►
From YouTube: Punta Gorda City Council 7-12-17 Part 4
Description
Description
A
We
read
in
the
paper
this
morning
that
Charlotte
County
has
voted
enough,
his
bandit,
which
would
leave
us
to
be
the
magnet
this
was
quoted
by
one
of
the
other
ones.
That's
very
painful
for
me
to
say
what
I'm
saying,
because
I
believe
so
strongly
that
it
should
be
easily
available
to
people
need
as
a
pain,
management
and
appetite
management
drunk.
So
at
this
point,
I'm
I'm
still
leaving
my
motion
on
the
floor.
If
somebody
wants
to
second.
B
D
C
County
has
banned
it
because
of
the
local
initiatives
they
banned
it
four
to
one.
The
reason
why
it's
coming
to
the
local
level
is
because
there's
an
opening
for
the
zoning
requirements,
we
haven't
determined
the
amount
of
thought,
the
pharmacy's
that
will
be
in
place,
whether
they
have
to
be
bonded
or
not,
and
what
the
process
is
they're
still
working
with
the
legislature.
The
Health
Department
is
actively
involved
in
trying
to
develop
the
legislation
as
it
goes
forward,
but
at
this
time
I
don't
the
other
questions
is
for
the
zoning
sections.
C
If
you
limit
one
area,
how
can
you
limit
the
other
three
when
you've
already
permitted
pharmacies
in
the
area?
I
think
the
legislation
as
it
currently
stands
makes
it
very
difficult
for
us
to
regulate
them
once
they're
allowed
in
so
you
know,
really.
The
decision
is
in
your
hands
as
voh
I'm,
a
neutral
figure
I'm
just
here
to
regulate
and
make
sure
that
everything
is
followed
appropriately.
C
Whether
you'll
have
to
be
able
to
get
a
refillable
thing.
You
may
have
to
go
through
another
review
process
to
see
if
that
marijuana
is
indeed
actually
needed
for
the
case
or
and
we're
currently
working
out.
Those
circumstances
having
deal
with
that
I
do
know
we're
looking
at
issuing
licenses
to
those
people
who
are
eligible
after
you've,
seen
your
physician
and
gotten
a
recommendation
for
it
and
how
we're
going
to
regulate
that
we're
still
working
on
as
well.
C
But
the
decision
again
is
in
your
hands
to
make
that
I
think
the
way
the
legislation
currently
is,
if
I'm
not
mistaken,
it's
whether
to
allow
it
locally
by
zoning
laws,
just
keep
in
mind
that
that
medical
area
is
actually
the
major
intake
in
and
out
of
Punta
Gorda.
So
that's
the
first
thing
people
see
when
they're
coming
to
the
city.
Also,
the
schools
are
a
little
bit
wait
for
business.
My
concern
lily
is
the
children
and
the
youth
in
the
area,
and
we
know
that
you
know
marijuana
usage.
C
I
come
from,
Colorado
went
to
school
in
Colorado,
my
parents
reside
in
Colorado
and
they're
going
to
be
relocating
to
Punta
Gorda
because
of
it.
So
you
know
being
cognizant
as
a
physician.
I
do
see
the
need
medically,
that's
my
own
personal
thing,
but
I
think
we
should
be
responsible
as
to
how
we
roll
it
out.
Thank.
F
All
right
does
this
law
allow
us
to
place
restrictions
on
how
it
operates:
ie,
signage
and
type
of
advertising
in
any
of
these
things
that
it
could
simply
be
clinical,
not.
G
G
C
Think,
just
from
a
departmental
level,
if
you
start
to
restrict
pharmacies,
I,
don't
know
whether
we
have
the
legal
authority
to
restrict
as
a
council
that
will
come
from
the
eh
level
and
the
licensing
level.
You're,
just
I
believe
from
the
way
I
understand
it.
Is
that
you're
allowing
it
in
that
area
and
then
the
restrictions
will
come
at
a.
C
Level
licensure
so
I,
don't
know,
that's
the
kind
of
the
game
that
were
caught
in
between.
