►
From YouTube: Punta Gorda Isles Canal Advisory Committee 5-17-2021
Description
Punta Gorda Isles Canal Advisory Committee 5-17-2021
A
B
A
A
F
F
G
G
G
D
A
A
G
G
H
J
J
A
A
No
all
those
then
please
say
aye.
If
you're
in
favor,
all
right
any
opposed
carries
unanimously.
We
now
come
to
citizens
comments
on
agenda
items
only
that
would
be
those
things
which
are
pertaining
to
the
special
permit
or
any
of
the
reports.
Anyone
wishing
to
make
comment
on
those
items
only
okay.
A
In
the
agenda,
no
that
we've
got
two
things
coming
when
we
get
to
the
public
hearing,
which
would
be
special
permit.
06
2021,
we'll
call
you
for
that.
If
that's
what
you're
here
for
okay,
so
anybody
else
wish
to
make
comments
on
those
not
the
special
permit,
but
the
other
agenda
items
all
right.
All
right.
Let's
go
to
reports.
Please.
G
A
L
A
A
A
I
G
These
are
the
same
items
that
I
would
have
presented
to
you
all
last
year
after
the
seawall
assessment
was
completed,
and
it
gives
us
our
rundown
of
where
we've
got
our
you
know
our
good
seawall
monitor
zero
to
two
monitor
three
to
five
are
replaced
and
are
unable
to
assess-
and
this
kind
of
gives
us
an
idea
of
kind
of
the
health
of
our
system
at
that
time,
at
the
2019-20
time
frame.
So
we
still
had
over
four
and
a
half
miles
of
wall
that
were
still
in
that
monitor
three
to
five.
G
G
This
year's
assessment,
like
I
believe
kathy
mentioned
before
we've-
we've
done
a
total
reset
of
the
way
we're
doing
it.
We're
collecting
far
more
data
points
and
we're
still
working
on
the
program
on
some
multipliers
that
we'll
put
in
for
each
item
to
to
come
up
with
a
you
know
the
final
basically,
this
kind
of
a
chart
here
to
show
you
the
health
of
the
system,
but
we
didn't
want
to
present
it
quite
yet,
because
we
just
haven't
had
that
time
to
dial
it
in
or
haven't
they
haven't
dialed
it
in.
G
Yet
we
want
to
do
some
field
comparisons
to
after
we
put
the
numbers
in,
go
out
and
look
in
the
field.
Okay,
yes,
does
this
actually
make
this
be
a
three
or
a
four?
So
that's
what
we're
working
on
right
now,
trying
to
polish
that
up!
It
also
shows
us
that,
from
in
42
years
from
when
the
first
walls
went
in
65
to
2007,
we
only
replaced
104
000
feet.
G
Roughly
so
21.62
percent
of
the
system
was
replaced
in
42
years,
then
we
got
into
being
a
little
more
proactive
of
our
program
based
on
the
edges
of
the
walls,
and
we
did
another
25
in
13
years
from
0.7
to
20
20..
Of
course,
hurricane
irma
really
helped
us
along
in
that
regard,
for
the
10
miles
that
we
got
to
replace
them.
G
Here's
all
of
our
estimated
original
installation
dates
and
percentages
of
the
systems
that
was
based
on
some
aerial
interpretation,
and
so
we
still
the
original
left
in
the
system.
We
still
have
48.49
miles
of
wall
of
original
wall
still
in
the
system.
As
of
the
2019-20
assessment,
so
we've
still
got
a
lot
of
wall
to
put
in
you
know,
256
thousand
feet.
G
G
M
Just
out
of
click,
curiosity
of
the
numbers
that
you
have
up
there,
one
two
three
and
four:
what
percentage
of
those
numbers
are
in
that
aged
population
of
walls?
Do
you
understand
what
I
mean
that
we've
you've
got
some
that
you're
watching
right,
the
ones
that
you're
watching
stuff
that
has
been
replaced
before?
Or
is
this
all
old
stuff.
G
It's
going
to
vary
I've.
This
year's
assessment
data
that
we're
working
on
now
that's
one
of
the
delays
I
went
in
and
I
programmed
each
of
the
original
installation
years
into
this
software
so
that
when
we
look
at
it
we
can
now
apply
a
factor
to
the
year
as
well.
So
this
particular
one
this
chart-
I
don't
have
that
parsed
out,
but
that
data
is
available
to
get
you
know
as
to,
and
we
can
judge
that
based
on
if
it's
mmfx
rebar
original,
which
we
always
call
is
unknown
or
the
epoxy
coded.
G
But
I
don't
know
I
know
kristin's
supposed
to
be
here
because
she's
got
a
budget
to
present
to
us
on
the
next
line
item
but
then
yeah
she
may
know
because
they've
been
in
contact.
I
know
it
wasn't
too
many
weeks
ago
that
I
just
submitted
a
report
back
to
her
for
an
update
as
to
where
we
are
on
the
master
permitting
for
the
riprap.
A
Just
just
to
add
a
little
more
guilt
to
this
lily.
The
the
71
and
older
walls
are
in
the
rough
numbers
of
200
000
feet,
and
so
at
5
000
feet
per
year.
That's
a
40-year
replacement
problem,
which
is
why
we've
recommended
some
increase
in
assessment
and
increase
in
the
rate
correct,
because
we're
going
to
we're
going
to
be
overwhelmed
pretty
soon.
G
Yeah,
because
I
mean,
if
we're,
if
we're
pushing
like
you,
said
up
to
50
years
old,
which
is,
I
believe,
what
they
said,
our
original
service
life
is.
Obviously
we
got
a
lot
of
walls
out
there
that
and
we
don't
just
replace
walls
to
replace
it
for
the
fun
of
it.
You
know,
they've
they've
all
got
issues
that
we
are
doing
on
our
replacement,
even
just
to
get
the
what
would
it
be
the
10.37
miles
and
the
4.47,
the
ones
that
have
known
cracks?
G
G
G
G
And
the
same
any
questions
on
our
seawall
status
report,
I
know
I
went
through
that
quickly.
