oh [Music]
n [Music] [Music]
[Music]
[Applause] [Music] oh [Music]
l
[Music]
[Music] la [Music] a [Music]
la [Music] oh [Music]
a [Music] oh [Music]
n
[Music]
and get started and call to order the code enforcement special magistrate hearings um of March 13 2025 um the way that the process works is that the county will present its case
first it will provide any evidence and witnesses that it has and you can cross-exam but you would not be able to present any evidence until it's your turn uh once the county has closed its case and it's your turn then you can present any
evidence or testimony that you have uh I'll make a decision here today if you're found in violation um you'll be given a number of days to come into compliance if you do not come into compliance by the time given you stand to have a penalty of up
to $250 a day imposed for the first time violation if you're here for a repeat violation you stand to have a penalty imposed of up to $500 a day if you don't comply within the time provided um if you do have an agenda in front of you
just bear with us we kind of have a an O our own method to our Madness the way we go through the agenda so it's not in order typically of the agenda that you have but please bear with us if you have signed in with the county you will be called I assure
you um okay so the first case case is 2511 cesm Daniel bullia Velasquez and Ley gutterz opania ASP
sorry okay so I'm going to go ahead and let me swear County individuals in first anyone who's going to provide testimony on behalf of the county if you'll raise your right hand do you somly swear affirm the testimony you're about to give to be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth truth I do okay
okay now I'm going to swear them in and I'll swear you in As an interpreter separately okay do you somly swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give is the truth the whole
truth and nothing but the truth yes thank you okay and do you solemnly swear affirm that you will testify into engl from from English to Spanish and Spanish to English to the best of your ability I do thank you Ruth Goldstein program coordinator
for the building division case 2511 cesm for Daniel abula Velasquez and Lady E Gutierrez opina located at 202 Jasmine Lane in Longwood the violation charged the seminal county code chapter 40 appendix
a section 105.1 description of violation is installation of wood fence with three gates two sheds electrical Lighting on the fence awning with the pergola underneath two sheds swimming pool plumbing and electric on Accessory
structure behind the pool in the drainage easement and drainage pipe in the rear yard without the required permits for the record um my copy has two sheds twice it should just be two sheds one occurrence of two
sheds the pool permit 23551 9 has been issued but it has expired and does require renewal and inspection per the building official the same concept follows for uh permit 24- 2784 for demolition of the sheds and pergola that permit was issued but it is expired now
and does require renewal and inspection in order to remove it from the violation so let me in addition to the violations above the pool actually needs a permit as well right the pool permit was issued but it has expired and due to it being a
safety issue need inection the case summary is as followed as as follows the initial inspection was December 19th 2023 the notice to the respondent was also mailed out December 19th 2023 compliance dates and EXT
extensions provided by the building division are shown on the screen as well as the follow-up site inspections and inspections via computer the results of the reinspection determine that the violations remain on the property this slide shows the property
appraisers Ruth for me I need you to be interpreting for them okay if you'll just wait a second and let her catch up okay thank you all right this screen shows the Property Appraiser's website
that shows Daniel abula Velasquez and Lady E Gutierrez Opa as the record owners of the property this slide shows a copy of the signed certified return receipt for the notice of hearing for this hearing okay and this slide shows aerial
images of before and after the construction there will be additional slides and photos presented that are closer of the actual violations but this gives you a better idea of what we're looking at the image on the left is dated January 16 January 2023 and it
shows what the property looked like at that time in the image go back Julie the image on the right shows the construction that took place between January and October of 2023 go ahead next
slide this slide shows an aerial image from November of 2024 which shows the status of the property at that time the two sheds in the back had been removed all right this is the first photo that was taken the day that the
violation was cited December 19th 2023 shows the unpermitted fence this photo was taken January 23rd 2024 showing that the notice of violation was posted on the property due to mail being
returned this photo was taken February 14th 2024 showing the fence and the pergola the awning copy of the final letter was posted on the prop property March 25th 2024 due to return
mail and again June 21st 2024 due to return mail more inspection photos from the same day showing the fence and the pergola and Awning a stop work order was posted on the property October 3rd wait wait one
second okay I no it's okay I just you're gonna need to provide testimony to me rather than than to her so if you I'm letting him know that speak okay s thank you so if you'll just wait I'll absolutely let you talk sorry sorry
sorry that's okay a stop work order was posted October 3rd 2024 when the inspector observed additional construction taking place on the property specifically the installation of Plumbing and Electric behind the pool in the drainage easement this photo shows the copy of
the stop work order posted on the door and these photos are of the equipment in the drain ad easement you can also see the electrical on the fence which is included in the violation and the clearing of the two sheds the photo to the far right shows where those sheds
were located did those sheds originally have permits they did not so they didn't have permits then they were removed without permits correct and now they are new sheds back they did have a demolition
permit issued to them however it's it's it has expired and due to their being electrical in one of the sheds it does require inspection to ensure that it was capped off safely so getting a permit for the new
shed will that accomplish everything or do they need a demolition permit for the old shed and a construction permit for the new shed there's only the citation for two sheds on the property both of which have been
removed they remain on the violation because the demolition permit that they obtained has since expired without the required inspections so the decision was made to keep the two sheds on the violation until the appropriate permit has been obtained to correct that
violation which would be the demolition permit to demolish the sheds and the pergola but it's expired and maybe this is a Jason question if they get a permit for the new sheds that are
there does that fix the problem for the Demolition and capping of the old sheds Jason roer County Inspector to my knowledge there are no sheds the only thing that's left on the property after I inspected it and I did take these
pictures and I inspected the property was the pergola was moved to the back of the house okay so the sheds that were removed there aren't new ones back no okay okay then because the way that this the
description of the violation says insulation of a wood fence with three gates two sheds electrical and lighting so if the installation of two sheds is not a violation the demolition of the two shed
correct okay it was initially um mailed to them uh with the verbiage installation of two sheds and then the decision to remove them okay all right and Jason don't go far because I'm going to ask you afterwards
about the photos and everything so essentially basically for the sheds that were demoed they need permits to demo them because it had Electric in them now I get it yeah lost me all right this next slide these photos were also taken October 3rd
2024 shows the pergola which has been installed underneath the awning which was constructed without a permit the center photo is a closer version of the photo on the left showing the pergola that's installed underneath that awning with electric and the third photo to the far
right shows the access structure that was constructed um in the rear yard behind the AC unit which also does include electric so that's kind of like a shed is it yes it is we were calling it an accessory structure on the violation okay we weren't sure what the purpose of
it was okay next slide right more photos of the fence and the gates taken October 3rd 2024 now we've got the pool taken October 3rd 2024 again that is still on the violation due to the expired
permit more photos of the fence that were taken more recently uh February 25th 20125 this is a slide that shows the global screen of all of the permit applications that have been submitted for this partial of record go back yeah go back was the is
there a a current fence permit the fence permit is 23 I don't have my glasses the the one that's labeled fence there that's currently in PC status which means plan check um to my knowledge and Megan come