If
you
restrict
legally
there
may
be
subjection,
there
may
be
some
lawsuits
as
to
if
you're
restricting
one
over
another
and
I
just
want
you
to
avoid
the
process,
if
at
all
possible
and
I,
don't
know
whether
we
could
mount
a
defense
if
we
did
that
as
a
community
in
the
direction.
If
you
want
that,
I
mean
I'm,
not
an
attorney,
but
that's
my
understanding
of
legislation.
Thank.
G
I
understand
that
there's
concern
about
if,
if
these
dispensaries
are
available
in
close
enough
proximity
to
the
city,
so
there
is
a
reasonable
alternative,
then
there
were
more
of
an
interest
in
prohibiting
them
within
the
city.
If
it
turn,
for
example,
that,
ultimately
there
aren't
any
reasonably
available
dispensaries
in
our
area
that
may
be
problematic
for
those
that
have
at
least
some.
A
A
B
I
What
does
it
really
mean
and
give
a
time
to
actually
work
with
our
legislators,
our
legislative
delegation
to
say
we
observe
something
and
this
isn't
working
for
us.
We
can't
we
want
to
do
this,
but
the
way
you
set
this
up,
we
can't
so
it
may
give
us
an
opportunity
to
work
with
our
legislative
delegation
to
help
change
things.
B
F
I
F
B
D
J
We
need
to
do
this.
Like
Gary
said:
let's
do
this
the
right
way
when
we
do
implement
it.
If
we
want
to
move
forward
with
it
a
year
from
now
totally
different
story,
we'll
have
a
lot
more
information
to
work
with
we'll
have
a
lot
more
sex
that
we
can
make
our
decision
and
have
it
be
a
sound
decision
that
could
hold
up
in
court.
You
know
right
now,
I
think
I.
Think
there's
just
too
many
intangibles
right.
J
H
I
E
B
A
B
G
So
we
will
come
back
to
you
as
soon
as
possible,
within
ordinance
to
ban
with
a
sunset
I,
don't
for
one
year.
I
do
not
think
it
needs
to
go
before
the
Planning
Commission,
but
we
will
discuss
that
like
out
so
that
we
can
either
have
it
brought
back
at
the
earliest.
In
top
of
your
next
council
meeting,
there's
also
a
possibility
that
it
could
be
adopted
as
an
emergency
ordinance.
G
G
B
H
G
I
J
J
B
E
E
H
E
That
it'll
be
widely
disseminated.
At
the
same
time,
building
height
has
been
discussed
since,
oh
since
I've
been
here,
12
12
and
a
half
years
ago,
we've
been
talking
about
building
height
on
and
off,
and
it
was
part
of
our
land
development
code
when
we
redid
the
land
development
code
in
2005,
it's
in
conjunction
with
the
citizen's
master
plan
advance.
E
But
let's
just
talk
about
the
last
year,
just
in
the
last
year
on
July
6th,
we
had
an
agenda
item
in
front
of
City
Council
that
talked
about
building
height,
we're
talking
about
City
Center,
just
the
city
center,
and
we
talked
about.
Should
we
revise
the
code
to
have
different,
differing
varying
height
limitations,.
E
With
some
some
architectural
accouterments
and
some
pedestrian
accouterments,
so
this
this
discussion
started
at
a
public
meeting
on
July
6,
then
on
December
21st
2016
at
another
City
Council
meeting
and
in
December
most
of
the
folks
are
back
from
their
summer
break.
So
we
do
have
most
of
the
people
back
in
town.
We
discussed
it
again
and
we
talked
about
building
height,
and
should
we
be
a
little
more
flexible
along
with?
If
we
do,
then
we
need
to
get
some
architectural
changes.
E
The
ldr
committee,
the
ldr
committee,
is
the
land
development
review
committee.
That's
been
in
place
for
a
number
of
years
and
that
those
representatives
are
members
of
all
the
various
neighborhoods
in
the
city
was
also
discussed
on
June
16th
in
front
of
the
ldr
committee,
building
height
and
staff
share
their
ideas
with
them
at
that
time,
as
well.
