e [Music] you you greetings oh one minute spirit I left too early it's couple years went slow March yes mam June 18th gr Workshop meeting they're working the June 18th nope it's not recording hello mine is the June 18 town of loah hatche groves Town Council Workshop will now come to order we can all please stand for the pledge of alleg of the United States of America rep stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all just AEF moment of silence give us some wisdom any additions deletions or modifications to the agenda for this Workshop nope okay can I have a motion to approve the agenda for the Workshop please motion to approve second second all in favor I I opposed none opposed oh I skipped roll call I'm sorry go ahead and do roll call Val but we're approved beyond that council member Shore council member manilia absent council member danowski here V vice mayor Herzog here mayor Kane present project coordinator Jeff CTS here Town attorney early present town clerk Oaks present we're good thank you sorry about that okay do we have any public comment on this I did receive um an email regarding the RV commercial project um which will just be attached to the minutes thank you no public comment go ahead you can hand her the card on your way up and go ahead and come up and speak okay okay all right please note for the record that pH manilia just arrived okay who's leading this Ro you okay go for it good evening Madame mayor members of the council Caitlyn Forbes for the record uh tonight we have a short presentation regarding the RV policy and ordinance that's in effect and we're looking for direction on if the council would like to revisit this ordinance um so we're going to present a couple slides and then open it up for discussion with the council we have a couple higher level questions that we'd like to get your input on to help um make the decision about whether we're going to revisit it and then give us some direction if so valer if you don't mind the next slide please okay so in your agenda backup you had a copy of the current regulations um so keep these on the screen and we can reference back to them if we need to um obviously the current regulations there's 180 day limitation there's certain ratios in terms of the number of RVs per lot um there's certain limitations on the storage of unocc occupied versus occupied RVs there's some setback uh requirements language regarding utility connections and um the permit language and requirements are in that section as well um if we go to the next slide please so we initially started down the path of revising the RV ordinance last summer believe it or not um we did a couple different public Outreach um Round Table events here at City Hall or town hall rather um there was a public survey that was available to Residents and then throughout the fall we went through the iterative process of going back and forth on different drafts and the draft that was um most recently presented in October was also part of your backup so you could uh review the the last version that ultimately we decided not to move forward with and the RV ordinance stayed where it was with the existing language next slide please so staff was told that um perhaps there was some desire to revisit RVs and so you have a couple questions for the council um if we are going down the path of of revisiting revising either the ratios the permitting process anything uh to help us narrow in of the the needs and the goals the intent of the update and then Define some of the challenges uh that the council would like to address through this ordinance update and then give us um some directions so at the outset during summer of last year there was a big need expressed um relating to the equestrian industry and the equestrian Community um for kind of seasonal housing um there's some other AG related uh use needs relating to you know perhaps caretaker uh quarters being able to operate out of RVs and similar things also the concept of providing affordable um housing not in the sense of you know State Statute affordable housing but reasonable housing options um for different folks that may be um income limited uh so all of those were expressed at at the summer uh outset as kind of the driver for the update and then as we went along that kind of evolved especially as it related to um some of the A and the equestrian needs so we're looking to define the need as well as the intent you know is is the intent to clarify the regulations is it to streamline the process is it to offer stronger regulation options um that type of feedback from the council will help us um make any changes that are necessary if we can kind of narrow down really where the concerns and kind of the pinch points are with the existing ordinance I know for example that there was a lot of concerns with not only the permitting process but the actual application form from the residents or certain things that were maybe invasive or you know weren't necessarily necessary um that maybe are still valid concerns that we could move forward with um the challenges again these were some things that were brought up um either from the council or from the public throughout the process um the permitting and the enforcement has always been a challenge with the RV ordinance um the utility connections and the infrastructure impacts especially the impacts the adjacent roadways um and increased traffic with heavier vehicles um life safety was a big issue um throughout the process as well as the impact just the community character and whether the town really wanted to um kind of adjust these ratios especially when uh we're talking in the fall we're talking about even you know annual RVs which would be a big departure from what a lot of towns are doing which is getting more strict on RVs U and then of course the perceived in real density know adding RVs is adding population you've always been a one to five uh density in the town so this would have a impact on at least the perceived density and the number of uh folks perhaps living on individual Lots so those are the types of um initial challenges that were discussed I'm going to open it up to council to see if there's an appetite at you know the highest level to even revisit this and if so we can get into some of the details here don't want to get into too much of the old ordinance um or really specifics even like ratios I want to stick to kind of what's on the screen here the high level goal and the intent and some of the challenges uh that you'd like us to frame up for a follow-up conversation if the council chooses to continue this conversation let's turn it over to you Madame mayor if anything to you'll say something okay great yeah just when you talked about the intent of the update I think you hit the nail on the head I think the intent was clarify the regulation streamline the process and offer stronger enforcement mechanism I think that was why we said it off nobody was using the existing program which started as a pilot program but one of the things it said was the town can come on your property anytime they want with 24-hour notice and that just in my opinion I believe most people said I don't think so I don't want to put words in their mouth but anyhow but you know the intent of the update I think that was the initial intent and you know I would think that intent is is still there in my opinion so to summarize he's saying that the your process of obtaining a permit needs some significant changes with more respect to land owners rights or you're you're done Laura I had a great chat with a resident and these were the two points that they brought home and the first one was it it it it melds right into what you're saying and um the summation of Robert's Point make rules that apply to all and that are not necessarily easy to follow but welcoming oh I I need to go down to town hall and you know make it clear that I have a toy hauler or you know a horse trailer that sleeps somebody you know or my own personal RV I personally I don't see where that's a problem but the other point she drove home was fabulous and it was she says I own five acres I'm homesteaded my neighbor owns 5 Acres they're homesteaded and they run an equestrian business why is it okay for the equestrian business to have X number of RVs rented out to Perfect Strangers in our town but I can't have NRV to put my son and his wife in on a permanent basis whether I agree with that or not it's a fabulous question so I just thought I'd throw that out there as you know yet another nut in the soup thank you this is a a point of clarification permanent being an an on an annual basis as opposed to just seasonal and and my issues have to do with on to piggyback on that enforcement it's very difficult when we for Mario and the code enforcement people when we make their job ridiculous okay there is no way that they can tell from the road whether somebody is occupying an i RV or not occupying an RV so we have to try to eliminate the culture that we have of rule breaking okay we have to try to eliminate that make it so that it's it's user friendly to follow the rules um and so I I think that if somebody's going to be there for 180 days or they're going to be there for a year I I just don't think that that's something that we can regulate we can't we can't regulate that you can't tell how are you going to know whether they're for 180 days or they're there for a year and the fact of the matter is we have people all over town that have people that are living full-time there we have people that need that do that for income basis but we also have people that need that for caretakers on their Farm which is protected under right to farm and egg so I think that looking at while you're saying that everybody else is going the other way we're not everybody else we're a rural egg community and we have to do what serves our citizens and the needs of our community so um I would look once again I say to take a lot of the words out of this and I I say said it to Glenn in the last meeting and I think the meeting before that I think a lot of the problem is we have so many words and so many requirements that we just need to keep it simple um keep it simple and basic and straightforward um I also think that um we have no accommodation for somebody that has um less than one acre I don't understand why the people on Tangerine if they choose to have an RV for their personal going on vacation in their driveway shouldn't be able to have one RV on their less than an acre um I I just think they should be able to um and I know a number of them do already so again are we gonna make a regulation and then go in and make all those people sell their RVs or pay to store them someplace I I don't think so um you're talking about their own personal recreational use they have par but but we say they can't have any that's silly yeah right okay so I mean we're not gonna we're not going to do that so that's what I'm saying take take a lot of this words out of it you know let's come up with something that's you know everybody gets one and and who cares whether it's for personal use or rent it out who like that's irrelevant let's look to get um a Max I mean just off the top of my head my Max would be four that's my Max tolerant tolerance level for like five acres and above but that doesn't mean that that goes for everybody else it's just where I would start um and let's look to put you know just a a simple BTR requirement in there a BTR and some kind of proof of that the septic is being appropriately handled which we know it is not in a lot of cases and that the water and the electric were hooked up correctly and maybe that happens when you get your BTR If you're renting it or or when when you have one there but we cannot create a situation where our code enforcement staff are running around town looking for our and then trying to find a way on people's property to inspect those RVs and we just can't do that we we have to create a culture of where people want to come to us and be in compliance because it's a no-brainer an easy to follow Ellis so you just spoke for everybody that wants to have 4 RVs on 5 Acres what about the people that don't want to have 4 RVs on five acres we heard a bunch of a few weeks ago I mean it was hell no to trailer parks you know it was hell no but sounds like y'all want to have one in your backyard so I'm not for that and are you guys all vetting the people that you have in your backyard because your neighbors deserve that all right your neighbors deserve to not have to worry about the strangers you're bringing onto into their neighborhood you know your neighbors deserve to know that you have a legal septic or that you're having the um the sewage removed properly the people that you're renting to deserve to know that they have really clean water to drink okay that you know I mean and that their sewage is not going somewhere it shouldn't and what is the Imp back to the town y'all you know yall made it clear what is the income to the town what's the income because are you guys going to charge a tax a percentage are you going to say hey instead of having two people live on my property now I have eight people living on my property and six cars going up and down the road what are you going to do for the town and the your fellow taxpayers you're increasing the density you're increasing the voting you know and I think that there are plenty of RVs in this town with the ordinance that stands and I do agree with Anita no one should be left out so if you do have an acre or less you should be allowed to have your own RV at least on your property but you know not wanting code enforcement to come on your property when you have multifamily housing I don't think that's fair to the town and I don't think that's fair to the other half of residents that don't need RVs in their backyard so I would like y all to consider that before you vote on doubling the RVs in this town increasing the voting and increasing the amount of people that are going to be living in here us the road because it will be annually it won't just be well that goes without saying well that's what I'm saying so I hope you take all the residents in this town into consideration Robert I'm sorry yeah I I like a lot of your concept you know five and under we can't with 4.9 and under I guess you know last time we discussed this because there's and I had the numbers here there's 206 properties between 4.9 and 5 Acres so where that tenth went over the years who knows but um you know having won less than five acres because you know I was thinking you if you're less than five acres are non-conforming why are we giving special benefits to non-conforming Lots so I would support one less than five and it the and as I read both ordin is you know the one that we tried to revise we put a lot of stipulations like you had to be living on the property you know to have more than one you know it was like okay everybody gets one if you're well the way it was is you had to be agricultural um classified or homesteaded to get the one I think was what we talked about we just discussed you know we don't want somebody to have vacant land and an absentee owner and all of a sudden you know they got one or up to four RVs on there and that's all they're using the property for so the discussion was if if you live on the property it's Homestead and you're there that hopefully you're going to police and pay attention to who's living on your property because you lived there and that was one of the rules that that we had implemented and then another one was that you had to be agriculturally classified um in order to get you know the additional benefits of additional RVs so you know I kind of get what you're saying but the go k lot you know based on the acreage you know full of more I think it's a starting point but I still think we need to narrow it down to okay you've got five or more Acres you know are you homesteaded are you egg um if it's just vac land my opinion is you don't you shouldn't have an RV on there even one in my opinion so you know I think that's where you know we need to start you know narrowing it down a little bit and creating some additional rules I know what you're saying and and the goal at the end was if you have an RB on your property you would have to have a permit whether it was one or four and it would be inspected the electric the water the sewer so the be confident and comfortable knowing that you have a legitimate RV site that's not creating pollution or not a safety hazard to the occupant of the RV you know that that's the goal um and then you know as code enforcement drives around and sees an RV you know it's okay yeah they got a permit the goal was that everyone would be registered um the goal wasn't to include the people that own the RV in store it there and I know what you're saying that becomes a tricky area but if you own an RV and you live on the property then um the tax collector you've got a license plate for it it's got to be registered and up to date well they all have to have that right yeah so I would think that it would be easy to identify oh that's the property owners RV that they store there year round you know that's not part of this RV program you know so I know what you're saying I would love to make it as easy as possible people to register as well as to enforce and uh in the goal I would hope that everybody would join the program and and everybody that does it we can feel comfortable that yes that's a safe situation you know because we have a local building official now that works here we have our own inspector so we have control over the inspection process so they're very familiar with our town and um and it would have to be you know obviously a proper electrical you know proper back flow prevention device to your house water or um if it was an a property and this was the caretakers or Security quarters then it would have to be a permitted well through palage County Health Department either permitted septic or you know somehow proved that you've got a service coming out and uh that that's I think some of the key components to um the other people in the town that aren't utilizing the program feeling comfortable that they're um drinking water is is not being impacted by somebody doing a you know dumping sewage on the ground or something they not supposed to be doing so how do you get there how do you get a program where everybody buys into it and registers um I I just think we've got to get there and enforce it you know give them time