up can come up here and testify for planning but she did just approve her side of the corrections that were submitted to the applicant so the task has been routed back to building for their subsequent review so they're still working on it what it was in plan check
since the the date um the 12 2223 date is that the date it was pulled or the date that the last it was applied for okay so it has been consistently going through Corrections the last few months
and the task is as of today it's submitted back to building and Megan zeroski can provide more testimony yes regarding the corrections that were needed okay but it it you gave some response to today okay
okay okay this is a copy of the permit application that was submitted for the fence and these are these response comments are from February 18th which were current as of yesterday but are now no longer current because the permit has been going through review since the
start of this hearing okay next slide this is chapter 40 in which they are in violation of okay the recommendation is based on the testimony and evidence presented in case number 25-11 cesm it's determined that
the respondents are the owners of record of the property located at 202 jasman Lane Longwood in Seal County as determined by the Property Appraiser's records in possession or control of the property and in violation of seminal county code chapter 40 appendix a
section 105.1 it's further recommended that the special magistrate order the respondents to correct the violations on or before May 7th 2025 in order to correct the violations the respondent shall obtain the required permits for the cited violations if the respondents do not
comply with the order a fine of $50 will be imposed for each day the violations continue or are repeated after compliance the respondents must contact the inspector Jason Rucker to verify compliance I've presented a copy of this presentation to the clerk and request it
to be entered into the record okay so before we get there Jason if you will um um did were you the individual who took all of the photos in the um presentation I took the majority of them
some of them were done by the previous code enforcement Vicki outway okay and are they were they then U photos of record that are in the the records of the county okay
um and you have personally witnessed and um seen each of the violations that have been indicated here correct yes I've been on property I met with the owners on site okay okay do
you have any objection to the document this document being placed into evidence okay um good afternoon yes so he's asking um what exactly um showing because everything is demolished so he's asking exactly what he has to do
to be in compliance um okay before we get there I need to know whether he has an objection to these documents being entered into the record from the outside I think the page
n so he's saying that the perola was constructed when he purchased the home that doesn't matter so we we will get to your testimony but I need to know if you have an objection to this document no no no no no okay I'm not I'm not sure
what you're doing but I need you to stop okay okay okay yep everything everything perfect then I will go ahead and accept this into the record as evidence okay now it is their opportunity to present
so he's saying explaining that the perola was placed exactly how it was when he purchased a home okay [Music] okay so the fence in the back he did not
place that himself self he only replaced pieces of it so he did not actually construct it and put it so he's saying when he replaced it he placed the exact aligning with the neighboring fences as well so he's explaining that the only thing
he did that he took the permit out for was to replace pieces because of a bear problem they had um to replace them so the page with um sorry the one that's on the screen one that's on the screen he's saying that
that accessory structure um has electricity to prot so it's covering the pool equipment okay because of its electricity so they believe it was dangerous to have that in the open Okay um
okay yes so he um he took down everything that was in violation um but he also has a letter from his HOA approving whatever construction he did um it was given to the depart buildingart he gave it to the building
department yesterday with his permit on page 14 the photos next he was just explaining that um those pictures were taken when they were cleaning everything
and closing any connections for the pool he didn't know he had to ask permission to demolition he apologizes he did not know it was his first home and he admits his errors but he did not know it cost him a lot of money to build
and to destroy but everything is removed no no everything's not removed the pool is there the fence is there the shed is there the pera is there so the perula he's explaining that he
did not put that perula there so was the pergola part of the original permit for the house number five a number five so he did put like support wood additionally to the perula that he had that was already there I you even if the
pera was there it got relocated so when you relocate it you would have to have a permit to relocate it but then did he put it back where it originally was no he put it up against the house and also on the fence back in 2017 there was a permit pulled for the
original fence and it never had its final inspection never got issue okay okay number five number five please is they built over can you have her go to that picture
that one so on the left he's explaining that's the original one see yep he's saying it's the same Pera so he did the awning in the violation and he's saying it's a Pergola he's saying it's the same
pergola yes the image on the right shows three red boxes at the top of that aerial image that middle red box is the pergola no okay so he just wants to make sure that you guys know that those three box at the very top are not there
anymore yep the one in the middle is now been relocated underneath the unpermitted awning and how do we know that for sure the last slide that you had up that shows the but he's saying it's not the same
one how do we know that it is no we have additional photos is it new so they're negating that that was moved under the current one so what they explain saying that that one that's attached to the home was never moved he only put additional wood
under there to replace pie one at a time one at a time one of you at a time one or the other so that per was always there oh he says he's painted it okay but it's always been
there yep so he's been there you were calling that it here yep so that he's saying the only thing he put was the three pieces P page number five the sheds and the percula in the back page number five so the the page number five the center
pergola in the back MH that's that was new at the time that wasn't something moved from your house over there okay so yeah they're confirming that those were all put themselves that those were all new nothing was removed from the home the pergula that was attached
to the home okay so the only thing that they did with the pergola that was there before was painted it and added some beams to it yep so that's what they're confirming they only put the wood on top and
painted it the one attached to the home he would like to show you live footage of his video camera at home of the of his backyard it's current it's right now it's alive no okay I don't need to see
that okay so what did you see out there that made you believe that he had moved the pergola from the house back to the backyard because the picture I'm looking at if I look at number five M number
five has both a Pergola and in that middle perola thing as well so they're both there so I don't know how we could have removed it from the home and moved it back there but they're both there was an awning and one's a Pergola I think
there's a a miscommunication in terminology of what's an awning and what's a Pergola if you look at um page 17 can we go to that Julie um the pergola that would be attached to
the back of the house a lot of the woodw repl electrical was added a roof system was added even though it's just IC Roofing it was added now we have a picture right here of this located
somewhere else remov this this is before the shed was removed but if if you look if you go back to 17 Julie page 17
please I'm sorry what what page is this okay if you take a look at the small on the on the on the left picture if you look at the small box okay you look at the right picture and you look at the small box you can definitely see that the roof has
changed so it is in violation now whether we're calling it the same thing whether they're calling it a pergl instead of an awning that could just be construction misunderstanding I don't think that was the the question because I see the
difference there but I thought you were saying that the middle box on which is that this picture over here was a portion of something that was moved over there yeah let me let me show you this picture middle box is what we were
calling the pergola which was between the two sheds M I don't think any the way that I'm that I'm hearing their testimony is that nothing was removed off the house things were added to it to make a roof on
it so this was back up against the fence and you can see that this is exactly how it is but but it couldn't have been built new we thought it was brand new he said it was that's what we but you
