►
From YouTube: Planning Commission Meeting 10 24 2022
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
B
C
D
E
F
F
F
B
F
B
F
Next
meeting
will
be
November,
28th
2022
at
this
location
and
at
this
time,
if
there's
anyone
who
wishes
to
address
the
Planning
Commission
on
any
topic
other
than
the
quasi-judicial
portion
of
the
meeting,
which
there
will
be
an
opportunity
to
do
that,
please
come
forward
to
the
podium
state,
your
name
for
the
record.
You
have
three
minutes.
H
Scott
I'm
I
own
the
property
immediately
next
door
to
the
property
in
question
at
age,
17
West,
Marion
Avenue.
So
my
question
was
basically
what
kind
of
properties
are
intended
to
be
built?
Excuse.
H
F
F
Okay,
see
none,
maybe
this
time
Sarah,
let's
swear
in
anybody
who
thinks
they
want
to
speak
at
the
quasi-judicial
hearing
since
you're.
Here
all.
E
F
G
G
J
F
J
On
page
five
of
our
package,
which
is
I,
think
page
two
of
the
page
and
page
two
of
the
minutes
under
item
three
B.
It
says
that
I
move
to
find
it
consistent
with
a
comprehensive
plan
and
then
I
seconded
it
I
know.
I
can
move
it
and
I
know
I
can
second
it,
but
I
don't
think
I
can
do
both.
B
F
F
E
All
right,
so
we
haven't
made
any
changes
to
our
presentation
at
this
time.
The
purpose
of
today's
discussion
is
to
review
the
comments
that
have
been
provided
to
us
and
if
the
commission
desires
to
have
commission
members
vote
to
recommend
the
changes
that
were
noted
in
the
comments
we
received,
would
we
like
to
take
them
one
by
one?
Did
everyone
have
a
chance
to
review
the
comments.
D
Yeah
and
again,
we
have
two
copies
of
the
bylaws.
One
is
the
existing
copy
of
the
bylaws
as
they
exist
today
again,
not
dated
or
indicating
that
it
is
the
current
edition.
We
also,
then,
have
your
annotated
where
you've
gone
through
and
done
the
line
changes
and
we
have
another
copy
of
the
bylaws,
also
without
date,
or
any
indication
that
it's
a
revision
or
anything
else.
D
When
making
our
comments
I
see
that
we
were
sort
of
like
okay,
when
citing
a
page
and
number
for
comment
which
Edition
are
we
comparing
against,
and
so
when
I
go
back
and
compare
we're
still
comparing
to
the
original,
currently
existing
bylaws
by
Page
and
number.
So
it's
still
just
a
little
bit
confusing.
D
This
is
set
up
so
as
we
come
back
again,
we're
going
to
need
a
clearly
legible
copy
that
says:
okay
as
of
this
date,
whatever
this
date,
this
is
the
second
revision,
two,
the
current
existing
bylaws,
as
proposed
amended
by
on
such
and
such
a
date.
So
at
least
we
know
what
copy
or
what
time
frame
we're
working
from
so
they'll
keep
going.
Okay,
I
say
paragraph
one
section:
one
is
that
paragraph
one
section
one
of
this
Edition
there's
a
paragraph,
one
section
one
of
this
Edition.
E
All
right,
so
the
first
comments
that
we've
received
was
Lisa,
Kelly
Thorne,
and
what
she
had
noted
was
that,
including,
if
asked
by
Council
for
the
part
that
was
about
the
capital,
budgeting
process
and
the
duties,
let
me
scroll
down
out
there.
E
B
G
Know
the
only
reason
I
put
if
asked
is
say.
For
example,
we
found
as
a
group
during
different
reviews
of
plan
development.
It's
a
need
for
additional
parking
or
something
some
other
community
benefit
that
we
would
present
that
as
being
knowledgeable
of
what
is
needed
by
the
community,
not
necessarily
as
an
ongoing
thing.
But
if
asked
that
we
should
be
able
to
present
a
capital
projects.
B
G
Comment
which
earlier
was
we've
reviewed
these
in
their
entirety
and
so
I'm
not
really
sure
why
we're
going
back
to
reviewing
them
again.
I
mean
we
went
through
all
of
these
prior
to
the
marketplace
review
it.
You
know
it's
kind
of
disappointing
because
it
feels
like
we're
changing
the
rules
to
change
the
amount
of
people
we
have
in
a
quorum,
and
so
that's
my
general
concern
because
we
already
went
through
these.
As
a
group,
we
came
up
with
one
outstanding
item,
which
was
which
was
the
capital.
K
I
I
I
A
Believe
or
feel
in
my
in
my
mind
that
we
came
to
any
hard
and
fast
conclusions
about
about
the
bylaws
and
it
was
since
the
discussion
was
at
the
prior
meeting
to
provide
the
city
clerk's
office
with
any
of
our
proposed
recommendations
for
change.
It
was
still
alive
and
inactive
issue
and
a
need
I,
don't
think
we're
rehashing
anything.
We
had
some
discussions.
We
didn't
come
to
any
conclusion.
As
far
as
I
was
concerned,.
A
Excuse
me,
we
did
go
through
a
number
of
items.
However,
there
was
some
that
we
needed
to
provide
additional
information
on
not
only
those
that
we
felt
may
need
to
be
re-examined,
but
the
the
reasons
behind
the
rationale
behind
any
potential
changes
or
the
implications
of
those
which
I
feel
that
we're
subsequently
provided
to
the
city
city,
clerk's
office.