but say hey you got to do it you know or if you have an RV you got show the license plate should be on it you know and um part of those rules were if you did have one year round it would be inspection twice a year and then part was just a six-month program so that was another caveat is you know year round versus 180 or 179 days so I like what you're saying C blanch you know keep it simple but there there's still I think some levels of of rules and enforceability is the key okay if we make this rule how do we enforce it right you know are we making a rule just to have a rule and then it's not enforceable or you know people can hide we don't want people to hide we love to have people come out and it be a simple process where where they can uh register so that that would I hope that would come out of it that would be my dream March yeah um I've um been talking talking to some residents and um I found that some of the trailers that um are coming into town are less than a standard um condition and there is now an enterprising person on 43rd Street that um is running a uh RV repair shop and uh from time to time they have more than 10 RVs stacked up waiting to be repaired so that's a concern you know what do we do about these um RVs that we want upgraded uh another thing is um some of the um Nursery owners feel that uh they shouldn't have to pay uh $50 fee uh you know they could uh just register uh like they do with the BTO for a a smaller amount and uh or even have it covered under the BTR because it is part of their business uh um the RV should be placed in an orderly manner not hophazardly um Helter Skelter all over your property U um some of the ones that are on collecting canal right now are are less than desirable the way that they're positioned all over the yard um it's the owner's responsibility also to um police the uh area around these campers and and not have the people being uh subject to throwing garbage out their door and having it pile up um there have been cases where old dilapidated uh trailers have been moved and the mess stays under where the trailer was until someone goes and picks it up um some older campers may not have uh titles or license plates uh a lot of the ones uh that the caretakers have may have had them for years and years and years and have lost track of the title and haven't registered them since they placed them on the property so these are some of the concerns that I've heard you have a lot to work I mean um just wanted to throw real quick Madam chair some numbers out there 2019 I did a tax roll breakdown on the numbers of properties at different acreage and less than 4.9 Acres or 600 properties greater than 4.9 866 so almost half of the properties are less than five acres so they'd only get one can we have all have that information please yeah they can can you share that want look at you can make copes yeah yeah can we9 so plus or minus 5% you know some things have changed five years thank you Robert for sharing so may I yeah so that number um are you saying that under five acres you only want people that have under five acres even though they're ad classified and they have farms and Arenas and um covered Arenas on their two acres are you saying they can't they can only have one RV anybody under five acres I think so based on a conforming versus non-conforming lot yeah well we're zon ar5 right we are but the non-conforming Lots were here since before we were a town so why why one RV you know I know people with horse farms you know people with horse farms like right on collecting and SEO they have a thriving business why only one RV for the for anybody under five acres well I think what's the logic my opinion any special because we're giving a special benefit it's essentially what this is and in my opinion special benefits should apply to conforming Lots ar5 properties and to give somebody with less than that the same special benefit is a conform lot and I'm not this apply everything you know tonight it's RVs you know it could be something else you know that we come up with so that that's my theory my thought and then because we talked about conforming versus nonconforming and you know we understand the conform the non-conforming laws were here when we came to town but I think a lot of them you know were plotted as single family neighborhoods more so and I know there's some that that aren't but you know when you look at you know Flamingo Paradise San Diego Los Angeles you look at those roads that were carved out in small Lots it's basically single family housing on those roads it's it's not you know an AR an agricultural type situation so yeah just looking at the ar5 I think and so you think somebody on five acres should have four but somebody that lives on four acres or three acres should only have one somebody on four acres but you can have four RVs right because you live on five acres it's not about me it's conforming well I think that most of the council here I seem to be the only one that represents the non-conforming lot and like you said we have a lot of people that live on non-conforming Lots yet they're not you know their lot isn't special enough that they could have somebody on four acres they can have two RVs or somebody at three or let's just make it two and under that's exactly what it's about it's a vendetta how many farms Robert um I don't know how correct this without trying to read your chart how how many farms do we have on the like 2.5 to 4 acre uh do you know that have the top row you know if you look less than one one to two 2 to 4.9 that's all the number of properties these have changed a lot 1466 that that's possible too the rest of the calculations were based on different allowances trying to figure out the total number of RVs so basically just the top row is the number of properties in those categor so are we in agreement with our direction to staff that there may be no distinction between stored and unstored that the number is the number that everybody gets one how about if we say that that anybody on under five gets two that's what it says and over five get four and it does and there's no distinction between stored unstored and may I ask a question so we have two ordinances we have one that says stored RVs you could have two correct right and then we have another RV ordinance that talks about the RVs you can rent we need to combine those two into one correct okay get stop with the 42,000 ordinances combine them into one and you're allowed or on 10 acres whether it's yours you're storing it you're renting it or it's somebody else's you're renting on five acres or less no four. um no on under 10 it's two and under one it's one those those are two different ratios that you all just if you can discuss that and right well it says it right here four of the 10 Lots 10 acres or more it says two RV lots two acres two less than 10 acres and then anything less than two acres gets just one two acres gets one is there consensus on those numbers or is that is everybody okay with those numbers is with that no I like the five and well five and below the what we agreed to at the last one we vote on on last we're we're working on it we're we're discussing it we're trying to get through it we're confused too right now we're we're all trying to work it out okay so first all I think we can all agree that everybody gets one is everybody in agreement with that everybody gets one no matter what okay first of all There's no distinction between occupied unoccupied you own it Joe Smith owns it so we all are in agreement on that okay you the storage is going away the storage is going away it's that it's the actual physical Vehicles whether you're storing them whether you're living in them whether your friend is living in them doesn't matter it's all one policy there's no such thing as storing on top of it for we're talking about RVs okay one is one one is one okay whe whether it's your personal one that you have in your driveway on your less than one acre lot on Tangerine or whatever okay one is one everybody gets one we're all in agreement that you do away with the storage ordinance and that it's no distinction between the two okay so I think we're all in agreement that anything under five acres gets two do I hear we're all in agreement with that Robert yes are you okay with anything under anything between like two and five acres gets two um I can live with that if five acres and above has something you we're we're gonna we're gonna we're gonna get to that what do you think do we use 4.9 or five and I I hate to belabor the point two to 4.9 gets two all right because that was a big issue last time well it says to 10 less than 10 what forget this we're making we're making it up now newly we're making it up newly right now okay no then I I don't agree with that it's less than 10 two to less than 10 acres mayor what were you trying to say I was trying to say two to 4.9 gets two and within that two is your individual one corre or if you don't have any you can have two correct okay yeah okay now is there I'm Sor sorry is there a seasonal nope on that I don't think we should have that I think that's unenforceable I mean that's just my opinion but I don't think I think that the seasonal compared to non-seasonal is unenforceable that you're you're going to run your code guys ragging trying to do that they just all have to be registered and whether people live in them year round or people live in them for six months that's the property owner's responsibility so less than two one two to 4.9 two two if you're gonna how about five to to 9.9 three and anything over 10 four may I join into this I'm just throwing it out there all right so I would like to join in please so you are double our density if you're making it less than 10 acres you are double our density with annual tenants because that's exactly what's G to FL you're making the assumption that every single person who has a five AC GNA run out and buy anual tenants no people bring their RVs with them I know I understand what you're saying go ahead I'm saying you're doubling the density if you're going to f look it needs to be two to um two to five acres two to 4.9 no it just make it five acres what's the 4.9 well there's 206 properties between 4.9 and five acres it could be it's probable that the 4.9 versus the five really has to do with easements and rways and and those kind of things so um I think we should probably take a a look at that if you're going to move forward and find out what it is but right now um you know there could be a lot that's 4.85 Acres but from our the rest of our um code when we look at things from development standpoint it's really a five acre lot because um it's out there so I think we should probably to simplify things talk about it as five acres and and above and we'll if you go forward with this we'll we'll deal with those 4.9 um you know through attributed acreage um and find out what the real details are on two to five and then five and up okay so so two to five two two that's it that's all you can have on your properties to five to 10 three or five and above three do we want three to be our maximum number do we want four to be our maximum number what's what's some opinions about PE from people is three a good maximum number I'm very okay with three you're okay with three I'm okay with three are you okay with three you guys are gonna rate you're getting more RVs so above five acres three and that's the maximum you can have can I throw another wrench in the soup here oh sure go ahead just for fun okay okay so you live on a 5 acre lot you're homesteaded one acre is the footprint of your house and your driveway so that's four usable Acres So based on this you could have two or three that's it's five acres of what your lot is not not what your or and even to to Jeff's Point what your lot is considered to be so a 4.85 could under the five classification okay because of that and that's their powers it be just piing n is everybody okay with the three maximum I I have a question go ahead what if we made it from two to six acres to this way it would at least give more room from 6 to 10 you're going to go three at least It's a larger acreage for to support the the higher density of RVs I personally like the breakoff being at five just because of Robert's point of what's conforming and non conforming I mean that is what we are zoned is so somebody with 5.5 acres is going to be able to have four RVs on their we just said three is the maximum just said three is it three is it three is the limit I think that's a good idea we've always stuck on four because that was is an RV park I think three is good I agree three should be sufficient and not not everybody's going to take advantage of that all right Jeff what kind of legal problems do we run into people oh I'm sorry goad I have another question so still my question and my problem is is how is the town benefitting this and the taxpayers of the town with because a lot of these people are going to be annual so how does this benefit the town and our infrastructure how do these support themselves well they have to be licensed for by lack of a better term and we're gonna have to come up with a permit a per yeah permit they're permit it that is GNA cover our infrastructure so I can't are you I didn't hear talking two sides of your if you I it's better to take comment from the public up at the public I think it would be a great idea right now to have a little public you haven't filled out a form please bring it up if you haven't filled out a form please okay are you ready to start public comment now or do you want to comment and then we'll go back to discussion because people have a lot that they want to say and I want to hear it and this is important standing can I start it's important we get ited Madam mayor if I may just before public comments starts one thing that I would like to get to is she's not first it's Miss sui's first yeah I go in order I receive them let me address this question first go ahead uh after public comment I just want to put it out so we can all remember to discuss how we treat Bonafide a Parcels if there's any distinction so I just want to make sure all right great Cassie's first I want to hear what people have to say before we oh can she can e go in front of you okay all right e go yeah you're first I'm sitting here listening it's like you're talking if you could start speaking there yeah get sign contract you do this and then you say well you can't have Co enforcement go look for RVs we can't do a nice way where they want to come down and do this that that's just not going to happen we either have a rule or we don't and have people make sure that they get their permits make sure they get it and I'm going to use this as an example because you're selling this person's property and you're friends with them I have a person who who has code enforce in violation has several um um RVs on his property that doesn't have a permit it doesn't have anything you can't no code enforcement has been able to go in there they got washers hanging out of going into the sale they have uh chickens they've got dogs they got all sorts of crap going on there's no code for it's a freefor all on that property but yet we want to be nice we don't want to go and bother them so it's either you have a rule or you don't but make it make a plan and stick to it so you're going to make all these plans and anybody's going to do what they want anyway so if you're going to have a commit make sure that code enforcement and Health Inspectors can go to it don't have it where we want to make them be happy to come down make it so we're strict we do want to have you have your Trail but we're strict we have rules regulation and this is how our town does it and that make it like that that's it we have rules that's make it simple we don't have to candy ass for people make it a rule and let them know you're allow to have trailer or arvs but these are our rules simple thank you thank you anybody else ma'am please speak into the mic anybody Jane Harding and also because there's many properties here that don't conform that have 30 RVs on them and I feel like I'm being lumped in with them okay and there's nothing done about them hasn't been it's been impossible to do things your hands have been tied I understand that so I think have your rules but keep it simple too I think if you make everybody register to start instead of go now we got a permit fit now we got an inspection now we got code enforcement you're scaring the crap out of me I want to move to Kentucky okay because this is getting like so out of hand you know get everybody you have to register have them pay an annual fee whether they get three two one you have annual fee you guys want to charge $400 for RV and if that RV you want to charge another $400 and this is getting so complicated all right you are allowed three spots okay $400 per spot annually that's what you get back to the town okay and I keep thinking about this RV part with the 285 what are they contributing okay how are they taking away from us now I have a business I'm here long term I had someone say if you were here long term then you would have a and c i here long term with my daughter with horses and I've lost lots of money because of the squabbling I have horse people who come down and rent stalls and they bring their RV I have complied I have people that I've had letters signed from the sewage people saying that they pick up the sewage I have proper electrical boxes I have a backflow on my well but it's getting to the point where why why is this and it's like to go back and forth on the number I mean I'm GNA be really blunt and then like and I'm afraid to get blunt you want two because you have two acres and you have two so two acres you want to I already have to and I did the permit but I did the permit with you last year when you said that's not fair I already have two already and I'm with you okay I have five acres and I don't think it's fair to be uh under four for me okay because when I first came here it was four that I could have and it shouldn't be more than four because it it's more than four by the state of pal Beach County that's an RV part so that's where it should remain so if you want people to conform don't scare them to death don't get all this code enforcement ground don't overwhelm your town and your taxpayer start with getting very simple rules one acre anybody can have one two to five you can have two five and above four no more and then register everybody register and you pay