April 23rd, 2025. Before we dive into the agenda, just a quick overview of how we will proceed today. We'll do a little bit of administrative work at the beginning. Then we will swear in all of our city staff, officers, and any members of the public who want to speak on an item today. You'll stand up and be sworn in by our clerk. And then we will go through all of the cases. We'll call them by the case number and the address. And if you want to talk on a specific case, you'll have an opportunity after the presentation. On that, we'll call you up. So starting out at the outset, I've reviewed the minutes of the March 26, 2025 meeting and have approved those. And so from there we will go straight into the swearing end of city staff respondents and witnesses. So if you're going to provide testimony today. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. I'm going to put it on. that is 824 Downing Street. Good morning, good afternoon. This is case C-0258-2024. 824 Downing Street. This is the 6th about the 6th hearing that we've had because it's been continued so many times. This property is owned R2 single family residential. The owner is Casey John stepping back. The code cited is 26171 permits required. This case was found to be a noncompliance by the special magistrate on in April 2024 or on excuse me. This case was found to be a noncompliance by the special magistrate on May 29th, 2024. This case was continued several times including to the February 26th, 2025 hearing, which continued the case to today's hearing. Sorry, I'm confused, so many dates. Code enforcement was notified by the building department that there was a variance that was denied and the owner needed to return the building to the original configuration to bring the property into compliance. And on that day, in February's hearing, you found them in non-compliance and you gave them until April 23rd, 2025 to bring the property into full compliance. The board order was posted on the property on March 4th and it was certified mail to the property owner and was returned to the city on March 14th, 2025. To date, no changes have been made to the rear of the building on this property to bring it into compliance. However, it is noted that during the meeting with the building department, there was a fence that needed to be moved and the owner did take the fence down. With all this said, the variance is denied. The property is still in noncompliance. It's my recommendation to the special magistrate to impose a fine of $50 a day to run for each day. The property remains a noncompliance, commencing on today's day and continuing to the properties brought into compliance and the fines not to exceed $15,000. And the variance hearing was held in March for that denial? Yes, ma'am. It was in March 3rd and about a week after our hearing in February. Okay. And there has been no appeal request of that variance denial. It's denied they would need to just. Yeah I think that I think that was there as far as I know that was their final decision on. And do they need to submit revised permits to reconvert the structure back to the way it was with them? They'll either have to get a demo permit or they'll have to submit some revised permits to put the property into non-compliance because it's a non-conforming structure and it shouldn't have been changed to begin with whatever's added needs to go back. That's right. Perfect. Thank you. Does any member of the public wish to speak on this item? If you'll come forward and state your name and address and affiliation if you're the property owner. My name is Casey Stappenbeck. I am the property owner at 824 Downing. I do have with me just for the sake of trying to help speed things up a little bit in the explanation, a packet that I would love to give you that has a summary with photographs. We can't give it back, just no dates. Okay. Like that. So, and I don't want to take a lot of the court's time, what is important that they understand the circumstances involved. This structure originally spanned two properties. It was owned by a couple of twin brothers, one on one side, one on the other. They have an easement between the two houses of six feet on either side. The garage again went across the property line. One door was on one property, one door the garage was on the other. This was all prior to my owning this home. When I received the code noncompliance for the non-work permit, the city nor myself knew that the building was non-compliant. I went through and was advised to go through a full permit process, architectural drawings, as is building drawings, I have all of those by the way. And the building passed with the new codes or the structure, electrical plumbing. However, the setback on the eastern boundary is two and a half feet from my property line instead of a seven and a half feet, which is the required setback. And again, no one including myself or the building committee or anyone knew that this was a nine-compliant building. Somewhere along the way, someone cut that garage in half and chose to leave one wall two and a half feet from the border. Was that building on both properties legal back in the 50s or 1920 when it was built? And the easement was the, in lieu of a variance, I have no idea. All I know is that before I bought the home, and you'll see in the pictures that when I bought it, the garage is cut in half. And you'll also see what I added to the floor I raised up. I did not go outwards towards any boundaries. I stayed within the footprint of the original building itself if anything it's about eight inches less in width and length than it was. When I went through the variance process and you'll see this in the notes as well, we had