►
From YouTube: Planning Commission 4-26-2021
Description
Planning Commission 4-26-2021
A
A
B
B
D
A
H
G
I
E
E
D
F
H
H
F
A
E
E
H
H
H
F
All
right,
so
anyone
intending
to
speak
on
the
public
hearings
today,
please
stand
and
raise
your
right
hand,
do
you
solemnly
swear
or
affirm
to
tell
the
truth,
the
whole
truth
and
nothing
but
the
truth
in
today's
proceedings,
all
right
when
you
are
ready
to
speak,
please
step
to
the
podium
state,
your
name
and
indicate
you've
been
sworn.
Thank
you.
I
I
So
again,
the
sign
code
goes
over
being
content
neutral.
It
simplifies
the
sign
code
by
defining
sign
types
set,
sign
sizes
establishes
permissible
sign
locations,
we
updated
the
definitions
for
equal
enforcement
and
the
clarity
of
regulations,
so
we
were
asked
when
this
was
brought
at
the
january.
25Th
planning
commission
meeting
a
few
of
the
concerns,
not
all,
but
a
few
were
brought
up
about
residential
signs,
the
size
and
the
number
profane
obscene
language.
I
What
is
and
is
not
protected
under
freedom
of
speech
and
the
potential
for
visual
blight
staff,
provided
a
visual
presentation
of
the
proposed
draft
ordinance
at
the
city
council,
meeting
march
3rd
pertaining
to
residential
signs
and
the
number
that
were
being
proposed
and
commercial
freestanding
signs.
The
presentation
and
the
ordinance
are
being
presented
that
are
being
presented
now
will
be
taken
to
council
for
consideration
of
adoption,
so
under
staff
findings.
I
I
So
when
we
look
at
a
typical
residential
street,
that
is
our
potential.
When
we
add
the
signs,
the
city
attorney
did
address
the
concerns
of
profane
obscene
fighting
words
in
decent
speech,
language
on
signs
and
flags.
There
are
new
definitions.
Added
to
this
proposed
sign
code
with
provisions
under
prohibited
signs
which
address
these
types
of
signs
and
flags.
I
The
number
of
freestanding
signs
in
the
commercial
zoning
district
was
reduced
from
five
signs
per
acre
to
four
signs
per
acre.
I
will
show
a
graphic
of
that
in
a
moment,
and
certain
regulations
and
restrictions
are
necessary
for
public
safety.
Aesthetic
concern,
while
allowing
for
commercial
and
non-commercial
freedom
of
speech,
so
as
part
of
the
residential
number
of
signs
that
also
include
your
flags.
The
flags
will
be
counted
toward
those
number
of
signs.
I
I
I
We
updated
what
used
to
be
the
creative
signs
to
an
iconic
sign
structure.
It's
going
to
be
unique
in
sign
and
desires,
signed
and
design.
I
just
caught
an
error
on
this
slide
and
I
do
apologize.
Staff
was
requesting
it
be
limited
to
the
cra
area.
Only
however
city
council
wanted
that
stricken,
so
it
is
out
of
the
code
that
was
provided.
I
just
my
mistake
on
not
updating
this
slide
appropriately.
I
A
H
H
H
I
G
I
D
D
But
if
someone
wants
to
put
up
a
sign
relating
to
a
candidate
from
a
previous
election
or
flag
for
an
anticipated
election,
if
it's
a
private
citizen,
not
a
candidate,
then
the
provisions
of
of
the
statute
that
I've
quoted
in
our
definition
don't
apply,
and
so
that
person
could
keep
their
sign
up.
Irrespective
of
of
the
date
of
the
election
that
the
sign
may
be
referring
to.
D
If
they're
not
regulated
by
the
statute-
and
I
believe
that
the
pacs
would
not
be
regulated
by
the
statute,
then
that
is
true-
I
mean
it.
The
statute
allows
us
to
cover
a
very
small
segment
of
the
signs
that
you
may
be
concerned
with,
but
at
least
we're
able
to
cover
some.
