e good afternoon welcome to the city of madira beach code enforcement hearing my name is is Bart Valdez and I'm the appointed special magistrate to hear today's cases I'm a practicing attorney and have been a member of the for ofar for over 20 years I've been appointed to this position in accordance and with the authority set forth in chapter 162 Florida Statutes it is my role to fairly and objectively review the matters presented as such I would like to advise you of certain matters related to today's proceedings today's matters will be heard in the order that they appear on the agenda every effort will be made to hear all persons having relevant evidence argument or comments to offer relating to the specific case that is being heard if you wish to speak today it is necessary that you be sworn in by the City attorney in just a few moments in all cases the city has the burden of proof the city will present its case first the respondent or property owner then will be given the opportunity to refute the city's allegations formal Rules of Evidence do not apply to this proceeding however I will exert every effort to ensure that fundamental fairness is afforded to all parties after hearing all relevant evidence I will then isue an order the order will be reduced us to writing and you will be provided with a copy by mail therefore please make sure that we have your current address additionally your advis that I do not have the authority to Grant you a variance permit or special exception of any kind my role is solely to determine whether a city code has been violated and to provide you a reasonable time to correct the violation by whatever means is available to you please be advised that you may be subject to a fine and a lean may be recorded on your property if the violation is not corrected by the compliance deadline if you wish to present any information to me today it is necessary that you swear affirm that you will tell the truth therefore at this time I'll ask the City attorney swear and all Witnesses good stand up raise your right hand be sworn under oath swear the testimony you're about to give today is going to be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth okay thank you all right the first uh matter on the agenda today is case number 2023 3699 for the property located 3141 129th Avenue is the city R to proceed we are goe Mr TR I would call Grace Mills as our witness today Grace if you can explain um your occupation and your job responsibilities here at the city of madira beach I am Code Compliance um with city of madira beach I work with um permitting and violations in the building department okay are you familiar with the property that is located at 314 129th Avenue yes okay and is this a case that was a proactive case or was it a result of a complaint that was received it was proactive okay this property at 314 129th Avenue East who is it owned by and how do you know that um it is owned by Paradox LLC if you look on page beginning on page three in the packet um this is the Property Appraiser's card and um it is reflecting Paradox LLC okay and did you also check to see what the tax collector provided as the owner yes I did that begins on page six and it also reflects let's see um owner is paradox LLC all right thank you so um when was your first uh dealing with this property um November 1st 20123 was when the courtesy notice of code violation was sent okay and did you go out to the property to inspect before you issued this letter dated November 1st our building official did okay and when the building official went to the property who who is the building official that did that Frank Des santis okay and when he went to the property what did he find when he arrived at the property um there were multiple health and life safety violations and concerns of the property falling into disrepair okay so you had mentioned that you issued a courtesy notice of code violation if you could um do you have that there then you have it pulled up on the screen yes okay and if you could go through that courtesy notice as to the code violations that were being cited and uh if you could go through the photographs too and explain the photographs Page by Page sure so the first um ordinance that we said was 1491 Declaration of an unfit structure would you like me to read each of them you don't you do not need to read the content of them I would just like you to site the sections sure um 1491 Declaration of unfit structure 1469 same maintenance of exterior premises and that covered three and8 1470 same general maintenance and that covered 2 3 4 6 7 9 and 13 okay and you're referring to subsections underneath each one of those code sections yes that's correct okay all right and did you tell the property owner what the property owner needed to do to bring the property into compliance on that yes the corrective action was listed in both letters okay and that was what um either a the property owner or a licensed contractor will need to apply for and obtain a building permit to repair VI violations if the permit cannot be obtained the structure must be removed and did you give a follow-up date that they needed to come into compliance with that direction yes November 15 okay of 2023 yes okay and if you could go through the photographs then that you've got in the packet starting page 12 yep starting on page 12 is a photo of the front door where um it's a better view on page 13 um it's where the unfit for human occupancy was posted that was posted November 2nd 2023 on the property then following to page 14 is just a general overview of the exterior of the house um I believe from the roadway 15 is another exterior showing the second level as well 16 um is one of the bottom porches of the house exterior 17 is a shot showing the disrepair of the S and fascia on the second story of the property 18 is an exter or interior photo of the house um it looks like the flooring 19 um looks like some damage to the wall Andor ceiling from