D
So
going
back
to
the
original
presentation
by
the
clerk
city
clerk's
office
on
the
proposed
changes
to
the
bylaws.
Yes,
there
was
some
discussion,
but
then
it
was
going
to
be
then
it
would
we'll
get
back
to
you
with,
and
there
was.
It
was
always
intended
to
be
more
discussion,
because
that
was
not
a
final
that
was
just
a
one-time.
So
by
the
time
they
got
back
to
us
with
what
was
going
to
be
a
further
in-depth
discussion.
D
We
had
the
marketplace
meeting
and
in
that
meeting
we
never
actually
got
to
a
discussion
of
the
bylaws
as
an
agenda
item
in
that
we
ended
up
being
adjourned
before
there
was
an
adequate
discussions
and
the
bylaws
were
continued
to
the
next
meeting.
The
next
meeting
was
our
last
meeting
where
we
started
into
it
again
and
I
started
into
a
line
by
line
comment,
and
it
was
obvious
that
it
was
going
to
go
too
long.
D
So
again
said:
okay,
so
board
members
come
back
with
your
comments
to
staff
prior
to
the
14th,
and
we
will
try
to
include
them
as
agenda
items
in
this
meeting.
So
this
is
really
the
first
time
we've
had
an
opportunity
to
do
an
in-depth
review
of
the
bylaws
in
in
Toto
as
a
body
where
we've
all
had
an
opportunity
to
look
at
proposed
changes
from
either
ourselves
or
other
members.
So
this
to
me
is
really
the
first
and
I.
D
Don't
see
this
as
a
final
answer,
I,
don't
see
necessarily
there'd
be
a
hundred
percent
resolution
to
day
this
is,
is
will
probably
take
one
and
maybe
two
more
meetings
before
we
come
to
a
final
thing,
because
after
after
looking
at
these
I
found
some
things
that
I
agreed
with
that
other
people
have
made
that
I,
you
know,
can
change
my
comments
and
stuff
on
so
I
still
think,
there's
room
for
changing
some
of
these
things
and
that
they've
never
been
completely
resolved.
J
Well,
I
think,
since
the
last
meeting
we've
had
a
few
events
that
have
impacted
the
city
that
have
prevented
a
lot
of
people
from
fully
focusing
on
this
issue.
Okay
I
know,
I
haven't
had
the
time
to
focus
on
this
issue.
I
spent,
most
of
my
time,
trying
to
figure
out
who's
going
to
fix
my
house
so
I
think
in
light
of
that,
and
that
includes
the
staff
I
imagine,
the
staff
has
been
pretty
busy
doing
other
things
than
worrying
about
the
bylaws.
I
J
The
people
on
this
board,
as
well
as
other
people,
have
had
to
cope
with
that
I.
Don't
think
we're
prepared
to
deal
with
this
issue
right
now
in
view
of
what's
happened
since
the
last
meeting,
I
mean
the
cities
and
disarray
the
place
is
a
mess
and
we're
here,
counting
Angels
on
the
head
of
a
pin.
I
would
suggest
that
we
put
this
one
off
put
the
bylaws
off
until
we
get
a
better
picture
and
people
have
a
better
chance
to
get
their
life
back
in
order
to
focus
on
this
issue,
I.
J
That
the
level
of
Engagement
that
is
necessary
for
these
bylaws
and
the
other
thing
I
would
want
to
point
out
is
that
it
isn't
just
the
bylaws
for
this
commission
that
are
an
issue.
It's
the
bylaws
for
all
of
the
boards
that
are
currently
being
updated,
and
we
can't
take
this
board
and
make
it
a
totally
separate
kind
of
set
of
rules
for
this
board
as
compared
to
the
other
boards
that
the
city
has
to
manage.
J
I
mean
we
want
to
do
a
five
minute
board,
but
all
the
other
boys
are
seven
members,
so
we're
going
to
create
a
different
kind
of
board.
So
I
think
we
need
to
have
a
little
more
background
as
to
what
goals
are
trying
to
be
achieved
by
the
rewrite
of
these.
These
bylaws
is
it.
Do
you
want
to
make
all
of
the
boards
more
or
less
consistent,
except
for
the
duties
that
they
are
engaged
in
and
their
responsibilities?
J
If
that's
the
case,
then
we
need
to
settle
on
on
the
fact
that
if
all
the
boards
are
going
to
be
seven
Amendment
boys
and
all
the
boys
are
going
to
be
seven
member
boards.
J
F
F
F
If
we
get
down
to
a
manageable
number,
because
clearly
that
has
been
a
challenge
and
I
think
it's
something
the
city
council
is
aware
of
and
thinking
about,
but
I
don't
disagree
with
you
that
if
people
feel
that
they
need
more
time
for
input,
we
have
comments
that
were
included,
but
if
we
feel
that
if
we
wait
another
meeting
or
so
there
will
be
more
comments
than
I
would
be
supportive
of
that.
But
just
recognize
this
is
my
last
meeting
so.
K
A
Much
time
I'm
prepared
today,
but
that's
that's
okay,
because
I
I
made
the
time
to
do
this,
but
everybody
had
different
circumstances.
