TOWN OF INDIALANTIC
Brevard County, Florida 32903
CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD MEETING
November 8, 2006 Town Hall 7:00 PM
MINUTES NO. 07-02
PRESENT Ronald Campbell, Chairman
Orlando Brillante, Member
Keith Mauter, 1nd Alt.
Beverly Goldner, 2nd Alt.
Suzanne Crockett, Prosecuting Attorney
Cliff Stokes, Code Enforcement Officer
Victoria M. Twitty-Mercer, Administrative Assistant
Julie Anne Holmgren, Secretary
ABSENT Betty Preece, Member
Ray Young, Member
1. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 P.M.
Chairman Campbell called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M.
2. ROLL CALL
The secretary called the role.
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES – October 11, 2006
Mr. Brillante moved to approve the minutes. Mr. Mauter seconded. Motion passed unanimously.
4. OPENING STATEMENT
Chairman Campbell read the opening statement.
5. VIOLATION HEARINGS
A. CEB Case Number 07-001 Clifford L. & Christine T. Cook
555 Newport Drive
Indialantic, Florida 32903
401 North Riverside Place, Indialantic, Florida 32903
Town Code Section 5.5-63 General maintenance.
Town Code Section 5.5-67 Building exteriors.
Town Code Section 5.5-68 Landscaping.
Town Code Section 15-32 What constitutes abandonment.
Town Code Section 15-33 What constitutes junk.
Town Code Section 15-34 Parking, storage on private property.
Town Code Section 15-35 Parking, storage on public property.
Town Code Section 17-103 Parking, storage, and use of certain vehicles.
Attorney Gougelman swore in Mr. Stokes and Attorney Crockett qualified him as an expert in Code Enforcement. Attorney Crockett elicited testimony from Mr. Stokes establishing the fact that all but two of the above violations have been complied. The remaining violations are Town Code Section 5.5-63 General maintenance and Town Code Section 17-103 Parking, storage and use of certain vehicles.
Attorney Crockett clarified the following evidence to be entered into the record: Case 07-001 Town Exhibit #1 – Code Enforcement Department, Notice of Code Violation letter sent certified mail return receipt dated August 8, 2006; Code Enforcement Department, Notice of Code Violation letter received certified mail return receipt dated August 9, 2006; Notice of Hearing letter sent certified mail return receipt dated September 21, 2006; and Notice of Hearing letter received certified mail return receipt dated September 22, 2006.
Attorney Crockett requested the following evidence be entered into the record: Case 07-001 Town Exhibit #2 – 12 photos taken September 7, 2006 indicated as follows: 1-East side facing vacant lot; 2-East side facing vacant lot; 3-East side showing electric meter; 4-Vacant lot that abuts east side; 5-South side facing 2nd Avenue, Note: no entrance to house no door; 6-East side facing vacant lot; 7-South side facing 2nd Avenue, Note: no entrance to house, no door; 8-West side facing River, Front of house; 9-West side facing River, Front of house; 10-West side facing River, Front of house, showing boat in front of building line; 11-West side facing River, Front of house; 12-West side facing River, front of house.
Attorney Crockett stated that Indialantic Town Zoning Code defines the front lot line as “That property line which abuts on a public street, or in the event the property abuts on two (2) or more streets it shall mean that property line abutting on a street which has been so designated by the owner at the time of his application for a building permit.” Mr. Stokes testified that this is correct. Mr. Stokes testified that the address of the property where the above pictures were taken is 401 N. Riverside Place, Indialantic, FL. Mr. Stokes testified that the pictures #8, 9, 10, 11 above depicting the West side facing River, Front of house, is actually the front of the house.
Attorney Crockett requested that the graphic depiction from the Brevard County Property Appraiser – Map Search of the Cook Property – Lots 13, 14 Blk, which was included in the original package for October 11, 2006, be entered into the record as to what constitutes the front line: Case 07-001 Town Exhibit #3.
