my cited Urban Design loc for not obtaining the business tax receipt and certificate of use your honor but it's not on my agenda as as as such so it's hasn't been properly advertised uh as a as a party uh violator uh Madame clerk did you uh advertise uh uh Urban Design LLC as one of the party that issue here before us today no we have the prop the the case in question that they have was cided to meia properties regarding those the case numbers that was presented but um Urban property I I'm not sure if they're the tenant yes we are at the property of that belongs to Mia Properties Inc I don't have any problem with citing Urban Design LLC if they're the ones that are violating if they don't have the business tax receipt and certificate of use but they're not a party that is listed on the agenda so how do you want to handle that maybe the City attorney can Aline maybe the clerk can tell me I'm not I'm not going to uh make any rulings as to Urban Design unless they are properly noted on the agenda special magistrate I would suggest that we table both items 22 and 20 three until we can properly understand what happened with I I agree I I think I I think they both should be cited but the the only party that is before me is my uh Mia Properties Inc and if they were not cited and they're not here then I can't hear the case so I I need proof that there that that both parties have been cited for the violation and so we will table it until the next meeting inspector Daniel do have proof where both parties were cited no ma'am I just have it for um Urban Design LLC okay okay you need you need toite the owner as well yes in in in the meantime to save time and maybe it won't have to come back uh I would strongly encourage Urban Design LLC and I would ask uh the corporate representative who's attending uh Mr Alish to immediately start the process of getting a certificate of use and a business tax receipt I'm giving you free time I'm not finding you uh and uh and and and I'm encouraging you to promptly do your paperwork so that it doesn't have to come back before me because when it comes back before me if you haven't done the work uh there will be a fine I promise you okay very clear we we'll sure okay so you you tell Christopher that I'm uh because of some legal technical issues we're not able to hear the case today uh but you've been warned you've been cautioned and now you're hearing from me that if you don't get your certificate of use and your business tax receipt by my next meeting uh there will be a fine thank you clear okay all right next case okay magistrate that concludes everyone that was registered for the agenda so um we don't have anybody else registered so we can go come start the case with case number one you you you need to to delete Christopher Collins he's done all right so it's just uh non-contested how many more cases do we have we [Music] have I would say we have roughly maybe about 20 or 25 more all right let's proceed all right case number one case number one and two are the same property and Property Owners um case number one is 1595 Northeast 123 street LLC case number is CF LR 2021 00104 case number 2595 noreast 123 street LLC case number is CCU 2021 00165 the officer on this case is Jonathan Lester all right we have a b business STX receive certificate of use my ruling will apply uh as to each one uh separately but uh we're going to hear them together okay go ahead officer good morning special magistrate uh neighborhood service inspector Jonathan Lester and this case is being heard for the first time both cases case one and two uh this is in regard to the business Valero gasoline uh they failed to renew their business tax receipt um on October 11th 2021 I open a notice of violation in regard to the business tax receipt and certificate of use um for Valero gasoline um I hand delivered the notice of violation to the property uh to the to the clerk at the gas station and I also mailed the notice of violation to uh the property owner via property appraiser as of the final reinspection datee uh the property owner has failed to renew the certificate to obtain the certificate of use and the property owner has failed to renew the BTR they have not renewed the BTR since um since September 30th 2014 okay um I reviewed both files and here here here are some comments first of all like like the last case when we have a situation like this I think that the the appropriate thing to do is to site the owner and the operator uh they're both responsible I know I know that there has been discussion previously that you know the owner is responsible and the owner is responsible well I I I agree with that the owner is responsible but so is the tenant because the tenant is operating without a business tax receipt and a certificate of use and they're on the premises the tenant uh stands in the shoes of the owner so I I I believe unless the City attorney proves me wrong that in these kind of cases we are to site the the tenant in possession who's operating the business and also the owner in this particular case after reviewing sunbiz I found that the owner uh the corporation has been involuntarily or or rather voluntarily uh dissolved it's an inactive corporation which means that whatever judgment lean whatever you get uh will be difficult to enforce when you have a non-existent corporation normally when you have a non-existent corporation you um should in in in a best uh World scenario sue the last board of directors or the last trustees uh of the corporation um so the City attorney should take take a look at that um I noticed also that and by the way they were deemed in uh inactive in in in in the State of Florida that means they can't do business as a corporation uh two three years ago over three years ago um the Valero apparently from the file that I that I saw is owned by uh a rage Corporation apparently and that's who really should be the party cited uh Valero is just uh a fictitious name you need to you need to site the actual owner of that entity operating there okay then we can table this case if if you'd like or whatever you need no no no no I I I I you know I intend since since the property owner was served um I'm going to I'm I'm going to adjudicate the case against the property owner um you know whether you know it's a it's it's a good judgment against a dissolved Corporation or not I'll let the City attorney make that determination but uh they don't have a business tax receit and they don't have a certificate of use so as to each case I will uh my ruling will be based on the testimony of the code compliance officer and the evidence presented reflecting that the violations exist proper notice has been given I find in favor of the city and enter a uh an adjudication and set a compliance date of April 17 in the event of non-compliance there shall be a daily fine of $250 until the violation is abated my ruling is as to uh both the certificate of use and the business tax receipt uh cases one and two uh whether you want to bring a case against the uh the owner of the Valero business um you know you you'll you'll have to decide that um yes sir you okay all right thank you next case next case we're going to call is Amber case number five on the agenda on the agenda Amber Cooper case number cbpr 2023 00794 the officer on this case is janaro Melo all right Mr Melo uh tell me about uh this case involving uh a uh an after the fact building permit this this case uh I'm going to puton it for for 60 days they apply for a permit so I grant them an extension okay very well moving right along let's hear the next case all right next case is going to be item number 10 Andy pellis case number c MHS 2023 00821 the officer on this case is shanon Sanders Miss Sanders I uh I already reviewed the file I know what the uh charge is for I did see in your photographs a uh a number uh like an address but you're saying that some something more needs to be posted uh tell me about it jna Sanders neighborhood service inspector um as stated yes um they need to have an identification Placer for commercial properties in or um minimum housing buildings they need to list who's the management company in the case of an emergency who to contact a telephone number if um something happens um at the property and someone needs to be contacted and address wouldn't suffice we need names and numbers posted on the property that's clearly visible um for anyone to see the case was originally opened on um August 3rd of 2023 I'm sorry August 3 yes August um 3rd of 2023 where as I met the property owner um had a conversation with him I explained to him you know what needed to be done I was at that time doing an annual housing inspection um he stated that he would take care of it within by the reinspection date the reinspection date has come and gone um here we are months later no placard has been placed on the exterior walls of the building um as of my last reinspection I am showing proper service was given I am showing that um notice um a violation and notice to appear was mailed out to the property owner via certified mail as well as me posting the property um and at that time had a conversation with the property owner again um but again as of my reinspection no PL record is posted is this a multif family condo oral what what um yeah it's a little it's a small apartment building I want to say anywhere between it's six to eight units um single story okay based on the unrebutted testimony of the city's code compliance officer the photographs and the evidence that I have reviewed depicting that the violation still exists proper notice has been given I find in favor of the city enter an adjudication and set a compliance date of March 20th in the event of non-compliance there shall be a daily fine of $350 until the violation is abated okay magistrate next item on the agenda is 11 and 12 um both the same property owner Christine Pierre item number 11 is C nus 2023 0161 this case was previously found guilty by magistrate Kazo with an abatement date of February 21st of 2024 F set at 250 per day um case number 12 um case number is cenus 2023 01163 this case was also previously found guilty by magistrate Kazo um with an abatement date of February 21st fine was at 250 per day and the officer is Christopher Coulson uh Mr Coulson I uh review the file so you don't have to go into the uh files deeply I've already seen the photographs um anything new since uh since the last uh hearing uh by uh the former magistrate or by magistrate Kazo good afternoon magistrate and far as both cases go there's been nothing new the port the port Tois are still there um the the uh the storage the storage building is still there with grass growing up in it and falling down so nothing new has taken place on that property no contact with anybody who owns the property either they uh have not made contact with you they have not made contact is it is this a single family neighborhood yes it is I'm sure the neighbor the neighbors are not very happy about it no the neighbors keeping constant contact with whatever with me is one of the officers there a couple other officers that work the area so the neighbors will reach out and say hey the grass might be getting a little too high every now and then if if we happen to miss it but they they're not happy about it well uh you might ask uh your director or others in the city what the city could do to force the removal of uh the um the items that uh the Portables or cut the grass or you know take some other remedy that will be a lean on the property uh in the meantime um I will ratify just for the clerk I will ratify the fines uh acrw to date which were set at 250 uh but going forward the uh the fines uh beginning today the fines will be 500 as opposed to 250 so uh based on the unrebutted testimony of the city's code enforcement officer the photographs and the evidence presented showing that the property has been out of compliance uh since the abatement date of February 21 um I find in favor of the city hereby ratifying agw to date uh in the amount of 250 uh going forward those fines will increase uh to 500 plus uh I find uh that the C is entitled to a $100 cost assessment uh this uh order is also the same order that I will enter on uh case number 12 which is uh a shed on the property or sheds uh so so so uh two orders involving the two separate cases both uh basically uh ratifying the fines to date and then going forward after today they're 500 until there is compliance okay all right we're gonna call you just an editorial note uh the magistrates orders need to have some teeth to it especially when people not only uh violate those orders but they don't even have the spine to to show up uh to address the issues and have nothing to correct the violations um the property address please stop any side conversations to be muted stop any side conversations uh so I I'm going to be harsh on people that do not comply with with special magistrate orders as I have in the past I will continue to do so in the future and I will increase fines uh appropriately uh for those that don't even bother to show up so let's move on all right we have item number 13 Empire Legacy Management case number cbpr 2023 00801 um the officer on this case is shanon Sanders Miss Sanders uh go right ahead um Empire um Shandon Sanders city of North B me um neighborhood service inspector this is a property address 65 Northwest 119th Street I originally opened um inspected this property I'm showing here February 6th of 2023 whereas I um spoke with a tenant at the time who had started who had installed um a driveway were partially installing the driveway in order the approach of the property long story short we have a kind of a conversation I explained to them that a permit needed to be obtained for the um driveway that was being installed um they stated that they would pass the information on to the property owner um I officially came I came to back to the office sent out an official notice um of violation I have not heard from anyone from the property since then um other than when I'm taking pictures and they're asking what's going on the property owner anyone has not reached out to me um regarding notice regarding this notice regarding the property as a whole um I have looked on file there are no permits um or applications for the driveway since I initially opened up the D um the the um violation they have now even resurfaced um the driveway or the front the entire front lawn with now um a black asphalt or something before it was a concrete kind of slab there but now was asphalt over the entire driveway but again I have not had any contact with any property management or um Property Owners from this um property um as of my last reinspection no permit applications are on file and the driveway still exist I am showing that um service was given for this um hearing properly notice was sent out certified ma as well as I posted the property um I posted the property um on February 6 for this um notice I mean for this hearing all right Miss Miss Sanders what is Empire Legacy Management what is it is it an LLC is it a corporation what is it a fictitious name who who who owns that name let me take