Otherwise
I
would
the
position
I
had
prior
to
that
statute
being
brought
to
my
attention
was
that
we
cannot
regulate
the
duration
of
any
sign
having
to
do
with
any
campaign
issue
or
candidate.
D
If
it's
covered
by
the
statute
it's
covered
by
the
ordinance,
I
don't
have
the
provisions
of
the
statute
in
front
of
me.
So
there
is
a
specific
provision
as
it
relates
to
signs
that
are
placed
on
property
by
candidates,
and
I
suspect
that
in
most
cases
the
candidates
don't
own
the
property
that
they're
having
to
sign.
So
by
implication,
it's
probably
that
the
candidate
is
asking
the
individual
to
put
the
sign
on
their
private
property.
E
J
D
C
C
D
D
C
Paragraph
eight
of
section,
11
13,
it
says
signs
may
be
placed
a
maximum
of
14
days
prior
to
the
special
event
date
and
must
be
removed
within
24
hours.
After
the
end
of
the
special
event-
and
I
guess
what
I'm
confused
about
is
elections
don't
happen
every
day
they
don't
happen
every
week.
They
don't
happen
every
month,
so
by
definition
would
not
be
a
special
event.
D
So
to
try
to
to
say
that
an
election
is
a
special
event,
I
think
runs
a
foul.
That's
that
general
recognition
that
campaign
signs
political
signs
issue
signs
are
all
extremely
protected
by
first
amendment
rights,
acquaintances,
the
arts,
sale
or
special
event.
A
church
bazaar
or
whatever
you
know
it's
going
to
be
a
special
event
would
be
recognized
as
a
totally
different
class
of
activity
than
camp
political
speech.
B
So
this
may
be
quibbling
or
parsing.
So
what
about
a
special
event
that
has,
should
we
say
highly
specific
political
overtones,
where
politicians
of
a
single
political
party
are
invited
to
speak
and
express
certain
opinions
that
in
most
instances
would
constitute
a
political
speech
or
a
political
rally
there.
It's
not
a
campaign
per
se,
but
it
is
a
special
event
sponsored
by
pick
an
organization
so.
D
D
B
G
H
D
Then
the
next
category
that
the
that
the
u.s
supreme
court
is
recognized
as
not
protected
language
and
is
is
fighting
words
and
fighting
words.
Definition
is
a
little
bit
broader
than
some
people
might
consider.
The
fighting
words
to
be-
and
I
expanded
it
a
little
bit
by
bringing
together
some
definitions
from
several
different
courts.
To
give
as
broad
of
the
definition
as
possible
and
and
fighting
words
would
include
epithets
directed
towards
an
individual.
D
The
hearing
of
the
word
is
not
going
to
go
shocking
you
and
cause
really
physical
or
other
mental
distress,
but
nevertheless
the
courts
recognize
that
there
are
certain
words
that
may
be
appropriate
for
adults.
That
may
not
be
appropriate
for
minors,
and
so
I
took
advantage
of
a
supreme
court
decision
having
to
do
with
fcc's
regulation
of
a
radio
program
that
broadcast
in
the
afternoon
george
carlin's
routine.
D
It's
indecent,
indecent
and
inappropriate
for
a
17
someone
who's
less
than
17
years
old.
Then
that's!
That's
it's
permissible
for
us
to
regulate
that
language
under
those
circumstances,
if
it
couldn't,
if
there
was
no
way
that
a
or
not
foreseeable,
that
a
minor
would
be
be
able
to
see
that,
then
it
wouldn't
be
prohibited,
but
for
most
part
the
concerns
that
you've
expressed,
let's
say
a
political
flag
with
a
indecent
word
on
it.
D
B
B
D
D
D
May
be
in
disfavor
with
the
vast
majority
of
us,
but
the
symbols
by
themselves
may
not
necessarily
have
the
common
understanding
of
most
people.
Somebody
may
be
familiar
with
with
the
symbol
that
might
be
something
different,
but,
for
example,
I
think
clearly
what
you
what
you
used
as
an
example
is
the
nazi
swastika.
