Loading...
01-30-1986 .. ~ \J j!;1 CITY OF EDGEWATER CITIZEN CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD January 30, 1986 7:00 p.m. MINUTES The Chairman called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Community Center of the City of Edgewater. CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL Members present were: Roberta Moses, Lois Kane, Mary Ciccarello, Delores Cucanich, Vince Turano, Paul Biggerstaff and Phillip Williams, Chairman. Also present were Police Chief Schumaker, Animal Control Officer Rhonda Schindler, Mr. and Mrs. Newell, Mr. William Rossiter and Attorney Thomas D. Wright. Mr. Williams then announced that due to four or five cases on the agenda, the agenda would be moved up to Number 86-CC-2, Denise Newell, Animal Running at Large. Mr. Williams also asked everyone who would be speaking this evening to please stand, and the secretary then swore in thief Scnumaker, Officer Rhonda Schindler, Mr. and Mrs. Newell, William Rossiter, David Jones, Assistant Code Enforcement Officer, and James Stewart. 86-CC-2, Denise Newell: Animal Running at Large Mr. Williams then asked Chief Schumaker and Officer Schindler to speak. Chief Schumaker stated he appreciates the problems the Newell . face as animal owners and hoped they could appreciate the problems law enforcement officials of the City face in attempting to adhere to the Rule and Regulations and Ordinances as written. He also stated he was not personally involved, other than being an administrator of the department, in the actual capturing of, tracking and locating animals that run at large. He stated this is performed to an outstanding degree by Rhonda Schindler, Animal Enforcement Officer, who is faced daily with multiple problems. Chief Schumaker also said he hoped the Newells would understand the position of the Police Department.'in what Officer Schindler has to say in this particular matter. Rhonda Schindler, Animal Control Officer, then spoke. She stated she had picked up the animal on three different occasions, had spoken with Mrs. Newell on three different occasions about the dog being loose. She also stated the Newells had called the police on three or four occasions about the dog getting out; they would leave their name and number, saying they could not find it. Miss Schindler also stated the dog was not licensed, not tagged, and was blind. Miss Schindler then went into an in-depth discussion of events that occurred during the ensuing days, resulting in a conversation with Mrs. Newell when Miss Schindler told her if the dog was caught loose again she would be taken to court. Miss Schindler stated she did not take her to court, but did take the case to the Code Enforcement Board to see if she could speed things up doing it this way. Mr. Williams then asked if there is a leash law, and Miss Schindler answered yes, Chapter 5-6, Animals running at large pro- hibited - any animal, cats or dogs, must be restrained on their own property; that if they are off their property, they must be under restraint at all times. Dogs, under Sec~ 5-10, must be licensed, and in order to get a license, you must have a ~abies tag, so they must be licensed every year. Mr. Williams asked "and on a leash?" and Miss Schindler replied "yes, on a leash". Miss Schindler continued that the Newells have violated both of these, the leash law and the license. r ~ \) Mr. Williams then asked Mrs. Newell to state her name, which she did, Denise Newell. Mrs. Newell devoted considerable discussion to the events as they occurred, including remarks made by M:i.ss Schindler which Mr. Williams interruped to state this was hearsay. After explaining various reasons for the dog not having a license, ?uch as being unable to wear a collar, Mrs. Newell stated she. owns three lots on that street, takes care of all the neighbors' houses, care-takes that street, and the dog is not kept on a leash for that reason as the area encompasses almost the entire land behind Miss Peggy's Day School. Mr. Williams then stated this Board goes strictly by the Code Enforcement of Edgewater, and that last October the Attorney General, at Sections 85-84, stated that from now on any fine can be assessed upon findings of the same violator repeating, and what he is saying to Mrs. Newell tonight is that she is being let off, as this is her first appearance before' the Code Board. He also explained the Police Department has records, the Board will keep records, and if her dog case keeps appearing before this Board, the minimum fine is $25.00, but the Board can impose up to $250, not saying they are going to. He went on to explain Miss Schindler's job is to take the animal to animal control, and he suggested Mrs. Newell keep her dog on a leash. Mr. Newell then asked to speak and also made reference to remarks made by Miss Schindler. Chief Schumaker then asked to speak and defended Miss Schindler's actions; that during the last six months he has seen Miss Schindler on a daily basis; that she goes out of her way to be pleasant, would never call names. Mr. Newell replied this is a personal thing due to a previous occurrence. Mr. Williams then asked the Board's pleasure, and Mrs. Cucanich moved that if the dog case comes before us again for violating the leash law, there would be a fine. The motion was seconded by Mr. Biggerstaff and CARRIED 7-0. 