Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDocumentation_Regular_Tab 6B_3/7/1996 VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA 4,4 Post Office Box 3273 • 357 Tequesta Drive . .„,, . . . . . IT a , ..,. . laA,f.t . • . to i ' V Tequesta,Florida 33469-0273 • (407)575-6200 . ,..A. °II:: : Fax:(407)575-620•-,v\wipo - ON to . . , • VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA' PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES ' JANUARY 31, 1996 I . CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL The Tequesta Public Safety ' Committee held a ' regularly scheduled meeting at the Village Hall, 357 Tequesta Drive, Tequesta, Florida, on Wednesday, January 31, 1996. The meeting was called to_ order at 9: 00 A.M. by Chairman Joseph Capretta. . A roll call ' was . taken by Betty Laur, the Recording Secretary. In attendance were: Chair Joseph Capretta, and Co-Chair Carl C. Hansen. Village Staff present were: .Village Manager Thomas G. .Bradford, Attorney • Tracey Biagiotti sitting in for Village Attorney John C. Randolph, and Department Heads. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA The Agenda was amended to include addition of five items Under Any Other Matters, requested by Village Manager Bradford. The Agenda was approved as amended. III. REVIEW OF PROPOSEt CODE ENFORCEMENT 'ENHANCEMENT ORDINANCES (A) MINIMUM PROPERTY STANDARDS ORDINANCE, Village Manager Bradford explained that the result of comments received from the Village Council and . ' the public was , a revised Ordinance, with the proposed changes mainly in' the area of minimum property standards. There was no longer any . . hF i Ii'd Parer , PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES JANUARY 31, 1996 PAGE 2 requirement for a building to be consistent with community character, or excessively dissimilar to the color of other buildings within two hundred (200) feet in all directions. There was no longer any requirement for principal building color or trim color. References to colors of a house had been deleted except painted surfaces shall be maintained free of graffiti and with uniform and consistent colors, void .of any evidence of deterioration. Co-Chair Hansen expressed concern that deterioration and peeling of paint might present enforcement problems . Village Manager Bradford responded that there would always be enforcement problems, however, , the Code Enforcement Officer should be able to recognize deterioration and peeling paint, so that problems would be kept to a minimum. Chairman Capretta questioned what items were currently being enforced by the Code Enforcement Officer. Officer Davis responded that the only items currently enforced with regard to a home were grass over 12 inches in height, pool enclosures, and pool water condition. Chairman Capretta suggested that driveways might be addressed next. Code Enforcement Officer Davis read the following excerpt from the proposed Ordinance, which he stated that he assumed would apply to driveways: ". . .when a deficiency or combination of deficiencies represents more than twenty five percent (25%) of the area of any wall or roof or paved surface as viewed from any single vantage point off the property." Village Manager Bradford explained that there was also another portion of the zoning code which allowed for maintenance of hard surfaces, which could be used for driveways, although it was a vague reference. Code Officer Davis provided the following example: A person had lost his home and subsequently left the country; the bank held title to the property, . which became overgrown and ' deteriorated, and. Officer Davis had no authority to get the property PUBLIC :SAFETY COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES JANUARY 31, 1996 PAGE 3 • cleaned up. Officer Davis explained that these were the kinds of blighted properties he needed power to enforce, and that he was not looking to enforce a missing paint chip. Chairman Capretta commented he had no problem with abandoned homes, to which Officer Davis responded that some rental homes were also in similar condition. Chairman Capretta commented he had no problems with those situations, but was concerned with the homeowner who lived in the house and kept it in a deteriorated state because he liked it that way or could not afford to fix it. Chairman Capretta indicated that driveways could be the next logical item to be included for enforcement, and that several homes within the Village had either never had, a driveway, or the gravel had long since disappeared, or the asphalt had disintegrated. Chairman Capretta explained that Mr. Laduca was an example of the person who kept his home in poor condition. Officer Davis reported that Mr. Laduca was still not maintaining his property. Attorney Biagiotti explained that the lawsuit was still in place, and that Mr. Laduca' s' attorney planned to withdraw since he. could not make contact with Mr. Laduca, and at that point she would try to obtain a default against him. Ms. Biagiotti explained that negotiations with Mr. Laduca had fallen through. Chairman Capretta commented the only reason he could see that Mr. Laduca would want to reach a settlement would be if he planned to sell the house. The driveway section of the proposed Ordinance was, discussed further. Co-Chair Hansen suggested that no other conditions be added to this Ordinance at this