a quick look yeah there there is no Inc Corporation or LLC associated with it or a fictitious name associated with it so I don't I don't know who the real party is when I pull up day County property workers it shows it just shows us the owner being Empire Legacy Management with a melon address 20761 Northeast 8 PAAD um yeah I I know I know that that's where you got it from but that that's not that's not a legal entity um if it's a fictitious name it's got to be owned by some Corporation or person uh there is no LLC there is no uh Inc there's no Corporation so uh you know for all we know it's it's just a name and and I'm wondering if you could do a sunbiz uh that's what I'm searching now I'm on it now trying to search it it could be if fictitious name owned by someone else I I'm just concerned that whatever order I enter will not have any validity it will not you know be enforceable against anyone uh unless you can tell me who owns that name anyway Sor my computer's going a little slow the circle is still kind of we can come back to it or we can wait a couple of minutes until you find out if it's a fictitious name or it's a corporation or uh an LLC or somebody who uses that name Joe do using it as a property you know Empire Legacy Management uh I don't know anything about the ownership based on what you're telling me okay soon as it comes up I'll I'll let you know if if we need to pass it we can and then once it comes up I'll you know back in let me let me find out if it's a fictitious name or whether it's a corporation or or an LLC registered with uh with with sunbiz in the meantime let's pass let's move on to the next case okay next case is item number 14 um Frey case number CDR 2022 00009 this was previously found guilty by magistrate Smith and with an abatement date of March 16 the fine was set at 250 per day the officer on this case was is Shannon Sanders he's still researching the other issues it's it's fine I am researching it just came up but um for this case it has been compliance has been met um I my apologies um we've been going back and forth between different departments trying to get this rectified but I did receive an email um after the docket was put together um stating that the compliance has been met we're talking about am Frey number 14 um yes for 12900 Northeast 4th Avenue that's correct all right so there's compliance with 14 all right you want to go back to 13 okay yes we can go back to 13 wait let me pull it up minute said Empire Legacy Management okay well I see well I see Legacy Empire Management Corp um and actually that one has a North Miami address but that shows a registered agent as um hum Bert Lugene for at 666 Northeast 125th Street uh let's compare yeah that's that's probably not the but that's that's says corporation that um afterward it doesn't it doesn't have one and some Bill that just says ire Legacy Management there's nothing under umpire Legacy Management no the only thing that comes up on sunbiz is Empire Legacy Management Corp but nothing just would just ending with management no how about the the one with Corp is a different address the one that with Corp is for principal address being 666 Northeast 125th Street Suite 233 okay well you know what I'm going to do I I'm going to go ahead and enter an order against Empire Legacy Management I don't know how effective that order will be but somebody's using a fictitious name at that address without having registered it so um I don't I don't know um of what consequence that will be have you looked at fictitious names under sunbiz I have um I'm sure you could probably tell I'm clicking away now trying to look it at in different ways under the under the fictitious name I'm trying to even search it under the address to see if anything at all comes up in nothing I'm not I'm not showing up anything all right I'm gonna uh I'm going to enter an order but I I would encourage you to follow up and if they're doing business under a unregistered fictitious name uh there other violations that they're committing beyond the one in question um because it's not legal to do business under a fictitious name unless you register it so maybe what if you would work with the city attorney's office on this one I would appreciate it this this order may may not help you very much unless you've got the right person uh cited uh citing a fictitious name alone is not typically going to get you anywhere but nonetheless I will um issue an order that based on the uh presentation made by the officer and the photographs of the asphal driveway having been presented uh as evidence uh showing that the violation exists uh notice has been given to that fictitious name at that address I find in favor of the city enter adjudication and set at a compliance date of uh let's do April 17th to give you some time to uh research this particular issue uh April 17 2024 the Amed of non-compliance there shall be a daily fine of $350 until the violation is Abad thank you next okay the next item we're going to call is um item number 17 on the agenda ingred belera case number CER CV 2022 00240 this case was previously found guilty by magistrate Kazo with an abatement date of February 21st 2024 fine was set at 150 per day uh the officer on this case is janaro Murillo Mr Millo I've reviewed the file um I know the facts but uh tell me if there's anything new that has come up since uh your last report no your honor on um I had a uh final inspection on February 21st and there's no permit and the uh RV remains in the property this is for the address 1180 noce 133 so they have an RB on the re the property without a all right um this is a uh a zoning violation you issued under uh 29-5 d405 the uh magistrate Kazo found the Violator guilty on January 10th with an abatement date of uh February 21 uh this is becoming a serious problem uh We've recently read in the uh newspapers that uh almost every other house in the city of haia has an RV next to it because of housing issues uh it is uh turning into a big nuisance with the uh high price of rentals people are using this as a second residence sometimes a third residence sometimes people have two RVs in the same property so I think you you guys need to really stay on top of it uh I am going to uh ratify the fines uh that have accured to date uh as said by magistrate Gazo but I'm going to increase the fines to $500 uh effective today and particularly in light of uh the non-attendance of the owner so uh my ruling is that based on the unrebutted testimony of the city's code enforcement officer the photographs and the evidence presented that the property has been out of compliance since the abatement date of February 21 2024 uh I find in favor of the city ratify the the fines agreed to date in the amount of $150 uh plus a cost assessment of $100 and Hereafter the fines shall increase to $500 uh fin shall continue to run on a daily basis until there is compliance okay all right magistrate we're going to call um item number 20 Margaret Garcia case number c a r 2022 000000 for the officer on this case is shanon Sanders Miss Sanders I'm here I'm sorry I was trying to do a little homework with that um that Empire Still yeah I I know that you're going to obsessed about that you're going you know me for for the for the next week uh but I think I think you should seek the help of the City attorney as well okay we're on 2200 North the 122nd row we're we're we're on the we're on on the case where the house looks like it belongs in the mountains of North Carolina not in Miami oh this is what the black house um yeah yeah I I I see a lot of those homes when I go travel uh to the Appalachia to North Carolina a lot of homes look like that but I don't think it's uh well doesn't matter what I think the uh design standards uh of the city say that uh This Is Not An approved uh color is that right that is correct Shannon Sanders neighborhood um service inspector for um property address 22000 Northeast 127 second Road this violation was orig originally cited December 15th of 2022 whereas they were cited for um as you just stated having colors that was that are not within the city's color palette um notices were mailed out to the property owner um instructing them um to visit the city to obtain the proper approval as of my last reinspection um approval has not been obtained and the color Still Remains this um Gray is black matte color I did um have a conversation with the tenant who called the property owner via telephone call I at least that's who they did identified them themselves as the property owner I do want to say on record she did ask for an extension um however I told her this being um a case that's been opened for um a lengthy amount of time I was not willing to give an extension she's stating that she's going to demolition the property um but I didn't see anything on record to show a demolition application on file with the building department so again I you know instructed her to possibly please show up and give testimony if that's what your stance is as we see here we have no one um and again the violation Still Remains um with this dark um black matte color I am showing service was properly given notice um of to appear was mailed out to the property owner certified mail as well as um the property was posted and hand delivered to the tenant um for today's hearing all right and the Tenant didn't bother to show up um meanwhile uh your your your testimony is that uh based on the uh on chapter 29 uh the design standards the colors have to be approved by the uh zoning or building department and this is not an approved color is that the bottom line that's correct okay so based on the unrebutted testimony of the city's C- compliance officer the photographs the evidence presented depicting that the cited violation still exists proper notice has been given I find in favor of the city enter an adjudication and set a compliance date of April 17th in the event of non-compliance there shall be a daily fine of $350 until the violation is evaded all right we're going to move on to item number 21 Marie C St Till case number ceod DS 2022 00224 this was previously found guilty by magistrate kzu with an abatement date of February 21 2024 the fine was set at 500 per day the officer on this case is janara millo marillo uh anything new since the case Was Heard by magistrate Kazo back in January of this year oh your honor um I went on February 21st which it was a reinspection date and um all the items that will store outdo remain what are they what are they what are they storing there what what is that bags of garbage I really don't know your H I don't know what it is it looks like plastic something like that okay and then there's also other things uh yeah that what is that yeah there like a pallet um I don't know what it has but but they have like a pet there it's been there for more than a year okay all right so um we'll make it expensive for them to keep that as a junkyard uh based on the uh City's uh code enforcement officer the photographs and other evidence presented uh that the property has been out of compliance since February 21st 2024 uh I find in favor of the city and hereby ratify the fines approved to date in the amount of 500 which is the appropriate penalty uh plus $100 in cost assessment the fin shall continue to run on a daily basis until there is compliance next guys all right the next case on the agenda is item number 26 Ru Roberts Rosler and Vanessa burn Rosler burn bomb burn bomb Rosler case number c LS C 2022 00009 officer in this case is shanon Sanders Shannon Sanders um neighborhood service inspector city of North Miami this is a new case for property address 11445 North Bas show Drive um this case was originally cited 12 I'm sorry December 8th of 20122 whereas I noticed here in the the in the um case File it states that mailing was mailed out to the property owner um on the of of um December no contact has been made to the city regarding this matter um over the past year or two um it has been placed on my lab to address I inspected the property for the first time um when I received the notice to appear whereas I observed Hedges that would be impeding over into um extending you know a little far over from the um stop sign whereas the city these code States if from the corner if you're turning in or just at the at the corner it needs to have a clearance a certain amount of clearance there um as depicted in the pictures that were already seen um you if you're turning the corner you don't have a clear view um of oncoming traffic um yeah I I get it I understand I understand what the law requires uh this is on their property right it's not on the Swale this is on it would be considered private property um per um city code and ordinance the swell is I it kind of is on the swell because this first six feet of the property is considered the swell area I mean I think you you I know you know Keystone in s sui fairly well a lot of properties don't have um swell areas or I would be best to say their swell areas kind of impede you know into their their um private property so so it's um I would say yes it is you know it was a it is the swell area but it's a long private property as well yeah it it is definitely and and you noted uh Public Safety it is it is a uh life safety issue uh with cars uh speeding around the corners and and children playing there uh I could very easily lead to a to a serious accident I'm uh troubled that they're not here present um this is a violation of uh section 29-5 D1 1211 um I would I'm I'm going to to adjudicate it uh but because it is a life safety issue uh the city may consider uh uh cutting down the Shrubbery and and and building the uh the the property owner for the cost of it because of the nature of the violation just a suggestion I I would hate to see a child get hit by a car because the driver didn't see the child due to the the Hedge uh that violates the code uh So based on the unrebutted testimony of the city's code compliance officer the photographs and the evidence presented depicting that the cited violation still exists proper notice has been given I find in favor of the city enter an adjudication and set a compliance date of March 20 um in the event of non-compliance there shall be a daily fine of $500 until the violation is debated thank you okay next item we're going to call is item number 27 28 uh this is for rhm Family Properties LLC case number CF LR 2022 004 07 item number 28 is C zcu 2022 000724 both cases were previously found guilty by magistrate Kazo with an abatement date of February 21st the fines were set at 150 per day all right I'm going to listen to both cases and I'm going to ask the officer uh who's on Christopher cson Carlson uh what what is is there anything new since uh the uh order by magistrate Cassel yes it is on these two cases they everything has been complied as of yesterday so I couldn't remove the dock it in time so everything's been complied as of yesterday all right uh that's wonderful I'm happy to hear that so uh we're done with 27 and 28 let's move on the next case would be item number 29 and 30 same property own owners Riviera Terrace condominium case number for 29 is cbpr 2022 