a pre-planning review meeting where I met with the building staff as well as some of the people from the variance team. And Mr. Baker offered to assist me with filling out the variance and I told him, I'm new to this, I've never done this. said, I don't know problem, I'll be out. Long story short, I sent emails and the email is in your packet as well. To Jake saying, look, here's my rough draft to answer the five important questions required for variance. I was under the understanding that he was gonna review them and we were going to, you know what to mean together, make sure that these wordings and what have you met the requirements. Jake responded to my email. They clearly said this is a draft. Thank you for helping me with your meeting today and offering to help with the variance. Here's my stuff and he said, oh, you know, I'm really busy, but it looks good. Just submit it. And then when I went to the variance,, Jake wasn't the person representing at all. It was a new guy that had no idea of what was set at the meetings and what I have. So the variance was denied based on those five answers, not being, and had again, I thought I wasn't getting assistance. I would have hired an attorney for the variance. Again, hindsight's 2020, that doesn't really help me with where I am now. But, and as far as the addition to the structure, it was done long before this complaint. The complaint was for drywall work that was being done inside. That's the only thing that was going on as far as build was concerned. When I went to get the permit, they asked for an ASS is drawing and that's when they realized. After the first submittal, they said this backward setback was wrong. So I had to cut the deck in half, redo the drawings, resubmit, and then second application for the permit, they denied it for the East border setbacks being off. And I said, guys, look, we got to do a meeting. I can't keep going back and forth with architects and paying these things. And the delay that it added to this hearing were in the months because of the amount of time it took for the review of the permits and getting the... So I've been diligently working as best I can to resolve this issue. And again, there are extentions in circumstances like I showed you where it was on both properties at one time. And these are all things that should have been taken into consideration during the variance meeting, but no one gave the time to listen or hear or see what I'm now sharing with you. There was no opportunity for a bottle. There were accusations made during the hearing from the code enforcement complaint that were not true. And again, wasn't even allowed to respond to it, which to me was quite alarming and shocking. I'm asking today, obviously, at the very end of that document that I gave you, is, you know, for some sort of understanding as to what's taken place, none of this was done maliciously or intentionally to screw the city or what have you. And no one knew it was a non-compliant building. I mean, why didn't the city have copies of it used to be one building now? It's, you know, cut in half and where where was the noncompliance knowledge? I wasn't told that at sale when I bought the house. I wasn't told that until we actually were in the permit process that this was an uncomplanned building. And now I got to tear it down. And it was just like, whoa, wait a minute. I'm, I'm, I'm, so I'm asking and I asked this in the last page. My hopes are, obviously, that I'd like to accept the building as is today, with at the codes that it meets with the drawings and everything in place, and consider it not compliant from this day forward. You know what I mean? I can put that in the deed so that it stays with, you know, the easements and what have you. I've got no issues with paying a fine for my part in the screw up and adding onto it before I realized or even knew it was not a client. Or allow me, instead of waiting a whole year to apply for a variance again, allow me to hire an attorney so I can apply for the variance again in a way that I think would succeed, I mean personally, based on the information that I've shared. I've also contacted the Storch Law Firm in Daytona to ask them questions about this, as well as the Coronado group here in New Sumerna. And the Storch Law Firm group I have a meeting with on Friday, they want to review what I'm saying, and they said that they would represent me, whether it be for the variance or the appeal should our decision today not go in a good direction. It's really not about the money, but it is a $30,000 building. There's photos in there showing you the inside. I originally was building this as a granny flat from my mother. She's 84, MS. I've had her 14 years. I was going to move her into that at some points and get a caregiver to take care of. I also see that there are some state statutes coming up and June that are being voted on regarding granny flats. I don't know if you're familiar with it, but they do speak about possibly allowing these in the cities and what have you thought Florida to help with the housing shortage. So with that, I again apologize for any partners that I may have played and I really hope that somehow some some way, given the lack of knowledge on both parties part and so many of the strange circumstances involved where the house is shared one driveway and an easement from both sides to share that for egress and ingress to the two garages that existed at one time. I hope all of that can be a little bit helpful in my plea. Thank you for your time. Yeah, and thank you for the detail in the background. It is helpful. I do want to clarify the role of this board versus some other avenues that you may be pursuing with other