Obviously,
kathy
would
normally
be
presenting
all
these
items.
The
it
looks
like
they're
getting
pretty
close
to
having
everything
started.
Almost
I
got
a
lot
of
completes
in
there.
Several
more
are
underway
and
there's
not
that
many
more
to
replace.
So
I'm
wondering
if
we're
going
to
be
wrapped
up
before
the
end
of
this
fiscal
year,
which
would
be
great.
G
G
G
Necessarily
a
dock,
it
was
only
going
to
be
some
mooring
pilings
to
be
able
to
tie
the
barge
up
to
the
side,
but
you
know
a
commercial
grade,
seawall
system,
so
that
we
can
run
track
machines
on
and
off
of
barges
and
just
being
able
to
transition
all
the
seawall
panels.
Things
of
that
nature
from
the
land
onto
that
barge
dirt.
On
and
off
things
like
that,.
C
G
Master
permitting
agreement-
let's
see
for
the
seawall
and
riprap
permit
not
listed
on
here,
is
the
fact
that
we
we've
actually
had
to
prompt
dep
to
allow
us
to
make
our
payment.
We've
tried
that
last
rai,
they
just
asked
for
an
additional
fee.
Do
we've
been
trying
to
pay
but
they're
still
on
their
side,
haven't
and
put
the
the
invoice
in
the
system.
Yet
for
us
to
even
pay
itself,
which
is
kind
of
interesting.
G
You
receive
an
rei,
and
now
you
try
to
pay
it,
and
you
can't
so
and
then
for
army
corps.
We've
got
a
meeting
set
up
on
may
27th,
because
the
rai
that
they
issued
was
a
very
broad
rai
and
so
not
easily
answered,
because
it
could
go
in
so
many
different
directions.
So
we've
been
going
back
and
forth
with
army
corps
and
we've
finally
got
a
meeting
set
up
or
the
consultant
hans
wilson
has
a
meeting
set
up
with
us
and
so
we'll
get
that
one
moving
again.
Okay,
thank
you.
O
O
O
O
So,
as
you
recall
a
few
months
ago,
we
kind
of
had
went
over
the
long
range
plan,
and
so
now
we've
put
together
some
numbers
for
going
forward
for
our
fiscal
year
22
budget
and
as
we
go
through
this
we'll
present
several
options
for
you
all
to
discuss
and
then
we'll
bring
that
forward
to
council.
As
part
of
the
recommendations.
O
O
O
So
again,
just
a
history
of
assessments.
We
didn't
go
all
the
way
back,
but
you
know
these
are
some
of
the
assessments
in
2019
and
2020.
We
had
the
additional
hundred
dollars,
but
that
was
specifically
for
the
hurricane
irma
project
and
originally
it
was
supposed
to
be
four
years,
but
they
had
upped
the
percentage
increase.
So
we
did
not
need
it
in
2021
or
2022.
O
So
going
on
for
the
assumptions
most
of
these
assumptions
will
be
the
same
for
all
options:
it's
just
the
assessment
and
the
seawall
program
only
that
has
the
difference
so
currently,
on
the
base.
We
said:
okay,
we'll
start
with
our
550,
our
additional
assessment.
Again
I,
as
I
mentioned,
we
did
not
need
for
21
in
2022
and
in
the
base
assumption
we
assumed
550
all
the
way
across.
O
O
O
O
O
The
pension
is
per
schedule
for
the
defined
benefit
plan
and
for
our
defined
contribution,
we're
trying
to
increase
that
from
seven
and
a
half
percent
of
a
match,
because
currently
we
match
the
first
five
percent
at
a
hundred
percent
of
what
the
employee
puts
in
and
fifty
percent
from
five
to
ten
percent
of
what
the
employee
puts
in,
and
we
want
to
we're.
Looking
at
doing
a
hundred
percent
match
up
to
ten
percent
of
employee.
O
What
the
employee
puts
in
other
estimated
increases
is
a
seven
percent
for
health
insurance
and
10
percent
for
workers
comp
on
the
liability
insurance
side.
We
have
a
six
percent
increase,
estimated
and
again
for
the
seawall
rep
program.
It's
about
4770,
linear
fee
of
seawall
replacement,
based
on
our
current
pro
forma
administration
and
computer
overhead
are
estimated
at
three
percent.
O
So
some
of
those
estimates
we'll
have
before
we
finalize
our
budget,
such
as
the
health,
insurance
liability,
insurance,
the
administration
and
computer
head,
will
be
updated
as
well,
and
that
is
based
on
all
funds.
So,
that's
why
we
don't
have
it
done
right
now,
because
we
have
to
get
all
funds
balanced
and
allocated
because
it's
based
on
each
fund's
share.
O
M
O
M
O
Correct
personnel
all
the
benefits,
those
are
going
to
be
city-wide
same
thing
with
workers
comp
with
general
liability
insurance.
Sometimes
the
spread
does
change
so
say:
one
fund
has
a
big
capital
project
that
comes
online.
It
may
actually
reduce
the
percentage
that
you
would
see
for
general
liability
because
it
puts
a
little
higher
burden
on
another
fund.
O
O
O
We
throw
merit
increase
in
there
still
at
four
percent,
because
that's
our
current.
What
we
currently
are
proposing
estimated
increases
are
three
percent
for
pension,
six
percent
for
health
insurance,
ten
percent
for
workers,
comp
insurance,
five
percent
for
liability
insurance
and
all
other
operating.
We
estimate
at
a
three
percent
overall.
L
O
Generally,
just
increasing
costs
because
again
it
could
be,
it
could
be
one.
It
could
be
both
right,
but
we
don't
know
what
the
costs
were
going
to
be
and
generally
costs
have
been
going
up.
So
at
the
moment
it's
cost.
But
as
we
get
to
that
year,
we
look
at
it
and
we'll
say:
okay,
can
you
hold
it
flat
because
the
cost
didn't
go
up
as
much
then
or
you
can
still
move
it
up,
but
you
might
be
able
to
do
a
little
bit
more
sea
wall.