00751 and number 30 is cbpr 2022 000752 both cases were previously found guilty by magistrate Kazo within abatement date of February 21st the fines for 29 was set at 500 per day and the fines for item number 30 was set at 700 50 per day wow he really uh raised her findes on those one uh those two violations let me let me just hear from the officer as to what has been done to make the necessary corrections officer janaro is on this case yes your honor for item 29 the property 888 noreast 132nd um they were asked to attain an after the fact building permit for the stle work that was done on the building um and I had a final inspection on February 21st of 2024 there has been no compliance no permits uh the notice to appear was posted on February 2nd and it was mail on February 5th of 2024 and I'm going to I'm why don't you read tell me more about 30 number 30 and number 30 same property address um they were asked to obtain um um permits for the renovation that was taking place um inside on the lobby area um this violation was open on November 12th of 2022 um the order to comply was posted on January 23rd of 202 4 the notice to appear was posted on February 2nd it was made on February 5th and I had a final inspection on February 21st of 2024 and there hasn't been no compliance this is a condo right um yes you know how many units uh are at this condom um I don't remember let me see if I get get that information more or less how many unit owners do you think they have looks horrible by the way it it looks like uh well never mind terrible anyway I I've seen enough um I am going to ratify the fines ACR to date on both cases at the amounts that magistrate Kazo entered um and um based on the photographs and evidence presented uh as to case number 21 uh uh 29 rather uh the fine is 500 yes plus 100 cost assessment and those fines shall continue to run on a daily basis until there is compliance on number 30 uh the fine is at 750 I ratify the fine uh and ACR to date uh and also uh those fines shall continue to run on a daily basis until there is compliance I uh certainly would hope that the condo owners understand that they're being thrown under the bus by the board of directors by not even having the courtesy to appear and ask for an extension or uh address the issues or explain why it's taken so long so um unfortunately because of the wrongdoing of the board of directors all of the unit owners in in this condominium are going to have to pay the consequences and so um go find yourself a lawyer that's all I can say all all right next case next case we're going to call is item number 31 the White House Condo um case number c POF 2022 00002 this was previously found guilty by magistr Smith um with an abatement date of 10 days um the fine is set at $11,000 and the officer is Christopher Coulson Mr Coulson I remember the case very well I have seen seen the condition of the fence while the pool is covered I think it is still a a life safety issue um I found that the White House condominium main is under a corporate name of nortex LLC I don't know whether you've been able to identify that entity as uh the owner but nonetheless just pointing out to you that apparently uh it's it's owned by a separate entity um I'm going to uh first of all nothing changed nothing changed your honor all right I've seen the photographs uh based on the testimony of the city's code enforcement officer the photographs and other evidence presented showing that the property has been out of compliance since the uh compliant uh compliance date of 10 days November 1st 2022 uh I hereby ratify the fines appr to date uh in the amount of $1,000 uh per day and assess costs in the favor of the city the fin shall continue to run on a daily basis until there is compliance again I urge the condo owners if there are any to uh reach out to attorneys and hold the board of directors directly responsible for breach of their fiduciary duties I hate to have to give legal advice and I won't give legal advice uh but nonetheless these violations need to be addressed uh for the health safety and Welfare of the residents of North Miami so with that said let's move on to the next one next case is item number 32 as well as number 33 number 31 is for tient management Heritage Condo Association number 32 yes number 32 Trident management Heritage Condo Association case number is cfob 2022 004 and then item number 33 is Trident management Heritage Condo Association case number CCU 2022 00707 and the officer is Jonathan lestre yes magist Smith uh neighborhood service inspect go ahead no no you all right neighborhood service inspector Jonathan Lester um on November 3rd 2022 I conducted an annual housing inspection at 645 Northeast 121st Street is a condominium 24 units um one of the two of the violations that I observed was uh they don't have a business tax receipt and or a certificate of use uh I posted a notice of violation at the property I also mailed uh certified letter to uh um Trident management and as to the final reinspection date nothing has been done in regards to the business tax receipt Andor certificate of use no application on F all right and then the uh you mentioned the certificate of use yes sir nothing on file for the certificate of use as well um they don't have either BTR or all right uh so as to both cases the ruling is to same based on the testimony of the city's co-compliance officer the photographs and the evidence presented depicting that the cided violation still exists proper notice has been given I find in favor of the city enter an adjudication and set a compliance date of April 17th in the event of non-compliance there shall be a daily fine of $350 until the violation is Abad thank you okay magistrate last item on the agenda is item number 34 tropical terrorist condominium case number CFB 2022 00389 this was previously found guilty by magistrate Smith with an abatement date of September 21st the fine was set at 250 per day okay let me hear from the officer off agent marillo yeah yes your honor um September 14 of 2022 while conducting an anal housing inspection on the property just 13725 n6f um they were cited for um tropical terrorist condomin Association having a business accuracy um I have posted an order to comply on August 19th of 2023 uh notice to appear was post post said on February 2nd it was also made on February 5th of 2024 and I had a final inspection on February 21st and there has been no compliance okay I noticed that this property is managed by prestige management a name uh that keeps popping up right yes all right um this is just a business tax receipt case there's no certificate of use issue here no you are okay and and I've found them guilty uh on August 23rd uh bait by September 2123 okay and my fine was set at 250 um based on the unrebutted testimony of the city's code enforcement officer and the evidence presented depicting that the property has been out of compliance since the abatement date of September 21st 2023 I uh hereby uh ratify the fines favor fine in favor of the city ratify the fines acur to date in the amount of $250 and assess cost in favor of the city this fin shall continue to run on a daily basis until there is compliant are we done we are done magistrate that concludes everything on the agenda wonderful when will I see you again say that again when will I see you again you will see me on your next hearing May 1 okay until then you all uh have a happy uh and healthy spring break and hopefully you won't have the same issues that we in Miami Beach are having so than stay thank you mistr thank you magistrate have a good one yeah you too thank you 49 1249 and all for --------- uh you uh should spell your name and your business or mailing address and your relationship to the property if you're not the property owner or an attorney representing the property owner then you must present a power of attorney or an affidavit in order for your testimony to be taken on behalf of the property owner for new cases you will be asked for the record if you're aware and understand the violation that is being heard today and if if you understand what is necessary to resolve the violation the city will present its case first and then the property owner alleged violator will be given an opportunity to testify on their own behalf you can bring witnesses to testify you can present any evidence that is relevant and photographs and also you have the right to cross examine the city's Witnesses following the case presentation I will issue not uh the findings a fact on the case if I find that a violation exist on the property then depending upon the case I will set an abatement or a compliance date for the violation to be resolved or for repeat violations I will impose a daily fine amount for new non-re repeat cases my order will include an abatement date by which you must resolve the violation and a daily fine amount that I may impose at a future hearing should the violation not be uh resolved by the abat and date if I find sufficient cause to postpone enforcement action at this time I will table or continue this case to another proceeding in the future if you do not agree with my findings of fact or my ruling then the property owner May appeal my administrative order on the case to the Circuit Court of Miami date County an appeal must be filed within 30 days of the date of the ex execution or the signing of my administrative order to be appealed in accordance with Florida law if a person decides to appeal any decision made by a special magistrate with respect to any matter considered at these proceedings then the person will need to have a Verbatim record or a transcript of the proceedings uh in in order to be able to appeal This Record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is going to be based the cost of obtaining the transcript shall be the sole responsibility of the appellant and it is recommended that persons who plan to appeal their case should provide their own court reporter at this uh proceeding pursuant to city codes at the city of North Miami prevails in Prosecuting a case before me then the city shall be entitled to recover cost reasonable cost incurred in Prosecuting these the case and the current cost assessment amount per the code is $100 per case once the City Records an order that imposes a fine and authorizes a lean against the property then the city will charge additional administrative fees to record and release the lean so uh I have uh I guess completed uh the preliminary statements I believe that at this point uh we will do uh the Pledge of Allegiance is that correct Madame Clark yes magistrate okay so let's uh do the Pledge of Allegiance and then uh after that you can swear the interpreters and the um officers we have an officer present yes we do okay is that you yes it is tell us who you are officer Carter nice to see you good morning all right we're ready for the pledge okay if everyone can place their hands over their heart we shall begin I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic one nation nation under God God indivisible indivisible with liberty and justice moving on to the swearing end of the officers can you please raise your right hand do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give in these proceedings will be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth if so say aloud I do I do do thank you now for the translators do we have the translators available yes this is kers Martine is a Spanish interpreter and The creal Interpreter no cre interpreter okay go ahead Erica okay do you swear or affirm that the translations which you are about to give in these proceedings will be accurate and correct to the best of your knowledge skill and ability say I do I do thank you all right um Madame clerk is it your turn yes sir good morning and thank you everyone for participating and today's special magistrate hearing I will be reviewing the process by which today's hearing will be conducted make sure all your devices is muted at all times unless you are given testimony on a case if you are using two devices to participate in today's hearing be sure your audio is only enabled on one device when your case is called if you are signed into Zoom you will receive a notification giving you access to the audio and video so that you may be given so that you may give your testimony if you are physically here at the city hall and wish to give a testimony you must sign in at the code Clerk and await your text indicating your case is ready to be heard upon receiving that message you should immediately come to the C- compliance Department office to give to be provided access to a computer if you would like to speak on behalf of a case once the case is called you should click the raised hand button to be acknowledged before giving your testimony on your case please state your name property address and relationship to the property if you wish to have an interpreter assist during your case please indicate that when your case is called magistrate that concludes the instructions all right any additions amendments deletions to the agenda yes we do um um so we do have a few cases that were removed from the agenda so case number four was postponed hang on okay that's Adela Australia Morgan case number cbpr 2022 00771 we also have case number by by the way um is there a reason why it was supposed phone I it seems like I had already adjudicated the case and set a daily fine is there a uh the proper the property owner requested it to be postponed and the officer gave them more time okay um hang on just a second uh just so that you the the officer is aware I I reviewed the file and uh there are some pictures that were attached of some Landscaping which have nothing to do with the file so if and when the case comes back before me uh make sure that you got the right pictures on there yes magistrate okay we also have case number 15 Golden Terrace condo case number CE wwc 2023 00125 what are we doing with case 15 we are postponing that as well it had some missing documents yes sir sir uh as part of our our dilenci here in the department one of the things that we've been doing is we have a pre-meeting a prehearing agenda meeting with the staff including our City attorney so this was the first uh second meeting that we've had in order to make sure the stuff like due process and services are being followed if there's pictures that are not depicting the correct item those stuff we've uh there's a a couple extra this week but as as we review the the the the agendas this will this will definitely uh get better sir yeah I appreciate that I I just um I was confused when I reviewed the file it was supposed to be uh um uh a case involving an expired uh permit of a window and while there are some uh pictures of a window when you when you open the the attachments the first thing you see are pictures of trees so I just wondered if that was a mistake or what but any in any event um yeah I you know it happens occasionally it's not it's not rare to see that but let's um try to do a bit better okay let's uh hear the next one so we have also case number 16 Golden Terrace condom main that's cwwc 2023 00126 that goes with