attorneys. As the special magistrate of code enforcement, we have no control over the variance process or if a structure is nonconforming or not. That is a determination by that board ultimately the city commission as a policy matter. The role here is just to determine if it is currently in compliance or not in a reasonable time to come into compliance. What I will say is it sounds like you are following the path to have the variance application reviewed. You're meeting with law firms. Yes. So you can do. But that's only if because you have to wait a whole year before you can apply for another variance based on the laws and codes in the city. So my ask was and again I don't know if you can do that, was can I instead of waiting a whole year, work with an attorney to help me do the variance and again, redo the variance? That would be something on the city's part that they said given what I've been going through, maybe we can do that, you know? I've also reached out to the city manager, the mayor, and the assistant city manager, and spoke to them about this, and explained to them as well that, in the past, I've had issues with the city. When Collid was involved, we made it happen. People cared. They understood common sense and reality, and they worked with the tax paying citizens of the city. I don't see that right now. I see numbers and I see a lot of people that are probably here today even that don't understand why they're here and how it got to this point. This was supposed to be a simple, you didn't ever permit, get a permit, and it snowballed into a huge affair. And again, all of it has been directed by the city every single step I took was derived and asked of me by the building teams and the variance committees. Nothing I did was on my own without their direction and for them to direct me and also feel that there was a positive outcome in my future because all of them I work with said, I don't see why not. And then here we are. I understand the laws, but I also understand that there are people within them in the hierarchies and one have you that can step in in this matter and can adjust or work with me on without finding me. The one question I do have for you is on the various summons that I got it says a subject a $250 fine with a maximum of $5,000 I'm hearing through other people within the city that that's not true that that $5,000 is $15,000 and that they can put a lien on your house if you want, if you don't come into compliance, how long the lien lasts, how much it is, what happens if I pay the max? I would like to know those answers. I've called on the city for them. I've not received them. I get, well, refer to this document or refer to that. But no one can tell me, what is the actual maximum fine? What happens after that fine has been paid? What happens if I don't pay the fine at all? I need to know what the possible outcomes are before I can choose a path. You know what I'm saying? So, I will say that they're great questions. I think part of the struggle of you have not heard the exact amount. As part of it depends on the order issued by this board, the magistrate. The statutory maximum for this violation would be 15,000. So it's not 15,000, not five. But why does this hearing summons say five when it can be 15? It clearly states right on the same hearing summons that all of us get when we do a code violation. I think it's not referring to the right thing. If you look down there, you notice appearing. Just so that our notes appearing, you see if I as a special magistrate found that you did something that was irreversible in nature that That was so egregious. That even if I say come into compliance, here's a fine, it still won't offset the impact of that violation. The statute and the law allows us to say immediately you have a $5,000 fine instead of running per day. So we can clarify that in the notice of hearing. Well, it's worth the attorney felt that that should be clarified as well and it should not be written like that because that puts you guys in a shitty spot. Yeah, so that's the irreparable, irreversible section. Right. So I will say, I've got some questions for you. When you went through the variance process, it's correct that you had full permit sets prepared for that application. Absolutely. If the variance had been approved, you would have had your permits issued. Absolutely. Okay. Everything was completed, stamped, engineering, everything. And following the variance, have you talked to anyone about getting a packet of a plan set or revisions to bring it back into full compliance? So in order to bring the building back into full compliance, would cost more than destroying the building and you know what I mean I also looked at moving the building To the inner terrier of my yard more that five feet is all I need sure and they wanted 18 thousand dollars Just to move the structure and that's without being foundations put in and everything else And again, we're approaching the cost of the building Honestly, and again, it's not a threat, but if I'm going to spend that kind of money or suffer these types of things that's where storage law firm comes in place. I don't feel I have a choice if I get cornered. That's not the direction I want to go. That's not how I want to speak to this committee. But again there are common sense things going on here people. You that building was on two properties the city knew nothing that it was ever cut in half knew nothing about where the current location was or of that garage and this was a surprise to all of us so why am I being penalized for something prior owners did you know as far the setback thing, what I did was add upwards. Again, I did not affect the setbacks. I think that should be considered, or at least taken into consideration. I mean, they're willing for me to leave the nine compliant building in the exact same spot if I put the roof back to what it used to be. Correct. Meaning they're happy with that side being right there. So what's wrong with the additional four feet straight up? So that's not for this board to decide. Right, I mean with the common sense factors, I think everyone's hearing even though no one's really going to speak because it could get you in trouble. But it's common sense and I really don't understand where how we got to where we are. I would ask for an extension, even though I've had multiple already, so I could get permits, our schedule drawings, and both our variances, and have team meetings and be directed incorrectly. I would like to have an extension again. So now I can, instead of working with the city, work with an attorney to do the same things, you know, and I really think it sucks that we have to do that. I really do, I think that we're common sense people and we should have been able to handle this right here. And I told the mayor of the same thing and, okay, I'm done rambling. Thank you. What mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I for saving back I do but it's a matter of the city. I must say in the city's behalf all of this could have been avoided all of it if he would have just got a permit to begin with. And this this this city must understand that this could have been avoided if he would have got a permit first. This complaint did come in as a second story added on to the on to the building as how it came in and plumbing and electrical is what got me out there the previous year so you know I like Mr. Stappenback but it's gone on a long time. You got to speak into the mic. So again, I agree with Mr. Traw. I mean, I don't know if it's frustrating to do it. You got to speak into the mic. So again, I agree with Mr. Trauma. And we're both frustrated on the amount of time it's took to mention, in my case, the run around, the many hours are running around by direction of the city and the cost. I mean, it's been a year. I mean, last sleep, the whole night, this has been crazy. So, and again, this was all for a granny flat originally, and this wasn't a malicious whatever. And I just hope that you will allow me some extension time, so I may be able to talk with a lawyer, and I would accept any advice or whatever you that the team can offer as far as, you know, I'll appear, peel the variance that was denied. I'm not sure if I still have time and try to get a variance request in before the one years up, it'll be nice. And I'd like answers too to the, what happens if I meet the full maximum fine? You gotta get to the mic. I'd still like to know what happens after the full maximum fine is paid. I would like to know if this is a reoccurring. Now you're going to hit me again. I'd like to know about the lean. Are you really going to put a lean on that house or all my houses in Blue Sh County? There's I need to see this information in front of me from the city documented so that my attorney can see it as well and represent me accordingly. This should be public information. It is. So it's in the floor to statue. That's what guides all of our decisions. But I'll give you a quick overview and then we do have to kind of know what you'll do. I apologize for taking more time. I just want to share that I've read the statute and I've read the statutes on variances as well. and I still don't understand why it failed, because I met the vibe requirements, but Jake didn't help like he said he was gonna help. So would you like us to go over the lien, and what would occur? I mean, I would like to hear, yeah, absolutely. So this, I keep saying this board, there's just one with me. I will determine a action moving forward from here. It may be some additional time, It may be implementing a fine from that date certain. We'll find out that in a few moments. From there, if a fine is established, it runs until you are in compliance or up to that maximum set forth in the order, which would be 15,000. At that time, it is capped. It can or crew interest. You can have a lien foreclosed on. So there are some limitations that are not best for me to give you advice on because I am the special manager to the city but there is a lien foreclosure process that if you've read the statute you can see that those liens attached to all property owned by you and the state. So that is the overview of what these outcomes can occur. I would suggest going through that with independent council, like you noted, and understanding your rights, but that's the overview at the high level. Sure, sure. And what happens if I don't pay fines and ignore them? I can't advise you on that. We would. But there should be something that tells the public. Sure. Something should tell the public what happens in these cases. The size. There's that. Sorry. Bar Bob Black code enforcement supervisor. Once a lien is placed on his property, the lien is there for 20 years. It's not going to go away for 20 years unless it's paid. Whether it's by sale of the property or you pay that yourself. But it will stick to all your properties for 20 years. But if it pays, the price in the 15,000 isn't that the lean? That's the cap, yes. Then there's a satisfaction of lean. Like you're still going to have the code violation riding out there. That's not going to go away. So if you sell the property, the person coming in is going to have to correct your code violation. Whether you paid that or not. Does that help? Yes, it does. But as it was stated, that does attach to all your properties. So. And you do have the right to appeal to Circuit