I
I
A
Time
would
the
commission
members
additional
time
commitment
need
to
to
provide
input
and
comment
to
the
city
court.
G
E
B
D
Necessarily
have
to
we
have
to
look
at
this
sort
of
independently-
it's
just
like
okay.
This
has
now
been
in
several
months
that
we've
been
putting
this
off
I'm
with
with
army.
You
know,
I've
got
I'm
ready
today,
but
I
do
see
the
value
and
and
pushing
it
off
or
not
pushing
it
off,
but
giving
time
for
more
comment.
D
I
I,
don't
think
we
necessarily
have
to
take
into
account
what
other
boards
and
commissions
do,
and
you
know,
I
have
sent
more
than
one
email
to
City
staff
and
to
council
members.
Expressing
my
opinions
on
this
and
as
the
chair
has
mentioned,
city
council
has,
in
their
discussions,
mentioned
the
idea
of
reducing
board
members
or
consolidating
boards
and
I
believe
at
the
last
city
council
meeting
there
were
19
vacancies
sitting
there.
D
You
know
any
of
the
other
boards
and
commissions
could
easily
operate
with
five
members
in
a
quorum
three
when
I
look
at
the
amount
of
paper.
You
know
just
this
week
just
for
this
board
that
the
staff
has
to
generate
for
us
to
all
have
hard
copies,
I
mean
we
could
cut
that
in
half
on
a
monthly
basis
across
the
board
cut
their
administrative
workload
cut.
D
The
administrative
costs
find
a
whole
lot
more
efficient
way
of
doing
it
and
not
necessarily
reduce
citizen
participation
yeah
in
the
meantime,
ideally,
you
know
in
a
more
open
democracy.
You'd
have
a
lot
more
participation.
I
think
we've
been
a
little
frustrated
in
our
efforts
to
get
people
to
volunteer
because,
unfortunately,
or
fortunately,
I
keep
seeing
a
lot
of
these
same
faces
at
the
same
meetings
can
I
finish.
Please.
Okay,
thank.
L
B
So
anyhow,
so.
D
I
feel
very
strong,
both
ways
in
the
words
Billy
Martin,
but
we
can
delay
it,
but
I
don't
want
to
see
it
delayed
indefinitely.
If
we
want
to
delay
it
I
want
to
delay
it
to
a
date
certain
and
not
tie
it
to
whether
or
not
there's
any
other,
large
or
potentially
contentious
agenda
items
on
the
agenda.
D
G
I
have
a
question
on
how
how
positions
are
posted
or
communicated
to
the
public.
I
mean
I
applied
for
the
building
board,
because
I
was
asked
by
a
council
member
not
because
I
saw
it
posted
somewhere.
So
I'm
not
sure
what
the
process
is.
So
if
we
have
a
shortage
of
people,
I've
been
approached
by
several
people.
F
I
think
the
clerk's
office
does
a
very
good
job
of
trying
to
publicize
the
openings
they
advertise
it's
very
prominent
on
all
of
the
city's
Communications
on
their
website
in
the
city
managers
Communications
in
the
council,
members
communication,
so
I'm
I'm
a
little
troubled
by
trying
to
blame
the
communications
method
for
why
we
don't
have
the
response
that
we
might
want
to
have
and
to
Joe's
point
I.
Think
one
thing
we
could
do
if
people
are
supportive
of
recommending
a
lesser
number
of
board
members
I
think
we
could
have
a
motion
to
that
effect.
F
F
L
It's
pretty
evident
that
we
are
not
ready
today,
anyway,
you
look
at
it.
I
think.
That's
one
thing
we
can
agree
on.
However,
I
also
agree
that
this
should
not
drag
on
forever,
but
it
may
need
a
bit
more
input
in
the
context
of
the
other
Commissions
in
order
that
are
involved,
because
we
really
don't-
and
it's
been
mentioned
here
before-
we
really
don't
want
to
stand
alone
with
something
that
may.
B
L
D
Okay
and
one
other
means
and
I
didn't
put
it
down
as
a
prerequisite
or
something
that
ought
to
be
required
for
board
membership.
D
I
found
out
about
it
when
I
went
to
the
Citizens
Academy
and
I
find
that
the
people
who
go
through
the
Punta
Gorda
Citizens
Academy
tend
to
have
a
little
bit
better
understanding
of
the
functioning
of
city
government
and
what
all
of
these
purposes
do,
and
it
was,
is
through
the
Citizens
Academy
that
I
actually
ended
up
volunteering
the
first
time,
but
along
these
lines,
I
don't
mind
stepping
out
and
being
an
example,
Brad
and
and
I
think
the
checks
and
balances
in
this
is
that
we
still
remain
an
Advisory
Board.
D
Our
decision
is
not
final.
Our
decision
will
still
go
to
the
city
council
and
the
city
council
will
make
the
decisions
as
to
whether
or
not
they
want
this
to
be
a
five-member
board,
a
southern
member
board
or
a
nine-member
board.
So
we're
offering
them
Our
advice
our
judgment
on
what
we
have
seen
as
a
working
body
and
what
we
think
will
work.
D
They
obviously
will
have
their
opinion
and
come
back
to
us
with
what
they
see
and
we
will
live
with
whatever
their
decision
is,
but
you
know,
I
don't
have
any
problem
with
stepping
out
and
saying.
This
is
what
we
want.