85-CC-19 - Volusia Truss - Weed accumulation, Fire hazard, No Licen~e for Trailer Mr. Williams asked if Mr. Fischer had been sworn in and the secretary then did so. Mr. Williams then asked Mr. Jones to speak. Mr. Jones stated Volusia Truss has moved and everything will be cleared out and that they are already in the process of removing the debris. He also stated they did everything he and Mr. Fischer required and believes it will stop many complaints from neighbors just by their moving. Mr. Jones requested an extension of time as the process of moving will require a little more 'time. A neighbor then inquired as to when a light, which is a problem, would be removed, and a second neighbor stated Volusia has been pretty bad neighbors, had been asked not to park on the road but continued to do so. The second neighbor also stated they had to call the ,cops to remove a semi trailer, which was dragged over the neighbor's iawn. Mr. Jones stated agatn they will have everything removed in thirty days. Mr. Fischer stated they were presently inactive, that the trailer is going back as it is leased. Mr. Turano then, moved that the Board give them a thirty day extension and it will be looked at again at the next meeting. The motion was seconded by Lois Kane, CARRIED 7-0. 86-CC-l- will'iam Rossiter- No License to Sell "Dishes" for T.V. Mr. Williams asked Mr. Jones what he knew of this case, and Mr. Jones stated he had a tape of the hearing when Mr. Rossiter appeared before the Planning and Zoning Board. Mr. Fischer then stated he did attend the meeting of the Planning and Zoning Board where Mr. Rossiter, of Rossiter Construction, applied for a license to sell satellite dishes from the address where he presently has his satellite company on Ridgewood Avenue. Mr. Fischer continued that at that time, questlons arose as to parking requirements, and it was determined by the Board that the two businesses, actually the business of Rossiter Construction and the Business of Sun City Citizen Code Enforcement Board Minutes of 1/30/86 Meeting -2- 2 Q or Dish City, or whatever, Saucer City - that's the name we're looking for- bdthcon~tituted they needed parking requirements, and I guess from the condominium association over there, you are assigned so many parking places bedause the owners of the building do not own the parking spaces themselves, they share in a common ownership. The 'judgment that was rendered by the Planning Board was, you are required so many parking spaces for both businesses and Mr.Rossiter was unable to obtain that number. With that criteria, they denied him a license to operate satellite sales at that location. Mr. Fischer stated again this is a synopsis of the Planning Board; they denied him a license to operate satellite sales because he did not have adequate parking, and the reason Mr. Rossiter is in front of the Board this evening is that later, after the decision where he was denied a license, he observed, several times, more advertisements for satelli~ sales at that address. The secretary then passed around clippings from the paper. Mr. Fischer pointed out to the Board the date on the clipping was January 14th, the license being denied prior to that date; he was denied a City license to sell satellite dishes c there and he is still doing so. Mr. Williams then called on Mr. Rossiter, and Mr. Thomas Wright, an attorney at law, stated he represented Mr. Rossiter and would like to take testimony from Mr. Rossiter for the record, and perhaps some testimony from the Code Officer, and asked if that would be permitted. Mr. Williams said of course, and an extensive cross examination fol,lowed. Mr. Wright also discussed the advertisements, stating they are available for display at Rossiter Construction; discussed Mr. Rossiter appearing before the Planning Board, and stated he believes it confuses what is really going on here, that what it is is a neighbor having a dispute with Mr. Rossiter and trying to use the City Boards to rrake it difficult for Mr. Rossiter to do business. Mr Wright concluaed by saying he believes the Planning Board is a red herring issue here. Mr. Wrightalso'stated the major point brought before the Planning Board at the original meeting was that Mr. Rossiter was operating two businesses out of the same location, which was a violation of the Homeowner's Covenants, and therefore he should not be able to apply for two licenses. Mr. Wright then went into quite a lengthy discussion as to what occurred at the next Planning Board meeting and ensuing events, one of which be believed to be unlawful, when the Planning Board asked the opinion of the City Attorney as to whether Home Owner's Covenants have anything to do with City businesses, or the issuance of an occupational license, and asked the City Attorney to render an opinion. Mr. Wright stated he believes it was tabled at the next meeting as the City Attorney had not rendered an opinion; and that at the following meeting, the Planning Board Chairman was absent, and the Planning Board voted he could not get a license. Mr. Wright continued this is clearly unlawful, as the only consideration the Planning Board had on this was whether or not the premises were zoned for retail premises, as it obviously is. After another quite lengthy discussion, Mr. Wright stated the whole issue of the Planning Board is not settled yet, and even if it was, it is his position that Mr. Rossiter was never properly notified, and if he had been, what he is doing is not a violation of the licensing law. Citizen Code Enforcement Board Mlnutes~of 1/30/86 Meeting -3- 2 Q Mr. Williams then asked Mr. Fischer how this ever got to him, and whether the Planning Board issues licenses. Mr. Fischer replied