The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMinutes_Miscellaneous_11/07/1990_Code Enforcement Board v VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA ' r., BUILDING DEPARTMENT � Post Office Box 3273 • 357 Tequesta Drive � Tequesta, Florida 33469-0273 • (4Q7) 575-6220 � FAX: (407) 575-6203 V I L L A G E O F T E Q U' E S T A C O D E E N F O R C E M E N T B O A R D M E E T I N G M I N U T E S N O V E M B E R 7, 1 9 9 0 I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL The Village of Tequesta Code Enforcement Board held a regularly scheduled meeting at the Vi17Lage Hall, 357 Tequesta Drive, Tequesta, Florida, on Wednesd�y, November 7, 1990. The meeting was called to order by Chairman William Frank at 7:30 P.M. Code Enforcement Board :members present were: Chairman William Frank, Tim Goldsbury, William Sharpless and William Treacyo Steve Kennedy, Code Enforcement Officer, and Village Attorney, John C. Randolph� Esquire, were also in attendance. II. APPROVAL OF PREVIOUS MEETING MINUTES (October 2, 1990) Boardmember Treacy moved to approve the above-referenced Meeting Minutes as submitted. Boardmember Goldsbury seconded the motion. The vote was: Chairman William Frank - for William Sharpless - for Tim Goldsbury - for William Treacy - for The motion was passed and adopted and the October 2, 1990 Meeting Minutes were approved as submitted. III. SWEARING IN OF CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER Steve Kennedy, Code Enforcement Officer, was sworn in by Attorney Randolpho Code Enforcement Board Meetinq Minutes November 7, 1990 Paqe 2 -------------------------- IV. IINFINISHED BUSINES3 There was no unfinished business. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS Case No. 90-016, Lighthouse Plaza Associates, Ltd., 177-207 Tequesta Drive: Violation of Chapter 6, Article II, Section 6-22, Model Countywide Administrative Code, for Building Section 101.3.5, Maintenance, as adopted by Ordinance No. 395, Village Code of Ordinances. The Code Enforcement Officer (CEO) explained there were five different areas of violation in the above-referenced case, four of which (a significant amount of work) have been taken care of already. Yet remaining is the patching of the parking lot. The defendants have requested a continuance of this hearing to be heard at the next CEB meeting in order to allow them time to come into full compliance. They stated in written form that they would be in full compliance by November 30, 1990. The CEO recommended that the continuance be allowed. Boardmember Goldsbury moved that the above-referenced case be continued to December 4, 1990. Boardmember Treacy seconded the motion. The vote was: Chairman William Frank - for William 3harpless - for Tim Goldsbury - for William Treacy - for The motion was therefore passed and adopted. Code Enforcement Board Meeting Minutes November 7, 1990 Paqe 3 -------------------------- Case No. 90-017, Lighthouse Plaza Associates, Ltd., 177-207 Te esta Drive: Violation of Chapter 10, Article II, Health and Sanitation, Section 10-17 and 10-18 as adopted by Ordinance No. 196, Village Code of Ordinances. The CEO explained this is the same property as the previous case, and the facts remain as in the previous case, i. e. , much work has already been done but to allow time to come into full compliance, the violators have asked that this case be continued to the next CEB meeting. The CEO recommended that the case be continued to the December 4 meeting. Boardmember Treacy moved that the above-referenced case be continued to be heard on December 4, 1990. Boardmember Sharpless seconded the motion. The vote was: Chairman William Frank - for William Sharpless - for Tim Goldsbury - for William Treacy - for The motion was therefore passed and adopted. Case No. 90-018, Tareq Kahook, Stop & Shop Food 3tores, Inc., 391 Seabrook Road: Violation of Chapter 7, Section 7-3(c), Village Code of Ordinances. The CEO explained that a sign was approved for the Stop & Shop, with conditions applied by the Community Appearance Board that the approval was subject to a landscape upgrade. The property owner states he paid someone to do the work but did not realize the work was yet undone. The CEO further explained he had received a fax from the parties in violation stating: 1) They were not able to attend tonight's hearing; 2) Compliance would be met within 30 days. The CEO recommended that the continuance be granted. Code Enforcement Board Meeting Minutes