$58,110 and counting – Code Enforcement Board acts again on South 8th Street property

Susan Hardee Steger
May 15, 2017 3:24 p.m.

Since October of 2015, Mark O’Brien owner of property located at 400 South 8th Street and home to Taylor Rental Center, has ignored most code violations and fines issued by the City of Fernandina Beach Code Enforcement & Appeals Board (CEAB). As of May 3, 2017, daily fines and administrative costs going back to October 1, 2015, total $58,110.43. Now there are more violations and more fines.

A growing crack on the Taylor Rental building located at 400  South 8th Street. Photo taken May 14, 2017.

During the May 3, 2017, CEAB meeting, Code Compliance Officer Michelle Forstrom, requested the board approve two additional violations noting unsafe structures and uncleaned lots. Forstrom said a complaint was filed in September 2016 calling attention to  a crack on the south side wall of Taylor Rental Center. Shortly thereafter, O’Brien was notified verbally and in writing of a notice of violation and a May 3 hearing. According to Forstrom, the crack is growing. The second violation for uncleaned lots involves a broken fence, garbage around the fence, a junk pile within the fence, and inoperable equipment on the property.

The board approved the additional violations and fines of $500 per day and requested City Attorney Tammi Bach to explore placing a lien on the property.  If during the next three months city fines are still unpaid, the board directed Bach proceed with foreclosure on the property “if legally possible.”

Property owner O’Brien did not attend or have representation during the May 3, 2017 meeting or during the prior October 1, 2015 CEAB meetings.

Top two photos of the Taylor Rental Center Sign facing north, and sign facing south (photos taken October 1, 2015). Bottom photo taken May 14, 2017 .

Violations on the O’Brien property that began on October 1, 2015, addressed concern over a poorly maintained and unsafe sign along with structure maintenance issues.

“The building is just an embarrassment at this point,” said one board member.

 

 

7 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Thomas Burns
Thomas Burns (@guest_48951)
6 years ago

After this eyesore is demolished a new city hall building could be built there. Then, the old city hall building could be demolished and a new parking garage built on that site. Or we could do nothing and just sit back and complain about how wonderful Florida was before Walt Disney came here……..

Ben Lloyd
Ben Lloyd (@guest_48952)
6 years ago

That is certainly one of the biggest eyesores on 8th Street and definitely needs to be cleaned up. It should look more professional and appealing to visitors and residents alike.

Deborah Wasdin
Deborah Wasdin (@guest_48958)
6 years ago

Before we all start judging this property owner:
$500 a day. Well, isn’t that obtainable?
With a fine that high, they may as well seize the property – take it as your own, City of Fernandina, regardless of the money he has invested in this property! I’m sure it’s difficult enough to pay for repairs on this failing building, let alone pay the fines in addition. Maybe he is just holding this property as investment property, hoping beyond hopes, that after surviving a lengthy failed economy, he may one day break even on this property. Heaven forbid someone look into what may be the reason this property is not being maintained or occupied. There is no exemption for hardship in this City?
He’d be a fool, at this point, to do both, pay for repairs and the fines, unless the City agrees to drop the accrued fines upon completion of repairs.
Lest we forget, not everyone has a bucket of money sitting around to maintain property that is not generating positive income.
How does he stand on his property taxes? He may as well stop paying them too if the property is at risk of being seized or there is the threat of a lien.
Might as well implement eminent domain. Heaven forbid someone own something unpolished on 8th St. Shall we make a list of all the eyesores on main roads and start accruing penalties on those as well? What about all of those that are not on main roads? Why should they be exempt?
With the screams of mis-prioritizing (to put it kindly) City funds, let’s look away from that issue and publicly pick on this property owner.
SMH

Dave Lott
Dave Lott(@dave-l)
6 years ago
Reply to  Deborah Wasdin

Deborah, you are right…there are always two sides to the story, but it would appear that Mark’s lack of action to respond and ignore the violations for as long as two years does little to generate any symphathy, especially since some of the violations would appear to be resolved very easily (and inexpensively). BTW, property taxes are current for 2017 based on property records.

Deborah Wasdin
Deborah Wasdin (@guest_48970)
6 years ago
Reply to  Dave Lott

His head is definitely buried in the sand, which benefits no one, but 58k? And $500/day?
That’s unrealistic, I don’t care who you are. I’m sure in his mind he is meeting his legal obligation by paying his taxes, and has no intention of throwing good money to bad by paying to update a building that appears to be unusable and for investment only. There would be no financial benefit in doing so, only “putting a coat of paint on an eyesore that would then turn into an eyesore with a fresh coat of paint…”
There are no winners here. If this community only enforces these rules on busy roads, the City is begging our PC culture to sue for discrimination. This could end up in court costing us all, because our property taxes will pay the attorneys and damages.
My hometown tried to bully Rayonier regarding property taxes. The County refused to reassess personal and real property. The Atty for the county blew it off. $8 million dollars and a few years later, property taxes for most doubled (at least) and the milage rate is still maxed out as are the assessed values.
Would hate to see that happen here.
Another thought: I have renovated property in the City. One permit and every blasted thing had to be brought to code regardless of the cost (unrealistic cost for the type and age of property) If that would happen in this circumstance as well, that he would be required by the uber strict City rules, when obtaining a permit, to bring the entire building up to current code, he’d spend a fortune and would not be able to recoup that expense even if he sold – it’s a b.s. building. The foundation is obviously bad if the walls are cracking and separating.

David Olson
David Olson(@sailorman)
6 years ago

Sounds as if the owner has abandoned the property and therefore forcing the city to take the property.

Chris Hadden
Chris Hadden (@guest_48978)
6 years ago

For years I drove by that place thinking it was nothing but a junk yard. One day I needed to rent a compressor so I thought, “I think they rent stuff” Stopped in and what an amazing place, that guy has everything and he knows a lot about equipment. I wouldn’t want that guy to leave town. Maybe we can help him out.?