time, and. that another condition could be added at a later date. • Village Manager Bradford referred to item 6-32© regarding proposed landscaping language, which Co Chair Hansen stated he believed was weak, since it stated that if more than 1/3 of the yard was PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES JANUARY 31, 1996 PAGE 4 blighted then the property was deficient, which would be hard to determine. Officer Davis agreed that it was hard to determine percentages. Village Manager Bradford requested direction regarding how specific the section should be. Co-Chair Hansen suggested this section be deleted at this time and that the section regarding driveways be made more specific. Chairman Capretta agreed that the Ordinance should be expanded one step at a time. Chairman Capretta discussed the problem of including specific items in order to deal with a property like the Laduca property which required tough, enforceable language, but. which seemed like a police state to the average homeowner; and stated that average homeowners would become angry if tough language was adopted even though they were the ones that the Village was trying to protect . , Co-Chair Hansen expressed his opinion that the silent majority was in favor of including specific items to be able to deal with blighted situations, however, favored moving toward that slowly by adding items in more than one step. Both Chairman Capretta and Co-Chair Hansen agreed that the entire landscaping section (6-32 (C) ) should be omitted at this time, and that Sections 6-33 ,and 6-34 should be included as written. Village Manager Bradford explained that interior home inspections had been deleted. Mike Meder questioned and• received clarification regarding the section which was to be deleted. Discussion ensued regarding whether to increase the driveway deterioration requirement to 50% so that it would be easier to enforce, the difficulty of determining the percentages and kinds of deterioration of various surfaces, such as cracks. in concrete, potholes in asphalt, and thin layers of gravel. Village Manager Bradford commented that other sections of the zoning code required all driveways to be hard surfaces of asphalt, concrete, _ or paver blocks, and that there were a 'lot of nice • PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES JANUARY 31, 1996 • PAGE 5 , driveways made of Chatahoochee stone which probably • predated the current ordinance. Wade Griest commented that an important point was enforcement of any Village Code, and until that was done and an example set, all the. fines did not mean much because the Village never collected them. • Village Manager Bradford reported that the Village. had been successful in one situation which would be reported under Any Other Matters, Mr. Griest commented on the Lantana Plan which included • language in the property maintenance section that referred to any physical condition of property maintenance which directly or indirectly causes a reduction in -the value of the surrounding properties. Mr. Griest stated that was important, since Tequesta was trying to increase property values. Mr. Griest commented that Code Enforcement problems had contributed to• declining values, which not the fault of the Police Department, but the problem was how the case was handled 'after a violation was found, since the fines were not • collected. Mr. Griest explained thatj,antana did not try to straighten out the whole problem at one time, 'but had proceeded block by block, which might be a way for Tequesta to proceed. After further discussion, the Committee ' agreed to keep the percentage of '25% in . the definition of • deficiencies for driveways. Code' Enforcement Officer Davis .,explained that he had addressed Code Enforcement with five homeowners associations and was in the process of meeting with others. _ • Mike Mader commented that the public had. been upset over the phrase "uniform and consistent colors", -which was included in Section, 6-32 (A) (2) , and suggested that a definition be added to clarify the meaning. • Attorney Biagiotti explained that the intent had been to delete any reference to specific colors. After discussion, it Was agreed that • • • PUBLIC SAFETY .COMMITTEE • . MEETING MINUTES • JANUARY 31, 1996 PAGE 6 , • • • referencing those items desired to be prohibited such as polka dots, stripes, and fluorescent paint would be preferable and aid in enforcement. Fire Chief Weinand suggested that a definition also be added to the section regarding repairs to state that repairs shall be consistent with .the existing material, so that for example, a pothole in an • • asphalt driveway could not be patched with Sacrete. • Wade Griest commented that no matter how specific an ordinance was written that if someone .wanted to • beat the ordinance they would find a way, and referred to a wall for. which a variance for 12 feet from the 6 feet allowed by Code had been denied by • the Board of Adjustment, and related that the property owner had merely piled dirt: up against the wall and measured the 6 feet from the top of the • raised ground level . • • Village Manager Bradford questioned how the Committee. -wished to proceed after the changes decided upon at this meeting .' had been made. Chairman Capretta responded that highlights of the Ordinance should be placed in the Village newsletter. Co-Chair Hansen requested that- a