Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Building Permit Violations topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Hobe Sound property owner ordered to get permits for stucco and shed, or face daily fines
Summary
Magistrate found permitting violations at a Hobe Sound property where stucco work and a shed were installed without approved building permits, ordered compliance by Aug. 29 and assessed investigation costs.
Get email alerts on the Building Permit Violations topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
A Martin County Code Enforcement Magistrate on July 16 found that work at a Hobe Sound property was completed without approved building permits and ordered the property owner to obtain permits or face a $100-per-day fine.
County investigator Kelly Switzer told the magistrate she inspected the property at 8379 Southeast Wyndham Street (also referenced as 11150 SE Federal Highway) and photographed stucco work on the home and a shed behind a commercial business that appeared to have been installed without an approved building permit. Switzer said she issued an expired-permit letter on April 7 and a notice of violation on April 28; the owner was given until May 26 to correct the issues.
The owner, Shahar Baruti (referred to in the hearing as Shahar Bhargothi / Shahir Margothey in public testimony), told the magistrate the work was not intentional and that a contractor, Jeff Walsh, was in the process of obtaining permits. He said family medical emergencies contributed to delays. "All I need is just more time," the owner told the court.
Magistrate ruling and costs The magistrate found a prima facie case and admitted county exhibits 1–13 into evidence. Based on county testimony and the owner’s statements, the magistrate ordered compliance by Aug. 29, 2025, and said a $100-per-day fine will accrue if the permit work is not approved by that date. The magistrate also ordered reimbursement of county investigation costs of $575, to be paid at the conclusion of the hearing.
Procedure notes Switzer testified the county offered a stipulation to extend time for compliance but the owner refused to sign. County staff posted notices and took follow-up photographs showing the work remained in place as of July 15. The magistrate advised the owner to pursue permits promptly and said the formal order will be issued and mailed.