D
So
if
we
were
to
if
we
were
to
find
a
sign,
a
flag
or
sign
with
some
sort
of
symbol
which
some
people
might
find
offensive,
but
the
majority
may
not
even
understand
it
with
it.
I
don't
know
that
we
would
be
successful
in
defending
a
prosecution
under
the
fighting
words,
because
that's
how
much
protection
the
courts
have
given
to
first
amendment
rights,
and
so
the
fighting
words
exception
is
probably
very
very
limited.
But
there
are
classes
of
you
know
cases
in
point
where
it
be
recognized
that
that
would
not
be
appropriate.
D
D
Would
we
be
successful
in
defending
our
position
if
we
took
an
action
against
like
a
sign
with
a
flag
with
the
noose
on
it
and-
and
I
always
have
to
think
about
in
terms
of
the
worst
case
scenario-
I
mean
in
the
grand
scheme
of
things:
what's
this,
what's
the
likelihood
of
the
city
being
sued
for
any
of
these
violent?
You
know
any
violation
of
of
you
know
our
code.
D
D
That's
I
mean
I,
I
think
that's
pretty
well
recognized
by
these
days
and
if
somebody
put
up
a
noose
or
put
up
a
flag
with
a
noose
and
we
determined
that
that
was
fighting
words.
I
would
feel
fairly
comfortable
in
being
able
to
defend
the
city's
enforcement
of
that.
We
can
go
through
all
kinds
of
different
examples
and
some
would
be
less
black
and
white
and
some
would
be
totally
gray.
D
J
D
J
D
I
would
say
that
that
would
be
particularly
if
it
was
if
we
included
graphics.
Yes,
that
would
be
where
I've
got.
Fighting
words
include
but
limited
to
defamatory
remarks
made
private
citizens
and
epithets
based
on
addresses
race,
color,
religion,
disability,
national
origin
or
sex.
I
think
it
probably
would
be
covered
some
covered
in
there.
Okay,
in
fact,.
D
B
G
E
D
E
D
D
B
D
D
D
B
Then
can
we
just
sort
of
agree
that
what
we
need
to
do
is
just
take
the
best
sort
of
common
sense
approach
to
your
okay.
Here's,
the
here's,
the
the
clean
shot,
the
rest
of
the
stuff
gets
more
difficult
and
realize
that
in
the
future
some
of
this
is
going
to
have
to
be
decided
by
a
court
until
there's
precedent.
B
D
D
Some
of
those
close
calls
that
come
up
and
and
we'll
we'll
have
to
make
you
know
the
code
enforcement
along
with
the
city
attorney,
will
have
to
make
a
judgment
as
to
whether
or
not
it's
a
violation
of
our
code
and
and
do
we
run
the
risk
of
any
type
of
lawsuit.
As
a
result-
and
I
think
this
morning
I've
already
practiced
my
my
opening
statement.
D
J
D
One
of
the
things
that
that
we
haven't
talked
about
in
donna.
I
know
you
have
a
question,
but
before
I
I
lose,
this
thought
I
was.
I
think
it
was.
You
all
had
asked
to
consider,
or
someone
did
ask
to
consider
the
the
previous
exception
that
we
had
in
here
regarding
signs
being
worn,
in
particular
somebody
that
might
be
wearing
a
shirt
with
a
decent
language
on
it
and
walking
around
in
a
place
where
there
may
be
children
able
to
see
it.
D
I
amended
this
draft
so
that
that
would
be
prohibited
it.
I
cannot
prohibit
another
thing
that
is
of
concern
to
people,
and
that
is
the
folks
that
are
standing
on
street
corners
with
the
with
the
signs
that
they're
twirling
and
all
that
kind
of
stuff
the
the
courts
have
said
that
that
comes
too
close
to
the
traditional
people
holding
signs
that
are
picketing,
something
or
other.
So,
if
they're
holding
signs,
I
think
I
have
to
let
them
do
that.
D
C
A
After
if
we
pass
this,
are
we
going
to
have
less
of
them
or
we're
just
going
to
have
more
of
them
longer
I
mean
it's
not
clear
to
me.
