Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
CEB Minutes 10/27/2011 R
October 27, 2011 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD Naples, Florida October 27, 2011 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Cod- L Enforcement Board, in and for the County of Collier, havi N, conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 . n REGULAR SESSION at Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida; x he following members present: Chairman: meth Kelly (Absent) Ro.ert Kaufman (Acting Chair) °��� arry Mieszcak Ron Doino Chris Hudson .. n James Lavinski ,wr Gerald Lefebvre t. a = Lionel L'Esperance ,�.; Tony Marino (Absent)re3 it AP g4,0 ALSO PRESENT: -1-t_Jean Rawson, Attorney for the Board Diane Flagg, Code Enforcement Director Jen Baker, Code Enforcement Specialist Page 1 CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA AGENDA Date: October 27,2011 Location: 2800 N.Horseshoe Dr.Naples,FL 34104 Growth Management Division Planning& Regulation Conference Room 609/610 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 Kenneth Kelly, Chair Lionel L' Esperance Robert Kaufman, Vice Chair Tony Marino Gerald Lefebvre Ronald Doino,Alternate James Lavinski Chris Hudson,Alternate Larry Mieszcak 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES— A. September 22,2011 Hearing 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS/MOTIONS A. MOTIONS Motion for Continuance 1. Autumn Woods Community Association, Inc. CEVR20100012560 Motion for Extension of Time 1. Kenneth J. Blocker Sr. CESD20100006112 2. Rene Zafra Jr. & Maria Zafra CESD20090008252 B. STIPULATIONS C. HEARINGS 1. CASE NO: CEVR20100012560 OWNER: AUTUMN WOODS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION, INC. OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR ANDREW KELLY VIOLATIONS: PUD ORDINANCE 96-80,GENERAL LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS, MAINTENANCE OF LANDSCAPING AND COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE,04-41,AS AMENDED, SECTION 4.05.05(K)(2)THE REQUIREMENT BUFFER"B"LANDSCAPE HAS NOT BEEN MAINTAINED ACCORDING TO COLLIER COUNTY APPROVED PLANS FOLIO NO: 00239720009 VIOLATION ADDRESS: AUTUMN WOODS, UNIT TWO LOTS 53-71 2. CASE NO: CESD20100017287 OWNER: JAMES& KIMBERLY DINUS OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR CHRIS AMBACH VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, 04-41 AS AMENDED, SECTION 10.02.06(B)(1)(a)AN UNPERMITTED GARAGE CONVERSION TO LIVING SPACE IN THE MAIN HOME ON THIS PROPERTY FOLIO NO: 36860521007 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 491 31ST ST. NW NAPLES, FL 3. CASE NO: CESD20110001015 OWNER: FAKAHATCHEE TRACE, LLC. OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR JIM SEABASTY VIOLATIONS: BUILDING AND LAND ALTERATION PERMITS,COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE,04-41 AS AMENDED, SECTION 10.02.06(B)(1)(a) OBSERVED RENOVATIONS OF BUT NOT LIMITED TO: REPLACING WINDOW AND DOORS WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE REQUIRED COLLIER COUNTY BUILDING PERMITS FOLIO NO: 00982880005 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 20201 SR 29 NAPLES, FL 4. CASE NO: CESD20100020505 OWNER: LEONOR MONTELONGO OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR MARIA RODRIGUEZ VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE,04-41 AS AMENDED, SECTION 10.02.06(B)(1)(a)SEVERAL UNPERMITTED ADDITIONS MADE TO MAIN STRUCTURE FOLIO NO: 51040440006 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 1201 TYLER AVE. IMMOKALEE, FL 5. CASE NO: CEPM20090014245 OWNER: LEONOR MONTELONGO OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR JOE MUCHA VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES,CHAPTER 22,ARTICLE VI, SECTION 22-231 SUBSECTIONS 9, 11, 12b, 12c, 12i,AND 12p STRUCTURE WITH DAMAGED EXTERIOR WALLS, BROKEN WINDOWS, ROOF DAMAGE,CEILING DAMAGE, BARE PLYWOOD FLOORS, ELECTRICAL FIXTURES AND WIRING THAT IS NOT PROPERLY MAINTAINED FOLIO NO: 51040440006 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 1201 TYLER AVE. IMMOKALEE, FL 6. CASE NO: CESD20110001027 OWNER: LARRY D& CAROL A BENSYL TRUST, LD& CA BENSYL LIVING TRUST OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR CHRIS AMBACH VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE,04-41 AS AMENDED, SECTION 10.02.06(B)(1)(a)TWO SHEDS BUILT IN THE REAR YARD WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING ALL REQUIRED COLLIER COUNTY BUILDING PERMITS,POOL PERMIT EXPIRED WITHOUT OBTAINING ALL REQUIRED INSPECTIONS AND A CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION/OCCUPANCY FOLIO NO: 36915440004 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 540 19TH ST NW NAPLES, FL 7. CASE NO: CEPM20110001038 OWNER: LARRY D&CAROL A BENSYL TRUST,LD&CA BENSYL LIVING TRUST OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR CHRIS AMBACH VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES,CHAPTER 22 BUILDINGS AND BUILDING REGULATIONS,ARTICLE VI PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE, SECTION 22-231(15)POOL WITH GREEN STAGNANT WATER FOLIO NO: 36915440004 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 540 19TH ST.NW NAPLES, FL 8. CASE NO: CEAU20110012715 OWNER: LARRY D&CAROL A BENSYL TRUST,LD&CA BENSYL LIVING TRUST OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR CHRIS AMBACH VIOLATIONS: FLORIDA BUILDING CODE,2007 EDITION,CHAPTER 1 PERMITS, SECTION 105.1 FENCE PARTIALLY ERECTED ON THE PROPERTY AND THE PERMIT#920003506 EXPIRED WITHOUT ALL INSPECTIONS PERFORMED AND A CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION OBTAINED FOLIO NO: 36915440004 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 540 19TH ST. NW NAPLES, FL 9. CASE NO: CESD20110006748 OWNER: LYDIA M.SLATTERY OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR TONY ASARO VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE,04-41 AS AMENDED, SECTION I0.02.06(B)(1)(a)SCREEN ENCLOSURE CONSTRUCTED WITH CONCRETE SLAB WITHOUT OBTAINING COLLIER COUNTY PERMITS FOLIO NO: 39659520009 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 4394 20TH ST NE NAPLES, FL 10. CASE NO: CESD20090007697 OWNER: TIMOTHY BEEBE OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR JANIS POTTER VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, 04-41 AS AMENDED, SECTION 10.02.06(B)(1)(e)(i), FLORIDA BUILDING CODE,2004 EDITION,CHAPTER 1, SECTION 105.1 AND COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS,CHAPTER 22, ARTICLE II,FLORIDA BUILDING CODE, SECTION 22-26(b)(104.I.3.5)OPEN SIDES WITH METAL ROOFED TYPE STRUCTURE AND ATTACHED DECK/DOCK WITH PILINGS ALL BUILT WITHOUT COLLIER COUNTY PERMITS FOLIO NO: 37743840008 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 245 22ND AVE NE NE NAPLES, FL 11. CASE NO: CELU20110009421 OWNER: TERRY HERNANDEZ& BRIAN K. FULTS OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR RENALD PAUL VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE,04-41 AS AMENDED,SECTION 2.02.03 OBSERVED POOL BUILT ON THIS PROPERTY WITH NO PRIMARY STRUCTURE. POOL WATER GREEN WITH ALGAE FOLIO NO: 35988400001 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 270047TH TERRACE SW NAPLES,FL 12. CASE NO: CESD20110002004 OWNER: CHARLES& LAURIE FLAUM 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)(I)(e),AND 10.02.06(B)(1)(e)(i)GARAGE THAT WAS CONVERTED INTO LIVING SPACE AND AN UNPERMITTED SHED,BOTH CONSTRUCTED WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING PROPER COLLIER COUNTY PERMITS FOLIO NO: 41885680002 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 5805 BUR OAKS LANE NAPLES,FL 13. CASE NO: CESD20110006185 OWNER: JOSE F.CASAREZ OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR MARIA RODRIGUEZ VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE,04-41 AS AMENDED, SECTION 10.02.06(B)(1)(a)A MOBILE HOME INSTALLED WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING A COLLIER COUNTY BUILDING PERMIT FOLIO NO: 63082502 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 4806 MIRAHAM DR. IMMOKALEE,FL 14. CASE NO: CESD20110002234 OWNER: RUTH ANN POWELL OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR RENALD PAUL VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE,04-41 AS AMENDED,SECTION 10.02.06(B)(1)(a)AND 2007 FLORIDA BUILDING CODE,CHAPTER 1,SECTION 110.1 PERMIT 2004051756 WAS ABANDONED AND NEVER COED FOR PREFAB SHED AND SECONDARY SHED UNPERMITTED. SHEDS HAVE ELECTRICAL AND PUMBING WITHOUT A PERMIT FOLIO NO: 36232560007 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 1784 55TH TERRACE SW NAPLES, FL 15. CASE NO: CESD20110002682 OWNER: VIRGINIA VILLARREAL OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR MARIA RODRIGUEZ VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE,04-41 AS AMENDED, SECTION 10.02.06(B)(1)(a)TWO SHEDS ERECTED IN THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING A COLLIER COUNTY BUILDING PERMIT FOLIO NO: 30732800001 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 1314 TANGERINE ST. IMMOKALEE, FL 16. CASE NO: CEAU20110011945 OWNER: SERGIO& SARA GARITA OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR CHRIS AMBACH VIOLATIONS: FLORIDA BUILDING CODE,2007 EDITION CHAPTER 1 PERMITS, SECTION 105.1 FENCE AROUND THE PROPERTY WITHOUT ALL REQUIRED COLLIER COUNTY PERMITS FOLIO NO: 37011920003 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 420 15TH ST. SW NAPLES,FL 17. CASE NO: CEPM20110001296 OWNER: SERGIO& SARA GARITA OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR CHRIS AMBACH VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES,CHAPTER 22,ARTICLE VI, SECTION 22-231(15)A GREEN AND STAGNANT POOL NOT PROTECTED BY THE ELEMENTS FOLIO NO: 37011920003 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 420 15TH ST. SW NAPLES, FL 18. CASE NO: CESD20110001287 OWNER: SERGIO& SARA GARITA OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR CHRIS AMBACH VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE,04-41 AS AMENDED, SECTION 10.02.06(B)(1)(a)EXPIRED COLLIER COUNTY PERMITS WITHOUT RECEIVING ALL REQUIRED INSPECTIONS AND A CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION/OCCUPANCY FOR THE POOL AND ADDITION OF A GAME ROOM AND LANAI. ALSO NO COLLIER COUNTY PERMITS OBTAINED FOR THE SHED BUILT IN THE REAR YARD FOLIO NO: 37011920003 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 420 15TH ST. SW NAPLES, FL 19. CASE NO: CESD20110003266 OWNER: ROGER TOVAR&OFELIA DELGADO OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR PATRICK BALDWIN VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE,04-41 AS AMENDED, SECTION 10.02.06(B)(I)(a), SECTION 10.02.06(B)(1)(e)(i)AND FLORIDA BUILDING CODE,2007 EDITION,CHAPTER 1 PERMITS, SECTION 105.1 GARAGE CONVERTED INTO LIVING SPACE, METAL CARPORT, 3 SHEDS ALL BUILT WITHOUT COLLIER COUNTY BUILDING PERMITS FOLIO NO: 41109120002 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 4760 10TH AVE SE NAPLES, FL 20. CASE NO: CESD0110002352 OWNER: JUAN CERVANTEZ&MARION HERNANDEZ OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR MARIA RODRIGUEZ VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE,04-41 AS AMENDED, SECTION I0.02.06(B)(1)(a)AN ADDITION,A CARPORT ATTACHED TO THE MOBILE HOME ALSO A ROOF OVER THE MOBILE HOME ALL ERECTED WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING A COLLIER COUNTY BUILDING PERMIT FOLIO NO: 60380320000 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 2915 DIMAR LANE IMMOKALEE, FL 21. CASE NO: CEPM20110014045 OWNER: HANNA LEE OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR JEFF LETOURNEAU VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES,CHAPTER 22, BUILDINGS AND BUILDING REGULATIONS,ARTICLE VI PROPERTY MAINTENANCE,SECTION 22-231(19)SEVERE BEE INFESTATION FOLIO NO: 35983360007 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 4706 25TH PLACE SW NAPLES, FL 22. CASE NO: CEPM20110003139 OWNER: NICHOLAS&CATHERINE GONZALEZ OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR PATRICK BALDWIN VIOLATIONS: FLORIDA BUILDING CODE 2007 EDITION,CHAPTER 4, SECTION 424.2.17 NO PROECTIVE BARRIER SURROUNDING THE SWIMMING POOL FOLIO NO: 37281720004 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 561 2ND ST NE NAPLES, FL. 5. OLD BUSINESS A. Motion for Imposition of Fines/Liens 1. CASE NO: CESD20090008252 OWNER: RENE ZAFRA JR.& MARIA ZAFRA OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR JANIS POTTER VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE,04-41 AS AMENDED,SECTIONS 10.02.06(B)(1)(a)AND SECTION 10.02.06(B)(1)(e)(i) ENCLOSURE OF GARAGE WITHOUT COLLIER COUNTY BUILDING PERMITS FOLIO NO: 40625000005 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 2710 2ND AVENUE NE NAPLES, FL 2. CASE NO: CESD20100010084 OWNER: MARIA B.GRANADOS OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR TONY ASARO VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE,04-41 AS AMENDED, SECTION I0.02.06(B)(I)(a)GARAGE CONVERTED TO A LIVING SPACE WITHOUT COLLIER COUNTY BUILDING PERMITS FOLIO NO: 39592680006 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 4270 8TH STREET NE NAPLES, FL 3. CASE NO: CESD20100005204 OWNER: CRESCENCIO LOPEZ GARCIA OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR MARIA RODRIGUEZ VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE,04-41 AS AMENDED, SECTIONS 10.02.06(B)(1)(a)TWO MOBILE HOMES, UNATTACHED CARPORT WITH AN EXPIRED PERMIT,AND A SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE THAT WAS ALTERED/ADDED TO WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING A COLLIER COUNTY BUILDING PERMIT FOLIO NO: 124120002 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 604 BOSTON AVENUE IMMOKALEE, FL 4. CASE NO: 2006100546 OWNER: CHARLES H. FREEMAN OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR ANDREW KELLY VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE,04-41 AS AMENDED, SECTION 3.05.01B CLEARING IN EXCESS OF ONE ACRE WITHOUT PERMIT FOLIO NO: 37641240001 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 2860 8TH STREET NW NAPLES, FL 5. CASE NO: CESD20100022396 OWNER: BRUCE LAMCHICK TR. OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR TONY ASARO VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE,04-41 AS AMENDED, SECTION 10.02.06(B)(1)(a)AN INCOMPLETE SINGLE FAMILY HOME WITH EXPIRED PERMIT #2005092527 FOLIO NO: 38726920009 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 4320 62ND AVE NE NAPLES, FL 6. CASE NO: CESD20100013659 OWNER: JESUS ENRIQUE PRADO OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR RENALD PAUL VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE,04-41 AS AMENDED, SECTION 10.02.06(B)(1)(a)ENCLOSED LANAI WITH NO PERMITS FOLIO NO: 36111680008 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 4972 22ND PLACE SW NAPLES, FL 7. CASE NO: CESD20080014926 OWNER: VALORIE K. LOJEWSKI&CAROL E.NELSON OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR CHRIS AMBACH VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS,CHAPTER 22, ARTICLE II, SECTION 22-26(B)(104.5.1.4.4)DETACHED GARAGE, PERMIT#910012418 EXPIRED WITHOUT GETTING COED FOLIO NO: 37220800008 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 330 WILSON BLVD NAPLES, FL 8. CASE NO: CENA20100018724 OWNER: JULIO IGLESIAS OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR TONY ASARO VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS, CHAPTER 54, ENVIRONMENTAL,ARTICLE VI, SECTION 54-181 LITTER CONSISTING OF, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, BUCKETS, CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS,OIL CONTAINERS, ETC. FOLIO NO: 00097840008 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 985 HONEYBEE DRIVE NAPLES, FL 9. CASE NO: CESD20100018717 OWNER: JULIO IGLESIAS OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR TONY ASARO VIOLATIONS: FLORIDA BUILDING CODE,2007 EDITION,CHAPTER 1, PERMITS SECTION 105.1 AND ORDINANCE 04-41 AS AMENDED,THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, SECTION 10.02.06(B)(1)(a)AND SECTION 10.02.06(B)(1)(e)(i) BOTTOM FLOOR OF THE SPLIT HOME NEW ROOMS WERE ADDED AND NEW WALL AND DOORS, ELECTRICAL WORK DONE WITHOUT COLLIER COUNTY BUILDING PERMITS FOLIO NO: 00097840008 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 985 HONEYBEE DRIVE NAPLES,FL 10. CASE NO: CESD20100018711 OWNER: JULIO IGLESIAS OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR TONY ASARO VIOLATIONS: FLORIDA BUILDING CODE,2007 EDITION,CHAPTER 1 PERMITS, SECTION 105.1 AND SECTION 111.1 AND ORDINANCE 04-41 AS AMENDED,THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, SECTION 10.02.06(B)(1)(a)AND SECTION 10.02.06(B)(1)(e)(i)SEVERAL UNPERMITTED STRUCTURES ON THE PROPERTY; SWIMMING POOL WITH DECK THAT IS COVERED BY A SCREEN ENCLOSURE WITH NO PERMITS FOR ALL OF IT; CHICKIE HUT WITH ATTACHED SHED WITH A BATHROOM UNPERMITTED; UNPERMITTED SMALL SHEDS ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY AND ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY;TREE HOUSE WITH ELECTRICITY UNPERMITTED.ALL STRUCTURES ON THE PROPERTY BESIDES THE PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE DO NOT HAVE PERMITS FOLIO NO: 00097840008 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 985 HONEYBEE DRIVE NAPLES,FL 11. CASE NO: CESD20090008686 OWNER: MARINA GUZMAN OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR CHRIS AMBACH VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE,04-41 AS AMENDED, SECTIONS 10.02.06(B)(1)(a), 10.02.06(B)(l)(e)AND I0.02.06(B)(1)(e)(i)CONVERTED GARAGE TO A LIVING SPACE AND AN UNPERMITTED SHED TYPE STRUCTURE IN THE REAR YARD WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING ALL REQUIRED COLLIER COUNTY PERMITS FOLIO NO: 37280600002 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 360 WILSON BLVD.NAPLES, FL 12. CASE NO: CESD20100021657 OWNER: FIFTH THIRD MORTGAGE COMPANY OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR AZURE BOTTS VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS, CHAPTER 22,ARTICLE II, FLORIDA BUILDING CODE, ADOPTION AND AMENDMENT OF THE FLORIDA BUILDING CODE, SECTION 22-26(B)(104.5.1.4.4);FLORIDA BUILDING CODE,2007 EDITION,CHAPTER 1 PERMITS, SECTION 105.1 AND ORDINANCE 04-41, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE,AS AMENDED, SECTION 10.02.06(B)(1)(a)OERMIT 2009100320 EXPIRED AND HAS BEEN CANCELLED LEAVING ADDITIONS/ALTERATIONS ON RESIDENCE UNPERMITTED AND INCOMPLETE FOLIO NO: 74412600008 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 3420 CALOOSA STREET NAPLES, FL 11. CASE NO: CESD20100018786 OWNER: OMAR J. BARREDA& VERONICA TRUJILLO OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR PATRICK BALDWIN VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE,04-41 AS AMENDED, SECTION 10.02.06(B)(1)(a)AND 10.02.06(B)(I)(e)(i),COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS, CHAPTER 22,ARTICLE II,FLORIDA BUILDING CODE, SECTION 22-26(b)(104.5.1.4.4) AND THE FLORIDA BUILDING CODE,2007 EDITION,CHAPTER 1,SECTION 105.1 SWIMMING POOL,SCREEN ENCLOSURE AND SHED BUILT WITHOUT COLLIER COUNTY BUILDING PERMITS.THE OWNER DID APPLY FOR A PERMIT FOR THE POOL AND THE SCREEN ENCLOSURE IN 1995,BUT THE PERMITS WERE CANCELLED FOLIO NO: 40922240005 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 2650 2ND AVE SE NAPLES, FL B. Motion for Reduction of Fines/Lien 6. NEW BUSINESS 7. CONSENT AGENDA A. Motion for Imposition of Fines/Liens B. Request to Forward Cases to County Attorney's Office as Referenced in Submitted Executive Summary. 8. REPORTS 9. COMMENTS 10. NEXT MEETING DATE - November 18,2011 11. ADJOURN October 27, 2011 ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Are we ready? Good morning, everybody. I'd like to call the Code Enforcement Board to order. Notice: That the respondent may be limited to 20 minutes per case presentation, unless additional time is granted by the board. Persons wishing to speak at any agenda item will receive i rt five minutes, unless the time is adjusted by the Chairman. All parties participating in the public hearing are ask; • . observe Roberts Rules of Order and speak one at a tim at the court reporter can record all statements being made. ,:c.,: Any person who decides to appeal a decision • his board will need a record of the proceedings pertaining theT -� a =d therefore may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the roeeedings is made, which record includes the testimony and ew ice upon which the appeal is to be based. Neither Collier tnor the Code o p � Enforcement Board shall be respo : -:le for providing rovidin this record. Let's have a -- the roll call first MS. BAKER: Mr. Robert aufman? ACTING CHAIRM N KAUFMAN: Here. MS. BAKER: Mr. Gerald Lefebvre? MR. LEFEB :Mere. MS. BAKER. .Mr. James Lavinski? MR. LAS JP SII: Here. MS. BA KU: Mr. Ronald Doino? MR DDOTNO: Here. a ®AKER: Mr. Larry Mieszcak? --ikaft4 MIESZCAK: Here. u MS. BAKER: Mr. Lionel L'Esperance? 'MR. L'ESPERANCE: Here. MS. BAKER: Mr. Chris Hudson? MR. HUDSON: Here. MS. BAKER: And Mr. Ken Kelly has an excused absence, as Page 2 October 27, 2011 does Mr. Tony Marino. Mr. Robert Kaufman will be acting as the Chair today as well. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And since we have two people that are not here today, all people that are here will be voting members; both alternates will be voting. Okay, I say this tongue in cheek, do we have any changes? xss MS. BAKER: Yes, we do. Under letter A, motions, motion for continuance. Nunn r��one, Autumn Woods Community Association, Inc., Case 4 CEVR20100012650, has been withdrawn, and will earn under public hearings number one 4v ) 4- Under letter B, stipulations, we have eight u tions. The first will be Case CESD20100020505, Leonor ontlongo. The second will be Case CESD201 0 .. 85, Jose F. Casarez. Number three will be Case C STS a 0003266, Roger Tovar and Ofelia Delgado. Fourth will be Case CESD 00002234, Ruth Ann Powell. Fifth will be Case CES I i 017287, James and Kimberly Dinus. 9° The sixth will be Case ESD20090007697, Timothy Beebe. Seventh will be Case CESD20110002352, Juan Cervantez and Marion Hernandez... Eighth will e Case CESD20110002682, Virginia Villarreal. Under Under,JetkC, hearings, number five, Case CEPM20090014245, Leonor MO e bngo, has been withdrawn. mtet six, Case CESD20110001027, Larry D. and Carol A. Bens st, LD and CA Bensyl Living Trust, has been withdrawn. ,v Number seven, Case CEPM2011000103 8, Larry D. and Carol Bensyl Trust, LD and CA Bensyl Living Trust, has been withdrawn. Number eight, Case CEAU20110012715, Larry D. and Carol A. Bensyl Trust, LD and CA Bensyl Living Trust, has been withdrawn. Number nine, Case CESD20110006748, Lydia M. Slattery, has Page 3 October 27, 2011 been withdrawn. Number 12, Case CESD20110002004, Charles and Laurie Flaum, has been withdrawn. And under number five, old business, letter A, motion for imposition of fines/liens, number 12, Case CESD20100021657, Fifth Third Mortgage Company, has been withdrawn. �H"� And that is all the changes. 9 } ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Can I ref* motion to accept the modified agenda'? MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I havet, motion. MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second. ° ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. All those in favor? MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: e ' ACTING CHAI ' -& UFMAN: Aye. MR. DOING: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. ACTING A IRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed'? (No respnse.) ACT b G ,_ - AIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Okay, #1;t-brings us to, if I'm not mistaken, the extension of time, which be Kenneth J. Blocker, Sr. MR LEFEBVRE: The approval of the minutes. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Oh, before I get to that, the approval of the minutes. MR. MIESZCAK: I make a motion we approve the minutes, September 22nd. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. Page 4 October 27, 2011 ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. I have one comment on the minutes. If you take a look at Page 12 of the minutes it shows Commissioner Coyle instead of Chairman Kelly. That needs to be changed. Because I don't think Commissioner Coyle was here that day. * So with that change, all those in favor? Iwo , MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. r r,P MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. Y �' MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. . ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN. A . •MR. DOINO: A e. Y MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. 4. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUF A Op t posed? (No response.) = ACTING CHAIRMAN KA - ► A N: Also passes unanimously. Okay. , . (Supervisor Snow a . trEarnest Freeman were duly sworn.) ACTING CHAIRMA KAUFMAN: Okay. SUPERVISOR SNOW: Well, sir, this is unusual, requesting extension of time: he property owner is in compliance, but it came •in after the compliance date after the extension was requested. So if you grant their extension, we'll be able to close the case with no fines that are accruing. So all we're asking is for that extension of 30 days. And i .t ey can come into compliance -- they are in compliance right ow rR. LEFEBVRE: I make a motion -- ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. MR. LEFEBVRE: -- we extend the time for 30 days. And also if the respondent and investigator can state their names for the record. Page 5 October 27, 2011 SUPERVISOR SNOW: Oh, Sorry. Kitchell Snow, Collier County Code Enforcement. MR. FREEMAN: Earnest Freeman with Freeman and Freeman Construction. MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second the motion. kot� ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion, WA, have a second. All those in favor? MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: A ,, MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. �A 4 ACTING CHAIRMAN KAU A : Any opposed'? (No response.) ACTING CHAIRMAN `MAN: It passes unanimously. SUPERVISOR SN • `We thank the Board. MR. FREEMAN: Thank you ACTING CHIRII► AN KAUFMAN: Which brings us to Rene Zafra and Mariafra. INVEST GATOR POTTER: Janis Potter, Collier County Code pn< Enforcement In estigator. Mr. Zafrahas requested I believe it's a 60-day extension. He's currently u the review process. His architect is making some changes to the 1'rawings to be resubmitted. 11R. L'ESPERANCE: What is your recommendation'? INVESTIGATOR POTTER: That we grant that to him. I think, you know, he's moving along. He's called me and he's said that the architect is working on that, so -- ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I have a couple of Page 6 October 27, 2011 questions. Was the $80.57 paid? INVESTIGATOR POTTER: Yes, it was. MR. KAUFMAN: Okay. Second question: Is the garage enclosure occupied? INVESTIGATOR POTTER: I believe that it is not ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. This was a s which was started 120 days ago. And the records show that 04' submitted it -- and I think we granted 120 days. And now 're looking for an additional -- and then an extension was -d after the 120-day p sti . And now we're looking to extend it a• g MR. LEFEBVRE: We gave them 120 days. h _a greed to 120 days on the stipulated agreement back in February -nd then we granted another 60 days in August. And now we're here again for another 60 days. ,gi ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAA N. A iy other comments or questions from the Board? 4, MR. MIESZCAK: My one one,c,Oniern is the safety. We don't know if somebody's living in thellar4e, It's unpermitted. So I don't see how I could go along with t h a " MR. LEFEBVRE: Have they been diligent in keeping you up to date on what's going on ' It just seems like it's taken a long time for them to get to a�, hi g tect and -- INVEST.°GTOR POTTER: Mr. Zafra has -- he was out of work. He obtained employment I believe this past summer, so he's going back to work. His wife is out of work. So there was -- money was anti - as well They had to get the money together to pay the architect and get the general contractor and everything. l R. LEFEBVRE: So they haven't applied for permits or anything yet? INVESTIGATOR POTTER: He's in the process right now. It's in the apply status. It's going through the review. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you have any copy of Page 7 October 27, 2011 any correspondence from the architect? INVESTIGATOR POTTER: I do not. I just have -- there's -- I believe Mr. Zafra sent in a Motion for Continuance, a letter. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: What does the Board feel? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion that we s rant the extension of time for 60 days, recommended'W g Y , the county Code Enforcement Board. =z MR. HUDSON: Second. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have airttotron, we have a second. All those in favor? T MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. t " MR. HUDSON: Aye. 4 . MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. DOING: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? MR. MIESZCAK: A eg ACTING CHAI ' irt4, x - UFMAN: Aye. Okay, it passes 5-2 will Kaufman and Mieszcak objecting. Okay. INVESTIGVR POTTER: Thank you, sir. ACTIN CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you That cgrnr4tes the extension of time requests, which brings us to stipulations.,. a�� stipulation is case -- unless you'd like to read it, its last four d are 0505, Leonor Montelongo. I believe we have two cases here also We'll hear them separately. MS. BAKER: No, there's only one case. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Oh, the other one was withdrawn. Okay. Page 8 October 27, 2011 (Investigator Rodriguez and Leonor Montelongo were duly sworn.) INVESTIGATOR RODRIGUEZ: 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 proseci of this case within 30 days of this hearing. Abate all violations b : Must apply for and obtain a Collier County building permit o ' a e demolition permit and request required inspections to • , formed and passed through a certificate of completion/occu a: c within 60 days of this hearing or a fine of$200 per day will be 4. posed until the violation has been abated. Respondent must notify code enforcement wvithin 24 hours of abatement of the violation and e request th ti ator perform a site q p g inspection to confirm compliance. -- That if the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any met ie to bring the violation into compliance, and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the pro : s ofilrdf this agreement, and all costs of abatement shall be assesse egto the property owner. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Can you state your name and your comments. MS. MO T,ELONGO: Leonor Montelongo. And I' 1 ,a0iee with the 60 days to do the work. ACTING HAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any questions from the Board`s " -MR.-LEFEBVRE: Yes, I do, I have some questions. It appears that you purchased this property in 2010? MS. MONTELONGO: Yes. MR. LEFEBVRE: In February of 2010. So was it in that condition when you purchased it, with the structures on the property? Page 9 October 27, 2011 MS. MONTELONGO: Yes. MR. LEFEBVRE: Are the structures currently -- do you have residents in them? Are people in them? MS. MONTELONGO: No. MR. LEFEBVRE: Do you plan on removing them, demolishing Tea them, or do you plan on permitting them for -- . '� '" MS. MONTELONGO: I do. I plan to pick up permits ' MR. LEFEBVRE: You plan on keeping them? ':' MS. MONTELONGO: Yes. - ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you h 60 days is going to be sufficient time for you to permit the b u:. n• , the changes Olt or whatever needs to be done? It seems like a me to me and to I'm sure my fellow Board members. = 4 Do you have anybody that's going to VO,Abe work that is -- MS. MONTELONGO: Yes. Y , �o ACTING CHAIRMAN KA r ~: And they have said to you that you have so much time, that they' l do it in 60 days? MS. MONTELONGO: Yves- ,,„_, INVESTIGATOR ' 0 RIUEZ: She has, if I may, permits already in the building department. They're just reviewing them. So 60 days should be.enough. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. L VI : I make a motion to approve. ACTING G CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. MR M1ESZCAK: I'll second the motion. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. = llkhose in favor? lR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. R. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. Page 10 October 27, 2011 MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously Thank you If you have any problems meeting that date, fie back to the Board before the 60 days is over so that we can adase accordingly. rreNi MS. MONTELONGO: Thank you. ri ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank That brings us to stipulation two, which is Jose Casarez. (Investigator Rodriguez was duly sworn.) ,qw INVESTIGATOR RODRIGUEZ: Mr Caarez is not here today because he had to work and he couldn't t off. For the record, Maria Rodriguezz WiierdCounty Code Enforcement. It is agreed between the parties ti at the respondent shall pay operational costs in the amou80.29 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days'' ' s hearing. Abate all violations by Applying for and obtainingCollier County building permit or demolition permit and request required inspections to be performed and passed through a certificate of completion/occupancy within 120 days of this hearing dr a fine of$200 per day will be imposed until the violation hasbeen abated. Res oidett must notify Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abate keit ®:f the violation and request the 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. Page 11 October 27, 2011 ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, do we have any questions from the Board? (No response.) ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I have a question. Is the mobile home occupied? INVESTIGATOR RODRIGUEZ: It is. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Does that seem 0 s e . problem for the county, that it's occupied right now? INVESTIGATOR RODRIGUEZ: He's been live f for about It five years, so I don't see it a problem because he's bce t ere that long. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay t e you know whether or not the permitting process has begu INVESTIGATOR RODRIGUEZ: He - as. He hired a contractor that came in yesterday to pull the permits foObe mobile home. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFIVIAt, Okay. Anybody from the Board that would like to comment othis? (No response.) ACTING CHAIRMAN 'MAN: Motions'? MR. LEFEBVRE: .4 di 61Eimotion to approve. ACTING CHAIRMA KAUFMAN: We have a motion to approve. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. ACTIN . CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second, Mr. Lavinski. All th© e n favor'? ; ._. ,EFEBVRE: Aye. MR MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. Page 12 October 27, 2011 ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any opposed? (No response.) ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So be it. The next stipulation is Roger Tovar and Ofelia Delgado. (Investigator Baldwin was duly sworn.) INVESTIGATOR BALDWIN: For the record, Patrick Baldwin, Collier County Investigator. kr Therefore, it is agreed between the parties that the respondent shall: One, pay operational costs in the amount of$81 i curred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this h r Two Abate all violations by Obtaining Co 'e ounty building permit or demolition permit, inspections and ca -- ate of completion within 60 days of this hearing or a fine of$200 per day will be imposed until the violation is abated. Three: Utilities are to be turned o o the addition of the 8 44 principal structure within seven da fi • this hearing until the permit has obtained a certificate of com . tion/occupancy, or a fine of$200 per day will be imposed until the violation is abated. Four: Respondent rust notify Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance. Five: That = e respondent fails to abate the violation, the - county may a "�to the violation using any method to bring the violation irito compliance, and may use the assistance of the Collier County She ifs Office to enforce the provisions of this agreement, and alb cots of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. property owner has applied for a garage conversion permit. It is ready as of today to be picked up. They stated they will pick it up. And they applied for the two other permits for the sheds and they have removed one shed and a metal carport from the property. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is that garage conversion being occupied right now? Page 13 October 27, 2011 INVESTIGATOR BALDWIN: Yes, it is. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So they're going to have to turn the electricity off to that portion of the structure? INVESTIGATOR BALDWIN: Yes. The renters in the property know that already, and here we -- in article number three -- or se on number three, it says seven days. '� ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Because a r seven days then there would be another case of living in a . cupied structure without electricity. So hopefully we can get r solved. INVESTIGATOR BALDWIN: The permit is a e i " it by affidavit. So they stated they would pick it up today ' ' d it should be C.O.'d before the seven days is up. - ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: ka . Comments from the Board'? MR. LEFEBVRE: I just have owevomment. Jean'? MS. RAWSON: Yes. _k CN,IF MR. LEFEBVRE: Regard4nentiMber Regarding five where it says using any method to bring the violation rito compliance, is that too vague'? MS. RAWSON: W sometimes we just say so many days to bring it into compliance. ey're not telling him specifically how to do it I guess -- h.. yY MR. LEFEB _ : What it's saying is the county will go in there with any met MS. WSON: Oh, for the county, that's probably fine. MR LE EBVRE: Okay. I just want to make sure it's not too vague ,, , RAWSON: Well, we don't want -- we probably don't even 11 -4 0e right to order the county to do anything, so I think it's fine. 'MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay, thank you. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any other comments from the Board? (No response.) Page 14 October 27, 2011 ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any motions? MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to accept the stipulation. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion to accept -- MR. DOINO: Second. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- the stipulated agreement. And we have a second. g .„ All those in favor? MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Ay ti, MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. kr MR. DOINO: Aye. - MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. „ , „1„ sp ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) 0 , -,g ACTING CHAIRMAN = x 4 MAN: Passes unanimously. INVESTIGATOR Y I �CIN: Thank you. ACTING CHAIRMAN-KAUFMAN: Okay, Jen, what stipulation number are We up to? Four'? MS. BAKER Yes, sir, we're on Ruth Ann Powell. ACTING�°C -IAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Ruth Ann Powell. (Inver ' at Paul was duly sworn.) INVE . GATOR PAUL: Good morning. For the record, Renalal °°`Collier County Code Enforcement Investigator. is: Powell came into the office yesterday and signed the stipulation agreement. She did pay the operational cost in the amount of$80.86 yesterday. She did agree to: Obtain a Collier County building permit or demolition permit with inspections and certificate of completion within 75 days of this hearing or pay a fine of$100 a day for each day the violation remains unabated. Page 15 October 27, 2011 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. 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 S - s Office to enforce the provisions of this agreement. And all cleats`f abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. She has chosen to keep these two sheds on the pry®= . She says she's going to get a permit for them both. I spoke with the contractor yesterday, and she aict would be -- the 75 days would be sufficient to get this dons ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: ka' , any comments from the Board? MR. MIESZCAK: What's the shed used for? What does she use 1/40 it for'? INVESTIGATOR PAUL „V storage. There were washers and dryers inside of them. One osthem was being used to store those washers and dryers insid ''a o then. I do believe they do have electrical and plumbing inside of them. MR. MIESZAK: Thank you ACTING C= = IRMAN KAUFMAN: Any other comments'? (No response ) ACTING eiMAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do I have a motion? MR. LA NSKI. Motion to accept. U KLIEFEBVRE: Second. 4TING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and we have a second. All those in favor? MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. Page 16 October 27, 2011 ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? , (No response.) ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Passes unanimously INVESTIGATOR PAUL: Thank you MS. BAKER: The next stipulation is James and 00 rly Dinus. (Investigator Ambach was duly sworn.) INVESTIGATOR AMBACH: For the rec p hris Ambach, Collier County Code Enforcement. Therefore, it is agreed between the p. cs that the respondent shall pay operational costs in the amount 0.86 incurred in the ii qk prosecution of this case within 30 dasofthis hearing. Abate all violations by obtaining Collier C 0 Otit building permits or demolition permit, inspections and a certcateof completion/occupancy within 120 days of this hearing ' 1 of$150 per day will be imposed until the violation is abate . Number three. Turning off utilities for all unpermitted living space within 24 hours of this hearing and remaining unoccupied until the building permit o demolition permit has received a certificate of completioncctancy, or a fine of$250 per day will be imposed until the violatioiis'abated. sist Nmes er four: Respondent must notify Code Enforcement within 24 hours f abatement of the violation and request the investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance. And number five: That 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 Page 17 October 27, 2011 agreement, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. I met with the owners, Mr. and Mrs. Dinus, two days ago on the 25th when they came in to sign the stipulation agreement. They've hired -- basically the architect also called me last week. All final work is being performed this week and that should be in apply status by h Fr tomorrow for the garage conversion. There's no one living in it It is basically a lounge area at this point few iro p with a ew couches in it. They've already paid t l o erational costs. They paid them immediately after our meeting 1 • d a meeting is set up for tomorrow at 3:00 p.m. to confirm t he ' sties are shut off ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: 0 a ,n H comments from the Board'? (No response.) ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN# _ Any motions from the Board'? MR. LAVINSKI: Motion : accept. ACTING CHAIRMAN `MAN: We have a motion to accept. MR. HUDSON: Second. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second, Chris. All those in favor? MR. LEFBVRE: Aye. MR. KA IEWCAK: Aye. ; A MR. a SON: Aye. • `G CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. 'MR;L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Passes unanimously. Page 18 October 27, 2011 MS. BAKER: The next stipulation is Timothy Beebe. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Timothy Beebe. (Investigator Potter and Mr. Ortega were duly sworn.) INVESTIGATOR POTTER: Good morning. For the record, Janis Potter, Collier County Code Enforcement The stipulation on the case: It is agreed between the parties that respondent shall pay operational costs in the amount of$81. incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of t_Fearing, and abate all violations by Obtaining all required Co1i j unty building permits or demolition permit, inspection a d e„ ificate of completion/occupancy within 180 da s of this hea ' a fine of days per day will be imposed until the violation ..:ted. Respondent must notify Code Enforce pent-within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the i4estigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance. That if the respondent fails to(a s ` •he 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 prosonsf this agreement, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. I've been in contact with Mr. Herminio Ortega. Mr. Beebe retained him to ge‘a. permit by affidavit. And Mr. Ortega is getting information t ether,and once he has all the plans and drawings, he will apply r that permit by affidavit. Mr. Ortega has also indicated they will pay the operational costs by the 04 of the day today. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Mr. Ortega'? clR. ORTEGA: For the record, Herminio Ortega, on behalf of Mr. Timothy Beebe requesting an extension of time. This case goes back till -- from 2009, of which the reasons why it's taken so long I really can't answer for. I can say this: At this point Mr. Beebe is committed to abating the violation and bringing this case Page 19 October 27, 2011 to a close. There are some mitigating factors here. One that was pointed out was the design process which is already in place by design will be completed by the end of next week. We've already acquired the required surveys. Because the survey that we found in the records v department didn't have any existing structures on it so -- which Oil help us in the design process. I've spoken to both the planning department, the builpg department, and this of course will be permit by affida.. it The p p Y - structure's already built. There's one issue with the South Florida Water I epartment, and that is there's an existing CBS built fire pit. xM e - -ranates all the way from the bottom of the bank. That wil._ be 'removed. Other than perhaps some corrective work that will be pessary, I think within the 180 days we'll be able to bring this ca close. But more importantly is that w e robabl going to have to wait 4.p Y Yg g until the water table goes down a the=bit more I spoke to the South Florida Water Department yestehlay, and they indicated that between March and April will pro � bl be the lowest water table. I don't think we're going to wait that lone And if you wait six months from now it's going to put us somewhere around April. So I think we have enough time to bring this to a close and abate the violation. ACTING. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I have one question and that's do you have authorization -- MR. . E GA: Yes, I do. DIG CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And you provided that to the= ourity INVESTIGATOR POTTER: Yes, he has MR. LEFEBVRE: I guess couple of questions. In your statements today you stated that you're looking for an extension of time. What you signed here is not an extension of time, it's a stipulated agreement. So it's two different things that you just -- Page 20 October 27, 2011 MR. ORTEGA: I'm glad you brought that up. I have an e-mail that was sent yesterday, and the purpose for it was for an extension of time. MR. LEFEBVRE: Well, what you signed today, this morning, is not an extension of time MR. ORTEGA: Oh, I take that back, you're absolutely coifed. i vi And the 180 days will be more than suffice. So the stipulatekL agreement is fine. MR. LEFEBVRE: Now, it says that it's a deck auctxtotk with pilings'? rN A MR. ORTEGA: That's correct. % MR. LEFEBVRE: So have you received c-A,. e outhwest Florida Water Management permits and everything'? MR. ORTEGA: No, all we've done i � ; ase one -- this is a two-phase project. One was to ide ti li rNhat4e're working with, do the proper research, which we hav -edy. The only issues I said that we have with the entire pro'e '.:going to be that the South Florida Water Management isno _oing to allow the fire pit, and that has to be removed, which whic144#0riotkan issue at all MR. LEFEBVRE: Bdoesn't it take quite a bit of time to get a permit for state or federal'? Whatever permits you need for -- MR. ORTEGA: Depends on who's applying for the permit. To answ the question, it should not take that long, no I had to put that on in here, you know that MR LFEBVRE: Yes, I know. SUPERVISOR PEREZ: Good morning. For the record, Code Eo dent Supervisor Christina Perez. W We do have someone here from Florida South Florida Water Management District, if you have any questions regarding their proceedings -- their permit process. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do we have any other questions from the Board, or would you like the individual from the Page 21 October 27, 2011 Southwest Florida to comment on the comments that were made by the respondent? MR. L'ESPERANCE: I don't think I have any further questions. MR. MIESZCAK: I don't. MR. L'ESPERANCE: I don't believe we have any further . questions -- at least I don't have any -- MR. LEFEBVRE: I just want to be very clear what w voting on We're voting on a stipulated agreement, not an extension extenleff)of time MR. ORTEGA: Correct. MR. LEFEBVRE: Because he stated extension t time. Okay, very good. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do' h e a motion? MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to accept. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. ,r ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUF ♦f otion and second. All those in favor? ins MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: A ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPEIIANE: Aye. MR. DOIN( Aye. MR. LA--_ITS . Aye. ACTING ��=.�� AIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) APT ING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Passes unanimously. AR ORTEGA: Thank you, Board members. , MS. BAKER: Next stipulation is Juan Cervantez and Marion Hernandez. (Investigator Rodriguez was duly sworn.) INVESTIGATOR RODRIGUEZ: For the record, Maria Rodriguez, Collier County Code Enforcement. Page 22 October 27, 2011 ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Hold on one second. Are we all set? MR. MIESZCAK: Yes, we're organized. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You're organized? Okay, sorry for the interruption. INVESTIGATOR RODRIGUEZ: It is agreed between th4-tr '`� parties that the respondent shall pay operational costs in the akodrit of $80.29 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 d ;°y of this hearing. Abate all violations by Must apply for and . i a Collier County building permit or a demolition permit and guest required inspections to be performed and passed throu•h a :'f sate of completion/occupancy within 90 days of this h c • it a fine of$200 will be imposed until the violation has been_ bated. Respondent must notify Code Enfor ` , eit within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request yt h en' stigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance. That if the respondent fails t abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using anv method to bring the violation into compliance, and may use' e assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office of '` toe enforce the provisions of this agreement, and all costs of abatement shall be .ssesed to the property owner. This is an addition that was built onto the mobile home. The roof-over ande carport are all attached to the mobile home. There is no electricity inalved in the additions, so we figured that many days would be enough for them to C.O. the permits. A CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is there any plumbing in it? INVESTIGATOR RODRIGUEZ: No ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do we have any comments from the Board? MR. LAVINSKI: Yeah, one question. Did she actually sign this stipulation? It doesn't look so. Page 23 October 27, 2011 INVESTIGATOR RODRIGUEZ: Yes. That's her signature. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's her signature. MR. LAVINSKI: Thank you. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any other comments from the Board'? (No response.) ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, do we ha motions from the Board? MR. LAVINSKI: Yeah, motion to accept. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have motion to accept. � � ' p MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second the motion: * ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. All those in favor'? MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. IINLL MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. 644 ACTING CHAIRMAN K� _ 'MAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANC : *Aye. MR. DOING: Aye. MR. LAVINSKKI: Aye. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed'? (No response.) ACTG - AIRMAN KAUFMAN: Passes unanimously. MS. BAKER: The last stipulation is number 15 from the agenda, Virgin a V llarreal. nestigator Rodriguez and Virginia Villarreal were duly sworn ) INVESTIGATOR RODRIGUEZ: 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$80.00 incurred in the prosecution Page 24 October 27, 2011 of this case within 30 days of this hearing. Abate all violations by: Applying for and obtaining a Collier County building permit or demolition permit and request required inspections to be performed and passed through a certificate of completion/occupancy within 90 days of this hearing or a fine of$200 per day will be imposed until the violation has been abated. Respondent must notify code enforcement within 24 h abatement of the violation and request the investigator per q a site inspection to confirm compliance. That if the respondent fails to abate the violati. tee`county may abate the violation using any method to bring the vig,Tatibn into compliance and may use the assistance of thelerCounty Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this agre meat, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the prope 3 er. These are two sheds. And the, r he , they are being used as sheds. Although the bigger shed hastitedtric in it No one's living in them. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Can the respondent identify yourself on -- _ MS. VILLARREAL Virginia Villarreal. Electricity was cut off, water was cut off, and it's been cut off seven years since brother died, because he was the one that was living in it When bought the house that building was there behind the house. I didn'tknow what it was used for or anything. It didn't have no will, no doors or anything. Loght the property in '87. I was a first time home buyer, so I really didn't know very much about it But I did buy it and it had the shed there. It's brick. I did not build it, it was already there since '87. And probably before that. So -- but there's no electricity on it and there's no water or sewer running to that place. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Your intention is to have it Page 25 October 27, 2011 permitted? MS. VILLARREAL: That's what my intention. But my advice from her was that it would probably not go through and I was probably going to end up spending a lot of money and then I'd probably end up having to take it down. I mean, it's brick, you =.ow, and it's heavy. It's like -- I know the other one is aluminum, I could easy � You know, have somebody take that out of there. But that one is it's brick, so it's heavy. And I know it's going to cost me to dot, but if I can't permit it and I'm going to spend a lot of mone, :._: ing to do it and then I'm going to end up in the same thing, trying -CO - them do -- tear it down. INVESTIGATOR RODRIGUEZ: I met with the lady with permitting. And she's encroaching. So, I M u, she can ask for a variance, but that would be up to h he e or not she wants to sp end the extra money and whethe?�b n ot they're going to accept t it a MR. LEFEBVRE: How much s she encroaching on the property line by? '%, INVESTIGATOR _0 - UEZ: She is encroaching quite a bit. Her setbacks on the side s ` uld be five, and she's not even a foot off. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any other comments from the Board? (No response.) ACTING IAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any motions? MR. L EBVRE: Make a motion to accept. AVINSKI: Second. 'ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Motion to accept. We have asecond. All those in favor? MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. Page 26 October 27, 2011 ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) 4 3 ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Passes unanimously Thank you. ` I believe that completes all the stipulations. MS. BAKER: Yes. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And w re _ ". : ing to move on to hearings. First hearing is Autumn Woods Community Association. MR. WILLIAMS: For the record, my. acne is Bruce Williams. I'm here to represent the Autumn We d I frimurnty Association. I was a corporate officer last year MR. DINAN: My name is Dinan. Spelled D-I-N-A-N. I was the vice president of the association last year and am president this y ear. (Investigator Kell y, SuP ervisor Jeff Letourneau, Bru ce Williams ams and Tim Dinan were duly sworn.) INVESTIGATOR KELLY: For the record, Andrew Kelly, Collier Coun a ode- Environmental Specialist Investigato MS BA R: This is in reference to Case CEVR20100012560, violation violatiO,of Ordinance PUD Ordinance 96-80, general landscaping requirements, maintenance of landscaping, and Collier County Land Deb 1pment Code 04-41, as amended, Section 4.06.05(K)(2). Description of violation: The required buffer B landscape has not been maintained according to Collier County approved plans. Location/address where violation exists: Autumn Woods, unit two, lots 53 to 71. Described in Plat Book 29, Page 60. Folio Page 27 October 27, 2011 00239720009. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: Autumn Woods Community Association, Inc., care of Greg Murphy Compass Group, 3701 Tamiami Trail North, third floor, Naples, Florida, 34103. , Date violation first observed: August 3rd, 2010. Date/owner person in charge given notice of violation: U December 14th, 2010. Date on/by which violation to be corrected: Janu. . 4th, 2011. Date of reinspection: June 17th, 2011. Results of reinspection: The violation remains INVESTIGATOR KELLY: Good morni.FOf the record, Andrew Kelly, Collier County Code Enforc-merit. This is in reference to Case No CEV . (I)_00012560, dealing with violation of the maintenance B u e otated at the Autumn Woods unit two, lots 53 through 71 , ecribed in Plat Book 29, Page 60, Folio 00239720009. Service was given on December 14th, 2010. I would now like to present case evidence in the following exhibits. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Has the respondent seen those exhibits? INVEST .GATOR KELLY: Yes, sir. ACTING G HAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Motion from -- MR. L FEBVRE: Motion to accept the exhibits from the coun 'ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. MR. DOINO: Second. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. All those in favor? MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. Page 28 October 27, 2011 MR. HUDSON: Aye. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Unanimous. INVESTIGATOR KELLY: The exhibits consist f o --r pictures taken October 22nd, 2011, recorded plat maps, Plat o 1 29, Page 59, �xr Plat Book 29, Page 60, and a large section of the dttitaiion notes of Plat Book 29, Page 59 and a copy of the appro scape and irrigation plan on record with Collier County ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN‘ rything else from the county? 1r 1r4 INVESTIGATOR KELLY: Yek, s ir. I'd like to present the case details -- details of the case. 4s On August 3rd, 2010 I observed that the buffer was not being maintained according to •int approved plan. This inspection -- I'm sorry, that the landscape buy l ier area was overgrown with prohibitive exotic vegetation. THE COURT' PORTER: Could I get you to slow down, please? INVESTIGATOR TOR KELLY: I'm sorry. During this inspection I observed that the landscape buffer area was o ,-rgripivn with prohibited exotic vegetation, including but not limited Brazilian peppers and ear leaf acacia. After research of the development orders, PUD plats and landscape plans, it was discovered that a Type B buffer was required. The Notice of Violation was issued on December 14th, 2010. The exotics were removed from the landscape buffer easement. The required shrubs still need to be planted and according -- in accordance Page 29 October 27, 2011 to the Type B buffer. SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: For the record, Jeff Letourneau, Collier County Code Enforcement. I just want to direct the Board to the original Notice of Violation that was issued. It was issued on December 14th. Description of conditions constituting the violation: The required buffer B landscape has not been maintained according to Col County approved plans. The order to correct was in three parts: Number o N.-Move all prohibited exotic vegetation, which they did. Numk o, plant shrubs and/or trees to meet the minimum standard or : buffer, as described in Collier County Land Development ra_a A .06.02, which is why we're here today, the county contends that it's not been done. And number three, install a five-foot 110 fence along the border of the landscape buffer easement or otnauthorization through the Collier County Growth Managemen T: ision/Zoning Services in the form of a plans change that allo ; h eexisting fence configuration. After this notice was issunvestigator Kelly found that this was not a requirement oft. e Land Development Code. It was on the original plans, but there wa the verbiage of "may" in the LDC. So we're not asking�them for the fence today. The exotics have been removed. 'hreason the county brought this case today was for shrubs to be planted according to the B buffer, and that's it ACT I G SkIAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. WILLIAMS: For the record, Bruce Williams. IV.vman exhibit that I would like to distribute to the Board. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Has the county seen it? MR. WILLIAMS: Yes, they have ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Motion? MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor? MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. Page 30 October 27, 2011 MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. k rf ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Passes unanimously MR. WILLIAMS: The exhibit that is being distributed" memo from me to Tom Dinan, who is here today. Tom scrrently the president of the association. . Last year in 2010 I was a member of the boar andA was involved with this issue with the county. And this fitter sets forth my recollection of events that occurred. During the first half of 2010 the Autum Woods Association received a complaint about a number f s about the B buffer. p ,bt The complaint was about a fence, the berm, a swale, landscaping there, and also about invasives, exotic eVicinvasives. The association agreed toreiove the exotic invasives but took issue on the other things... Now, although the fence has been removed as an issue, I think this memo gives you a good idea of what a shotgun approach was taken and how unfounded many of these allegations were For exae, the association was instructed to repair a fence that actually is a fence- on Collier County School property. The developer never instaldAhe fence on the B buffer, and the county has now conceded an`this hearing that that is not required. "N have -- as this memo shows, we had a meeting here in Adwst in this building with Collier County Code Enforcement Officers Kelly and Perez to discuss this very issue. We had here Wilson-Miller representatives to cover all the issues. And as you can see from this memo, issues that we were told by Officer Perez and Officer Kelly of issues on the fence, the berm, the swale and Page 31 October 27, 2011 landscaping were resolved, okay. We were also -- then we also did -- subsequent to that August meeting Officer Kelly, Officer Perez, Tom Dinan, the property manager for Autumn Woods at that time, Greg Murphy, and myself did an on-site inspection of the B buffer at issue. We walked the a� entire buffer. And we were told by Officers Perez and Kelly the issues were resolved except for a few invasives that had bee A. a overlooked by our invendor (sic) to remove those. We agreed to remove those invasives. And we called officer Kelly to tell him when that was done. Officer Kell .. were told by Officers Kelly and Perez that Tom Dinan would woul-elte btified when -- that the county would sign off on these issue . We never received as -- we were never told about this subsequent December 13th filing. That apparently enttt our property manager who did not inform us. s` I did not become aware of this s e as an ex-officer until October, 2011. And I did not actu�alfy°see the complaint that was filed until this week. And with that, my c &iis are concluded. MR. DINAN: If I ma ,m in your packet you will notice there's several photographs of the land here. And I think it shows that as far as the compliance ''issue, there's ample vegetation. There's one photograph which is quite bare. Rund • along this fence we first of all have a school behind us, a playgrou ®, a.`baseball diamond, pretty rough land. Then it opens up to a late; very nice view over the lake with some littoral plantings there And then towards the end it becomes very shabby again on the of hr side of this fence. There's been debris thrown out there. I don't know who owns the property at all. There is an intense here in this photograph where people cleared out to have a lake view. This photograph shows -- it is not a direct photograph looking directly at the house. It's at an angle. If you were Page 32 October 27, 2011 to stand in their yard and look directly at the lake, they have a nice view. What is being asked here is to plant shrubs to obscure that view. We have more than enough shrubs along this berm, at the last count that we did, to satisfy any requirements. s The only other issue I would like to say is Mr. Letourneau mentioned about this five-foot fence. He said we're not objecting to that today. Our concern is tomorrow. This was resolved a .r ago and now it has come back. Now, it's going to be resol e...:. t a ? Is it g g Y going to come back tomorrow? Next week? Next � t h ? Next year? We'd like to get it taken care of and close the ssu 'out if we could today. Thank you MR. WILLIAMS: Just one more concluding comment. There are 19 homes along this buffer. Eight of h- li homes are the original homeowners who bought from Centex i 9'9 They have stated to us that that buffer is in essentially the same condition that it was when they purchased the home, and w- have had no complaints whatsoever from any of those 19 homeowners about the condition of the buffer, we as an association. Thank 'o . SUPERVISOR LETORNEAU: Just a couple points. The claim tht,.their registered agent got the Notice of Violation and they weren't:informed of it does not mean it is not a violation. I'm so that he didn't convey the information to you, but that does not take away the matter of the violation. What was stated at various meetings, I wasn't there, I don't know, but th asically hearsay. Again, it has nothing to do with the violation violatichl We served the Notice of Violation clearly stating that these shimbs-shad to be planted according to the PUD plat map and also the Land Development Code. That was a clear issue on the Notice of Violation. I don't know why there's a contention that they don't have to do it. Page 33 October 27, 2011 MR. L'ESPERANCE: How many shrubs are we speaking about? SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: I'll let Mr. Kelly talk to that. INVESTIGATOR KELLY: The shrubs have to be planted at a four-foot on center, 10-gallon, five-foot high. With that being said, since there is a berm on there, that does not necessarily mean that e shrubs when they're planted have to be five-foot high. They hayOttoi reach an elevation five foot o above the grade. So if you measure from the bottom of the berm to the4op of the shrub, that portion has to be five feet in order to meet t e buffer requirement. With that being said, it's four feet on center for t e ength of the lots that do not have vegetation. Not every lotlOedbuffering. Some of the lots have vegetation already in spots. So We're talking approximately about half the lots on there h peed to be buffered. ACTING CHAIRMAN KALIF ooin back -- MR. L'ESPERANCE: And how tnany is that? ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- to how many is that? MR. L'ESPERANCE: troximately. INVESTIGATOR Y -1�. I'm thinking my math in the head, excuse me. = I'm think it's goingto be about 20 -- it's 19 lots. We're probably looking at about,n or 15 lots. Four feet on single lots are approximately„75 feet -- or 80 feet wide. Eight times four 32, times 15. So whatever-. that comes out to be ACTINGCHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It's a whole bunch. TIGATOR KELLY: It's a whole bunch. About 500. SING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Are there existing plants there now? 'INVESTIGATOR KELLY: There are places with existing plants that falls with (sic) inside that landscape buffer easement. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So when you figured out approximately how many have to be put in, I guess you have to take Page 34 October 27, 2011 into consideration what's already there? INVESTIGATOR KELLY: Yes, sir. Now, with that being said, that means they still have to have a single line four-foot on center plantings throughout the entire buffer. Even though there are some places that are much thicker and exce' that portion within -- and portions on individual lots that, you ko ,`- they don't need any plantings at all MR. L'ESPERANCE: I assume these are Xeriscape redo these have to be irrigated? INVESTIGATOR KELLY: They can -- there' = la t portion that says irrigated, so if they want to put plants the need-to be irrigated, they have to have the irrigation in place -.e he original B buffer that's described inside the landscape jrrigation plans that's inside the exhibits . ou iven to g Y ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN AS far as the fence, that is no longer an issue? INVESTIGATOR KELLY1a 's correct. ACTING CHAIRMAN is FFMAN: Are we sure that that will be part of our minutes, ifo ,i mill, and that will not come back again? INVESTIGATOR K LY: Yes, sir. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So that should resolve some of your questions on that There wette three items. Item one, which was not an issue any longer. INVESTIGATOR KELLY: That's correct. They did a very nice job in retmc ving all the exotics. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And number three, the fence,that's no longer an issue. So we're down to the plant issue. INVESTIGATOR KELLY: Yes, sir. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any other comment from the Board? Page 35 October 27, 2011 MR. HUDSON: I have a question. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Sure. MR. HUDSON: They stated that they took a brief count. You just stated that it was roughly 500 or so. I was just curious, even though we've talked about some of them weren't on center, but whgt was your rough count in walking with the members of your . ° association? MR. DINAN: We quit counting when we exceeded t e requirement. MR. WILLIAMS: One of the issues originall wd about native trees. And the code enforcement officer took exce nto the fact that there were sable palms planted there by the developer Of course sable palms are a state tree of Florida. We did a count. The number of the tree-required was 48. We had more than 48 trees. de A-, The Site Development Plan ha specification for number of shrubs required. I can't read it, but tt �clear it looks like a number of about five or 600. The suggestion hereodaTMis that there would be -- if there's more than 500 required, there'd be zero shrubs there. That's not the case. I would also like to point out to the Board that the Code 406.02.C.2 about .buffers states the following: When an alternative ��? B buffer is lo - d within a residential PUD and adjacent to a lake, the required plat thgterials may be clustered to provide views. Clustered plantings -- and so in effect they don't have to be every, I believe, four feet wa.s 'number on center, according to the code itself Vd-again, for the most part, this buffer is in the condition today that=dwas when the county signed off on this for the Centex Development. And that sign-off I believe occurred on or about September of 1999. SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: Okay, couple points. Our contention wasn't that they needed a total of 500 trees, our contention Page 36 October 27, 2011 was you needed 500 more trees on top of what -- shrubs on top of what they already had. He mentioned something about trees. That has nothing to do with what we're asking about today. The last point he made about the -- ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It's a distinction between trees and shrubs; is that what we're talking about? " r SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: Right, exactly. We're long for the shrubs. The trees are fine, they removed the exotic. ,an the fence is no longer an issue. . I'd just like to go back to the original Notice of Violation. f Everything he said had nothing really to do with what vv 're asking. We're asking for the required shrubs to be planted, as liagrammed in the Land Development Code._ MR. WILLIAMS: Just one counte This will be my last statement. I think y ou can see the proZlOwt at the association faces. We could never get precise coun o what it would take to satisfy p � fY Agent Kelly or Agent Perez. WeAkepfgetting new numbers. You need compliance. Now we hear awe need more Clearly the Site Development Plan shows for shrubs that the total is well under a thousand. Yet today we've heard that we need as many as 500 more That ould assume that there are zero shrubs along this buffer. MR. DIN And the photographs here show that there are shrubs back there: In fact, there are little walls of shrubs in some areas to obscure an relatively unsightly view coming up at the end of this baseball .iond with a lot of debris thrown back there on unkept property prp-pelVAvho we don't know who owns it, whether the school owns that ppPif it's privately owned, we don't know. It's not our property. So we have put up hedges almost to obscure that. Then there's openings where people can view over the lake. And then there's continuation at the other end. And at the far end is where apparently, according to homeowners Page 37 October 27, 2011 who have been there, nothing was ever planted and the county did in fact accept what was done. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: My question is -- and it doesn't really matter, but I'm going to ask it anyhow. Do we know where this complaint came from, or is this an anonymous complaint? : MR. DINAN: No, I can answer that, sir. . That came from a woman, Margo Cast, who had a problem with a different view in the community. Her -- they bought .illere which quite frankly overlooked the storage area for dumps - i n Taylor Road, which is not our property. She called us and'van ted us to do something, and we offered to work with her to `! 6 And no matter, whatever we would do it was never enough And that was on a C buffer running on her eastern area e However, apparently when Mr.-t -K , sa v this, he noticed the other one She sent me a letter. AnIan give this to you right now, but it said, I spent today trying t® ode to stop and recognize there never was a complaint, but they are unstoppable. That is her quote. The a c n was unstoppable when she said I q � ty pp do not have a complaint, they would not stop. Nobody has complained in our community about this Everybody is very-happy with it because it's a limited unsightly view from their ho l es to an attractive view over a lake to an area where nobody ca - a .-corner. So thee- is absolutely no issue of any homeowner. None a lake to`No homeowner ever on that strip has ever had an issue with`t e B buffer area -° $ ` PERVISOR LETOURNEAU: Two points. The county signed off in '97, obviously, what, 14 years ago? I wasn't there to determine whether or not the required shrubs were there at that time. I hope they were. But they're not there now. So it's -- whether or not they were there or not has nothing to do Page 38 October 27, 2011 with whether or not it's a violation at this time. I believe there was an e-mail sent in regards to the B buffer at one point, I don't have it in front of me, by Ms. Cast as she was complaining about the C buffer. But we did get a complaint from one of your homeowners. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Was the C buffer compliance? INVESTIGATOR KELLY: Yes, sir, it was brought .0.1O compliance. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: On then " otos, which one are -- there's one with a fence in it That's this litoto, We're not talking about that, or are we? `. INVESTIGATOR KELLY: Yes, sir. we talking about the fence or talking about the vegetation? ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUF e vegetation. INVESTIGATOR KELLY: t shrubs, yes, sir. ACTING CHAIRMAN K N: Is there any particular picture that shows where they're a= other than this one, which looks like -- without the grass. ° $X INVESTIGATOR KELLY: That's the only one that had no grass on it The other ones have grass. What I did iot�present, since it was not a violation within the provisions of the buffer, was the areas that already had the vegetation. I only presented photos that are missing the shrubbery. ACTIN6THAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So then it's not all of the lots, itlkoay ywhat these three pictures show; is that -- µ STIGATOR KELLY: That is a representative of-- there's more than just those four pictures of lots that need vegetation. That's just a representative (sic) of the landscape buffer easement along the overall 19 lots. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any other comments from the Board? Page 39 October 27, 2011 MR. LEFEBVRE: Yeah, I have several. One item I'm looking at is almost like a site plan where it shows the plot of the lots. And it was produced by Wilson-Miller landscaping irrigation plan back in '97. MR. DINAN: Yes, sir. MR. LEFEBVRE: It shows a C buffer, which has been brought, into compliance, and then it shows at the very bottom, whichitkrd would assume the southern part of the property, Autumn r ds, and then behind it is a school that you can access from Pin- �w' e e Road. MR. DINAN: Yes, sir. MR. LEFEBVRE: If this C buffer is in come arc - and you brought it into compliance, I don't understand P , '-re's a point of contention that this B buffer isn't being maintained. It does show a B buffer. I'm not sure -- I guess a C buffer isa. �eavier amount of buffering because it's industrial verso commercial MR. DINAN: Yes, sir. MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay So Iguess my question is, if there are holes in this B buffer, as they tend there is, no matter if it was that way back when the devel , rturned it over to the association or when the developer had it, it doee 't matter, it's still not in compliance. p � p The other question,' had is, does a PUD specifically spell out what kind of shrubs to be installed and where they need to be installed? Because typically they do. MR D [NAT: That would have been done back in 1997. I did not move there t*evuntil 2002. When we had Wilson-Miller come to the meetin 4Wison-Miller claimed everything was in agreement that was scheduled schedttla (fin the C buffer, the issue on the C buffer, you're correct, there's an industrial park behind us. And there's a cyclone type fence probably about eight feet height. And there are slats in the fence to obscure the view. But the slats get pulled out during hurricane season. Well, we were missing some slats so we bought a gross of slats and Page 40 October 27, 2011 replaced them -- MR. LEFEBVRE: We're not talking about that. But I'm just trying to say that if you're maintaining the C buffer here to the easterly part of the property, why not maintain a B buffer? I mean, that's the thing I'm trying to get at And also, if it states within the PUD, which it probably do- at you have certain buffers and it spells out where you have pla ,,ntygs and so forth, you have to maintain that And that's I think what -- the issue that we're contending with today.AN MR. DINAN: And we're contending we have. RIO issue is that we have this lake which people had an attractive of And now we're being told we have to obscure their view:E .01 F Ling these shrubs, which will impact their view -- ther 's aerm there which is several feet high, the shrubs we planted of the berm. And these people will not have a lake any longe comity r MR. LEFEBVRE: Does the have any aerials at all showing back in 2000 or '99 when this was approved by the county versus today? INVESTIGATOR . .^_ ,L : I don't have an y aerials with me. If you would like to take a recess, I will gain access to aerials. I will tell you that Fdid look at aerials during my review process, and you can't determine from those aerials about the shrubs. Again, the trees wer -m er an issue. But I cannot tell you -- MR. F E B VRE: The trees are probably obscured. INVESTIGATOR KELLY: -- definitively from looking at the aerials bout'what was there as far as shrubbery. °LEFEBVRE: Okay, there probably wouldn't be any Google maps where there would be a road view or anything that you could look in back from 2000 either. INVESTIGATOR KELLY: No, sir. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I'd like to make one comment. Page 41 October 27, 2011 You brought up that the -- I guess it was the LDC, says that you can cluster the plants so that you don't obscure somebody's view of the lake or whatever. I'd like the county to comment on that portion of the LDC. If the total vegetation is there and they're just not grouped properly, is that what we're talking about? .� SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: Well, I'm going to m one point is if we did get to the point where we did find a violation, the second part of our recommendation would be obtain a f - nation through Collier County Growth Management Divis. Zoning Services in the form of a landscape buffer plan'change to allow an alternative -- r THE COURT REPORTER: Please slew down. SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: 1 : : -- to allow an alternative planting R . So they could get an alternate planning scheme. I don't 0- 'eve- e that that planting scheme was in the original document, so� p g INVESTIGATOR KELLY Y Oka I'm going to -- if you don't Y� g g Y mind, I'm just going to goe a few technical things real quick with you for the record. I'm going to go over the -- you know, make sure that everybody understands what`aB buffer is Then I will go through the plans as well as the P144document, if that's okay with you ACTING tHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Sure. INVESTIGATOR KELLY: Thank you Type buffer states that you have to have trees on center at 21-fool on center throughout the landscape buffer easement. The shrubs ghave to be a number 10 basically 10-gallon shrub -- ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Can I interrupt you as you do it? Trees, just so we can isolate what we're talking about. Are they in compliance as far as you're concerned with trees? Page 42 October 27, 2011 INVESTIGATOR KELLY: Yes, sir. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. INVESTIGATOR KELLY: The shrubs are four-foot on center, 60-inch height at planting. Again, earlier I stated that that is measured from the grade. Not on top of the berm but from where the bottom of the berm react grade. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And the"b rm is approximately how high? a� ` INVESTIGATOR KELLY: The berm is not a consistent height as you look at it But I would average, you know, er*,,_ n two to three feet throughout the lots. , ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: ,So the bushes then could be two feet? INVESTIGATOR KELLY: Yep it` O r'three feet. Okay, so that is a B buffer just-fin Its simplest form, as identified by code. >>w The plans in there that I gave to you, there is one portion that says landscape irrigation-911i that is the plan on record during the development of this portion of Autumn Woods. This portion of Autumn Woods is called, according to the plat, was Autumn Woods? unit two The plans came in and were approved in 1997. Whet review those plans. And I= oize for the small print. Those notes on this plan are to identify ail-lithe vegetation that's required to be put in there and plant apsIthe location of that vegetation. When you look on the bottom of the south side of the landscape buffer easement plans, it shows a line of shrubs and has small circles, that's where the shrubs are going. They do have lots of vegetation as far as in clusters throughout the portion, but there's nothing in the plans that I saw that mentions clustering, as well as the -- the plants that are existing do not have to come out, they just have to go out and Page 43 October 27, 2011 plant additional plantings. The ficus hedge that was identified about blocking the view of the baseball for the school, that can stay in there. They're allowed to have up to 50 percent non-native, as long as it's not a prohibited exotic species that's being planted in there. x So they, you know, would just have to, you know, submit a', an of shrubs that would bring it into compliance with the minimum code g p as identified in the -- identified here. � ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let me gob back o what I asked before, where it says you can cluster them. D o y ou have to submit a separate modification of your site to sho at they're clustered, or is it just permitted? y INVESTIGATOR KELLY: The way - since this is a recorded document, you know, that the county acre and signed off on it, that they would like to go back and a'� t h argument, I think that Fay�� . would be something that they wou ae to go through the growth management department and obtain aplan change. ar MR. LEFEBVRE: The t Development Code is something that a PUD typically follow , correct. INVESTIGATOR KELLY: Yes, sir. MR. LEFEBVRE 0 But once you go to a site plan, if you're going to cluster plants you would have to show that on the site plan, correct, where those ' ters are going to be and then where -- like this Type B hedge, Type B offer wouldn't be here if it was clustered somewhere else, correctrkh I -VSTIGATOR KELLY: That would be my understanding, y s, MR. LEFEBVRE: So this kind of trumps the LDC code. It says you can -- the LDC code says that you can in fact cluster shrubs and so forth and plantings, but this would tell otherwise. Because it shows a Type B buffer and says that this is what -- in this development, this is what you're supposed to have, correct? Am I making sense? Page 44 October 27, 2011 SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: Yeah, you've got the lot plan as a basic PUD plan right there. They could have had clusters in there when they made that plat plan. MR. LEFEBVRE: But that would have had -- SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: But they don't have them r . there at this point. They put the straight line shrubs in there. ,, MR. LEFEBVRE: Right. SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: They have the opportunity to come down to growth management and see if they canAet authorization to have some of the clusters be part of t plants they're requiring at this point. But right now it just shows a straight line, `°tl at's where we're at. 4 MR. LEFEBVRE: LDC says that o have clusters. SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAUiVactly. MR. LEFEBVRE: It doesn't s ,= at this development has clusters. , ,,, What I'm saying is, it shows Type B buffer. If this -- if their argument is that they're clustering plants, it should have been shown on this. °- INVESTIGAORKELLY: Since you have a plan that shows -- no, that's the only I ng we go through. , MR. L BV : Okay. I make a motion that there is a violation. ail_. ACTING=CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. Do we have a second? response.) - , ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Motion dies. Do we have any other motions? (No response.) ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I have another question. Specifically, and I understand the respondents not wanting to continue Page 45 October 27, 2011 to come back and argue the same things over and over. There were three items that Mr. Letourneau brought up; item number one and item number three have been taken care of. We're talking about bushes, not trees, and we're not talking about 500 bushes, I'm sure. What is this hinging on? If they planted 20 bushes, would that probably bring them into compliance, in your estimation? Not t Im saying that you're not in compliance, but I'm just trying to fin4 fin Way of resolving this without drawing blood. " INVESTIGATOR KELLY: No, planting 20 plant ld not bring it into compliance. We received the complaint, I observed the vice. ' p o So the only thing I can do is to go by the Land Developmerc,C o se"and the drawings submitted. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: understand that The complaint that was called in was resolved, .hAt portion of it INVESTIGATOR KELLY: No sir. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The C buffer was the complaint. INVESTIGATOR 441. The C buffer, that's a different complaint. That C buffer h been resolved, yes, sir. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And you're saying there was another compint? INVESTIGATOR KELLY: While there, the complainant, you know, brought itito the attention of myself of the B buffer, of the south side of it a v `Il as through an e-mail, and that is the reason why we're =.pling to this B buffer as a separate complaint. 'ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Unless the school called, it was some homeowner along that buffer that complained'? INVESTIGATOR KELLY: The complainant was along that particular buffer at the -- same complainant as the C buffer. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: We're just asking for that Page 46 October 27, 2011 drawing right there on the B buffer, for these shrubs to conform with what is on that B buffer drawing and is on that plat map in the back there to conform. That's what we're asking. And they have to be planted in a certain way, and that -- ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes. MR. WILLIAMS: To set the record straight, to the best o knowledge there was never a complaint filed by a member o e community or anyone else other than Officer Kelly on the 1buffer. And if the county has -- if the code enforcement has a evail that contradicts my statement, please have them produc- MR. LEFEBVRE: I don't think that's really pit o' his case. There's many a times that a code officer is driving, oa n the road going to a particular violation and sees another and reports it, or follows up and opens a case out of it So I n't think that's an issue here. It's their point that there is a violation and it's up to us to find if there is or not I made a motion that-- it didn't go forward and we haven't heard any other motion, et I don't know if there's other debates that we can -- or q u stions to try to move this along. MR. MIESZCAK: Me your motion again. MR. HUDSON: Before you make the motion, I would just like to ask the Boardfisome input here. Is it possqe that we can give them a certain amount of time to go before t. e growth development organization department here and seek a site plan=change? AG CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We could have the county withdraw it at this time and bring it back at another time I was hotting that we could somehow resolve this here. The reason that I think that that motion died was I look at the photos -- for myself, I look at the photos and it looks -- we've seen lots of places where it doesn't look as pristine as this looks. So that's number one. Page 47 October 27, 2011 Number two, originally we were told that it was a person who complained that was on the C buffer, and that was resolved. So our primary goal is to keep the constituents of Collier County happy, and I don't know that that does it. So is there some point where it just makes sense, you can argue about it till the cows come home, but to plant 50 or 100 bushes,4W9' foot bushes on top of a three foot berm that would resolve t situation? MR. LEFEBVRE: Here's the problem. They're t - u o argue that the LDC says that there's clustering and that the -want to try to have clustering apply to here. But they can't, because t e PUD states that here is where the buffer -- the Type B buf has to be, which they do not have, according to the county. So if they were to go and try to get tha ,-4",.. - anged, if I'm not mistaken, then you probably have to y e ` site development improvement plan, SDP, to amend e Development Plan, p p k p correct? ti INVESTIGATOR KELLY Speaking in general terms of the landscape with planning services, in the past is that this would most likely go through as an ins w stantial change. Whether it's an SIP or an SDP, or substantial, I'mnot sure exactly what process that they would go through, that mro,,141d be up to planning services. But there is a process for the to go, most likely, and get an insubstantial change. u. MR. FEBVRE: Now, would you -- for the respondents, would that be something you'd be willing to do is go back to the county a ay that it's our contention that we would like to see this -- folloW,the LDC and have clustered plantings and see if this falls under those parameters and change your site development plan? If you want to get this resolved today we're trying to -- MR. DINAN: I'm reluctant to do that. We'd like to resolve this today. The key questions is why do we have to destroy a lake view of a Page 48 October 27, 2011 couple of people when it was agreed obviously before any of us were here that it didn't have to be done? This is the argument. I do have some photographs. You mentioned earlier photographs. But unfortunately it's so thick vegetation you're not going to get down to the ground to see a short shrub. But there ism ,k row of vegetation along there. ,�� No one is complaining. Everyone is happy. The woma rt*b complained, her home, sir, abuts the C and the B buffer. Anti, she was complaining about a C. And then like she said here, ticou' nty are unstoppable. She doesn't want to contend with them 'an amore. MR. LEFEBVRE: Right at the cul-de-sac. F But what I'm trying to say is you're trying tryinglratre that this -- you're trying to argue that the LDC, you're following the LDC which says you may have clustered developments,but your PUD unfortunately shows something different ` othat s what we have to follow. And that's the argument. £ The reason I made a motion because from my point of view the Type B buffer is not being followed But if you want to follow the LDC which says you may luster development, that's not afforded in your PUD the way it stands. MR. WILLIAMS arOkay, the county provided as an exhibit, I think it's four or five photographs. MR. LE. E3V : Correct. MR L ° S: These are the worst, okay? MR. LEFEBVRE Okay. ' LIAMS: If it would resolve this -- would it resolve this if we agred on these four sites or however many there were, four or five To add an agreed to number of plants, would that resolve this issue? MR. LEFEBVRE: Well, the violation doesn't spell out four lots. It says the PUD Ordinance 96-80, general landscaping. And part of the exhibit is this whole buffer, Type B buffer. It doesn't say four lots, Page 49 October 27, 2011 it doesn't say six lots. It's to maintain. If this C buffer is being maintained, which you agreed to as part of the PUD, but you're trying to say that this doesn't apply. You can't have it -- you're trying to have it both ways and it can't be both ways, it has to be one or the other. MR. WILLIAMS: There are 19 lots along there. There are some lots where there are hedges. There are no gaps at all There art 46me lots that meet -- putting clustering -- let's take clustering oitittf the issue. There are some lots that meet the requirement vt4.9,1t regard to the clustering. MR. LEFEBVRE: How many lots don't meet he - potentially not meet the requirement? MR. WILLIAMS: I don't know. We could never get a -- that's part of the problem, we could never get . spfic number that we had to add on specific sites. We never cop _ettat identified. MR. LEFEBVRE: He said h ots. So let's say half the lots. I'm going to do some quick matte . .a f the lots, which are nine lots. Let's say the lots are 65 feet ide - I'm not sure, but 65 -- 60 feet wide, okay. So that would be 5 �0 feet divided by four, would be -- about y �.>� y 110, 120 plantings? MR. MIESZCAK 110. MR. LEFE , -- : More than that, actually. 440. So it would be about 130, 140 plant shrubs. Roughly. Correct? 540 divided by four? WO INVESTIGATOR KELLY: Before I do the math, I intentionally didn't out-lot-by-lot. Because one, I don't have a survey. And se,c on° the plat map clearly sh ows that there's a landscape buffer easement. I'm concentrating strictly across the easement and not per lot-per-lot. I'm looking at the easement as a whole that has to be brought back into compliance. MR. LEFEBVRE: Their argument is they don't know what they have to do. So what we're trying to do is give them some direction Page 50 October 27, 2011 here. And I think that's part of why the motion might have failed. It's one thing to say bring it into compliance as a type B buffer, but that leaves up for a lot of discretion. I don't know how -- ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It would be easier if you went hand-in-hand down the buffer and say I need one here, here, kii here, et cetera. And you would have a number, you would knot m # you'd need to do, and that would resolve the situation. SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: The plan clearly s =os right down the easement four feet right in a row, shrub, shrub°, 'b, shrub, shrub. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It also a approved. SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: It was flog ed. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: t w•s approved. So that's all water under the bridge now If we ca frOolve this situation by the county accompanying the homeowners.