an annual fee start there start simple and then one last thing whatever happen to the six the six stalls per Gro it's it's done okay you can build a barn and put a Grooms quarters in a St bar done Missi I don't know if she wasn't talking again but I just got the mic wasn't working it's picking up on the screen it's picking up picking up um so I'm not really sure I agree with keeping it simple and exactly what you told the attorney too much for it's it's not understand it's not so we need to make it simple if you do this this is what's going to happen this is what prevents it how to comply and what happens if you don't comply very um I do agree with the fact that people with one acre should at least get one so you know there are some people on stit I talked to a couple people they they have less than one so they should be able to talk so that's true you know U I do agree with stopping this 4.9 4.8 2.3 whatever was 2 to five anything above five or five to 10 anything above 10 you could do it that way just keep them since we're RR five two to five anything above five to 10 how we want to do with that um I don't agree with having you to register every RV with the town because not everybody in the town has an RV that's the a business like people that they doin a business I agree with those people I don't know how they would even navigate some of the rules that we have to even comply and we're not talking about the people that are trying to comply we're talking about people that aren't trying and those are easily defined as long as somebody turns them in because I drive around the town but I don't know every place in the town so I would hope that somebody would at least turn it in or notify through an email that the code enforcement could do it because people are very uncomfortable I put myself out there and I have been attacked personally and they don't want to attack their neighbor if they're living next to their neighbor because we've seen retaliate Behavior so perhaps maybe we could have those people that know that where there's a 30 Park R could send an email to Mario hey you might want to check it out and it's not a formal complaint and have Cod enforcement do it that way as formal so it leaves that person out um that's an option as well so thanks thank you any more Cynthia Taylor it's on you just need to speak into the mic speak into the yeah yeah we got you okay I'm sorry I'm late and I don't know what's been covered and what's not been covered um I live on [Music] Marcella I've never been part of a Town Council so I don't know how easy or hard it is to do um all I can tell you is um God brought me to lock Groves in 2016 um I saw a lot on Marcel ended up building a house with my father we spent 1.4 million and Marcel is the most beautiful stream count it is a magical place and I know I've only been here six years there's people who have been here 30 years my neighbors it's really disgusting I'm talking not only for our street but to our community we have such a jewel here and you know I don't know if my words mean anything to you guys the trees they're precious they're beautiful it's what makes Marcel and the whole town what it is if we want to have planted palm trees we can go live out in wesle I am so angry at what is happening on my street and I know a lot of my neighbors AR I want to know what we can do to put some ordinances you know my concern is the trading level the trailers are disgusting the blue building that's on my street that looks like a I don't even know what it looks like the lady across the street has a beautiful yard she's going to move didn't to sell of her house because that was allowed to be put up and there's three4 trailers looks like a trailer park I mean I'm watching that's one thing at a time the the piece of property on F that had the beautiful trees that was like a paradise probably 100 150 beautiful huge mature gorgeous trees cut down every single one to put their little Nursery it's disgusting and it's like the rest of the world it's about money and I don't know that that's for you all to decide is that what this sounds about it's about money yeah shouldn't be look at the world look at the world look what money is doing for our world power you know we have something very precious here and I don't know you know if there's something as Citizens we can get a of what we have to do but I am not going to sit back any longer they watch the two lot on Marcella Andro here when I first moved in we used to walk there's a beautiful lot but there's a pond down there there's a family of otters in there every three gone we have a kuta hedge around there now solid gate couple trailers on there who knows what they're doing in there you can't see that event is what we want for our Comm the business down on fome and look at the end now the new the new lawn care business looks like a jum I mean there's got to be some kind of rules or something to keep our town beautiful there's a lot of people on our who have bought and have spent a lot of money renovated but this is that just tearing down and degrading our town I just want to know from you all you know what what can be done number one about the trees I there the cypress trees there was bunch of Cyprus trees on this L that just got cleared every single tree every kind tree everye gone only man dominated if he came here and saw that I guarantee you you have a heart attack and job over dead he took such pride in his yard and F thank you so much for your comments maram miles we allowed to interact a workshop or not a workshop are we allowed to interact is the question we are not supposed to council mil you are recording okay um we all know why we're here to solve a problem we tried to solve a problem last year and the year before and it was shot sh down mainly because of the two and the one and the three and the four and Phyllis and Robert got into it and it went by the wayside and the people now are waiting and they were waiting for their business last year and we just kind of put a hold and said let them go what they need to do because business and season is here so we didn't send code enforcement after them okay um whatever you guys do we need to resolve it and we need to resolve it quickly because this is June heading to July and season again is coming around the corner so um I think it should be plain I think it should be simple I think it should be easy to understand I agree with a lot that has been set up here except for one thing the 5 ACR we have a maximum State requirement of four they can't have any more than four because then they're a trailer park not every 5 acre tract is going to have four RVs if they do they do but not every single one is going to have four if you took the time to look and the cost somebody that is not doing it now probably is not going to do it with this excuse me when this gets into place because it is highly expensive and they're not going to do it on a whim the electric costs money the septic costs money even if they have it pumped out it's a lot you're going to go and spend 15 to $20,000 a 5 acre tract and hope that you get four RVs for season and it's going to take you years to recoup your money years so the majority of people aren't going to do it in lockah hche groves but what you're hurting now is the acreage that have been doing it the horse farms that have been doing it that need to do it because they have a business and they rely on people coming in for their business as far as telling residents or telling the town who they are that's up to the landowner they're not going to let their pieces of property go to hell in a hand basket I can tell you that and if they do again it's a reflection on the land owner that needs to clean up and take care of their property it's always that way whether it's egg or whether it's something else we have a responsibility I've been out here for almost 35 years I like my property the way I like it it's not a garbage dump but everybody else around can say and do what they they should be allowed to do what they want on their property within reason I'll end with this we did discuss when I was on Council the people that did not come in and get a permit for legitimate RVs to hit them with fines and hit them hard and say they are not allowed to have an RV on their property for x amount of time this is for compliance so we know well septic every everybody's okay and if they don't come in make the rules simple and easy to understand and if they don't come in hit them thank you Eileen has requested to speak again okay we're at six o'clock right now okay what is the rule right now about owners that don't live on the property and RVs can you clarify if you're talking about a non-homesteaded person or if there's no principal resid on the propert there no resid on the property you have to have a single family house on the property okay so what happens now if there are RVs on the property and nobody lives there it'd be a code enforcement matter okay well it can depend on whether it's caretakers there's exemptions under the current ordinance but we're getting rid of uh Robert I know but she was asking about what is now so I don't want um this is 7 46 hide Park Road this is the opposite of what Maryann was saying uh we don't need these RVs in our community we're a single family residential Community I can understand some of the horse farms that might need a groom's quarters which can be one person who's not renting they're living there for free because they need the help at the Grooms quarters but we're turning into a trailer park she says to keep the properties nice look at the trash at croad and collecting Canal it looks horrible they got a taco truck in front you look down there by fome Road it's garbage absolute garbage they have the $5,000 campers that move around every six months in our community because they know they can do it and people who are in their 40s and live in a $5,000 camper might be bad luck but usually it's due to poor life choices and we have these people running all over our community and they just take advantage of us I've read a new thing that we're putting out they're putting in modular homes that's not mobile homes right no no okay also right in there it's about uh residential homes like group homes that can go to residential neighborhoods the state I don't think we can regulate that I don't think we have any okay because we don't need halfway houses in the middle of a community because I worked in drug rehab for nine years and most of them are a joke but we are a single family residential Community I mean if you can get it to equestrian season maybe two units per acre she just said $155,000 they'll make that in three months they rent them out for $1,000 a pop so four units that's four grand a month so okay okay all but we don't need that in the neighborhood it's a single family neighborhood this isn't a trailer park thank you for your comment all right do you have mayor do you have we received another request from Jane Harding to speak okay but we're at six o'clock the me the meeting's over with people are also forgetting that it's an agricultural community and agricultural people out here for that I'm all with the residents I'm all with keeping it beautiful okay but the reason why I'm out here is for what I do as well I put in hundreds of thousands of dollars into this now if I had known this was going to be the hugest issue here I would have never bought here don't forget it's also agricultural so agricultural people aren't all pigs they aren't all going to have slummy trailers they're not going to trash their par at all I mean give me a I'm so tired of getting lumped in with the trash in lockah hat go after the trash not the actual people contribute to this community thank you all right I think you have a lot to go on um I'm not sure that you could come back I don't know that we came to a consensus of what's going to happen over 5 three four what where we're going to be but I think you have something to start with and bring us something back hopefully at the next meeting can you can you all right let's talk about when you say the next meeting the next meeting is July 2nd you will not see this on your July 2nd um agenda but I don't think we can put this off Jeff until I well I'm just I'm just telling you logistically um that would mean that we would have to draft an ordinance in a in a day essentially have it reviewed all those kind of things um I don't know that anybody's asking you to draft an ordinance we already have we already let mean just to be fair we already have an ordinance we're talking about redacting a bunch of stuff out of it we're talking about adding some stuff into it and I I think it is fair to ask you to bring us something back by July 2nd for us to then take a a vote on and make a final decision on so that it can be brought back in the August meeting and put into law before season and that people can have some kind of a if if you if you want to continue the discussion on July 2nd we can um come back with a summary document for you to review um it will not be an an ordin form perfect this in order to to go forward this will have to go through the process I think it'll have to be reviewed by um the Planning and Zoning Board um and then it will um have to have why zoning why not ulc well um right think it's ulc not zoning there's no zoning change man okay so I I stand corrected whether it's ulc or whether it's U pcab um you're talking about it going to a committee for review you and so what you're talking about is first reading in um probably September and passage um in October would be the time frame I just want to be realistic about the time frames on getting this in place may I yes please di we have two ordinances I've been told we can amend an ordinance at any time or a resolution correct you can amend an ordinance but you have to go through the process of passing an ordinance to amend that ordinance and that process requires two readings in front of this group advertised um and currently the way we have your meetings set up that is a two-month process we also have to get something um in shape uh to go to ulc if you want it to go to ulc it's one of those things that you're talking about utilizing your committees one of the things they would do is review ordinances that were um being moved forward so what I'm what I'm suggesting to you that the we'll bring this back for further discussion um at your July meeting try to get a summary um document together so that you can review what appears to us to to be the consensus or what we need further Direction on so that somebody can go and draft an ordinance and it's being reasonable that that ordinance would get to you in the September and October time period for passage okay I I think I have go right ahead I think I have it Caitlyn we love you okay but I think this Council can handle this okay I think think we already made some decisions here we heard from the public you have half want four RVs half people probably want no RVs I think we should trim it at this point we should do the three um I I I I don't agree with you guys I don't think five acres should have four I think the three should just be 10 or more and I think we should leave it the two up to 10 as it was and let people under one acre well I was going to say if we went with that and Miss Harding recommended a $400 impact fee per RV site I think that's a good start and then we don't have to wait but I think you should go with the other numbers that the majority consent it on and then yeah I go with the numbers that the majority it's going to take for for us to get the direction we need we need to come back back to you um to and then we and then we need to draft up something and we need to make it go through the process and all the advertising and the public hearing and that September or October time period it sounds like it's a long way away but real to look at at the at the very next meeting in July 2nd some some kind of consensus for us to come to I think so I think based on your discussion um we can do that what I'm hearing is that they all have to be registered and you're going to have to make a decision on three or four yeah but we'll do that at that time yeah we get a little more input from the community okay Robert you've got one more comment before we adjourn this yeah and our longterm schedule um it shows first reading is August 6th second reading or ordinance September 3rd so that's in our long range schedule um this does not have to go in front of any other committees yeah I don't think so either it's not required um we've been beating this up a couple of years it's been in front of you LDC actually a long time ago yeah so Jeff that's in the long range schedule looking at it at the end of our upcoming meeting was on there for August SEK I I understand that I'm sorry but this meeting's actually adjourning at this time and then we're gonna take a two-minute break guys before we start the next one e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e there meeting not just a bre okay do we do another call another plg do we yeah do it because there are people that are just joining in for this okay July 18th Council workshop and special meeting beginning at six o'clock will now come to order if we can all please stand to believe we'll skip the moment of silence we'll do another roll call valer council member Shore pres sorry council member danowski here council member manilia present vice mayor Herzog here mayor Kane present project coordinator Jeff K still here Town attorney early here and town clerk Oaks here okay any additions deletions or modifications to this Workshop agenda can I have a motion to oh I'm sorry go ahead well I want to know about some of the information we got in our emails today to add to the agenda it wasn't adding it was changing we'll we'll review that when it comes to the particular agenda item okay can I have a motion to approve the agenda as it motion to approve second okay all in favor opposed passes five to zero okay let's look at the consent of this do public comments I'm sorry okay uh as I stated earlier we received a email from Fran Holden um which will be attached to the minutes and then we have a comment card from Miss sui I'm going to go quick um first of all uh I thought we discussed with one of the rules that email uh email responses from the public should be read into the record if they were requested that was one of the rules that you guys allowed back in I'll go back and review my transcriptions but I know it was