Temple Terrace code board extends deadlines, imposes fines after February hearings

The Municipal Code Enforcement Board on Feb. 12 handled more than a dozen property cases, extending compliance dates in multiple cases, finding several violations of the city code and imposing monetary penalties in tree‑removal and long‑running nuisance cases.

The board front‑loaded enforcement actions affecting commercial and residential properties across the city. Code compliance staff and the city arborist presented evidence in every tree case; several property owners said work was already underway or promised mitigation. Board members emphasized the city’s tree‑protection rules and repeatedly told respondents to bring documentation or permits when work is proposed.

City compliance director Tom Barone and code officers presented the city’s evidence and recommended outcomes. In one tree case, City Arborist Joe Ferris told the board that “topping is prohibited by our code,” and recommended replacement plantings where feasible. Code officer Doug Allen repeatedly described properties that had been brought back into compliance before the hearing and recommended fines where violations persisted.

Votes at a glance - Case 242968 (Spectrum Medical Park LLC, 311 Bullard Parkway A): Board granted a 30‑day extension; new compliance deadline 2025‑03‑12. Fine schedule (if any) begins 2025‑02‑13 as previously noticed. The city noted exterior work (roof, painting, landscaping) was in progress at the time of the hearing and staff supported another 30‑day extension.

- Case 243477 (Hilavano Nava, 203 Redwood Avenue): Board granted a 30‑day extension to 2025‑03‑12 to resolve a shed/permit issue after permitting staff confirmed paperwork had not been entered into the system. City staff said the property was expected to be in compliance with the additional time.

- Case 244673 (General Realty & Chick‑fil‑A, 5302 E. Fowler Ave.): Board found 8 trees unlawfully topped/removed, accepted mitigation work (replacement trees, irrigation) and imposed $25 per tree, totaling $200. The owner testified to roughly $26,000 spent on remediation; the board said the expenditures and mitigation influenced the modest fine.

- Case 244597 (Matthew W. and Kelly J. Godwin, 8608 Beverly Drive): For accumulated debris, accessory‑structure setbacks and outdoor storage violations, the board found the violations proved and ordered correction by 2025‑03‑12; if not corrected, a fine of $50 per day will apply. The respondent requested 30 days and the city agreed to monitor progress.

- Case 244950 / 24‑4950 (same property, utilities): The utility‑account and habitability issues at 8608 Beverly Drive had been corrected before the hearing; the board entered a finding of compliance and imposed no fine for that matter.

- Case 244789 (Temple Terrace Village Inc., 10910 N. 50th St., shopping plaza): Two protected oak trees were removed without prior city approval. The board found the removal irreparable/irreversible and imposed a flat $250 fine; arborist testimony recommended a mitigation planting plan, and the owner had already installed replacement landscaping at staff direction.

- Case 244804 (Victoria Terrace Condo Association, 5891 Granville Dr.): The board found three protected oak trees removed without documented pre‑removal approval, deemed the violation irreparable and imposed a flat $250 fine. The association told the board it intends to upsize and replant replacement canopy material and was working with staff on permits.

- Case 244665 (Thomas & Linda Beckman, 610 Hollywood Ave.): A prefabricated shed was installed without a permit. The city’s building official advised the board the unit may not require a permit if it is a preassembled unit and meets setbacks; the board continued the matter to the March 12 meeting to allow the owner to resolve setbacks or permitting with staff.

- Case 242353 (James L. & Joyce A. G. Evans, 11305 E. Queensway Dr.): The board found a fire‑damaged, uninhabitable structure to be a nuisance under the code, ordered correction by 2025‑03‑12, and set a $50 per‑day fine to begin if the property is not brought into compliance. The respondent reported recent insurance activity and said he had retained an architect; the board said it expects tangible progress at the next hearing.

- Case 244712 (Antoinette L. Anderson, 13106 N. 50th St.): Board found removal of a grand‑size oak without the required documentation; it imposed a $750 fine. Staff said the homeowner had not contacted the city arborist before the removal and had not provided an arborist report prior to taking down the tree.

- Case 244802 (Jamie Lara, 309 Deer Park Ave.): Code compliance presented evidence of yard‑parking and debris; the respondent had corrected the violations prior to the hearing and the board entered a finding of compliance with no fine.

- Case 244951 (José L. Gonzales Pupo / Gonzalo T. Gonzales Fernandez, 6619 Baybrook Circle): Board found an unlawful removal of a 36‑inch DBH live oak and imposed a $1,000 fine. The city emphasized that large canal‑shade oaks are subject to mitigation requirements; the property owner was not present at the hearing.

What it means The board repeatedly told property owners that city code requires documentation or prior approval for removing protected trees and that post‑hoc arborist letters do not substitute for pre‑removal documentation. Where respondents had quickly mitigated damage or replanted at larger sizes, the board reduced monetary penalties; where no contact or mitigation plans existed, the board imposed higher fines.

Upcoming: board members asked staff to return documentation of compliance for continued cases at the March 12 meeting and reminded property owners that repeated noncompliance can prompt new enforcement actions. Several board members and staff noted winter illness had affected permitting and staffing, and asked respondents to work directly with code staff when scheduling inspections or submitting documents.

Ending note The board’s actions reflect a mix of enforcement and negotiation: extensions and monitoring where staff verified progress, and fines where removal or long‑standing nuisance conditions occurred without prior city authorization. Property owners who were granted time were told to return with evidence of permits, receipts, or planting invoices at the March meeting.