D
This
is
why
we
think
it's
good
and
and
use
it
as
a
model
for
other
boards
and
commissions
on
a
city-wide
basis,
because
you
know
it
you
can
look
at
all
you
need
to
do
is
look
at
the
agenda
or
the
minutes
from
any
city
council
meeting
and
look
at
the
vacancies
out
there
and
realize
they're,
not
feeling
you
know
and
I
don't
see
things
necessarily
getting
better.
So
anyhow,
thanks.
M
M
I
just
want
to
make
a
couple
of
comments
on
some
of
the
things
that
I've
heard,
reducing
the
board
to
five
members
and
you're
in
and
the
comparison
is
made
to
city
council
city
council
represents
five
districts
and
each
person,
although
they
do
represent
the
entire
city,
they
represent
a
small
portion
of
the
population,
best
divided
into
equal
districts,
equal
number
population
by
District
that
could
change.
M
M
The
important
thing
to
consider
so
I
think
the
only
other
board
we
have
with
five
members
is
the
Burnt
Store
Isles
Canal
advisory
committee.
The
reason
they
only
have
five
members
is
because
they're
so
much
much
smaller
in
population
than
the
Punta
Gorda
Isles
Canal
advisory
committee,
which
has
seven
members
so
I'd
like
you
to
sort
of
keep
that
in
mind
when
you're
thinking
about
how
many
members
should
be.
M
Okay,
the
so
the
and
and
another
comment
there
I
heard
the
term
open
democracy.
Well
again,
you
need
to
consider
that
this
commission
is
representing
the
entire
population
and
we're
hoping
to
get
a
representative
of
the
entire
population.
So
people
are
are
represented.
M
Okay,
the
Citizens,
Academy
I,
don't
know
if
you
were
suggesting
that
that
be
a
requirement,
but
I'd
also
like
you
to
consider
that
that
will
put
further
restraints
on
finding
applicants
and
Citizens
Academy
may
only
be
offered
one
time
per
year
in
the
future,
so
that
would
really
hinder
people
from
applying
if
they
were
forced
to
go
through
the
academy
first,
because
they
may
have
to
wait
an
entire
year
for
it
to
be
offered.
M
So
each
board
has
their
own
bylaws
and
the
there
are
some
things
that
are
common
from
one
board
to
another,
and
that's
that
was
our
goal
here
was
to
make
the
bylaws
more
or
less
consistent
with
some
items,
but
of
course
your
duties
are
going
to
be
different.
There
are
going
to
be
some
differences,
but
for
the
most
part,
procedurally
for
meetings,
public
comment
and
that
kind
of
thing,
those
those
types
of
items
we
our
goal
was
to
make
them
the
same
consistent
and
fair.
M
So
please
keep
that
in
mind
too,
when
you're
thinking
about
what
what
the
goal
is
with
these,
we
were.
Quite
frankly,
we
were
anticipating
this
level
of
discussion
because
it
wasn't
supposed
to
be
an
in-depth
substantive
change
to
the
bylaws.
We
were
trying
to
bring
them
up
to
date
and
make
them
consistent.
M
L
My
feeling
actually
is
today
is
not
the
day
to
approve
anything.
Today
is
the
day
to
have
learned
a
little,
and
thank
you
for
the
comments
and
perspective
actually
to
comment
about
the
Citizens.
Academy
would
be
something
we
might
encourage
board
members
to
do,
but
it
is
well
taken
and
waiting
if
you're
11
months
down
the
road
and
there's
you
might
run
out.
I
L
Anybody
so,
but.
B
A
It's
not
a
criteria,
but
there's
a
place
on
the
application
form
for
considerations.
I
would
like
that
in
our
motion,
and
we
can
follow
it
up
with
discussions.
I
would
like
that
intermotion
that
we
table
this
discussion
until
the
following
Planning
Commission
meeting,
which
is
November
the
28th
and
allow
time
for
the
all
the
Planning
Commission
members
as.
B
N
Yes,
would
the
proposed
changes
have
to
be
voted
on
independently?
In
other
words,
if
there's
11,
the
proposed
changes
to
the
base
document
is
the
thought
process
that
we
would
vote
on
each
one
of
those
and
treat
them
individually,
because
that
can
become
rather
drawn
out
the
way
I
look
at
bylaws
is
I.
Look
at
bylaws
like
a
constitution.
You
know
you
have
to
update
them.
You
don't
have
to,
but
it'd
be
nice.
If
you
can
update
them
every
now
and
then,
but
it's
it's
not
to
be
changed
at
will.
N
That's
where
the
policy
is
for
and
if
so,
if
you
wanted
to
have
a
subset
to
the
bylaws
call
it
the
policy
of
the
Planning
Commission,
where
it's
a
lot
more
flexible,
and
you
only
need
the
majority
of
the
Planning
Commission
members
to
approve
a
policy
change
without
having
to
go
through
a
formal,
bylaw
constitutional
change
and
that's
how
I
look
at
it
at
at
this
document,
so
the
the
the
shorter
or
smaller
it
is
I
believe
the
better,
because
if
you
get
too
detailed
into
your
Constitution
you'll,
never
get
it
done.