cuz I brought up the fact that you were you were basically alienating a small group of people in the community that maybe cannot make it to a meeting I don't have time I want to talk about I think in a future meeting we need to talk about the flood plan I was T listening to a lot of things about people having a lot of expenses to build their houses and I started to educate myself and I went through the entire FEMA manual and I compared the FEMA manual to our current ordinance and what do you think I found I found that our ordinance was against our residents there are a lot of caveats in the FEMA manual that give breaks to the average small community or small developments but based on the definition of our actual Town being the five acres we fell into the large developments without any information from the town that tried to you know to with FMA to let that we were a different type of town there were also um things in there where um some expenses FAS those should not be burdened with the permit holder and they were not required like the base flood plane I also found in 20120 there was an actual manual done for the management requires and identifying agricultural structures and accessory structures and there was also a letter in 2024 telling that communities that have these type of buildings need to adopt variances and they actual gave they actually gave example ordinances what agricultural building was agricultural structure and they wen't held to the same standards of dry flood planing as other buildings were they were basically putting what they called wet flood planing so there's a lot of issues and there's a lot of things that we need to do and right now I don't think that our ordinance for flood plane and any of these code things that are coming in with private citizens should stand until you guys review this we didn't become a town so we can basically hurt the person trying to build a small home and then give them so much expense and FEMA identified this with small developments they actually said that the base flood plan elevations and the topographies and all the stuff that was that we require is very expensive to the person that's building a small home on a secluded lot which is what we were there's a lot of information in the flood plan manual and I don't think it was put in it was not put into our ordinance I have examples back and forth so I would basic urge you guys to have sometime future agenda when we pull this up and we review this ordinance because right now it's hurting the people thank you thank you all right any more public comments for the committee to get that let's let's okay yeah we've got the engineers coming back no more is it for non-agenda it items No Agenda okay yeah got it you can continue I'm I'm helping him okay I need to look at the consent agenda is everybody okay with the consent agenda is there any anybody wants to item three please item two you am pulling item three too oh I you I thought you said I am too we takes one person okay so we're pulling items two and three anything else okay can I have a motion to approve the consent agenda make motion to approve second with pulling items two and three all in favor I opposed passes five to zero okay Robert you were first item three okay pulled item three my appointee is uh Frank Shola with uh James MB for an alternate and there was a second alternate so I thought we weren't doing alternates well did ask for it yeah that's actually the ordinance asked for two alternates uh the current the current resolution does um I'm not sure in the I don't think that the new resolution does yeah in the in the ordinance that um is moving forward um I think uh you're just you're not having alternates on your committees so pick one so my suggestion is right now appoint the the regular and then after you pass your ordinance on committees um you can either it'll either be resolved because an ordinance takes precedence over a res resolution um or you can deal with it because you are allowing all so just an appointee yeah okay and I sent both names to the clerk um earlier so she could check code issues and they got theola cleared yes thank you okay so then we just so are you are you looking to approve resolution number 20438 minus the alternates but you're will be frank Shola so we can approve it revise it for your signature okay if that works for you all in favor I need a motion I need a motion sorry to approve it with the addition of FR well I thought you were making the motion you did it so well make a motion approve resolution 202 24-38 adding Frank shola's council member shor's appointee and leing Alternate one and two blank for now until uh the just resolution or or would you mind just removing that from the resolution so that way it doesn't appear that information is missing removing the two alternate that way there isn't a blank so we can just remove um the options of alternat so start again but can we remove that if there's an ordinance in place that says you can you can remove it on this resolution because all you're doing right now is you're appointing the core members or the um the regular members of the um committee and if if I may read the the resolution that you're referencing it's 2020-02 um section 21 a and it says uh the Town Council May appoint one member including alternates who is not a land a who is a non-resident land owner um and then it goes on to say at some point um I think sh was stricken and say may appoint so you don't have to it's an option right and we also removed that non-land owner correct from I mean the non-resident from our regular standing committee so that really does need to be stricken so so does this resolution replace resolution 2020-02 no that is the that resolution is for the requirements of the board correct and this is just for the just the appointments correct attorney there there is a current resolution um dealing with um R Gat and um that resolution remains in place we did not um come forward with a new resolution reenacting because that resolution is in effect um what you are doing here is you are appointing um the five members to the committee um what you will see there are two things that are going to happen is you're going to deal with the ordinance that talks about all committees um um and boards and provides a framework there that everybody has to comply with because the ordinance takes precedence over a resolution then if we pass or if you adopt the current version um of the comprehensive plan one of the things in the comprehensive plan is that the r GAC is um renamed the MCH or something like that because it's a multi-use trail um so that will be coming back just for that purpose and we'll straighten it all out so that ordinance which encompasses all committees will replace this 2020-2 it'll supersede it supersede okay and then because of the naming change at a minimum we would be coming back um with a revised ordinance for R GAC because it's going to be called mut GAC or something like that but not until um you actually pass your uh comp plan Amendment which won't happen until July okay you want to try again Roberts poining your person make make a motion uh approving resolution 20 24-38 with the change of removing the two alets and adding Frank Shola as Robert Shore Council memb appointee okay second March Herzog seconds all in favor opposed none opposed okay Laura you pulled item number two which I also was gonna pull so you go ahead and say your your reason first and then I'll say mine all right um really thrilled to see Jeff sluggett on This committee what does he do for a tourism I never knew well he the reason that I appointed him is because of his enormous knowledge on legislature and issues of that nature and what's going on in Tallahassee so I thought that he would be valuable in that way okay that was what the reasons that I wanted the committee to be reformed is to look over what was done by the other committee and make sure that everything was in conjunction with what's going on in the Statewide so then should we revise our criteria because that that doesn't meet our criteria I'm not disagreeing with what you're saying about his knowledge and what he can bring to it but should we revise the criteria to include that I don't know that the criteria discludes him he passed the vetting by the pwn so I'm not sure that the criteria discludes them I thought our criteria was um participate in egg tourism and be either a resident or a landowner I thought it was an and conditional thing res uhuh and a land and a land owner and and participate and they do do I believe do agat tourism on their other property which is not in lahi grov so great yeah I'm not sure um I my reason for wanting to pull it is man your appointment Robert is on another committee and we said that a person can't be on two committees so you're gonna need committee so you can be on an oh that's right you did say we did say adoc you're right you are correct we did say somebody could serve on adoc with respect to Mr slugged I would offer that he does represent um some folks in the AGR tourism industry in within the town within the town corre and elsewhere I believe but within the town he does no but thank you I love that you put my new on Robert awesome thank you yeah all right can we have is that that's that was your only question yeah okay so we can we have a motion to approve this resolution motion approve resolution 2024 d37 second all in favor I oppos opposed okay passes 4 to one all all right make motion oh do we need public comment or consent we didn't have we ask for public comment prior to the consent we just passed the consent did that prior to the other we passed all the other ones yeah okay so now we're on to the workshop agenda um and we're looking at the ear comprehensive plan okay um so the ear is the eval ation and appraisal report so when we redid do our comprehensive plan which we have to do periodically I'm just going to give a little education piece Jeff you can correct me if I'm wrong we have to send out send it out to a variety of state agencies to see whether they have any material objections to any of the changings or any of the things that we're proposing within our comprehensive plan we sent them out to you want to list off the agencies um I would with respect to all the agencies I know sou Florida got South Florida Water Management District Treasure Coast um the Palm Beach County School District Florida Department of Transportation I would look to Caitlyn Andor Jim as to whether there's anyone else including the state there's a set of standardized agencies and reviewers that receive the list available on Theo website um there about a doz I don't have I okay so if you're interested in the exact agencies you can email Caitlyn um and we received back no material objections to any of the uh any of our proposed changes so that's good news [Music] um I think we should probably start by going looking at item seven and going over that report um just really quickly with respect to to item seven um uh there had been um a mistake um in the documents that were originally included in your package um the so you're working 2024 goals objectives and policies portion the goes the the 2024 goals objections and policies um that were included in the original package was not was not uh the package that was sent to the the state we have in front of you today at your places and we have posted on the website um the change um in that and you have the um corrected documents the one Mater the big material thing I think it is the the one and the big um is that uh policy 1.5 um 1.5.7 um which this uh Council in February had determined should be deleted um uh was shown as um uh as it was drafted for your February meeting um and not deleted what we have done is we have corrected um that in the agenda package that item was deleted it is not part of the package that you are currently reviewing um if you want to revisit the issue that is up to you but staff is not recommending that um there are uh there were originally items um in the memorandum for Council clarification we have reviewed those there is no need for Council clarification if the council wants to readdress them that's fine um and we will be happy to take your lead on it but our present recommendation is um not to not to review those items what you have in the agenda item report um as revised our comments that we received from Treasure Coast South Florida Water Management District um Florida Department of Transportation um and you have the staff's recommendations with respect to how those comments should be addressed um and rather than go through a presentation and go over items that you don't really care about what I would like to do is turn it over to you if you have questions about those particular items the staff will be happy to address them if you have um issues other than um those how we're going to address those comments we'll be happy to address them but we'll turn it over to rather than go through a presentation because you guys have gone through this with the exception of the mayor um a whole I'll call it a bazillion times um and I spent a lot of time with I I know I know that you are well acquainted with the document as well so okay does anybody so we're looking at this two-page document here that has the recommendations from each of the agencies that did respond so let's just look at them one at a time let's look at Treasure Cod treasure Cod made um two Rec I'm sorry Treasure Coast made a couple of suggestions and there's staff's recommendation below it does anybody have anything that they want to ask about just the Treasure Coast which you'll find on page two of this um this you have it's with your clip together oh right here and those and those four recommendations are the same as were in your original package okay okay anybody have any questions about or anything that they want to ask staff about item one the TRC tcpc comments fellis so I think if I'm reading this correctly they're saying that the original form of 7.3.1 should be revised and I remember when we took it out it was more about the local schools in Palm Beach County am am I correct that's one of the items I it's on page 159 is is what we actually have in what we actually have in the year right 15 so they're wanting us to revise to put it back in correct it says in its original form to be revised so I I I don't know I'm not going back and forth I'm looking at what's crossed out here that's not crossed out that's staff's recommendation oh oh I see what you're saying yeah it's crossed out so that's what I'm saying is this the verbiage that they're wanting to put back in is my question yeah we cross that whole section out made it Reserve mayor I can address that so Jeff U Jim can address that I think yeah um one uh one of the major revisions that we're making is it is taking the entire Public Schools element out of the comprehensive plan because it's no longer required but but there is coordination uh new florid of statutes language that that requires coordination with the school district as as far as school planning and population projections and that's that's why we're recommending that this go in there is to meet the the new requirement we can have we can have these two policies in here rather than 30 pages of public school facilities element in the comprehensive plan so we're replacing the 30 pages with these two slightly redacted yes to fill state requirements we're going to unstrip no we're gonna do it just how it is yeah so with the strikes so if and Jim you correct me if I'm wrong policy 7.3.1 would read as follows um the town of lockah hatchee groves will work with the school district on population projections and school sighting in accord with Section 163 31776 H2 of the Florida Statutes right so we cut a bunch of verbage out basically and about 20 yeah at about 20 Pages yeah yeah okay okay anybody else have any questions just about the Treasure Coast no okay anybody have question any questions about the south Florida Water Management District section they may they have two recommendations and then we have staff's recommendation below that yeah um man' please so basically they their request is to remove the word zeroscape because it's dated yeah yes that's their request I'm good with that spe 128 okay so everybody's okay with South Water Water Management okay sorry Laur I didn't see your light oh that's okay um it was late it I'm trying to meld the yeah good luck the change the changes that were're discussing as well as my addled memory of what we did and then some of these really informative emails regarding consumptive use permits and integrating some of the things for water quality and I I just want to make sure that you know we're not just going to gloss over information that's being supplied to us that may be of value am I making any sense yeah well we're gonna go over the full document in in a minute right now we're just going over just the recommendation section so hold on to hold on to the emails because they come they may become handy in a minute do you have do you have any question about their one recommendation anybody else have okay School District anybody have any questions about theirs nope okay fdot anybody have any questions about theirs okay great then we hold on I got a problem with the light at Southern and D is that on here no okay shoot thank goodness I was like where did that come up uh okay all right basically they were suggesting we not call it a rural minor connector and we're gonna call it a rural minor connector because that's what we're going to call it um which kind of doesn't really matter but that's what we're gonna call it but they think it does matter when they want to widen or no it doesn't because they're going to call it what they want to call it but we can call it what we want to call it in the meantime so now do we want to go over any modifications that the council has and then we can talk about the okay there were two items for Council clarification right no those are no longer needed for clarification okay they're no longer good if you if anybody wants to bring them up we can talk about them but they council's Direction was very clear council's Direction was very clear that's a wonderful thing to hear okay so that's item seven um so uh item eight mayor no item seven is still going through the whole big document okay all right here we go so we're on this document now everybody is the document that was given to you in a clip yes and it's essentially the same as the agenda but