you all said it was moved from the house back here well it was it had to have been built at some point now he said before in his testimony that it was there before he bought the house no he said the one up against the house was there the one not up against the house
he said was new and built okay so this is the one up against the house yes since they've moved since they've moved in it since they've moved in not moved it the sh correct
okay that's not in the same place though right Jason go back to the this is a photo of what we were calling the pergola which I guess you took from the side and painted it installed underneath what we were
calling the awning and then the next photo that is what's now underneath the awning that structure was in the center of the two sheds which were removed they moved the two sheds and they moved the pergola
and bumped it up under the house and how can you see that cuz this is what it looked like before and then show the after of the back this one there you go look I can't see that that that is the same structure how how
do you all know that's the same structure okay there's there's another picture in the slides that shows the angle from where it's underneath the house oh yeah the electrical and the metal photo matches the electrical from when it was in the center of the two
sheds okay there's there's another picture to Julie can we run through the pictures real quick please okay go forward that right there back up the center picture is up against the house so
saying how you prove that that's what was in between the two I mean I guess at the end of the day it doesn't matter um okay but but because I'm just trying to see what all we've what all you have
witnessed out there I and I and I they're saying that it that that's new so if it's new construction and I'm taking them at their word that they had new construction back there not just something that was
moved if they built that pergola new there and tore it down versus built that pergula and moved it what kind of permit is needed for that operation it still would be a permit for
no demolition though for it no you know what I'm saying like was it hooked into any electric the demolition is for the electric right and so was this middle pergola hooked into electric yes it
was I'm not aware of that but yes there saying Megan zorski for Planning and Zoning um I have an aerial from 2023 on our GIS that shows there was actually no structures there at all up against the house if you
would like to see that up up against the house correct where this proposed awning SL pergola against the house there's nothing in that area on our aerial imagery from GIS as of 2023
but they gave evidence if you turn to page five they provided evidence from an aerial from 2023 that does show there being something there we have multiple multiple versions from different years but what was entered into
evidence is showing something is an awning so we could have caught it in between that awning being demolished and the new structure being placed is what I'm trying to communicate to you okay is an awning was the awning
con an awning to me is something that's a temporary fixture on a home it's not a a structure so is was the image in evidence in January 2023 is that a permanent structure that was part of the
initial permit on the house that was the last inspector but to my knowledge was wasn't there that's why we called it an aw it wasn't there and there that was from the last inspector that was out there however I understand what you're she called it an awning and
I understand what you're saying um an awning would be like a tarp type structure okay and it was the roll of thumb back when management um looked at this case that if it had been there more than 6 months
it would require a permit okay so if I look at both of these pictures together there's clearly something in both of them and the something is different in both of them yes so I don't know what
he's saying all he did was add Ro like roof planks to the top of it so would that require a permit for him to add to an existing permitted
structure like that yes okay so so regardless of whether it was moved back and forth the fact that they have added on to this whether they want to
call it a Pera or an awning or whatever they have added on to something it requires a permit okay they're just confirming that they only put the pieces of wood to reinforce it it doesn't matter why they did it it's
the fact that they did it okay okay so to me that is altering the structure okay um is what it from their their testimony and your testimony I'm see that as um altering the construction
of the structure um but that still requires a permit um in addition they need to understand that even though they didn't build something they bought it that way
they're still responsible for the permit okay okay okay so in addition to the alteration of the structure the pool the plumbing and electrical the
fence all of those things need permits oh so she's saying that the pool did have the permit but now she's waiting for it to be renewed um because they had to move the pool equipment because it was in the eastment okay so is there nothing in the easement
now so the letter that they submitted from the HOA giving permission to put the fence and it says installation of fence on private easement and installation of pool equipment um their HOA gave them permission to do that okay
so if you all because you all have here that it's in a drainage easement is it in a County Drainage easement or a different drainage easement so it on the plat was jointly dedicated we did some research it's dedicated directly to the HOA the green
belt there's all also a utility easement that runs directly on top of the green belt a duel so we have the green belt issue and we have a utility easement issue so the county allows fences in utility
easements with an a stopple letter because they can be removed if utilities needs to come in and do any maintenance so the fence the fence is not temporary structure but it can be moved the the larger ISS is the ho the HOA
letter that they're presenting or might be presenting States specifically at the in the subject line that it's the fence and the pool equipment but in the body of the letter they're only giving permission for the placement of the
fence they do not specifically call out the the approval of the pool equipment because they want to visit whether or not it's a green belt or just a utility easement they're saying they move the pool equipment though however we haven't had the pool
permit resubmitted showing that and we the county does not allow any encroachments into utility easements for structures okay so that would be a pool heater uh a pool equipment the accessory
structure with a roof on it to cover the pool equipment anything that's constructed other than the fence within take the green belt out of that anything other than a fence would not be approved in a utility easement let alone a green belt which is supposed to be in its
natural unaltered uncleared state they would like you to read their HOA letter if that's possible yeah absolutely they can sub I mean I think they're going to more need that and and I absolutely will will read it and we
can take a copy of it for this proceeding but I think they're going to need it for their permit but okay so this was submitted with the fence permit already already just so you're aware and the um fence permit has been approved by zoning um specifically only
allowing the fence under that permit no additional structures um per the letter and um it is now with building we had to notify building because the fence is for pool safety and that also goes through plans examin review so it should be with the plans examiner this afternoon for
review of that fence the placement and location for pool safety Megan can you please repeat that so I can translate what you said which portion um for the F for the pool so zoning has
completed and approved the fence is placed with the HOA letter however it needs to go to the building plans examiner because on the fence checklist it states it's for pool safety to secure the pool which needs to go to a plan's examiner for review
[Music] so they're saying that somebody came out from the county to inspect and saying that they did not need the like a mesh covering mesh fence around the pool correct that is because they've applied for this fence permit which is what is going to the plan examiner is the fence
not the mesh around the pool but the fence around the perimeter of the property yep not related to it really but it's the he's saying that the gates that they have um are automatic they open close
can yep so he's just making sure verifying that the fence is with security for the pool correct that's why it was route to a building plans examiner but I will say that the fence checklist nor the site plan listed Gates so upon inspection of the
inspector because I only have what is in front of me to review when they submit the permit application they may need to revise the permit upon inspection depending on what's in the field yeah it's not automatic Gates it's not it's it's springloaded Gates that
close because the pool code requires them to automatically close okay so then the only other question that I have it is it also indicates electrical and Lighting on the fence so if the fence permit is um issued does that include the electrical
