Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Drainage Culvert topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Magistrate continues culvert dispute after homeowners and town disagree over May road work
Summary
A Loxahatchee Groves code‑enforcement hearing over a collapsed culvert at 14090 North Road was continued to Feb. 2, 2026 after competing accounts of whether town roadwork in May 2025 or a collapsed private pipe caused flooding. Both parties’ evidence was entered; town photos of a Nov. 6 road blowout were added to the file.
A special magistrate hearing in the Town of Loxahatchee Groves on Dec. 1, 2025 was recessed and reset to Feb. 2, 2026 in a contested code‑enforcement case over a culvert and roadway collapse at 14090 North Road. Code compliance officer John Suarez presented the town’s notice of violation, citing ULDC provisions governing swales, culverts and an alleged “imminent public health threat.”
The town’s public works superintendent, Craig Lauer, testified he inspected a collapsed pipe beneath the road, described the road surface giving way, and said town crews had to add material and repair the roadway on Nov. 6, 2025 after a homeowner’s attempt to pump water through the pipe caused a blowout. Lauer said the pipe showed internal rot and repeated collapse when excavated.
Respondents’ counsel Melissa Cluski and family members contradicted that account, saying the town performed a road project in May 2025 that covered or altered the culvert and exposed underground power lines. The homeowners argued the town’s May work created drainage problems and that photographs from May included in their packet show the culvert functioning before the town’s maintenance. One resident said, “Our culvert was working,” and another testified he had pumped hundreds of thousands of gallons from his yard in recent days to try to manage flooding.
Magistrate Amity Barnard admitted the town’s composite exhibit and the respondents’ composite exhibit, including 17 additional town photographs dated Nov. 6, 2025. The town and respondents disputed the timeline: the town traced its emergency repair to November; the homeowners said the town’s May work precipitated the problem and that the town had not provided full records or timely follow‑up. The respondents requested a continuance to review a newly produced application and related communications; the town did not oppose a continuance if it clarified the record.
Barnard found service was proper and, after entering both parties’ evidentiary files, reset CE2547 for a violation hearing on Feb. 2, 2026 at 9:00 a.m. She instructed the town to preserve and return the full case file for the next hearing and asked parties to discuss outstanding records and potential solutions outside the hearing. The magistrate noted the parties would receive a signed order granting the continuance by certified mail.