the interior 20 um is more damage to the ceiling of the interior of the home 21 is from the first level of the home the I believe that's either the side yard or the backyard 22 um is actually bees or insects that are in the home from the walls 23 is showing um the electrical panel it's out of date for the fuse box 24 is showing the second level um porch and there's actually some holes in there um and just showing the dilap dilapidated uh porch as well 25 I believe that is a bedroom on the Second Story just showing the interior of the home and 26 is showing the Second Story um roof from the inside okay this last photograph then it's actually some of the ceiling has been removed from the second floor that's correct and you can see the sky through the ceiling through the yes okay all right did the property owner um contact you or the city after um this initial courtesy letter was issued not after the initial first courtesy letter no okay so obviously they were not in compliance on November 15th correct correct all right and you did then issue a notice of code violation yes November 15 2023 the notice of code violation was sent certified and is that reflective in page 27 of the packet that's correct okay and the rest of the pages 28 and 29 are the remainder of the notice but the photographs that follow it are these the exact same photographs that you just referenced in the courtesy letter that's correct yes okay so in this code violation notice that you issued on November 15 did you have a follow-up date on that that you asking the property owner to bring the property into compliance yes that was November 29th 2023 did they bring it into compliance by that date they did not okay and what was the next action that the city took when it there was no compliance on that date um we sent out the magistrate letters let me scroll all the way down my goodness I'd like you to start on page um I guess 48 okay um that would reflect the statement of violation request for hearing that was sent on July 19th 2024 and how was that statement of violation request for hearing sent to the property owner U normal mail certified mail and it was also posted at the property and did you also issue a notice of hearing yes I did that would be reflected on page 50 and 51 and 52 okay and then um you issued an Affidavit of service reflecting the types of services that type of service that you provided to make sure that the property owner had these notices that's correct um that's starting on page 53 that was since July 19th 20 okay and that affidavit was executed by you yes okay so on um pages 55 and 56 it looks like there's a certified mail and a green card was that for the notice of hearing and the statement of violation yes those were for the prior documents okay and have you received the Green Card back on this uh last notice yes you have received it oh I'm sorry no not for this case okay but you did um post the property and post it at City Hall as well yes that's correct okay and is page 57 a reflective photograph the posting of the property yes and does 58 reflect the posting of the notice at City Hall yes okay have you had any contact from the property owner during the rest of the process I asked you after the courtesy letter but any other time Code Compliance directly has not okay has anyone in City staff heard from them I believe that the planning department has okay and do you know the specifics of as to what was um the conversation with the property owner with the planning department or do I need to ask Marcy or um the building official I would uh deflect to either Marcy or Mr DeSantis for that okay before I go ahead and talk to uh one either one of those um have you gone out to the property and determine whether or not it's in compliance as of today as of today it is not in compliance okay how much time do you think it will take to bring the property into compliance um the city would see that 30 days would be sufficient to bring the property into compliance and you're presuming then that the property would be demolished correct that's correct okay and if the property can't be demolished within the the 30 days what is the daily fine that the city is asking the special magistrate to Levy in case there's non-compliance um 250 per day and what is the reason why you're asking for the $250 per day with this being life health and safety violations um of the entire property becoming dilapidated we would see that it would fit for that okay all right I have no other questions for you I do have some questions for um Marcy though all right uh is there anyone here on behalf of the respondent is there anyone here who is representing the property owner perod do LLC okay seeing no one then there will be no cross examination I don't have any questions for Miss Mills go ahead and call your next witness Mr TR I would call Marcy Forbes um Marcy can you U please uh tell the special magistrate what your occupation is here at the city and your job responsibilities I'm the Community Development engineer and I review plans and permits um for the city as well as anything else that comes my way um like are you familiar with this particular case yes um and so much that the people the property owners have met with the city at least once possibly believe maybe twice um the tone of our conversation was more about what they could do with the property moving forward they were aware that there were some issues with that um and Mr danis was in the meeting as well and so I believe that there was some conversation about confirming the number of units they currently have so um but mainly ours was talking about the future what the future could look like for that property when those when it was demolished okay so there was specific discussion that they were not interested in rehabbing the property it was their intent to actually demolish it they seem to there was if I remember correctly there may have been some talk about trying to rehab a portion of it for renting out and