During
all
of
these
meetings.
During
all
of
these
meetings,
there
was
never
a
consensus
for
those
in
attendance
that
we
stopped
the
discussion
actually,
quite
the
contrary.
E
E
There
will
be
public
hearings
in
front
of
the
PAP
Planning
Commission
there'll,
be
public
hearings
and
the
City
Council
I
know
how
long
it
takes
for
us
internally
to
put
those
to
fit
that
let
draft
language
together
by
the
time
we
get
it
ready
by
the
time
we
schedule
it
in
front
of
the
Planning
Commission
and
the
City
Council,
the
community
will
be
full
again.
People
will
be
back
in
town
I,
just.
E
K
For
the
record
Mitchell
Austin
good
afternoon
urban
design
in
your
packets,
the
entire
presentation
contains
the
section
that
was
presented
previously.
The
City
Council
back
in
the
and
December
and
Planning
Commission
in
January
I
can
walk
through
that
portion
of
the
presentation.
Again,
if
you
would
like
or
I,
can
start
with,
I
think.
K
B
K
K
Base
flood
elevation
in
our
fair
city
can
be
significantly
above
the
existing
grades,
so
when
we're
measured
when
we
look
at
building
the
overall
height
may
exceed
that
measured
height
per
our
code.
Quite
significantly,
we
also
permit
certain
exclusions
from
the
building
height
in
certain
districts
of
specifically
in
the
city
center
district.
We
allow
20%
an
additional
height
for
non
occupied
space.
K
B
K
Is
their
option
if
they
are
building
a
commercial
ground
floor
and
as
we
saw
with
the
hotel,
the
the
state
has
tightened
up
those
regulations
where
they
consider
to
us
hotels,
the
commercial
use
to
the
state
it's
a
quasi
residential
use,
so
they
require
them
to
build
that
base
flood
elevation.
So
yes,
so.
K
So,
in
terms
of
discussing
building
height,
we
are
talking
about
the
city
center
district.
That
is
the
area
in
purple
on
the
image
that
you
see
above
it's
a
very
discrete
portion
of
the
Community
Redevelopment
area,
which
is
less
than
one
square
mile
of
land.
So
the
the
actual
city
center
district
is
only
a
couple
hundred
acres.
K
Currently,
within
the
city
center
district
height
is
regulated
both
as
a
minimum
and
a
maximum.
The
minimum
height
is
regulated
at
two
stories,
and
a
story
is
habitable
space
and
26
feet.
The
maximum
height
is
50
feet
and
again
we
allow
those
exclusions
of
20%,
which
you
could
get
another
10
feet
in
terms
of
setting
height
limits
in
our
building
for
our
city.
They
varied
over
time.
K
K
So
just
a
brief
history.
In
1958
we
limited
in
the
first
zoning
code,
commercial
and
industrial
uses
to
no
more
than
60
feet
and
over
a
height.
Of
course,
this
is
before
the
FEMA
regulations.
So
there
was
no
mention
of
base
flood
elevation
in
those
regulations
1962
they
had
changed
it
and
they
limited
building
height
to
40
feet
everywhere
in
the
city,
with
the
exception
of
all
properties.
K
K
Paraphrasing
I'm,
not
an
attorney,
so
we
hear
50
feet
and
we
think
five
storeys
and
fifty
feet
really
isn't
five
stories
in
a
modern
building.
In
terms
of
office
floor
Heights,
they
range
finished
floor
to
finish,
for
between
12
and
16
feet
for
retail
on
a
ground
floor
level,
they
prefer
higher
ceilings.
K
The
example
here
this
is
actually
the
medical
office
building
a
hospital
have
a
little
bit
of
space
base
flood
elevation
and
got
nine
feet
for
their
above
that
for
their
parking
to
get
to
their
first
floor.
I
have
a
14-foot
story
on
the
first
floor,
another
14
foot
story
on
the
second
floor
and
the
third
floor
is
another
16
feet
and
another
8
feet
for
mechanical
lost.
This
building
did
require
variance,
and
it's
only
a
three
story:
office
building
over
Park.