with some changes excuse me one second we have one public comment before we begin does anyone else have public comments before we start number seven item seven no no okay um I do have a public comment from Stefan LaVine you can come up to the podium Stephen good evening my name is Steve LaVine uh I own and operate red clover Farms with my wife Jasmine and we're at 670b Road uh I'd like to ask a couple questions the first one is uh I'd like to understand the process of dealing with the Antiquated subdivision such as the nearly 100y old plat concerning my land that's my first question uh second question would be I'd like to also know that the town is complying with the Mandate set forth in State uh law specifically for guiding where the project projected seasonal and permanent population will live in what housing options are available and last and finally um what is the breakdown of future lands available for future residential and commercial for example like 15% from what I'm reading of the land is available for new residential this is some questions I have I'm a little bit confused Jeff I don't know how you want to handle that how do you want to handle that welcome would you it it is it's public comment um and it sounds like he wants those specific issues addressed um as to how it relates to his particular property um what I would suggest is um that you set up a meeting with um staff and we can go over those kind of those kind of issues that you just raised um and get into it a little more detail because it was sounded like it was all about that how those things affected that particular property noar it's for everyone and we did have a staff meeting and these start question that we were if you could if you could come up to the mic so that we can have you on the record um including your name and all those kind of things hello Jasmine LaVine uh Rec Clover and it's we did have a staff meeting or actually I had a meeting with Jim and then Council was there um The loah hatche Grow Cil in any event there are there are areas in your um what you're going to be discussing right now with the puds uh and future land use that we would want these specific questions answer within the discussion today so it's it's not just on red clover it's what are you what do you have planned in general for these like his question for instance um how the town is complying with the mandates set forth in state law specifically for guiding where the projected seasonal and permanent population will live and what housing options are available all right and then what is the breakdown of future land use available for future residential and Commercial that's not specifically our property this is not if you know what the process is is that you free to make a comment and then we will address what the council directs us to uh address um but right now all we're doing is a workshop meeting um and formal passage is uh probably in a couple weeks yeah I understand it's a workshop so I thought that that's something that you discuss amongst each other the future it's not a dialogue back and forth it's for there's opportunity through the public comment for you to um have your voice heard by the the council and then if the council uh wants to discuss any of those issues they can ask um the staff to elaborate on it and get into it okay that's fair thank you did you have something you want yeah I I do I want to remind everybody that we're 5 acre buildable and I don't think any of this council is intending on changing that we already have smaller Lots in this town that aren't developed and if that's where you're going with how many Parcels can you chop your five acres into as as long as this council's sitting there here I have a feeling it's one house per five acres mayor we have one more comment okay great thank you for the record Katie Edwards Walpole it's not discretionary it's state law and there's a difference between mandatory and optional elements of your comp plan and that seems to have been overlooked there was a very basic question that parrots exactly what's in state statute my comment is the discretion you think that you have in comments like that are in violation of state statute for example you can't just go up the boundaries and say that's it nobody else come here every municipality has to take their fair share of the projected population that's in State Statute shell mandatory so when you close up the boundaries and say that's it no more I want my one house on five acres every single element mandatory shell that has to be included that state statute how difficult is it to comply and explain to the public how you're doing just that mayor while we're on public comments I just want to State for the record that we did receive um a few emails um that were distributed to you from Miss Katie Edwards um one was regarding fdot comments from 2017 and 2020 the March 14 2024 board Treasure Coast Regional planning Council memorandum written comments um from the year Workshop regarding conservation element and also um from the flood plane management goals and you have those in front of you thank you very much okay um not sure uh where to go from this but let's just go through it one page at a time guys Jeff um what I would suggest is if the rather than going through it one page at a time if the council has um anything they would like us to address we go through it in that fashion so if we start with the future land use section which seems to be a huge concern this evening um is there anything in the future land use section that we've changed that anybody has any issues about on Council laa is kind of okay great all right so future land use if a Florida statute says we need to accept incoming population but our rules say one per five how do we deal with this Miss Tanya so actually I hate to do this but I'm gonna ask Jim who actually created this document to explain the population um the population data that he used and how he arrived at the document itself it I'm not asking for counting I'm asking for how do we deal with the conflict understood I my short answer is I'm not sure that there is a conflict just because it was stated to you and if there is an issue we will certainly bring that to the attention of council okay I'm not I'm not I'm not at this time willing to accept that that there is an issue with this document right now okay yeah yeah go ahead sorry Mary is he allowed yeah to explain they brought up the point of uh population projections which which we did we have to project for for for uh 10 years and for 20 years and we projected that that over the 20year period from from 2025 to 2045 there was going to to be population growth of 576 residents or an average of about 20 people per year we have more than adequate land to accommodate population growth of 20 people per year make a public comment during public comments he's answering your question that's that's not answering question this is not a cross-examination but it's five one resident per five AC saying you have plenty of land consider you have plent of homes if she's going to if you're going to allow her to speak she needs to speak on the mic otherwise it will not be on the speak that public comment over with so I don't know really what to do I'm sorry we have a public comment time mayor it's it's it's one residential unit per per five acres it's not one person it's uh one residential unit on the average in uh in lock ache growes is between three and four people so if we assume four people that's uh seven units per per year over the next 20 years and we have more than enough land to accommodate that thank you Jim for answering the question anybody else have any questions about future land use Robert nothing to say no just looking at number of properties 10 or more Acres there's 200 of them so if those 200 split into five each and they're not all 10 acres some are 20 100 150 if it was just those two split you would have 400 lots available for houses so I think that's more than enough when you look at that projection of the population 400 times four people in a house 1,600 people just far exceeds our population numbers yeah okay anybody else have any questions about the future land use section I'm concerned about the um where are you at give us a number on page 96 give us a number because we've got one 15 okay 1.15 okay the multiple land use um designation and um I I just think that that whole section on multiple landu should be removed so so you don't think that we should be able to as Council have any say in what uh what people do on 50 acre tracks when they're trying to have multiple like solar sport when they're trying to have multiple uses on the same land we shouldn't we shouldn't have any input into that well I I think it uh opens the door for um combining things that we may not like um but this says that only on that Southern Boulevard Corridor that we will allow multiple land use and that Council will have something to do with it and you're opposed to that I think we need to have more control over it but that's what this allows not in the direction we need to have it though okay M may may we are going to have a discussion on the mlu and the puds later today and perhaps we can get into some of that discussion at that time as well okay to clear that up okay yes ma'am okay all right Robert yeah if if this comp plan says minimum a th linear feet on an arterior roadway your ordinance can't turn around and say 600 feet can it which one overrides so it any ordinance needs to flow from the plan and be consistent with it you can't have something that contradicts okay because I don't think there's a single property that can even meet this criteria anymore anything that's left that that can even meet the criteria of a th feet our only arterial roadway we have is Southern boul Southern boul yeah so is there even a th000 feet of property left that somebody according to the comp plan I'm I'm not even looking at the ordinance because it says 600 ft but the comp plan plan is the the Bible but but some of our directions says 750 uh and we we will get into this in the presentation I have a map that kind of shows the eligible properties are lack thereof um at this present time based on the assemblage and the um the frontage and the other restrictions there doesn't appear to be any properties that that are eligible for the mlu outside of the one existing Town Center um the the solar plex uh site and uh we did identify one property that would potentially be available or eligible for a commercial low um PUD which is a little bit separate than the mlu um but it's very unlikely for different reasons that we'll get into that you would see that type of resoning and we'll get into some of the uh safeguards that the town does have um in that discussion that I think is following well come back to this Madam chair if we have a PUD discussion that says yeah remember this is a workshop not voting on anything this is a workshop today you're not voting on on anything PUD discussion is going to affect this chapter of the year if we well it begs the question if if there's no land that falls into that category why include it well you've got some existing situations the existing ones we have okay okay and and one of the things is um uh mlus are kind of an urban um thing and we were just designated a rural community you know so I I don't understand why we're putting this in you know but maybe a future discussion will lead to some yeah it's been in that's the you're not taking it out necessarily but it's been okay anything else on this section the future land use section okay we're still rolling uh I have a question two is the transportation element do you want to do go through element by element we're going to do element by element yeah so Transportation oh I'm sorry you still march has another question on future land can you answer um on non-conforming Lots can you give us a number please yes um one 11.4 it says they can build a single family home on a non-conforming lot do we have any idea about the size of these non-conforming Lots they they vary down from what to what of an e of an acre to anything under five mhm an eth of an acre is buildable yes okay thank you that's it anything else in this are we on to Transportation or you got you you got a lot of NES Mar that's it okay Transportation element huh uh these are not paginated I'm I'm working on the new one the twos anything in the Tes okay Laura not sure if this is where this lands but as far as being a rural community and how we classify our roads is this where that would land meaning our road classification system yes okay LEL one level two level three correct yes um you know again just trying to to Wade through the information as far as God which one was it anyway um is it done properly are we eligible for funding you know have we crossed the te's and dotted the eyes and done it correctly that's what I'm trying to spit out here uh yeah well I had a I had a conversation with the transportation planning agency that's that's the agency that that essentially oversees the TPA grants which include Federal funding and and they told me that it U it doesn't make any difference what we classify the RS it's it's what the TPA classifies the RADS and they're not going to change their classification from from Urban collector to to what what we propose rural rural minor collector so so we can call it whatever we want they they still are the the official designating Agency for for funding and in projects using federal funds um and uh they told me like I said it doesn't make any difference what we call them it's what they call them and uh they told me that that if we wanted to get get that statement in writing that that they would be more than happy to do that so we call it X thinking we qualify for this they call it y but really we don't qualify for something so should we be calling it why or does does it not matter uh uh I don't think it matters what do you mean we don't qualify and and again did part of this is my novice and misunderstanding if we classify our roads as I'm just going to use something ridiculous a snail Trail and we think that because we're in a rural community and we call this road a snail trail that we're still eligible for federal money grant money you know whatever money is out there but because we call it a snail Trail and all of the prevailing bodies that would be awarding the money say no you should be calling it a four lane road with a median in the middle you know are we shooting ourselves in the foot based on the conversation I had with them I I would say I would say no because the the uh the TPA Transportation Planning agency is the one that that is responsible for for assigning the the Federal Road classification system to the major roads in palach county and that classification system is is used to um to uh to identify the types of projects uh uh the amount and location by by the by the grant leting agencies So based on what they said to me and that they said that they'd follow up in writing was uh it doesn't make any difference what we call it U if if the T TPA for example wants to forlane Oobi um they would apply for Grant they would get it and the fact that we called it a a rural minor uh minor collector would have no impact if we conversely if we wanted I had a conversation with conversely if we wanted it it it doesn't matter we can we can call it that because that does actually fit more with our rural designation so it's fine yeah it doesn't interfere with us getting funds so I think yeah if if there was a requirement that or if your funding had to do with a road that was supposed to be um four-lane Road um it would depend on whether or not you actually had a four-lane road not whether you called it a four-line road if that makes some sense it's the it's the actual substance of what the road is um that would determine whether or not you were qualifying for a grant yeah so do the words called it and classification mean the same thing in this discussion uh well well we are classifying it for the purposes of our comprehensive plan but the federal classification system which is officially assigned by by the TPA is it is the one that counts when it comes to funding where where it's the benefit to us in my mind is all of those uh major Improvement projects need to go on on the tpa's fiveyear schedule of improvements which um which is updated every year um we have an opportunity to uh to make make comments and and uh suggest what improvements are included in that five-year schedule if we can go to our comprehensive plan and say look our comprensive plan says says two lanes and you're looking at four uh that may have some some effect on whether or not that project goes on the fiveyear schedule so so so it could be a real benefit to us and or it could be ignored okay so in the context of this conversation called it in classification yeah it's the same thing okay thank you for the Indulgence moving on anything else on anything else on Transportation anybody yeah the um number uh 2.5 is where um phis was referring to the situation on B Road I think that's where that would di in because we know it's uh I don't remember talking about anything on B road today BR Road at oobe I mean at s okay well I'll talk about it then um the um Transportation uh uh studies that were done don't seem to have uh taken into into consideration the amount of traffic going east and west Crossing B Road uh and the backups that you get heading north and south also um something needs to be done there not with our wording but with the situation okay anything else Robert yeah just real quick okobe was on the TPA 5ye plan five years ago and I spoke at the TPA meeting um talking about a rural community and it got removed and I think their priority shifted at that time to you know North Lake State Road s thankfully away from our town so it was on there but it's not on there now and hopefully it won't get on there thank you marer you still have something your no okay all right anybody else with anything with Transportation we're still in the twos uh okay then let's move on to the infrastructure element that's the threes everybody there a lot to do with coordinating with South Florida water management and issues like that Laura was there something you wanted to tie together with this I think L knows I'm trying um zerape was on there I'm sorry the what what Zero Escape and again trying to tie this in to um what one of the public that with tying the the document that we were given separately with this please yeah