� o ' tion and seeing what would bring it into compliance, that� o d resolve the situation as far as I can see. If you differ from thatlet us know. SUPERVISOR LETOU' � � °U: My contention about that is I don't believe they're going t -:40finless they're ordered to do so, I don't believe they're going to go ld plant the bushes. That's why we're coming here, to make safe there's an order to do this MR. DINANNy I could comment on that, sir. Exactly what you said is exactly w at we did. What we were told is we were in compliance and e would get a letter of compliance. Greg Murphy, our property:tY nager, on several occasions requested this letter. We were never able to get it A concern of doing this again today and saying okay, everything is done, like I said earlier with the fence issue that was resolved a year ago, 'popped its head up on this. We take a walk today and we all shake hands and say everything's fine, plant this, that and the other thing, we do it, and a year later they say well, we want this, we want that. Page 51 October 27, 2011 When does it end? That's the question. We want closure. We want to be able to close this file out and say everybody's happy, we maintain the -- keep invasive out, trim the shrubs, et cetera. We cannot get to that point. Every time we get to the goal, the goal line is moved. SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: I'd like to object to that. don't think we moved any goal lines for these -- we stated whaas in the NOV. 4.,'4k The buffers are put in for a reason. They buffehomeowners from surrounding properties. If we're going to say tM®-. t at this B buffer wasn't put in for a reason, say we don't find ° 'o ation, we leave it as it is, we're here because there was atitnptaint about the -- original complaint about the C buffer, because one of the residents didn't have enough buffering from the industrial area If we're here today and say there is° iolation, who knows 20 years down the road what's going tcpwiltybuilt in the area next to them and we're going to be back here cause a resident is going to complain about something than isn't buffered that should have been buffered today. 44,44. MR. WILLIAMS: To build on what Mr. Dinan said, as I mentioned in my memos after the meeting here in August of 2010, Officers Kelly and Perez, our property manager Tom Dinan and I walked the site his site's probably over 1,000 feet long. We walked the entire s' e And they agreed that the only thing required -- that no more planting was required. SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: Object. Once again, this is hearsay A ,,MR. WILLIAMS: The only thing that was required was to remove some additional invasives. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Mr. Chairman -- MR. WILLIAMS: We are volunteering -- MR. L'ESPERANCE: -- I call the question, please. Page 52 October 27, 2011 MR. LEFEBVRE: I make a motion that a violation exists. MR. DOINO: I'll second that. MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and we have a second. All those in favor? y �' MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. ' MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. DOING: Aye. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Op ose. Ay e. ) '41, MR. HUDSON: Nay. 14,.. MR. LAVINSKI: Mr. Chairman, I'd 14 to not vote on this issue unless our counsel feels different. Tii . nagement company is a direct competitor of my company, just don't feel comfortable on g votin on this issue. So I'd like t aabstain MS. RAWSON: You c t.m use yourself I'll give you a sheet to fill out MR. LAVINSKI: Ok MS. RAWSON: We'll leave it with the court reporter before you leave today. MR. LAITSI, I: Okay. MR. LEFEVRE: I was hoping that the property manager would be 1160 I think he could have answered some questions or helped, : , , MR. DINAN: Our property manager, Bill Covitz, who is here today r- the property manager you're speaking of our company, Greg Murphy, resigned. I believe he resigned for health reasons. We think he may have went to Kansas. We have not been able to locate him. In fact, what we asked for was a continuance to try to locate him. But I work. I had to take today off from work. And I was told to get Page 53 October 27, 2011 a continuance, I had to be here at 8:30 to know if I didn't have to be here at 9:00. Pretty much of a moot point. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, the motion passed, one abstention, 5-1 (sic) then. Mine was -- I voted against the motion, Mr. Lavinski abstained, and the rest voted for the motion. Now, the way this works -- MR. HUDSON: For the most recent motion? No, I'm .y` ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So there are t• nays. It still pass, 4-2, with one abstention. The way this works now is we have found you - v :elation. Now what can be done to resolve the situation? r MR. WILLIAMS: Please tell us. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: goo the motion maker to see if he has -- , MS. BAKER: Would the Board l et ear the county's recommendation? ACTING CHAIRMAN LEAN: Yes, I would. MR. MIESZCAK: Yes,3 Tioilike to INVESTIGATOR E LLY Thank you, gentlemen. Description of-- the recommendation: That the Code Enforcement Boar orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of ga0 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and abate all violations by One, plant required vegetation to meet mini um standards for the buffer Type B as described in the Collier County Land Development Code 4.06.02, by installing five-fc o r gh shrubs along the border of the landscape buffer easel-At with "X" days of this hearing, or a fine of "X" dollars per da_y� l be imposed until the violation i y p is abated. Or two: Obtain authorization through the Collier County Growth Management Division Zoning Services in the form of a landscape buffer plans change to allow an alternate plan scheme within "X" days of this hearing or a fine of "X" dollars per day will be imposed until Page 54 October 27, 2011 the violation is abated. Three: 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 Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of tlakoider, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do _ shave any comments? (No response.) ro ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I ha - couple of V questions on there. Number one is plant theregired vegetation. Are you going to specify that? INVESTIGATOR KELLY: I o. e to them what to plant other than it has to come into compliance with the B buffer. If they would like to submit a plan, I wig ew that plan in saying that plan meets the requirement of the B infer. But I cannot tell them what type of plant or how to ply- nt the vegetation on that area That is completely up to the respoddent. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Number two, five feet high, as far as the'W ants we discussed the berm issue there. So the total height w uld have to be five feet high. INVESTIGATOR KELLY: Correct, total of five feet high, as measured from grade. 4-, ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Any comments from t1Board? (No response.) ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Would someone like to fill in the blanks? MR. LEFEBVRE: Is this area irrigated? INVESTIGATOR KELLY: There is an irrigation line in there. I Page 55 October 27, 2011 do not know if the irrigation does work, but there is definitely an irrigation line still present. MR. LEFEBVRE: Do you know if it works? MR. DINAN: No one has ever said it doesn't. That doesn't mean it does. Nobody ever told me it did not Again, because everybo y is happy with what they have �j MR. LEFEBVRE: With the dry season coming -- well, We're probably at the fringe of it right now -- we have to take int consideration that You know, we want to give it the b , ° nces of survival, these shrubs. So anyone that makes a mot Cr; s ould take that into consideration. o _ 1 Can I see the -- now, who would provide wta - is there someone that would have to go out there and actually tell them how many plantings there would be? Who woul teat person be? INVESTIGATOR KELLY: The ir c a e a consultant, they can hire a landscape company, they cari4 'r --somebody who is familiar enough with the vegetation that should be planted in that area We g g te p have provided a planting list 04 m previously that the county recommends. They can 05Ifftliat list. But they would probably want to gain the advice of `professional to what plants would be best to put in that location. MR. LEFE ' ' : Can a landscape company go out there and do that? k :, INVESTIGATOR KELLY: The landscape company -- MR. LEFEBVRE That they retain to mow their lawn and cut their s e., t and everything. dl 4, 1 , STIGATOR KELLY: I do not see why they would not be able tai do it As long as they realize what the plants that they're putting there must be able to survive that location. MR. LEFEBVRE: But that would have to be -- some kind of plan would have to be submitted to you. INVESTIGATOR KELLY: No, we already have a plan -- the Page 56 October 27, 2011 form of the original landscape plan, as long as they meet those requirements and the Land Development Code and, you know, goes along with that plan. Again, we're only looking at the minimum requirements. So the area that already have enough vegetation, they don't have to go back and plant those areas. MR. LEFEBVRE: Right. But what I'm trying to say is if tTik Tv was just barren land, you would know. You would do the lin.e* het divided by four and say okay, you need "X" amount of plays, But we're not doing that here. SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: Investigator 4 l y can go out, meet with these gentlemen, walk that entire easem t, ani point out every four feet where these plants are going to _-, 0 be done. MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay. And then 'nusout what is already there as a buffer. .�b y SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU• a ey're in that string of four 46 feet. I think the clusters would probably`have to be approved by the growth management division as_pt f arr the plan, because they're not actually in there. That woulderobably their best bet is to maybe go to the growth management ision, have them look at the clusters and determine whether or not that could be part of the whole shrubbery that needed to be planted'. I believe that if they're not in a row on that easement then it',0 .ing to be hard for Investigator Kelly to okay any shrubs. MR. LFEVRE: So it won't qualify as a Type B buffer? SUPEMSOR LETOURNEAU: Right, unless they get perms • 0 on whatever shrubs that are already in there that are off the ease A TING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do we have two inspectors named Kelly? INVESTIGATOR KELLY: No, sir. SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: We used to have Kelly, but he's in the -- Page 57 October 27, 2011 INVESTIGATOR KELLY: Planning department now. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is that the same Kelly that walked the property? INVESTIGATOR KELLY: No, I -- that was me. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You did. INVESTIGATOR KELLY: Yes, sir. t ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And you did wakttie property? INVESTIGATOR KELLY: Yes, sir. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes. ,, MR. WILLIAMS: Can I have a -- of course w ` i ,I comply with the county's directive, but we would like some to �ccompany an on-site inspection that subsequently takes place after planting takes place and verify in writing on-site that the 1 4 pection has indeed taken . lace and that we have met the re � f this place it's going to be -- b e what g g Mouse you said here is that the prior inspection which took lT,,. our report on that was just p p p just So we want verificatio n n writing. MR. LEFEBVRE: „o : ill. Because it says in number three, the respondent must notify-the code enforcement investigator when the violation has bin abated in order to conduct the final inspection and confirm abato - ent. MR. W t S: We did it MR. F at And then you probably come back in front of us and v e ou�ld -- what I'm saying is there would be a record of you being compliance. -SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: We could supply these gentlemen with two forms: An affidavit of compliance and also a compliance letter when the case is closed. MR. DINAN: We did exactly what you're asking. Exactly. We walked it with these people, we were told we'd get this letter. Then they don't send us a letter. So the same thing happens again and again Page 58 October 27, 2011 and again. Where do we get closure? Where do we finally say it's done? MR. LEFEBVRE: That's what we're doing right now. That's what I'm trying to do right now. MR. DINAN: Okay, so we're going to do the planting, we're , going to walk it, they're going to say fine, we'll send you a letter,ten we don't get this letter sent. _ x MR. LEFEBVRE: Well, what will happen is -- first — : 11, can you walk the property and tell them what they need to,gitko is that out of your -- INVESTIGATOR KELLY: The only thing F thin an do is to confirm that they have met the minimum code koirement for a Type B buffer. MR. DINAN: Which we did. MS. FLAGG: Let me help yon : u •it his. What they're trying to say is these gentlemen ' y g t emen clearly d� ant to obscure a lake view. In order to not obscure a lake viewre going to have to get an alternative plan approved. Because the plan that has been approved and the one that these folks "ha've to follow is the plan that you were presented as part of the evidence They're not saying we want to hold them to the approved plan. What they're giving them an option to do, understanding that tliktbey would like to keep a lake view, is to get a plan amendment approved to allow them to cluster. They will --these folks will walk with them. Now, if they walk with them trnorrow, that means they have to follow the plan that's been aOroyed, which is a line of shrubs. If kou want to keep the lake view, then the first step that needs to be tlen, and these folks will accompany them over to the planning department to allow them to seek an alternative landscape plan so they can maintain a lake view to the best of their ability. So we have two options: It's either plant according to the approved plan, or get an amendment to the landscape plan to allow to Page 59 October 27, 2011 maintain the lake view as well as possible. If they get an amended plan that allows them to keep the lake view to the best of the ability maintaining a B buffer, then we will walk with them on that amended plan. But again, if the choice is we keep -- we want to keep what was approved, it's going -- it sounds like it's going to obscure the la ;e'; pp ' g g g g ^�- view. Were open to both, but I guarantee you, these folks wlk with them, based on whatever plan they wish to pursue. 74.t MR. LEFEBVRE: With that being said, I'd like 01'44. Where it says landscape buffer easement within 360 days of hi hearing or a fine of$100 per day will be imposed. And then numero would be the same something, 360 days of this hearing oran of$100 per day will be imposed. The reason being is, I don't think it Wilke that long to get the Collier growth management division i bier-- for them for that process. But I'd like to give them a*kaso that if they need to have these plants survive, they have a r iny'season to go through. ACTING CHAIRMAN ,A 'MAN: Okay, we have a motion. MR. MIESZCAK: second that motion. ACTING CHAIRMATKAUFMAN: And we have a second. All those in favor'? MR. LEFEB E: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON Aye. ACTING` CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. '° 'ESPERANCE: Aye. MRDOINO: Aye. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed'? MR. LAVINSKI: Abstained. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: One abstention, six yeas. It passes. Break time. Why don't we be -- we'll be back here at five of Page 60 October 27, 2011 11 :00. (Recess.) ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I call the meeting back to order. Our next one is Fakahatchee Trace. I understand we have p= 0 .le in the audience that want to speak about that as well, so we wort . forget you. (Speakers were duly sworn.) ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, we're .l worn in MR. WEIDENMILLER: Good morning. Cas- w eidenmiller on behalf of Fakahatchee Trace, LLC, the respon. Z t s - I just spoke with Mr. Snow, and we may . ° -4 SUPERVISOR SNOW: She needs to read - MR. WEIDENMILLER. Oh, I'm s FI wasn't sure if that happened while we were not kind enough toome in MS. BAKER: This is in referSiNto Case CESD20110001015, violation of ordinance building amt land alteration permits, Collier County Land Development Cede, 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a)• r. Description of violation: Observed renovations of replacing windows and doors without first obtaining required Collier County building permits, Location c dress where violation exists: 20201 State Road 29, Naples, Fl k, ida. Folio 00982880005. Name ri� '"address of owner/person in charge of violation locatio T �.kahatchee Trace, LLC. Registered agent, Michael � Urban 406 Arnold Avenue, Naples, Florida, 34104. Date violation first observed: March 25th, 2011. Date owner/person in charge given notice of violation: April 4th, 2011. Date on/by which violation to be corrected: April 24th, 2011. Date of reinspection: June 7th, 2011. Page 61 October 27, 2011 Results of the reinspection: The violation remains. SUPERVISOR SNOW: Mr. Urbanik brought this forward, counselor. MR. WEIDENMILLER: Good morning. Casey Weidenmiller, once again, on behalf of the respondent, Fakahatchee Trace, LLCN, I spoke with Mr. Snow just moments ago in the hallway. may have something that could resolve this without the need , a long protracted and confusing hearing. Just as a brief background, you all may recall this_c De. It deals with the former prison out on State Road 29. Unde 'mg his is that my client, the owner of the property, did none of t wwork and there is currently a dispute. And we're not actually ablT- , 6 -0Zt 6-0 access to the property JAIN We have subsequent to our last her • one out with the Sheriffs Department after getting w -� '-7--:ned by Judge Provost, along with your kind code enforce aff and I think members of g Y gip. both the fire department and may the building department. What I have talked to Mr, lo'w about and which we would propose is to continue this flays to determine -- there's also a lawsuit pending as to the Olvership. There's also a bankruptcy. What we would like to do is, assuming that it's agreeable to the county, that there ould be an order indicating no use or occupancy of the property, at wewould continue this or postpone it 90 days to see if it would be possible to work out the ownership dispute. Othery ise, we're going to get into this uncomfortable situation wherw. _r: ,lent could potentially be facing fines from your Board on the--o and and on the other hand being circuit court fighting us to acc- .sand not even have the ability to get out there and do any work, if that's ultimately where this heads. Thank you. SUPERVISOR SNOW: For the record, Kitchell Snow, Collier County Code Enforcement. Essentially what he has described is true. The issue is if we were Page 62 October 27, 2011 to progress today we may impose fines if there's a violation found on a property that has no ability to cure. We would request that the use and occupancy cease during this 90-day period. Then when we know nothing is happening, there's nothing going on on the property, it is going to remain vacant una you give the attorneys the opportunity to decide ownership. MR. LEFEBVRE: Well, who would be occupying the t eitty if there is a contention of who owns it, if there's a contenti i h hat the - respondent can't get access to it They can't put a ten ere, correct? SUPERVISOR SNOW: There is a tenant there n MR. LEFEBVRE: There is a tenant there . Well, then who's going -- MR. WEIDENMILLER: Or a squ tt pending on which side of the lawsuit you take. rte- MR. LEFEBVRE: Well, who ing to be the person that's going to enforce the removal of pant? I guess if we give a contingency for 90 days, we c90make a decision and an order. SUPERVISOR SNP . . 'Well, you're not finding a violation. All we're asking for is a continuance of 90 days with a cease of any use. MR. LEFEBVRE: I don't think we can -- MR. L'ESP. ' A NCE: What does the county attorney have to say on this op . ion7 MR. I D3NMILLER: I mean, we could do it as a stipulation or an order I loesn't matter how we do it It's just I think a way to make4t4L,11 uch more straightforward as opposed to -- M RAWSON: There's a stay that's presently in effect until today,v MR. LEFEBVRE: But it doesn't say anything about occupancy, correct? MS. RAWSON: No. MR. WILLIAMS: Steve Williams with the County Attorney's Page 63 October 27, 2011 Office. Your enforcement question issue would then come to the circuit court and the Sheriffs Department in terms of removing a tenant, should the court so find. At this point in time it would not be this Board's decision. I think what they're asking for is the 90 days to let the court decide who the rightful user, owner and occupier of the premises TS and then enforcement of that of course would come to the tent powers of the circuit court and he can always utilize t Sheriffs Department for removal. MR. LEFEBVRE: I make a motion that we a t ally grant 120 days, but no mention, because we don't have th ` i t y to do that without an order of the occupancy. So just, tricly 120 days so this can work through the circuit court. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUF' i Hold your motion for one minute, while we have other peopletav want to speak. MR. LEFEBVRE: I remove; ymotion. MR. WEIDENMILLER q Are 'we in an open forum where non-parties to the hearinanbegin presenting testimony? I've been in a lot of forums and I've never been in one where somebody who's not named as a respondent has the right to appear at a microphone and asked to be heard" don't know if you allow public comment for each, but that's esse Bally what's being attempted to occur here. UNIDEN VIED SPEAKER: I represent the tenant. MR. VIDENMILLER: Exactly. And the tenant's not a named respoVnt, I would defer to your counsel on that one I don't mean to g9t1 = &way, but -- S. RAWSON: Generally speaking we do allow people in the public to speak. But generally speaking, it's always during a hearing. And so if there's a stipulated agreement as to a stay and you're not going to have a hearing, then you're not going to have any testimony. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So if it's a Page 64 October 27, 2011 continuance, we're not hearing anything. MS. RAWSON: You can call it a continuance or a stay, just tell me what to write. MR. LEFEBVRE: I would make a motion to continue this case 120 days, or in four months. . MR. L'ESPERANCE: I'd like to second that motion. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion we have a second All those in favor? MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. _ r ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye:, MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed'? (No response.) ACTING CHAIRMN MUFMAN: Passes unanimously. MR. WEIDENMILLER: Thank you ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: To the public speaker, we'll be back here, and I guess at that time if it's heard you're certainly welcome to sneak. This b 'ng"sus to Terry Hernandez and Brian Fults. Am I pang the right one, Jen? KER: Yes, sir. ''(Iestigator Paul was duly sworn.) -,MS. BAKER: This is in reference to Case CELU20110009421. Violation of ordinance Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 2.02.03. Description of violation: Observed pool built on this property with no primary structure. Pool water green with algae. Page 65 October 27, 2011 Location/address where violation exists: 2700 47th Terrace Southwest, Naples, Florida, 34116. Folio 35988400001. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: Terry Hernandez and Brian K. Fults, 3425 29th Avenue Southwest, Naples, Florida, 34117. :,. Date violation first observed: July 19th, 2011. Date owner/person in charge given Notice of Violation - my 19th, 2011 . Date on/by which violation to be corrected: Augu_tVffi, 2011. Date of reinspection: September 26th, 2011. Results of reinspection: The violation remain. 1. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: 0 - - - aul? INVESTIGATOR PAUL: Good morning.-),For the record, Renald Paul, Collier County Code Enforcement Investigator. This is in reference to Case Nr C ``2 110009421, dealing with violation of Collier County Lahr. Development Code 04-41, as amended, Sections 2.02.03. p Service was given on Jul 9th, 2011. And I'd like to present case evidence in the followinghibits. At this time you'll get a photo. It's one photographt just shows a picture of the pool. Just to give you some insight on this property, we did have a prior CEB case some time back, and what had happened was the pool -- okay. . MR. 41,,E "� CAK: Motion to accept the photos. MR LE' BVRE: Second. A = G CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor? MRS: LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. Page 66 October 27, 2011 MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: They're accepted. Let the record also show that the respondent is not present. 