Court. Oh, thank you, Your Honor, for your time. I appreciate it. I'm sympathetic to the plate. My day job is the land use attorney going through that same process and it is complicated. So I think talking to someone makes sense for anyone who has questions. What we are going to do today is I understand and I'm willing to give you some time because you put together the full plan set, assuming if the variance was approved, that was the end. The variance wasn't approved, which is not a guaranteed outcome, that's a different board. So I think you deserve a bit of time to shift, I will say. So the order that we are going to enter today is going to be modified from the recommendation, which is the recommendation was $50 a day until you come to compliance. I am going to say that we are going to give you until May 15th, so next month, three weeks from now, to have a demolition permit or the permits needed to revise the structure. At that time, if you do not have the permits issued, which would be what you need to show the next step, then that $50 a day would kick in until you meet compliance. Okay, very good. So as long as I have something underway as far as a permit or... A permits issued. We need permits issued by May 15th. Okay. Okay. Very good. Thank you. So what we are going to do is revise this to say we have found the property and violation of Section 26-171A permits required. We are ordering that by May 15th, the property owner shall have a demolition permit or permit for renovation of the structure issued or a fine of $50 a day shall be implemented. Let's see, what else we need to say? It's the respondents burden to request the re-inspection to determine whether compliance is achieved after that date, if the fine begins to run. And I will say because we're giving you an amended compliance date, let's also return you to the May 29th hearing just to confirm that structure. Very good. Thank you. Thank you. All right. So this will come back to the May 29th hearing. Yes, and we'll work on the amended order. So the next item is CCSM 0535 2024 780 pine shore. Okay. Case 0535-2024. It's hearing number two. 780 pine shore circle owner is hinting properties. Zoning is R30a-family detached and attached residential. Violation is 26-171A permits required. On February 26, 2025, the special magistrate found Hinton Properties Inc and or Entity and Violation of NSP Code 26-171 and gave until April 15th to bring the property into full compliance. If the magistrate found that the violation was not corrected at this date of fine of $50 a day, she'll be in post for each day, the violation exists. The border was posted on the property on March 4th, 2025. The border was milled, certified milk that a property owner was signed for and accepted on March 3rd 2025 and Daytona Beach. To date, the owner has a permit submitted and it's in review at the building department. It's my recommendation to the special manager straight to simply continue this case to the next hearing. To allow the permit process to take place and have the owner ensure the permit is issued. If the owner does not follow through, it will be my recommendation at the May hearing to ask special magistrate to impose a fine beginning on that hearing day of $50 for each day until the property is brought into compliance with the fine not to exceed $15,000. And I have two orders I just want to clarify. You are requesting the May 28th. Yes, May. He should have it done by then. We weren't sure at first, but. Sure. Perfect. Okay. Then a question. This is May 28th. I know we just said May 28th. I believe it's May 28th. Now that I think about it. Okay. Good. It is the 28th. Perfect. Okay. Just want to make sure I'm saying that right? Okay. Perfect. Well, that sounds like good progress. We will see. Okay, good. It is the 28. Perfect. Okay, just want to make sure I'm saying that right? Okay. Perfect. Well that sounds like good progress. We will see. Is anyone from the public who's to speak to this item? They're not here. Okay. The based on the testimony provided in the evidence and the record, we will continue8 2024 2016 Woodland Avenue. Okay. This is CCSM 0608-2024. Hearing number two, 2016 Woodland Avenue. The owner is Robert F. 0608-2024, hearing number two, 2016 Woodland Avenue, the owner is Robert F. on the list of the . . . . . the committee and the committee and the committee and the committee and the committee and the committee and full compliance if the special magistrate found that the violations were not corrected by this date. A fine of $20 a day for each of the items listed under NSB Code 26914, and a $50 a day for NSB Code 802.02, shall be imposed for each day the violations exist. The border was posted on the property on March 4, 2025. The border was certified milk to the property owner, but was returned to the city by the US Postal Service. To date, there has been some improvement on the property. NSP GOD, 802.02 for the vehicle is now in compliance. Also the yard is mode and the old above ground swimming pool in the rear is removed, putting NSB code 26914 items 8 and 11 in compliance. The outside storage issue and most of the fences stood back up. However, these items remain in non-compliance. The rear structure that does not appear to have been touched and remains unsecured and in extreme disrepair. With this being said, it's my recommendation to the special magistrate to impose a fine of $20 a day for each item and noncompliance for NSB Code 26914. This would be items 2345679 and 13. That's $160 a day total, commencing on April 23rd to date and continuing for each day until the property is brought into compliance. The fine not I think Habitat was going to help the roof. Nothing came through on either one of those. I do have some recent pictures that I can give you to look at. Sure. Habitat was going to help the roof. Nothing came through on either one of those. I do have some recent pictures that I can give you to look at. Turn. This is the area. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. It's a good life, no need to stand up. But that's not as long as street rocker's the rest of the street. Yeah. Can you hear me? What? Turn me. Mm-hmm. Does anyone in the audience wish to speak to this item? When you come up, please state your name and affiliation with the site if you are the owner, neighbor, etc. I'm Penny Hall. I'm at 2020 Woodland. I'm on the west side of Mr. Jarvis. I've lived next to him for close to 30 years. And up until his wife passed many years ago, it's just gotten worse. After the hurricane, Hurricane Ian, he lived in the little mobile home RV thing on the side for a couple years. I know his health is not good, but this is an ongoing thing. It's not something that has just started in the last even 10 years. The two story building in the back is full of junk. It's a health hazard. It's a fire hazard. It's a safety hazard. We have watched raccoons come out. During the day, there's armadillos, there's snakes, there's rats. We keep my mom's on one side, she's on the east side, I'm on the west side of him. We keep ours clean. He needs to clean up. There's nothing that they're going to do if they're given extra time. There's too much. They need dumpsters. The back, that back shed that's metal. It is falling down. Once it falls, it's going to fall on my fence line, my property line. The top of the two-story building is wood, the bottom's concrete block. So the top of it, every hurricane, there's stuff blowing off of it. It's got so much overgrowth of vines. You can't see the top hardly anymore. The same with this side of their house that I see is covered in vines. For the longest time, you couldn't get to their front door. It was covered. Now they've made it where you can get to the door. As far as I know, the inside of the house has not been rebuilt. It's still half walls. And they're living in it like that. I don't know. I was told that their septic system didn't work. Health-wise, he probably shouldn't be living in it. At his age with his health condition, I don't know Wendy. I've tried to talk to Wendy. I can't get anywhere with Wendy. They've been offered help. They won't take any help. And my home, my mom's home, that's our biggest investment. And it's a shame to walk out, see their house in this condition when, you know, we take care of ours. So, they just need to clean up. I mean, that's all I'm here to ask for is make them clean up. Given them time isn't going to make a difference. It's really not. There's so much there that needs to be done. A month or two, it can't be done. They did come out and do the pool, the wall. They took the wall down. But then they also had somebody come tack up pieces of the board fence back up so you can't see. But you still can't see if you walk to the back of their property. It's dilapidated. If that two-story building caught fire, I don't know what kind of chemicals are stored in there, but it's full and it would not be good for the rest of us if it did. So I'm just asking for it to be cleaned up. Thank you. Does anyone else wish to speak to this item? Mr. Jarvis is here, the owner. Perfect. Good afternoon. My name is Robert F. Jarvis Jr. 2016 Woodland. And thank you for seeing me today. I respectfully request a delay in any fines or anything else until at least July. My boss hasn't paid me for the last three months and probably won't pay me for April either. Which leads me really strapped. My daughter is the only one that's working as far as bringing in money every month. Unfortunately, I think it's in about three weeks. I've go in for another heart surgery and I still got neck problems with the broken neck that I had. So I'm terminating my job as a license holder for J&J Security Services Corporation, because he's not paying me. I can't be financially responsible for him anymore. So that's going to really put me behind. Don't know what's going to be able to do. And I don't know what kind of procedure they're talking about, either in planning something over here to keep my heart going or they're going to try and replace the bell. They've already done that once and it didn't work. So the doctors don't know until they get in and take a look, I'm going to need more time. My daughter's the only one that's been able to do any work. I just can't help her. I'm not supposed to lift over five pounds and you know it's I can sit out there and watch her but that's about all I can do. So I would appreciate more time. I don't know what else I can do. Mike said he wouldn't, at Sam's rule of demolition, said he wouldn't take the job of tearing the building down. It was too small. For the $4,000, he said he might be able to get the price down a little bit, but it'd be several weeks or more probably in the July before he ever can get anybody out there. But I still can't raise the money for that. So I'm going to get somebody from the church. I have a neighbor, the other direction from me that said he can put up plywood along the face of the doors of the double my garage and I'll have to rent something to be able to go upstairs and do the upstairs too. And we'll apply with that in. Once again, that costs money. And if Wendy can get enough money out of her job to do that, then we'll go that way. I don't think I can borrow any money on the house So I'm not sure I want to Okay, thank you for your testimony I don't think I have any current questions right now. I can't hear. She says she didn't