I'm referring to an email that mentions water use permits South Florida Water Management District water supply facility work plans and then one of the public comments brought up the a document and the the issues we seem to be having with flood plane applications is this where that all lands I'm looking through the that I have a question hang on a second let yeah let's address this one thing and then far as far as the water supply my plan goes we now we did address that in the data and Analysis uh section Water Management District is currently updating their uh their 10-year plan and when they get done uh all of the all of the water suppliers within their jurisdiction have to up update update their plan but they can't do it until Water Management gets done now now we are part of the Palm Beach County system so uh our requirements in terms of a water supply plan are are very minimum we have to do population projections and and we have to project our water demands and and also if there's any other uh policies um uh uh water water saving policies things like that um we would uh uh we would uh update our plan when Palm Beach County up dates theirs so so as far as as what we have to do at this current time we're good I think the I think the question um uh that the councilwoman was asking had to do with um U email we receiv received from Kat Katie Edwards walpool um today at 1:57 PM is am I on the right one um and uh uh what um it suggests I think is uh that we include language concerning the flood plane management goal in our infrastructure goals objectives and policies um my short response to that is um that I don't think there's anything wrong with including it with it in at the same time I don't think it's mandated that you um include it in and don't think it not being in prevents us from uh accomplishing the um the goals that are stated in here right I mean I am certain but it's it's something that you you could include and if you want to have a discussion about it in more detail we can do that um but the short answer is um I don't think it would cause us a problem um but I don't think it's necessary and it doesn't the fact that we don't have have it in um I don't think it hurts us with any of the the flood plane management calls that were talked about I'm not trying to retool the document but I keep having little Snippets running through my head of people who come forward and say I'm on the north end of town and I have no water and I'm I'm looking at words like consumptive use and you know controlling and working with South Florida water management and you know the whole regulation and provision process that's kind of where I'm trying to go I know it's kind of messy but I'm trying are you okay with leaving this as it stands as with Jeff's assurance that we're we're fine okay phis I just have a question because it seems like you guys are leaning on all these emails so did um is is Katie Edwards in the room yes she is okay and you also sit on our Planning and Zoning Board no it's not the same attorney and are I mean am I allowed to are you representing anybody in the room does council wish to invite her to the podium that way it's on the record well please since you wrote all these emails I I'm apologized because I couldn't get through them all so I know and you you hit my heart with the FDA okay so because I'll tell you how I had to learn it my background is an agriculture believe or not I'm a former State Rep and there's actually a former State House speaker who I learned today lives in lockah hatche groves and said speaker ghost have S come to the meeting I know these issues are very near and dear to his heart as they were when I was in Tallahassee as well I had to Le about flood plane um from Doug wise and just could you could you just for the record yes could you get your name on the record and advise them as to who you're representing I'm Katie I'm me on myself when I don't have my kid I'm bored I need things to do to keep my mind Ive and I listen to these meetings and I'm in pain KD Edwards 9321 Chelsea Drive South imp Plantation I'm registered lobbyists you can see our represent I was giving you some of the background I'm sorry I I don't mean to interrupt um Madame mayor I just wanted to be clear that um this attorney does represent at least one applicant with a project that has a pending application before the town that project could potentially be affected by the Amendment to the ear so I would advise caution when it comes to back and forth especially on the Fly especially in light of the fact that we received multiple emails from this person today and that we have not had an opportunity to research them and with you know I I didn't mean any disrespect whatsoever to council member danowski when I didn't directly answer your question but to the extent that it's something that I think needs proper research I really don't want to do that on the flag with you so that's that's my two cents thank you so much so that that was what I was wanting to know if you were actively um working for somebody I get your passion and not get to get through all this but I think in all fairness we need to rely also on the Our Town attorney and I would like to review some of your information with our town attorney that's fine but In fairness I prepared some of these and I think it says this was previously sent to the council back in June it's June last year yeah 2023 these comments that I wasted my time on apparently looking through it trying to be a good sport this has nothing to do with my client I was working for the county building Planning and Zoning on agricultural issues and flood plane I learned a lot I'd like to share it if you can't accept that and accept the help because I have to work with other property owners and all over the place trying to help them work through it and be in compliance and if you can't educate your own property owners and say these are the things that we do you don't want to have setic and Sewer hookups you go back to the Wells a lot of people don't know that they have to get Wells tested that they need to plan include those types of things I mean it's just it's there it's information but with all due respect to your attorney this has been submitted several times in the last few months and it's been provided through the clerk as part of the public record and file this was not all done today this was a reminder because I was apparently ignored no I Katie I don't think anybody's trying to I don't think anybody's trying to cut you off I just think we need to know where you're coming from on all the issues you please okay Al righty future land use the threes any more comments from Council on future land no no Rob here I'm usually quiet tonight you always have something to say oky dokie then we will move on to section four conservation this will be the fours may I yes give us a number um well I just want to know is the tree mitigation in here Jim is nobody knows about it um like the tree mitigation and or does that not need to be in this document and the um the tree Bank oh well all of those the various Tre applications permits Etc are in our code 4.61 landscaping and tree protection standards okay thank you uh all of the of the specifics um related to to the tree removals are are in our code we have we have three different types of applications the uh the biggest problem in my mind is is the fact that a lot of property owners uh don't know that they need to get approval or if they get approval they may think that they know the difference between native and non-native species so they go cut some down and and oops I cut down some natives so um uh uh educating individual prop Property Owners prior to the time that they uh submit an application is something that I think that we need to do a much better job of agree and and and that number one that that would save us staff time and uh and it would save a lot of uh uh pain for for the property owner when they cut down a native tree and they get cited for a code violation and and and have to and have to go before the magistrate so so uh we're in the process of of uh updating uh article 87 which is the the tree removal standards ordinance of the town and hopefully we're going to be putting some stuff in there that can help address those those issues of uh doing something that you really don't know that you did something wrong thank you anything else in the fours anybody no ma'am okay five this is Recreation and open space element none from me did you the park is here I know the park is near here so okay I stick with the book rather than other okay uh section six the housing element these will be the sixes laa I'm good so does this can we have a number oh I'm sorry it just the general section six housing um so does this take us back back to having to accept congregate living or you know population flow as we were kind of knocking on that door earlier or do we stand firm on our five five acre buildable unless it's in a commercial area it's two it's two different questions in the sense that um there's your congregate your congregate living is controlled by State Statute um and what it essentially means is wherever you could put up a a house for a family you can put up a house um for congregate living under those circumstances but there's limitations as to how close they can be um under the state statute um so the the housing and the density that's a different question okay thank you page 155 it says Robert you got to give us a number because we're dealing with page 15 oh got oh you don't have page number oh I'm sorry okay 6.3.5 thank you sir it says uh they care facility to five persons yes within a single is that the same as congregate livings it's no congregate or like the foster home I mean the um group homes and sober homes yeah that's in here different regulations chapter have congregate living we have Community we have we have to have congregant living it's state we have okay yeah that's 6.3 the ter that's chapter 419 correct 419 of of statutes we have to allow it but there are regulations on that like they can't be like right next door to each other it's a certain distance apart I'm not it's like a mile or something like that I'm not sure what it is but I hold on time question go ahead um so Madame mayor the council is exactly correct what we did was we took out for example if you look at policy 6.3.3 we took out um references to group home facilities and use the term Community residential home so that it tracks with State Statute um right now um there I believe are quite possibly some changes pending with regard to the state statute but the language in the policy the way it is is Broad enough that I think that we can you right they amended exactly so I I'm comfortable with the way it is right now um when you start putting in distance requirements and that kind of stuff that's more ulc and even there it needs to be well thought out to make sure that you're not running a foul of any disability um laws well does the state statute doesn't it that doesn't that include distance require I thought it does it it does um but there's some Nuance to it okay so and how that distance is measured gotcha there's there's Nuance to the distance requirement and it's usually flushed out in a ulc okay so we should address that in the ulc um care I would advise you wait to see what happens with the state statute before you do that because it can be very labor intensive okay all right thank you B still have a question or if you're good um we we don't have a problem with the daycare facility in a residential what do you mean by that well Robert brought it up but there's not an issue with that right it's five kids right yeah yeah I mean it's a needed thing I mean yeah five kids speaking of that Madam attorney we quantify that could that number change in chapter 402 should we not say up to five persons I mean um I think that one is not as much a problem I think it's saying as regulated by chapter 402 um I think it's state regulated it is State regulated you also have a county level you have county level regulations Health Department everything correct think that might be what you're doing is you're saying with the limitation of five that you're going to allow one that is small there are daycare facilities that you know handle many many more than that and what the this is saying is up to five is um going to be and I'm pretty sure that's the county reg is f yes and I don't anticipate and again A legislature may never do anything with chapter 419 we don't know but I've heard discussions from people who are in that field um and I've not heard the same thing as it applies to chapter 402 for daycares okay anything else in the sixes guys moving yes Laur no oh sorry moving along to the section seven intergovernmental coordination element none from me okay moving on to Section 8 the Capital Improvements element somebody's got to have something to say here um going back to um the eight yeah we're in the eth section now oh okay what number eight point what 8.55 five 8.5 five okay go ahead when it's talking about the capital Improvement in um e is that correct that it says Loach Groves water control districts and not whatever the new name for that department is cat I think well the locki Groves water Control District still exists um as a dependent District um I believe that's the the name and you all are its governing body yeah I mean it is an agency okay okay so they they make the decisions that's what the The Heading is we do it's whether or not the e in particular says whether or not the proposed project is consistent with the plans of state agencies PBC agencies and the lockah hatche Groves water Control District I really don't know whether that was an oversight or it was intended to um reference the the dependent District um I wouldn't be concerned about it because as I said you all are the governing body of the dependent distri District but the the the the water Control District does have regulations and one of the things that um someday you'll probably address is the um the water control plan um and you know whatever projects you come up with uh would have to be consistent with that water control what Mar is suggesting Jeff if I might try to interpret is that it says should State Palm Beach County agencies the town of loah haty groves and the lockah Groves water Control District I think what she's suggesting is that the element of the town is what's missing there as a governing agency and when you read the 8.5.5 it it says it's a capital Improvement project to be evaluated and ranked in order of priority according to the following guidelines so in the what she's saying is they really actually should be the town of blackace GES not the water Control District because the water Control District does no longer makes the plans for Capital Improvement projects does that make sense uh the Water control district will um will pass your water control plan so there are regulations that are going to be imposed should be added to that we can that sentence and the town of loide she grows just they're calling it The Town throughout the document yeah um so insert after PBC agencies the town okay that's it for me anybody else anything in Section 8 no we finished it guys and I think we might be moving towards Madame mayor I do have one question um to the council um Back to the Future land use element there was number uh yep I'm GNA find the table it's in table um it was one one it's the future land use table that shows you all the different land use categories section one and the sheet in our packet is labeled 1-6 and it's rotated to be the other way is category got okay so there was some discussion at our have it is everybody on the same page almost hold on a second make sure everybody it's labeled 1-6 four one flu 1.1 future land's table got it after objective one it looks like this it could be page 98 it's within the ones I'm sorry let's let Marge get here Robert you're here okay Laura you're here okay we're all here go ahead okay so there was some discussion um at one of our last meetings H within the commercial low uses which is the second table or second uh row down we added reference to the recreational facilities and and the discussion around that was particularly the commercial recreation facilities so now that it's contemplated in the land use the question to council would be uh would you direct staff to craft a corresponding zoning District to implement commercial recreation land uses currently we do not have a zoning District um that's available for such uses and so now that it's clearly stated isn't it within commercial low uh no there's it's in the old yeah there's a very limited uh type and number of uses it's not really contemplated in the zoning at this time so it would be best to if Council were looking um be own district and right it would apply to a property like PK they're going through the process um help them what I mean is come into compliance with the town regulations and offer them a way to kind know address a lot of the longstanding issues we don't really have a zoning District that accommodates that property there's other properties obv recreational you're calling it yeah it would be a c type of uh zoning District Laura flat out no from me okay what why are you referring back to this which we took out so that's the land use but in the CL um in the CL row you'll see in the underline there's a reference to um including limited access Self Storage child care and Recreation facilities can I ask you a question what commercial recreational also apply to if someone to were to want to put like a major equestrian venue along Southern Boulevard would that apply would that be commerci would that be commercial low or commercial recreational it would fit better in something like a commercial wreck but we would have total control over what uses you're allowing because it'd be something that the town's creating we're just looking for direction of if there's an appetite for us to consider say for sure I got that we heard okay reping here says overnight stays and everything well she's talking about recreating it so if that's part of it that worries you it could be taken out but let's hear and that's the land use so we wouldn't propose reestablishing it at the land use level it would be a Zone District that would be available to implement the CL land use and like I said we would need to come back obviously for multiple workshops and kind of craft the outline and the types of uses and things but just looking to