case number 15 as well so we postpone both of those due to some items missing and the last case we have postponed is case number 19 Gan Max forville and W Joslyn cbpr 2023 0086 okay well that's not too bad it's a short agenda so so it's uh makes makes uh our day a little shorter so that's good all right so are we ready to start with number one so we will start we have some people who are registered for the agenda so we'll go ahead and call um case n into record case number seven eight and nine that's okay the same property owner same property owner that's okay adri Veno case number seven cbpr 2022 00676 case number 8 cbpr 2022 00677 and case number nine cbpr 2022 00678 all right let's start with number seven it's uh 655 Northeast 143rd Street uh two bathro remodeling um what what is that about is your honor yes let me let me hear from the officer and uh please uh speak uh loud and clear so I can hear you better yes could you hear me yes um is the property owner present okay I don't see Adriana here so I uh Adriana is not here magistrate all right uh do you think they'll she'll and I don't know who Adriana is is she the uh managing agent or an owner or what uh janaro is she no she don't you don't um she's not a property own okay well if she signs in a magistrate we can oh here she is I I see her oh yes that's that's a proper um on all right Adriana if you can accept the invitation please Andrew votino if you can please accept the invitation she was here and then all right here we go adj if you can please raise your right hand he did okay do you solemnly swear or or and affirm the testimony you're about to give to these proceedings shall be the truth and the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you God please say I do I do okay let's hear number seven yes good morning on um September 1st of um 2022 the case was open to a property R 655 noce 143 Street um this violation um was found after um um workers um who let me into the property and I observed that they were um doing um two bom remodelings without a permit I had a inspect on September um 12 2022 there was no compliance and um several stens have have been given on February 2nd 2024 the not appear was posted it was made on February 5th 2024 and as my final inspection on February 21st um there has been um um no compliance you you said that an extension had been granted or at least one um two extension has been granted yeah okay can you show me the pictures of the bathroom uh remodeling can you put can you put those up okay that's that's one bathroom and that's the same one that's the other bathroom yes yes you're okay and you say the uh whoever was doing the work let you in there was no permit at the moment I no no I my my question is who let win oh the workers so I went because um they had a debris outside I was following up on a complaint and then when I observed they were doing work um they didn't have no permit and the the workers at the moment that um they allow me to go inside and and and do an inspection okay were the workers themselves licensed contractors or subcontractors um yes they they were licensed as what um I don't recall right now but I asked um ier that yeah that they had um they had um um they were licensed okay did did you ask him uh why they didn't pull a permit um no you AR okay so but they let you in and you took some pictures and did you review the records to determine whether or not permits have been pulled for the two yes there was there was no permit at the moment okay uh and to this day they haven't complied um well um they pull a permit but it's it hasn't been finalized so that's they pull a perment yes but I mean this been been for a while and and the per hasn't been finalized uh that means that they filed the paperwork but the city has not accepted the uh the application for a permit they don't have a permit right they apply for the permit but the but they don't they're still working on so yeah so they they still don't have a permit they still don't have a permit okay let me hear from you um how do you pronounce your name uh Andre your honor okay Andre um what what happened uh your your honor um indeed I wanted to replace the uh the tile and repaint um kind of the bathroom because it was old bathroom and um I I was never engaged really in construction so I honestly didn't know that I need permit and my workers didn't tell me uh but I understand and I accept that I have violated the kind of the rules and the call um now since then uh I hired um another company that helped me to um comply with the code um their name is archo those are the people who are building houses actually um we have filed for a modeling permit um the permit was approved um we actually have two cases your honor um yeah but let's hear about this case first okay okay yeah absolutely absolutely let's start with this one uh so the permit got approved last year um and we scheduled one inspection uh so it's approved the permit is approved the city has approved the permit where have have we comp thank you so much yes um no when when when was the perimet approved I thought I heard from the inspector yeah I I will ask uh Mr Maro to help me here because I think he has he has records I um I can pull it too but I will need to log in to the system I'm sorry is that haven't been approved yet so I don't see a final um inspection from the building department no no no but but the permit itself for the renovation is been provided so um sir sir let me let me try to clarify something yeah there there's a difference between making an application for a building permit yes and receiving a building permit and then having an inspection uh uh to clear up the uh the violation you're you're probably at the stage where you applied for a permit but you don't have an actual permit yet uh for for the bathroom renovation I do have permit issued and we uh asked inspector to stop by two weeks ago to pass the inspection uh inspector did stop by we had two inspections uh one was the plumbing and another one was electrical and the plumber inspector stopped by to pass inspection and his request was to provide the evidence that we haven't renovated anything Behind the Walls uh because um uh yeah he wanted to confirm that and so he requested the letter from certified engineer to provide that confirmation um and that's what my subcontractor is doing right now we already find an engineer who can provide it um and today ago um they confirmed that they can work with me and they will provide the Slater basically so that we can schedule another inspection um and inspector can stop by and we will give him this letter uh on the property because that was his request um and the reason we haven't asked electrical inspection to stop by yet is because the pluming inspector told us that we would need this letter anyway so let us provide this letter and then with do pluming and electrical at the same day um Let me let me let me stop you let me stop you there I don't want to get into a lot of the details how much time do you need to comply um you honor I it's like I that's the first time I'm working with this um I would request 60 days if you permit because I'm really working on this and it's just not as fast as I would expect both from the City and from the way contractors work in Miami it's something okay all right all right I heard you uh Madame clerk what are my abatement dates magistrate your date of abatements are March 20 April 17 and May 22 all right um Andre I'm um you say you you you need 60 days we're um we're in the uh first week of March um I'm going to give you till May 22nd to um get everything done okay y honor I really appreciate it um it's I just want to tell you that it's my interest to get it fixed and um I I really work on it but it's uh well you well I don't I don't think you have any choice so I'm going to I'm going to give you I'm going to give you U uh till May 22nd to um to fix it yeah and uh and and and then after that if you if you don't then uh penalties fines will start acre so um just mark your calendar it's May 22nd May 22nd okay it's a little bit more than it's a little bit more than the time you requested yes um okay based on the unrebutted testimony of the city's code compliance officer the photographs and the evidence presented depicting that the cited violation still exist proper noers has been given I have heard from the property owner uh who is present and I therefore fine in favor of the city enter an adjudication uh and set a compliance date of May 22nd to 2024 in the event of non-compliance there shall be a daily fine of $250 until the violation is evaded so no fine now but after May 22nd the fine will be $250 a day ni you okay let's let's hear the next case the phone number item number eight um same property 655 nor East 143rd Street um on September 1st of 2022 um I observed that the property was cited to obtain it after the fact um building permit for the concrete that was Bor on the back on the property out of inspection September 12 2022 there was no compliance also um the notice to appear was posted for February 2nd 2024 it was made on February 5th and as my final inspection February 21st 24 24 um there has been no compliance all right uh show me the uh the the concrete behind the property that you were talking about which I think is right next to the pool area yes all right so um there there's no uh there is no permit for that either uh Andre uh same thing you this was done by the same contractor and he didn't pull a permit so yes exactly your owner um now the story with this permit is slightly slightly different um if bathroom permit was at least approved then I need to pass the inspection um here I'm working with the city to get this permit approved um and I can explain you why but I need to go in technicalities if you would allow me um just I can give you high level message that we have provided the updated plan for the city to approve it because the comments were around the um steel reinforcement and the fact that it should be properly connected to the pool and the city requested the letter from a certified um electrician to confirm that now the the reality is that this concrete slab is not connected physically to the pool so I can't provide this letter and um last months and a half I was trying to reach um the inspector Who provided this comment um I I I I can share you like at least five uh emails I sent to the city and I called the city I got no reply so last week um my uh contractor has decided to anyway provide updated plan uh indicating that like there is actually one ft gap between the concrete and the pool so we don't need to provide the letter in a way because they're not connected yes you see like there is um there is a small piece between the tile of the pool and between the concrete uh there is space so like they're not connected it's it's an island in a way but but visually they are connected because they P like a concrete but there is no steel reinforcement um we have submitted this um and if City needs I can break it and show that there is no metal right so now we did it a week and a half ago uh city has requested since then to provide not El not the plan with the digital signature and stamp from the architect but with the in physical um and we resubmitted it two days ago um and like I'm also in talks with my contractor to to to like to facilitate it uh as soon as possible to comply um now one thing about this permit is that you don't see it in your records but actually this permit got um approved so issued by the city at the end of last year before the permit with the bathroom was issued even so ear we haven't passed the inspection for the only reason because my contractor wanted to have one two inspections in one day after the permit was issued actually the city changed their mind and reopened the permit and asked us to request additional information um I haven't print screed the system to prove it to you but this is the story with this one so they issued the permit then they decided to change their mind and ask for additional documents which are very complicated this concrete this steel reinforcement thing it requires x-ray it is like really complicated all right okay i' I've heard I've heard enough apologize uh there there's too much uh engineering uh which is above my pay grade but um I was wondering and I and and we have another case on the agenda later on uh regarding the U what what zoning and building call a 6040 Rule and I this question is not directed to you Mr Andre this is directed to staff uh in light of all that Concrete in the back of a house and the pool area are are we uh do we have uh a zoning sign off on on the permit and no I'm not asking you uh Mr uh venko I'm I'm asking staff is is there a zoning U uh signature that is required here yes your H have they passed on the uh application for this one yes yeah okay so there's not there's not too much concrete in the back there there's is it perious or is it a solid concrete or I mean what what how did they conclude that they met the 6040 rule when about uh looks to me like at least 80 % is concrete and pool I don't see any comments here from Sony but um I could I could tell you well you know I I'm going to ask those same questions uh again when you come before me I'm also uh I'm I'm going to also uh give you uh until May 22nd to keep everything consistent because I want to hear it all at one time and if if you if it turns out that you're still working diligently with the city on May 22nd uh then we'll talk about it uh some more but but as of right now I am going to um find based on the unrebutted testimony of the city's code compliance officer and the photographs that I've seen uh showing that the violation still exists proper notice has been given the property owner is present I find in favor of the city and enter an adjudication set a compliance date of May 22nd in the event of non-compliance there shall be a daily fine of uh $250 until the violation is abated uh please check with uh uh Planning and Zoning to make sure that you're not violating the 6040 rule which um I I didn't uh never had a never had a a case before but I I know that later on in the agenda that we're going to be hearing from a property owner whose driveway is completely uh impervious meaning that the water can't drain so it's going to go to the next property over so we want to make sure that you have enough green space in the back so that when your property uh you know has has uh flood that it doesn't drain to your neighbors okay all right uh so that's the second case let's hear uh the third case you can pass because I have my a video Let's Hear the uh let's hear the next case U yes your H yes same property address ex 5 noes 143r Street um this case was open same day of September 1st of 2022 um they were asked to to obtain an after the fact permit for the new flooring that was done at the pool area I had an inspection of September 12th of 2022 there was no compliance the notice to appear was posted on February 2nd it was mail on February 5th and as my final inspection on February 21st of 2024 um there has been no compliance all right let me see the uh pictures of the pool area and the new