on the fence it does not from a zoning perspective it's been um between building and planning um that they have to do the electric separately because that is a permanent structure again that shouldn't be tied to a fence that's in an utility easement depending on what
it's attached to so that's reviewed separately so could the electrical be denied a per but the fence get a permit yes okay so he has no problem removing the electricity and the lighting of the
fence if you have to you know let's you need to go through the process and you need to remain in contact with the county at all times yep he wants to just go ahead and be done with this and fix this since it's been two years he's on everything that's
possible however you guys decide he'll go ahead and do it to fix the issues okay yes I just wanted to ask that um go over the electric and pull equipment in that easement one more time I just want to make sure that they
understand I don't think this is the place for that okay I I I think that that is a meeting that needs to be had and that was going to be my next question okay has the communication been difficult
um with with the language barrier so we do have a staff member um on the second floor her name is Jay we work very closely she's on my team um she understands variances setback she actually does some fence permit review for me or with me and um she's been the
one that's been communicating with them through me so basically she'll relay comments or meet with them at the counter I've met with them as well at the counter multiple times trying to explain to them the encouragment into the
easement it has been difficult we've had multiple submitt that haven't satisfied zoning review mostly due to the letter not meeting the standard because their letter previously specifically um excluded the green belt
so I couldn't approve the fence in the green belt when they didn't specifically approve the fence to be located in the green belt but the green belt aside we still have the utility easement that runs contiguously with it and that's the
issue that we're having now is that can be resolved with the pool permit the electrical and the the shed I don't know if that would that need to be permitted separately the covering for the for the pool equipment the pump house if you
will um none of those structures can encroach into that green belt whether because it's also utility easement whether the HOA approves it or not we have a utility easement okay so a utility easement
drainage easement but on know a green Bel see he's confirming they're confirming that they're saying that it does State green belt in that letter yes it does it does
okay so I'm going to find that there is a violation of the code for failure to have the necessary permits MH with respect to specifically the fence with Gates and electrical on the
fence the alteration done to the structure stru or the swimming pool with plumbing and electrical what was the exact they want to know the exact ones for the pool the pool and the plumbing and electrical and accessory
structure related to the electrical keeping it so they're saying that the pool was inspected from inspectors here in the county and that they did take out the permits for that yeah it doesn't have a permit the pool does not have a permit it expired okay speed okay
expired okay okay okay she's saying that she's been here many times to renew it she said that she came here to renew the permits multiple times but that she was not going to get the permits if she did not bring that letter from the HOA
approving the equipment in the easement she thought with this letter from the HOA she'd be able to renew the permit well apparently it was not done like that in the system so she'll need to go back and meet with the county with all of these things and have them do
that um and let her know um how to either revive that permit or apply for a new one whichever can be done see he's just asking if he can everything can be fixed with the permits I believe so however to the extent that
there is an encroachment in the drainage eement the green belt that is not permittable then anything that's in that area would have to be moved in order to get a permit and green belt and utility easement so they want to know how they
could fix that that is what they're going to need to meet with County staff okay so those are the violations and then I feel like that I I need you to come down to the county and and keep
Communication open with them and do what they ask you to do okay thank you okay so I'm I think it might take a little longer so I'm going to give you until June 11th and if you do not come into compliance by June 11th there will be a
fine of $250 a day [Music] imposed okay thank you thank you thank you thank you very much page make sure I have the right one up what do we got next thank you
Karina need some water yeah number two thank you of course no problem we got did we give him a copy of the PowerPoint yes okay you're fast dang quick okay the next case is
2425 cesm Amed and Sakina Nora Muhammad good afternoon your honor for the record McGregor love 2115 North Eola Drive yes sir Ruth Goldstein Building Division
okay case 24-25 cesm for Ahmed and Sakina Nur Mohammad located at 846 Isle point in Sanford seminal County on February 13th 2025 an order was issued extending the compliance date to March 12th 2025 with a meeting scheduled
for March 13th 2025 an Affidavit of non-compliance was filed by the inspector after reinspection on March 13th 2025 the administrative cost to process this case for the clerk totals $35.70 the administrative cost to
process this case for the inspector total $581 12 the total administrative cost to process this case to date for both the clerk and the inspector is $886,000 needed and this concludes my
presentation thank you when we were last year I guess almost exactly a month ago um we were uh the county was directed to process the permit the next day um my client submitted the plans that were sent to
you and and ahead of the last meeting uh those were um under review uh and I don't know exactly U maybe somebody from the county can provide more context because we followed up earlier this week about the status of review um my client
had actually been directed to come in sign some paperwork associated with the revised plans um and when I asked him what the status was he said he hadn't heard anything um we were sent an email that had comments from the 19th of
February that we uh that he never received um and I think that they may have had some clerical errors in them because they cited the uh the surveyor notes that you directed us you know don't control this issue um so somebody
from the county may know more about kind of what the status of the review is but the the top line is that we're still in permit review um and we we need however much time the county believes that they need to to review it okay good afternoon
Megan zorski for Planning and Zoning um we are going to respectfully ask for 60 days to complete our review um we did receive the permit has gone through initial review but after your direction at the last meeting um we have provided
documentation um to the county attorney's office and we are waiting to have a meeting with the county attorney um they want additional information before they provide um a determination on the permit and some additional things that I put into the legal work request
so based on that and knowing how slowly sometimes it can be like hurting cats to get all of the staff in a room you're not blaming it on an attorney are you no I hope all of us no coordinating all of our schedules teasing because there's there's approximately six staff plus a
county attorney that needs to be involved in the meeting um and getting all of them together I just got notification two days ago that we needed this meeting okay um and I've been trying to work on coordinating schedules and it hasn't been very easy so if we could please have 60 days to complete
our review it would be greatly appreciated perfectly fine with me all right good deal thank you that's 60 days there we go thank you so we'll see you back here on May 8th excellent thank you hopefully with a permit hope
so you're welcome okay the next matter 23 46 cesm Rico properties Brian [Applause] Reese Ruth Goldstein program Ator for the building division okay let me swear
[Music] in affirm the testimony you're about to give to be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth I do okay case 23-46 cesm it's for Rico properties lllp located at 2710 pton Drive in
Apopka Florida on September 12th 2024 the special magistrate issued an order extending the compliance date to March 12th 2025 with a compliance date of March 13 2025 an Affidavit of non compliance was filed by the inspector
after reinspection on March 13th 2025 the administrative cost for the clerk on this case totals $ 4255 the administrative cost for the inspector on this case total $714 129 the total administrative cost
for this case for both the clerk and the inspector is $1,139 34 the recommendation is the special magistrate issue an order constituting a lean back to March 12th 2025 at $50 per day and continues to crew until
compliance is reached Jason Rucker is the building inspector available for further comment this concludes my presentation well I've got good news your honor since we last met we have uh completed two of our permits and so