Mr. Stokes further testified that he and Attorney Crockett met with Mr. Cook on November 6, 2006, in the parking lot of Indialantic Town Hall. Mr. Stokes stated that during this conversation he advised Mr. Cook of the nature of the violations and explained to him what he needed to do to correct the situation; specifically to fix the boat dock, remove the boat and to cut the grass on the far west side. Mr. Stokes further testified that on November 8, 2006 he met with Mr. Cook to re-inspect the property and took photographs on that date. Attorney Crockett requested that the following evidence be entered into the record: Case 07-001 Town Exhibit #4: 7 photos taken September 8, 2006 as follows: 401 North Riverside Place, Indialantic, Florida, as additional evidence of the cited evidence. Mr. Stokes testified that the only items remaining in violation are the boat dock repair - Town Code Section 5.5-63 General maintenance; and moving the boat - Town Code Section 17-103 Parking, storage, and use of certain vehicles.
Attorney Crockett requested the following evidence be entered into the record: Case 07-001 Town Exhibit #5 – handwritten drawing by Mr. Stokes depicting the location of the house and the location of the streets in question.
Attorney Crockett stated that this completes the Town’s presentation of evidence concerning the cited violations and asked Mr. Cook if he would like to present some other evidence.
Attorney Gougelman swore in Mr. Cook. Mr. Cook presented his case, stating he received the Town’s Notice of Code Violation letter by certified mail return receipt dated August 8, 2006 and was given a description of the Town Code Sections that were in violation. Mr. Cook stated that in September 2006 he came to Town Hall to receive clarification of the Code and met with Victoria M. Twitty-Mercer, who signed the letter from Code Enforcement. Mr. Cook stated he then received another certified letter stating that he was to go before the Code Enforcement Board on November 8, 2006 because he was still not in compliance. Mr. Cook testified that on November 6, 2006, he talked with Attorney Gougelman concerning the issues and Attorney Gougelman suggested he speak with Attorney Crockett. Mr. Cook did speak with Attorney Crockett for approximately ½ hour stating that nothing had ever been defined to him regarding the violations on his property.
Attorney Gougelman swore in Victoria M. Twitty-Mercer. Mr. Cook questioned Ms. Twitty-Mercer stating that he met with her at Town Hall to go over the items that he needed to correct in order to come into compliance and that she left a message for Mr. Stokes regarding this.
In addition, he requested the following evidence be entered into the record: Case 07-001 – 12 photographs: Respondent’s Exhibit #1-Where’s the boat? It is shielded; Respondent’s Exhibit #2-Unshielded; Respondent’s Exhibit #3-Where’s the boat? Boat is shielded; Respondent’s Exhibit #3A-Side Yard (with “Front” door); Respondent’s Exhibit #4-Front yard (mailbox, address numbers); Respondent’s Exhibit #5-Side yard; Respondent’s Exhibit #6-Front yard (w/mailbox and house numbers); Respondent’s Exhibit #7; Respondent’s Exhibit #8; Respondent’s Exhibit #9-Front yard (oops-boats in front yard?); Respondent’s Exhibit #10; Respondent’s Exhibit #11.
Chairman Campbell reminds the Respondent that the Board must go by what the Code currently states and Respondent agrees. Chairman Campbell asks Mr. Cook what in his opinion determines the front of the house. Mr. Cook responded that he believes what determines the front of the house is the street it abuts. Chairman Campbell asks Respondent if it is his contention that he is not guilty of any code violations. Respondent answered yes. Respondent requested that his neighbor, Rudy Graf, who is in attendance make a statement for the record. Respondent noted that Mr. Graf lives on Riverside Drive and also has a right of way in front of his yard.
Attorney Gougleman swore in Mr. Rudy Graf. Mr. Graf stated that he had applied for a permit for a fence last November and was turned down based on the fact that front yard fences are not allowed. He stated that when Mr. Cook told him his (Mr. Cook’s) front yard was on the river, Mr. Graf stated that he would like to go before the Planning Board, and that if he changed his house to be like Mr. Cook’s, facing the river, that would make Riverside Drive his back yard, and then he could put a fence up.
