Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Development Compliance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Martin County approves stipulation with Mariner Village HOA over protected wetlands, street trees and preserve upkeep
Summary
The magistrate approved an agreed order requiring Mariner Village Property Owners Inc. to restore and maintain preserve areas and street trees under a 1990 PUD/PAMP, set compliance deadlines through 2032 and imposed administrative costs and daily fines for failure to comply.
Get email alerts on the Land Development Compliance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Martin County Code Enforcement Magistrate on July 16 approved an agreed order with Mariner Village Property Owners, Inc., requiring the association to bring preserved wetlands, native uplands and required street-tree plantings into compliance with a 1990 planned unit development (PUD) and preserve area management plan (PAMP).
The county’s site compliance officer, Jerry Mitchell, said the PUD/PAMP established protections for 15.27 acres of wetlands, 35.2 acres of native upland habitat and required perimeter buffers and street trees, and that county inspections beginning in 2019 found removal of protected street trees, exotic vegetation in preserve areas, mowing into upland preserve areas and failure to maintain plantings around two community lakes. "The exhibit provides for 15.27 acres of protected wetlands... and 35.2 acres of protected native upland habitat," Mitchell said during his testimony.
Why it matters: the PUD and PAMP are development-order obligations recorded with the county; the stipulation converts a long-running code enforcement investigation into a multi-year compliance plan and a monetary threat for missed deadlines.
Magistrate action, penalties and schedule The magistrate reviewed a stipulation the county negotiated with legal representatives for Mariner Village. The stipulation, signed by association officers and by the county, requires staged reviews and monitoring beginning with a trigger date of January 30, 2026, and continuing through periodic reviews out to January 30, 2032. Administrative costs of $575 were paid before the hearing and the magistrate ordered the agreed order approving the stipulation.
The magistrate warned that failure to meet the stipulation deadlines would result in a daily fine. During the hearing there was a clarification about the daily fine. The magistrate initially stated a fine of $500 per day should a violation continue; Edward J. Koch Jr., speaking for the association, corrected that by saying, "Actually gonna be $1,500 a day," and the exchange noted there were three parcels implicated. The approved order noted the monitoring schedule and the enforcement consequence; a copy of the signed agreed order will be provided to the association, the magistrate said.
Discussion and next steps Mitchell told the magistrate that county staff had met with association representatives on May 21 and that the association was amenable to a stipulation. Koch testified he has lived in the community for 21 years, served as a director for about 12 years and was authorized by the board to be the county liaison. Mitchell asked that county exhibits be admitted into evidence; the magistrate admitted them and entered the agreed order.
The magistrate emphasized the long-term monitoring requirements and warned that the association must submit the periodic inspection reports and follow the schedule in the stipulation. The county will notify the association when the agreed order is available.