November 7, 1990 Paqe 4 -------------------------- Boardmember Sharpless moved that the above-referenced case be continued to be heard on December 4, 1990. Boardmember Goldsbury seconded the motion. The vote was: Chairman William Frank - for William Sharpless - for Tim Goldsbury - for William Treacy - for The motion was therefore passed and adopted. VI. PRESENTATION OF NEW CASES TO SET FOR HEARINGS: Case No. 90-019, W.A. Siegel, 498 Dover Road: Violation of Chapter 10, Article II, Health and 5anitation, Section 10-17 and 10-18, as adopted by Ordinance No. 196, Village Code of Ordinances. Boardmember Sharpless moved that the above-referenced case be set for hearing on December 4, 1990 at 7:30 p.m. Boardmember Treacy seconded the motion. The vote was: Chairmaa William Frank - for William Sharpless - for Tim Goldsbury - for William Treacy - for The motion was therefore passed and adopted. Case_No. 90-020, Frank Broedell, 357 Cypress Drive, Unit 6: Violation of Chapter 6, Article II, Section 6-22, Model Countywide Administrative Code, for Plumbing, Section 103.1.1(2), Permits, as adopted by Ordinance 395, Village Code of Ordinances. Boardmember Sharpless moved that the above-referenced case be set for hearing on December 4, 1990 at 7:30 p.m. Boardmember Treacy seconded the motion. The vote was: Chairman William Frank - for William Sharpless - for Tim Goldsbury - for William Treacy - for The motion was therefore passed and adopted. Code Enforcement Board Meetinq Minutes November 7, 1990 Page 5 -------------------------- VII. OLD BUSINESS There was no old business before the Board. VIII. ANY OTHER MATTER3 A) Tim Goldsbury asked for an update on the case involving the swimming pool which was previously in violation. The CEO explained it was still not in compliance and has a fine that is accumulating. The house is presently uninhabited. There is a VA loan on the house. Therefore, the Veteran's Administration has taken over. A West Palm Beach Realtor who handles VA foreclosures is overseeing the transactions and is trying to contact the VA to take care of the pool problem. Boardmember Sharpless asked if it is possible to record the fine for violation as a lien on the property. Attorney Randolph explained that in order to lien the property, this case would have to come before the Board again with a recommendation for a lien, then the appropriate paperwork would follow. B) Boardmember Treacy asked if there is any recourse for neglected lawns. The CEO explained that current provisions require lawns to be no higher than 12 inches in height, but that Deed Restrictions are often more strict. Attorney Randolph further explained that Homeowner's Associations would have Codes separate and apart from the Village. The Village cannot enforce Homeowners Associations regulations. C) Tim Goldsbury inquired as to Case No. 90-004, Lighthouse Plaza, and what its status is presently. The CEO stated that Mr. Suska, the gentleman he has been dealing with regarding Lighthouse Plaza, explained that he was completely unaware that a fine was running on the property, or in fact, even that it was in violation. Mr. Kennedy reminded Mr. Suska of the many Certified Return Receipts that were in the file of Notices which had been sent out. A letter has been received from Mr. Suska asking that when compliance is met that the fine be reduced. Chairman Frank pointed out that the original owners (Roebling) are no longer in control of the property. Roebling is only a branch of the actual owners; perhaps that explains the confusion. Code Enforcement Board , Meetinq Minutes November 7, 1990 Paqe 6 -------------------------- Boardmember Sharpless suggested that when a certain property comes up for hearing before the Board, that the Board be informed of all facts concerning that property, (such as Lighthouse Plaza) before the Board makes any decisions. Attorney Randolph concurred. D) Attorney Randolph pointed out that in order to avoid confusion when cases are set for hearing, and the defendant involved is requesting a continuance, those parties need to appear at the scheduled hearing since perhaps their case may NOT be granted continuance. If it is not continued, it would be heard as scheduled, and the parties need to be in attendance. IX. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 8:00 P.M. Respectfully submitted, �/`��/X/ �3C�O Fran Bitters Recording Secretary ATTEST: �� SD = ��tC�c� � l',�o Scott D. Ladd Clerk of the Board DATE APPROVED: /�� - �n