maybe recognizing the other portion of it wouldn't be usable um and I believe they they may own more than one property too so I don't want to confuse any of the two but but um they did know that there was issues on site with this related to this particular structure that needed to be addressed when was the last time the planning department or you specifically had any contact with these Property Owners I believe when I looked at it it was like maybe April of this year that we had some conversation I'd have to go back and look for shom okay all right thanks I don't have any other questions for Mercy once again is there anyone who has arrived on behalf of the respondent or the property owner who would like to cross examine Miss Mills Miss Forbes I'm Sorry Miss Forbes I have no questions for Miss Forbes myself and let the record reflect there is no one approaching the podium or even in the audience on behalf of the respondent Mr trash do you have any more witnesses I would just like ask a few questions of the building official all right and Mr tras I'll go ahead and move into evidence just for the record Pages three through 58 of the agenda package is exhibit number one thank you Mr D santis if you could um tell us what your job what your occupation is and your job responsibilities here are at the city I am the building official for the city of M Beach and my responsibilities are to oversee the building department and code enforcement are you are you familiar with this property we're talking about today 314 129th Avenue yes were you the person that actually went to the property to see it in its current condition yes okay and are you the individual that issued the certificate of non-occupancy on the property yes yes okay um were you at the meeting uh with City staff planning staff relative to um repairing this building or demolishing it yes okay do you have any specific recollection as to what the property owners were going to do with the property and its current state uh no okay it's is it your opinion that this uh structure needs to be demolished yes okay thank you I have no other questions Mr s just a few questions just for the record um to your knowledge is is there anyone living in this property or at the property at this point in time no are all the photographs that are pictured on page 12 of the agenda packet through page 26 of the agenda packet true and accurate representations of the condition of the property as it existed then and as it exists today yes I take it Mr Dan having seen it with your own eyes do you also believe that the uh nature of the violation constitutes a threat to health and safety yes all right Mr TR feel free to ask anything and follow up to my questions follow questions thank you all right okay uh again I'll give the respondent one opportunity is there anyone on behalf of the respondent who wants to come forward and cross-examine Mr Dan sanis seeing none we will move on U Mr tras any other Witnesses no other Witnesses Mr tras are you seeking a violation $250 per day per violation for all three violations or just finding the respondent in violation of all three code provisions and then just $250 a day after 30 days the latter okay yes all right anything else Mr tras no sir all right uh let the record reflect there are no members of the public here but I'll go ahead and say are there any members of the public who want to come forward and provide com public comment in regard to this particular violation of this property all right seeing none we'll go ahead and close public comment based upon the testimony and the documents and the exhibits of the city I'm going to go ahead and find that the property is in violation of the three city code Provisions that were set forth in the notice of violation based upon the testimony of the city I believe that 30 days is a reasonable time period to come into compliance and thereafter there'll be a $250 a day fine on this property all right let's move on to the next one on the agenda which is case number 2023 3683 for the property located at 301 boka sea Avenue is the city ready to proceed uh yes we are but I just want to bring to your attention that this property came into compliance late Friday afternoon I found out this morning um the property owner did obtain a building permit for the fence that was issue at issue in the case and he has paid for the permit therefore it is not we're not moving forward with this case based upon his compliance um as a Fray afternoon all right do you need me to enter any kind of order or anything like that I don't believe so no just remove it from the agenda all right we'll let the record reflect that that property is brought into compliance prior to the hearing therefore it's removed from the agenda just to make sure I see that there was a case 2023 37 17 for the property at 14361 go Boulevard I note my agenda that says canel is there any business that I need to take up on that particular matter today no that matter was removed from the agenda because of the fact that there was a code notice issue that I wanted to correct before we move forward on that particular case and that's why it was removed all right great we'll move on to the first matter for old business which is case number 2023 36 08 for the property located at 572 John's Pass Avenue this was a mo i construed as a motion for extension of time uh this is a situation where the uh I believe it was the owner of the property respondent of the property sent an email to uh my office on July 9th 2024 I immediately forwarded it to the city and the City attorney asking that it be put on the agenda for today uh so Mr tras I'll let you go first as to how the city would like to deal with this and then if anybody shows up we'll hear from them as well sure I I did want to let you know that even though there was no one in the audience this was properly noticed for hearing um the uh notice went out on the 22nd day of July um the property owner Mr hul did in fact uh receive