K
We
definitely
don't
want
to
give
them
carte
blanche
right
now,
under
the
current
code,
we
have
zero
lot
line.
So
there's
a
zero
foot
setback
on
on
your
street
yard.
We
have
allowances
for
them
to
encroach
into
the
right
of
ways
actually
above
the
the
first
floor
up
to
five
feet.
So
there
are
various
provisions.
They
can
enclose
that
space
quite
legally
under
the
current
code,
but-
and
we
really
talked
about
that-
that's
really
intentional.
We
want
buildings
to
address
the
street.
We
want
them
to
face
the
street.
K
K
That's
the
intent
and
the
reason
for
that
from
an
urban
design
perspective
is
we
want
the
street
to
become
a
public
place,
want
it
to
be
the
enjoyable
environment
that
you
want
to
be
in
when
the
builders
of
the
of
the
modern
American
shopping,
mall
took
that
move
and
faced
all
the
retail
into
the
interior
of
the
space,
and
they
said
what
are
we
creating
they're
modeling
Main
Street
America?
They
were
creating
a
street.
K
K
K
The
image
that
you
see
there,
that's
actually
the
herald
court
alley,
which
is
only
a
10
or
12
foot
wide
alley
and
the
buildings
that
flanked
it
are
about
14
to
18
feet
tall.
It's
a
really
comfortable
sort
of
space.
On
the
day
that
I
took
this
picture,
there
was
actually
a
professional
photographer
taking
portrait
casual
portraits
of
a
family.
You
know
when
professionals
that
are
interested
in
photography
take
your
space.
K
K
K
And
we
have
a
nice
sort
of
three-to-one
ratio
right
now
with
some
two-story
buildings
and
some
four-story
buildings
and
some
five-story
buildings,
so
it's
kind
of
nice.
What
the
code
currently
allows
is
this,
so
you
know
250
foot
tall
buildings
flanking
the
street
still
going
to
be
pretty
good.
Pretty
nice
urban
space.
K
K
So
in
terms
of
the
pedestrian
experience,
what
are
we
really
talking
about?
It's
the
street.
The
way
the
street
is
formed,
it's
the
buildings
that
flank
it
and
it's
the
sidewalk
facilities
in
terms
of
the
street.
It's
really
traffic
volume,
vehicle,
speed
and
physical
separation.
We
have
all
those
three
things
we
have
parallel
parking.
This
travel
speeds
are
fairly
low.
The
traffic
volume
is
a
little
high
on
some
of
those
roadways,
but
it's
not
untenable.
K
In
terms
of
buildings,
we
want
lots
of
windows
and
doors
so
that
people
feel
like
they're,
welcomed
into
those
space
sort
of
visual
transparency
into
the
ground
for
the
buildings,
and
we
want
to
have
a
lot
of
architectural
detail.
We
want
to
feel
like
we're
passing
stuff
like
we're,
making
progress.
K
One
thing
that
we
are
lacking
on
for
sure
is
rain.
Sun
protection.
No
in
our
in
our
code,
do
we
require
request,
incentivize,
the
provision
of
rain
and
sun
protection.
If
you
go
to
earlier,
it
was
mentioned:
downtown
Fort,
Myers,
downtown
Fort
Myers
has
its
problems
as
you
come
over
the
bridge.
You
see
these
giant
skyscrapers
on
the
water,
but
if
you
go
to
the
historic
nine
blocks,
that
is
the
historic
center
of
downtown
Fort
Myers,
you
can
pretty
much
walk
that
entire
nine
blocks
without
ever
getting
wet.
K
K
Sidewalk
we
have
lighting,
we
have
street
trees.
One
thing
that
we're
fairly
deficient
on
is
public
seating
and
the
width
of
the
sidewalk
itself.
Our
sidewalks
are
quite
narrow
for
a
commercial
Main
Street
setting
they
average
in
some
places.
Actually,
there
is
narrow
as
five
feet,
but
they
they
average
six
to
eight
in
the
downtown,
and
typically
you
want
to
see
10
12
even
wider
in
certain
applications.