we're making great strides to to become comp uh however I'm not certain why we're we're not in compliance now because uh initially it was our understanding that um the only thing that we were in violation was was the second floor mezzanine that was unpermitted and uh
within the the actual structure um we have some carports that are outstanding that we're in the process of uh a PD major and a um a vacation of a um utility easement uh the utility easement became an issue throughout the process
of the PD major and it was discovered that the building was actually permitted with um the utility easement noted on the original plans that were permitted back when the when the uh the first permit was issued to build the original
structure so um I'm not quite sure how the two are combined can you help me with that um let me see my original order so it fell off this has always been for this always the beginning of
time and they haven't got to thank you the original order was related to the construction of the interior exterior Renovations including the second floor area and
canopies without the necessary permits okay so you're you're saying that the canopies were enjoined okay all right that clears it up okay my understanding was that they were two separate issues no I think they were both included in the order my mistake um in regard to the
canopies we we have uh removed the building we've done everything that planning has asked us to do we've uh went through Great Links and great cost to remove um the structures that were actually in the utility easement put up a new fence um we we're probably
$400,000 into this steal uh without exaggeration and uh I would pray for Mercy from the court in regard to these uh findes that were uring every day if they if it would be possible to wave them or at least uh consider waving them
well how far away from the final permits are they do we we're we are in the process of going through a PD major Amendment um we we initially oh yeah okay we initially had um filed for a minor and throughout the the review
process it was determined that we needed to actually apply for a PD major and the PD um change is really dependent on these carports yes you are um good afternoon Megan zorski for Planning and Zoning my understanding was We were supposed to
have um the planner here that is familiar with this project she just walked out so I'm somewhat familiar with this um due to staff meeting that we had vacates can take anywhere for from 3 to six months and the PD Amendment and I don't know if they're running them at
the same time we are they're running the project simultaneously so 3 to six months depending on how responsive they are to comments um so your compliance hearing would fall on whether or not those are
done and then their permitting process after those are completed and I think Caitlyn's actually walking in now for additional information Kaitlyn if you'll come up please and be sworn do you solemnly swear affirm the testimony you're about to give to be the
truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth I do okay um can you tell us a little bit about how the process for the the PD major that they're having to go
through how it is these carports and the permits for the carport are dependent upon that yep um so they can't um approve those permits until that PD major Amendment goes through the vacate itself is not holding up the PD
Amendment um like Mr sim said the vacate is necessary because of some old ploted utility easements that were there when the site was approved that's not holding up the amendment but it will hold up um excuse me it'll hold up the site plan okay a site plan will be needed after
the PD amendment is so there's going to be something else you have to do there's three total processes here for planning now can he do the site plan simultaneously as well at his own risk he can so the PD major amendment is going to be heard by the Planning and
Zoning um commission for recommendation and then the um the BCC will make final approval or denial what are those dates uh we have not scheduled it yet we are on our third review cycle Mr Sims has been really communicative with planing
staff about resubmitting um but there are just a few more details that we need on the plan before we can schedule for Planning and Zoning um but as soon as as soon as we can we'll we get an additional submitt um and if he's meeting all staff comments then we can
schedule okay so BC approves the the the Pud major and how much time after that is site plan review Once um once that's approved you can I mean so technically he can submit for
a site plan now um but if they deny it then he's out the money that he spent but if he if they deny it then he's got a bigger problem anyway because of all the car ports where they sit but if they're
approved um the cost of the site plan could be done simultaneously but if it's not and it's done after the the 3month period how long does a site plan review and approval take so it submits um goes to the review coordinator for accuracy
of documents I think the first review cycle is 10 business day 10 business days approximately so the most of approval um I would say honestly it could be like depends on completeness of site plan if there are any staff comments it's perfect perfect okay it
will be there's a pre-con meeting I know afterwards but you know I'm less involved with that process maybe like honestly one to two months if it's like perfect okay and then they have to permit when they're done yes so my recommendation would be six months to
bring to say six months but I yeah I so but the permits are everything's done with the permits they're just waiting for all these other processes no yeah we're we haven't been able to apply for the permits because of these processes
you can't even apply you can't even do minimum on them correct now the that didn't have anything to do with the other the other permits that we we that was fine we' completed everything inside the building okay satisfactory I might
add so the interior okay let me see my order again I'm sorry the the front of this I think was revised while while you're thinking about that if you wanted to add into your order that we could continue it based on
staff recommendation to you so that if he's not done in 6 months if we could notify you to get an amended order that way if he if he needs another additional three months because the site plan process or any of this process is taking him additionally longer we would
not need to bring him back until such time as those things are complete and then hopefully he's going through the building permit process and getting them approved so technically you don't have to bring him back if you all are
recommending um a continuance that is a staff necessitated continuance you don't have to bring him back and notice him you can know you have to notice him but you you can tell him he doesn't have to be here if he's in agreement with the
continuance absolutely so that's absolutely acceptable as long as you indicate to me that you have communicated that with him and you're providing me the notice of hearing for today's hearing and those sort of things um okay I'm going to find
that the so it's the interior and exterior Renovations those permits have both been issued and complete correct that's the addition permit that you see there at the bottom the exterior stairs is in CC
which means certificate of completion which means it's super duper done and then they have three there you go not just regular done just super super done they been certified done okay so I'm going to find the
interior you love me don't you exterior help you are thank renovation permits to be in compliance and they did to back up what he said they did remove some of those
exterior canopies that were in the easement I think but they did all of that in accordance with whatever right that was all good to go the only one that remaining is the one can in the three carports that that structure there okay the only one that we haven't
received a permit for but as I understand that might be part of the p& major site plan Amendment too so we always was permitted on the original drawing wasn't it I don't believe so no it's and so were those those car ports
are okay go through the ports these are the different carports here there's three of them in different locations on the property yeah and I think we referred to them kind of as canopies but yeah they're that yeah those are the we're calling them
carports they can be called can whatever you prefer okay okay okay so I'm going to find the interior and exterior renovation um permits have been received and you're in compliance as far as that goes and that the carports um still are in need of
permits um however you're going through a process that is necessitating um a continuance and I'm going to Grant you a continuance through September 10th thank you um and then the compliance hearing would
be held on September 11th perfect thank you so much thank you all right third times charm right thanks be good [Applause] than K's gone
think they talk you would have found it you spent like an hour looking at those aals I know we were hoping it was gone that was crazy that one that waser okay next case
2447 cesm am Armando cero and we will also hear 2449 cesm backto back Armando cero as well you don't care and I to fight for it who goes first yeah I want to see it