I
know
I
get
the
sign
size.
I
get
the
first
amendment
argument,
but
I'm
just
wondering
about
the
numbers,
because
I'll
go
back
to
the
poll
that
we
conducted
and
our
citizens
said
they
wanted
fewer,
and
I
don't
know
what
we've
got
at
the
end
of
the
day.
D
I
don't
think
we're
going
to
end
up
with
any
less
signs
if
somebody
is
disposed
to
put
a
stone,
you
know
in
their
yard.
This
will
allow
them
to
do
that
if
they're
disposed
to
put
10
signs
in
their
yard,
no
they're
not
going
to
be
allowed
to
do
that,
and
I
don't
think
there's
been.
I
don't
know
that
we've
really
had
a
problem
with
anybody,
putting
10
signs
on
their
yard.
What
what
we
had?
What
I
had
to
struggle
with
was
what
is
the
minimal
number
of
signs
that
we
could
legally
for
hit?
D
You
know
if
the
government
said
that
supreme
court
says
that
yes,
you're
allowed
to
regulate
the
number
of
signs,
that
is
a
content
neutral
regulation,
but
if
it
artificially
limits
the
ability
for
someone
to
express
again
in
the
nature
of
political
views,
for
example,
let's
say
that
there's
two
candidates
in
two
or
four
or
five
political
issues
that
somebody
wants
to
talk
about,
whether
it's
on
an
election
or
just
in
general.
They
want
to
put
some,
you
know,
get
us
out
of
afghanistan.
You
know
put
a
sign
like
that.
D
D
You
know.
Could
it
be
a
sign
more
maybe
could
it
be
a
sign
less,
maybe,
but
and
and
people
most
people
are
in
all
likelihood
are
going
to
put
their
signs
out
during
the
political
season
and
most
likely
are
going
to
take
their
signs
away
during
political
at
the
end
of
political
season.
But
we
know
at
least
in
recent
history
that
people
are
putting
up
the
names
of
people
that
aren't
even
running
for
election,
but
that's
an
expression
of
their
political
viewpoint
and
we
can't
prohibit
them
from
doing
that.
D
D
D
I
think
I
was
mentioning
the
supreme
court
decision
having
to
do
with
george
carlin's
routine
and
as
an
appendix-
and
I
rarely
see
this
but
as
an
appendix
to
the
decision
they
had
a
transcript
of
his
routine
from
that
radio
show
and
two
things.
First,
when
you
read
it
and
and
it's
not
george
carlin
delivering
it,
it
really
isn't
that
funny.
You
know,
but
secondly,
the
words
that
he
was
identifying,
and
I
think
that
I
think
that
the
the
skit
was
the
five
or
seven
dirty
words.
D
These
are
words
that
are
clearly
dirty
according
to
the
fcc,
and
when
you
looked
at
the
words,
only
a
handful
of
them
were
really
what
we
would
consider
nowadays
to
be
offensive
and,
and
then,
when
you
also
look
at
the
words
and
you
look
at
the
definition
of
indecency
and
indecent
speech.
Like
I
said,
obscenity
is
different
and
most
of
the
obscenity
words
or
things
that
we
would
call
obscenities,
really
aren't
obscenity
by
definition.
D
K
D
D
Yeah,
probably
can't
think
of
that
many
examples
of
where
children
wouldn't
be
able
to
see
it
if
it
was
on
public
property,
but
if
they
were
on
private
property,
if
they
were
in
a
a
private
tennis
club
or
pickleball
club
or
whatever
and
were
wearing
it.
That
would
be
something
totally
different.
They
would
be
allowed
to
do
that,
but
but
in
the
farmer's
market
or
on
on
the
harbor,
walk
yeah.
D
H
C
C
I
So
when
you
go
into
the
highway
commercial
zoning
district,
I'm
sorry
lisa
and
zoning
official,
when
you
go
into
the
highway
commercial
zoning
district,
you
have
your
channel
set
letters
that
have
the
clear
face
on
them.
