 45 days from this date, the County will be well into the school year. Chairman Lazarus referred back to Ms. Wilson's point that the Board may ratify the previous actions and the date would run from the date of the previous Order. Ms. Ornowski declared that is part of the problem, because discussion on the minutes indicates 45 days from the date of an Order, therefore, there must be an Order to comply with something. Mr. Pedone questioned if any of the procedures have been started yet for changing the Provisional Use or requesting a hearing before the Board of County Commissioners? Ms. Ornowski replied the Respondent has obtained a building permit and is making efforts to perfect his appeal. She reiterated he must have an Order to deal with that. She men- tioned he is also looking at alternative sites for the homeless and has sent a letter to Mr. Clark asking for his assistance in that regard. In answer to Mr. Constantine, Ms. Ornowski stated the Respondent's confusion is in regard to whether or not the CEB actually made legal Conclusions of Law in the meeting that the shelter is not a custo- mary and accessory use. She indicated her understanding that the conclusion was the Board would have to rely on Mr. Baginski's interpreta- Page 5 CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY AUGUST 5, 1991 tion; however, she is not sure, and that is the reason for this meeting. Assistant County Attorney Wilson asked Mr. Anderson if he would strike from the Order the eighth paragraph contained in the Conclusions of law, which seems to be of great concern to Ms. Ornowski? Mr. Anderson replied he would not volun- tarily do so because the subject is a critical part of the Findings and Conclusions. Chairman Lazarus advised members of several ways to proceed. He said if the Board is so inclined, a motion will be made on whether to grant a rehearing on the limited question of the Order. Assuming the vote is to grant the limited rehearing, he said, the Board may ratify its previous actions and con- firm Findings in the Order. He noted the alter- native is to go through the allegations and ma' _ 2 specific Finding on each of them, which will make it unnecessary to go through ratification proce- dure. MOTION: Made by Mr. Constantine to grant a rehearin~ limited to the question of Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law embodied in the Order of the Board. Seconded by Mr. Strain. Carried 5/0. MOTION: Made by Mr. Constantine that the Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order of the Board in Case No. CEB #91-013 are that this cause came on for public hearings before the Board on May 30, 1991, 3une 10, 1991, June 21, 1991, JUly 25, 1991 and Augu~ 5, 1991, and the Board having heard testi- mony under oath, received evidence, considered memoranda of law, and heard arguments respective to all appropriate matters, thereupon issues its Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order of the Board as follows: that the Respondent, First Assembly of God of Naples, Florida, Inc., is the owner of record of the real property described in the attached Exhibit "An, which is incorporated by reference herein {hereinafter "subject prODer~'I. and that the ~bject property lies in the RMF-6 zoning district. That the Code Enforcement Board has jurisdiction over the SUbject property and .urisdiction over the Res ondent co ~oration, that Respondent's President, David J. Mallory, was pre- sent at the public hearings on behalf of Page 6 CODE ENFORCEMENT ~Q!RP()"~_g_Q~LIE~__9J>UNTY ---____AUGUST 5, 1991 MOTION: MOTION: Responden~and that Res~ondent was re~resente~ leaal counsel at the public hearings. That all poti~es required by Collier County Ordinance No. 88-89 ("Collier County Code Enforcement ~d Ordinance") have.~~~.!l_J2.!:Q.per!y issued. Seconded by ~!"_.._-P_~g.Q~~. Carried 5/0. Made by Mr. Constantine that this cause came on for public hearings before the Board on Mav 30; 1991, June 10, 1991. June 21, 1991, JUl~ 25, 1991 and August 5, 1991, and the Board havin_ hear~ testimon under oath received evidence considered memoranda of law, and heard arguments respective to all appropriate matters, thereupon issues its Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order of the Board as follows: That the SUbject property is in violation of the fOllowing Collier County Ordinances, as hereinafter specified: Ordinance No. 82-2 "Collier Count Zonin Ordinance" Sections 10.2, 10.7 and Ordinance No. 90-75 "Collier Count Buildin