flooring that you're referring too all right the flooring that you're talking about is not inside the pool it's around the the side of the pool correct yes you okay and and that was done without a permit without a permit okay uh Andre uh same issue so same people same issue the flooring means the tile uh I I had basically a like gray concrete around the pool um we put the tile on top of this concrete that's what we did same contractors who ped the concrete Etc um uh we the reason it's we have not complied is because we filed the permit one permit for both concrete slab and the tile um and um it's it it comes in a in a pack essentially um and so it's I mean it's style it's pretty straightforward there's nothing um I'm sure it's all going to look nice it's a pretty house how long have you owned it uh I bought it in um June um 2022 okay it it looks like it's going to end up being a beautiful home and uh you're going to be a good resident and a good neighbor so uh as soon as you get these permits resolved you'll be in the clear uh I'm also going to give you till May 22nd on the uh that that pool tile that we just saw so uh based on the uh testimony of the city's code compliance officer photographs uh depicting the condition U that the city cited the property owner for condition still exist property owner has been given notice he's appeared uh and agreed to a uh an adjudication and a compliance date of May 22nd in the event of non-compliance there shall be a daily fine of $250 until the violation is evaded I I've kept uh sir just a property so property owner just just so that you understand uh I've kept the uh you know the the the fine relatively low most of the time the fines that I set are a bit higher but I appreciate your cander I appreciate your uh efforts to cooperate with the city which is what we're really trying to do we're not trying to impose fines on people this is not about collecting money from people this is to encourage them to correct the violations just want to make that statement overall so that everybody hears it this is not a money-making thing for the city this is just to to to encourage Property Owners like yourself to work with the city to get these violations resolved and I appreciate your cander um and hopefully uh you will not have to come before me again um so uh thank you for your appearance I appreciate the fact that you're with us uh so now uh we're going to move on to the next case I appreciate your honor and I want to give um I don't know a compliment what to Mr Maro because he was also very Cooperative um so thank you we try to work with the property owners yes thank you so much okay magistrate I'm going to call number item number 18 on the agenda Jacob pasnik Terrace pasnik irrevocable trust case number czp 2023 0094 the officer on this case is janaro Millo and I'll go ahead and um allow the regist yeah I'd like to I'd like to have the property owner um sworn in sure Linda if you can batch if you can please accept the invitation we also have Raymond trota also if you can please accept the invitation as well as Javier Castillo Linda please yes magistrate we do have three people here on behalf of this case Linda bad Javier Castillo and Ramon CH travado all right I please enable your cameras yeah uh the the first name you mentioned was you said Linda Linda Lind Linda Bach Linda Bach please enable your camera uh start and Ramiro who yeah Ramon travado as well as Javier Castillo okay okay and missing we're missing one more we have Linda we have Ramon and we need Javier I think it's Roman here Roman Roman please raise your right hand do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give in this proceeding shall be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth please so help you gu please say I do I do all right uh who is going to uh testify on behalf of the owner all three of you I can testify for myself I'm an owner all right let let let me let me start uh let me let me start you have they been sworn yes all right let me start with Javier castill you okay uh who are you representing no I am the tenant of the property no I'm sorry I'm not asking you I'm asking no please don't interrupt uh who do you represent Mr Castillo we we can hear I am the property manager you are the property manager for the property next door you are the property manager for the property next door correct okay and the property next door is called what Keystone Towers Condominium Association okay just want to get the party straight that's you know Stone what towers Condominium Association okay all right uh now we'll go to Roman trovato and I want you to tell me who you are representing no I am the hello I am the the tenant of the property you are the tenant yes and who's your landlord no the landlord is no in the in the Country Now what's the owner's name irrevocable Tru okay do you have a do you have a lease agreement with the owner or is that an oral verbal no yes I have a lease agreement I need it's more easy for me if I have a translator all right so let's use a trans Spanish English translation and please uh I want to know sir if you have a uh lease with uh the trust that is uh listed as the property owner Jacob prashik trustees um pric IR irrevocable trust okay uh Mr translator please ask him if he has a a written lease see yes all right what what is is the period of that uh lease that you have with the owner March 1 March 1 St in May 1 it begins in May in March 1st and it ends uh in April of 25 April 30th 2024 that's when it ends all right so it's about a year leas right okay and and what what does that lease entitled you to do well I honestly do not know I have rented the whole place and I also rent places that are inside the property sir is one of the businesses uh that uh is is conducted under your lease the operation uh of uh uh kayaks paddle boards and other um uh recreational type equipment for all right stop Sir Mr interpreter he gave a long speech but essentially from what I understand and and correct me if I'm wrong Mr interpreter um there is a business across the street that handles paddle boards and kayaks and he has given permission for that that business to go over his property and um uh and and use that property for the purpose of accessing the uh the water is that correct that is correct okay all right uh so he's uh authorized someone else to use his least premises to access the um what is that a canal or what it's uh well it's Arch Creek the Canon that it's well right next to 135th okay um now I want and I appreciate uh Miss Bach uh uh keeping uh silent while everybody else is talking uh uh Miss Bach uh I assume correct me if I'm wrong I assume that you're going to be telling me that you are somehow associated with the property either as an owner or as a managing agent what is your position with respect to this property I live across the street from where they are launching their High X and the people are coming almost into my backyard 120 people a day okay uh so you're you're a more of a witness than uh than a participant in in this activity correct an an an unfriendly witness okay uh you mean a hostile witness yeah there you go okay uh and so you you live at Keystone Towers no I live AC across the street in Keystone Point on Arch so you live on the other side you live on the other side of the water correct and when they launch The Kayaks they tell them go across the street and hang on to that property's dock until all the kayaks are launched and then we'll all move down the canal together so I'll have 20 kayaks hanging onto my dock four times a day okay just uh we'll we'll save that uh for later right now I just wanted to have you identify for the record um I have reviewed the entire file um and I am going to ask the city to present the testimony uh in support of their case I do recall if my memory serves me right that this particular property owner was was on a prior agenda months ago I recognized the name because it I I recognized the name and I remember months ago that uh it was pulled from the agenda um I also reviewed the um file to determine who is doing this particular activity and and it's another name I wrote it down somewhere um South Florida Water Adventures uh is listed as the actual operator so what I want the uh officer on the case to explain to me is the history behind this operation um why is South Florida Water Adventures I want to know why they're not cited and I want to know why Roman trado as the tenant is not cited and the reason I want to spend a little bit of time on this file is because as I see the pictures and and and I I I live on bis Gan Bay so I see these people probably not far from where they're launching um I live on the other side of the bay and and um and what I don't understand is I I know police went out there and cited some people why is the why is this activity still going on uh Mr Castillo uh not Castillo uh who's the officer on this Maro yes your honor give give me give me a whole history uh of of this of this issue because I know it's been going on for a long time and and and I'm wondering why it was pulled from the agenda the last time it was performing well yeah so basically this started because um um first they were running the business without a certificate of use which um they obtain it okay um we're talking about um selft flid um Adventures right um then I I noted that South Florida water adventurers is the party that is conducting this this Enterprise and um but they're across the street uh they're not they're not allowed to launch from somebody else's property are they they they should they should be allowed to condum business former commercial um uh um zoning right so um in this case they obtained the certificate of use right but um they keep they kept on launching from the uh the residential um property okay so they they across the street where they receive their certificate of use zoning allows that use from that site right is that what you're telling me well that's well that's a commercial property but from then to launch the kayak it should be from a commercial um um zoning um District which for example next to it there's a marina which they can use that to conduct business but not from a residential okay so when they receive their certificate of use and that's from zoning correct yes they were allowed to operate from their existing location as a commercial Enterprise which but they don't have a canal to launch their kayaks right on that side they don't have a canal on that side yes okay so how are they supposed to operate if they don't have a canal for example like as I was saying next to it there's a marina okay they can use that right but not from this property I know but I I don't understand how they can get a certificate of use for something that they can't you know from where they can't do business if they don't have the ability to launch their kayaks from their business how did they get a certificate of use good morning special magistrate if I may interject uh I do have some background with this uh property uh good morning everybody Jose Perez the manager for the neighborhood service department uh so I do have some extensive history with this property um as well as the case and as well as the business owner uh in itself the business owner was granted a certificate of use and a business tax receip to operate however they had very uh stringent restrictions that said you cannot operate from The Preserve that is a budding that property where he's rented at right now they gave him stipulations that if he finds a commercial property that he can launch from he could use that commercial property as long as it's approved and zoned correctly uh within that being said um they were previously launching from The Preserve and from the FIU section which was uh in essence causing a nuisance in that area and it was then uh cited and the pro the business owner stopped and then he moved his business to the location that's across the street from this current address at that point in time the property owner uh went into uh an agreement with the business owner to allow him to use his property uh to to launch The Kayaks however the issue came about where the property is actually zoned as residential which is where we have the issue at this hand um so with that being said they were cited for the commercial use that was ongoing at the uh residential zoned property uh at that point in time the uh property owner as well as the business owner was represented by Mr Frank wand who uh is a former uh mayor of the city of I know I know Frank Wen and they came into an agreement with the city attorney's office uh where they would go ahead and apply for the rezoning of the property uh to allow the use uh and allow the uh kayaking uh launching to happen from this residential property as long as they adhered to the agreement which was that they would apply for the rezoning of that residential property uh at this point in time and to date they have not apply for the resoning uh of the property and at this point in time uh Mr Murillo is citing the property owner uh because that is what they're actively launching The Kayaks from uh in essence if the property owner revokes the access to the business then this would resolve the violation in itself however as evident by uh Mr Caso and Miss Linda uh unfortunately the property owner as well as the business owner contined to launch from the the residential property which is prohibited uh if they were to launch from a marina then it would be allowed uh per the zoning and allowances with the city I hope that gives a little bit more clarification I I think I think you've clarified uh most of the issues that I that I have um that I had just just a couple of questions Jose because I I know you've been on this for a while the property which is apparently next to Keystone Towers Condo Association based on the pictures that I've seen this particular property is in a residential zoning correct that is correct yes as is the condo association that is correct and under the zoning code if you are zoned residential you're not allowed to operate this type of business correct that is correct all right so this uh owner and this tenant have entered into a one-year lease to operate an illegal business right that is correct and you cited the owner of the property which is a trust you didn't site the uh the actual tenant in possession uh that is conducting the activity um and I'm wondering why I'm I'm wondering why the tenant wasn't cited well if I'm not mistaken the tenant it actually named on the violation itself but we cited the property owner because the property owner is responsible for their folio should they sever the ties with the um the business and prevent them from further launching or obtaining the rezoning as agreed then that would cure the violation but in essence I'm pretty sure uh me if I'm wrong uh jaro uh the uh business was mentioned in the notice correct that the business that correct yes the business was mentioned in the original notice okay so so whatever violations are issued uh will be whatever findings I I I make uh will will apply to the tenant correct all right let me let me ask you this okay