L
The
reason
I
was
asking
is
because
I
was
going
to
comment
later
on
your
previous
slide,
about,
where
you
say
no
rate
increases,
I'm
not
sure
if
I
was
running
the
railroad
that
that
would
be
the
way
I'd
do
it.
I
mean
we
know
what
gary
just
showed
us
is
that
we're
going
to
run
into
a
brick
wall
on
the
sea.
Walls
are
going
to
be
falling
down
and
we're
not
going
to
have
any
money
to
fix
them
and
we're
going
to
have
to
take
some
big
rate
increases.
L
We're
gonna
have
to
take
some
big
rate
increases.
It
seems
to
me
it
would
be
better
smarter
to
take
a
little
bit
every
year,
yep
build
up,
build
up
a
little
cushion
and
then,
when
you
do
have
to
take
a
big
rate
increase,
it
might
not
be
quite
as
big
and
people
aren't
gonna
have
as
many
heart
attacks
as
they
will.
You
know
with
what's
coming.
O
O
So
again,
on
the
expenditure
side,
the
riprap
mitigation
project,
total
project
cost-
is
approximately
8.2
million.
Again
it's
scheduled
in
fiscal
year.
2021
has
not
started
yet
so
that
may
move
forward
and
again,
the
repayment
of
that
line
is
scheduled
for
fiscal
year
2022.
So
if
we
move
the
project
that
will
also
move
out
another
year,
the
special
projects
are
presented
on
the
next
slide
and
is
currently
being
funded
from
the
planned
reserves.
O
O
O
Then
you've
got
your
dredging,
your
transfers
for
the
debt
and
the
spoil
site
is
on
its
own
line.
So
you
can
kind
of
see
all
the
various
pieces
you
can
see
where
we're
building
up
those
funds
to
for
that
spoil
site
project,
and
then
we
use
it.
So
that's
why,
by
fiscal
year
2026
you
see
it
back
down
at
zero
and
where
the
district
would
end
at
projected
carryover
and
out
in
2026.
O
O
O
That's
about
an
extra
779
000,
almost
780
000
generated
in
revenue,
which
of
course,
will
be
added
to
the
expenditures
for
the
seawall,
and
that
adds
about
2,
400
linear
feet
to
the
program
in
all
years
and
again,
the
three
percent
is
added
in
there
as
well,
but
that
just
means
you're
doing
a
little
bit
just
a
tad
a
little
bit
less.
Just
like
you
said
so.
O
You
can
see
how
that
affects
the
pro
forma
overall
again
at
the
in
fiscal
year,
2026
you're
down
to
about
772
000
in
reserves
and
again
our
divisions,
try
to
try
to
be
very
careful
so
a
lot
of
times.
We
do
end
up
the
year
with
a
little
bit
more,
but
so,
as
we
got
close,
if
we
were
still
that
low,
we
would
probably
still
be
recommending.
A
A
O
L
Assuming
that
the
costs
don't
go
up,
and
we
know
that
that's
not
going
to
be
the
case,
it's
going
to
take
51
years
to
replace
that
256
thousands
feet
even
with
this
150,
it's
still
going
to
take
over
34
years,
yes
to
replace
yeah,
so
I
yeah
mr
court
said
that
isn't
nearly
enough
150
doesn't
even
come
close
because,
what's
going
to
happen,
is
you're
still
going
to
wind
up
having
to
take
big
increases
later,
if
you
don't
and
the
longer
we
wait,
the
worse
it
gets.
Yes.
C
Yeah
jake
dot
the
other
question
I've
got
well.
Maybe
it's
part
question
in
comment:
two
is,
and
that's
just
the
ability
to
ramp
up
to
to
a
level
where
we
can
actually
spend
that,
so
that
150
added
to
the
program
for
a
couple
years
to
get
us
started.
Maybe
what
the
contractor
needs
as
well
to
be
able
to
to
increase
the
capacity
to
be
able
to
accomplish
this.
G
Yeah
and
that's
typically
the
case
in
burn
store
where
we
we
like
to
run
burn
store,
do
the
tide
levels
in
the
summer
when
we
can
make
those
corners
and
stuff,
but
for
pgi
we
pretty
much
are
working
non-stop
through
the
area.
You
may
see
us
move
out
of,
say
the
bird
section
and
move
the
barges
up
and
around
up
to
you
know
up
near
palms,
but
in
essence
they're
always
something
going
on
and
one
thing
they
were
very
successful
in
ramping
up
production
when
irma
hit.
G
So
I'm
sure
in
a
case
like
this,
they
would
be
able
to
do
something
similar.
I
don't
know
if
it
would
take
them
that
long
to
really
get
ramped
up.
Of
course,
I
don't
know
the
availability
of
leased
barges
and
equipment
and
things
of
that
nature,
but
for
irma
it
seemed
to
work
pretty
good
and
just
say
for
the
mcg,
our
current
vendor,
just
for
their
portion
of
the
project
too.
Of
course
we
had
two
other
contractors,
but
taking
that
aside,
I
know
mcg
definitely
ramped
up
nicely
for
us.
C
So
did
we
see
any
benefit
from
or
benefit
or
lack
of
benefit
from
having
multiple
contractors
working
on
irma
was
that
did
that
work
all
right,
and
I
guess
what
I'm
thinking
about
is.
You
know
maybe
we're
getting
to
a
point
where
getting
a
second
contractor
might
be
worthwhile
as
well.
So
you
don't
have
all
your
eggs
in
one
basket.
G
Yeah,
I
know
it,
it
worked
out
fairly
smooth.
I
know
we
had
a
little
bit
of
growing,
pains
and
stuff
and
the
reason
we
had
to
break
it
down
further.
I
think
we
were
tapping
out
at
bonding
limits
on
some
of
the
companies,
so
it
was
tough
to
get
somebody
to
bid
it.
They
could
reach
those
big
bonds
because
everybody
was
still
busy.
G
G
A
O
P
H
A
G
And
I
know
that
offer
was
made
many
a
time
during
irma
in
the
beginning:
hey
you
can't
get
here
today.
I
want
my
wall
fixed
I'll,
put
it
up
myself
and
then
they
got
numbers
on
it
and
then
they
called
back
okay.