'tt,„ INVESTIGATOR PAUL: All right. So as you'll see, like said earlier, we did have a prior CEB case where there was some. o. :�e rty maintenance issues on the primary home. And that was around the time Hurricane Wilma had come to Naples. And we e p demolishing the home. But the pool was left in plateer- ause of prior conversations. The owner was going to rebuild another 4* keep the pool in place. Well, the owner never built the home and so what we're left with was just a pool. And it's been in this thiaacpdition for I guess some time now This case began on July 19th of 2111. We had the complaint in regards to this pool and the condition th at it's in, as you see by the pictures. We prepped the Not' e�o �Violation. We did post the property and the courthouse and did ttem t service to the property p operty owner but was unable to On 9/26 I dicta reinspection, observed that the violation did remain in the e condition, and I prepped the case for a hearing and we're here%o dad I've new had contact with these property owners. I don't know if my' 4r visor had any contact with them, but -- MR L'ESPERANCE: I have a question. . VESTIGATOR PAUL: -- the violation still remains. Yes? MR. L'ESPERANCE: The fence that I see in the picture, does that completely encircle the pool? Is there any danger? INVESTIGATOR PAUL: The fence does completely encircle Page 67 October 27, 2011 the pool. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Is it locked and secured? INVESTIGATOR PAUL: It's a chain-link fence. I don't believe there's a lock, it's just a chain-link goes all the way around and there's no lock. There's no gate or anything like that ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It looks like the pooa ° covered by the county at one time'? INVESTIGATOR PAUL: Correct. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any motio - comments from the Board? MR. MIESZCAK. Make a motion a violatio , exist-s. MR. DOINO: Second. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Welave a motion, we have a second. All those in favor? MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. 40 1 MR. HUDSON: Aye. *s 4 ACTING CHAP UFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE "Aye. MR. DOINO s.Aye. MR. LAVN SKI: Aye. ACTING '' HAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed'? Ni (No r NG o ne.) ACTING-CHAIRMAN IRMAN KAUFMA N . Carries unanimously. . . �°have a suggestion for -- " ESTIGATOR PAUL: Yes, I do. e ask that the Board order the respondent to pay operational 4 j. costs in the amount of$80.86 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing. Ask that the owner abate violations by obtaining required Collier County demolition permit, inspections and certificate of completion/occupancy, or fill the pool with county Page 68 October 27, 2011 approved clean fill within "X" amount of days of this hearing or a fine of "X" amount of dollars will be imposed until the violation is abated. The respondent must notify 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,tbe county may abate the violation, using any methods to bring the violation to compliance and may use the assistance of the Co*,r r County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this order, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property ovyik. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is this i kbendens, do you know? INVESTIGATOR PAUL: No, I don't bel v it s, no ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Has this been given -- I guess it has not been given to the -- MR. LEFEBVRE: When was t e-ito" se--torn down? INVESTIGATOR PAUL: So*me I believe around 2006. MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay o - long -- I guess they said they were going to rebuild. „ f INVESTIGATOR ' t ' Correct.■ MR. LEFEBVRE: How long could this exist before they would have to pull a permit to rebuild? We're way past that, obviously. INVESTIGATOR PAUL: Yeah, we're way past that I don't know. MR. � F E. VRE: Okay. Just curious if they like -- because this isn't an acce • y structure which has to -- there has to be a residence Agt there,-c ct? - ESTIGATOR PAUL: Correct. lR. LEFEBVRE: Okay. And that's why it's a violation. But the county tore down the -- INVESTIGATOR PAUL: The main house, yes. MR. HUDSON: In thinking about this pool, just from my former career in working with pools, do we know if there's a leak in the pool, Page 69 October 27, 2011 do we know if that's just rainwater, do we know what's been dumped in there, do we know if there is a leak, what's leaking into the groundwater? In thinking about the time frame as we assess this we don't know what's leaking -- we don't know if there's a leak in the pool, we dnt know what's going through the foundation of the pool. We don't b,E really know anything about this pool MR. MIESZCAK: Would it make a difference? MR. HUDSON: I'm just thinking in shortening tKtime n frame -- MR. MIESZCAK: Oh, yeah, I agree. text MR. HUDSON: -- would be my recommend - www at I'm saying is -- ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Theuidelines we have, by the way, with pools show typically seveatays and $250 a day fine is the guidelines. Not that they are,gqinZfo be that It's whoever makes the motion what they select MR. LEFEBVRE: Well, this issrnore unique than just your typical pool with a structure. This doesn't have a structure. To fill the pool in, would lhey need to permit to do that? INVESTIGATOR PAL: They would need approval from our building department once type of fill that they would be bringing in They just need t make sure they're bringing in clean fill. MR. LEFE BVRE: Okay. But it's not like they need to pull a permit to dump INVES' GATOR PAUL: Right. . FEBVRE: -- dirt in here and -- {: ESTIGATOR PAUL: No, they don't. ,ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Mr. Letourneau, have you had any contact with the owner? SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: For the record, Jeff Letourneau, Collier County Code Enforcement. (Supervisor Letourneau was duly sworn.) Page 70 October 27, 2011 SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: I have had conversations. I was the original investigator when this occurred. It went before the Code Enforcement Board. They were here at the time of the hearing. They actually pulled the permit and demolished the house. They kind of said to us, be it me and the building department can we keep the pool there, because we plan to rebuild in the next c e of years. We agreed yeah, you can do it as long as you put a approved fence around it It kind of fell through the cracks, never got it take ` 'o g f We received another complaint about it I have never so e to them after that, after a permit was CO'd. .t.. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Th a, give years ago, o Y right? ... SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: 200,-Yes,-Yes, sir. So we're just kind of-- I meat i l reality, it's been a code violation. We were just, you know,- ,,, r a,,Tw when -- we were trying to give people a chance to rebuild, and o we thought that rather than destroying the pool at that tinwe'd allow them to keep it there. MR. LEFEBVRE: ,T ' motion that we give them 45 days -- I don't know the exact -- b . 5 days for whatever has to be done, and/or $150 a day,fine.40Was there a different step one, two, three or was it just one ,$_ INVESTIGATOR PAUL: It was one step. One step for everything. 'v MR. L EBVRE: Okay then, very good. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. Do we have ascond? MR. DOINO: Second. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. All those in favor? MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. Page 71 October 27, 2011 MR. HUDSON: Aye. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. ' ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? ��°� '4 (No response.) ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. INVESTIGATOR PAUL: Thank you MS. RAWSON: Did you say 250? . MR. LEFEBVRE: Forty-five days and 150. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Th'. i s us to Sergio and Sara Garita; is that correct? MS. BAKER: Yes, sir. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN A=rid this is -- there were several cases here. One was withdrawrand there are two left? MS. BAKER: No, they're al still on the agenda. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN They're all still on, okay. MS. BAKER: WelliiikeNNthem separately. ACTING CHAIRMAb KAUFMAN: Yes. (Investigator Ambach was duly sworn.) MS. BAKE This is in reference to Case No CEAU201100 1945, violation of Florida Building Code, 2007 edition, Chterl, permits, Section 105.1. Description Descriptioh of violation: Fence around property without all requires •bier County permits. cation/address where violation exists: 420 15th Street Sthig ,est, Naples, Florida, 34117. Folio No 37011920003. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: Sergio and Sara Garita, 420 15th Street Southwest, Naples, Florida, 34117. Date violation first observed: August 25th, 2011. Page 72 October 27, 2011 Date owner/person in charge given notice of violation: August 25th, 2011. Date on/by which violation to be corrected: September 6th, 2011. Date of reinspection: September 29th, 2011. Results of reinspection: The violation remains. INVESTIGATOR AMBACH: Good morning. For the reckrd, Chris Ambach, Collier County Code Enforcement. This is in reference to Case No CEAU20110011945 ialing with the violation of a fence around the property without equired Collier County permits, located at 420 15th Street S! west, Naples, Florida, 34117. Folio No 37011920003. Service was given on August 25th, 2011. , I would now like to present case evidence in the following exhibits. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN,- Motion to accept the exhibits. ; MR. LEFEBVRE: Make arotion. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. ACTING CHAIT UFMAN: We have a motion, we have a second. All those in f or?! MR. LEFEB : Aye. MR. M ` . 0 : Aye. MR. „ UDSON: Aye. ACTITHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. f 'ESPERANCE: Aye. a. DOINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. INVESTIGATOR AMBACH: One photograph dated September Page 73 October 27, 2011 29th, 2011 and one photograph dated October 26th, 2011. This case initiated as a complaint from neighbors, that the property was in foreclosure and not being maintained. Upon my visit I observed the fence on the property was built without first obtaining all required Collier County permits. Further research showed the property was in foreclosure, an041, } forwarded it to the foreclosure team. After no response I received this case back and it was'p-epared K.for today's hearing. As of October 26th, the violation 1 s. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Ar questions �t from the Board? £' (No response.) t ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: , nnotions from the Board? (No response.) ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I'd like to make a motion that we find them in violation. t � MR. LAVINSKI: Seconds _- ACTING CHAI IMUFMAN: A motion and a second. I'm allowed. All those in favor?,, MR. LEFEBZE: Aye. MR. MISS CAK: Aye. MR HUDSON: Aye. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. . ' SPERANCE: Aye. . '- DOINO: Aye. '4-MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. y ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. I got my dirty look from my -- do you have a suggestion for -- Page 74 October 27, 2011 INVESTIGATOR AMBACH: I do. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- us? INVESTIGATOR AMBACH: That the Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of$80.57 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 dayslg abate all violations by Obtaining all required Collier County building p ermits or demolition permit, inspections and certification o ,„ - completion/occupancy within "blank" days of this hearing, orb 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��'` f inal inspection to confirm abatement. If the respon a 4 • ails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may abate -- and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sherfffie to enforce the provisions of this order, and all cos ,efebatement shall be assessed to the property owner. ACTING CHAIRMAN MAN: Would someone like to fill in the blanks? MR. LAVINSKI: Yeah, I'll take a shot at that one ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. LAVINI: I make a motion that the fees of$80.50 be paid within 30"dysthat the violation be cured within 30 days or $100 a day fine , ereater. MS. " R: Just for clarification, operational costs are 80.57. ' _R` , AVINSKI: 80.57. Sorry. R LEFEBVRE: Second. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion, we have a second. All those in favor? MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. Page 75 October 27, 2011 MR. HUDSON: Aye. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? g (No response.) ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries un. '_o ously. INVESTIGATOR AMBACH: Thank you ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have to`swear Chris in again because the swearing wears off after each ae INVESTIGATOR AMBACH: I was wondering about that (Investigator Ambach was duly sworn )) MS. BAKER: This is in referenceoCe CEPM20110001296, violation of Collier County Code of La s and Ordinances, Chapter 22, Article 6, Section 22-231, Subsection 15. Description of violation/ , seen stagnant pool not protected. Location/address where violation exists: 420 15th Street Southwest, Naples, Florida ,-04117. Folio 370119200003. Name and addressof owner/person in charge of violation location: Sergiotaii0 Sara Garita, 420 15th Street Southwest, Naples, Florida, 3411V,I, Date violation first observed: January 31st, 2011. Date owner/person in charge given Notice of Violation: Februath, 2011. Date on/by which violation to be corrected: March 2nd, 2011. Date of reinspection: September 15th, 2011. Results of reinspection: The violation remains. INVESTIGATOR AMBACH: For the record, Chris Ambach, Collier County Code Enforcement. This is in reference to Case No. CEPM20110001296, dealing Page 76 October 27, 2011 with the violation of a green and stagnant pool not protected from the elements. Located at 420 15th Street Southwest, Naples, Florida, 34117. Folio No. 37011920003. Service was given on February 9th, 2011 . I would now like to present case evidence in the following . exhibits: One photo dated January 31st, 2011, and one photo dated -' October 26th, 2011. , `� MR. MIESZCAK: Motion to accept the photos. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a a, , t � n. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. All those in favor? MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. _ � ACTING CHAIRMAN KAU kA -A4.4: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye ' MR. DOINO: Aye. t , MR. MARINO: Aye‘'", MR. LAVINSKI: Yy ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response ACTING C ' IAs :MAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. INVE eTIGATOR AMBACH: This case initiated as a complaint from neighbors that the property was in foreclosure and not being proper ' antained. n my visit I observed a green stagnant pool not protected fro ; t e elements. Further research showed the property was in foreclosure and the case was forwarded to a foreclosure team. After no response, I received this case back and it was prepared for today's hearing. As of October 26th, the violation remains. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Is the fence (sic) protected? Page 77 October 27, 2011 INVESTIGATOR AMBACH: It is. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Is the pool protected? Pardon me. INVESTIGATOR AMBACH: I'm sorry? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Is the pool protected? INVESTIGATOR AMBACH: Clarify'? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Is the pool fenced in and protected` t% INVESTIGATOR AMBACH: The property is The ent r property is, correct. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any other k ments from the Board'? MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion that the violation does exist. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We've a motion, we have a second. All those in favor? Na MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. p MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. tiA MR. HUDSON: Aye. ACTING CHAI tMUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. DOINO -5 Aye: MR. LAVITS, I: Aye. ACTINGHAIMMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed'? (No reone.) ACTINHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. I) �w uchave a suggestion for us? `=-ESTIGATOR AMBACH: I do. he county recommends that the Code Enforcement Board order the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of$80.86 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and abate all violations by chemically treating the pool water and kill the algae growth and maintain the filtration system to keep the pool water clean, Page 78 October 27, 2011 and provide biweekly treatment within "blank" days or a fine of "blank" per day will be imposed for each day the violation continues. Number two: Alternatively, respondent may chemically treat the pool water, killing the algae growth and covering the pool using HUD standards, preventing the intrusion of rainwater within "blank" d ; or a daily fine of blank will be imposed for each day the violation continues. ,T_ And number three: The respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator when the violation has been r e in order to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement. , fl respondent ,t, fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into complia i e i may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs 0 ficeto enforce the provisions of this order, and all costs of .ba - a ent shall be assessed to the property opener ACTING CHAIRMAN KAU SAN: Do we have any comments from the Board? :, (No response.) ACTING CHAI x `UFMAN: Would someone like to fill out the blanks? MR. LEFEBYE:, I'd like to make a motion. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. L BV : That the fine be paid in the amount of$80 -- operationa . os • a the amount of$80.86 within 30 days, and a fine of $250 a clay af er 14 days covering pool for both of the -- either coverin the ool or Y5 Y chemically treating it. 'ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. Do we have a,second? MR. LAVINSKI: Second. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. All those in favor? MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. Page 79 October 27, 2011 MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. 0°s ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? 44, (No response.) ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It passes u aiun ously. INVESTIGATOR AMBACH: Thank you ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Which i rings us to Sergio and Sara again. This is the third case. _ 104 (Investigator Ambach was duly sworn . MS. BAKER: This is in reference toicisy CESD20110001287, violation of Collier County Land Dev4e:lerit Code, 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(. _ ��� Description of violation: Fired Collier County permits without receiving all required inspections and a certificate of occupancy/completion for the aol and addition of a game room and lanai. Also, no Collier County permits obtained for the shed built in the rear yard. Location/addr ss where violation exists: 420 15th Street n;r Southwest, Na es, Florida, 34117. Folio No 37011920003. Nam e�_ '4address of owner/person in charge of violation location: S rglo and Sara Garita, 420 15th Street Southwest, Naples, Florid 41 ate violation first observed: January 31st, 2011. Iate owner/person in charge given notice of violation: August 25th; 2011. Date on/by which violation to be corrected: September 6th, 2011. Date of reinspection: September 15th, 2011. Results of reinspection: The violation remains. Page 80 October 27, 2011 INVESTIGATOR AMBACH: For the record, Chris Ambach, Collier County Code Enforcement. This is in reference to Case No. CESD20110001287 dealing with the violation of expired Collier County permits without receiving all required inspections and a certificate of completion/occupancy fo he pool and an addition of a game room and lanai. Also, no Collie County permits on file for the shed built in the rear yard. Located at 420 15th Street Southwest, Naples, Florid , 4117. Folio No 37011920003. a Service was given on October 25th, 2011. I w s now like to present case evidence in the following exhibits: T o f•h otos dated January 31st, 2011 and one photo dated Octob=: t2011. MR. MIESZCAK: Motion to accept t b e p otos. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFW,, Motion and a second. All those in favor'? MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. ,„ �� MR. MIESZCAK: Aye -4 't, MR. HUDSON: A r -- ACTING CHAIRMA° KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPEANE: Aye. MR. DOINOyAye. MR. LAITSII: Aye. CHA ' ° _ KELLY: Opposed'? } (No response.) a� G CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. ESTIGATOR AMBACH: This case initiated as a complaint fro m the neighbors that the property was in foreclosure and not being pa maintained. During research I observed expired Collier County permits without receiving all required inspections and a certificate of completion/occupancy for the pool and an addition of a game room Page 81 October 27, 2011 and lanai. Also, no permits on file for the shed that was built in the rear yard. Further research showed the property was in foreclosure and the case was forwarded to the foreclosure team. After no response I received this case back and it was prepare. for today's hearing. As of October 26th, the violation remains ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I have a question.4 the foreclosure team. Had they given you back any comment INVESTIGATOR AMBACH: No No, sir. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: They h v' .been unable to contact the respondent as well'? INVESTIGATOR AMBACH: That's co bb ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any from the Board? (No response.) ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUA : Any motions from the it Board'? 414k MR. MIESZCAK: Motion that a violation does exist. MR. LAVINSKI: Second ACTING CHAIRMA° ��KAUFMAN: All those in favor'? MR. LEFEBVRE Aye. MR. MIESZ CK: Aye. MR. H SON Aye. ACT KG CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye MR. L' ' PERANCE: Aye. V= OINO: Aye. 1R. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Opposed'? (No response.) ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. MR. MIESZCAK: Recommendation? ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Recommendation from the Page 82 October 27, 2011 county? INVESTIGATOR AMBACH: 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 Number one, obtaining all required Collis County building permits or demolition permit, inspections and i‘- certificates of completion/occupancy within "blank" days of i hearing or a fine of "blank" per day will be imposed until violations are abated. ,. And number two The respondent must notify h c code enforcement investigator when the violations hav "_ en abated in order to conduct a final inspection to confirm a °tem nt. If the respondent fails to abate the violations, the county may abate the violations using any method to bring the violations into compliance, and may use the assistance t Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of rder, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. ACTING CHAIRMAN FMAN: I'd like to make one comment as far as whoever s`'go'ing to fill in the blanks, that the sooner dates are preferableersus the later dates. Otherwise, 60 days is better than 360 days, because the bank won't act until they have a fire burning on th 'x. back side, if you will, and this is the kindling. So with that, is 'here someone who would like to fill out the -- fill in the bla ? MR I ESZCAK: I make a motion. Operating costs $81.15, 30 days, t tae of$200 a day. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. Do we have a'second? MR. LAVINSKI: Second. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. All those in favor? MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. Page 83 October 27, 2011 MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. DOING: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. KK` fr ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any opposed? (No response.) ° ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries u ; ously. INVESTIGATOR AMBACH: I'm sorry, I did : t the -- within %how many days? �,0, 0 I MR. MIESZCAK: Thirty. =- INVESTIGATOR AMBACH: Okay, _.hank you, sir, appreciate ACTING CHAIRMAN KAU' _ A , ar believe that brings us to Hanna Lee. _ � (Supervisor Letourneau was my sworn.) MS. BAKER: This is in reference to Case CEPM20110014045 violation of Ordinance CO -r County Code of Laws and Ordinances, Chapter 22, Building and Building Regulations, Article 6, property maintenance, Section 22L231, Subsection 19. Description violation: Severe bee infestation. Location/address where violation exists: 4706 25th Place Southwest,1 _.aj 1 , Florida, 34116. Folio 3598336007. Name`Tnd'address of owner/person in charge of violation locatioviZatna Lee, 4706 25th Place Southwest, Naples, Florida, 341/6. ,00 `ate violation first observed: October 10th, 2011. Date owner/person in charge given Notice of Violation: October 10th, 2011. Date on/by which violation to be corrected: October 12th, 2011. Date of reinspection: October 13th, 2011. Page 84 October 27, 2011 Result of reinspection: The violation remains. SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: For the record, Jeff Letourneau, Collier County Code Enforcement. This is in reference to Case No. CEPM20110014045, dealing with the violation of a severe bee infestation, located at 4706 25th Place Southwest, Naples, Florida, 34116. Folio No 359833600 __ Service was given on October 10th, 2011. I would now like to present case evidence in the following exhibit: One picture taken yesterday, October 26th, 2Q41., Before you guys look at this, I'd like to apologizes was kind of aiming around the corner. I was -- the camera was- id of shaking I think because I didn't want to get stung. So ree a t ircled the area where the bees are going in at so -- _ : MR. MIESZCAK: You didn't wan tet too close, did you? SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU; dn' want to get too close, to be honest with you Lot of bees,'- MR. MIESZCAK: Motion At M aecept the photos. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second ACTING CHAIRMAN - UFMAN: We have a motion, we have a second. All those in favor? MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIL,SZCAK: Aye. wq MR IUDSON: Aye. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. 1\ DOING: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. k ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any opposed? (No response.) ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Okay, chicken, you can -- Page 85 October 27, 2011 SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: I was, I'll admit it. A long run to the truck. I received the complaint about a bee infestation near the front door of this house. I called the complainant who stated the bees had chased and stung numerous kids in the neighborhood. On October 10th, 2011 I did observe bees hanging along the soffit and board on the outside of the garage. It appears there-d4; space underneath the boards, right where I circled on that t iure, where the bees are accessing to get I believe inside the garage, probably. A The house is vacant and our foreclosure tea eking with the bank, Wells Fargo, to see if they will abate it However, due to the safety factor, I decided lto bring the case to the first available hearing. As of yesterd cober 26th, the violation remains. 4y I'd also like to point out that it is a on a Main Street right to Golden Gate Middle School, so a lot of lire walking in front of this house right now MR. MIESZCAK: kit st a*quick question. Are they honeybees or what? SUPERVISOR L ETOURNEAU: Honeybees. MR. MIESZ 4K: Thank you I don't w h y a beekeeper just couldn't go over there and take a minute to o ` .t. SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: I think it's real difficult a lot of times beekeepers. Number one, the Africanized bees, they don't want t - _ . And, you know, I think they're always under the assumption now that they have some form of Africanized bees. MR. MIESZCAK: I was assuming it was a honeybee. SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: Well, no, they're Africanized; that's a strain of a honeybee. They're the real aggressive ones. And the beekeepers just don't want to keep them because they're not worth the Page 86 October 27, 2011 problems. MR. MIESZCAK: Really? SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: Yes. MR. MIESZCAK: I did that in my second life. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Maybe we'll send you over there. '° MR. MIESZCAK: With you in front of me. �„� � _ , SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: When I go out an °' my reinspection, I'll call you up and you come on over her oo. MR. LEFEBVRE: I don't think he's as fast as ed to be I make a motion that a violation does exist. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion, we have a second. 1 All those in favor? MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. w. X401' MR. HUDSON: Aye. ww - ACTING CHAP N _ UFMAN: Aye. w MR. L'ESPERANCE dye. MR. DOINO .. Ay MR. LAVII: Aye. ACTINGk.CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No reone.) ACTINGCCHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. ro • q 'have a suggestion, Mr. Letourneau? S, . ERVISOR LETOURNEAU: Yes, sir. I IR. MIESZCAK: That Jeff go there and get the bees out SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: Recommendation: That the Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of$80 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and abate all violations by: Removing the bees and all Page 87 October 27, 2011 related hive debris within "X" amount of days of this hearing or a fine of "X" amount of days (sic) be imposed for each day the violation continues. Number two: The respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement. 4,;� N. If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the countyAavy abate the violation, using any methods to bring the violat n into compliance, and may use the assistance of the Collier rivt57 Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this order, and al i.R4s of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner s ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Cain°0as 0 e that the county has had cases like that -- this in the ast where they can get a bee person out there within a short period Time? SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU. .AAP ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: With that, do we have any comments from the Board? , Nt (No response.) ACTING CHAI ' KAUFMAN: Well, I'll -- MR. MIESZCAK: I like bees, I can't make that motion. MR. LEFEBRE: I'd like to make a motion that respondent pays operational co is in the amount of$80 within 30 days of this hearing, ti seven days, or a $350 a day fine. g� Y � $ Y ACT I,q G CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. Do we have a second'?�� �-, VINSKI: Second. 8 TING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. All those in favor? 4 R. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Page 88 October 27, 2011 MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any opposed? (No response.) ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN. It carries unanimoul_ � SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: Thank you. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The next case i S iNicholas and Catherine Gonzalez. (Investigator Baldwin was duly sworn.) w MS. BAKER: This is in reference to Case CitrkI20110003139, violation of Florida Building Code 2007, Chap robr, Section 424.2.17. Description of violation: No protective mrrier surrounding the swimming pool. pp Location/address where violation exists: 561 Second Street Northeast, Naples, Florida, 341 34120cRAlo 37281720004. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: Nicholas and Catherine Gonzalez, 561 Second Street Northeast, Naples, Florida, X4120. Date violation irst observed: March 17th, 2011. Date owneyfilesson in charge given Notice of Violation: May 17th, 2011. . Date e byhtich violation to be corrected: June 8th, 2011. Date of nspection: September 21st, 2011. - . sof reinspection: The violation remains. PESTIGATOR BALDWIN: Good morning. For the record, Patrick Baldwin, Collier County Code Enforcement Investigator. This is in reference to Case No. CEPM20110003139, dealing with the violation of no protective barrier surrounding the swimming pool, located at 561 Second Street Northeast, Naples, Florida, 34120. Folio No. 37281720004. Page 89 October 27, 2011 Service was given on May 17th, 2011. I would now like to present case evidence in the following exhibits: Five photos, three taken on my initial site inspection, March 17th, 2011, one photo taken on May 17th, 2011, and one photo taken yesterday, October 26th, 2011. MR. MIESZCAK: Motion to accept the photos. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion MR. LAVINSKI: Second. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a •M o `d. All those in favor? MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. E MR. HUDSON: Aye. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN4p-yj e. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. "` MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. ACTING CHAIRMAN ',.!MAN: Opposed'? (No response.) y E ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. INVESTIGATORBALDWIN: On March 17th, 2011, I responded to a complaint about an unmaintained swimming pool without a protective barrier. While won tile property, I observed that there was an unmaintained swimming pool without a protective barrier. I t A transferred the case over to the foreclosure department -- the.fdtOosure team, I'm sorry -- and they were able to get compliance from the bank to maintain the pool and to cover the pool, as the photo from May 17th, 2011 shows. And as of today, the violation still exists. The bank will not put up the screen enclosure or a fence to surround the pool or property. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you know why? Page 90 October 27, 2011 INVESTIGATOR BALDWIN: Typically the banks haven't been putting up fences or dealing with the permitting department and putting up any buildings or fences to abate violations. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: If this was a green pool, they would cover it, though. INVESTIGATOR BALDWIN: They did. In the photo, the ' second to last photo from May 17th, it shows that they did --4e1P, it doesn't show that they cleaned the pool, but it shows that,t - .ank did cover the pool, theoretically as of right now eliminatiWle afety violation. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Is this a fabric cover wwt s a wood structure underneath it'? INVESTIGATOR BALDWIN: I believe they covered the pool to HUD standards, which would be two-bj4purs, some chicken wire screening and a tarp over the top. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Can that be4�walked on by an adult without falling through? INVESTIGATOR BAL ' : I haven't been too close to the pool to see that, sir. I can°of ��� . gee through -- the pictures that you're seeing, you're seeing from the front door looking through the vacant home out to the back sliders. I haven't been around to the pool to see exactly how the have covered it, but from a distance it appears to be to HUD stand.rds ACTING VAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I probably couldn't walk on it, but that's -- any comments from the Board? fte:T s ` onse.) A CIFING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I'd like to make a motion then that we find this respondent in violation. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. All those in favor? MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. Page 91 October 27, 2011 MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. DOING: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries u ani ously. Do you have a suggestion? INVESTIGATOR BALDWIN: I do. That the Code Enforcement Board orders Vitokfee ondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of$80.80 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days an sate all violations by One Obtaining a Collier County il•trig permit, inspections and certificate of completion/occupa. cto install an approved protective barrier within "blank",46 of this hearing or a fine of "blank" dollars per day will beim posed until the violation is abated. Two The respondent 4 Est 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 wing any method to bring the violation into compliance and nay use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this order, and all costs of abate e hall be assessed to the property owner. ING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I know the bank won't go and dortanything if the home is occupied. Since it isn't occupied, giving a long time frame on this will just delay the situation, the bank will wait. They have no set date as far as foreclosure is concerned on this? INVESTIGATOR BALDWIN: The foreclosure team sent it Page 92 October 27, 2011 back to me stating that the bank will not put a protective barrier up surrounding the pool. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Anybody like to take a stab at filling in the blanks? MR. MIESZCAK: Well, I'll make the motion to pay all operating costs of$80.86 within 30 days, and 30 days time frame �_. complete all violations, and a fine of$200 a day if not MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a ±tin, we have a second. _ g All those in favor? MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUF _"";1 Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. , MR. DOING: Aye. IR.� MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. e F ACTING CHAIRM- �UFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Unanimously. INVESTIGTOR BALDWIN: Thank you ACTING CIAMAN KAUFMAN: I believe that's the end of the cases, id Bare now into the imposition of fines. First case hat I have in front of me looks like Rene Zafra. ZAKER: They actually were granted an extension of time, so we'd-be on number two ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, Maria Granados. (Supervisor Perez, Arcenai Perez and Ms. Vanduhano (phonetic), translator, were duly sworn.) SUPERVISOR PEREZ: Just so you know, Ms. Perez has limited (sic) with her English. She had asked Ms. Vanduhano (phonetic) if Page 93 October 27, 2011 she could assist her in some translation in case she had difficulty understanding any questions from the Board. For the record, Code Enforcement Supervisor Christina Perez. This is in reference to Case No. CESD20100010084, violations Ordinance 04-41, the Collier County Land Development Code, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(A). 41 Location: 4270 Eighth Street Northeast, Naples, Florida, olio No 39592680006. 0 Description: Garage converted into living space iO u t Collier County building permits. p Past orders: On May 26th, 2011 the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact, conclusion of law and dr -The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances in order to correct the violation. See the attached Order of h hard OR 4639, Page 2134, for more information. th The property is in compliance ' he CEB orders as of October 11th, 200 -- I'm sorry, as of September 29th, 2011 . The fines and costs to date axe-described as follows: Order item one and three, fines at the ate of$150 per day for the period between September 24th, 2011 to September 29th, 2011, for the total of six days, for the total of$900. Order item .number seven, operational costs of$80.86 have been paid. Total aunt to date is $900. The c n recommends full abatement of fines as the violation is abated and - erational costs has been paid. -to FEBVRE: Make the motion to abate. MR $ LAVINSKI: Second. ,ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion, we have a second to abate the fines. All those in favor? MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. Page 94 October 27, 2011 MR. HUDSON: Aye. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. Nq ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? ��N` (No response.) ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries una nusly. You're all set. No fines. Thank you for taking ca n� 'he Y � violation. AN' ,IN ,,, SUPERVISOR PEREZ: Thank you. .. MRS. PEREZ: Thank you ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN That brings us to Crescencio Lopez; is that correct? 0.40,. (Investigator Rodriguez and Translator IMs. Montelongo and Mr. Garcia were duly sworn.) 'k . INVESTIGATOR RODRI U For the record, Maria Rodriguez, Collier County Cderforcement. I know that he's her r imposition of fines, but he asked me earlier this week if he coul Piave an extension of time due to the fact that his permits are in, he just hasn't C.O.'d them yet. So he's asking for a 90-day extension exteriskon. SUPERVISOR=SNOW: If I may? 4. (Sup isoSnow was duly sworn.) SUPE VISOR SNOW: For the record, Kitchell Snow. W .e,.j st received information this morning that he's applied for his pet its. We had no idea that he was going to request an extension. He's,done a massive amount of work on the property. He just didn't have permits to do what he did. Sometimes we do walk them through the process, but there may be something lost in translation here. And all we're doing is asking him -- for a 90-day extension for him to come into compliance so we don't impose. Page 95 October 27, 2011 ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Ordinarily you would do a withdraw on this, wouldn't you? SUPERVISOR SNOW: Yes, we would. MS. FLAGG: In light of the information that he gave this morning, we would request that the case be withdrawn to allow htni some time to come into compliance. MR. LEFEBVRE: You want to explain that to him? SUPERVISOR SNOW: What? r MR. LEFEBVRE: Please explain to the interpret k, lirit way she 4 can explain it to him. , SUPERVISOR SNOW: I will. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN. ThVbrings This us to Charles H. Freeman. (Supervisor Letourneau was duly sw SUPERVISOR LETOURNEA � Fo m t record, Jeff Letourneau, Collier County Code Enforcement. This is in reference to CEB 0C:O No. 2006100546. The violation is of Ordinance 04-41, the Coeounty Land Development Code, as amended, Section 3.05 01 • Violation location is 2860 Eighth Street Northwest, Naples, FloridaFolio No 37641240001. The violation description is clearing in excess of one acre without a permit. Past ord : On February 25th, 2010 the Code Enforcement Board issued issugg.a fading of fact and conclusion of law and order. The respondent va s found in violation of the referenced ordinance and ordered correct the violation. See the attached Order of the Board, OR 454 m Page 1056, for more information. The property is not in compliance with the CEB orders as of October 27th, 2011. The fines and cost to date are described as the following: Order item number one and two, fines at the rate of$100 per day for the period between February 26th, 2011 to October 27th, 2011, 244 days, Page 96 October 27, 2011 for a total amount of$24,400. Fines continue to accrue. Order item number seven, operational costs of$81.15 have not been paid. Total amount to date, $24,481.15. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Have you had any contact with the respondent'? SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: We've been out there '° numerous times and left notes, messages and he has not resp.. 4 Oaf. There's signs of people living there, but no response to any nno knock on the door or anything like that. 2,4 ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is this part o the foreclosure team's efforts at all'? �z SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: No, I believe this guy is not in foreclosure at this time ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN He's more or less ignoring the situation. ..� SUPERVISOR LETOURNEA lk More or less. MR. LEFEBVRE: Has an the work been done at all'? SUPERVISOR LETOU AU: Nothing. MR. LEFEBVRE tke , motion to impose. MR. LAVINSKI: Second ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion, we have a second to im._ ose. All those` 9 favor? MR. 4 FVRE: Aye. MR M SZCAK: Aye. HUDSON: Aye. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) Page 97 October 27, 2011 ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Next case is Bruce Lamchick. (Supervisor Perez and Mr. Lamchick were duly sworn.) SUPERVISOR PEREZ: For the record, Code Enforcement Supervisor Christina Perez. This case is in reference E ce to Case No. C S D2 1 0 00022396.,. , Violations, Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). Location: 4320 62nd Avenue Northeast, Naples, Ron a. Folio No 38726920009. Description: An incompleted single family hone with expired permit no 2005092527. Past orders: On August 25th, 2011 the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact, conclusion of la order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced4oNitnances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attache °Order of the Board, OR 4718, Page 2043, for more information:, lt.,r)i= The property is not in compliance with the CEB orders as of October 27th, 2011. '� - The fines and cost to date are described as the following: Order item number one and two, fines at the rate of$200 per day for the period between e' ember 25th, 2011 to October 27, 2011, 33 days, for the total of$-6,600. Fines continue to accrue. Ordertemumber five, operational costs of$81 .43 have not been paid. Total amount to date, $6,681.43. TING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you LAMCHICK: If the please the Board, first of all, I apologize -- ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Could you just identify yourself? MR. LAMCHICK: Yes. Bruce Lamchick. I'm acting as a trustee here for several persons who had previously made a mortgage Page 98 October 27, 2011 to the former landowner who was in the process of building the home. The funds were intended to be used to build the home. Midway through the project -- and this is a five-acre parcel in Golden Gate Estates -- he had the superstructure done, he had the electrical done, he had the plumbing done, he had done a significant amount of wok. And then he pretty much abandoned the project. We had to take back the property. We were left with th property half done. They were investors, they weren't builders. We solicited some bids from contractors. The co S o complete it were significant. We tried to market the property IS was in 2007. Right about then of course there was a sign f� c n'economic reversal. I'm sure you all are much more famil' . ' h Golden Gate and the properties out there than I am. I'm pre much based in Miami. When I got notice of the prior hear' , lad filed a Motion for Continuance due to the hardship of coming here. Apparently you chose to deny it, so therefore the ii0tial fine was imposed. I did not want to disregard the importance pf this g p �_. � The main problem hl i that the property was secured. It is -- there is a significant struct' there. We need to find the right buyer. ACTING CHIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let me interrupt you for one second. We'r .not going to hear the case now The case was heard, it was fund in`violation. What we're here now is for the imposition s f fines. �a It apps hat it is not in compliance, according to the paperwork that I i aand the $81.43, which would be a bare minimum of an expense to pay, has not been paid as well So I'd like you to -- MR. LAMCHICK: I would like to have the opportunity to get the property marketed to the right person who could then complete it. That's really the only real way to resolve it. Having additional fines from the Board would certainly present an additional obsticle which would make it economically impossible. Page 99 October 27, 2011 We're not here -- I'm not a builder, unfortunately. It wasn't a situation that the investors sought to be involved in. It's going to be a loss in any event. The only thing that can actually come out positively, I think, is that we find a buyer who has an interest in proceeding with the completion of the project. y G The project as initially proposed was wonderful. It's just that our owner abandoned the project and left us with a mess. And I n�ti s hoping on behalf of the investors that the economic situation ould turn around so that it would be more viable. This hasrued to be a nightmare, needless to say. And no one is in a po to put in hundreds of thousands of dollars more when it's al =as y s losing project. So time is the only thing that I could ask othe Board, and your „7 understanding that we would like to -- it's in our best interest to try and resolve it, as it is yours to make sure that doesn't become a blight to the area. " We did secure it I don't be i it's a hazard as far as safety to completed structure, I agree with that ACTING CHAI ' ''-AN l‘AUFMAN: On the $81.43, any reason why that was never paid'? MR. LAMCHICK I'll be happy to pay the $81, obviously. ACTING CI4IRMAN KAUFMAN: Any comments from the Board? -' .. ire (No r. orie.) ACTIN CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: No comments'? MR.,' SPERANCE: I'd like to make a motion that we impose the fines-as state by the county staff A', MR. LAVINSKI: Second. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion, we have a second. All those in favor? MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. Page 100 October 27, 2011 MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any opposed? w (No response.) ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries u i ously. You can appeal this to the county board, but it .. i usly is in your best interest to get things going. Fines can b= . 1 .ted by the county, but at this point we are moving on on t I'it. MR. LAMCHICK: Okay. MS. BAKER: Just for clarification an .ppeals can be made to the Collier County Circuit Court a d -a . e Clerk of Courts. MR. LAMCHICK: Thank yob ACTING CHAIRMAN KAAL.kF, AN Next case, Jesus Enrique. (Supervisor Letourneau wasduly sworn.) SUPERVISOR LETJAU: Once again, for the record, Jeff Letourneau, Collier Count , ode Enforcement. This is in refe -nceto CEB Case No. CESD20100013659. Violation is of Co 'er County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Sect on 1 2.06(B)(1)(a). Violation location is 4972 22nd Place Southwest, Naples, Florida Folio No. 36111680008. V. lat on description is an enclosed lanai with no permit. Pasta}order: On June 23rd, 2011, the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact and conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinance and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached Order of the Board OR 4698, Page 1329, for more information. The property is not in compliance with the CEB order as of Page 101 October 27, 2011 October 27th, 2011. 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 September 22nd, 2011 and October 27th, 2011, totaling 36 days, for a total amount of$7,200. Fines continue to accrue. Order item number five, operational costs of$81.15 ha , of been paid. Total amount to date, $7,281.15. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you Any comments from the Board'? o- r MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion to impose MR. LAVINSKI: Second. tao ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Moon and a second to impose. All those in favor'? , MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. 1/4, :1/4 MR. HUDSON: Aye. ' ACTING CHAIRMAN N `UFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE :A ye. MR. DOINO ,AyeTM MR. LAVMI: Aye. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed'? (No reone.) ACTIN ` CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. That br ngs us to Valorie Lojewski and Carol Nelson. -' supervisor Perez was duly sworn.) .EJPERVISOR PEREZ: For the record, Christina Perez, Collier County Code Enforcement. This is in reference to CEB Case No. CESD20080014926. Violations: Collier County Code of Laws, Chapter 22, Article 2, Section 22-26B, 104.5.1.04.4. Page 102 October 27, 2011 Location: 330 Wilson Boulevard, Naples, Florida. Folio No. 37220800008. Description: Detached garage, Permit No. 910012418 expired without getting C.O.'d. Past orders: July 28th, 2011 the Code Enforcement Board is -.. ed w a finding of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered t : oect the violation. See the attached Order of the Board, OR 47O8, Page 1577, for more information. . The property is not in compliance with the CE44kders as of October 27th, 2011. The fines and costs to date are described . lws: Order item number one and two, fines at the rate of$290 per day for the period between August 28, 2011 and to October 2 11, 61 days, for the total of$12,200. Fines continue to acne ° Order item number five, o p erg.go.i°al costs of$81.15 have not been aid. Total amount to date,i. 1 281.15. p , MR. LEFEBVRE: Make motion to impose. MR. LAVINSKI: S�. c o n l- ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Motion and a second to impose. All those irk:favor? MR. L BVRE: Aye. MR � IE AK: Aye. MR. H "SON: Aye. ® D4 G CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. 11 L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It passes unanimously. Page 103 October 27, 2011 Which brings us to Julio Iglesias. Name rings a bell. MR. MIESZCAK: Is he going to sing? (Supervisor Perez was duly sworn.) SUPERVISOR PEREZ: This is in reference to CEB Case No. CENA20100018724. Violations: Collier County Code of Laws, Chapter 54, environmental, Article 6, Section 54-181. Location is 985 Honeybee Drive, Naples, Florida. F _ .. i t No. 00097840008. Description is litter consisting of but not limited _buckets, construction debris, oil containers, et cetera. Past orders: On May 26th, 2011 the Cod- - o - em' ment Board issued a finding of fact, conclusion of law ad order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordi -nces and ordered to r correct the violation. See the attac e r �f the Board OR 4693, Page 2132, for more information The property is not in compliance with the CEB orders as of .44 October 27th, 2011. The fine:,1 nil costs to date are described as :a4 fi following: Order item o a nd o fines at the rate of$200 per day for the period between June" 6th 2011 to October 2 p � 7th, 2011, 124 days, for the total of$24,800. Fines continue to accrue. Order numbtem number five, operational cost of$80.57 have not been paid , otal amount to date is $24,880.57. MR. F j BYRE: Make a motion to impose. MR. 6A SKI: Second. 4 A I CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second t6 impose. All those in favor? MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Page 104 October 27, 2011 MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Opposed? (No response.) ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimouy Julio Iglesias, next case. There are three total. This is tks&ond one (Supervisor Perez was duly sworn.) SUPERVISOR PEREZ: This is in reference to Case No CESD20100018718. Violations: Florida Building Code 2007 'gin Chapter 1, Permit Sections 105.1 and Ordinance 04-41 as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code. Section 11 2.06(B)(1)(a), and Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(ei). , Location: 985 Honeybee Dri . ,Naples, Florida. Folio No 00097840008. VP Description: Bottom floe'Oa stilt home, new rooms were added and new wall and f 4 orsElectrical work done without Collier County building permits. Past orders: May 26th, 2011, Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact,riislusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation ofthe referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached Order of the Board OR 4693, Page 2130, for mreinformation. The operty is not in compliance with the CEB orders as of October.7th, 2011 . The 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 September 24th, 2011 to October 27th, 2011, 34 days, for the total of$17,000. Fine continues to accrue. Order item number five, operational costs of$81.72 have not been paid. Total amount to date, $17,081.72. Page 105 October 27, 2011 ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do we have a motion from the Board? MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to impose. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. MIESZCAK: Second. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a secontriOltion and a second. All those in favor? YF MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. �Kb 8 � . ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: y MR. L ESPERANCE: Aye. , MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. ACTING CHAIRMAN KALIF AN : Opposed? (No response.) ACTING CHAIRM N KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Which brings us to -- -'re still on Julio? The third case, okay. (Supervisor Perez was duly sworn.) SUPERVISO PEREZ: This is in reference to CEB Case No CESD201000 871 . Violations' Florida Building Code, 2007 edition, Chapter 1, permits Section 105.1, and Section 111.1. And Ordinance 04-41, as amend0,46 Collier County Land Development Code, Section 101:0 (B)(1)(a) and Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(ei). n Location is 985 Honeybee Drive, Naples, Florida. Folio No 00097840008. Description: Several unpermitted structures on the property. Swimming pool with deck that is covered by a screen enclosure with no permits for all of them. Chickee hut with attached shed with a Page 106 October 27, 2011 bathroom unpermitted. Unpermitted small sheds on the south side of the property and on the east side of the property. Treehouse with electricity unpermitted. All structures on property besides the principal structure do not have permits. Past orders: May 26th, 2011 the Code Enforcement Board i :.- ed a finding of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent,,w found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered t, correct the violation. See the attached Order of the Board OR 46 O 'age r4 261, for more information. The property is not in compliance with the CE X61 e s as of October 27th, 2011. The fines and costs to date are_ d s ibed as the following: Order item number one and two, fir00-Ne rate of$500 for the period -- $500 per day for the period between September 24th, 2011 and October 27th, 2011, 34 days, ford total of$17,000. Fines continue to accrue. Order item number five, operati ''Aa l costs of$81.72 have not been paid. Total amount to date, ',1� ,181.72. ACTING ACTING CHAIRMAN � MAN: Do we have any motion from the Board? MR. LAVINSKI: Moon to impose. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion to impose. MR. MIE` A JC : Second. ACTING H- AIRMAN KAUFMAN: And we have a second. All those ni favor say aye. 1\4k7,-_,LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. lR. HUDSON: Aye. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. Page 107 October 27, 2011 ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. MR. L'ESPERANCE: One quick question. May I assume that the screen enclosure does secure the pool: SUPERVISOR PEREZ: There is a fence that also surround the entire property. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Thank you very much. 3£s ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That brings Maria -- Marina Guzman. (Supervisor Perez and Ms. Guzman were_dul o .) SUPERVISOR PEREZ: This is in reference 4o EB Case No CESD20090008686. Violation: Collier County Land Dev a soTent Code, 04-41, as amended. Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a), 10 066(B)(1)(e), and 10.02.06(B)(1)(ei), and Florida = g Code, 2004 edition, Chapter 1, Permit Section 105.1. Location: 360 Wilson oulevard, Naples, Florida. Folio No 37280600002. Description: Converted garage to a living space and an unpermitted shed type structure in the rear yard without first obtaining all required Ceer County permits. Past I, ■er -On April 28th, 2011 the Code Enforcement Board issued a findin: of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found o violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached Order of the Board, OR 4681, Page,2'3037 for more information. The property is not in compliance with the CEB orders as of October 27th, 2011. The fines and costs to date are described as the following: Order item number one and three, fines at the rate of$200 per day for the Page 108 October 27, 2011 period between August 29, 2011 to October 27, 2011, 60 days, for the total of$12,000. Fine continues to accrue. Order item number two and four, fines at the rate of$200 per day for the period between June 30th, 2011 and October 27, 2011, 120 days, for the total of$24,000. Fine continues to accrue. Order item number seven, operational costs of$82 have be d paid. Total amount to date is $36,000. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do we have any. otion from the Board? MR. LEFEBVRE: Just a clarification. The operational costs have been paid, you said? SUPERVISOR PEREZ: As of today. FU z MR. LEFEBVRE: As of today, okay. Thank you MR. HUDSON: Did they turn off h==o 00s er? SUPERVISOR PEREZ: The in a of, Christopher Ambach, could elaborate a little bit more on tha . lb- (Investigator Ambach was d _ t�LL sworn.) INVESTIGATOR AMI3,46H. For the record, Chris Ambach, Collier County Code Enforcement. w,. I spoke with Mr. Guzman this morning. She actually stopped by the office here. Basically she's not done anything with the exception of moving away rom that area of the interior of the house. She said p that after we s e t spoke we set up a meeting I would stop out there ta i on Friday It would give her time to shut that power off to that area She's not done anything else because she's in the process of trying to sell the e through a short sale. So that's basically where we are. _ _ LEFEBVRE: She's trying to sell the home via short sale. I guess its there an offer on the property right now; do you know? INVESTIGATOR AMBACH: She said no. She didn't say there was an offer, she said she was working through a real estate company at the time -- at this time, and thought she had a chance of basically selling the home. She didn't elaborate on it. Page 109 October 27, 2011 ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah, we don't want homes to be sold with liens on them. They need to have a clear title. And that's some of the stuff that occurs, why we came out with the edict to go to NABOR, that they would have the real estate folks make the buyers aware of what's going on. ' ., SAM: On this one she paid the operational costs? INVESTIGATOR AMBACH: That's correct. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: What's the Bor g -- MR. LAVINSKI: It still looks like nothing has b e d ne. I don't see why we don't impose the fines. Aq4a P4, ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. :s th :t a motion? MR. LAVINSKI: Make a motion to impose ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: „We' ave a -- MR. L'ESPERANCE: Second. CS ACTING CHAIRMAN KAU * "emotion and a second. All those in favor? MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: A e qo ° MR. HUDSON: A ACTING CHAIRMAKAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPEANE: Aye. MR. DOI ■ OAye. MR. LA�° INSKI: Aye. ACT I G GHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No repo' se.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It passes unanimously. ch brings us to the last case, Omar Barreda and Veronica Trujillo. (Supervisor Perez was duly sworn.) SUPERVISOR PEREZ: For the record, Christina Perez, Collier County Code Enforcement. This is in reference to CEB Case No. CESD20100018786. Page 110 October 27, 2011 Violations: Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a), and 10.02.01(B)(1)(ei), Collier County Code of Laws, Chapter 22, Article 2, Florida Building Code, Section 22.26 -- 22-26.B, 104.5.1.4.4. And the Florida Building Code, 2007 edition, Chapter 1, Section 105.1. R Location: 2650 Second Avenue Southeast, Naples, Florida.:\ Folio No 40922240005. Description: Swimming pool, screen enclosure and e built without Collier o er County building permits. ,, The owner did apply for a building permit for t � ool and the screen enclosure in 1995, but the permits were care'' e d p Past orders: On April 28th, 2011 the Cod n _ =cement Board issued a findings of fact and conclusion of 1®w and order. The respondent was found in violation of the r== - ced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. Seep tfta.ehed order of the Board OR O 4681, Page 2039, for more information. The property is in compliance with the CEB orders as of September 21st, 2011. The fines and costs a+ a re described as the following: Order item three and five, fines a e rate of$100 per day for the period between August 29 2011 and September 21st, 2011, 24 days, for the total of$2,400. Okrational costs of$83.72 have been paid. Total amount to dat $2,460. The c n recommends full abatement of fines as the violation is abated and operational costs paid. .3 P ESZCAK: Motion to abate. MR LEFEBVRE: Second. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion, we have a second. All those in favor? MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. Page 111 October 27, 2011 MR. HUDSON: Aye. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any opposed'? ('''4,% 'o. (No response.)- , ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Your time waiting was well spent. That ends the hearings. We are now up to rep s. 1). That putting her glasses on , MS. FLAGG: You don't have to call attention that For the week ending October 19th, theme- the banks have expended $2,484,000, and abated 2,002 co °violations. Just in that one week, the banks e� pen , $22,000 to abate code violations, which then eliminated t*d for the county taxpayers to spend it So not all banks are uncooperative. Most of them are very cooperative. 4_ ..„ Additionally for this *eek 148 new code cases were opened. 499 property inspections were conducted, 98 lien searches were requested. And of those 90 .ere were actually nine code cases identified. So what what4qat means is through the cooperation of NABOR and letting folk know that getting a lien search before they buy a property is a reall �o '°idea. We limited the potential pote teal of nine code violations being awed on to new buyers without them being aware of it An the investigators last week were carrying an average of 62 cases,each. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you. Do we have any new business or any other comments from the Board? MR. LEFEBVRE: I just have a comment. Page 112 October 27, 2011 Did J. Peaceful, under the memorandum regarding the foreclosure, J. Peaceful, LC, is that the one that is across from -- is that the property across from Gulf Coast High School? MS. BAKER: Yes. MR. LEFEBVRE: And I thought that case went away. I thought they came into compliance. N, MS. BAKER: I believe that they did. And I believe h- -% MR. LEFEBVRE: It's showing that there's a fine stile'there. MS. BAKER: I would have to research to verify ' f 'sure. I don't want to give you any wrong information. 7 MR. LEFEBVRE: Because I know there wa- . ouple. There was a sign and then there was a thing regardin• ° Hauls. MS. BAKER: Yes. MR. LEFEBVRE: And I thought both§� f those were taken care of. = IN., .' MS. BAKER: Yeah, we can * t up and report back to you at the next meeting. ,, ," MR. LEFEBVRE: Just curious. MR. MIESZCAK: . eta motion to adjourn. MR. LAVINSKI: Secid. ACTING CH, IRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in.fav r? MR. . FEVRE: Aye. MR. MI' ZCAK: Aye. ' • dDSON: Aye. ING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. ACTING CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We are adjourned. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Next meeting is the 18th, on a Friday? Page 113 October 27, 2011 MS. RAWSON: It's a Friday. Notice that the next meeting is on a Friday. MR. LEFEBVRE: And where is it at? Is it here? MS. BAKER: It's at the BCC chambers. ***** ( ; ' There being no further business for the good of the Coun e meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 12:25 ,, L0,,, COLLIER CO DE ENFORCE W N BOARD el ,-:10 Robe'', ufman, Acting Chairman These minutes approved yloard on as presented or as corrected . 4 { Transfpt prepared on behalf of Gregory Reporting Service, Inc., by Cfioa R. Nottingham. Page 114 FORM 8B MEMORANDUM OF VOTING CONFLICT FOR COUNTY, MUNICIPAL, AND OTHER LOCAL PUBLIC OFFICERS LAST AME-FIRST NAME-MIDDLE NA. E NAME OF BOARD,COUNCIL,COMMISSION,AUTHORITY,OR COMMITTEE ,r ��j N It . Fl m > :�t ti, i i) C,,)P C T A) 1-- MAILING ADDRESS THE BOARD,COUNCIL,COMMISSION,AUTHORITY OR COMMITTEE ON J. ) V` ..s, )L( E5 C 1 f1.,... WHICH I SERVE IS A UNNIJ OF: CITY �' COUNTY n ❑CITY COUNTY ❑OTHER LOCAL AGENCY )a I L L J C G' Lt' I L 1 NAME OF POLITICAL SU BB IVISION: DATE ON WHICH VOTE OCCURRED )c 7 ^� 7, :'t 7. )/ MY POSITION IS: L;! I � ❑ ELECTIVE APPOINTIVE WHO MUST FILE FORM 8B This form is for use by any person serving at the county, city, or other local level of government on an appointed or elected board, council, commission, authority, or committee. It applies equally to members of advisory and non-advisory bodies who are presented with a voting conflict of interest under Section 112.3143, Florida Statutes. Your responsibilities under the law when faced with voting on a measure in which you have a conflict of interest will vary greatly depending on whether you hold an elective or appointive position. For this reason, please pay close attention to the instructions on this form before completing the reverse side and filing the form. INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 112.3143, FLORIDA STATUTES A person holding elective or appointive county, municipal, or other local public office MUST ABSTAIN from voting on a measure which inures to his or her special private gain or loss. Each elected or appointed local officer also is prohibited from knowingly voting on a mea- sure which inures to the special gain or loss of a principal(other than a government agency)by whom he or she is retained (including the parent organization or subsidiary of a corporate principal by which he or she is retained);to the special private gain or loss of a relative;or to the special private gain or loss of a business associate. Commissioners of community redevelopment agencies under Sec. 163.356 or 163.357, F.S., and officers of independent special tax districts elected on a one-acre, one-vote basis are not prohibited from voting in that capacity. For purposes of this law, a "relative" includes only the officer's father, mother, son, daughter, husband, wife, brother, sister, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, and daughter-in-law. A"business associate" means any person or entity engaged in or carrying on a business enterprise with the officer as a partner,joint venturer, coowner of property, or corporate shareholder(where the shares of the corporation are not listed on any national or regional stock exchange). * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ELECTED OFFICERS: In addition to abstaining from voting in the situations described above,you must disclose the conflict: PRIOR TO THE VOTE BEING TAKEN by publicly stating to the assembly the nature of your interest in the measure on which you are abstaining from voting;and WITHIN 15 DAYS AFTER THE VOTE OCCURS by completing and filing this form with the person responsible for recording the min- utes of the meeting,who should incorporate the form in the minutes. * * * * * * * * * * * * * APPOINTED OFFICERS: Although you must abstain from voting in the situations described above, you otherwise may participate in these matters. However, you must disclose the nature of the conflict before making any attempt to influence the decision,whether orally or in writing and whether made by you or at your direction. IF YOU INTEND TO MAKE ANY ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION PRIOR TO THE MEETING AT WHICH THE VOTE WILL BE TAKEN: • You must complete and file this form(before making any attempt to influence the decision)with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the meeting,who will incorporate the form in the minutes. (Continued on other side) CE FORM 8B-EFF. 1/2000 PAGE 1 APPOINTED OFFICERS (continued) • A copy of the form must be provided immediately to the other members of the agency. • The form must be read publicly at the next meeting after the form is filed. IF YOU MAKE NO ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION EXCEPT BY DISCUSSION AT THE MEETING: • You must disclose orally the nature of your conflict in the measure before participating. • You must complete the form and file it within 15 days after the vote occurs with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the meeting,who must incorporate the form in the minutes.A copy of the form must be provided immediately to the other members of the agency,and the form must be read publicly at the next meeting after the form is filed. DISCLOSURE OF LOCAL OFFICER'S INTEREST I, J r�pn ? L. 2410 N i l/ , hereby disclose that on C rT C E 7 ,20 // : (a)A measure came or will come before my agency which(check one) inured to my special private gain or loss; A_ inured to the special gain or loss of my business associate, Vii'/ti`s ��S S �� •C:-iw •7 e• inured to the special gain or loss of my relative, inured to the special gain or loss of by whom I am retained;or inured to the special gain or loss of ,which is the parent organization or subsidiary of a principal which has retained me. (b)The measure before my agency and the nature of my conflicting interest in the measure is as follows: / r3 C. E 0 Co I (3.S6 0/9 2/// e. t)-1/1/Ohl Date Filed Sig ure NOTICE: UNDER PROVISIONS OF FLORIDA STATUTES §112.317, A FAILURE TO MAKE ANY REQUIRED DISCLOSURE CONSTITUTES GROUNDS FOR AND MAY BE PUNISHED BY ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING: IMPEACHMENT, REMOVAL OR SUSPENSION FROM OFFICE OR EMPLOYMENT, DEMOTION, REDUCTION IN SALARY, REPRIMAND, OR A CIVIL PENALTY NOT TO EXCEED$10,000. CE FORM 8B-EFF. 1/2000 PAGE 2