BRADENTON BEACH – With 85% of a building project completed under a 2024 city permit, a stop work order was issued at 106 23rd St. N. by city Building Official Bill Palmer, who said the prior permit was approved in error by the previous building official.
City commissioners voted at an Aug. 21 city commission meeting to lift Palmer’s stop work order if the owner complies with the building official’s recommendations; further discussion is planned on Thursday, Sept. 18.
“I wanted to update you on something that came to my attention on a permit that was approved and was issued and is in my opinion a violation of our land development code,” Palmer told commissioners at the Aug. 21 meeting.
Palmer said the existing 4,200-square-foot parcel is zoned R-3 for a one-family or two-family (duplex) dwelling with a requirement of a minimum of 5,000 square feet and a minimum new lot area of 7,500 square feet.
“Last April 2024, we (the city building department prior to Palmer) issued a permit for a home with an R-3 occupancy. Which means it’s either a one-family or two-family dwelling,” Palmer said. “It was described on the plans as a garage accessory dwelling unit. The issue that comes into play is that there’s already a single-family dwelling unit on the property. It’s been there for a number of years and there was a detached garage on the property also, so they received a permit to demo the garage and then they built the second structure. The new structure is approximately 90 feet larger than the 25% allowed in the LDC (Land Development Code).
“Some of our definitions that are going to apply is that a two-family dwelling unit is defined as both units under a common roof. It’s not something that is two structures or tied in with a breezeway,” Palmer said.
Palmer said a previous building official, Steve Gilbert, had told the previous owner, who wanted to do a similar thing, that it was not allowed.
“I don’t know what happened after 2021, but in 2024 they submitted pretty much the same plan, and it got approved. And the permit was issued.”
He said the reviewing process in 2024 was done by the city planner for M.T. Causley and then-building official Darin Cushing.
“Bill (Palmer) did reach out to me, and he had concerns. In his independent review he saw that the property violated the code of the city,” City Attorney Ricinda Perry said. “When he did his investigation, he shared with me that Mr. Cushing and the planning services of M.T. Causley under Luis Serna had reviewed it and they did sign off on it, and in his opinion it was erroneous. That’s a lot of liability and exposure all the way around. This impacts individuals who’ve made an investment on their property. We couldn’t say tear it down when actors in the city had said go ahead.”
Perry said she and Palmer felt it was best for the city commission to be made aware of what they saw as improper decision making.
“I advised Bill (Palmer) to issue a stop work order, which didn’t make anybody happy, but there was no sense in continuing to expend funds and we really couldn’t sign off on any inspections because it violates the code,” she said. “In our professional opinion it violates the code and it’s a sub-standard lot at 100 by 42.”
Land use attorney Scott Rudacille represented property owner Neal Morse at the meeting.
“When they acquired this property there was an existing detached garage on the property,” Rudacille said. “What was not mentioned was that the detached garage had an illegal unit that had been built within. So, when the property owner initially met with Mr. Gilbert, he said this is illegal and it was done without permits, obviously before this property owner acquired it, and it’s going to have to be torn down.”
He said the property owner worked with Gilbert to develop plans to remedy the issue.
“I’ve seen multiple emails from Steve (Gilbert) from 2022 where he’s telling them exactly what they need to do and it is specific to detached garage with living space above it,” Rudacille said. “Those plans were developed in consultation with Mr. Gilbert. They didn’t get permitted until 2024, but he was involved in those plans being developed.”
“The property owner was proceeding in good faith,” Rudacille said. “Other than this issue that’s been raised about whether it’s an accessory structure or not, the project itself meets all the city’s requirements in terms of setbacks, lot coverage, height. They replaced an old ground-level building with a FEMA compliant elevated structure. They’ve been getting inspected regularly by the city throughout the process.”
Morse said he hired a local architect who consulted with Gilbert. The plans were approved on March 12, 2024.
“What is the intended use?” Vice Mayor Deborah Scaccianoce asked.
“That depends on what we’re allowed to do,” Morse said. “On the plans it says it’s a game room and a bonus room with a deck. We just want to complete it at this point. The focus with the city was not so much the use as it was what we’re allowed to build.”
“I think what you’re looking at here is additional living space for the house, it’s just not connected,” Rudacille said. “The issue that they had was you had an existing ground level house, which under the 50% limitations they couldn’t add additional square footage to that. Steve (Gilbert) said if you did a separate structure then you can have living space as long as it’s above the base flood elevation. So basically, what you have here is living space that happens to be in a separate structure but all still part of the same single-family dwelling. The only thing unique is the space between the house and the detached garage.”
“This was permitted by us somehow,” Commissioner Ralph Cole said. “I’m looking for a solution to the problem that we have and that problem seems to be coming up more and more that permits were issued that maybe shouldn’t have been. Right now, we’re in that situation again.”
“The city has approved the structure to be built,” Mayor John Chappie said. “To put it bluntly, it’s a screwed-up mess and the liability out there is extreme on all parties. It could be very costly depending on how we handle this. I don’t want to force somebody to tear something down like this. I think it’s a mistake that both sides are going to have to figure out and live with. We have to figure out how can this go forward and not set a precedent of any kind, because I guarantee you other people will come back and say you let this guy do it and now, you’re not going to let that guy do it.”
“If we issued the permit, we’re in kind of a pickle,” Cole said. “Was it the commission’s fault? No, but we’re the ones that have to determine what’s right and what’s wrong.”
“I think we have to take responsibility for our actions,” Commissioner Jan Vosburgh said.
“It’s unfortunate that this situation exists,” Perry said. “I think what the commission needs to decide today is whether or not to allow the property owner to continue with construction plans so they can continue to move forward or if you’re going to keep the stop work order in effect. Having two houses on that lot is a violation.”
Palmer said he favored keeping the stop work order in place until he receives an under-construction elevation certification and a tie-in survey.
Commissioners reached a consensus to lift the stop work order contingent on receipt of the documents Palmer requested.
Perry read the following motion: “Motion to authorize the removal of a stop work order for 106 23rd St. N. contingent on receipt and acceptance by the building official of an under-construction elevation certificate and tie-in survey with the property owner accepting the risk and financial exposure for any additional costs incurred for work conducted as of 8/21/2025 and to further direct staff and the property owner and/or his agent to prepare a proposed resolution addressing the second R-3 structure and its uses for 106 23rd St. N. for commission review no later than Sept. 18.”
The commission approved the motion unanimously.
Perry said there will be expense as the city is now exposed for the legal fees through the actions of M.T. Causley contractors, and she asked if the commissioners wanted to direct staff to provide any proposed remedies for the added financial cost to correct the permit that was issued. She said staff will bring back a recommended path for remedy of the financial cost for correcting the issue.