yes they do, it is called a COZ, and to obtain a City license you apply for a City license and if you are zoned in the correct area for that style business, then they will go ahead and issue you what is called a Certificate of Zoning, and once that's obtained, the next thing is the State License itself. Mr. Williams then asked Mr. Rossiter if he could buy a refrigerator, a washer, dryer, swimming pool? Mr. Rossiter stated yes, he would be able to sell it with the house, and could use sub-contractors. Mr. Williams then asked how this got before our Board, and Mr. Fischer stated the question before the Planning Board was, does a licensed contractor . . . can he sell retail items under the license as a contractor, that is the question actually before the Board. Mr. James Stewart then took the floor, saying he represented more than one party in the complex in this conflict. An exchange of words took place between Attorney Wright and Mr. Stewart; then Mr. Stewart started showing pictures to the Board and Mr. Turano interrupted, stating pictures have nothing to do with what we have to decide and asked how this got before this Board. Mr. Fischer replied he has no license, operating a business without an occupational license. Mr. Stewart then stated Mr. Rossiter attempted to get a license from Planning & Zoning, was denied, and after the first of the year continued with signs and running of ads in the paper. Mr. Stewart stated he spoke with Mr. Jones and Mr. Jones stated Mr. Rossiter did have a conversation with him concerning the fact he could not operate retail, but that there is a lot more involved here than the picture being given. Mr. Stewart then continued with quite a discussion of the problem that would arise when new businesses move in; that when the building was originally constructed, because of a mistake in the okaying of Planning and Zoning, there was not enough parking, as they had to go back and put in more storm drainage. The Board had quite a discussion concerning the problems that have arisen and Mr. Turano suggested tabling this matter until Planning or Council makes some decision. Mrs. Kane then moved that it comes back before us after they have been to Council, and that we give them so long - until the 27th of February. Mr. Turano seconded the motion and it CARRIED 7-0. The secretary was instructed to send to Council copies of 86-CC-l, as well as to Attorney Alvarez. Mr. Wright asked just what it is the Board wants them to do, and Mr. Williams told him to argue this same case before Council and Mr. Wright stated he was not sure the Board passed their jurisdiction to Council. Mr. Williams replied Council has the right to change the zoning while this Board does not. Quite a discussion followed, with the Board agreeing Council should try and rectify this. 86-CC-3 - Terry Russell, Accumulation of Weeds; grass over 24 inches. The secretary announced this case came into Compliance just this week. Mr. Jones stated they were very very cooperative. Mr Williams announced it would not be necessary to go any further with this case and instructed the secretary to mail an "In Compliance" form to the Russells, which had already been done. Citizen Code Enforcement Board Minutes of 1/30/86 Meeting -4- 8 Q 85-CC~7 ~ Corbett Smith, Extension to 1/1/86 Mr. Jones announced he and Mr. Fischer went over to the location and it is still loaded with a lot of debris and looks as though nothing else has been done. Mr. Jones stated he also believes the Board was more than generous in the time they have given them to bring this into compliance and right now, as it stands, they are still not in compliance as the rodents could still get in there; the children could still play in there, the tin, the wood . . . you name it; it's still laying around. Mr. Williams asked which building was burned and Mr. Jones explained there is just one concrete block building there, which, if it is going to stay there, should be boarded up. The secretary apologized for misplacin9 the pictures Mr. Jones had taken, just four~ittuves but they could explain the situation. Mr. Jones stated there are still piles of wood, and Mr. Fischer stated they look almost like a bonfire ready to start, eight feet high, plus numerous debris from tearing down the other building; the non-salvageable lumber has been left. Mr. Williams then asked for the Board's pleasure. Mrs. Kane asked if the City could do it and Mr. Fischer and Mr. Jones both answered no. Mr. Williams did point out the City has been after them for more than ten years, and they have done more for this Board, but Mrs. Cucanich said it still looks junky. After some discussion, Mrs. Ciccarello moved that we send a letter stating action to be taken in ten days or the City will, at the end of that ten days, take action itself, cleaning up the property, and a lien will be placed on the property. The motion was seconded by Mr. Turano and CARRIED 7-0. Miscellaneous Mr. Williams announced several of our meetings fall on the holidays this year, and since City Hall makes their calendars now, it is necessary to vote for a new meeting night. The Board discussed a night suitable for everyone and Mrs. Moses moved that we meet the Thursday before the holidays for October, November and December. The motion was seconded by Mr. Biggerstaff and CARRIED 7-0. There being no further business, Mrs. Kane moved the meeting be adjourned, seconded by Mrs. Ciccarello. The meeting adjourned at 8:40 p.m. Citizen Code Enforcement Board Minutes of 1/30/86 Meeting -5-