They
are
internally
illuminated
so
back
in
the
day
when
the
first
iteration
of
one
of
our
sign
codes
for
city
center
zoning
district,
they
did
not
want
those
specific
types
of
letters
in
the
city
center
zoning
district,
so
you
can
have
what's
called
halo
lit.
I
You
can
have
the
the
faces
clear,
but
the
light
shines
on
the
back
of
the
building
that
will
reflect
and
it
gives
a
shadow
effect
so
race
ways,
because
we
have
the
six
inch
and
di
dimension
from
the
face
of
the
building
for
the
thickness
of
the
letters
we
are
correct.
No
internally,
illuminated
like
channel
set
letters
are
permitted
in
the
city
center
zoning
district.
C
C
C
Ground
sign
bay
shall
be
not
less
than
a
hundred
percent
of
the
width
of
the
sign
face.
Now
I
guess
at
the
last
go
round.
I
think
mitch
was
here
and
I
said,
are
we
observing
september
rules
for
sign
bases,
excuse
me
and
signs,
and
his
answer
was
yes,
if
you
have
a
sign,
that's
I'll
make
it
up
ten
feet
wide
and
the
base
is
10
feet
wide.
C
Didn't
interrupt
you
if
that
sign
were
reduced
in
width
to
80
or
if
it
were
an
arched
sign
that
the
fenestration
would
be
through
the
center
of
the
sign
you
put
poison
ivy
around
it
and
everything
else
the
chances
of
you
standing
or
of
someone
standing
behind
that
sign
and
grabbing.
You
are
greatly
diminished.
I
Okay,
I
I
understand
that
pole
signs
pylon
signs.
We
don't
allow
those
that
was
I
I
understand.
I
understand
where
you're
going
with
this
again
in
2005,
when
the
sign
code
was
rewritten,
they
eliminated
the
ability
for
poland
pylon
signs,
they
wanted
monument
style
solid
to
the
ground,
monument
style
signs,
so
I
will
work
with
the
city
attorney
and
I
will
work
with
mitchell
on
that,
but
the
last
iteration
or
the
last
or
the
way
the
sign
code
is
now
it's
the
sign.
The
base
is
not.
I
C
E
C
C
C
C
E
C
I
Have
a
landscape
code
for
for
signs
in
the
interchange
or
interstate
commercial
zoning
we
don't
currently
in
the
sign
code
now
or
in
the
in
the
code.
Now
there
are
landscape
requirements
for
any
commercial
or
multi-family
residential
developments,
not
specific
to
the
sign
code,
not
specific
to
the
sign.
C
C
I
C
G
I
So
that
could
be
written
into
the
that
usually
is
written
into
the
pre-annexation
agreement.
When
somebody
comes
in
and
requests
they'll
either
request
to
keep
their
existing
non-conformity.
That
would
be
up
to
city
council
whether
they
want
to
agree
to
that
or
not.
We
haven't
it's
like
with
the
goodyear
sign.
I
I
think
when
we
annexed
good
jiren,
it
was
permitted
to
remain
we
annexed
part
of
palm
in
but
as
palm
changed
over
to
ghetto,
they
have
brought,
I
think,
all
of
their
signs
into
conformance
on
their
own,
but
I
we
can
bring
that
up
to
council
if
they
wanted
to
say
when
people
annex
in
it
has
to
go
or
not.
That
might
be
a
sticking
point
for
people
annexing
in
as
well.
Then
that's
gonna,
a
lot
of
like
I
said
a
lot
of
times.
That's
brought
brought
up
at
the
with
the
pre-annexation
agreement.
C
With
council,
I
I've
done
this
before
in
another
municipality
and
we
did
not
say
if
you
come
in
tomorrow
morning,
you
got
tear
down
your
pylon
sign.
We
said
we
had
somebody
analyze,
a
sign
for
cost.
The
sign
is
worth
ten
thousand
dollars.
You
got
five
years
or
two
thousand
dollars
a
piece
amortization.