have any questions. You want me to go back? You can tell me you can tell. Thank you. Thank you. And I couldn't hear what Penny said in my next door neighbor. So probably true, but I just can't. Couldn't you're back there, okay? Sure. So I am very sympathetic to everything happening on the site, both for the neighbors and the property owner. I think that, unfortunately, based on the time frame we've had so far, additional time and the form of a month or two will not change the ability to correct the major violations that we see there. I do see that the suggested action is to reduce the typical fine to $20 a day for the outstanding violations. And I will note that if the fine is established, and I know property owners are of hearing, so it'd be great if we can talk one-on-one after or staff can to go through what the lean review process looks like after compliance for lean reduction after it's in place. But I think at this time, the action that we will take is we will find the property in violation of these dated sections of 26-914, subsection 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, and 13. We will implement a reduced fine of $20 a day for a total of $160 a day, commencing on April 23rd, 2025 until the property comes into compliance or a limit of $10,000. We will ask the respondent to coordinate very closely with the city on steps. And then once compliance is achieved, I will note again that there is a lean review process for a reduction that can be reviewed. Thank you. Thank you. next item on our agenda. PCC SM0638 2024 103 North Orange Avenue. Good afternoon. Good afternoon. This property on 326 2025, the special magistrate, continued this case until today's hearing. The property owner Peggy, W. Garriks, and or entity in violation of section 26, dash 171A permits. It was given until 423, 2025 to bring the property in full compliance. If the special magistrate found that the violations were not corrected by this date, a fine of $50 a day Shall be imposed for each day. The violation exists. The board order was posted on property on 327 2025. The board order was mailed certified mail to the property owner and was signed for and accepted on April 11, 2025 at 341 PM. To date, the permit is still in review status. According to our system, it is scheduled for a building permit review on 526-2025. However, as of about two days ago, I did check the system again, and this is when I wrote this script here. As of the staff to come in and ask the staff to come in and ask the staff to come in and ask the staff to come in and ask the staff to come in and ask the staff to come in and ask the staff to come in and ask the staff to come in and ask the staff to come in and ask the staff to come in and ask the staff to come in and ask the staff to come in and So I contacted Stephen Clancy of Clancy Construction who has taken over the job, this was not originally their project, they're trying to correct the issue. And Stephen is now aware that there. Something got triggered by it. And he's actively working to try to correct it by producing a survey. Whatever else is still needed. So due to that, it is my recommendation to the Special Magistrate to continue this case until the May 28th, 2025 Special Magistrate hearing to allow time for the city to review the permit on 5, 6, 2025. Hopefully everything's in by that time, and it doesn't push a date back. Perfect. What sounds like they are steadily working. They've got a little homework to do. But based on that testimony, we will continue this case. We'll first. Is there anyone in the audience who wishes to speak on this item? No, good. Okay. Then hearing none, we will continue this case to May 28th, 2025. We return to the special magistrate for further review. Thank you. Thank you. That brings us to our last item to be heard for the day, which is CC SM09162024602 Ball Street. Good afternoon. Okay. This property is zoned R2 single family residential on December 21st, 2024. Co-compliance received a complaint regarding multiple vehicles being parked in the rear yard with no tags. On December 26, 2024, an inspection was conducted and research was done. The property was found to be in violation of the end development regulations 802.02, storage on residential lots, and sections 26171A permits required and 26172 penalties for work commencing before permit issuance. On January 14, 2025, a follow-up inspection showed a new fence had been installed in the rear yard with no evidence of permit. On January 28th, 2025, a notice of violation was posted on the property with an initial compliance date of February 26th, 2025. A copy was mailed certified to the property owner and was signed for and accepted on February 18th, 2025. On January 31st, a copy of the notice of violation and notice of hearing was pushed down the front door of the property. On February 4th an application for a permit for the fence was submitted but nothing for the two structures. On February 24th another application for a permit for the two structures was submitted. The original hearing was scheduled for March 26, 2025. Since there had been permit application submitted, I allowed for additional time and rescheduled the hearing to April. Then on March 27th, I conducted another site visit and found that all but one of the vehicles had been removed from the rear yard. That one vehicle remaining had a current tag on it. On April 10th, 2025, I checked on the status of the permits. The permit for the two structures had been issued. And then as of today, I got an email from one of the permit tax telling me that they had come into the office and corrected what needed to be on the other one. But it still hadn't updated in the system yet. Therefore, it