F
D
That
being
said,
I
specifically
did
not
get
into
making
specific
qualification
recommendations
like
Citizens,
Academy,
etc,
etc,
because
I
don't
see
that
as
part
of
the
purview
of
this
commission
I
see
that
as
the
purview
of
the
city
clerk's
office
and
the
city
council
and
the
overall
board
and
commission
thing,
there
has
been
a
good
deal
of
discussion
about
qualification
of
members,
but
in
in
hours
I
would
just
leave
it
necessarily
kind
of
vague.
You
know
qualified
member,
this
it's
up
to
the
city
to
determine
what
a
qualified
member
is.
D
It's
not
our
decision,
and
so,
whereas
it's
it's
desirable,
it's
not
a
requirement,
and
so
when
looking
at
changes,
yeah
there's
some
things
in
here.
I
change
that
may
change
to
other
things,
but
there's
some
that
I,
wouldn't
I
would
not
get
to
that
degree
of
specificity
because
I
don't
believe
it's
within
our
purview
and
it
should
remain
with
the
city
council
to
make
that
kind
of
decision.
Well,.
J
First,
one
man's
qualifications
is
another
man's
disqualifications.
Okay,
so
nobody
sit
down
and
Define.
What?
What
do
you
mean
by
qualifications?
What
qualifications
are
you
going
to
have
a
spec
for
individual
members
of
different?
No,
so
I
I
believe
that
you're,
correct
I
think
we
should
keep
it
to
the
level
of
Citizen
interest
and
participation
and
knowledge
to
the
extent
that
they
can
have
knowledge.
But
once
you
get
into
qualifications,
now
you're
doing
a
job
interview
and
you're.
Looking
for
a
specific.
J
B
J
To
put
in
each
of
the
sets
of
bylaws
to
make
it
consistent
and
then
Define
that
section
of
these
bylaws
that
are
specifically
attributable
to
the
Planning
Commission,
so
that
we
can
focus
on
those
rather
than
those
pieces
that
are
going
to
be
kind
of
consistent
among
all
the
other
boards,
for
example.
So,
for
example,
a
code
enforcement
board
has
has
really
final
Authority
with
regard
to
those
issues
that
come
before
it
so
I'm
sure
there's
a
lot
of
potential
conflict
of
interest
or
expertise,
communication
that
could
occur,
which
would
not
be
appropriate.
J
So
what
I'm
saying
is
I
would
like
to
see
the
pot
that
you
want
to
standardize
among
the
boards
put
that
in
one
place
put
the
peace
that
applies
to
the
Planning
Commission
in
another
place.
We
should
focus
on
those
specific
pieces
that
apply
to
us
as
the
Planning
Commission
and
see
what
we
have
to
say
about
those
and
not
getting
embroiled
in
the
wordsmithing.
J
A
Mean
I'd
like
to
make
one
more
comment
on
that
and
I
kind
of
agree
with
Paul
on
that.
What
we're
talking
about
when
I'm?
Looking
at
the
at
least
those
proposed
changes
for
considerations
have
already
been
submitted.
A
A
What
what
I'm
reading
here
from
what
has
been
submitted
is,
on
an
exception
basis
about
eight
or
nine
items,
there's
there's
a
consistency
with
with
several
of
the
of
the
submittals
on
some
of
the
items.
So
there
are
only
maybe
about
seven
or
eight
items
that
again,
on
an
exception
basis
that
would
apply
to
the
bile
house
and
not
again
every
paragraph.
Every
stipulation,
every
part
of
the
process.
I
think
that
would
be
extremely
frustrating
and
unproductive.
G
I
agree
with
Paul
as
well,
I
think
at
the
next
meeting.
If
we.
G
M
J
Yes,
but
now
I
have
an
amendment.
I
would
like
to
say
that
a
second,
the
amendment,
a
second
emotion
with
the
Proviso,
that
the
staff
provide
us
with
the
breakdown
that
I've
asked
for
and
we
could
take.
J
A
A
Procedure
is.
I
A
E
Would
be
very
simple
other
than
he
section
about
qualifications
in
the
creation
I'm.
D
Okay,
administratively
speaking,
I
think
this
will
delay
the
process
and
I
think
we'll
lose
about
two
weeks,
because
it's
going
to
take
a
staff
time
to
come
back
after
this
meeting.
Prepare
minutes
get
everything
out
by
the
time
we
see
what
Paul's
asking
for
we're
going
to
be
a
week
from
our
next
meeting.
That's
also
going
to
be
Thanksgiving
week.
People
probably
still
going
to
be
busy
again
we'll
find
another
round
of
excuses.
I
think
we
ought
to
keep
it
as
as
Harvey
proposed.
D
K
D
Open
proposal
to
amend
and
and
and
reconsider
at
the
28th
November
meeting.
A
F
A
F
J
F
B
F
Okay,
thank
you
all
right.
We're
gonna
move
on
into
the
quasi-judicial
public
hearing
next,
so
that
we
don't
hold
up
our
audience
for
much
longer.
So
this
is
and
we've
already
sworn
anyone
who
thinks
they're
going
to
speak
in.
So
this
is
quasi-judicial
src-03
2021,
a
resolution
of
the
city
council
of
the
city
of
Punta,
Gorda
Florida,
approving
the
final
subdivide,
the
parcel
of
land
containing
15,
860,
plus
or
minus
square
feet
into
three
single-family
residential
lots.
P
Good
afternoon,
Lisa
Hannon
zoning,
official
and
I
have
been
sworn
I'd
like
to
enter
our
staff
report
into
the
record
in
its
entirety
by
reference.