statement be included indicating that it was the - feeling of the Village Council. that the majority of residents wanted to do this. Village Manager • Bradford stated that while' he agreed as to Mr. Hansen' s., assessment of public opinion, . that this might appear to 'be presumptuous. Officer Davis reported that after the controversial meeting he had received 15-20 calls in support of- the Ordinance from people who did not wish to attend the meeting. Co-Chair Hansen reported he had . spoken to people in Lantana and Hollywood, Florida who were very happy with their Ordinances. Officer Davis commented that all of the Homeowners Associations supported - Code Enforcement. Village Manager Bradford stated he would try to get the • -article into the February newsletter; however, it might not be possible until March; and the first • • Public Safety Committee Meeting Minutes January 31i 1996 ' Page 7 . • readin• g would then be in April . • (B) SPECIAL MASTER ORDINANCE Code : . Enforcement Officer Davis reviewed the • advantages of a Special Master system by agreeing • with Mr. .Griest in that if someone did not intend - , • to comply that there was not very much the Village could do; and that this system would speed ' compliance by the majority, who wanted to comply and , for the few who did not want to ' comply it would • provide ' a nudge toward compliance . Officer Davis reported that Palm Beach County Code Enforcement Department had recently instituted. a Special Master • • into their system in order to gain speedy compliance. The County' s Code Enforcement Board' s • duties had been limited to those cases that wished to request more time for compliance. Officer Davis reported that Greenacres was moving toward a , Special Master since the Code Enforcement Board tended to want to delve into areas beyond their • jurisdiction. Officer Davis stated ' the Special • Master system would (1) eliminate questions in regard to litigation against the Village, since -the cases would be handled by a trained lawyer; (2) the Special Master would write out the order so there would be no doubt in_ either the Code Enforcement • Officer' s mind or in the respondent' s mind as to • what had transpired, what the violation was, and • what they had to do to come into .compliance; and (3) ' the biggest reason that Officer Davis. recommended the Special Master 'system was that -a • process which now .took 90 days would be reduced to 30 days or less. Under the present system, 30 days . prior-notice must be given to• the Code Enforcement Board that a case would be coming before them, the - Board met 30' days later to discuss the case, and 30 • days after that .met again to. decide . the outcome. The Special' Master hearings were proposed to be held once each month on the third Thursday .at 10 A.M. Any citations issued before a week ahead of . the hearing could appear. at the . hearing to have • their case resolved, and there would be no return Public Safety Committee • , Meeting Mantes January '31, 1996. • • Page 8 hearing dates . Village Manager Bradford reported the cost difference between the two systems would be minimal, and explained that the Special Master • would be paid $100-$150 per .hour for- time spent and preparation time. The Village' s law firm would not • provide the Special Master, and would be available to act as prosecutor if necessary. Officer Davis • advised that, the Special Master position would be advertised listing certain requirements, and would not require residence in Tequesta. Officer Davis explained that it might be hard to find a lawyer • living in the Village who. had Code Enforcement • litigation experience, and reported that he had spoken to an excellent prospect who lived in Ft . Lauderdale and was the Special Master for Lantana, . and also backup Special Master for West Palm Beach, • Chairman Capretta suggested that attorney might be hired as a consultant to the Village on Ordinances, to which Village Manager Bradford commented that was beyond the role of - a Special Master. Chairman • Capretta clarified that he was thinking of two different people, one to act as consultant and one as the Special Master. Village Manager Bradford stated that Village Attorney Randolph and Attorney Biagiotti had had years of experience writing Ordinances and the problem was not with language, • it ,was just that the •Village Council needed to let staff know exactly what they wanted., Chairman Capretta stated he believed the Village Council had not done a very good job of selling Code • Enforcement as a positive thing for .the community, the only people •who came to the meetings were those • . who were against Code Enforcement, and the silent majority were too silent, so that the Council just had to do what they thought was right. Chairman Capretta recommended that when the article was . . placed in the newsletter that a presentation also be made at the homeowners associations. Chairman • Capretta suggested that political candidates could • make presentations. Officer Davis volunteered to' help with presentations. - 'Chairman Capretta stated that he liked the Special, • • Public Safety Committee Meeting Minute• • • January 31, 1996 • • Page 9 • Master system since it would speed the process, and cited the Siegel case which had dragged on and on and really pointed out the ineffectiveness of government. ' • Village Manager Bradford advised