is my recommendation that the Special Magistrate find Willard Borer and Joanne W. Borer, revocable trust, and or entity in violation of the land development regulations 802.02 storage on residential lots and section 26171A permits required. Since the violations were not in compliance by the original comply by date of February 26th. I recommend giving until May 1st, 2025 to bring the property into full compliance and if the owner does not come into compliance it is my recommendation to impose fine in the amount of $25 per day until the property is brought into full compliance. the fine amount, not exceeding 15,000. But again, I believe that the permits will both be issued and then it'll comply prior to that date anyways. So, got it. Perfect. So as of today, the automotive vehicle storage is resolved and just not resolved by that former compliance date. Correct. I just want to clarify because the order I will enter will say exactly what is currently not in compliance. So I want to tweak it just to say it was not and it is now, but the permit is still outstanding. So it's just the fence permit left and it sounds like that's almost complete. I'd like to find it in violations. Correct. The structures were built without permits. I discussed the violations with them, with all the vehicles, and then they built a fence without permit. So I want to make sure that they understand that if they do this again, it'll be a repeat violation. Right. And we will make sure that that's called out for both the automotive vehicle and the permit required. Does anyone in the audience wish to speak to this item? If you'll state your name and address or affiliation with the for the record. My name is Joanne Boyer. And you're the property owners. Yeah, where the property owners? Yes And do you have any testimony you want to provide beyond what the complaint was a neighbor like me The neighbor lady said we was on her property by You know build the pants But we weren't so she came out and was very I'm sorry. Root. Root, I'm sorry. Root, I'm sorry. Root, I'm sorry. Root, I'm sorry. Root, I'm sorry. Root, I'm sorry. Root, I'm sorry. Root, I'm sorry. Root, I'm sorry. Root, I'm sorry. Root, I'm sorry. Root, I'm sorry. Root, I'm sorry. I built the pants, but we weren't. So she came out and was very rude. A rude and rude. And we still have got to survey where we were on our property. But she doesn't seem to like. And we did have some cars and stuff there. They're all there. They'd been there, but they have licensed them now and been removed. And the complaint about the buildings was that we bought the buildings. We didn't know we had to have a permit and they told us, as long as they didn't have a foundation, we could. That wasn't so. That wasn't so. And we found a building for a house. Since 2008. 2008, we got a deed for it. And we come and go from Florida. Yeah. And spend our money here. Well, it sounds like you guys have done most of the work needed to come into compliance. Yes. And the fence permit is the last thing left. And so, and that is almost done. Okay. And we got it with permits. Except the fence. Except the fence. Except the fence. And then, and then, and then, and then, and then, and then, and the other neighbor, Cameron said, you know, and, and build the fence for. Sure. So. and the neighbor, Cameron said, you know, and built the fence for it. Sure. So, what we are going to do today is I'm going to phrase it as a stern, written warning, which is that we're going to provide until May 1st for the fence permit to be issued, and we think it will. If so, then your, oops, in compliance, but you will get a note that these violations occurred previously and why that is important is that if you do something else without a permit or you begin to store vehicles without tags again, then you would come back before this board and would be immediately fined instead of being given time. But we've got your tags and everything in the car. So, certainly. And everything in the yard's mode. Perfect. You want to see the lady next door? I'm sorry for neighborly troubles. So that's, I will summarize that in a moment. But it sounds like you're almost done. You'll get a record of the former violation. But it's looking like it will be resolved before a fine. It's sending mail there and everything and we don't know what they are. Thank you. Thank you. All right. So based on the testimony and the evidence and the record for the property located at 6.02 Ball Street. We are going to find that as of February 26, 2025, a violation existed of two land development code sections, LDR 802.02 storage on residential lots and section 26-171A permit fired. We are going to note that as of the date of today's hearing, April 23, 2025, the storage on residential lots is incompliance, but that a repeat violation would be treated as a repeat violation of the Land Development Code. And that the Section 26-171A per cent is not currently incompliance. We are going to provide the respondent until May 1, 2025 to come into compliance and notify the code inspector and request a reinspection to deferment compliance. If they are not corrected by that date, then a fine of $25 a day may be imposed. And if this site the final date of the final date of the final date of the final date of the final date of the final date of the final date of the final date of the final date of the final date of the final date of the final date of the final date of the final date of the final date of the final date of the final date of the final date of the final date of the final so we will move on there's no repeat business no lean amnesties any staff reports no staff report okay well then with that we will adjourn thank everyone