As
stated,
this
is
a
subdivision
request
for
805
West
Marion
Avenue.
The
request
is
to
subdivide
parcel
into
three
single-family
lots.
A
10-foot
utility
easement
has
been
included.
This
is
considered
a
minor
subdivision,
the
property
Zone
neighborhood
residential
10
units
per
acre.
This
would
permit
a
single-family
residence
on
each
lot,
a
single-family
residence
with
an
accessory
dwelling
unit
or
duplex
structure
on
each
lot.
P
The
request
does
not
create
any
non-conformities.
It
is
served
by
public
streets,
West,
Marion,
Avenue
and
Berry
Street
Public
Works
has
made
a
comment
that
the
drainage
will
be
reviewed
and
approved
at
the
time
of
lot.
Construction,
utility
availability,
a
10-foot
utility
easement,
was
provided.
An
installation
of
utilities
will
be
at
the
owner's
expense
conditions
of
approval.
Staff
recommends
approval
with
the
conditions
based
on
utility
department,
installation
of
the
utilities
at
Property,
Owners
expense,
and
that
drainage
will
be
reviewed
and
approved
at
time
of
lot
Construction.
K
K
Jerry
waxler
I'm
a
land
use
attorney
with
the
McCrory
Law
Firm
I'm,
representing
William
H
quedno
danetta
H
quedno,
Barrow,
Michael,
T
quedno
and
Margaret
F
Seton,
who
are
the
owners
of
805
West
Marion
Avenue
they're,
requesting
final
plot
approval
for
a
three
lot
subdivision.
Each
lot
of
the
subdivisions
approximately
50
by
100,
some
are
90.
Some
are
you
know,
49
points
something
some
are
a
little
less
than
100.
Some
are
a
little
more,
but
they
are
approximately
50
by
100..
The
lot
sizes
and
dimensions
comply
with
the
nr10
zoning.
K
In
fact,
as
Lisa
indicated,
the
lot
sizes
are
actually
larger
than
what
is
allowed
by
the
minimum
lot
size
requirements
of
the
neighborhood
residential
10
zoning
District
planning
is
a
ministerial
act.
The
purpose
of
this
quasi-judicial
hearing
is
to
determine
whether
the
proposed
lots
are
consistent
with
your
comp
plan
and
conform
to
the
requirements
of
your
Land
Development
regulations.
You
have
just
heard
testimony
from
the
staff
that
they,
in
fact
do
meet
the
requirements
of
the
comprehensive
planner,
because
this
was
a
comp
plan
and
do
meet
the
requirements
of
the
neighborhood
residential
10
zoning
District.
K
There
is
no
impact
on
zoning
by
approval
of
a
subdivision.
The
same
uses
that
are
allowed
at
the
lot
on
the
large
lot
would
be
allowed
on
each
of
the
small
Lots,
but
each
individual
lot
has
to
meet
the
setbacks
from
the
newly
established
side
lot
lines
which
may
impact
what
could
be
developed.
The
property
owners
are
The
Heirs
of
an
estate.
They
are
not
developers,
they
have
no
development
plans.
I
am
not
able
to
tell
you
today
what
they
will
do
with
the
lots
of
others
and
that
they
intend
to
sell
the
Lots.
K
So
there
will
be
subsequent
owners
of
those
lots
and
the
subsequent
owners
will
determine
what
they
wish
to
place
on
the
lot
as
long
as
what
they
wish
to
place
meets
all
the
requirements
of
the
neighborhood
residential
10
zoning
District
cladding
creates
no
variances,
it
does
not
change
the
requirements,
it
simply
takes
one
larger
than
normal
lot
and
divides
it
into
three
lots:
consistent
with
the
neighborhood
residential
10
zoning
District.
Based
on
that,
we
would
request
approval,
or
at
least
a
recommendation
of
approval
from
this
board
for
the
final
plan
for
this
subdivision
available.
F
So
Jerry,
obviously
because
you're
extremely
experienced
in
this
area
and
I
have
a
hard
time,
envisioning
sizes,
and
what
that
means
you
can
do
with
the
property.
What
would
you
expect
the
parking
situation
to
be
well.
K
I
would
expect
that
it
that
they
would
have
to
have
some
sort
of
a
driveway.
These
are
they
have
a
depth
of
a
hundred
feet.
You
have
a
room
to
be
able
to
put
a
home.
Quite
frankly,
these
these
five
thousand
square
foot
lots
are
what
we're
typically
seeing
in
subdivisions
like
Waterford
Estates
subdivision
the
subdivision.
That's
going
up
on
Jones
Loop,
most
of
the
large.
K
This
is
not
going
to
be
developed
with
three
lots
by
one
of
the
large
National
home
developers,
but
there
are
typically
what
you
see
on
this
size
lot
would
be
a
single
family
home,
but
you
do
have
the
ability
to
go
flatter.
You
could
put
a
duplex
structure.
Does
a
duplex
have
to
be
single
story
kind.
K
They
could
have
a
flat
or
flat
two
units
flat
over
flat.
That
would
be
something
someone
could
choose
to
do
if
they
wanted
to.
There
are
requirements,
though,
that
you
provide
parking
on
the
property
for
those
lots,
so
you
would
have
to
have
a
drive
you
might
have
to
have
built
into
the
structure.