right here got my boots on thank you and ma'am if you'll state your name for the record please Maris Molina you Marissa Molina is that
okay Miss Molina if you'll raise your right hand please do you solemly swear for the testimony you're about to give to be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth I do thank you thanks Ruth Goldstein program coordinator for Building Division case
2447 cesm for Armando P cero located at 170 East Third Court in Chul Leota seminal County Florida on November 14th an order was issued giving the respondent a compliance date of March 12th 2025 with a meeting scheduled for March 13th 2025
an Affidavit of non-compliance was filed by the inspector after reinspection on March 13th 2025 the administrative cost to process this case for the clerk total is $188 15 the administrative cost to process this case for the inspector total
$682 66 and the total administrative cost to process this case for both the clerk and the inspector is $870 181 recommendation is the special magistrate issues an order constituting a lean
retroactively to March 12th 2025 at $250 per day and continues to acrew until in compliance building code inspector Jason Rucker is here for further questions this concludes my presentation okay so
no per no permits have still been received the slide on the screen shows that there there are two permit applications currently in PC status which means they're under review that top one for the Leni Edition is permit
25-3 346 3465 and alteration permit 24- 8073 yes Y and are those the only two permits that are needed I would need the inspector to answer that I have not had a chance to review
the scope of work in the plans associated with that alteration permit okay so Jason if you'll provide me with a testimony related to what what still is outstanding on the property and any photos the shed and the
pool have been demoed so the permit for that is um should be completed that's issued yeah yeah um this alteration permit yeah the alteration permit is not completed and and it still remains on the property when I last inspected it so
they would still need to uh complete those other two permits so for the lenai Edition which is the exterior construction and then some interior construction there's also a pool enclosure that has not been permitted
and there's no application for that and if that is going to be torn down does it need a permit I don't know if it's electric there's nool there's no electric so no okay so they could just remove it to come into comp attached if it's attached to the
house we would need to see it a permit okay okay so but to come into compliance they could remove it as well MH okay yes ma'am interior well I'm here to repres
to be for them because they couldn't be here but um they told me that the one thing that was spending for them was a conversion from the multif family to the single family that that was going to be resolved by enclosing the outside stairs
and that the blueprints have been submitted the architect has signed them and the count is reviewing that as we speak they understood that the other part of the pool the pool have been covered so they
understand that that comp meets a compli for that part and they needed more time to finish the part of the stairs The Filling of the pool H is now in compliance because of the demolition
permit that they applied for right there 24-11 102 says Pi status that means it's been issued there are still inspections that they need to schedule but yes that does correct the pool portion of the violation not the screen enclosure or
the interior alterations or the addition yeah the the screen en closure also the permit was uh submitted which do you know which one of those permits on the screen is for the screen
enclosure I would say the laai you'd have to look at the plans but I I don't think that that's it either way it's not issued yet right it's not issued and they're not
um and so they've submitted to an architect they submitted the permit for the L for the screen enclosure the stairs to being part of the house they submitted the blueprints to the architect can can you show show a
picture of what this is pictures need you there that that's the screen en that's the screen enclosure and then the renovation was that additional top back Julie area yeah there's stairs if you see there's stairs
in the back and then the the the renovation upstairs making it a multif family okay okay all right those Corrections are being submitted under the alteration permit application okay the one that's called a Leni Edition um
uh that's for one of the screened enclosures they have a couple there's two of them one that used to have a pool it's now been filled in and then there's another side of the house that has a screen enclosure it's got Turf on it astro turf on it now you can scroll
through those photos Julie and it'll pop up can you do and a roof can you do two of those in one permit or do does each structure have to have a permit the alteration permit could be
included with the lenai portion because it has a roof and it if it's structurally attached to the house um that's typically how we've been treating those between building and planning that anything that's connected to the house as a quote unquote addition which would
be the stairs the Second Story and the Leni and potentially even the screen room if it's attached to the home all of those could be permitted under the same alteration permit do you know if the screen room is attached to the house ma'am
the pool screen the pool screen is I mean it's outside right where the pool used to be or but was it attached to the home it's Bri or is it detached the pool one there is a door
like in any pool there a door to the pool area so it could be attached to the roof yeah and this picture it it's showing that it is attached if you look at the brick which would that would need to be permitted it anyway um if you look all the way
through where the the artificial turf is to the other side it's attached to the eve of the house on the other side Oh I thought you were saying that the turf one wasn't the pool one that that was a different one it is yeah that is I think that's what they're calling the Leni
Edition we have to look at the plant the site plan itself okay and then the pool screen is different completely correct the first photo that had just dirt they filled in in the pool with dirt so now it's just flat and dirt okay and that permit U ma'am just for your knowledge
for the um lenai is in submissions they submitted it just a couple of days ago it has not been routed for review by any staff member okay so I have not seen a site plan or any plans for the for those structures so have had there been any
communication prior to them submitting so I've had a few meetings with the property owner and the design professional trying to explain to them that the and this ties into car's case
as well um with the addition on the second floor that makes it multifam that staircase needs to connect interior living space of the first floor to Interior living space of the second floor um the plans continue to show them
even though the stairs are enclosed it is not connecting living space to living space um I spent a significant amount of time on a teams meeting communicating and showing them if you could put it here you could put it there to connect
in to tie the living space to visually show them it has to go either a door either like you've got to have some connection into the house or you've got to make a connection into the house to connect the living areas the other option that was provided to them was to
convert to leave the stairs open and convert the upstairs floor to an accessory dwelling unit they have opted not to take that route so in order to convert it the way they're applying they need a living space to living space and that has not been accomplished even the
most recent submitt was this week that I reviewed and it's it's showing the stairs enclosed but it does not make it a single family residence okay so do you have anything further to add ma'am no you not okay um
I'm going to find that the violation still exists on the property um unfortunately I had given them six months five months to come into compliance to begin with they had five months to um mean it was a very basic um
ask and I believe that with the testimony related to having meetings and the submittals continue to be um the same that that um there's really no sense in me giving additional time that
they need to I'm going to um ratify my prior order of November no my amended order of oh it was November November 18th
2024 and I'm going to impose the fine of $250 a day beginning on March 12th 20125 I'm also going to
impose the costs associated with this case of $870 and 81 CS to be paid within 30 days or they will also be imposed as a lean against the
property um special magist are you reading the right one maybe not I apologize no you might be right nope I skipped over sorry about that 88685 ises that sound
right or 8 SE 561 no I'm sorry 8781 can you go back to the C screen we're on 24 47 cesm
correct yes yes so 870 81 yes okay that's car my bad to be paid within 30 days okay thank you thank youas thank you yes and we have the
ma'am we have another case are you the representative for this case as well for carot no it it's his it's your same Armando cero [Applause] yes it's case
2449 cesm [Applause] car you were sworn previously yes ma'am okay Officer Hill suo County Sheriff's Office code enforcement east region this is case number 2449 cesm respondent