let me ask you this uh Jose um you consider this to be a life safety issue for the public I would carefully say yes and no and and I say that uh carefully and I want to tr carefully because uh there there's also the potential hazard in anything we ever do in life right uh with that being said if one of these um paddle board renters uh slips and falls and and hits their head in in a non-secured uh launching site that is could potentially a life and safety issue uh if one of these kayakers get in front of a moving vessel and and get ran over that is potentially life and safety issue now uh could they be cautious and and try to be observant for these things I'm sure uh but there is potential where they can be life and safety issues yeah my my yes ma'am I'll call you in a minute let me hear from the officer uh the the reason I ask is because I see a uh tremendous conflict between boating and kayaks and uh and the boards the uh surf boards that are used uh I I see a tremendous conflict I you know I can see a boat a yacht going you know 10 20 miles an hour and hitting somebody on a kayak um especially you know if it's dark it's very little room to maneuver if you're uh a boater uh so I'm I'm looking at at conflicts between uh permitted activities with with with boats and Yachts and and these individuals that are on top of a basically a piece of wood yeah no I agree and and I believe uh Mr raon director raand wanted to actually give a word or two as it relates to this case as well for your um input as well yeah I I I I I saw the pictures I saw probably as many as a dozen kayakers uh standing uh if you show the picture uh that's not it but uh there's there's a couple of them with a you know like like 10 people um on um there's a better one keep going that's one see there there's a lot of boat traffic in the area and and there you know you can see where a collision is almost inevitable if it hasn't happened yet um I'll hear from the witness in a moment but um do do you uh Jose do you consider this violation to be reparable and irreversible uh at at this time I would say it wouldn't be irreparable or irreversible in the sense where they can obtain the resoning aspect of the property so we always give them that option hey you can reone the property and abide by the regulations or cease the operations altogether and that would solve the violation uh in this case we're not citing for the individual launching that happens every single time we're citing for the operations as a whole which can uh have a resolution all right um I'd love to hear from zoning um about the chances of this property ever being rezoned for uh this type of practice particularly ajacent to a large condominium and I'm going to hear from you now uh Miss Bach uh I want to give you an opportunity Mr trado I'll I'll call you in a minute but let me hear from I assume the the the city is okay with Linda Bach speaking as a witness that is correct although Mr raand did want to have a remark he wanted to mention as well okay let me let me hear from Mr Raman first uh the magistrate uh yes in this case also there's also the addition of that many people crossing the street you know just that in itself it's right in the middle of the street knowing how how patterns are observed I don't know how they're crossing the street but crossing the street with a paddle board to conduct business is probably not a good business plan in addition it does add another life safety component to this aspect which is just not based on the SE it's actually based on the operation that anytime you have that many individuals with equipment crossing the street it's something that's relevant and and will Point towards a life safety issue I appreciate that and the street that we're talking about is 135th Street yes sir okay um okay uh all right thank you very much uh Miss Bach uh tell us um what's on your mind I have um three safety concerns number one as a physician I see them launching the kayaks in the middle of lightning and thunderstorms and um children getting onto the kayaks lifting them in in the middle of lightning so I actually just couldn't stand it anymore and so I went out and I said do you realize that it's lightning there's lightning and he goes oh it's okay it'll be fine so number one I find that a big concern as a person who treats people who are injured number two the canal that I live on is a very busy I Canal because it's one of the only two outlets to the Bay so we get a lot of traffic up and down this canal especially at big boats that can't go under the little Bridge that's also in Keystone and a lot of people just don't observe the no wake sign boers and so there's a lot of weight going on which is really not safe plus there's the marina right down the canal from this so a lot of people come down there to get gas and plus there's all the boat launching from the marina so there's a lot of traffic going right by that area and then there's a lot of these kayaks are just hanging there waiting you know waiting for everyone you know to get onto the kayaks you know for them to launch all the kayaks so there's a lot of people just sort of hanging around you know with all this boat traffic and it's just really not safe especially them launching in the middle of a thunderstorm yeah um I uh I understand your testimony uh I know that Roman trovato has something to say sir yes um what what do you have to say to the city's uh allegation that you're conducting through your property with your permission an illegal business and I'm going to have the Translator translate that for well uh the thing is that when I gave him permission to be able to operate the business I had uh well first of all that business uh does not belong to to me uh I had understood that half of the property that I rent half of it is commercial and half of it is residential therefore that is the reason why I gave them the permission in order because it was a half of it was commercial however once I received a letter from Mr uh jado um when I received the second letter he well I told him on February 6th I told him that they can not continue with their operation that they cannot continue to operate because it was not good so basically on the 6th of February everything has stopped well I hope so Mr trado do you live uh on the premises no no who who lives on the property Kim three different families and do you have leases with them yes I have Lees I have le agreements for one year written down everything in paper okay all right I I'm not I'm not going to prolong this because to me this is very very clear um is there anyone from zoning Madame City attorney what do you think the chances are of this property ever been reson to allow this particular use what do you think the chances are good morning everyone we would have to speak with someone from zoning to know exactly what the chances are in terms of them getting the the variant and allowing them to continue with their their business there I wouldn't be able to respond without having some type of opinion from zoning okay based on my uh experience and common sense with a large condominium property next to it and the conflict that exists between voters and kayakers I will tell you that it's probably slim and none the chances of the property being reson uh but I you know I'm not a City attorney I'm not a planning uh expert just experience so uh for the time being uh I understand that the uh operation has ceased but here's what we're going to do I am uh going to impose a fine of $1,000 on the property owner and to the extent that the city is able to um enforce it as to the tenant I would order that the fine also acre to the tenant um and I would also order that if it has not stopped this operation must cease and desist within 24 hours or if it does not cease and beist within 24 hours if it it continues Beyond 24 hours I will find the property owner and the operator $11,000 a day for every day of non-compliance so uh I'm going to deviate from my standard order which grants a little bit of time because I do consider this to be a public Hast uh a safety issue uh and I know that they've been engaging in this activity for a while because I remember seeing this particular file several months ago where this activity was ongoing without a variance or a permit so Madame clerk have I made my order clear enough or do you want me to clarify it further so from my understanding you want to place a $11,000 fine on the business owner as well as the tenant and if they do not stop the process of the business then there will be a within 24 hours there will be a $1,000 per day yeah I I didn't mean to say the business owner I mean I meant to say the owner of the property the trust and and and make sure when you record uh this that uh uh that that it's recorded specifically against the trust make sure that the trustee gets served and noticed if they have gotten served already of of the fine uh this is an unusual way of owning real estate um I don't see is there a trustee in in this in this trust who is the trustee I I I saw Monique Benson as a trustee is she a trustee according to your records Jose please feel into to to feel free to weigh in on on this I didn't call upon you sir I'm not I'm not asking you I'm asking staff to tell me who the trustee of this trust is and whether or not uh that person has been served for the trustees we do have Jacob parsik trust parnik irrevocable and a Monique Benson listed as the owners okay all right and so the trust was served by serving who Monique Benson how how was the trust served I'm looking at the records now one moment it was served by means of postage at the property and they were served by means of certified mail to the registered address of 6291 Miller Road in South Miami Florida 33155 okay all right so Madame clerk just so that we're clear I'm not able unless the City attorney tells me so I'm not able to uh Levy a judgment against the business of South Florida water adventurers although conceivably they're violating their permit from what Jose told me they were not permitted to launch from certain areas and Jose is this one of the areas where not they're not allowed to to to to launch they're not allowed to launch from public property and The Preserves that was the stipulation that was granted when they were obtained the the licensure uh in this aspect it is private property so that that's not the Restriction that was set on their business tax receipt and certificate use okay I thought I read uh that one of the uh prohibitions was that they could not launch from a residential area that may have well been included as a stipulation but I know originally the main uh trajectory was you can't use public property because that was the original cause of uh what they were doing all right I don't you know I just don't want to keep playing guacamole if they'll stop here they'll stop here and then they'll resume their operations uh a few blocks away so I think I think the city needs to monitor uh this company and uh if they want to launch out of hover Beach they're welcome to it but uh uh you know if they launch from from uh an area that is not zoned appropriately um the city should should follow up but uh with respect to my order Madame clerk just to return to it I'm I'm I'm my order applies to the uh pnik irrevocable trust Jacob pnik trustee and Monique Benson trustee whoever they are de or Alive a trust doesn't die the trust is dissolved but if the property is in the name of a trust that's who the that's who the owner is and so that that's uh one uh uh uh violator the second violator is the uh tenant who's authorizing this use which is not permitted in a residential area uh he's he's a joint violator and he's being uh also similarly fine uh as I said before uh and uh if it if if it continues Beyond 24 hours it's $1,000 a day uh I want to hear now from the tenant Roman trovato and uh Through The Interpreter well I think I understood a bit uh what I had understood is that if it if this was to continue that I'm going to be fine is that what I understood yes but he's also being F $1,000 for what has happened uh before today for the activity itself for be conducting that that activity uh illegally for that past uh uh violations it's $1,000,000 fine and then after if it continues uh it'll it'll uh increase to $1,000 a day for every day that uh there's activity going on there that is prohibited by the code okay for well two things that I wanted to clarify I stopped all the activities since February the 6 I told him that he canot be able to continue with his activities he remove everything from the property everything has been stopped and another thing that I want to clarify uh on the 30th of April I would uh well my lease is done and I'm not going to renew it so I'm not going to be attendant starting May 1st I just want to clarify uh that I'm not going to be uh well responsible for um being the tenant uh starting May 1st I I understand uh what he said earlier about uh the length of his tenancy but uh as the tenant he's responsible for all activities that take place whether he knows about him or not until April 30th and if uh he permits even if he's not aware he may have to do some some monitoring but if if he becomes aware that the activity is still ongoing then um he'll he'll be fine again so he has to make sure that as long as he's the tenant he's not going to permit any uh any operation that is illegal and and he may have to fence the property he may have to have a conversation with the commercial uh entity across the street South Florida water adventures and make sure that they understand also that they're not allowed to use this property for any purpose okay okay Perfecto Magistrate um yes so if the violation continues after the 24 hours are we just doing the $1,000 per day for the tenant or the tenant and the trust both both got it thank you until until April the 30th when the tenant vacates the property then it'll be against the property owner also I also want the City attorney to consider potential enforcement against South Florida water adventures there's a saying that you know you can't do indirectly what you can do direct what you can't do directly and if if uh they come up for Renewal their certificate of use business tax receipt uh they have to identify and this is just my recommendation I can't order this but they that particular business entity has to identify a location from which they will be a legal location from from which they will launch uh these activities uh I I I think that that should be a requirement of their certificate of use uh Miss back uh any any final remarks no I appreciate your consideration on this matter okay uh anyway uh it's it's something that I think needs to be addressed very quickly uh to uh if for no other reason respect uh the rights of the other residents in the residential area including the condo association Keystone Towers I also uh believe and I have seen very bad accidents happen since again I'm close by I can almost see d-stone point from where I live and I see these uh Reckless uh people mostly on jet skis not so much in in K kayaks but I see kayaks being operating it at night sometimes there's no