When
are
we
going
to
be
on
the
schedule?
So
it's
not
anything!
Anybody
wants
to
stomach
it
pain.
You
know
550
even
700
a
year,
your
payback
on
another,
what
40
50
000
seawall
in
your
backyard?
It's
going
to
take
you
a
long
time
to
make
that
up.
G
O
Yes,
we're
pretty
much
done,
I
mean
there
might
be
like
we're
for
the
actual
seawall
construction,
we're
just
trying
to
finalize
everything,
but
they
pretty
much
paid
us
a
hundred
percent.
You
know
on
whatever
we
submitted
the
only
piece
that
we're
still
obviously
is
still
kind
of
open
is
the
riprap
mitigation
project.
O
2004
was
hurricane
charlie.
That
projects
are
those
projects
are
all
closed
out.
We
actually
were
able
to
close
out
with
fema
completely
finally,
in
fiscal
y
mid-fiscal
year,
2020.
so,
but
the
projects
that
were
outstanding
were
not
sea
wall
projects,
so
when
they
finally
closed
it
out,
they
were
a
couple
utility
welcome.
O
Oh
yeah,
we
got
one
more
alternative
just
so
you
can
kind
of
see
whether
you're
thinking
about
it
or
not.
I'll
present
it
so
again
when
public
works
brought
the
consultant
in
and
they
spoke
to
the
council
and
had
provided
the
original
recommendation
of
the
150
council
had
asked
if
there
was
any
other
options,
and
so
this
is
one
option.
Obviously
we
have
more,
you
could
say,
hey.
Well,
let's
do
five.
You
know,
let's
do
75
dollars
the
first
year
and
start
from
there
again.
O
This
is
just
to
get
this
discussion
going
and
get
your
direction
on
what
you
would
like
to
see.
So
in
this
one
we
said:
okay,
let's
start
at
35
per
year,
because
that's
500
linear
feet
extra
and
keep
bringing
that
up
all
the
way
through.
So,
as
you
see
in
the
the
last
year,
we're
up
to
175
dollars,
and
you
see
what
the
the
sea
wall
so
that
by
the
by
fiscal
year,
2026
you'd
be
at
2500
linear
feet
give
or
take
with
the
three
percent
increases
and
your
carryover
endings
about
1.4.
O
I
H
H
L
H
L
You
know
start
at
a
higher
number
and
then
ramp
it
up.
So
you
get.
I
would
at
the
end
I
wouldn't
get
to
to
the
585
average.
I
would
get
to
the
700
average,
but
you
could
ramp
it
and
then
people
are
going
to
be
more
used
to
it
going
up
and
then
beyond
26
I
mean:
do
you
keep
going
up
or
do
you
level
it
off
a
little
bit?
I
don't
know,
but
if
you,
if
you
step
it,
you
get
people
used
to
it
going
up
because
the
150
isn't
going
to
be
enough.
O
L
L
N
L
L
So
your
budget,
your
total
budget,
you
look
at
what
your
budget
is
for
700,
the
700
and
you
just
you,
keep
the
same
bottom
line
number
and
you
just
adjust
it.
So
you
start
a
little
lower
and
you
end
higher
than
700,
so
that
the
whole
thing
gets
you
the
same
amount
of
money
as
at
700
and
and
your
assessment
at
the
end
of
2026
is
going
to
be
much
higher
than
it'll.
Be.
However,
however,
however
much
you
were
down
in
the.
I
L
N
O
N
A
I
appreciate
what
mr
karsky
is
saying,
but
I
think
that's
too
light
if
you
recall
the
the
engineering
consultants
had
a
number
that
was
dramatically
higher
and
we
backed
that
down
significantly
in
order
to
get
the
150
per
I,
the
150
doesn't
help
us.
It
helps
us,
but
not
enough
right.
I
think
what
we
should
be.
Signaling
is
150.
A
H
A
I
don't
think
it's
going
to
work,
otherwise,
there
just
won't
be
enough
money
and
you're
going
to
need
some
amount
just
to
compensate
for
the
call
it
three
percent
increase
cost
every
year,
if
you're
dropping
linear
feet
per
year
per
year
per
year
per
year.
It's
that
caucus
race,
we're
just
marching
in
place.
So.
O
So
let
me
go
back
to
this
150.
So
when
we
bring
this
to
council,
would
you
like
to
see
say
150
with
a
say,
25
increase
per
year
through
2026.,
because
I'll
present
what
you,
what
you
would
like
to
recommend,
I
mean.
Obviously
they
only
have
to
talk
about
2022,
specifically
for
what
they're
gonna
put
on
the
trim,
notices
that
go
out
in
august,
but-
or
I
could
say,
do
you
want
150
for
two
years
and
then
go
up
to
200
for
two
years
and
then
go
up
to
225
or
250.
E
L
Negotiated
ourselves
down
and
that
went
to
council
what
we
should
go
to
is
with
the
full
amount
that
that
study
and
then
and
then
let
council
figure
out
what
they
want
to
do,
because
that's
really
that's
really
what
needs
to
happen.
Anything
else
is
going
to
put
the
whole
system
at
risk
because
you're
not
going
to
have
enough
money
and
you're
going
to
have
sea
walls
falling
down
all
over
the
place,
whether
you're
having
a
hurricane
or
not
so
so
we
we
in
order
to
be
a
little
bit
more
palatable.
L
O
I
do
think
they
did
understand
that
that
was
your
recommendation
to
start
a
little
lower,
but
I
think
they
were
thinking
of
and
again
when
it
was
taken
to
them.
It
was
only
back
in
january,
I
believe
or
december
I
forget
when
they
actually
took
it
to
them,
but
I
think
with
the
worries
of
covid
and
various
other
things
going
on,
I
don't
know
that
they
were
ready
to
make
that
recommendation
or
or
they
kind
of
wanted,
some
other
additional
input.
But
we
can
recommend
that
you
stick
with
the
150.
O
C
I
would
jake
I.