C
E
D
B
D
E
I
So
I
think
I
think
flags
are
addressed
if
we
get
into
that
much
detail
because
with
the
definition
of
flags
oh
they're,
going
to
be
on
poles,
they
have
to
be
yeah,
it
states
how
flags
have
to
be
displayed
via
pole
bracket
permanently
affixed
to
a
building
or
in
the
ground
or
fixed
to
the
ground.
Okay.
So
if
it's
in
the
back
of
a
truck,
it
would
be
prohibited.
We.
B
D
D
One
to
tell
that
and
and
when
we
when
we
talked
about
what
we
talked
about,
limiting
the
number
of
flags,
I
had
that
situation
directly
in
mind
and
and
it's
either
got
to
be
on
a
pole
mounted
in
the
ground
or
mounted
on
a
building,
and
it's
limited
to
a
total
of
four
so
the
flag.
So
you
can
have
four
flags
and
no
signs
or
two
signs
and
two
flags
what
I
thought
you
were
going
to
ask
and
then
I'll
address
it
anyway.
D
J
G
D
H
H
B
Our
chairman's
comments,
thank
you,
and
I
know
this
has
just
been
more
fun.
You
ought
to
be
allowed
to
have,
but
I
just
have
a
couple
of
comments
and,
and
one
is
on
your
the
the
sign
on
the
typical
residential
street
with
all
the
signs
I
just
couldn't
help
but
think
of
the
old
burma
shave
shines
going
down
the
highway
to
the
south.
G
H
A
D
I
I
appreciate
the
discussion
you
had
here
and
the
discussion
that
you
had
the
last
meeting,
which
gave
me
an
opportunity
to
kind
of
think
about
some
very
tough
questions
and
try
to
make
the
ordinance
better
than
than
it
was
before
you
saw
it.
So
thank
you
for
your
role
in
this
and
hopefully,
by
the
end
of
the
day.
Well,
certainly
after
the
city
council
votes
we'll
have
one
of
the
better
ordinances
around
the
country.
So
thank
you.
I
I
I
I
Application
is
in
order
and
the
statutory
requirements
have
been
satisfied.
The
property
is
already
within
our
utility
service
area,
currently
server
municipal
water
and
wastewater.
It
is
a
large-scale,
comprehensive
plan
amendment
and
or
requires
a
large-scale,
comprehensive
plan.
Amendment
rezoning
amendment
they
are,
they
are
running
concurrently
with
the
annexation.
It
does
support
the
city's
strategic
plan.
I
H
H
K
H
B
A
H
H
I
I
Sorry
about
that
roadway
for
roadway
facilities.
It
is
existing
to
develop
commercial
properties,
potable
water
and
wastewater
facilities,
that
is
within
our
utility
service
area
and
currently
being
served
storm,
water
and
drainage.
Existing
developed
commercial
properties.
The
solid
waste
collection
is
provided
by
the
city.
The
county
zimmer
road
facility
has
sufficient
capacity
through
the
2030
planning,
horizon
parks
and
recreation
is
not
applicable.
I
Existing
developed
commercial
properties
as
well
as
public
schools
is
not
applicable.
The
application
is
in
order
and
all
statutory
requirements
have
been
met.
Request
is
consistent
with
the
city
of
punta
gorda
conference
of
plan
2040,
a
rezoning
application
is
required
and
it
is
running
concurrently
with
the
annexation
and
the
comprehensive
plan
amendment.
H
G
H
Next
and
last
is
z,
0
one
twenty
twenty
one,
an
ordinance
of
the
city
council
of
the
city
of
puna
quarter,
florida
reserving
six
point.
Sixteen
point:
eight
plus
reminds
acres
being
a
portion
of
land
lying
in
charlotte,
county
florida
being
all
block
c.
I
will
track
c
and
d
portions
of
the
box,
a
b
d
e,
f
h
and
I
and
portion
of
tracks,
b
and
e
all
in
coral
ridge
unit
number
two.
H
3231
page
1963
and
subsequent
amendments
thereto
of
the
public
records
of
charlotte
county
florida
and
being
more
particularly
described
in
the
boundary
survey
attached
here
too,
and
addressed
as
3130
and
3132
cooper
street.