lighting there's no reflection and it's very very easy for a Boer to run into somebody and then they end up being treated by Linda Bach and that's not a good thing okay next case thank you okay magistrate the next case we're going to call is item number three aah Hernandez cbpr 2023 00821 the officer on this case is janaro morillo we also have leis and Maldonado representing the case Le and Maldonado please accept the invitation all right is Miss Maldonado uh present she is present please enable your audio and video all right Mr Maldonado if you can please raise your right hand do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give in these proceeding shall be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you God please say I do can't hear you you got transl uh translator go ahead ask him to speak up I I I I don't want him to tell me anything about the case right now all I want him to do is to identify himself I'm representing Miss AA herandez are you a lawyer I am the runner the person who's doing all the paperwork I'm not I'm not going to take testimony from a runner uh you are you are you are you a a PL um expediter is that what you do no what I do is work with all the documentation and basically I get all the permanence all right I'm I'm not I'm not going to listen to to his testimony uh that's not what the law provides for uh he's neither an agent property owner or attorney so I'm going to completely disregard his testimony and just listen to the city side only only Miss Hernandez is allowed to testify uh and any lawyer or agent that she authorizes do you have a power of attorney do you have any written authority to be representing aah [Music] Hernandez [Music] well I actually spoke to this to Mr Moro uh he stated that missa needed to do a documentation where she needed to WR WR write down on that I was authorized and she actually signed it uh Mr Moro is there a document authorizing this gentleman to speak on behalf of the property owner I told him that document that he saying um it was not acceptable that we he needed to a part attorney or something that from missa which he didn't provide all right uh let me let me hear from you then uh uh officer Mario what what is this is uh work on on a pool that was done without permits tell me tell me what the status of it is yes your honor so this case was open on May 6 of 2023 uh for the property a 2340 bab Lane um as youer they were doing a full work without a permit um I spoke with me to Mr Mado on March 23 of 2023 and he said that he was going to be working on obtaining the permits but um as my final inspection on September 21st um 2024 there has been no no permanent file yeah I um I saw that in the file that uh on March 23 that was almost a year ago uh Mr Maldonado uh told you that he was quote working to obtain permits and here we are a year later so I think it's time to move this case along uh based on the unrebutted testimony of the city's C- compliance officer the photographs and the evidence presented depicting that the cited violation still exists proper notice has been given I find in favor of the city enter an adjudicate ation and set a compliance date of April 17th in the event of non-compliance there shall be a daily fine of uh $500 until the violation is Abad all right we're done next case all right magistrate the next case we're going to call is item number six Anna annaise Rios case number cbpr 2023 00910 the officer on this case is janara marillo and I'll allow the attendee in all right this uh is the property owner an NA Rios pres she is present anise please accept the invitation and enable your audio and video hello you have to you have to press this there all right I I see I see a lady and a Gentleman uh an Rios identify yourself hi yes this is Anise Rios the property owner and my husband Daniel Rios also the property owner magistr let me swear them man yes please raise your right hand do you Solly swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give in these proceedings shall be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you God please say I do I do all right um Let me let me ask uh either one of you uh whether you understand the nature of the violations that the city is charging you with just you know yes or no do you understand yes we have an idea what's going on okay okay so do I I I reviewed the file I know what the case is about so I want to get down to the to the issue okay um do you understand the 6040 rule uh well after the the after the the violation is it's trying to be uh issue uh uh we have been uh working back and forth with the city and more or less yes we do have an idea what's going on yeah okay you understand uh ma'am you understand what the issue is right yes you have a beautiful home okay uh beautiful landscaping uh you know the artificial turf is is is in mode these days a lot of people use it uh because it doesn't require any maintenance uh the concrete blocks everything looks great except that the code has a 60/40 requirement to permit uh water to drain instead of moving to your next door neighbor's house that that's really all you know considered by zoning and planning as a a component of any home in the city that there has to be drainage and what you have there is um non- perious which means that water can't penetrate it so that's that's how I see the case I want to let the inspector correct me if I'm wrong and if he wants to add anything uh you know talk to me about how to we achieve compliance I'm sure that uh the city and the property owner can reach some type of an agreement as to how long it's going to take to correct the violation I also understand that from the from the file that you you've gotten a permit the permit has been revoked the permit has been re reinstated and revoked but we still have the issue of the 6040 rule so if we may your honor if we may uh yeah if we make talk can we talk yeah I I I want to Le since we've spoken between ourselves and and you you you will have all the time necessary but I want to hear from the inspector first sure sure H you want me to read the case for you or whatever you whatever you need to do I'm I'm I'm listening well your honor um you already review the case um it was open on September 27 2023 as you know there's have been alterations in um on the driveway and needs to be reduced to only have a 60% um I know they're trying to work on with the city um because extension has been granted for the building department but um you know so my final inspection there has been no compliance so um the building official official is here as well so I don't know if you oh I'm I'm glad I I want to hear from the building official is the building official present I I want to hear uh about uh this this 60 40% Rule and also why the the permit was issued and revoked and issued and revoked you know uh doesn't seem fair that once a permit is issued uh uh and the file closed that the city goes back and reopens it uh I know it happens and I know people make mistakes but I want to hear from a building official hello I'm present all right so we want to see you and uh want to hear from you hi there so this um this permit was issued um and the permit was closed before before I was the building official it was the prior building official um I know are you are you the new building official yes okay how long you've been with the city uh this would be my third week okay all right uh we appreciate your uh participation a lot of building issues come up during these hearings and so um I'm going to call on you periodically from time to time and so I'm I'm I'm glad you're with us tell tell me tell me the history of of this property and why the permit kept getting uh issued and revoked and issued and revoked and now we're in la la land so because of the um error on the zoning side of it uh even though it was given a final approval to close the permit uh that final approval was revoked so that compliance could be met um in terms of the zoning requirements okay from what I read the uh there was there was an original permit issued uh which provided for a new driveway and is it my understanding am I correct in assuming that the property owner exceeded the amount of work that was permitted under the original permit from my understanding yes remember the building the building department enforces FL a building code not zoning regulations so from from the building from a building standpoint the construction of it was okay now the zoning zoning requirements were not met and we issued the permit but I would expect that before the building official issues a or the building department issues a permit that you get a sign off from zoning before you do that did did you not have a sign off from zoning when you when you issued the final there was a sign off from zoning yes okay so then the the mistake is with zoning correct okay anybody from zoning to discuss it and explain how that mistake was made okay uh go ahead I would I didn't want to put all the blame on zoning as well the building department shouldn't have closed the permit if there was an outstanding inspection uh with zoning yeah but it's not within the purview of the building official who interprets the building code to determine whether there's a violation of the zoning code is it correct we enfor all right so getting down to uh to the actual where we are now I understand I understand the the um concerns of the property owner I don't have to spend a lot of time hearing from them I would be concerned I would be unhappy if after getting an approval the city came back weeks months later and said hey not not good we're going to revoke the permit city has the right to do that and you know the City attorney may want to weigh in on that uh and the property owner may have other re Avenues to to uh seek relief but I'm only here to uh consider uh code violations uh so uh let me hear from uh the proper owner and ask you what if anything are you doing to comply with the zoning requirement that there be a 6040 uh ratio between pervious grounds and impervious grounds okay yor um well we we um when since we got the approval by the city of doing this driveway and we did everything that that is in the plans after we pass the final inspection after we pass all the inspections um the uh some inspector came and said that it was not uh by code so uh we explained to them that we did everything that was in the plans that was approved so after that we got the letter from Mr uh monio saying that we have to um uh apply to the 60 40% uh rule after that I just start uh going back and forth to the city to see uh what was going on because to be honest I don't know about construction it should have been addressed before so that's why we going back and forth back and forth saying that because we have all the receive that we spend more than $40,000 on this driveway so I mean and paid all the permit fees got everything we did it through the right way we don't we don't we don't do nothing on this house without permit you get me because I know how it is but s we follow all the rules how we're getting penalized now yeah penalized now I mean now we have to invest more money to try to bring something to code that should have never been approved if that was a case well the the problem I understand perfectly your situation it's not the first time that I've seen a building department or a zoning department or a planning department make an error uh happens a lot actually in especially in bigger cities they don't have uh you know sometimes uh they miss things they they're humans uh this happens to be one of those cases that maybe they assumed that that that grass that you have there in your driveway was real grass maybe they they thought that you know you know that that complied with the 6040 rule it turns out that it's artificial uh grasp and technically uh you don't comply so uh the only thing the only thing I can do and you know is enforce the rule and in in in the city of North Miami you have this rule that even though the city made a mistake um you still have to comply with it uh is the City attorney online yes that's magistrate okay do you have any thoughts on whether or not uh there is some kind of a stopple that the city uh is a stop from enforcing this particular provision of the code because they already the city has already approved the permit and that there has been detrimental Reliance by the property owner in spending $40,000 to do this driveway uh you know what what is your thought on Equitable EST stopple I would need to have the building inspector on to understand exactly why and how it was approved for them to continue with someone that every something that every pretty much everyone knows that there's that rule I don't believe at least not in my experience that there's an esole for any errors but that is something that we can discuss with the building official and see how we can move for all right uh let Mr building official before I uh go further uh what are your thoughts how how do you propose uh that the property owner cure the violation mindful that they've already spent $60,000 what what or $40,000 what is it that you would like to see you want them to shrink the driveway do you want them to put real grass what what is it that they have to do in order to comply with the 6040 rule in order to comply with the 6040 rule they'd have to provide the green area that's required by Sony um whether that's the artificial grass and replace it with actual grass um meet the setbacks on the sides uh with real grass U again that's a zoning issue so I mean uh I'm I'm not too clear on the zoning ordinances I enforc the Florida building okay uh and since we have nobody from zoning uh attend these hearings I think I'm going to table this until there's an opportunity for your honor yes sir um I'm trying to find an email but as I must understand the VII Santos from the building department she said um Mark March uh where they were still doing the work and told them that um to make the corrections and they had the opportunity to make the corrections at the at the time where they were still doing the work okay Mr Rios no we didn't your honor uh when this uh Mr Mar came to the to the to the side of the of here to the to the property every every single uh material was here on the side they were installing the papers all was here all the money was spent already so everything was here on on the property okay but it was was it before you installed and and put in place the papers we were installing the papers that day so another thing that I would like to say is that they told us that um Mr Mark I believe the name of the guy that some uh neighbors complained with our driveway I personally called the city Cod enforcement to verify that and there was not um there is not complain about that that that's not that's not relevant I I don't care if if people complain or they don't complain okay or who they complain I don't care if the mayor complains it doesn't matter to me okay what matters to me what matters to me is that there be compliance with the code of course okay that's all that matters and that's what we want and that's what we want and right now right now you're not in compliance