Armando P cero located at 170 East Third Court in chiota violation charge with someo County Land Development code Chapter 30 part 11 section 30182 use is permitted a multif family dwelling is not a permitted use in an R1 zoning
District my initial inspection was October 12th of 2023 the special magistrate orders were for November 13th 2024 and March 12th 2025 my follow inspections were November 13th 2024 and yesterday the results of
my inspection is the violation of a multif family dwelling remains on the subject property the next few photos are going to be from the inspections per the special magistrates order with these were taken on my initial inspection back in
2023 same date these were taken for the first magistrate order still not in compliance these photos were taken yesterday there is still no connection to the bottom part of the residence the suggested recommendation B
by the code enforcement officer based on the testimony evidence presented in case 2449 cesm ster that the respondent Armando p cero is the owner of record located at 170 East third Court in SEMO county is determined by property appraisers records in possession of
control of the property and is in violation of SEMO County Land Development code Chapter 30 part 11 section 30182 use is permitted I am requesting the special magistrate issue an order constituting a lean retroactively back to March 12th at
$250 per day and continues to acrw until com in compliance this concludes my presentation what are the costs associated with this matter the cost for the sheriff's office is excuse me uh
$313 53 the clerk's cost $ 24781 for a total of um the new photos taken today by the officer submitted into the record as evidence no okay the photos will be accepted do you have anything you'd like
to add no okay I'm going to go ahead and um in 2449 cesm I'm going to find that the property remains in violation I'm going
to impose the fine in my prior order um of March 12th 2025 as of March 12th 2025 a $250 a day I'm going to impose costs in the amount of5 16134 to be paid within 30 days or they
will be recorded as a lean against the property thank you um can I ask you a question yes um all these fines will they get a letter letting them know that they have to pay all these things yes they will get an order in the mail okay
thank you thanks okay 2457 cesm Marquee Longwood LLC oh in compliance this is a good news one this
is happy happy one good afternoon good afternoon hello Ruth Goldstein program coordinator for Building Division thank you case 2457 cesm property owners are marquee Longwood LLC property located at 855
North US Highway 1792 in Longwood seminal county is in compliance okay in my original order were there any continuances it was just complied with straight Affidavit of compliance was
filed by the inspector after reinspect February 11th 2025 the compliance date was March 12th so they came into compliance prior to their compliance date you get to go home goodbye thank you that's all you're done oh really
you're done well we do want to apologize you know for our non-compliant tenant that was on our property and we also wanted to uh say how much we appreciate semal County's efforts and working with us to correct these violations and we do look forward to rebuilding our positive
relationship with you guys that we've had in the F in the past and look forward to the future well it's rebuilt as far as I'm concerned you did a good job thank you thank you 24 CE um 70 cesm who's going next
2460 no 70 got it thank you oh hopefully with Goldstein Building Division case 24-70 cm Lord forgive me for butchering this name cyntia El Graco and John F
scaglione at property 710 wine Drive Sanford and seal county is in compliance the case was originally heard by the special Magistrate on December 12th 2024 and an order was issued giving the respondents a compliance date of March
12th 2025 with a meeting scheduled for March 13th 2025 an Affidavit of compliance was filed by the inspector after reinspection on January 28th 2025 the administrative cost to process this case for the clerk totals $128 49
the administrative cost to process this case for the inspector totals $556 126 the administrative cost to process this case for both the clerk and the inspector total $684 75 recommendation would be to issue
an well that's not right well you're in compliance as well and I didn't have to continue you so you get to go home too wonderful thank you thank you say pay in 30 days C 2471
CSM Mary Beth and Tyler Carlson yes thank you [Music] Ruth Goldstein program coordinator for seminal County Building Division case 24-7 CM Property Owners Mary Beth and
Tyler Carlson at 161 Alder Avenue Altimont Springs Florida this case is now in compliance it was originally heard by the special Magistrate on December 12th 2024 or with an order issued giving the respondents a compliance date of March 12th 2025 with
a meeting scheduled for March 13th 2025 an Affidavit of compliance was filed by the inspector after reinspection on March 3rd 2025 the administrative cost to process this case for the clerk totals $986 the administrative cost to process
this case for the inspector totals 81067 the administrative cost to process this case for both the clerk and the inspector total $993 County recommendation is the special magistrate issues an order imposing the administrative costs totaling $99. 33 and require these costs
to be paid within 30 days or the fine will constitute a lean on the property and you are in compliance as well and I didn't have to continue you so you get to go home as well okay thank you very much I want to thank Megan and
everybody for all that help thank you very much everybody's been very kind thank [Applause] you wait tell Vicki okay we need to tell Vicki she came complain that's right
and no one's here for 2479 cesm let's go through that one real quick thank you thank you oh this is my okay so this one's in
compliance with no um continuance and so it's complied as well done not yet I mean but yeah coming up oh I don't know I'm not
sure she doing yeah okay okay next case 2476 cesm what page is that on 2476 76 me too did I say 76 yes
okay thank you Ruth Goldstein program coordinator for Building Division case 2476 CM property owner is Michael S shidan located at 1760 mullet Lake Park Road in Geneva semal County
Florida this case was originally heard by the special Magistrate on January 9th 2025 and an order was issued giving the respondent a compliance date of March 12th 2025 with a meeting scheduled for March 13th 2025 an Affidavit of non-compliance was filed by the
inspector after reinspection on March 13 2025 the administrative cost to process this case for the clerk total $796 the administrative cost to process this case for the inspector total is $569
65 the total administrative cost for both the clerk and the inspector is $648 181 County recommendation is the special magistrate issues an order constituting a lean retro retroactively back to March
12th 2025 at $100 per day and continues to acrew until in compliance this concludes my presentation and we have inspector Jason recer here for questions if needed okay and um Jason can you provide
testimony related to what is not in compliance uh there's several items out there still not in compliance the addition um pictures are there any new photos taken um before before this hear okay for this
hearing mhm uh um his designer has contacted me he is in the process of going ahead and and getting all the plans done there are some things they're going to have to do um um because some of the stuff is
covered up um but uh he's made me aware of that and we're going to do our best to work with him to try to get him into compliance um so he's still in noncompliance he's got the uh the Big Shed carport in
the in the back area that you can see all the way over on the right then the little addition in the center picture um the first picture is just another angle of the kind of like a polebarn type structure but it does
need a permit what's this property zoned a85 A5 it's A5 it's not agriculturally exempt um he has been in contact with me we've been talking we've talked several
times since the last meeting I think he's going to request more time okay since the last hearing on January 9th he started talking to you right away oh yeah okay yeah yeah when when I come last time January 9th I you'd have never told me I wouldn't have all my permits
by now but uh when I went to pull the permits they said I had to have a letter of uh a letter from the health department saying that I'm not encroaching on any of the septic system went over there come to find out
somebody didn't check a box 20 years ago when I built the house and the septic system was never final I got a CO on the house but the septic system wasn't final oh my good so they wouldn't give me my letter until I go through a whole process re repo the permit get it the
septic tank cleaned out and get it all inspected again so that's where I'm at at this point how does that happen I don't know right right okay so how much time do you think you'll need to come into compliance well
I got a septic company working on it now two months three months I'm not sure I've got everything ready to go for my permitting on 90% of everything and uh as soon as I get done with the health department
