Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Building Code Compliance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Oviedo magistrate finds 469 Franklin Street out of compliance; orders fines and daily accrual until repairs, permits complete
Summary
A special magistrate found the owner of 469 Franklin Street (case CE24-00042) has not obtained required permits or submitted application materials after a compliance order, assessed existing fines and ordered a continuing $150-per-day accrual until the property is brought into compliance.
The City of Oviedo Special Magistrate on Jan. 23, 2025 found the property at 469 Franklin Street (case CE24-00042) out of compliance with prior code enforcement orders and ordered fines for the owner and continued daily penalties until outstanding building and zoning documentation and approvals are complete.
City Code Enforcement Supervisor Shakuria Moyer told the magistrate that the owner, listed as G.R.E.I. King LLC on the property record, failed to submit required applications and obtain building permits after converting the property for multifamily use. Moyer said the owner had ensured units were not occupied at the time of inspection but had not submitted the necessary permit applications, plan sets or approvals called for in the compliance order.
Moyer told the magistrate the compliance deadline tied to the code change (Nov. 18, 2024) had passed and the owner had not applied for rezoning or otherwise satisfied applicable zoning regulations. She said the city had received an application for mechanical and electrical permits but that no building approvals had been issued.
The magistrate said the existing noncompliance through the hearing date amounted to $3,300 and noted a separate $500 fine remained unpaid. The magistrate stated he would “enter an order to that effect” and ordered that a continuing fine of $150 per day accrue until the respondent comes into compliance.
The hearing record shows the city posted notice at the property after certified mail was returned; Moyer said a posted notice was used to effect service. No representative for the company identified themselves by name during the hearing.
The magistrate’s orders recorded at the hearing address only the fines and the daily accrual; the transcript does not show additional criminal or civil action being taken at the hearing or any new deadlines beyond the continuing daily fine order.
The city will submit a written order reflecting the magistrate’s directives and mail it to the owner, the magistrate said.
The magistrate’s ruling does not state that permits have been approved; the transcript shows those approvals remain outstanding and that the accrual of the daily fine will continue until required submittals are approved and the property brought into compliance.
A written order will follow; the city indicated it had accepted evidence into the record showing ownership and the earlier compliance order.