that the Code Enforcement. Board members must be properly dealt with, and that even though .they were dedicated people who volunteered in a civic capacity that they had contributed to Code Enforcement problems by going outside their quasi judicial capacity into administrative and policy areas . Officer Davis reported that he still had the very first case he . • had dealt with 18 months ago, which was the bird - . lady. Wade Griest- pointed out that the Code Enforcement Board members were required to be residents of the • Village which meant they were dealing with their neighbors, and that would be eliminated with the Special Master system. Mr. Griest also commented he thought people who did not comply should be asked why, as was done in Lantana, and sometimes the response was that they were unable to do so and . help. could be obtained for them. Chairman Capretta agreed that more community involvement could show the human side of this issue rather than just the legal side. Village Manager Bradford . suggested the possibility of using JASP and public works crew leaders to oversee people required to do • community service.. Chairman Capretta agreed, and cited the larger numbers of young people now living • in the Village who might become involved in programs to help cut grass, etc. • Village Manager Bradford reported he had been • hesitant to change the system from the Board to a Special Master. Attorney Biagiotti advised that the Board could remain intact, although only one or the other would be active in regard to specific cases, and stated that she saw no reason to keep both. Village Manager Bradford commented that .- Lantana had kept both for political reasons, but • Public Safety Committee Meeting Minutes January 31, 1996 Page 10 • • their Board never met. After further discussion, it was agreed to keep the Code Enforcement Board • but to change their role to become champions of Code Enforcement rather than to handle cases . In • their new role they would develop public relations programs, study the impact of the Code Enforcement Officer on the town, make recommendations for new Ordinances, become a public support base to sell • Code Enforcement, and act as a positive force for the Village. This could entail changing their role , to something like a task force or advisory body. A brief discussion followed regarding the need. for • a positive organization to raise money for the Village for such items as� BRITT and the library. The citation process was discussed.. Officer Davis • explained that it speeded the process and informed the recipient to appear before the Special Master. X. ANY OTHER MATTERS (1) , Village Manager Bradford announced that Attorney Biagiotti had been successful in foreclosing on the Walters property, which was now toward the end of the ten-day appeal .period, and the . Village now owned the house and the land. The Village Manager reported that he had ordered a structural report to • determine, whether the roof was salvageable, and also a written estimate to demolish and dispose of the house; and would make a decision when the reports were received. Also, two prospective . purchasers had expressed interest. Attorney Biagiotti reported there was an ,existing lien which , the Village would have to pay off. Discussion ensued regarding the fact that the fine had been , approximately $100, 000, which was more than the . value of the property; and that if handled delicately it could be publicized that the Village . might realize $40, 000 because of Code Enforcement involvement. • • (2) Village Manager: Bradford reported that a Village Ordinance allowed anyone to go before the Village • • • Public Safety Committee - Westing Minutes January 31, 1996 • Page 11 • • Council to request a handicap waiver of the parking • requirements for recreational vehicles . Mr. Little had appeared before the Village Council and the Council had denied the waiver he requested. Mr. Little appeared before the Council at a later date and requested that a change be made in the ' - Ordinance and the Council had voted 3-2 to have the Committee .come back with a proposal, which would be an Ordinance which would let certain waivers occur ,if certain requirements were met by the party making the request.. After . discussion, it was decided to discuss this matter at the next Public Safety Committee meeting. and• then make a recommendation to the Village Council. Officer Davis advised that Mr. Little - was still in violation of the existing ordinance and he had not pursued the matter because he had been waiting far a decision by the Village Council, with which the Village Manager and the Committee concurred. (3) Village' Manager Bradford stated his desire to place a stop sign at the intersection of Tequesta Drive and Country Club Drive, which he believed would be in keeping with the Village' s desires to discourage traffic on Country Club Drive and could alleviate , the problem of many near accidents which had been • reported at that location. After discussion, it was agreed to proceed with taped . stop bars as a . test to gauge public reaction. ' Chairman Capretta reported conversations in which he had received complaints that Turtle Creek residents who had been discouraged from using Country Club Drive were now shopping at Chasewood instead of patronizing Tequesta businesses. Village Manager Bradford reported a meeting with Janet