Code" Sections AI03.1.1.1 and AI07. That the testimony of wit- nesses and evidence presented showed the Respondent converted and remodeled bUilding formerly used for day care to use as homeless shelter without applYing for and receiving written approval of bUilding permit by the Zoning Director that the lans submitted conform to a licable zonin re~- lations, in violation of Section 10.2 of Ordinance ~o. 82-2. That the testimony of witnesses and evi- dence presented showed the Respondent im~~ov~9-!h~ sub.ect ro ert and en a ed in construction on the sub.ect ro ert without a 1 in for and rior to havin been issued the r ired buildin ermit in violation of Section 10.7 of Ordinance No. 82-2. That testimony and evidence presented showed Re ndent remodeled a structure on the subJect ~roperty without first obtaining the required buildin rmit in violation of Section AI03.1.1.1 and AI07 of Ordinance No. 90-75. Seconded by Mr. Andrews. Carried 4/1 (Mr. Strain opposed). Made by Mr. Constantine that this cause came on for blic hearin s before the Board on Ma 30 199~ June 10, 1991, June 21, 1991, July 25, 1991 an~ " .ugust 5 1991 and the Board havin heard testi- mon under oath received evidence considered memoranda of law, and heard arguments respective to all appropriate matters, thereupon issues it~ Page 7 CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY AUGUST 5, 1991 Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order of the Board as follows: That the testimony of wit- nesses and evidence presented showed the Respondent to be in violation of Section (5) of subsection 13 of Ordinance 89-06 (Collier County Housing Code) bV allowing too many occupants to occupy the subject "Dwelling" which did not contain the minilDUDl floor space requirements for the number of occupants occuPYing said "Dwelling". Seconded by Mr. Pedone. Carried 4/1 (Mr. Strain opposed). MOTION: Made by Mr. Constantine that the Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order of the Board in Case No. CEB #91-013 are that this cause came ~n for public hearings before the Board on May 30, 1991, 3une 10, 1991, 3une 21, 1991, July 25, 1991 and Au~st 5, 199~d the Board having heard testi~ mony under oath, received evidence, considered memoranda of law, and heard arguments respective to all appropriate matters, thereupon issue~ it_~ Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order of the Board as follows:That,_th~_1:t:!l!J1:!JIl.Q.nYJ)f lflit-: nesses and evidence presented showed the Respondent is using the subject property for a homeless !Sh~Jtt:!~L.,~!!~t_t~_~1:__R~~R.Q~den1:_ failed to apply for and receive Provisional Use approval of Petition~_;J;: to use the subject prQJ2.er~f9..r a homele_~_._~~~Jte!"L in violation of Sections 7.12.b.4 and 13 of Ordinance No. 82-2 and in violation of the pre- viously approved Provisional Use (PU-83-21C, Resolution No. 83-203) for the subject property issued pursuant to the afore~~e~erenced sections of Ordinance No. 82-2. COMMENTS: Ms. Ornowski relayed her confusion with the above motion due to her understanding that the Board has indicated the Respondent should be operating under the new Ordinance 91-34. Chairman Lazarus concurred and asked for comments from Staff. Mr. Clark reported Staff holds the position that the language read by Mr. Constantine is correct. He said if Respondent wishes additional language to reflect Ordinance 91-34, Staff will have no objec- tion. He pointed out that prior to the enactment of Ordinance 91-34, which amends Ordinance 82-2, the homeless shelter was in existence as a violation of Ordinance 82-2. Page 8 CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY MOTION: COMMENTS: AUGUST 5, 1991 Assistant County Attorney Wilson added Ordinance 82-2 is the correct reference. She asserted, however, that language is not important, adding the important factual finding is whether or not the Board found the Respondent in violation under Ordinance 82-2 as it stood then and as it stood at the time of the hearings. Ms. Ornowski disagreed, stating in three days of hearings a very important issue was, should Reverend Mallory, under the amended Ordinance 82-~, get an additional Provisional Use. She said the issue of vested rights was addressed. She noted their whole argument was they did not have to apply for a Provisional Use because they were already operating under one. Mr. Strain communicated his concern with the language as written in Paragraph 4 C. of the Findings of Fact. The motion