then I the state that could take some time um for the septic alone and then to get through plan review and Zoning review I don't know if he's going to need variances for any of the structures um I've seen some Aerials but without
knowing the use or the or the setbacks or anything and whether or not there's Wetlands or easements or I I can't speak to where do look like it's a division you're on acreage it's a 5 acre
subdivision that he's located in so there is there are recorded easements a lot of times over these properties for conservation areas um utility easements that are large so without doing a lot
research or some sort of pre-plan review prior to the septic letter I'm I'm in no way able to tell you how long it's going to take him to get through review okay I don't see anything wet on your property as far as
any are there any Ponds natural ponds or anything there's one back corner that they consider Wetland over on the north is that a man-made Pond or is that natural that's a man-made Pond okay cuz I'm I'm looking at the property appraiser site and there are they do
there are properties around you that have some natural but that doesn't no we would not require um an extensive setback for that we just require measurement from the proposed structure to that so that we know that there's enough room for zoning purposes between
the bank and the building so that if there is any sort of erosion that the structure isn't going to fall into the man-made Pond is your designer completed with the plans no he's still working on it okay as soon as you get that done just submit them and that that will start the
process anyway okay even without the letter from the health department correct okay okay so what I'm going to do is continue you for let's go to June 11th so that'll
give you three months and then we'll check to see where we are hopefully in that time you could you should be able to get through it's not to me like there should be anything
major um okay so I will continue compliance date to June 11th okay thank you all right thank [Applause] you oh lost I lost I lost I did too
bad I they're still for me wait you have four minutes Oh no you're 3:45 you do we got two I can talk fast do it like an auction style to the it's a boy okay this gentleman is here I don't
see oh it is so he's not okay all right so then we are 64 uh 2460 CM gin program coordinator for building division 24-6 cesm property owner is
Annabelle Fernandez located at 1982 Longwood Lake Mary Road in Longwood seminal County lost my spot in the agenda on December 12th 2024 an order was issued extending the compliance date to March 12th 2025 with a meeting
scheduled for March 13th 2025 an Affidavit of non-compliance was filed by the inspector after reinspection on March 13th 2025 the administrative cost to process this case for the clerk totals $778 the administrative cost to process
this case for the inspector total $661 46 the administrative cost to process this case for both the clerk and the inspector totals $839 128 the county recommendation is that the special magistrate issues an
order constituting a lean retroactively back to March 12th 2025 at $150 per day and continues to acrew until in compliance Jason Rucker is here for the building inspector for questions and this concludes my
presentation Jason can you please walk me through um first of all was that okay let's go back was that green card for today's hearing yes uh it was received December 31st for
today's hearing looks like it was signed 1228 that would make sense since the last hearing was December 12th so the order was sent out between the uh okay 12th and the 28th so the green card was
signed by Mrs Fernand does okay so can you walk me through Jason the the violations that remain it's the it's the wood privacy fence around the property and there still is not a permit
that has been issued for this property okay I'm going to go ahead and find that ma'am if I could speak this she's was set to we gave her this amount of time because she had to go through the variance process there was a little bit of a hiccup with the submitt um that was
submitted with the variance packet her setback was shown from the edge of asphalt to the property line not the property line so when staff that took the permit in reviewed it it was determined that she didn't need a variance when the permit came back
through I made the comment again about the variance and before she was refunded I was able to catch it that she did need the variance um that and then coupled with the fact by the time I finally got an act ual survey of the property the fence does also not meet the front property
line so she needed two variances not one which is set to go before Board of adjustments not this coming Monday the following Monday the 24th so she has done everything she needs to do to get to the point of getting the variants were just a couple of weeks behind
meeting the deadline that you originally set for her um she has picked up her permit or her placard for posting of the notice of the public hearing that was this past Friday that she had to pick that up um I did not verify whether or
not she sent the Affidavit of posting back to the clerk um but they have until the date of the hearing to provide that um otherwise we would continue it um the site plan is now complete the we are now just awaiting
the board of adjustments and then that 15-day appeal period if the variance is approved so if the variance is approved how long does it take her to get her permit issued for the fence I would be I'm the one presenting her item so I would do the letter the next day I would
upload it to the permit portal and I would um have the internal review coordinator rout it without her even having to touch it so 15 days post approval more or less maybe another day depending on my workload to get that
approval letter done um she would have a permit so if you wanted to set her for 30 days she should be compant think I can figure out how to sent her um okay so I think that probably that knocks us into May though because of the number of
days if you need 15 days after the approval and the approval is on the 24th that was going to be my suggestion with 60 days just to make sure we got everything so I will continue her to May 7th for a compliant
and okay thank you Santa Bell just Champion okay 2507 cesm Ruth Goldstein program coordinator for Building Division the next case is
25-7 cesm with property owner Lillian drberg located at 109 Champion Avenue alont Springs in seol County this case was originally heard by the special Magistrate on February 13th 2025 and an order was issued giving the
respondent a compliance date of March 12th 2025 with a meeting scheduled for March 13th 2025 an Affidavit of non-compliance was filed by the inspector after reinspection on March 13th 2025 the administrative cost to process this
case for the clerk total is $986 the administrative cost to process this case for the inspector total $916 and the total administrative cost to process this case for both the clerk and the inspector is $889
182 County recommendation is that the special magistrate issues an order constituting a lean retroactively back to March 12th 2025 at $250 per day and continues to acrew until in compliance Jason Rucker building inspector is here for
questions if no questions this concludes my presentation can you um show me the green card or how the order was received property uh the notice of hearing was posted on the property is personally served to Angela wood pardon
me on February 25th 2025 okay did she not receive the original order I don't have return but it's it was sent but but it was not was it returned return the
first did we send it right reg mail as well did the regular mail come back when you um posted the property with the notice of hearing did you provider with a copy of the order yes okay yes and who Who provided
her with this notice appearing inspector Rucker I hand delivered it she yes personally served her with it okay and um what violations still remain on the property
the the structures that were uh constructed um unpent structures including mechanical electrical Plumbing all remain is that low Barn looking type structure okay and her this is what was
included and so is the property praiser just not updated to show what exists on the property because this is gone what showing in the property appraiser is that correct do you all have the property appraiser in this slide I can speak to they're extremely
slow to update the photos and I do believe it's done as they do the reassessments on as far as what the structure looks like on the main but Jason is that structure there yes that is the actual house where they live and it is still there correct okay so these
are behind it on the side okay okay it appears that they've split the property with two residences without actually splitting the property okay that makes sense all right I'm
going to find that um in 2507 cesm Lillian dyber has been properly noticed to be here today and she has failed to show I'm going to find that she that the property is still in violation
and ratify my prior order of February 13 2025 um and I'm going to impose the fine of $250 a day uh effective and going into effect on March 12th 2025 and I'm
going to impose cost in the amount of $889 182 to be paid within 30 days um or it will be imposed as a lean against the property and that's all thank
you think that's it I [Music] sign 825 at 130 and that's all you win Alexa
[Music] [Music]