K
We
could
require
that
the
buildings
be
set
back
from
the
right-of-way
line,
the
red
line
vertical
line.
There
is
the
right
avoid
line.
We
require
that
10-foot
setback,
we
give
them
additional
story
of
height.
We
have
the
space
to
have
a
better
pedestrian
experience
on
the
ground
on
that
side
of
the
street.
K
So
that
concludes
the
original
presentation
that
was
given
to
City
Council
at
the
end
of
last
year
and
presented
to
playing
Commission
and
others.
So
this
is
the
second
half
of
that
again
reiterating
the
history
of
discussion
belabor
that
and
again
how
we
regulate
now
on
the
left-hand
side
of
the
screen
is
the
current
right-hand
side,
the
current
code,
the
50-foot
height
limit,
the
20%
of
exclusion.
We
measure
from
base
flood
elevation
deviation,
is
not
permitted
under
current
code.
K
There's
there's
no
path
to
getting
additional
height
of
then
requesting
a
variance
from
City
Council
from
look
so
the
proposed
regulations
would
be
to
regulate
the
number
of
stories
and
again
we're
basing
that
change
from
feet
to
stories,
because
a
story
is
not
ten
feet.
A
story
is
what
a
story
needs
to
be,
and
staff
does
recognize
the
fact
that
we
need
to
make
sure
that
that
story
definition
is
written
very
tightly
so
that
we
know
exactly
what
we're
going
to
get
and
we
are
comfortable
with
it.
K
But
that's
definitional-
and
we
haven't
gotten
to
that
point
of
detail
that
level
of
detail
in
this
discussion.
Yet
so
we
have
a
four
story
based
limit.
Then
we
could
permit
bonus
stories
up
to
a
maximum
of
eight
stories.
It
would
still
allow
the
exclusions
to
building
height
so
that
you
could
get
that
required.
You
know
mechanical
addict,
the
elevator
towers,
those
things
that
need
to
be
there
to
make
a
building
work.
K
So
in
terms
of
the
stories
there
would
be
a
maximum
height
per
story
and
we
would
be
measuring
the
story
from
finish
four
to
finish
four
or
to
the
roof
and
again
we
would
retain
Meno
deviations
permitted,
so
somebody
would
still
have
to
go
beg
for
variants
and
I.
Don't
know
how
they
could
get
that.
Oh,
if
this
were
considered.
K
So
again
the
base
limit.
We
would
retain
the
two-story
minimum
and
and
have
a
four-story
maximum.
The
setbacks
would
still
be
as
they
are
in
the
code.
Today,
zero
foot
street
and
side
yard
setbacks
staff
does
recommend
a
change
to
the
rear
setback
provision.
Currently
it's
20
feet.
We
recommend
revising
that
down
to
10
the
20
foot
setback
from
non
alley.
Setbacks
was
a
legacy
of
a
previous
code
upon
which
this
was
based.
It
was
probably
a
mistake
that
was
left.
K
K
So
in
this
example,
the
option
a
they
would
be
required.
The
10-foot
setback
that
10-foot
setback
must
connect
across
an
entire
block
face
so
a
building
like
sun
loss
center,
although
it
does
not
connect
across
the
Sullivan
Street
block
or
the
Taylor
Street
block.
It
does
connect
all
the
way
on
from
Taylor
the
Sullivan
on
Marion
Avenue,
so
you're,
connecting
across
at
least
in
one
entire
block,
face
that
10-foot
setback
would
be
required
to
be
dedicated
as
a
public
access
easement
and
the
developer
would
be
required.
K
K
B
A
K
Again,
in
order
to
get
to
a
five-story
building
under
this
scenario,
the
five-story
building
would
have
to
have
one
complete
block
face.
So
you
could
have
multiple
stories
on
the
block
in
the
other
direction,
but
for
this
scenario
on
Berrien
Avenue
they
would
have
to
connect
from
one
side
street
to
the
next
side
street.
Okay,.