made by Mr. Constantine was seconded by Mr. Pedone. Chairman Lazarus advised that the Board at the 6/21/91 hearing, found a violation of the ordi- nance, but not a violation of the previously approved Provisional Use. Mr. Anderson directed attention to page 19 of the 6/21/91 minutes, under "Comments", stating that is one of the two charges that were combined into one. Ms. Ornowski indicated her concern is the specific wording, not so much the number of the violation. She stated her belief that the Board's conclusion had to do with not on the prior existing Provisional Use, but that the Church had to go through a separate procedure. Mr. Anderson advised there were two sections of Ordinance 82-2 they were charged with violating. He said one is Section 7.12.b.4. which gives a spe- cific listing of Provisional Uses in the RMF-6 zoning district. He stated Section 13 authorizes the procedures for Provisional Uses generally. He asserted Subsection "e" of Section 13 provides that violation of such conditions and safeguards which are made a part of the terms under which the Page 9 CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY ~QTIO~ : MOTION: ~OMMENTS: AUGUST 5, 1991 Provisional Use is granted shall be deemed a viola- tion of this Zoning Ordinance. He noted Staff was willing to stipulate to combining the two charges into one so the Respondent would not face separate fines for each violation, but nonetheless, they are two distinct violations of the Zoning Ordinance. Chairman Lazarus commented the motion on the floor states there was a violation of Section 7.12.b.4 and Section 13 of Ordinance 82-2 and a violation of the previously approved Provisional Use. Upon call for the question, the motion carried 4/1 (Mr. Strain opposed). Made by Mr. Constantine that the Findinas of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order of the Board in Case No. CEB #91-013 are that this cause came on for public hearinas before the Board on May 30, 1991, June 10, 1991, June 21, 1991, July 25, 1991 and Auaust 5, 1991, and the Board havina heard testi- mony under oath, received evidence, considered memoranda of law, and heard arguments respective to all appropriate matters, thereUpOn issues its Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order of the Board as follows: that the testimony of wit- !1esse~_~!!<!. eviqence ~~ent~!1 showed that a home- less shelter is not a customary accessory use to a church under Ordinance 82-2. Seconded by Mr. Pedone. Chairman Lazarus indicated his belief that the Board took the position that Mr. Baginski made a determination, as an official of Collier County Government, and that the Board was not making a finding on customary accessory use. Mr. Constantine relayed his opinion that the Board accepted the position of Mr. Baginski and felt an obligation to follow it. Chairman ~azarus asserted he specifically wanted to avoid putting the CEB in the position of making a finding on this issue, because he does not believe it is the Board's legitimate role. He questioned whether this finding is necessary in the Order. Mr. Pedone communicated ilis opinion that the issue of customary accessory use is very important to the Order. Page 10 CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY _ AUGUST ~991 Ms. Wilson explained the factual finding should be that the Board accepts the interpretation of the Zoning Director. MOTION: Mr. Constantine amended his motion to include the fOllowing: that the testimony of witnesses and evidence presented showed that a homeless shelter is not a customary accessory use to the previously ap roved Provisional Use for the sub.ect ro ert . Seconded by Mr. Pedone. Carried 3/2 (Messrs. Strain and Lazarus opposed). MOTION: Made by Mr. Constantine that the Findinqs of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order of the Board in Cas~ No. CEB #91-013 are that this cause came on for blic hear in s before the Board on Ma 30 1991, 3une 10, 1991, 3une 21, 1991, 3uly 25, 1991 and Au st 5 1991 and the Board havin heard testi- mon under oath received evidence considered memoranda of law, and heard arguments respective to all appropriate matters, thereupOn issues its Findinqs of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order of the Board as follows: that the Petitioner has made ~__!~islat.ive determinat ion to regulate and classif a homeless shelter as a use which re ire~ a ProvisiQnal Use in the RMF-6 zoning distr!