the notice of hearing um I got the green card in hand I'd like to walk down and hand it to you want to let you also know that the property was posted um and an Affidavit of service was also in the packet all right great thank you for handling the notice I'll go ahead and just for the record put in as exhibit number one Pages 91 through 96 and exhibit number two will be the green card that I note is signed by a person who here appears to have the last name of hul I'll mark that as exhibit number two right so um just to give you a little bit of background in this case um the special magistrate held a hearing on October 23rd uh 2023 the property owner's contractor appeared at that hearing um and he presented on behalf of the property owner the property owner was cited with two different Co code sections dealing with the requirement of a building permit um the um special magistrate entered in order on October 31st um requiring compliance on November 30th um and if it was not in compliance that a $250 a day fine would be issued for every day thereafter there was a follow-up special magistrate hearing on May 20th uh where the special magistrate considered compliance or non-compliance at that hearing non-compliance was found um since the compliance date on November 30th 2023 there have been 235 days approximately eight months uh where the property owner has not brought the property into compliance as for the ordinance that uh Mr hulum was referencing I I've got a copy of that I'd like to provide to the special Magistrate this ordinance um was discussed numerous times before the city commission and had its first reading before the uh Commission on May the 8th and it was adopted on June the 12th this ordinance does provide for some relief for um outdoor kitchens um this is the uh information I believe Mr hul is bringing up in his email to you uh that he wanted to um address the new code section to see whether or not he could come into compliance there has been some uh discussions with City staff relative to that um and Mr hul mentioned some of that in his email to you um as to what he is or is not doing uh um that being the background it's the city's position that Mr hul um should not receive an extended compliance date because we believe that if you extend the compliance date that he will just have further time in which to um delay the um actual permitting approval even his discussions about something happening in May we're now in July and it's not been completed as of now I don't believe that relieving him of the compliance date will be helpful in obtaining compliance and therefore it's the city's position that um the compliance date should not be revised that upon Mr hulum bringing the property into compliance he has other avenues to take relative to the Fine whether it's a fine reduction request um or the like but having taken eight months and not brought the property into compliance we don't we think that he should be benefited by having additional time Mr tras couple things here because he notes in his email that I'm construing as a motion the $100 day fine but I thought I did $250 day fine so my missing did I enter some different order that I'm not aware of so I went back to look at that because I was concerned that too that there was a different order that may have been entered um I was not able to find a subsequent order okay um I do have the order that that I had mentioned to you that was issued on October 31st and another one following the May 20th hearing um I'm not really sure where the $100 came from yeah I'm not I'm not either let me ask you about just a couple of the more a couple of other paragraphs here uh Mr tras in regard to his statement in paragraph three that there has been an ordinance change recently that now allows for outdoor kitchens I've I've given this ordinance a glance but I want to understand the city's position on that is is this a situation where number one is he accurately saying what this ordinance says and number two is it a situation where as it relates to the outdoor kitchen he just needs to call how would he remedy that I mean words how would he be brought into compliance if it says what the ordinance says what he says it says so he'd have to apply for the building permit and get it approved okay so you still even under this ordinance his statement that now so it's allowed but you would have to apply for a building permit in in this case an after the fact building permit for his existing outdoor kitchen correct um and I would bring your attention to section 110- 491 of the ordinance dealing with outdoor kitchens um and it has some specific requirements in it um so for example outdoor kitens must follow the setbacks for open accessory structures provided in this division we don't know exactly where it's located we believe that it's in the setbacks and it would not be permitted it would have to be moved uh the counter Stu countertop structure cannot exceed a height of 36 in from grade and cannot be larger than 50 ft in area uh they would have to provide us with that information in the permit application uh the kitchen must be permanent and meet the requirements of section 94-1 140 if the outdoor kitchen contains a sink it must be connected to a sewer line with an inline isolation valve that would require a permit electricity must be isolated with disconnects from the primary structure that would require a permit Plumbing lines must have a backflow prevention that would require permit any sewer and Electrical Plumbing must be shut off during during any name storm event obviously that speaks for itself but there are a number of um even though outdoor kitchens are allowed under this code section there are other requirements that have to be met and he and this owner has not met the requirements has not applied for a building permit even though he references a contractor and and feel free if you need to reference the city staff on this one but as we sit here today he has not applied