A
So
if
it's
a
regular
block,
there's
already
a
four-story
building
and
there's
a
vacant
lot
like
there
is
it
you
there's
three,
those
three
little
dots
you
guys
on
one
of
them:
okay,
if
there's
three
Lots
that
are
available
on
Marion
and
they
would
all
have
to
be
have
the
same
setback
as
the
other
built
is
already
on
that
block,
so
they
would
be
limit
to
the
right
by
their
setback.
Would
that
be
correct,
correct.
K
We're
saying
they
don't
need
to
do
the
10
foot
set
in
order
to
get
the
additional
height
that
they
want
for
that
extra
story.
They
would
have
to
provide
a
contiguous,
8
foot
wide
canopy
for
rain
and
sun
protection.
It
must
cover
the
pedestrian
way,
the
public,
sidewalk
and,
of
course,
may
encroach
into
the
right-of-way.
K
K
G
G
K
B
B
K
K
K
H
G
F
Mean
I
daresay,
that's
that's
the
point
like
I
had
an
office
in
Tokyo
for
about
ten
years
and
in
the
fashion
district,
which
is
like
most
offensive
part
of
the
city.
You
I
cannot
remember
right
now
how
high
any
buildings
were,
because
they
did
this
effectively.
They
probably
they
were
six
storey,
I,
don't
know,
but
they
had
your
eyes
were
directed
to
the
street
level
and
because
of
this
effective
use
of
cannabis
instead
back,
you
cannot
see
the
building
I
personally
seen
this
applied
well.
F
G
Boys
Michels
response
to
my
first
question
was:
was
a
legitimate
one.
You
know
without
that
canopy
you're
looking
at
you
know
straight
up
at
6:05
stores,
whatever
it
is,
but
in
a
situation
where
you
only
have
three
stories
or
two
stories,
you
know
Jason
to
the
immediate
sidewalk
and
you're.
Looking
straight
up,
you're
not
going
to
see
those
additional
three
stories
that
are
set
back
so
where's
the
justification
for
for
the
awning,
if
you're
not
also
going
to
require
that
awning
for
the
lower
buildings
as
well.
K
K
E
K
In
order
to
get
to
the
seventh
floor
again,
they
have
to
meet
all
the
requirements
of
getting
to
a
five
storey
building
option
a
and
option
B,
as
well
as
a
requirement
for
six
storey
building
and
then
requiring
an
additional
step
back
of
ten
feet.
So
a
total
of
twenty
feet
from
the
primary
Society
at
the
six
story.
K
K
What
you're
getting
into
now
is
really
planned
view
elements,
so
the
requirements
would
be
for
a
mid
block
public
access,
easement
across
the
property
from
one
side
street
to
another
side
street,
that
pedestrian
connection
could
be
covered
and
partner
and
whole
and
that
it
would
be
developed
for
pedestrian
access,
so
would
have
the
amenities
required
for
that
lighting,
surfaces,
architectural
detail,
etc.
The
example
that
I
use
for
this
is
if
some
off-center
Sun
loss
center
has
a
mid-block
crossing.
That's
publicly
accessible,
it's
not
really
designated
as
such,
but
everybody
lots
of
people
use
it.
K
It
would
be
required
to
have
seating
landscaping,
decorative
amenities,
architecture,
sculpture,
pergolas.
Those
types
of
elements
could
be
written
into
the
code
conceptually
and
that
space
would
be
some
portion
of
the
build
the
building
lot
area.
The
courtyard
could
be
moved
in
space
and
the
sun
loss
center.
It's
immediately
in
the
in
the
middle
of
the
building.
I
could
be
pushed
to
the
rear
if
it
was
a
residential
building
or
residential
mixed-use
building,
it
could
be
pushed
to
the
street
if
you
wanted
a
nice
outdoor
dining
space
along
the
street
front.
E
Now,
that's
all
part
of
the
land
development
code
in
the
city
center.
There
is
some
other
parts
of
the
land
development
code
in
the
city
center
that
we're
struggling
with,
and
we
have.
Some
developers
have
come
to
us
on
some
other
properties
in
the
city
center
and
they're
struggling
with
whether
or
not
they
want
to
comply
with.