~:t. Seconded by Mr. Pedone. ~O~~~ : ".....; it is not the Board's position to rezone Collier County. ~>; (l Mr. Anderson explained this issue is simply a reference to the quaSi-judicial notice the Board took of the Collier County Zoning Ordinance. Chairman Lazarus communicated he also has a problem with the above motion. Mr. Pedone gave his interpretation that the Petitioner, being Collier County, has made a deter- mination they can classify what is a homeless shelter. MOTION: Upon call for the question, the motion carried 3/2 (Messrs. Strain and Lazarus opposed). COMME.l'ITS : Ms. Wilson asked both counsels to state for the record they have no objections to the form of the motions made by Mr. Constantine. Page JJ CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY AUGUST 5, 1991 Ms. Ornowski stated she has no objection to the procedure and her objections to the wordings are on the record. Mr. Anderson stated he has no objections. Ms. Ornowski pointed out that the combination of two violations and dropping of another have not been specifically addressed in the Findings of Fact. Ms. Wilson agreed that dropping Violation #5 should be addressed for clarification, however, combining Violations #2 and #4 was addressed. In answer to Ms. Wilson, Mr. Anderson indicated he had no objection to addressing Violation #5. MOTION: Made by Mr. Constantine that the Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order of the Board in Case No. CEB #91-013 are that this cause came on for public hearings before the Board on May 30, 1991, 3une 10, 1991, June 21, 1991, 3uly 25, 1991 an4 August 5, 1991, and the Board havina heard testi- mon under oath received evidence considered memoranda of law, and heard arguments respective to all appropriate matters, thereupon issues its Findinas of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order of the Board as follows: that the charae of violation of Ordinance No. 82-2, Section 7.12.b.4. as t~ allowin more than four unrelated ersons to occu a sin le dwellin unit b utilizin a structure as a homeless shelter is found to be redundant with the violations referred to and afore-described in Para a h 4.C herein and is therefore stricken. Seconded by Mr. Pedone. Carried 5/0. MOTION: Made by Mr. Constantine that the Conclusions of Law are that the Respondent, First Assembly of God of Na les Inc. is in violation of: Ordinance No. 82-2 ("Collier County Zoning Ordinance"lJ~ction~ 10.2, 10.7, 7.12.b.4, and 13; Ordinan~e NO~_89=0~ "Collier Count Housin Code" Section 5~ Ordinance No. 90-75 ("Collier County BUilding Code" Sections AI03.1.1.1 AI07. That the ReSpOndent is required to and failed to obtain Provisional Use approval from the Petitioner in grder to add operation of a homeless shelter, a new land use and a chanae in occupancy from its pre~ Page 12 CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIE1LCI~~_ .....__..,-_....__..~ugu~!_...~..l--.!991. vioUS~roved Provisional Use lPU-83-2l~ Resolution No. 83-203) for the subject pro__rty zoned RMF-6. That the homeless shelter is not a customary accessory use to a church. That the ~ homeless shelter is not a customary accessory use to the Provisional Use preViously approved by Petitioner for Respondent's property. That the Board is bound bv the written interpretation of the Petitioner's Zoning Director (Planning Services Mana er that a homeless shelter is not a customar ~ccessory use to the preViously approved Provisional Use. That the Board does not have jurisdiction to consider or rule upon federal ~~ state constitutional issues. That ReSpOndent may avail itself of alternative administrative reme- dies. That adoption of zoning laws ~~_~la.~~9~~ ~J!...~.~~.!.f!.t;_~t!~~pQ..t uses therein is a local legis_!~_.t! VtL_t~C?:t!9;r!1__.~~__tl!.~!__!"~J.~_!.!Q!L~~ ~lassifica~Jon of uses by one local_legisjative ~ody ma.Y_~!.ff~f!"C?~tl1~.~ .._()J_.~Q_!I1f!r lQc::~!J.f!g!.sl~:- !.ive body. Seconded by ~r~..._~edone. Carried 4/1 (Mr. Strain opposed). QOMMEltTS: Ms. Wilson inquired if Ms. Ornowski is imposing any new objections to the Order of the Board? Ms. Ornowski asked for clarification if the 45 day time period will start from this date? Chairman Lazarus replied in the negative, stating the Respondent has until August 15, 1991. He suggested the re-signed Order specify that the Respondent correct the violations on or before August 15, 1991. Ms. Ornowski objected, stating as far as the Respondent is concerned, there was no Order. Shp said that was the basis for the motion for a rehearing. She ridded the Board made the decision to aJlow the Respondent 45 days from the date of the Order', 8.n.d .this.is the d<:i.te of:'u' Order. Chairman Lazarus mentioned the Order of the Board indicates the Board allowed the Respondent to correct the violations on or before August 15, 1991, not 45 days from the date of the Order. Ms. Ornowski countered that the minutes reflect otherwise. Page 13 9_()_DA.ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLI, I RR COUNTY MOTION: AUGUST 5, 1991 Chairman Lazarus stated the Board is ratifying its previous action, which means the Respondent has been on notice during the intervening time. Mr. Anderson noted when the County made its origl~ nal recommendation for a 45 day period, it was 4~ days fro;,: _ ~ "02. , was extended in the Order an additional 10 days because that is how long it took to get the Order signed. He indicated today is the 45th day from hearing and there has been no Provisional Use application filed, nor has there been an appeal of Mr. Baginski's interpretation. He said the 30 day appeal period has long since been passed. Ms. Ornowski reiterated the minutes clearly state 45 days from the date of the Order. Made by Mr. Strain to reaffirm the previous Order of the Board that based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, and pUrsuant to the authority granted in Chapter 162, Florida Statutes~ ~d Collier County Ordinance No. 88-89, it i~ here Ordered: That the Re ondent correct the violations on or before August 15, 1991. That in the event Respondent does not comply with this Order and correct the violations on or before Au st 15 1991 Res ondent is hereb ordered to a a fine of 250.00 er da for each and ever da the 0 ration of a homeless shelter continues at the SUbject location is in violation o~ Ordinance No. 82-2, Sections 7.12.b.4 and 13 con- tinues past said date and a fine of 50.00 r da er erson in excess of 17 occu ants for each and ever da the violation of Ordinance No. 89-06 continues ast said date. That a fine of 25.00 er da ast said date that Res ondent fails to obtain the required bUilding permit in violati~n of Ordinances. 82-2 and 9<!:-75. Th~L~to a~d including August 15, 1991, the Respondent shall com 1 with each and ever term and condition set forth in the attached Stipulation of First Assembly of God of Naples, Inc., which is incorporated by ~eference herein as Exhibit liB". That at any time on or before Auaust 15, 1991, Petitioner or Res ndent ma file a re est for the Code Enforcement Board to reconvene for the pU~ose of ~ehearin and reconsiderin the date when viola- tions must be corrected, the amount of the fines, Page 14 CODE EKPoRCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY AUGUST 5, 1991 such other matters as ma be a ro riate includin but not limited to enfor- cement of terms and conditions in the StipUlation identified as Exhibit ABA; and to that end, th~ Code Enforcement Board hereby reserves its juris- ~iction. Failure to comply with the Order within ~he specified time will result in the recordation of a lien pursuant to Chapter 162, ~lorid~ Statutes which ma be foreclosed and Res ondent's ro ert sold to enforce the lien. Done and Ordered this 5th day of Auaust, 1991, at Collier County, Florida. Seconded by Mr~_Constantin~. Carried 5/0. C~S: Ms. Wilson asked if there is any objection to the County Attorney's Office drafting the amended Order? Ms. Ornowski stated she does not object, however, wished to clarify a portion of the Order pertaining to failure to comply will result in the recordation of a lien. Ms. Wilson indicated that is standard language from the State Statute and the Ordinance. Ms. Wilson asked for confirmation that the Findings of Fact and Conclusions and Order of the Board that were executed on June 30, 1991, by the Chairman of the Code Enforcement Board have been approved in all respects with one exception; that is the addi- tion of paragraph 8 to the Findings of Fact regarding redundancy of alleged violation of Ordinance 82-2, Section 7.12.b.4. Chairman Lazarus confirmed the above. *** ITEM: Next Meeting There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned by Order of the Chair. Chairman Lazarus advised members that the next meeting will be on August 19, 1991 at 9:00 A.M. CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY Page 15 CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY -'-..-.,.-.----'-_~'_._h_._.._..._.._._____..._..~.~".._^_"~__,__.....~...._. / i~{ . .~--.-^^~I!.~Q-~r___!h_.19 9 1.. rman Page 16