Port St. Lucie magistrate sets compliance deadlines, fines in multiple building-code cases

Port St. Lucie — At a special magistrate hearing on Jan. 29, 2025, the City of Port St. Lucie ordered a series of property owners and commercial tenants to correct building-code violations by set deadlines or face daily fines and administrative costs. The hearing resolved long-pending files, granted several deadline extensions and scheduled at least one reinspection.

The most contested case involved John M. Wengle and Arlene Wengle, whose pool enclosure in the Tesoro planned unit development sits inside a PUD setback. Audra Creech, land use and zoning attorney for the Wengles, said the owner has a medical sensitivity that factored into attempts to resolve the issue administratively and asked for 30 days to pursue a permit route after the building department denied a compliance permit in October 2024. Albert Moore, representing the Tesoro property‑owners association, urged certification of fines, calling the repeated continuances a “stall tactic.” The magistrate granted the Wengles 30 days to address compliance; the case previously carried a proposed fine of $50 per day and an investigative cost of $510, pending enforcement if the Wengles do not achieve compliance.

Why this matters: the magistrate’s rulings set precise deadlines and financial penalties that can become liens on properties, affecting homeowners, small-business tenants and commercial property owners across Port St. Lucie. Several cases date back to 2021 or 2023 and involve both residential accessory structures and commercial interior buildouts.

Key outcomes and orders from the hearing

- Gatlin Point 18 LLC (Case No. 31720, 1214 Southwest Gatlin Boulevard, Unit 108): Investigator James LaPonza reported a commercial interior buildout with added electrical work done without a permit. The magistrate ordered Gatlin Point 18 LLC to comply with the Port St. Lucie Code by Feb. 26, 2025, or pay $100 per day (not to exceed $5,000) plus a $510 investigative fee included in the lien if compliance is not achieved.

- Ruth Valdez and Hedrick Valdez Vedana (Case No. 31691, 456 Southeast Fairchild Avenue): The city asked that the garden structure with electrical work be brought into compliance. The magistrate granted a 60‑day extension (to March 26, 2025) for the owners to pursue a variance/permit; if not compliant, a $25 per day fine and a $195 investigative fee will apply.

- John M. Wengle and Arlene Wengle (Case No. 28996, 140 Southeast Rio Angelica): After lengthy briefing and testimony, the magistrate gave the respondents 30 days to pursue compliance; the city had sought certification of fines (previously described at $50 per day, up to $10,000, plus $510 investigative costs) if compliance was not achieved.

- Bridal Cotton and Karen Cotton (Case No. 31469, 1034 Southwest McCall Road): The Cotton family had entered a stipulation but had not achieved compliance. The magistrate granted 60 days (to March 26, 2025). If not in compliance, a $25 per day fine — up to $2,500 — and a $335 investigative fee will be included in the lien.

- Breethorn Eastport Plaza LLC (Case No. 31596, 9074 S. U.S. Highway 1): The magistrate granted a 60‑day extension (to March 26, 2025) for the commercial interior permit review process; the city’s proposed penalty remains $100 per day (not to exceed $10,000) plus $510 in investigative costs.

- Hamilton Stone LLC (Case No. 31598, 201 Southwest Port St. Lucie Boulevard, Units 107–108): The owner requested more time to finalize plan review and close out permits after combining two office spaces. The magistrate granted a 90‑day extension (to April 23, 2025). The case carries a proposed $100 per day fine (not to exceed $10,000) and a $510 investigative fee if compliance is not achieved.

- Javier G. Garcia and Tarvana de Garcia (Case No. 31551, 1802 Southwest Fears Avenue): The violation arose from fire/battery damage to a garage wall; the city requested an engineer’s report and a permit application. The magistrate granted 60 days (to March 26, 2025) to submit required documentation; the city’s stated penalty is $50 per day (up to $10,000) plus $510 in investigative costs.

- MD To Go LLC (Case No. 31326, 1700 Southeast Hillmore Drive, Unit 102): The respondent reported permit submissions the morning of the hearing. The magistrate allowed 60 days (to March 26, 2025) for plan review and permit issuance; the proposed penalty remains $100 per day (up to $10,000) plus a $510 investigative fee.

- Inovo PSL Office LLC (Case No. 31409/31409x, 10513 Southwest Meeting Street, Unit 104): The tenant/owner reported work converting a former coffee shop into a salon; plan-review comments remained outstanding. The magistrate set a deadline of Feb. 26, 2025 (the hearing’s 30‑day extension window) for permit resolution; the cited penalty is $100 per day plus $510 in investigative costs.

- Natalie Canalco LLC (Case No. 31634, 1314 Southwest Bayshore Boulevard): The owner removed added walls and restored a bathroom to its prior condition and requested reinspection. The building department scheduled a reinspection for the same day; if the unit is returned to its original condition the violation may be cleared without further action.

What was not decided: Several cases introduced without parties present were listed for future hearings or certification of fines; those files were not addressed substantively at this session. In the Wengle matter, the magistrate deferred to the 30‑day deadline rather than immediately certifying the lien; the homeowners association and the city continue to dispute whether HOA architectural control precludes the city from allowing a corrective permit in that PUD.

Speakers and who said what (selected)

- Special Magistrate (presiding official) — issued compliance orders and set deadlines. - James LaPonza, Investigator, City of Port St. Lucie Building Department — presented case findings and recommended deadlines and fines. - Evelyn Roxas, Lien Services, City of Port St. Lucie — introduced lien‑modification and vacate procedures at the start of the hearing. - Audra Creech, land use and zoning attorney for John and Arlene Wengle — requested 30 days to seek permit remedies and argued the city should not enforce HOA covenants in lieu of city code compliance. - Albert Moore, representative of the Tesoro POA — objected to further continuances and urged certification of fines. - Respondents and representatives who appeared and spoke at the hearing included Eamon Fadusa (Gatlin Point 18 LLC representative), Ruth Valdez, Brian Cotton, Steve Darby (property manager for Breethorn Eastport Plaza), Robert Walser Jr. (representing Hamilton Stone), Gerard O’Yalla (general contractor), Gregory Dawkins (respondent for MD To Go LLC), Michael Roberts (Inovo tenant/owner), and Marjorie Castro (representing Natalie Canalco LLC).

Next steps and context

The magistrate’s deadlines range from Feb. 26, 2025 (30‑day extensions given at the hearing) to April 23, 2025 (the single 90‑day extension granted). Cases not resolved by their deadlines will be subject to the stated daily fines and administrative costs and may be certified as liens. Several cases were continued to allow permit resubmission and plan review by the building, planning and fire review units.

The hearing record shows the city relied on the City of Port St. Lucie Code (including enforcement provisions often cited as City ordinance 150.105.1) and the Florida Building Code (cited as section 105.1) in its notices and recommended remedies.