Gettig had been a flop. (4) Village Manager Bradford reported that Jupiter had • issued proposals for Fire Rescue services, which • the Village did not, propose to bid on, but asked whether the Committee would like the Village to • ' peak Jupiter' s interest regarding forming a regional system through this proposal process. Chairman Capretta expressed interest in a regional system. • Village Manager Bradford reported a • • . Public Safety Committee Meeting Minutes January 314 1996 Page 12 • newspaper. article which had endorsed the County giving Jupiter a. break on their contract in order to keep them, and stated that if that happened then - Tequesta or another municipality receiving County service should sue the County for equal treatment . • Chairman Capretta speculated there was no way that • Mayor Golonka would embarrass- Commissioner Marcus . by taking away. the last sizeable city from the County Fire Department and completely destroying it, and predicted Jupiter would get a $2, 000, 000 price reduction. • Village Manager Bradford' suggested that instead of a• proposal, that a letter be written to Jupiter offering to help them' establish a regional system. Mike Meder questioned whether the Village would consider offering a, proposal for the area north of the Loxahatchee _River.- Village Manager Bradford • responded that he believed .the proposal specifications precluded that option. Mr. Meder • suggested it be done anyway, which would make the • Village look'neighborly. • ,Chief Weinand suggested that a letter be sent, since the proposal requirements were so extensive. It was decided that 'a letter would be sent with the • 'suggestion for the area north of the river and 'for a regional system. • • (5) Fire Chief Weinand reported NAMAC had been working on central dispatch and a regional hazardous material team. Each municipality had been asked to contribute $'1, 000 towards hiring a. consultant for ,advice on establishing a- regional ;dispatch center. • The trend to go to centralized .dispatch and - possible dollar savings were .discussed. Chief Weinand explained that' whether savings would be realized was unclear, which was one •of the reasons for hiring a consultant; however, the centralized • system would definitely be more effective by • erasing , jurisdictional. boundaries so that the closest .units to an emergency could respond. ' Village Manager Bradford advised that the Village ' Public Safety Committee Meeting Minutes • • January 31, 1996 • Page 13 was paying $150, 000 to $200, 000 annually now for their own dispatch system. The centralized dispatch would cover the area from Riviera Beach north, and now each municipality in that area was paying for their own system. Police Chief Roderick advised that three communities had refused to contribute the requested $1, 000, which were • Mangonia Park, Jupiter Inlet Colony, and Palm Beach Shores, who now were receiving free dispatch from • the County. It had been rumored that they would no , longer receive these free services after a new Sheriff came into office. Discussion ensued regarding whether enough $1, 000 contributions would be received to actually hire a consultant . • Co- Chair Hansen favored the contribution in light of • the amount being spent by the Village each year and - pointed out that ,. if not enough pledges for contributions were received to pay a consultant' that the money would_ not be spent. The decision of the Committee was to authorize the $1, 000 expenditure providing a minimum number of communities participated. • Attorney Biagiotti verified that the Committee did not want to abolish the Code Enforcement Board at this time. Chairman 'Capretta suggested that the Village Manager • write a ,letter to the members of the Code Enforcement • Board to inform . them of a meeting to .discuss their new role in Code Enforcement for the Village, how the' minimum property standards would be expanded, a Special Master, and ,changing their role from a negative to a positive concept. Attorney Biagiotti questioned and received • confirmation from Chairman Capretta that insofar as the Ordinance, the Board would be abolished; however, it would then assemble as a group in another role. • IX. .. COZMUNICATIO JS, FRC 4 CITIZENS • Wade Griest referred to a Public Safety meeting in May 1995 - ' where a suggestion had been made that people renting property in the Village receive information regarding the Village Codes, - which had been made during ' discussion involving people who had lived in a travel trailer for over a year. Mr. Griest inquired whether the Village had ever • • • Public Safety Committee Meeting Minutes • • January 31, 1996 Page 14 • notified realtors about the common codes . Village Manager Bradford responded it had not been done because of the • difficulty involved. The Village Manager pointed out that many areas had deed restrictions, which people even had difficulty obtaining at their closings, and the Village could not rely on realtors to properly communicate codes because prospective renters would not rent. 'Village Manager Bradford stated that in such a case the owner would be • responsible . . �CII . ADJOURNMENT . • There being no further business before the Committee, the meeting was adjourned at 10 : 38 A.M. • • Respectfully submitted, `rf -- • Betty Recording Secretary • ( ATTEST: • • Joann Manganiello Village Clerk • • DATE APPROVED: