Loading...
CEB Minutes 03/22/1990 1990 Code Enforcement Board March 22, 1990 CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY DATE: March 22, 1990 ~- TIME: 9:00 A.M. PLACE: 3rd Floor Boardroom, Building "F", Collier County Government Center, Naples, Florida CEB STAFF PRESENT ANDREWS CONSTANTINE LAMOUREUX LAZARUS PEDONE STRAIN WILLIAMS X X X X X X X CLARK MAN'ALICH SMITH X X X MINUTES BY: Carol McClenathen and Ellie Hoffman, Deputy Clerks CALLED TO ORDER AT: 9:00 A.M. ADJOURNED: 10:50 A.M. PRESIDING: Timothy Constantine ADDENDA TO THE AGENDA: None Page 1 CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY. FLORIDA AGE N D A DATE: March 22, 1990, at 9:00 A.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. 1. ROLL CALL 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES February 22, 1990 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Board of County Commissioners vs. Emanuel DePeppo. Jr. and Joann DePeppo; Case No. CEB 90-013 B. Board of County Commissioners vs. Frank H. Atkinson. Jr.: Case No. CEB 90-014 C. Board of County Commissioners vs. Mateo Ayala and Nora Ayala: Case No. CEB 90-015 D. Board of County Commissioners vs. Silas Bacon: Case No. CEB 90-016 E. Board of County Commissioners vs. Jack L. Smith and Ruth Smith; Case No. CEB 90-017 F. Board of County Commissioners vs. Patricia Dancer: Case No. CEB 90-018 5. OLD BUSINESS 6. NEW BUSINESS 7. REPORTS 8. NEXT MEETING DATE Scheduled for April 26, 1990, at 9:00 A.M. 9. ADJOURN CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY MARCH 22, 1990 ITEM: MOTION: Minutes of February 22, 1990 Consensus of approval with the following changes: 1. Page 8, Item: Terrace Nursery, all spellings of Terrace Nursery should be changed to Tari's. 2. Page 1, Motion: ..."Conclusions of Law is" should read, "Conclusions of Law are:" *** CASE NO: CEB 90-013 RESPONDENT: Mr. Emanuel DePeppo Jr., and Joann DePeppo LOCATION OF VIOLATION: 5312 Texas Ave., Lot 6, Block 10, Naples Manor Lakes, Naples, Florida. VIOLATION: (Section 1.1164 of Ordinance 82-2, Collier County Zoning Ordinance) COMMENTS: Mr. Bill Smith, Compliance Services Enforcement Coordinator, stated that the recorder and the Board have been given Composite Exhibit "A" and he requested this be admitted into evidence. Consensus was to admit Composite Exhibit "A" into evidence for Case No. 90-013, with Mr. Emanuel DePeppo, Jr. and Joann DePeppo respondents. Mr. Smith said the respondents were properly notified as required, and are not present, adding that Mr. and Mrs. DePeppo are charged with being in violation of Collier County Ordinance 82-2, Section 1.11b4 and are the owners of record of 5312 Texas Ave., Naples Manor Lakes, Naples, Florida. Mr. Smith continued by saying that Mr. and Mrs. DePeppo have used a residentially zoned property to store automotive parts, dismantled automobiles, and trash. He noted that the respondents have complied and staff is recommending a $150.00 per day fine should the violation reoccur. Mr. Clark indicated that because compliance did not occur until the eleventh hour and because these are often repeat violations, Mr. Clark, the Code Enforcement Supervisor, concurred with Mr. Smith in Page 2 CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY MOTION: MOTION: MARCH 22, 1990 requesting the $150.00/day fine be imposed if a repeat violation occurs. Made by Mr. Strain that Case No. 90-013 came before the CEB on March 22, 1990 and the Board having heard testimony issued Findings of Fact that Emanuel DePeppo, Jr. and Joann DePeppo are the owners of subject property, and the Code Enforcement Board has jurisdiction of respondents, and that the respondents are not present at the public hearing, although due notice has been issued. All notices required by Collier County Ordinance 88-89 have been properly issued and that property located at 5312 Texas Avenue was in viola- tion of Section of 1.11b., Collier County Zoning Ordinance 82-2 as amended, in the following particulars: Illegal land use by unauthorized accumulation of trash and debris. Seconded by Mr. Lamoureux. Upon call for the question, the motion carried una- nimously. Made by Mr. Strain that the Conclusion of Law is that Emanuel DePeppo. Jr. and Joann DePeppo were in violation of 1.11b., Collier County Zoning Ordinance 82-2 as amended and the order is based upon the foregoing Findings-of-Fact and pursuant to the authority granted in Chapter 162, Florida Statutes, in Collier County Ordinance No. 88-89 as amended; it is hereby ordered that the respondents have corrected the violation of Section 1.11b. Collier County Ordinance 82-2 as amended, by clearing the unauthorized and illegal accumulation of trash and debris; that said correction has been completed on or before the 22nd of March, 1990; that if the illegal use occurs again, respondent is hereby ordered to pay a fine of $150.00/day for each and every day any violation described herein continues past this date; failure to comply will result in a lien pursuant to Chapter 162 which may be foreclosed and respondents property sold to satisfy the lien. Seconded by Mr. Lamoureux. Upon call for the question, the motion carried unanimously. *** Page 3 CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY CASE NO. RESPONDENT : MARCH 22, 1990 90-01. Mr. Frank H. Atkinson, Jr. LOCATION OF VIOLATION: 1880 Washburn Ave., Naples, Florida. VIOLATION: COMMENTS: CASE NO: RESPONDENT : Section 1.9b4 of Collier County Zoning Ordinance 82-2. Mr. Bill Smith, Compliances Services Enforcement Coordinator, stated that Frank H. Atkinson is in compliance and requested that CEB 90-016 be dismissed. *** 90-016 Mr. Silas Bacon LOCATION OF VIOLATION: East of 303 Carver, Immokalee, Florida. VIOLATION: COMMENTS: CASE NO: RESPONDENT : Sections 8.51 and 1.12b4 of Ordinance 82-2, Collier County Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Bill Smith, Compliances Services Enforcement Coordinator, stated that Silas Bacon is in compliance and requested that CEB 90-016 be dismissed. *** 90-015 LOCATION OF VIOLATION: 111 South 4th St., Immokalee, Florida. Mr. Mateo Ayala and Nora Ayala VIOLATION: COMMENTS: Section 1.23b. of Ordinance 82-2, Collier County Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Smith, Compliance Services Coordinator, stated that the recorder and the Board have been given Composite Exhibit "A" and he requested this be admitted into evidence for Case No. 90-015. Consensus was to admit Composite Exhibit "A" into evidence for Case No. 90-015 Mr. Williams withdrew (Conflict of Voting Form not filed with the Clerk of the Board Office) due to potential conflict of interest. Page 4 CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY MARCH 22, 1990 He said Mr. Mateo Ayala and Mrs. Nora Ayala are charged with being in violation of Collier County Ordinance 82-2, Sect 1.23b4. Mr. and Mrs. Ayala are the owners of record for the parcel on 111 South 4th Street, Immokalee, Fl., known as all of Lot 14 and 13 less the South 68 feet, Lot 4, Carson Subdivision, as recorded in Plat Book 2, page 40 of the Public Records of Collier County, Fl., Mr. Smith continued. He stated that Mr. and Mrs. Ayala have a mobile home stored on the rear of the pro- perty which is Zoned C-4, and prohibits a mobile home to be stored or occupied. He also said that the respondents have been properly notified as required by ordinance. Mr. Smith noted that the Property Appraiser's Card indicates that everything on the property was removed in 1913 and that all that remains on the property is a primary structure. In addition, Mr. Smith continued, the Card indicates Mr. Ayala purchased the property in 1985. At this time Mr. and Mrs. Ayala arrived and upon approaching the podium, indicated that the aerial photos were not correct, and this was so noted by the CEB for the record. Mr. Smith continued, saying that Mr. Dick Clark, Mr. Robert Nonnenmacher, a member of the Immokalee Fire Department and he visited the property on December 21, 1989, and noted that there were two mobile homes and one mobile home chassis on the site. On December 28, Mr. Nonnenmacher, established that Mr. Ayala is the owner of the property, prepared a notice of violation, and a stipulation for the mobile home chassis and litter, in Violation of Ordinance 88-45, Section 5, 6, and 1, and also illegal land use under Section 1.23b4, Mr. Smith said. Mr. Smith then noted that Investigator Nonnenmacher and Mr. Ayala met on January 10, 1990, and Mr. Ayala indicated that the litter and the mobile home chassis would be removed, however, he indicated that the two mobile homes have been on the location since the 1960's and they are non-conforming. Page 5 CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY MARCH 22, 1990 Investigator Nonnenmacher went to the Property Appraiser's office January 11, and researched the Property Appraisers Card, which indicates there is no mobile home on site, Mr. Smith stated. Upon being sworn in, Investigator Nonnenmacher stated he has been to the property and there is an OCCUpiRd mobile home existing. He continued by saying that the two occupants of the mobile home pay rent to Mr. Ayala, and further indicated that all trash, litter, and debris has been removed from the property. Mr. Clark then asked Mr. Nonnenmacher to identify the copy of the Property Appraiser's Card showing the subject property. Mr. Nonnenmacher indicated that the card shows the total structures on the site prior to 1973 as four, and that during that year two had been removed. Upon question, Mr. Nonnenmacher responded that the mobile home that exits on the property at this time is not the same one that was there previously, and the only struc- ture that legally exists is the main structure. Mr. Clark asked Mr. Nonnenmacher whether the site has permanent sewer connections, and he responded by saying that the pipe goes into the ground and from there he does not know where it goes. Mr. Nonnenmacher further stated that the water supply goes under the mobile home and towards the main house, which indicates that it is a temporary supply line from the main house, and the electric supply is also furnished, without meter, from the main structure. Upon further questioning by Mr. Clark, Mr. Nonnenmacher responded affirmatively when asked if the mobile home No. 4 that was on the property when it was first visited has since been removed. Mr. Lazarus asked Mr. Nonnenmacher why there is a discrepancy in the address on the card and the address of the subject property, to which Mr. Nonnenmacher indicated that on the back side of the Property Appraiser's Card, the new address is 111 South 4th Street, and the legal description is one and the same. Mr. Nonnenmacher identified the photographs as ones he had taken on March 20, 1990, as the conduit with Page 6 CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY MARCH 22, 1990 the electric line running to the rear of the mobile home, the water lines to the rear of the conduit, and the broken sewer line, and that he has marked the photos with the case number, the date and the description and initialed them on the back. Mr. Smith requested that the photographs be admitted into evidence as page 25 of Composite Exh i bit " A" . Mr. Ayala, upon looking at the photographs, indi- cated that he concurres with photos one and two, but does not agree with photo number three. Mr. Nonnenmacher, responding to Mr. Clark's questions, indicated that there is a lot of mobile home movements in the Immokalee area, that new mobile homes are being moved in any time including weekends, that the zoning is C-4 for the subject property, and that a mobile home is a violation of that zoning. Upon being sworn in, Mr. Mateo Ayala, was notified that Mr. Williams has removed himself from the voting. Mr. Ayala stated that the mobile home in question has been there since 1969, and he brought a former resident of the trailer with him to testify that it is the same trailer, and that the trailer should still be under the grandfather issue. Mr. Ayala inquired why Mr. Nonnenmacher or his representatives are not in their office to hear response when he visits the office, and noted that he is unable to phone because he is usually in the fields, and he objects to the report indicating that he has not responded. In response to Mr. Clark's questions, Mr. Ayala stated that he purchased the property in 1985, but did not recall the man's name, that the gentle- men here to testify lived on the property prior to Mr. Ayala's purchasing it, that he is not aware that it had been zoned C-4 in 1982, and that he has not ever lived in the mobile home in question as of this date. Mr. Ayala stated that he has lived in Immokalee all his life and that he had taken four mobile homes Page 7 CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY MARCH 22, 1990 off the property and that he has not appeared this date in order to keep the mobile home on the pro- perty, but because of the principle involved. Upon being sworn in, Mrs. Nora Ayala, stated that she agrees with Mr. Ayala's principle. Mr. Ayala indicated that since he purchased the property in 1985 he has not paid any property tax because he has received no bill. Mr. Clark indicated that tax records are very scru- pulous and that the property is not listed on the tax record even though the property has been visited, because there were no mobile homes on site. He further stated that the grandfather issue, non-conforming use, was lost when the last trailer was removed several years ago. Contradicting Mr. Clark, Mr. Ayala stated the mobile home has been on the site and that the gentlemen who accompanied him this date put the existing mobile home on the property and lived in it himself for approximately two months. Mr. Ayala indicated that he understands that the County is simply trying to make Immokalee look good and that he could remove the trailer at any time, however, he still feels that his rights are being violated, and for this reason he is loosing a days pay. Upon being sworn in, Mr. Jose Montejo, 315 6th Street South, Immokalee, Fl., testified that the mobile home in question was placed on the site in approximately 1968, since that time, the trailer has not been removed, and that he had lived in the trailer for one month, while having a new trailer installed on his own property. Mr. Clark asked Mr. Montejo if he has seen that same mobile home every day since 1960. Mr. Montejo indicated that although the mobile home is not visible from his place of residence, he has passed it nearly every day and the trailer could not have been moved without his noticing it. Mr. Constantine noted that the electric has been run from the house, and at one time five Page 8 CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY MARCH 22, 1990 trailers were on the lot but they have been removed periodically and not replaced. Mr. Lamoreux asked Mr. Ayala if he was aware that the aerial photographs do not show any trailers on the property. Mr. Ayala indicated that he understands but the trailers have been on the property and the fact has been testified to, regardless of what the photos show. Mr. Strain inquired if there is a way to check the date of manufacture of the trailer, to which Mr. Clark responded that that is not in question, and there were no identifying marks to authenticate the year of manufacture. Mr. Strain requested clarification, stating that it is his understanding that according to the Tax Assessor's roles structures No. one and No. four were taxed and legal and that No. four turned out to be trash. He asked if the subject mobile home is moved to site No. four, hooked up properly with water, sewer and electric, would it be legal? Responding, Mr. Clark said that this is not feasible, because non-conforming use states that once the item is removed, it cannot be replaced. Mr. Strain asked whether it could have been rebuilt, to which Mr. Clark responded that if destruction is over 50%, it cannot be rebuilt. Mr. Constantine indicated that he feels the supplying of the aerial photos is important and that the Board should have been supplied with same, due to the testimony of the witness. Mr. Smith indicated that Mr. Ayala has received copies of all materials presented. Mr. Clark indicated that the Tax Assessor will not remove a property from the tax roles unless it is actually gone. Upon closure of the presentation of evidence, Mr. Clark then made a recommendation noting that the evidence presented, including official tax records, indicates there has been no property tax paid, but official records show that the mobile Page 9 CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY MARCH 22, 1990 home was not there for a period of time. He said the placement of the mobile home on the site after the non-conformance was terminated, whether by Mr. Ayala or any other prior owner, is not relevant but the mobile home must be removed by Ordinance. Continuing with the recommendation, Mr. Clark stated that since Mr. Ayala has no serious finan- cial problems with the removal of the mobile home, it is the recommendation that the Zoning Ord~: 2. removed within 30 days; failure to comply will result in a $200.00 per day fine, and repeat violations will be treated in a similar manner. MOTION: Made by Mr. Andrews that Case No., 90-015 came before the CEB on March 22, 1990, and the board having heard testimony under oath, received evi- dence and heard arguments respective to all mat- ters, issued this Finding of Fact; that Mateo and Nora Ayala are the owners of record of subject pro- perty; that the CEB has jurisdiction of the respon- dents; that Mateo and Nora Ayala were both present at the hearing; that all notices as required by Collier County Zoning Ordinance No. 88-89 have been properly issued, and that the pro- perty located at 111 South .th St., Immokalee, Fl., described as Block., Lot 1. and part of Lot 13, Carson SUb-division, as recorded in the Public Records of Collier County, Fl., is in violation of Section 1.23b., Collier County Zoning Ordinance No. 82-2, as amended in the following: Illegal land use in a prohibited district, C-4. Seconded by Mr. Lamoureux. During the discussion that followed, Mr. Constantine indicated that he is not comfortable with Staff's side, stating that there are conflicting statements from the respondent's wit- ness, adding that he feels uncomfortable without the photographs and the County has not covered all the possibilities regarding this issue. Mr. Lamoureux requested that Mr. Smith explain, again, for the benefit of the Board, why there is a discrepancy in the addresses on the tax records. Mr. Smith responded saying that the Post Office, at one time set up addresses for some areas, and that those are not necessarily the addresses of record; Page 10 CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY MARCH 22, 1990 therefore, the Legal description has been used, indicating that the exhibit on Page 11 refers to the new address. Mr. Constantine reminded the board that if the mobile home has been there since 1968 without interruption, it is not illegal. Upon call for the question, the motion was denied, 1/5, Mr. Lazarus, Mr. Constantine, Mr. Lamoureux, Mr. Pedone, Mr. Strain, opposed. (Mr. Williams abstained. ) Without Finding of Fact, Mr. Constantine indicated there can be no Conclusion of Law and called for any other Findings of Fact. There being none, the case was dismissed. CASE NO: 90-011 RESPONDENTS: Jack L. and Ruth Smith VIOLATION: LOCATION OF VIOLATION: 4083 New