Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Appeal Outcome topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Fort Myers council grants appeal, leaves altered Richards Building facade in place
Summary
City Council voted 4–3 on Oct. 30 to grant an appeal of the Historic Preservation Commission's denial of after‑the‑fact approval for work on the Richards Building facade at 1615–1617 Hendry Street, leaving the stained/painted front as is.
The City of Fort Myers City Council voted 4–3 on Oct. 30 to grant an appeal and allow the altered facade of the Richards Building at 1615–1617 Hendry Street to remain.
The appeal challenged a Historic Preservation Commission decision that denied after‑the‑fact approval for painting or staining unpainted masonry on the front (Henry/Hendry) Street facade. Daniel Garza, representing the appellant, told the council the question before them was whether the front had ever been painted and whether a certificate of review was therefore required. "The front was painted previously," Garza argued, urging the council to find the appeal properly brought and to allow the work. Appellant testimony included an expert from Midwest Brick Stain who differentiated the product as a silicate masonry stain rather than a latex paint: "It's not a silicone. It's a silicate... Paint is a latex material," the witness said, explaining that silicate stains bind into the brick and allow breathability.
City planning staff and former Historic Preservation Commission members urged the opposite outcome. Nicole Devon, planning manager, said staff's review and contemporary photographs show no prior paint on the upper front facade and recommended upholding the HPC denial. "The front facade, particularly the upper floors, were never previously painted," Devon said, and staff recommended that the council require removal using the gentlest means practicable and submission of a certificate of review for the removal method.
After public comment and deliberations that repeatedly referenced a stop‑work order that was issued and then ignored, a councilmember moved "to grant the appeal and leave the building as it is." The motion passed on a roll‑call vote, 4 in favor, 3 opposed. The clerk recorded votes as Yes: Bonk, Streets, Watson, Berson; No: Mayor Anderson, Brown, Moshek.
City Attorney Alley told the council that separate enforcement or fines related to the stop‑work order would require their own due‑process hearing; that subject was not part of the appeal. The council did not impose penalties during the appeal vote and left questions about enforcement and ordinance clarification for staff or future action.
