5.b.1.
Special Magistrate Hearing - 9:00AM
- Meeting Date:
- 03/18/2026
SUBJECT:
| Case Number: | CE-2025-237 | Investigating Officer: | Shaun Coss |
| Violation Location: | 1010 Seaway Dr Unit A | ||
CASE INFORMATION:
| Case Type: | Code Enforcement |
| NOV Issue Date: | April 10, 2025 |
| NTA Issue Date: | August 19, 2025 |
| NTA Service Method | Certified mail / Posted at property |
| Posting Date: | September 5, 2025 |
PARTIES:
| Violator: | 1004-1010 Seaway Dream Team LLC 800 Brickell AVE Ste 320 Miami, FL 33131-2974 |
| Additional Party: | Diversified Corporate Services Int'l, INC. 110 SE 6th St Suite 1430 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 |
| Additional Party: | Dan Eagle 3825 PGA Blvd Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 |
VIOLATIONS:
117-3(b) - Signs: Maintenance
FINDINGS/CASE FOLLOW-UP:
On September 17, 2025, Special Magistrate Barreau granted the violators 30 days to repair or replace the broken sign or be fined $250.00. The violator was not present.
REDUCTION CRITERIA:
October 20, 2025 - Inspection done. Property still not in compliance. Affidavit of Non-Compliance was issued and fines started.
November 20, 2025 - Inspection done. Property came into compliance. Affidavit of Compliance was issued and fines stopped.
December 1, 2025 - 1st request for massey hearing received from previous project manager.
January 21, 2026 - 1st massey hearing heard in front of Special Magistrate Peshke. No one appeared, massey request was denied.
February 12, 2026 - 2nd request for massey hearing received by new project manager.
Balance: $7,790.00
Reduction Criteria:
November 20, 2025 - Inspection done. Property came into compliance. Affidavit of Compliance was issued and fines stopped.
December 1, 2025 - 1st request for massey hearing received from previous project manager.
January 21, 2026 - 1st massey hearing heard in front of Special Magistrate Peshke. No one appeared, massey request was denied.
February 12, 2026 - 2nd request for massey hearing received by new project manager.
Balance: $7,790.00
Reduction Criteria:
- Whether the requesting party is the person responsible for the original violation that resulted in the Lien?
- Yes
- Whether the requesting party has established the existence of extenuating circumstances that prevented timely compliance and/or any extenuating circumstances that support the reduction below the minimum administrative review amounts provided in Special Magistrate Rule 5.4(B)(1)?
- No
- Whether there is a current code enforcement action on this property or any other property under common ownership?
- No
- The type and number of Lien reductions granted for this property or any other property under common ownership in the past 24 months?
- No
- Whether granting of the reduction is in the best interest of the City?
- To be determined by the Special Magistrate
RECOMMENDATION:
To be determined by the Special Magistrate
Form Review
- Form Started By:
- Katherine Calderon
- Started On:
- 03/10/2026 10:20 AM
- Final Approval Date:
- 03/10/2026