Punta Gorda committee says 18-month flood-study will guide multi‑million-dollar downtown projects
Loading...
Summary
City staff told the Punta Gorda capital projects committee that a Kimberly Horne study scheduled to take about 18 months should inform use of flood‑mitigation funds; council has moved roughly $2 million to the project and staff said total costs likely will exceed $5 million.
Punta Gorda City staff told the capital improvements committee on Nov. 1 that a consultant study of downtown flooding will take roughly 18 months and that the study’s findings should guide use of construction funds.
The committee heard that the Kimberly Horne study is funded and expected to conclude in about 18 months, and that staff will present recommended options to city council after the study’s completion. "It's only 18 months to complete," Ron Evers, Public Works, said. Finance Director Kristen Simeone said council had already moved "a little over $2,000,000 to this project as well, from the Fishville sale that was originally scheduled for the city hall project." She added that staff currently believes the full scope of work could push the project cost beyond $5,000,000.
The committee’s discussion focused on sequencing: staff said the completed study would be the recommended precursor to selecting and funding construction options. "For future funds, yes," Krist en Simeone said when asked whether the study was necessary before using additional dollars. Committee members asked whether the CIP line items shown for fiscal 2026 should remain as listed or be pushed out if the study is not complete in time; Simeone said the schedule is an estimate and could be delayed.
Staff also told the committee they will pursue grants for design and construction and that a grants writer will assist during the study and design stages. Evers emphasized that many of the projects that flow from the study will be expensive and that grant applications will be an important part of the funding strategy.
The committee did not adopt any construction decisions at the meeting; members instead rated and discussed the project’s priority and funding options and asked staff to return with refined budgets and timing once the study advances.
The meeting opened with a procedural motion early in the agenda. A member said, "Motion to approve," and the motion was seconded by Sherry Dankley; the motion carried by voice vote, after the chair confirmed Ken Krause had made the motion.
Looking ahead, staff said council input will be required to select which options to build after the study is finished and that timing for construction depends on study results, grant success and council direction.