I
would
think
that
we
have
the
ability
to
recommend
that
we
start
with
150
with
the
idea
that
we're
going
to
start
ramping
up
from
there,
and
I
have
a
tendency
to
think
about
things
in
terms
of
communications,
because
that's
where
my
background
is,
and
one
of
the
things
that
we
don't
do,
a
good
job
of
is
really
explaining
to
everybody
what
we
have
and
the
sea
walls
everybody
likes
them.
C
They
understand
them,
but
a
lot
of
things
they
don't
understand
is
the
fact
that
seawalls,
because
they're
concrete,
don't
have
you
know,
unlimited
life
concrete
wears
out
sea
walls
break
and
they're
going
to
deteriorate,
even
if
we
don't
have
any
storms,
so
we're
always
going
to
have
that
requirement,
and
the
other
thing
is
it's
way
less
expensive
and
a
lot
easier
on
everybody
to
do
it.
This
way
than
just
turn
the
problem
over
to
everybody
and
let
them
do
it.
C
One
of
the
reasons
our
community
is
so
attractive
is
because
our
our
city,
our
community,
maintains
the
sea
walls,
that's
one
of
the
really
bright
spots
of
and
in
the
canal,
depth
too.
So
I
like
the
idea
of
getting
started
in
this
right
now
and
going
with
150,
for
you
know
for
a
while,
until
we
start
ramping
up
in
my
mind,
I'm
I'm
also
looking
at
the
at
the
requirement
to
operationally
ramp
up
to
the
capability
to
be
able
to
handle
this
too.
L
With
no
increases,
then
that
I
would,
I
would
show
150
in
2022
and
then
I
would
every
year
I
would
ramp
it
up
by
whatever
some
period.
Some
number
we
can
agree
with,
and
it's
just
a
plan
now.
Maybe
they
can't
ramp
up
fast
enough,
and
maybe
they
may
be
next
yeah,
but
but
I
would,
I
would
put
a
number
in
there-
that's
higher
than
150
successive
years
and
and
a
step
up
every
single
year.
L
O
O
L
H
A
Yeah
we
we
have
about
a
four
or
five
year,
grace
period,
if
you
will,
where
we
can
catch
up
if
we're
aggressive
about
it,
but
in
in
2029,
etc.
2030
gary
you'd
have
to
give
me
the
numbers,
that's
when
things
begin
to
hit
the
fan
and
we've
got
to
aggressively
get
to
that
point
or
we're
going
to
see
a
giant
need
so
that
signals.
I
think,
where
we're
going
with
this.
O
So
and
then
for
alternative
c,
we
will
probably
still
have
to
provide
something
to
counsel
just
to
honor
their
requests
of
some
other
type
of
plan,
but
we
will
let
them
know
that
you
requested
that
you
are
for
alternative
b
and
we
will
up
alternative
c
to
start
with
a
higher
dollar
amount.
No,
no.
I.
L
M
L
L
O
I
totally
understand
what
you're
saying
we'll
do
c,
but
we
may
have
to
do
a
d
then,
because
I'm
just
gonna
tell
you
what
I
heard
from
council
at
their
meeting.
Was
they
wanted
a
stepped
approach
that
started
with
a
smaller
amount,
so
we'll
have
to
provide
them,
at
least
that,
but
maybe
we'll
start
at
a
higher,
not
35
dollars
per
year,
but
75
and
then
ramp.
It
up
quicker
and
we'll.
Let
them
know
that
was
not
your
recommendation
at
all,
but
I
have
to
also.
O
N
A
O
O
Yes
and
you're,
more
than
obviously
counsel
approve,
welcomes
input
so
we'll
let
you
know
which
we're
planning
on
bringing
it
to
the
second
meeting
in
june.
So
that's
that
second
wednesday,
because
bsi
will
be
earlier
in
the
month
in
june,
and
that
way
we'll
bring
both
of
them
to
council
the
second
meeting
in
june
and
please
come
and
bring
your
comments
as
well
as
what
we
provide
them
from
the
minutes.
Okay,.
C
G
I
would
think
so
and
if
we
do
hit
a
point
to
where
they're,
not
all
we
have
to
do
is
go
back
out
on
the
street
to
add
a
second
contractor
like
you
had
mentioned,
so
I
mean
that's
always
an
option
there
in
a
what
a
three-year
agreement
with
a
three-year
renewal.
If
I'm
not
mistaken,
that's
how
that
one's
set
up.
So
at
any
time
where,
where
we're
not
meeting
what
we
need
them
to
meet,
then
you
know
we
put
it
on
the
street
and
add
a
second
contractor.
C
G
So
yeah
we'll
have
to
work
on
increasing
our
staff
level,
maybe
not
staff
level,
but
our
ability
to
produce
panels,
because
right
now
I
think
we
hold
525
panels
in
the
yard.
At
a
time.
Obviously
we
were
we
dumped
10
000
over
10
000
on
the
ground
during
irma,
with
a
contractor
or
with
a
contracted
service.
To
do
that
plus
staging
all
the
panels.
I
mean
we've
we've
done
it
before,
and
what,
if
we
do
10
miles
within
two
years,
so
we
can
make
things
happen
for.
Q
M
G
I
know
that
the
increase
was
specifically
for
increase
in
sea
walls,
so
it's
not
just
the
the
you
can't
just
take
that
150
and
divide
it
by
the
the
amount
of
footage
we
do
because,
obviously,
there's
staff
involved.
There's
we've
got
to
buy
the
concrete.
We
got
to
buy
the
steel.
We
got
to
put
things
together,
so
it's
not
a
direct
correlation,
but
yes,
it's
the
overall
price
per
foot.
It's
all
included
in
that.
G
H
H
H
J
J
J
Here's
an
overview
of
the
layout
in
review
of
the
applications
staff
does
not
recommend
favorable
consideration
based
on
the
position
and
alignment
of
the
second
lift,
as
it
relates
to
article
2,
section,
2-1
c
4,
subsection,
a
which
is
would
be
in
harmony
with
the
general
intent
and
purpose
of
this.