A
garage
again
whatever
would
be
developed
on
this
lot
would
have
to
be
consistent
with
the
dictates
of
your
code,
and
that
doesn't
change
by
splitting
it
from
one
line
into
three
lots.
K
I
would
agree
particularly
because,
unlike
some
of
the
lots
for
that
as
a
cardboard,
which
have
been
on
kind
of
side
streets,
this
front's
on
a
major
well.
F
J
Jerry,
it
bothers
me
that
it
looks
like
there
was.
There
were
I,
don't
know
what
there
is
on
the
lot
now
on
those
lots.
Three
very
mature
looks
like
very
nice
trees
that
are
going
to
have
to
come
down
of
those
lots
have
developed,
I
would
expect.
Do
we
know
what
the
conditions
of
those
trees
are?
That
may
be
mute
now
it
may
be.
They.
Q
K
But
again,
unless
you
have
a
code
that
dictates
what
they
can
and
cannot
do,
plotting
is
simply
ministerial
if
the
size
of
the
Lots
complies
with
the
minimum
is
at
or
above
the
minimum
lot
size
if
it
has,
if
it
contains
at
the
plot
itself,
contains
all
the
requirements
required
by
the
Florida
statute,
which
it
has
been
now
reviewed
multiple
times
by
your
by
as
contracted
County
Surveyor,
and
we
and
it
agrees
that
it
does
it's
one
of
the
few
zoning
processes
that
has
almost.
K
Involved
in
it
it
is,
and
the
brothers
Florida
Supreme
Court
is
held
over
and
over
again.
It
is
simply
a
ministerial
act.
You
are
simply
checking
boxes
here.
We
have
three
lots.
The
minimum
lot
size
is
3.
500
square
feet
are
the
three
lots,
3
500
square
feet
or
greater?
Yes,
they
are.
You
have
to
have
a
certain
amount
of
minimum
Frontage
I,
believe
it's
50
feet,
or
do
they
have
at
least
50
foot
of
front
to
John
vallots?
Yes,
they.
Yes,
they
do
if
you
check
the
boxes
and
it
meets
all
the
boxes.
K
In
other
words,
the
Lots
meet
these
requirements
of
your
code.
There
really
isn't
discretion
about
whether
or
not
to
approve.
Now,
when
someone
comes
in,
if
you
have
codes
that
address
how
you
how
you
treat
mature
trees,
they
will
have
to
follow
those
codes.
If
they
do
not,
it
is
not
a
basis
to
say
sorry.
K
You
can't
have
this
because
now
these
three
lots
they're
gonna,
we're
gonna-
have
to
take
down
a
tree
unless
there
is
a
code
that
addresses
whether
or
not
you
can
take
down
a
tree,
but
even
that
has
nothing
to
do
with
plotting
but
would
have
to
do
with
whoever
was
looking
to
develop
a
lot.
Ultimately,
thank.
F
F
H
Excuse
me
I've
been
sworn
in
your.
H
You
I'm
with
my
company
that
owns
the
lot
next
door
is
called
Brit
properties,
so
I'm
interested,
maybe
to
talk
to
the
lady
afterwards
about
my.
H
H
So
I
might
be
interested
in
trying
to
do
something
similar,
oh
now,
a
lot,
but
that
would
be
for
another
day,
I'm
sure.
Okay,
that's
what
I
want.
F
F
All
right,
this
is
a
public
hearing.
Anyone
wishing
to
address
the
commission
on
this
topic,
please
come
to
the
podium
state,
your
name
for
the
record
and
that
you
have
been
sworn
you
have
three
minutes
last
call
this
is
a
public
hearing.
Anyone
wishing
to
address
the
commission
on
this
topic,
please
come
to
the
podium
state,
your
name
for
the
record,
and
you
have
three
minutes.
I
I
B
K
B
B
A
P
Would
have
to
meet
the
code
as
it's
written
and
adopted
at
the
time
of
construction.
So
as
of
now,
you
are
required
two
parking
spaces
per
dwelling
unit,
Beyond
site
that
that's
the
code
AS
written
and
adopted
now
so
they're
going
to
have
to
meet
the
code
when
they
come
in
for
development.
They
have
to
meet
the
code.
We
have
our
development
standards,
so
they're
gonna.
They
will
have
to
meet
those.
It's
that
it
shouldn't
be
a
condition
of
approval,
because
it's
in
the
code
now
they
have
to
meet
the
development
standards.
Okay.
F
P
No
ma'am
it
would
not,
it
would
be
on
site.
There
is
a
provision
in
the
code
that
allows
them
to
come
in
for
a
waiver.
However,
with
the
location
of
this
I
don't
see
how
a
waiver
would
be
approved
for
something
like
that
like
it
would
be
on
a
further
offside,
Street
or
something
wide
enough
that
they
could
create
on-street
parking
for
themselves.
F
C
The
record
Mitchell
Austin
principal
is
playing
our
Urban
Design,
so
Florida
statute
requires
that
local
municipalities
have
a
comprehensive
plan
and
that
that
comprehensive
plan
be
reviewed
regularly
to
ensure
consistency
with
Florent
statutes
as
they
change,
and
also
to
to
ensure
that
those
plans
encapsulate
fully
the
community's
vision
for
how
it
wants
to
see
itself
develop
over
time.
C
The
city
of
Punta
Gorda
is
due
for
what's
called
an
evaluation
and
appraising
report
process
at
this
time.