so you're going to need to reduce the concrete uh provide more pervious uh areas so that the water will drain and not affect your neighbors on each side okay because that's what you know that what happens with flooding is if the if the water doesn't percolate down it's going to go to your neighbor and your neighbor has as as as much rights as you and you don't have the ability to flood your neighbor's property by making your entire property concrete and then all the water has no place to go except your neighbor's property and that's what we're trying to prevent so here's here's what I'm going to do I'm going to give you I'm going to give you some time to work with planning and zoning and the building official maybe even the City attorney uh but I'm going to give you time you you you must come back with a plan that is acceptable to Sony and uh in in in the most efficient uh cost affordable uh way and you know if the City attorney feels like you know maybe the city should uh consider a variance or consider uh some other way of dealing with the issue based on the fact that they originally gave gave you a permit and then they revoked the permit and so on and so forth you all talk it out but in the meantime I am uh going to find you in violation of the code in that your driveway is not compliant with the 64% rule uh notice has been given the V the the owners are are here and testifying on their behalf but I will enter an adjudication and set a an statement date a compliance date of May 22nd you have until May 22nd to um to comply with a rule or settle in some way with the city enter into some kind of a settlement with the city or the City attorney or whoever uh but if there is no compliance if there's no formal settlement agreement or compliance there will be a daily fine of $250 until the violation is upated so uh between now and April and and May 22nd you need to find some solution even if it ends up costing you a little bit of money because we cannot allow your property to drain to your uh neighbors uh on each side and and and we cannot I cannot in good conscience allow allow you to be in violation of the code um whether you have a legal case against the City uh I I can't comment on that uh that's you know you should retain an attorney if you feel that the city did something wrong speak to an attorney protect your rights and if you feel you've been wrong you can take the city to court but I I am not allowed to uh deviate from the strict provisions of the code you all understand that yes okay I hope you can all work it out you have a beautiful home I love the the way you know that you've set out the uh you know the front driveway um I think it's great but uh there's just a little bit of a problem that we need to resolve and I wish you all well and I'm ready for the next case thank you thank you Mr thank you all you're welcome sorry about that all right mag we're going to call item number 24 and item number 25 NN W 1051 Inc case number CF o b 2023 0494 case number 20 item number 25 NN W 1051 Inc case number c zcu 2023 00823 all right before we before we hear these cases I I just want to let you know in advance that as soon as we're done with 24 and 25 we're going to take a 10minute break we'll take a 10-minute bathroom break or uh whatever you want to do any emergency calls or anything you need to address we're going to take a 10minute uh break as soon as we finish with 24 and 25 okay all right let's hear 24 so we do have attendee ail June Jin they are the Le of the property they are the what of the property the leas the leasi the person leasing so spell the name a v l l last name is j u n e Das G NS all right I see that now on the the screen okay and and he's the tenant yes okay can you a can you please enable your audio and video hey hang on one second please uh I'll be right back I'll be back in 30 seconds I need to uh I need to address an emergency so just give me one minute sure for e right let's uh resume where were we okay and we have shanon Sanders on this on both of these cases all right uh the first case uh has to do with a uh lack of a business tax receed and uh the the other Case Case 25 is a certificate of use I'm I'm sure that there's some relationship between the two so we can uh hear the two of them together okay okay let me swear in the um the attendee please raise your right hand sorry um so I'm his granddaughter um IA is the the tenant so um I've been assisting him since he he has been ill um so I can give some information as to the process and where he is in the process of the documents as well okay and you're you're uh AEL is that how you pronounce your name Grandpa he said how you pronounce your name okay and and and the granddaughter's name is lenisha spell that l a n i s h a you need my last name as well yes yes please j e a n hyen p i e r r e okay is that Lanisha yes okay all right I got you so so uh your grandfather father is the owner of the business the tenant he's the tenant okay yes and uh this is um the name of the uh business is what eloen missionary baptist Baptist Church okay and I assume from the name that it's carrying out its business as a church correct Church yes church service about how many members how many m is like 20 25 sometime all right and it's located at 1049 Northwest 119th Street correct yes sir all right uh do you understand what the violation in magistrate oh okay all right let's wear them in okay can you please both um raise your right hand right do you solemnly swear and affirm the testimony you're about to give and these proceedings shall be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you God please say I do I do thank you all right you can put your hand down uh do do you uh understand the nature of the violations that the city is charging you with um for the most part yes so um my grandfather um received um notific that he had complete the certificate of use um he had been um going down to City Hall to kind of get um information as to what he needed to do and what paperwork needed to get done so when he received it um I assisted him with filling out the paperwork and then we uh oh oh and then we submitted the documents um as a result so when we logged back in um because he has been having some medical issues um it expressed that two of the documents um were disapproved um so we redid it because it needed he needed a covenant for a covenant um document um and then he needed a letter um that was signed by himself and the owner of the property stating a square footage so he got those and he uploaded them they needed 24 hours to review them um and when I hey and when I looked at the document um riew this morning it stated that um the the square footage letter was um disapproved again so I sent the email to follow up on in regards to what was what was the reason for the disapproval because that was specifically what was notated needed to be done okay how long has uh your grandfather been operating this church I'm sorry give me one second because that dog's barking I'm sorry you want me to repeat it yes please you said about how long how long how long uh has your grandfather been operating this church how long you've been at that location grandpa oh since 20 but let me see 20 like a year but but like how long six months a year yeah I think two years two three years something it's not two years yeah yeah so about a year or some months cuz he's he's not certain okay you understand saying that in order to do any business in uh North Miami you need two things you need a certificate of use which you said you're working on you need also a business tax receipt which is just paying a tax to operate uh but you can't get one without the other they have to come together you understand that okay now let me hear from the officer and uh then I'll make a decision on what to do okay sh can I add one more thing I'm sorry yeah real quick prior prior to receiving the information he didn't have knowledge of that so he just had the LLC I believe or the incorporation um where the church was was registered so I don't think he had knowledge of that prior to the notification from the city okay what was there before he uh moved in you know what that um what the that from from when we was doing certificate of use paperwork it said a hair salon or something in that range all right so it's a relatively new church that opened there yes okay well you need these two items in order to operate let me hear from the inspector okay Janna Sanders um neighborhood service inspector for the city of North Miami um both of these cases were originally opened on June 14th of 2023 um as you already asked um what business was there before I originally went to the the property to do an inspection we were doing inspections on um businesses that were not in compliance and or that needed to renew their business tax receipt at that time it was a hair salon I believe the name was Silver Streak or Blue Streak I I think it was Silver Street Hair Salon at the time when I inspected it was the gentleman and his wife at the property he brought to my attention he had just moved there so to answer I think your first initial question when you're asking the time frame he stated he had just been there for about a month or two before I visited the property so if I inspected it on June I would say he was there roughly April or May of last year so I would even say short of a year um that he's been there from our initial conversation at that time I brought to his attention that he needed to obtain the lure and the certificate of use um both him and you know someone who identified themsel as his wife said that they would visit the city to do so um they did um within a week or two visit the city um um as requested they have been going back and forth with you know trying to get things approved um you know it has been taken you know quite some time as the granddaughter has stated it has been denied for different reasons from what I recall and from what our conversation was I believe it's in durm at this present time um as she just stated it was denied again yesterday this morning but you know they have been trying to you know get the the the certificates however again has been denied um for different reasons through durm so the city is kind of at a standstill with issuing it until durm approve whatever it is that they're asking for um you so you know we did have a conversation with the business owner as well as his daughter she did say that she would ask for an extension I am okay with granting an extension because again they have been diligently working she know to get that she has stated that the grandfather has been eill um but you know I I am okay with giving it extension if if you would allow that I'm going to table it how's that that's fine for me I'll uh I'll I'll hear it I don't want to adjudicate anything on this yet uh I want to table it until my next meeting and we'll see where we are then uh I think that based on the circumstances that this they just recently moved in there uh the grandfather is not well they've tried the paperwork I don't know why it was denied if it's Derm I know durm takes a long time uh this this you know it is a church uh it there are 25 members uh I don't I don't want to uh you know taint their reputation by entering any kind of adjudication uh if if if all it is is doing some paperwork I I would encourage uh both the grandfather and the granddaughter and uh perhaps uh others to work with the city as quickly as possible so that by the time that I hear it if I'm going to hear it at the next meeting that they have what they need in order to operate uh which is a certificate of use and a business tax receipt they may need some term uh approval but I I if if the prior property uh uh prior tenant was a uh was a beauty salon I think that uh I think that Durham will be delighted to have a church in Li of a beauty salon only only because we're not talking about chemicals and you know other items that go into the sewer system so anyway I am going to table this until the next meeting magistrate your next hearing is May 1 and July 3rd uh let's uh do May 1 okay and at this point as I announced uh a little earlier we're going to take a 10-minute break and uh let's see what time it is it's they also have item number 25 also is that your ruling yeah it's my ruling is as to both the business tax receipt and the certificate views we're going to table those and uh I'll see you all back in about uh 10 minutes okay okay e for e e e e what you ready e e recording stopped e e e e e okay okay here we go recording in progress all right let's uh move on to the next case Okay magistrate um at this time we're going to call in the case num case number 22 and 23 on the agenda it's for Mia Properties Inc um case number cfob 2023 0475 case number 23 is meia Properties Inc as well case number CCU 2023 0799 the officer for this case is Brentley Daniels now go ahead and um request the attendee join all right the attendee uh on behalf of Mia properties uh Christopher Collins that would be Christopher Collins Christopher if you can please en AO audio and video right Christopher I'm gonna promote you so if you can please accept then enable your audio and video all right Christopher we need you to enable your audio and video please why don't you go ahead and click on the the little microphone button and the uh video button can you hear me now okay uh Christopher Collins uh let's uh let's wear let's wear him in all right Christopher if you can please raise your right hand I'm not Christopher I work for cristoper are you an attorney or um LLC what is your name I just for Ahmad alj what is your name Ahmad ah mad D and and your last name a L J I'm sorry yeah spell your last name a l j b as a boy o r how do you pronounce that alabor yes all right and and who are you here on behalf of erban Christopher Collins is the honer of Urban Design LLC I work for El Urban Design LLC what what do you do what do you do for what do you do for Urban Design LLC what do I do for Urban Design LLC I'm a civil engineer you're an engineer sir you're you're you're Frozen right you're an engineer I'm sorry yes I am and and uh why is uh Christopher Collins not present in another meeting that's what I understood all right do does do you have a power of attorney or do you have anything to uh show that you have the uh authority to represent Urban Design LLC as an agent or employee I don't have any power of attorney I work for every design that's all uh but are you representing the entity or you're just here because Mr Collins is not available yeah Mr Collins asked me to represent him for this call okay has he has he been sworn yes no actually no he has not okay all right if you can please raise your right hand for me Christopher do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give in these proceedings shall be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you God please say I do I do okay the the first uh the first thing I want to clarify is that the citation is against M Properties Inc not against Urban Design so uh Mr code officer uh inspector Daniel uh you know where is the owner um your H that I'm not aware of uh the citation was