Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Code Enforcement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Special magistrate orders removal of outdoor storage at Okeechobee Boulevard property; use limited to agricultural barn
Summary
Special Magistrate Amity Barnard found an Okeechobee Boulevard property associated with Hemel Construction/SROK136 LLC in violation for remaining outdoor storage but, based on counsel's representation, did not find a prohibited-use violation for barn operations. The owner must remove remaining material by June 1 or face a $250/day fine.
Special Magistrate Amity Barnard ordered the removal of remaining outdoor storage at a property on Okeechobee Boulevard tied to Hemel Construction and SROK136 LLC, giving the respondent until June 1, 2026, to comply or face a $250-per-day fine and administrative costs of $409.66.
John Suarez, the town's code compliance officer, told the magistrate the structure at 13640 Okeechobee Blvd. was permitted through Palm Beach County as a "barn" but, on inspection, appeared outfitted and used as an office and storage yard for construction materials. Suarez said photos and on-site observations showed drainage pipe, piles of construction material, and a sign reading “Hemel Construction,” and that while most outdoor storage had been removed there remained at least one pile of sheetrock and fill.
Respondent counsel Christina Himmel said the structure was built and used as a barn in connection with a cattle operation, and that documents in the permit packet describe a "metal barn office" and referenced agricultural use. She disputed the town's characterization of the site's use and said that existing agricultural uses and cattle on the property supported the respondent's position.
Barnard said she had reviewed the town's case file and, relying on the parties' testimony and counsel's representation that the structure is being used as a barn for agricultural purposes, declined to find a violation of the town's prohibited-use code section for the building's intended purpose. She did, however, find a continuing violation of ULDC 20-010g1 for remaining outdoor storage and ordered that the remaining material be removed by June 1, 2026. The magistrate directed the respondent to contact Suarez for a reinspection and said that, if the items were not removed, she would assess a $250-per-day fine at the June 9 fine-assessment hearing.
Barnard also assessed the town's administrative costs for the hearing in the amount of $409.66. The magistrate recorded that the town and respondent may return the matter for enforcement if evidence later shows the building is being used for an unpermitted construction-office operation.