That
letter
is
due
at
the
end
of
this
month,
so
earlier
we
got
our
timelines
a
little
backwards.
So
this
agenda
item
should
have
come
to
Planning
Commission
last
at
their
last
meeting.
However,
due
to
our
admin,
administrative
oversight,
it
is
on
this
meeting.
So
city
council
has
already
heard
this
item
resolution
to
forward
the
required
notification
letter
to
the
Department
of
Florida
Department
of
Economic
Opportunity.
C
So,
generally
speaking,
this
letter
outlines
for
the
Department
what
changes
the
city
anticipates
upon,
making
to
its
comprehensive
plan
and
the
the
date
of
receipt
of
that
letter
by
the
Department
of
Economic
Opportunity
starts
the
clock
ticking
and
we
have
one
full
calendar
year
to
adopt
those
proposed
changes.
C
If
we
fail
to
adopt
any
proposed
changes
or
if
we
were
to
fail
to
submit
this
letter,
we
could
be
found
in
non-compliance
with
the
Florida
comprehensive
plan
and
that
could
impact
Grant
applications
and
would
prohibit
the
municipality
from
undertaking
certain
or
visions
to
its
comprehensive
plan.
I.E
map
amendments
so
comprehensive
plan
changes
or
annexations
in
the
case
of
municipality
like
ourselves.
So
the
actual
contents
of
the
letter
are
based
upon
the
community
and
putting
feedback.
C
C
Q
C
Would
firmly
appreciate
it
if,
if
the
board
were
to
make
a
motion
to
to
recommend
approval
to
city
council
and.
C
Day,
if
the,
if
the
board
does
have
questions,
though
it
would
be
nice
to
know
what
those
are
so
that
we
can
ensure
that
as
we
move
forward
with
actual
draft
changes
that
we're
fully
capturing
this
process,
this
board,
the
Planning
Commission-
is
the
local
planning
Agency
for
the
city,
which
is
required
under
Florida
statute.
It
is
your
job
in
the
sole
authority
to
advise
the
city
on
whether
or
not
proposed
land
use
changes
are
our
land
use.
Matters
are
consistent
with
Comprehensive
plan.
It
is,
it
is
your
Authority.
J
Oh
no
make
a
motion
that
we
forward
the
proposed
letter
to
the
city
council
without
recommendation.
F
F
The
last
item
Leia
a
Bittersweet
moment
for
me,
I've
thoroughly
enjoyed
my
involvement
with
the
Planning
Commission,
especially
that
meeting
in
September
was
really
good
and
I
move
on
two
more
good
times,
I'm
sure.
But
anyway,
at
this
moment
we
really
need
to
elect
a
new
chair
to
fulfill
my
term
of
office,
and
then
we
will
elect
again
in
February
with
all
of
the
other
commissions
at
the
annual
time.
So
Leah.
O
If
you
can
yes,
I'll
open
the
floor
for
nomination
of
chair
I.
J
I
O
Do
Vice
chair
probably
next
month,
then
just
since
we're
a
vice
chair.
Okay,
take
your
advice.
F
Okay,
we're
at
the
point
now:
congratulations,
Joe
any
staff
comments
before
we
conclude
the
meeting
any
additional
member
comments.
K
A
Support
of
the
Planning
Commission
when
she's
on
the
city
council.
Secondly,
we
received
the
resolution
from
the
city
council
regarding
a
quasi-judicial
public
hearing
procedures
and
rules
for
ex
partly
Communications.
A
I
A
A
matter
of
comment:
I
was
I,
had
questioned
the
the
understanding
of
I,
don't
know
if
any
of
y'all
have
it,
but.
I
A
I
B
A
Quasidual
proceedings
on
the
land
use
matters
and
from
what
I'm
I
had
a
question
into
to
the
legal
office
in
in
the
Salem
City
staff
I
haven't
heard
back,
but
from
what
I'm
gathering
from
comments
from
City
staff
is
that
most
everything
we
come
in
contact
with
is
a
land
use
matter.
D
Yes,
and
just
from
the
discussions
at
city
council
listening
to
the
City
attorney,
explain
it
he
very
specifically
broke
it
out,
just
as
you
indicated
where.
Previously
the
statute
had
not
shown
that
exception
for
land
use
matters.
The
attorney
found
where
there
had
been
a
subsequent
Court
decisions
that
included
land,
use
matters
and
specifically
addressed
that,
and
it
came
up
over
the
because
it
was
getting
to
be
almost
ridiculous.
D
What
was
being
considered
ex
parte
Communications,
you
know
if
you
run
into
somebody
at
the
gym
and
they
says
hey
what
do
you
think
of
Fisherman's
Village
now
you've
got
an
ex
parte
communication,
you
know
it
just
it
was
getting
to
the
point
of
ludicrousness,
and
so
you
know
this
state.
This
statute
does
allow
you
to
have
any
number
of
conversations
on
land
use
matters
without
having
the
requirement
to
disclose
each
and
every
one
of
them
individually,
and
that's
the.
A
Key
thing:
investigative
wording
in
that
last
line
that
says
the
communication
by
member
of
the
decision
making
body
is
not
required
and
such
non-disclosure
shall
not
be
presumed
pre-prejudicial.
B
G
A
A
Right
and,
however,
what
what
what
we
got
an
email
it
did
not
have
the
resolution
number
on
it.