Article
c
would
not
impede
safe
navigation
and
d,
would
not
allow
a
structure
or
use
aesthetically
or
functionally
incompatible
with
existing
structures
or
uses
on
surrounding
lands.
J
A
A
question
right-
and
I
don't
think
this
is
material,
but
it
does
shift
it
just
a
little
bit.
These
are
two
lots
and
they
they
are
not.
That
happens
to
be
combined
by
one
owner,
but
we're
interpreting
that
to
mean
that
they
have
more
than
85
feet
of
seawall.
In
fact,
it's
less
than
that
each
lot,
so
wouldn't
the
wouldn't.
The
code
suggest
that
they're,
because
since
they're
doing
lot
eight
in
this
case
that
they're
applying
for
an
exception
outside
the
structural
limitation,
this
is
not
really
two
lifts
on
one
lot.
A
J
A
C
Jake
dime
for
the
record,
I
have
been
sworn
in
and
I'm
represent
kiesling
construction.
The
this.
If
you
see
that
legally,
these
two
lots
are
combined,
so
that
is
one
considered
to
be
one
parcel,
so
we've
got
more
than
the
85
feet
of
seawall,
so
they're
allowed
to
have
two
two
lifts.
The
the
issue
here
is
that
the
second
lift
is
being
built
with
to
the
pilings
outside
the
boat
limitation
line.
C
C
A
C
Q
C
E
C
Need
clarification
so,
but
what's
in
front
of
us
today,
what's
in
front
of
you
today
is
the
fact
that
this
is
a
parcel
that
has
more
than
85
feet
of
seawall
and
the
request
is
for
a
second
lift.
If
that
is
approved
and
we
won't
go
into
if
it
isn't
approved,
because
then
you
know
the
combinations
increase
exponentially,
but
if
it
is
approved,
then
you
have
in
fact
you
have
two
lifts
that
would
both
be
out
of
code.
However,
they
exist
so
they're
grandfathered
in
and
the
code
doesn't
allow.
N
N
C
C
I
don't
know
exactly
I'll
put
them
away
why
that
was
mentioned,
but
I
think
that's
pretty
subjective
the
the
one
that
I
think
that
applies
here
is
navigation.
This
is
the
very
end
of
the
of
the
of
the
canal.
No
boats
come
close
to
it.
No
boats
go
near
it.
It's
not
interfering
with
navigation
of
anybody
else
or
any
other
vessel.
No
one
would
be
coming
down
there
for
a
reason
to
interfere
with
that
lift
or
for
that
lift
interfere
with
them.
C
C
A
C
L
L
C
P
M
C
M
L
L
A
N
B
F
F
F
Okay.
My
name
is
brian
menife,
my
wife
vicky,
and
I
just
bought
the
lot.
That's
adjacent
to
that,
so
we're
taking
it
3713
carmichael
right
there
and
if
I
seem
exceptionally
nervous,
I
assure
you
it's
only
because
I'm
exceptionally
nervous
public
speak
is
not
my
thing.
You
all
seem
very
comfortable
with
it,
but
anyway,
as
the
new
owners
of
property
at
3713,
carmichael
were
opposed
to
the
request
for
a
special
permit
for
boat
lift
for
the
adjoining
property.
F
We
have
been
looking
at
property
in
this
area
for
the
last
over
two
years,
and
one
of
the
criterion
we
had
given
our
realtor
is.
We
are
not
interested
any
of
the
three
n
lots
on
a
canal
because
of
the
crowding
of
boats,
the
tight
spaces
for
lifts
and
maneuvering,
and
we've
just
seen
too
many
times
when
there
were
people
butting
heads
over
that
situation
of
tight
lips.
F
F
H
F
F
So
essentially,
if,
if
I
hadn't
known
that
they
were
going
to
be
putting
in
two
new
docks
right
there,
well,
maybe
we
wouldn't
have
bought
the
house,
but
in
the
meantime
we
did
so
some
of
the
specific
concerns
about
the
proposed
boat
lift
and
if
you
look
at
the
this
drawing
here,
so
the
existing
lift
right
up
there
where
it
says
existing
okay.
Now
I
just
added
two
black
lines
there.
F
F
I
assume
most
people
here
have
done
a
lot
of
boating
things
and
seems
like
there's
always
a
time
when
people
want
to
get
get
out
and
get
off
the
water
like
every
time
a
storm
comes
up
or
the
wind
comes
up
and
that's
when
everybody
wants
to
get
off
so
there's
a
safety
issue
with
the
fact
that
for
them
to
back
off
their
lift,
they
really
don't.
I
mean
there's
no
margin
for
air
to
hitting
our
lift.
F
The
lift
that
is
has
just
been
added
on
the
previous
one
is
13
and
a
half
foot
wide.
So
now
you
have
a
35
foot
boat.
You
got
this
boat
dock,
you've
got
the
proposed
boat
dock
or
lift,
and
our
lift-
and
you
know
frankly,
if
I
wanted
to
buy
a
place
that
was
like
a
marina
condo
situation
where
they've
got
lifts
stacked
up,
then
that's
what
I
would
have
bought.
F
F
F
P
D
D
The
boat
was
blown
sideways,
making
it
necessary
for
the
captain
of
the
vessel,
and
I
have
no
idea
who
that
person
was
to
leave
the
helm
to
attempt
to
move
the
boat
manually
onto
the
lift,
since
the
only
other
passengers
on
the
boat
were
young
children.
This
was
presented
to
me
as
a
dangerous
and
not
safe
situation.
D
A
K
I'll
take
my
mask
off
now
for
the
record.
My
name
is
linda
taylor
and
I
reside
at
3618
bone
air
court.
I'm
actually
here
representing
not
only
myself,
but
I
have
a
letter
from
another
homeowner.
If
I
may
read,
I
believe
they
have
sent
it
to
you
for
the
record,
but
I
like
to
just
read
it
quickly:
it's
not
that
long.
So
I
am
reading
a
letter
from
mrs
dorothy
gerholtz,
dana
beagle
and
judge
duncan
beagle.
K
K
K
If
an
exception
is
made,
and
this
proposed
boat
lift
is
allowed
to
be
installed.
