close
close

Solondais

Where news breaks first, every time

    • sinolod

    Palm Beach store must pay $8,500 fine for unauthorized renovations

    Mars Posted on

    A luxury kitchen appliance company, which faced a 48-day fine – totaling $12,000 – after violating Palm Beach code by building a showroom without a permit, has been granted a stay of from the Code Enforcement Board.

    The panel voted 4-3 during a fine reduction hearing Oct. 17 to reduce the amount Officine Gullo incurred from $12,000 to $8,500.

    The lawyer representing the family business urged the board to cut the fine in half, but code members found no reason to grant greater relief, citing the significant number of renovations done before until the violation is noted by the city.

    Code Officer Julien Felix noticed the violation Feb. 22 when he visited the storefront at 242 S. County Road after being informed that Officine Gullo had taken the space previously occupied by Onblonde Pet Spa.

    None of the renovations related to the pet spa’s conversion to a kitchen appliance retailer had been authorized, Felix told the board at its May 23 meeting.

    On March 12, a company representative assured Felix it would remedy the violation, he said. By then, Officine Gullo had hired a new contractor, who applied for the required permits on May 7, Felix said. The request was still under review when the council met in May.

    At the May hearing, code members were shocked by the extent of the renovations.

    “If you’re going to do the kind of work being done in this case, logically you would call the building department or you would know that you would need some sort of permit to build,” said Martin Klein, a board member of the administration. Klein took over as chairman of the board in July.

    The codes board ordered Officine Gullo to pay a $150 administrative fee and gave the company until June 17 to come into compliance.

    When the council met June 20, Officine Gullo’s permit application was still under review.

    With no representative present to speak about the status of the matter, the commission imposed a daily fine of $250 starting June 18 and until permits are obtained.

    The company finally came into compliance on Aug. 5, 48 days after the fines were imposed, Felix told the board at its Oct. 17 meeting.

    Officine Gullo’s attorney, Anthony Barbuto, said it was city staff who caused the delay in approving the permit.

    With the contractor absent and no additional evidence supporting Barbuto’s claim, board members were unconvinced that city staff were to blame for the delay.

    “What we’re supposed to do is look at the evidence, and there’s a four-month time limit, whereas in other cases it usually takes… 30 days, 35 days or 40 days,” he said. declared MP Chris Larmoyeux. “We don’t really have evidence that the delays are not caused by the contractors…and that worries me at a fine reduction meeting.”

    Barbuto said the permit still serves as proof that the company has met its responsibilities, since sending the initial application in May.

    “But the fact is that considerable work … had already begun and was underway before a permit application was filed,” said MP Harris Fried. “Your client basically said, ‘We’re going to do this,’ probably had a plan and asked some people to do it, and all that work was done until they received a notice of violation.

    Barbuto argued that because his client is from Italy, the company was unaware of the city’s zoning code before the interior renovation project began.

    This argument also fell short, especially for Alternate Member John Cohen.

    “As my accent will probably tell you, I am not from the country here,” said the former British magistrate. “I know that if I go to Italy and break the law, the ‘I didn’t know’ excuse doesn’t work. If I speed on the roads, they will give me a speeding ticket.

    Barbuto emphasized again that the daily fines were imposed while Officine Gullo was awaiting approval of the permit application.

    “But could you have come and asked us for more time?” Klein said, noting Barbuto’s absence from the June board meeting.

    The attorney agreed but said members were receptive to an extension at the May 27 board meeting. Additionally, members and the contractor believed the permit application would be approved before the June deadline, Barbuto said.

    The board had rejected Barbuto’s request for an extension, with Vice Chairman Scotch Peloso telling Barbuto at the May 23 meeting that as the owner of showrooms in Los Angeles and New York, Officine Gullo should have known that building permits are normally required for interior renovations. , especially if they include changes to electrical wiring and plumbing.

    Although he said he was not convinced by any of Barbuto’s arguments, Fried offered to reduce the fine by $3,500. The motion passed 4-3, with Larmoyeux, Cohen and Peloso in the minority.

    Diego Diaz Lasa is a journalist at Palm Beach Daily Newswhich is part of the USA TODAY Florida network. You can reach him at [email protected].

    Mars
    View all posts

    You Might Also Like