for a building permit for this after the fact building permit for this kitchen so we don't know whether or not as it's built it would even apply this code Prov he would comply with the new code provision correct I would I would ask for maybe Marcy or or Mr D santis to answer the question relative to exactly where the application is and its process because there have been discussions so I would call Miss Forbes um and you've been listening to the conversation between me and the special magistrate about this issue can you Enlighten us as to where we are in the application process with Mr hul on this out Kitchen yes so um I have heard from the contractor and the property owner they were asking for some clarification about the code um this was as recent as last week and so I provided them that clarification but they have not circled back around to provide me with anything via email uh nor does there appear to be a permit in MGO I checked this morning okay what what what was the acrm you used oh sorry MGO it's our permitting Software System okay my government okay so we're waiting for information on them and they still have to apply for the building permit in lat's terms okay yes okay and I mean I think that's consistent with what he's saying here is he's continuing to work if I'm now looking at the one two three four the fifth paragraph that he's continuing to work with the city officials which is good the the next one indicates next paragraph says it was agreed during the meeting that my contractor would take measurements of the kitchen along with particulars involving electrical and plumbing hookups and provide that and provide to miss Forbes along with a survey of the property to determine compliance Miss Forbes has he has he done what he said he was going to do in in that particular paragraph they have not been able to provide that data yet all right okay and and we don't know as we sit here today whether or not what he has built compli with the new section 110- 491 is that a fair statement correct yes he did allude in his email that there may possibly be some size uh issues that he may have to address so it it um he mentioned that but nothing specific yet sure and Mr TR I'm G to ask this question to you but please defer to the city if necessary the there was a third violation in regard to this property and it dealt with fcing around the pool that is in compliance that is in compliance okay so Mr TR if I understand the city's position on this it's that it would not be appropriate for me to Grant the motion for an extension at this time because he doesn't he hasn't applied for a building permit and we don't know whether or not what he has built there will comply but what would be more appropriate is after he's in compliance to come back and seek a lean reduction that's our position correct all right Mr tras anything else on this one no thank you okay I'm going to deny the motion for extension of time I'll put in my order of course that I reserve jurisdiction to consider a lean reduction once the property is in compliance Mr tras can you please prepare the proposed order on this one so it says exactly what the city is comfortable with and especially since this is a brand new ordinance I want to make sure that my first ruling on this new ordinance is in compliance with the language of the new ordinance as well as the intent behind the ordinance and let the record reflect that there is no one here on behalf of Mr hul and I do go ahead and you can put this in the order Mr tras I do find that proper notice was provider provided to the respondent and an adequate opportunity to appear for today's hearing was provided all right so we have one other one again this is uh case number case number 22 20 22. 3526 for the property at 590 Normandy Road again this is a situation where the uh well I guess not again but this is a situation where Mr TV vestgard filed a motion for continuance of hearing on motion for extension of time I I guess and also filed or sent correspondents asking for some additional time he filed a motion for an extension of time to comply with magistrates order so Mr tras what's the city's position on this particular matter okay so the the way we see this is is that there is an order entered it provides that Mr VES Gart needs to comply he has he has filed this motion for extension of time to comply again this is the third one I think um that was dated July 17th after he issued this motion for extension of time which we set for hearing um and he did receive it and I've got the Green Card providing for today showing that he was properly noticed um by way of a notice of hearing and service on him by way of posting the property in City Hall and once that was received he then he didn't did file a motion for continuance of a hearing on his motion for extension of time uh to the August hearing the city has no objection to having his motion for extension of time to be heard on the next special magistrate hearing he asked for it to be after August 15th and my review of the calendar shows that our next meeting here per special magistrate is August 29th and so that would work so the city has no objection to having his motion for extension of time heard at that time all right thank you Mr TR if you can do the same thing on this one just prepare a proposed order and uh I'll go ahead for the record while you're bringing me the Green Card move into the record is exhibit number one Pages 97 through 93 through 112 exhibit two will be the motion for continuance of hearing on motion for an extension of time and exhibit three will be the Green Card showing that he received notice of today's hearing so if you can just send me that proposed order Mr tras and then if the city can take whatever steps are necessary to notice that for August 29th we will do that that'll be fine are there any other matters before me today uh not on on the agenda now all right uh that will conclude today's hearing thank you all very much thank you