Mr. Brillante questioned Mr. Cook about his November 6th meeting in the parking lot of Town Hall, wherein Mr. Cook was given the specifics about the outstanding violations and that Mr. Cook was aware of what needed to be done in order to come into compliance. Mr. Cook responded that is correct. Mr. Brillante asked Mr. Cook what was his understanding of the violations that need to come into compliance. Mr. Cook stated that he is not in agreement with the Town’s findings. Mr. Cook further stated that he understands from Attorney Crockett and Mr. Stokes that they want him to move his boat to the front of his yard to come into compliance with what they call is a street, which is a right of way and that he has to bring the lawn down by the river into compliance. Attorney Crockett stated that Mr. Cook has complied with the lawn. Mr. Cook then stated that the two items that are not in compliance are the dock and the boat and asked the Board to determine if the front of the house has to have a street in front of it in order to be the front of the house, or is this the right of way. Mr. Cook asked Attorney Gougleman if Riverside Place was a street or right of way. Attorney Gougleman stated that it is a right of way and asked Attorney Crockett to read the Code defining a street. Attorney Crockett read the Code definition of a street as “Street. Any public or private right-of-way set aside for public travel thirty (30) feet or more in width, including roads, avenues, boulevards, lanes, drives, thoroughfares and highways” further stating that Riverside Place is a street.
Chairman Campbell stated to the Respondent that the Board is here to determine the guilt or innocence based upon the evidence that is presented, not to interpret.
Mr. Stokes stated that Mr. Cook is confusing the front of the house with the side of the house and that the front of the house is the front door. Attorney Crockett again stated that Indialantic Town Zoning Code defines the front lot line as “That property line which abuts on a public street, or in the event the property abuts on two (2) or more streets it shall mean that property line abutting on a street which has been so designated by the owner at the time of his application for a building permit.” Mr. Cook stated that his mailing address is 401 Riverside Place. Attorney Crockett stated that it is the Town Staff’s position that this property is definitely a corner lot and abuts on two streets as defined by the Code; the Code does not require a street to be paved and because the property has been designated with a street address of 401 Riverside Place and the front door of the house faces Riverside Place, the garage door faces Riverside Place, and due to the fact that there is no entrance to the building on the south side of the property along Second Avenue, the Town Staff believes that the overwhelming evidence with regard to the front of the house is actually the west side of the house that faces the Indian River and faces Riverside Place and, therefore, the Code prohibits the parking/storage of a recreational vehicle in the front yard.
With regard to the dock, Attorney Crockett stated that the Town Staff is well aware of the wait and the amount of effort that would be required for repair to that dock and giving the Respondent some time to bring that into compliance is understandable. Town Staff is agreeable to the Board designating an extensive amount of time for bringing that into compliance.
In conclusion, Mr. Cook stated that he is going to the County on Thursday, November 9, 2006 to apply for a mailing address change to Second Avenue and will have a letter from the Post Office for them.
Chairman Campbell closed the evidence.
Mr. Brillante moved to find that in Case No. 07-001 Clifford and Christine Cook be found guilty in violation of Code Sec. 5.5-63 for failure to have their dock in proper structural condition and that the Respondents be given 120 days to come into compliance; if compliance is not met, a fine of $50 per day for each day the violation continues. Mr. Mauter seconded.
After discussion, Mr. Harrison moved to amend the motion to 180 days to come into compliance with a benchmark to have all the appropriate permit applications filed with the appropriate governmental agencies within 90 days; if compliance is not met with either one of the 90 or 180 days, a fine of $50 per day for each day the violation continues. Mr. Brillante seconded motion as amended. Motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Campbell moved to find that in Case No. 07-001 Clifford and Christine Cook be found guilty in violation of Code Sec. 17-103 and that the Respondents be given 30 days to come into compliance; if compliance is not met, a fine of $10 per day for each day the violation continues. Mr. Mauter seconded. Motion carried unanimously.
6. REPORT OF COMPLIANCE WITH PREVIOUS ORDERS
A. CEB Case Number 06-006 Jeremy Norcross
480 Grant Avenue
Satellite Beach, Florida 32937
346 Third Avenue, Indialantic, Florida 32903
Town Code Section 5.5-63 – General maintenance.
Town Code Section 5.5-67 – Building exteriors.
Town Code Section 5.5-68 – Landscaping.
Town Code Section 5.5-71 – Fences and walls.
Attorney Crockett advised that Mr. Norcross is making progress on repainting his windows and we will continue to monitor until he comes into compliance.
7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
8. OTHER
9. NEW BUSINESS
10. ADJOURNMENT
Mr. Harrison moved to adjourn the meeting. Mr. Mauter seconded. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p.m.
________________________
R. H. Campbell, Chairman
Julie Anne Holmgren, Secretary