Moon Ct., Naples, Florida. COMMEBTS: Sections 5, 6, & 1, of Ordinance 88-45, Collier County Litter Ordinance Mr. Smith presented Composite Exhibit "A" and said that the Board and the recorder have copies of this exhibit. He asked that it be admitted into evi- dence for this case. Mr. Constantine requested that Mrs. Smith approach the podium, and asked if she has any corrections to the evidence? Mrs. Smith indicated she would like a definition of the word "tenant" as used on Page 5, paragraphs 3 and 4 and on Page 6, paragraph 1. Defining this word, Mr. Thurston, investigator of the complaint, indicated that the occupant does not hold deed to the property, and is, therefore, referred to as tenant. Mrs. Smith then requested that the Board be aware that the phone call referred to on the last paragraph of this page was in fact made by herself, requesting a meeting between herself, the tenant, and Mr. Thurston. Page 11 CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY MARCH 22, 1990 The respondent, Mr. Smith noted, has stipulated that the violation did exist and has also stipu- lated that the violation has been corrected, and Staff agrees. Upon being sworn in, Mrs. Ruth Smith, owner of the property, testified that there was unauthorized and illegal accumulations of debris and the pro- perty was in violation of Ordinance 88-45, Sections 5,6, & 7, but that she and Mr. Jack L. Smith were not aware that they were the party responsible for the violations. She noted that when they became aware of their responsibility, they made every effort to see that Mr. Dee complied, because in their opinion, he is the true owner of the property. Mr. Smith indicated that there is an "Agreement for Deed," however, Mr. and Mrs. Smith are the true owners of record for the property. He said the property is now in compliance, and staff recommends that, should there be further violations, a $100/day fine be imposed for every day from this date. Mrs. Smith stated for the record that neither she nor her husband were aware of any problems, what- soever, or of any obligations on their part con- cerning the property. Upon notification of this responsibility, Mrs. Smith continued, they worked very hard, conducting their own investigations and finding that they are indeed the responsible party. She added that they have since acquired the ser- vices of an attorney, drawn up a new sales agreement with Mr. Dee's name on the deed, and will no longer be responsible upon recording of the documents. Mrs. Smith requested a 30 day grace period before the violations would be sited, allowing time for the recording of the documents. Mr. Smith requested that the Board make a finding with the evidence as presented and not grant the 30 day grace period so that the findings of the board will carryover to the new owner. Should for some reason the paperwork not go through, Mr. Clark added, the Smith's will still be the legal owners and subject to the findings. Page 12 CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY MARCH 22, 1990 Mrs. Smith indicated that no change will take place except that the responsible party will be Mr. Dee from the time of recording forward, and further stated that she feels it is unfair to levy a fine on her husband and herself since they are making every effort to comply. Mr. Clark indicated that Staff will be very conscientious and try to work with the owner and be as tolerant as possible; however, the neighbors have a right to expect action to be taken if the violation reoccurs. Mrs. Smith entered into evidence a copy of the Sales Agreement between her husband, herself and Mr. and Mrs. Dee, with no objection from staff. During the ensuing discussion, Mr. Lamoureux noted that it is unfortunate that the Smiths have to be responsible but until the Sale Agreement is recorded, they must retain that responsibility. MOTION: Made by Mr. Lazarus that the Findinas of Fact in Case No. 90-011 are that this case came before the CEB on March 22, 1990, and the Board heard testi- mony under oath, received evidence and heard arguments respective to all matters, thereupOn issued its Findinas-of-Fact; that Jack L. and Ruth Smith are the owners of record of subject property; that the CEB has jurisdiction over the respondents; and that Ruth Smith was present at the Public Rearina; all notices required by Collier County Ordinance No. 88-89 have been properly issued; the property located at 4083 New Moon Court, Naples, Fl., was in violation of Sections 5,6, and 1 of Collier County 88-45, as amended in the followina particulars: unauthorized accumulation of litter. Seconded by Mr. Lamoureux . Upon Call for the question, the motion carried una- nimously. MOTION: Made by Mr. Lazarus that the Conclusions of Law are that Jack L. and Ruth Smith were in violation of Sections 5,6 & 1 of Collier County Ordinance No. 88-45 as amended, based on the foregoina Findings-of-Fact; the respondent has complied and corrected the said violations by removing the accumulation of litter, and in the event of Page 13 CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY MARCH 22, 1990 recurrence are hereby ordered to pay $100/day for each an every day any violation described herein continues; failure to comply with the order within a specified time will result in the recording of a lien on the property which may be foreclosed and the subject property may be sold to enforce the lien. Seconded by Mr. Lamouraux. Upon call for the question, the motion carried unanimously. Mr. Constantine then reminded Mrs. Smith that she could obtain a copy of the proceedings, should she wish to appeal the findings of the CEB. **. Deputy Clerk Hoffman replaced Deputy Clerk McClenathen at this time *** CASE NO. 90-018 RESPORDENT : Patricia Dancer LOCATION OF VIOLATION: 321 21st St. N.W., Naples, Florida more particularly described as Tract 39, Golden Gate Estates, Unit 1 according to the plat thereof recorded in plat book 4, pages 95 and 96 of the public record of Collier County, Florida. VIOLATION: Section 5 of Ordinance No. 89-06, the Collier County Housing Code Ordinance COIIlIEU... S : Compliance Services Enforcement Coordinator Smith informed that the recorder and the Board have been provided with Composite Exhibit "A", and requested that this be admitted into evidence. The consensus was to admit Composite Exhibit "A" into evidence for Case No. 90-018. After being sworn in by Mr. Smith, Mrs. Patricia Dancer acknowledged that she is the owner of the subject property. In answer to Mr. Smith, Mrs. Dancer stated that there were numerous violations of the ordinance, and she is attempting to correct them. Mr. Smith informed that Staff is recommending that the remaining violations be corrected within 15 Page 14 CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY MOTION: MOTION: MARCH 22, 1990 days from this date, and that any violation that exists for any day thereafter, that a fine be imposed in the amount of $100/per day for each and every remaining violation. Mrs. Dancer concurred with the recommendations of Staff. Mr. Lazarus questioned whether the property in question is occupied by Mrs. Dancer or someone else? Mrs. Dancer replied that the property is occupied by someone other than herself. Mr. Lazarus noted that several of the alleged violations concern failure to exhaust a fireplace properly and electrical violations. He asked whether any of these violations are potentially hazardous? Mr. Smith replied that the remaining violations are not hazardous at this time. Being there was no further discussion relative to the charges, Mr. Constantine advised that the evi- dence in Case 90-018 is closed. Made by Mr. Lamoureux that Patricia Dancer is the owner of record of the subject property; that the Code Enforcement Board has jurisdiction of the per- son and that Patricia Dancer was present at the public hearing; all notices required by Collier County Ordinance No. 88-89 have been properly issued; that the property located at 321 21st. Street N.W. is in violation of Section 5 of Collier County Ordinance 89-06, as amended, in the following par-ticulars: Numerous electrical and plumbing violations to the structure. Seconded by Mr. Lazarus. Carried unanimously. Made by Mr. Lamoureux that Patricia Dancer is in violation of Section 5 of Collier County Ordinance No. 89-06, as amended, based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, and pur- suant to the authority granted in Chapter 162, Florida Statutes, and Collier County Ordinance No. 88-89, as amended, it is hereby Ordered: That the ReSpOndent correct the violations of Section 5, Collier County Ordinance No. 89-06, as amended, by fiXing all electrical, plumbing and other viola- tions cited in this case; that said corrections be completed on or before the 6th of April, 1990, and if Respondent does not comply with this Order on or before that date, then and in that event ReSpOndent Page 15 CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY MOTION: MOTIO.: MARCH 22, 1990 days from this date, and that any violation that exists for any day thereafter, that a fine be imposed in the amount of $100/per day for each and every remaining violation. Mrs. Dancer concurred with the recommendations of Staff. Mr. Lazarus questioned whether the property in question is occupied by Mrs. Dancer or someone else? Mrs. Dancer replied that the property is occupied by someone other than herself. Mr. Lazarus noted that several of the alleged violations concern failure to exhaust a fireplace properly and electrical violations. He asked whether any of these violations are potentially hazardous? Mr. Smith replied that the remaining violations are not hazardous at this time. Being there was no further discussion relative to the charges, Mr. Constantine advised that the evi- dence in Case 90-018 is closed. Made by Mr. Lamoureux that Patricia Dancer is the owner of record of the subject property; that the Code Enforcement Board has jurisdiction of the per- son and that Patricia Dancer was present at the public hearing; all notices required by Collier County Ordinance No. 88-89 have been properly issued; that the property located at 321 21st. Street N.W. is in violation of Section 5 of Collier County Ordinance 89-06, as amended, in the following par- ticulars: Numerous electrical and plumbina viola- t ions to the structure. Seconded by Mr. Lazarus. Carried unanimously. Made by Mr. Lamoureux that Patricia Dancer is in violation of Section 5 of Collier County Ordinance No. 89-06, as aaended, based upon the foregoing J'indinas of Fact and Conclusions of Law, and pur- suant to the authority granted in Chapter 162, J'lorida Statutes, and Collier County Ordinance No. 88-89, as aaended, it is hereby Ordered: 'l"hat the Respondent correct the violations of Section 5, Collier County Ordinance No. 89-06, as aaended, by fixing all electrical. plumbing and other viola- tions cited in this case; that said corrections be completed on or before the 6th of April, 1990, and if Respondent does not comply with this Order on or before that date, then and in that event Respondent Page 15 CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY C~.I.s: AMElmED MOTION: COMMElfl S : MOTION: ITEM: COI....TS : ITEM : COMMEft"rS : MARCH 22, 1990 is hereby ordered to pay a fine of $200 per day for each and every day any violation described herein continues past said date; failure to comply with this Order within the specified time will result in the recordation of a lien pursuant to Chapter 162, Plorida Statutes, which aay be foreclosed, and Respondent's property sold to enforce the lien. Seconded by Mr. Lazarus. Mr. Andrews requested that Mr. Lamoureux also include any repeated violations in his motion. Mr. Lamoureux amended his motion to include any repeated violations. Mr. Lazarus accepted the aJae1ldaent . Mr. Strain indicated that Staff had recommended a fine of $100/per day, and questioned whether Mr. Lamoureux would consider amending his motion as same? Mr. Lamoureux replied that he would like to keep the fine at $200/per day if the violation per- sists. Upon call for the question, the motion carried 6/1 (Mr. Strain opposed). *** Old Business Tari's Nursery Mr. Strain asked the status of Tari's Nursery? Mr. Clark informed that Tari's has filed suit against the Board and the County. He indicated that he is not certain of the steps of litigation, the insurance carriers, etc. He noted that the case will not be brought back up until that issue is resolved. *** Walta J's Mr. Lazarus questioned whether Staff has an update on Walta J's? Mr. Clark advised that the business was removed from Collier County several weeks ago, and there is no reason to believe that they will be back. Page 16 CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY ITEM: COIBIElnS: I'l"EM: COI8IEIft S : MARCH 22, 1990 Assistant County Attorney Mafialich stated that a draft of an ordinance is nearing completion with regard to bottle clubs. He informed that the ordi- nance requires that bottle clubs comply with the same hours of operation as duly licensed liquor establishments. Mr. Constantine asked whether the fines that had been imposed against that establishment had ever been paid? Mr. Clark reported that the fines have not been paid, and Staff is looking into the available options. *** St. Matthew's Rouse Mr. Lamoureux requested an update on St. Matthew's House. Mr. Clark stated that there appears to be a much better management team in place that recognizes the rights of the neighborhood. He advised that there have been no complaints during the past several months. He affirmed that the Housing Code viola- tions have been resolved, and he has no knowledge of any violations at this time. *** Discussion re Ayala Case A discussion took place relative to the Ayala Case, and whether the Board could have requested a con- tinuance or rehearing. Attorney Mafialich noted that there were other violations that were not cited that could come before the Board. He advised that the only other thing that could have been done with regard to today's case, would be to have considered other Findings of Fact, but noted that the issue seemed to be rather narrow. Mr. Clark indicated that once the Board reached the decision that no violation existed, it was pretty well limited. *** Page 17 CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY Iv1ARCH '22, 1990 \.. ITEM: Next meeting date is April 26, 1990, at 9:00 A.M. *** There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned by Order of the Chair. CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER CQJJNTY 2 . ~j(i~ e, Chairman '- '-- Page 18