From
his
current
charlie
shaw,
county
zoning
classification
of
industrial
general,
slash
county
to
print
ig,
slash
county
to
public,
slash
city,
parent
p,
slash
city,
providing
conflict
and
severability
and
providing
an
effective
date.
I
Good
afternoon
again,
lisa
hannon's,
owning
official,
and
I
have
been
sworn
this
I'd
like
to
enter
our
staff
report
into
the
record
by
reference
in
its
entirety.
This
is
the
last
application
to
go
along
with
our
annexation,
comprehensive
plan,
amendment
16.8
plus
or
minus
acres,
and
it
precipitates
the
need
for
rezoning
of
the
property.
I
The
amendment
will
change
the
zoning
classification
from
the
county,
industrial
general
to
the
city
public.
All
provisions
of
the
city's
land
development
regulations
will
apply
when
this
is
adopted.
Again
there
are
existing
buildings.
No
new
development
is
proposed
at
this
time
and
currently
served
with
municipal
water
and
wastewater
concurrency
requirements.
I
Roadway
facilities
not
applicable
potable
water
and
wastewater
facilities.
It
is
within
our
city's
utility
service
area,
currently
served
with
city,
water
and
wastewater
storm.
Water
and
drainage
is
not
applicable
due
to
it
being
an
existing
developed
property.
Solid
waste
collection
is
provided
by
the
city
and
the
county.
Zimmer
road
facility
has
sufficient
capacity
through
the
2030
planning
horizon
public
schools
and
parks
and
recreation
are
not
applicable
due
to
the
existing
developed
property.
I
It
is
consistent
with
the
city's
comprehensive
plan.
Future
land
use
objectives,
1.1.2,
1.1.10
policies,
1.1.4.3,
1.1.10.1
conservation,
element,
objective,
2a,
0.1.1
policy,
2a,
0.1.1.4,
infrastructure
policies,
3.4.1.1
transportation,
element,
objective,
7.1.6
policy,
7.1.6.1,
7.1.6,
housing,
element,
objective,
4.1.8
policy,
4.1.8.2,
intergovernmental
coordination,
element
policy,
9.1.1
parent
b,
capital
improvements,
element,
objective,
10.1.4
and
policy
10.1.4.1.
I
I
I
I
believe
the
3134
was
part
of
that
vacated.
I
think
it
had
an
address
at
one
time
but
per
the
resolution
that
vacated
a
portion
of
the
coral
ridge
unit.
Number
two,
I
believe:
that's
what
that
was
addressed.
As
we
did
have
legal
has
reviewed
the
legal
ads.
They
are
the
one
who
tweaked
it
and
wrote
it
so.
I
I
H
J
H
B
C
A
Yeah,
just
on
the
signed
ordinance,
I
really
do
hope
that
we
see
some
improvement
because
I
think
for
the
average
citizen
they
don't
understand
all
of
the
nuances
of
the
things
that
we've
addressed.
I
love
the
idea
that,
if
your
that
the
candidate
put
it
in
the
yard,
then
it
can
well,
at
least
if
the
candidate
puts
it
in,
then
it
can
go
away
at
the
end
of
the
season.
So
I
would
hope
that
there's
some
way
to
communicate
that,
so
we
don't
have
in
perpetuity
signs.
H
And
I
would
agree
with
all
that
and
just
say
again
thanks
city
staff
and
the
city
attorney
and
our
city,
I
think,
is
going
to
be
better
off
for
this
ordinance,
there's
going
to
be
a
a
growing
in
period
for
it
with
with
our
residents
and
businesses,
but
we're
better
off
for
it.
So
thank
you
very
much.
J
It
was
my
comment
is
that
we
had
a
deep
discussion
on
the
ordinance
at
the
last
meeting.
I
recall
correctly,
and
I
was
very
impressed
with
the
fact
that
the
staff
and
the
city
attorney
took
our
comments
to
heart,
which
doesn't
happen
all
the
time
in
this
business
and
and
did
a
good
job
of
trying
to
rectify
and
reconcile
our
comments
with
the
ordinance
and
the
legal
issues.
So
congratulations.