It
would
not
only
be
very
obtrusive,
but
would
also
set
a
very
bad
precedent
for
other
aisle
homeowners
who
may
want
to
do
the
same
thing
in
the
future.
These
codes
were
enacted
for
very
good
reasons,
including
aesthetic
and
safety
considerations.
K
K
K
K
Okay,
so
my
understanding
is
this
special
permit
is
because
they're
in
violation
of
the
structured
limitation
lines,
but
when
you
do
actually
look
at
the
drawing-
and
you
see
it
as
it's
presented,
it's
just
showing
you
the
lifts,
but
you
need
to
visualize
the
boats
there
and
when
you
visualize,
the
boats
you'll
also
notice
that
they're
going
to
be
in
violation
of
the
vessel
limitation
lines,
which
is
not
actually
part
of
the
permit.
It
was
not
identified.
K
K
K
K
K
What
are
the
special
circumstances
that
prevent
building
a
lift
in
compliance
with
the
structural
limitation
lines
in
compliance
with
the
vessel
limitation
lines?
Now
I
don't
know
the
history,
but
when
I
look
at
the
drawing
there
is
no
reason
why
they
can't
be
built
within
the
lines.
So
I
say:
maybe
they
want
a
larger
lift.
K
Maybe
they
don't
want
the
lift
blocking
their
view.
Is
it
just
because
it's
more
convenient
because
there
is
no
obvious
hardship
to
build
the
lift
outside
of
those
structural
limitation
lines,
but
then
I
look
at
so
okay.
Well,
it's
a
pie
shaped
lot.
You
have
a
smaller
seawall
pie,
shaped
lots.
There
is
an
expectation
that
you're
not
going
to
be
able
to
put
a
big
lift
in
otherwise
you
buy
a
piece
of
property
that
has
a
longer
seawall.
K
K
Actually,
when
you
look
at
the
lift
as
proposed,
yes,
it
is
identical
to
the
one
they
already
have,
but
it
is
larger.
It
is
a
larger
lift
than
that
resides
at
2650
ryan
boulevard,
the
owner
that
just
flew
down
from
colorado
to
be
presented.
So
it's
a
larger
lift.
That's
not
the
expectation
of
a
pie
shaped
lot.
K
We
talked
about
density,
we
have
the
photo
there.
It's
very
easy
in
the
drawing
to
say,
there's
room,
you
have
to
visualize
boats
being
there
when
you
visualize
a
boat
and
you
don't
have
to
be
scientific.
I
cut
a
little
piece
of
cardboard
out
and
I
said:
okay,
if
I'm
going
to
put
a
boat
on
that
lift,
assuming
it's
going
to
go
out
a
little
bit
either
way.
K
Not
only
am
I
violating
the
vessel
limitation
lines
and
the
structural
limitation
lines,
I'm
butting
up
against
the
existing
lift,
that's
not
piloting
it
in
it's
once
I'm
lifted
on
the
boat
or
I'm
down
in
my
dock
right
on
the
lift.
So
it
is
a
safety
concern
that
is
before
you
talk
about
wind
and
water
currents.
Pushing
you
around.
The
best
pilot
still
cannot
turn
on
a
dime
additional.
K
K
Additionally,
you
need
to
talk
about
equitable
treatment.
So,
yes,
let's
say
you
do
consider
building
the
structure
in
this
slot.
What
about
deborah
foster
at
2662
ryan
street?
Are
you
going
to
then
allow
her
to
have
one?
And
if
you
look
at
the
picture
with
the
boat
story
on
the
lips,
there
is
no
space.
K
Yes,
you
are
at
the
end
of
a
canal,
but
it
doesn't
mean
you
don't
have
five
other
boats
trying
to
get
in
and
out
and
as
was
mentioned
when
it's
a
nice
day,
everybody
wants
to
get
out
the
same
time
and
when
it's
dark
tide's
coming
in
or
out,
everybody
wants
to
come
in.
At
the
same
time,
injuries
are
going
to
happen.
Property
damage
is
going
to
happen,
the
location
of
the
lift
we're
just
looking
at
how
it's
proposed
again
convenience,
it's
not
undue
hardship.
K
B
A
N
A
E
L
E
L
H
L
To
this
one,
but
but
but
that's
that's
I
mean
okay,
hey
every
every
every
property
should
have
a
right
to
have
a
dock.
They
should
I
mean
you
bought
a
piece
of
property
with
with
waterfront,
and
you
should
be
able
to
put
a
dock
on
there.
You
know
there
is
a
dock
there,
a
dock
and
a
lift.
You
should
be
able
to
put
your
boat
on
there.
You
can't
I
mean.
Q
L
N
L
A
M
Yeah
ron
living-
I
I
guess
my
biggest
question
at
this
time-
is:
why
isn't
the
the
proposed
new
lift
moved
in
this
case?
I
don't
know
what
direction
that
is,
but
let's
call
it
south
so
that
it
does
not
exceed
the
the
limitations
there.
I
mean
what
you
know.
Why
does
it
have
to
be
in
that
location
which
causes
it
to
be
outside
the
boundaries
when
it
could
we
move
down
a
couple
of
feet
and
be
within
the
boundaries?
Does
anybody
have
an
answer
for
that.
E
C
C
Construction,
the
main
reason
you
can't
do
the
because
of
the
the
the
limited
sea
wall.
If
you
move
the
the
lift
all
the
way
down,
so
you
could
get
the
all
the
pilings
into
physically.
You
can't
get
all
the
pilings
into
it.
The
only
way
you
could
get
all
the
pilings
inside
the
45
is
put
it
up
against
the
seawall
and
we
know
that's
not
going
to
work
so
the
only
in
the
farther
you
move
it
to
the
south,
the
harder
the
smaller
boat
you're
going
to
get
in
there.
C
C
If
you
turn
it
around,
it's
going
to
be
smaller
than
that
and
the
you
know
the
general
feeling
locally
is
in
the
harbor
start
getting
under
24
feet,
you
start
getting
a
boat
that
is
going
to
be
tough
in
the
you
know
in
the
weather
out
in
the
harbor,
so
people
are
looking
for
something
that
is
going
to
be
more
seaworthy
than
something
24
feet,
and
that's
that's
why
this
is
configured
like
it
is
a
vessel
limitation
line.
