Reply to a comment

If I read Ms. Carr's statement accurately, this looks like a solution looking for a problem.

"We hear over and over it's a quality of life issue. (Code compliance officer) Liz Carr said we had six complaints total in the past year, and four of those were directed at one specific instance."

I strongly request the boards do not go overboard (no pun intended)in creating some regulatory nightmare coupled with a governmental "insurance/financial" program given the current makeup of this council. A council makeup, where financial solvency is decided in court as bankruptcy proceedings.

And with regard to Punta Gorda model: at 20 years life expectancy x 500/yr for program cost/lot appears to be inadequately funded. Unless my math is off or seawalls are that much lower in costs or life expectancy is much higher by a factor of 2x.

Recommendation: Cost impact should be an overriding consideration, for it is the cause of seawall abandonment/maintenance. I hope the city can foster a solution that is not an overreaching ordinance (with unintended consequences) but based and focused on derelict properties.