see if that's something that council is even interested in before staff exactly did you want to elaborate um yeah I should have before so um my flat out no comes from a commercial recreational zoning District solves problems for people who people in entities who are to town regulations and requirements um they've gone ahead and done X and now they're begging forgiveness um so having a zoning District of commercial recreational kind of says it's okay that you really screwed up and you used a great phrase earlier when we were talking about the RVs um we have to eliminate the culture of what was your phrase forgiveness rule breaking basically yes the culture of rule breaking um like Marge just said commercial recreational allows overnighting um and pnz took it out so I I'm kind of giggling when you said well you know we could take it back and tul it and the town would have complete control over this zoning District we don't have complete control over anything well you would have control over all the text that goes into it so if there was a no overnight stay then that's obviously nothing that we would put into the into the text no thank you that was my elaboration what is your definition of recreational com commercial well I think that's something that we would need to brainstorm and work together through and talk about uses and intensity again it just an initial question of whether there's even an appetite from the council to consider that given that it's now being proposed as a component of the land use you would think that there's an implementing zoning District that goes with it well I do any other towns have the designation commercial recreation absolutely it's a very common what's their definition oh it's anything from so you don't have to do any research I'd like to know what their definition is I can send you a couple ordinances but it's anything from like sporting type uses it could be horse related it could be indoor outdoor is there another word besides yeah commercial sure you could you want think the word commercial is somewhat offensive in the St yeah you can name it whatever you want again we don't have to move forward with anything just noticing that we added saying I don't do we really have to do this doesn't commercial recreation if we approve it and I'm just putting a big F here doesn't that fall under commercial low it it certainly says it right here so when when you look it could fall under it right so then when you look at the um CL zoning that implement the CL land use there's a very limited number of uses and maybe that's the town's desire but maybe you want to revisit those uses could we yes you can expand those uses we could expand those uses in the future if a project comes up if somebody comes and wants to open something that's really appealing to council as a whole couldn't they open that up at that time okay under recreational on a Case bye the benefit of creating a new District would be that you could be even Tighter and more controlled about where it goes versus amending your CL which might be used more broadly across the town um where if you created a new District you could really tighten up a lot different aspects of it you know geographically where it could be located so that it's not widespread and available for the same it to basically be along the Southern Boulevard like the sure yeah instead of amending the one District maybe you're a little tighter in terms of where it can be applied the types of properties that are eligible so I think there is a benefit if you were to consider adding uses make it a new district and don't you know open it up to all CL properties okay um but again not not sure that we want to go that are you done yep Robert yeah I think having it listed as a acceptable use under CL is satisfactory at this point yeah I do too because we don't have very many vacant CL properties and like the mayor said anybody can come in front of council and to do something you know if it's a very appealing project to the residents in the town and it makes sense then you know Council can consider it fit it in wherever they choose I think you have a consensus to take the time you know to to go through and redo something to just in case now put something back in that I think scared the heck out of some of us when we read it I think we asked it removed several times so no thank you all right thank you for the discussion okay I think we're moving on to agend okay mayor may I yes absolutely um we had a meeting with you uh last breek and and you came up with with several Provisions to the to the comp which we did not discuss to me would you like to I I was notified that you would be bringing them up if they were good ideas so go right ahead and bring them up oh okay you didn't now you didn't get a copy of it I guess no oh okay well if we did it's buried in here with all the other stocks wa so can you give us the section okay um let me see that would be where my great ideas were future land use give us a number we can get you a copy of that it's one point yeah I think I think I support all of them but the one I think the home office one I just didn't have time to look and see yeah oh you got mine back yeah they sent the email I think we distributed by email that was last week I didn't get it it was included in the original email it was like a third attachment um but I can make a copy if you'd like you want to give me let's go through them one at a time okay Jim okay objective 1.2 12 in future land use on page okay 1.2 go ahead you actually wanted that that deleted I'm sorry you wanted that deleted I'm sorry one 1.12.4 okay thank you because I did not want that yeah yeah yeah the policy you wanted that policy deleted I wanted that deleted I I don't recall ever saying that but what 1.2.4 the town shall continue to allow homebased businesses to the extent that impacts are compatible with an agricultural residential Community yeah I don't think I ever said that Jim I'm sorry maybe there was a all your comments I'm sorry I don't think I ever said that so anyhow well so no I if I did say it I withdraw it go ahead what was the next one that I said okay so that one stays in right yes that stays in all right uh next one is uh uh one point uh 1.15 under the multiple land use yeah which one 1.5 point and then uh capital E 1.15 sample e no thank you up with all these great ideas and I forgot about it it's mind numbing sometimes well I spent about eight days with this thing 1.15 straight up but I'm not seeing an e oh here here's e on this sheet yeah it's on the [Music] point I can't find it it doesn't page inate with this yes but I will okay no it's not in here it's it's on page uh 96 of of the of the agenda package it's actually one point one 1.1.5 yeah under the 1.15 not 115 yeah 1.1.5 and I didn't want this taken out what I said was to change the word to reduce in e in other words you had development maybe I can't remember the word you had before there lied limited and I put reduced that was my change yes yeah and that's what I have here okay and adding the language analysis of the surrounding area adding the language analysis of the surrounding area and reduced was the other right change that I made I do remember making that one okay so that's okay okay and then 3.84 what is do we want to get consensus on okay Robert supports it yes Laura supports it phis changing this word yeah to reducing instead of limiting like that that's our action would be to make a less land usage I I'm still hung up because of but we're gonna go into the that further designation right we're gonna go into that further we have a general consensus we're good with reduced okay 3.84 here it's 133 yes oh thank you I think this is you wanted I wasn't at the the meeting but uh is it that you okay I actually spoke with with Glenn today so um so this question that came up for me was um I had a meeting um and it the result of that meeting was that uh there may be a lot of action this year in the legislature to um make uh government funds available to private citizens after the next legislative session to hook up to like you know the like maybe North Road or Southern this the water and the sewer that we have on there which is a very expensive process which keeps most people from hooking up to it obviously along Southern most of those are commercials and they don't have any option they do have to hook up to it but um the question had come up a couple of weeks ago in a meeting of what are the people the people on North Road want wanted to hook up to that water that's there with the water shortage on the north end of town um how would they do that how would they go about that so I kind of started asking some questions and I got some down low that there might be be a bunch of money coming up after this legislation session that would be available however I was cautioned that other municipalities had already started taking action towards allowing their citizens to do that so that they were being discluded from the availability of those funds so I wanted clarification from our attorney he spoke to one of those towns and in fact got the information and we're good this is good how it is it doesn't put us in Jeopardy of potentially losing money for our citizens to be able to hook up if it suddenly becomes rampantly available like the prediction that I got so that that that no change is proposed so no change it it should be it can stand how it is after that long-winded explanation I wanted you to understand where I was coming from okay just wanted to make sure that the government money if it becomes available is actually available to our citizens that we don't do something we don't cify something or write something to screw it up for our citizens up and in fact we're okay okay I also had uh policy 2.4.3 on page 115 in the infrastructure element you wanted to change there no transportation I'm saying 2.4.3 in transportation okay now you added the sentence uh further whenever possible include multi-use trails to paved Road segments on town roads correct yeah now that's not on here um so one of the things that I think it was part of your email iell the one you got the new one yeah I think it was in there so what's the change so the change is that where wherever possible include multi-use trails along the sides of the East West roads but what's the that are paved that are paved as they are paved correct as part of the paving project right it's 2.4.3 yes correct in transportation could you read the language Again Jim since you're the one that has further whenever possible include multi-use trails to paved Road segments on town roads where's further it needs to be added where are we adding further to the end of 2.4.3 we're adding another sentence okay another sentence after the word policy no no after the word resources after the word resources well that was my question where the heck are we putting this okay all right got go ahead and read the sentence further one more okay further whenever possible include multi-use trails to paved Road segments on town roads never possible to P include multi-use Trails like we're doing along Gruber in 161st make it part of the design and Thea footprint a pave job correct um is that okay with everybody yes can we take a look at that I don't particular like the language whenever whenever possible because um you know Engineers will tell you with time and money anything is possible right um so I don't I wouldn't go that strong with the language uh maybe have it evalu evaluate or encourage encourage encourage I like encourage to encourage great encourage the possibility no don't take don't make it too iffy because then they'll be like you C that we want those tril change 2.4.4 because the end of it it's like you read to 4.4 it says you're going to do multi-use Trails until I guess it's 2.3.3 is completed the plan for cohesive internal trail system connection nebor communities so I don't really think well there's a bunch of4 point4 should be there it should just be completely your sentage whatever we can on roads and think change the end of that right but there's a whole bunch of things on the next page that go with that oh I'm sorry Mar catch and it's well je yeah that's where it belongs is there robt North Northwest East West Town TR activity multiuse so it should be added to C yeah should be at all all not just likeing Canal six right right and not instead of the East West townwide Trail but but but it's like 161st really East West and we're doing it there so that doesn't really work either north south so leave it where it's at wherever you wherever you guys think it fits but that sex we do we have a consensus that that sentence belongs in there yes okay all right yes okay we have that consensus and we don't necessarily want it limited to East West we don't necessarily want it limited to East West because we're doing it on First and that's not East West so I think weever feasible wherever something along stay away from feasible and possible we're racing it at 43 yeah they're gonna put it they're gonna put it in the right place once they figure out where to put it okay the next one was in 4.1 okay I gu just have to tell you what I said I said this one's just stupid and I said just take it this about the dumbest thing I've ever seen in my life 4.1.5 I I just think that's stupid and I think we have so many things that we need to educate the public on like why not to cut down 200y old oak trees but to tell tell somebody they can't leave their truck running I I just like I just thought it was stupid and what I found out was that there's kind of like a template that you start these things with it apparently that was kind of T part of the template so I suggested it be stricken completely because I just thought it was dumb but you guys could decide not only that it's just dumb I'm stking it okay it's we have a consensus to strike it 4.1.5 you strike we all do it well I said you could wome to some guy leaves his diesel running when he runs into Country Auto and Toby can't leave his diesel running I don't think so because they have an argument that that actually sa sa yeah saves when you do that and and and what are you g to do even leaving them on like all night phone hold the phone now was this put in because of issues we have in town with the companies and all those no put in because it was part of conservation okay it was put in because it was part of a template covered in the one above correct so do you reserve that or do you just delete that we're just taking that out um easier probably to reserve it if it unless it is it the last number doesn't affect the number you could strike and just remove it you don't have to reserve it all right and then the last one I had was 4.4 and that has to do with the protecting the tree canopy um and hug it is that what you said yeah I'm all for it um I'm not sure what the note revision unknown I wasn't sure where you were getting out there okay so what number here's here's 4.4 and this came up beautifully with this nice couple sitting in the back here this evening when I was talking to them during the break between them here's the thing we talk about adopting standards we talk about educating people not to leave their truck running we talk about educating people to do this and adopting standards for that this says the town will adopt standards and will allow for protection and enhancement of existing tree canopy what standards how are you going to do that these are my questions that I kept tell how are you gonna educate these people what what are you gonna do I mean I need to know because this is an important question you know these people just watch the property near them get completely clearcut was it a matter of somebody just coming in and say I don't care I'm just going to do it anyhow and hiring one of those Saturday Warriors that just comes in in clearcuts or was it a a matter of somebody that just really didn't know that you know moved here from some place like I don't know New Mexico where it's all open and Barren like that and wanted their property to look like that and and and really had no Mal intent at all so how are you gonna adopt these standards how are you gonna let people know what these standards are through the tree mitigation how do they know there's a tree mitigation these people didn't they've lived here how many years well the what what this is referring to is that we will develop standards and we have standards in chapter 87 which we're currently rewriting so um when I'm looking at this I think that's how we answer it it's in the code um that we have addressed or and maybe we can address it better but that's what that policy relates to when I moved in in 2004 my neighbor and his wife galloped over within the first 40 hours of us being there didn't even introduce themselves and said you're not going to be cutting down any trees are you that's how I was educated on the tree canopy gallinger I don't know you know I I like I don't know that that was my big issue with this as is my big issue as you remember when we were going through this with a number of these items that said educate the public on this do that what do we do we have a brochure that every new homeowner gets that says you can do this you can't do that you can do this whatever you need to C you need to like like we got if we if we say to say if it's in our comprehensive CL that we are going to educate people and we are going to set standards then we have to communicate those to the public somehow and we have to communicate them to before the error happens not afterwards and and have it be something egregious to AR Trey canopy in particular is something that I'm concerned about so anyhow that's why I was raised a stin about this and these two ladies have something to say I think Phyllis was first go ahead so could we do something thing with our um parade whatever that the veteran state parade the Fafa and maybe have an arbor day and use you know one day a year to just dedicate to tree preservation and education in our town and see if we can get some of the nurseries to assist it we have a tree Bank does anybody know that we have a tree Bank how many people know that raise your hand if you know we have AE what is the treeag where and where is it we have a tree bag did you know that like people it's not you got coun a tree Bank oh Bank yeah yeah but but how many people out there know we have a tree bank nobody knows that okay like we know that because we're on Council that's my this is my point exactly yes we need an education