The
vessel
limitation
line
is
actually
shown
on
there.
C
E
A
A
C
I
think
the
heartburn
that
I'm
hearing
is
just
the
proximity
of
the
approach
to
the
lift
to
the
adjacent
lift.
As
far
as
the
navigation
and
everything
else,
that's
really
pretty
much
a
failed
argument,
but
I
understand
what
everybody's
saying
about
the
proximity
to
that
other
lift.
So
maybe
we
go
back
and
take
a
look
at
at
reconfiguring
this
and
see
if
we
can
do
something
to
alleviate
that
all
right.
I
would.
A
A
A
G
There's
for
the
record
gary
disher,
if
any
you
say
if
it
changes
substantially
right
now,
it's
the
the
whole
application
is
for
two
pilings
outside
of
the
structure
limitation
line.
So
if
it's
rotated
or
moved
and
a
third
piling
then
comes
outside,
then
it
has
to
be
re-advertised,
so
it
has
to
be
less
than
or
equal
to
what
the.
G
L
G
C
C
Having
had
just
a
little
bit
of
experience,
getting
these
continued
for
this
reason,
what
we've
had
to
do
in
the
in
the
past
is
redesign,
it
get
it
back
to
bob
and
it
gets
republished
again,
but
the
special
permit
continues.
It's
still
the
same
special
permit.
It's
continued
with
a
different
design.
That's
what
we've
had
to
do
in
the
past.
A
A
Okay,
that
that
that's
kind
of
the
answer
that
was
going
to
be
out
there
so-
and
I
guess
the
second
part
of
that
is-
is
there
anything
in
the
law
in
the
real
estate
law
or
in
it?
Certainly
it's
not
in
the
code
that
would
say
that
the
lot
owner
of
both
couldn't
simply
sell
off
the
current
vacant
lot
as
it
is
today.
It.
G
My
understanding,
it
was
just
a
basic
killing
combined
and
killing
combined,
doesn't
break
a
plat
down.
So
it's
not
like
you're
vacating
the
flat
underneath
it
I've
got
where
my
house
is.
I've
got
a
kill
in
combine
as
well,
but
if
I
want
to
go
ahead
and
split
off
the
two
lots
out
of
the
group
you're
more
than
welcome
to
because
it
doesn't
legally
split
it,
it's
more,
it
helps
trim
up
tax
bills
and
stuff
you
get
one
tax
bill
and
then
it
puts
all
the
property
together.
So
you're
you're
capped
under
your
homestead
exemption.
G
A
A
P
A
H
A
Q
So
my
name
is
lisa
kelly,
thor
and
I've
been
sworn
and
I'm
properly
property
owner
of
319
val
harbor
boulevard,
which
we're
scheduled
to
have
the
I'm
scheduled
to
have
doc
replacement
june
7th.
So
my
comment
is
kind
of
two-fold
one.
Since
the
plan
was
established
back
in
september
and
there's
like
57
property
owners
that
were
affected
by
that
plan,
319
bell,
harbor
boulevard.
Q
It
was
just
surprising
to
me
because
my
I
have
a
new
cap-
I
don't
have
any
degradation
of
my
wall
from
my
side.
There
is
a
crack
if
you
look
from
the
water
side,
so
I
wasn't
anticipating
that
my
wall
was
going
to
be
replaced.
I
put
on
a
coating
on
my
dock.
I
put
on
steps
all
within
since
september
and
I
have
a
dog
fence.
Q
That's
on
both
property
lines,
so
it
just
seems
like
it
would
be
courteous
that
in
the
future
the
number
of
people
57
people
affected
by
the
next
year's
plan
be
notified
in
advance.
So
I'm
sure
people
you
know
that
are
seasonal.
I
was
planning
to
go
to
ohio
now
I'm
planning
on
staying
here,
so
that
would
be
courteous,
and
that
would
be
my
recommendation
that,
in
the
future,
property
owners
are
notified
that
they're
on
the
plan.
At
the
time
the
plan
has
developed.
Q
I
got
my
letter
two
weeks
ago,
so
it's
five
weeks.
It
was
five
weeks,
so
I
mean
it's
just
a
lot.
You
know
I
have
to
move
my
water
and
power.
I
live
by
myself
and
so
it's
and
then
my
dock
is
connected.
So
I
have
to
replace
my
dock,
which
is
you
know,
kind
of
a
financial
burden,
and
it
would
have
been
nice
to
know
back
in
september
that
I
had
to
prepare
for
this.
Q
So
at
least
knowing
at
the
time
the
plan
was
developed
rather
than
you
know,
so
the
five
weeks
in
advance
is
fine,
but
if
I
would
have
known
in
september
I
wouldn't
have
done
work
and
I'm
sure
there's
a
lot
of
other
people
that
you
know
put
in
pavers
down
to
their
dock
or
put
in
water
and
power.
That
may
not
do
it
if
they
knew
they
were
on
the
plan
for
that
year.
C
A
question
and
there's
no
place
on
the
website
to
look
at
kind
of
the
projected
seawall
replace.
We
can
see
what
the
the
schedule
for
the
actual
lots
are,
but
there's
nothing
to
look
farther
out.
I
run
into
this
all
the
time.
Every
every
customer
asks
me.
When
do
you
think
they're
going
to
work
on
my
sea
wall,
and
you
know.
Q
L
E
A
C
C
Q
Q
That
may
or
may
not
be
able
to
be
saved,
and
I
have
a
kayak
mechanical
lift
on
there.
Also,
so
there's
a
fair
amount
of
work
that
needs
to
be
done
and
they,
the
contractor
did.
I
did
meet
with
julio
he's
very
pleasant
and
he
said
he
would
help
with
the
fence
moving
and
the
removal
of
the
stuff
on
the
dock,
but
still
it
would
have
been
nice
to
know
like
six
months
ago
rather
than.