element if we're gonna do it I don't think I don't think putting it here is where people are gonna find it please things like this here because they this strikes me just as dumb as don't leave your truck running okay I'm sorry go ahead no no that's all right because I mean if we're GNA leave in the thing about the truck running we should do left right left right but um when Jamie came here and before covid we talked about a brochure a foldout a something to be given to every single realtor within a 10 m radius of of Hatchi gr the the don'ts that's it not not the fines not the anything just these welcome to the neighborhood yep here you go if you're planning on selling property in lahache groves and that's where it starts and actually as I was talking to these people the gentleman who used to be the state speaker of the house had a comment which I thought was very interesting and I I'll leave it up to you guys to see whether it could be done which he said don't find the property owners when the trees are cut down on Saturday with something by some of these Weekend Warriors who clearcut their proper on Saturday find the vendors find the guys who are taking the trees out make them aware of what our rules are I think that's a I don't know how legal it is but I think it's a brilliant strategy if we can come up with something like that let's make it let's make the people who have those Bobcats and whatever that come out and rip out everybody's trees know that if you do that in our town it's a problem you're G be yeah you're G to be fined as well you're because you know it's against our rules and supposed to get a vendor's license anyway when they come in so anyhow I think rather than amending this or anything like this this is a good reminder that we should come back to you with how we're going to proceed with some educational issues that's a great idea um budget is coming up and we can talk about how much money we're gonna spend on those things perfect well that was what my soap box was but I'm feeling really very unhappy about the tree canopy so Madam CH yes please go ahead so do you want to add the word education this policy doesn't talk anything about education it does everywhere else in here at nausea but go ahead put education in there somewhere in that policy I mean we're going to spend money on it it should be in the I agree comp plan to the town Shad education standards our standards include education yeah that will allow for tree protection enhancement of using fre canopy and provide education um yeah I public we'll come up with we'll come up with something I I think I understand what you do if you want but where it exactly goes uh we'll figure out in the next day or so we we'll Wordsmith it um and then bring it back to you rather than doing that right now is there any has anybody heard of any rules or programs that would Trump the state agricultural rule that says you can clearcut your land is there any designating trees historical or is there anything a town can do from a town perspective to protect the canopy townwide because we're at that you know caught between a rock and a hard spot you know a beautiful Town rural Town agricultural agriculture has the right to clear and you know unfortunately it is what it is and uh I wish we could have you know that's a state statute is there any I will say I believe that article 87 the way that it's written right now says that for the initial clear cutting of property they've still got to come through and at least talk to the town um it doesn't until until they're designated until they're designated and then they and they give us they give us a uh a mitigation Bond if you will but you know we end up keeping 2% of it after yeah the town in answer to your question program that could Trump the state statute with the EG I other than changing property classifications no and and I'm not that familiar with it but there are those tree preserv there's Tree City um standards and things like that and one of the things that I think they do is they help educate people um to it so we could look into to that and whether or not you want to become a tree City and all those kind of things on the on the on the on the educational standpoint um so um well we'll look into those standards when I say I don't know enough about it um because it might require us planning in rights of way that we don't have we've got polls that we could put Tre C on yeah we we we'll look into we'll look into all this um as far as the education and and uh during our budget presentations we can talk about it in more detail because it probably doesn't require a little bit of investment on your part okay um we uh we're gonna move on to item number eight um do we have any public comment on item number eight yes we do uh Miss sui okay well Bassy sui this proposed uh this proposal to the Town Council I'd like to make a proposal to repeal ordinance 201208 and article 41 this ordinance should be repealed in its entirety due to the extreme Urban nature of its purpose article 41's only intention is to increase density and subvert our Town's limitation on development as noted in the UL DC AUD will automatically change the zoning in the town's official zoning map while Town Council will have input into the process the mere existence of it in our town code is a gift to developers and is a disaster for the residents our rural agricultural lifestyle and an insult to our Town's Charter and incorpor ation as noted in following references we have already experienced many of the pitfalls of what puds have these are D were not directly created by a put application but as demonstrated by solar sport in the Public's Plaza developers often ignore change or flatly misrepresent their intentions or adherence to original development orders if the staff wants to go on record and say that this is something bad for the town I urge you to you ask them to show you the facts because I've done my research what is a PUD a PUD in real estate is a planned unit development it's a special zoning designation adopted an amendment on this area zoning rules to create new residential and Commercial development once approved by the council the Pud zoning change will transfer with the property to any future owner ownership the plan unit development Community is not limited by standard zoning regulations allowing for more property type Flex ability and it's a way for the developers to supersede local zoning laws giving them more flexibility he's free to create communities intermingling residential commercial and Industrial uses all into one project why won't residential buildings in residential P typically are usually condos they can be town home single family houses with commercial buildings uh put throughout some of the uh information I did research was from rural designations Rural jurisdictions and they have found it necessary to relook at their puds and their multi-and use designations rural development codes typically have barebone standards processes governing puds and therefore provide little guidance to local officials and few controls to ensure that the puds are properly located are properly designed and provide adequate infrastructure and Community benefits rural communities are beginning to recognize the downsides of plan unit developments negotiated developments large puds often intrude and have adverse impacts on agriculture operations natural resources I have like two sentences three sentences and strain local government services and budgets they can create unpredictability for Neighbors of prop proposed puds who cannot rely on existing zoning or land use plans to protect their rural LIF style environmental and design standards are sometimes overridden or ignored in the Pud review process or the final product extra work is created for staff in these Rural jurisdictions and planning zones who have to deal with multi mini zoning codes created for each PUD over time what I'm asking you is we are a rural Town puds do not belong in our town I would ask you to repeal this in its entirety and if for some reason you want more information to put some type of stoppage on any type of proposals or applications till you can get all the adequate information as it relates to rural towns advantages and disadvantages thank you phis so this is on the agenda because um not only we do have one more comment I didn't know if you were planning on responding to her would you like to hear the other comment okay sorry U Mrs LaVine Jasmine LaVine okay this is just a comment and it's just to read and assist the pound council with the Florida law 163 3177 and it states as follows the amount of land designated for future plan uses shall provide a balance of uses that Foster vibrant viable communities and economic development opportunities and address outdated development patterns such as Antiquated subdivisions the amount of land designated for future land uses should allow the operation of real real estate markets to provide adequate choices for permanent and seasonal residents and business and may not be limited solely by the projected population again Florida statue 163 3177 thank you okay go ahead CL so I put this on here for a few reasons um one reason was because there's a lot of rumors going through the town and we had and I'm not talking about anybody sitting on the stus we have a previous vice mayor that has constantly uh spoken to property uh buyers that if you buy 50 acres you could basically do whatever you want in this town so that is a concern to everybody that lives in this town I don't now I have what I have been told about this particular HUD ordinance is that it only pertains of Southern Boulevard and it specifically says that and let me read it to you in section B puds shall have Frontage on and legal access to Southern Boulevard this only refers to the along Southern Boulevard okay so the reason why I brought this up is because I would appreciate if staff would in plain language please explain to the residents and possibly some of the speculators out there exactly what this means Kaitlyn has a presentation ready for you that hope C language and she's very well spoken go Kaitlyn take it away for this it says specifically on Southern I hear you but I am told over and over but we're getting the facts okay let's hear the facts yeah we'll go go through the facts in a couple of slides here so uh first of all uh the the puds are available only for the mlu the mixed land use uh land use category and properties with a commercial land use uh designation being CL or clo there isn't in uh lockah hatchee a residential only option which you might be familiar with in other jurisdictions they do plann Residential developments some of them call them prds puds p DDS a lot of acronyms um but within the town of lahache you have to have a um a commercial land use element as part of that you can't do a residential only PUD um the Pud does not and cannot increase overall density intensity there's specific language in our ordinance that states um just that um further the zoning regulations um are they they would preclude any sort of condo apart anything like that because you have to default back to the U the zoning District that corresponds with your land use and the town only allows for detach single family so there wouldn't be a scenario in which you're approving a PV with with condos or town homes or apartments or anything like that um and as a point you do have to have an approved master plan for commercial properties and we're going to get into what that means and can you just explain briefly to everyone what would be the benefit of having a PUD for that area as opposed to not having a PUD we're talking commercial develop that was my next question thank so we'll get into that in a couple sides but it does allow some flexibility in exchange for other benefits to the town okay perfect go ahead okay so then the next slide okay so let's look at this is our future land use map this is a snippet because as the mayor noted um the only eligible properties are along Southern Boulevard here so if you look at the red pink and the Purple colors those are your mlus or your CL clo land use categories you'll see other colors on there those properties wouldn't be eligible in their current state which ones are eligible I'm sorry red the the red pink and purple are not necessarily eligible they just currently have the right land use category to set themselves up for if you see the purple one that's the um solar so you know that already is a PUD and you kind of know what you're getting there with the master plan um so again to the earlier points there's locational and dimensional criteria that have to be met you have to have access off of Boulevard if you're doing the mlu Pud you have to have a minimum of 50 acres and if you're doing a CL or CL PUD you have to have a minimum of 600 feet of Frontage along Southern with a minimum depth partial depth of 750 feet with the caveat that commercial structures and uses parking can't go beyond that 750 feet um So currently when you're looking at the land use there's no um properties outside of the solar plex that would be available for a um mlu PUD and then for the CL clo PUD the only potential property that could take advantage of um the clcl O PUD right now would be the Public's parcel but it would be highly unlikely that they would come in and reone to that because they were just recently developed um so that it it would be very unusual for them to come in and seek that rezoning so if we go to the next slide okay so then within the code we have a whole host of what we call design and performance standards within the district and I just listed some of them here I won't go through all of them but basically you have to demonstrate consistency with the comprehensive plan and all the other Town's adopted plans and studies and there's a whole bunch of design features that you have to meet such as screening and buffering you have to look at the minimizing impervious area look at drainage you have to address parking and have underground utilities you have to go um to the uh retag I know we're going to rename that and have them review and provide a recommendation amongst a whole bunch of other things that are available in the PD ordinance that you um had in your backup if we go to the next slide thank you okay so how do you apply and how do you get approval if uh you aren't currently eligible it's a pretty hefty lift in terms of entitling your property um as a u p so first of all the applicants have to come for a workshop before the council um that's a requirement you'd also have to have the correct land use um so outside of the properties that we looked at they'd have to come in for a land use Clan Amendment if someone that isn't currently eligible wanted to you know seek approval for that a land use plan amendment has two readings of an ordinance and importantly it's a legislative decision so you have a lot more latitude in approving or denying a land use plan Amendment than you do other types of applications like a resoning you could have approve or deny for a much wider range yes excuse me so whether we do or don't have a PUD in place somebody can still come in and ask for a land use plan Amendment it doesn't make any difference so what's the benefit of having the Pud in place so there's some trade-offs listed in the uh PUD language it's in the front section and it talks about benefits to the town I'm going to pull it up just quickly here no you're fine I know you were on a rooll but I I really need to know what the benefit is I mean I know it kind of really doesn't make any difference because somebody can come in and request it any house yeah uh so essentially the the general concept of the Pud is that it provides flexibility that would create a benefit to the town in terms of um clustering um maybe certain impervious areas so that you keep larger pervious spacers or more green space over here because you clustered your parking and your buildings over here but you haven't changed the overall intensity gives us more sight control It's usually the concept is that it pushes creativity from the developer and exchange for benefits like greater impervious greater open space reduced parking um better design overall in terms of the building layout and configuration um so it's usually a give and take um the give is a little more flexibility the the ask of the town or the requirement of the town is that there's better design over overall um with the end product okay um but to your point um you know there would need to be an available land use um category or designation for someone to come in and seek that designation or they would come in with a text amendment to create a new land you got to and again you have the same discretion um it's a legislative decision you have much more latitude than with a quasi item um so the L use plan amendment gives you the broadest protection I mean any could say otherwise but you could pretty much literally say no for pretty much any reason you just don't like it you don't have to uh meet a certain criteria like you do for a rezoning or a site plan um so beyond once you get through the land use plan Amendment which again you have a lot of protection at the land use plan Amendment level uh and if it is over 50 acres that map Amendment does need to go to the state that's called a large scale map Amendment then you have the rezoning the rezoning again it's um by ordinance so it's two readings there you there's your um resoning criteria there numbers one to six that they would have to demonstrate compliance with through their application again here you have um you have the requirement to kind of approve or deny the resoning based on these criteria here versus the L use plan Amendment which is legislative um and then there on the bottom of the slide there it talks about this is language that talks about um the council's ability to place condition on the Pud to protect Public Health um safety and Welfare amongst other interests and you can further limit the land use um the use and intensity on specific pods and Parcels within the Pud beyond what the comprehensive plan which would all which would allow you know the 01 or the 0.15 F ARS it actually gives you the latitude to say on parcel C within your PUD we would like to restrict it to 05 or whatever the the reason would be and if we go to the next slide you also need um as we noted the master plan the master plan um is approved on two readings of an ordinance and then finally after all of that you get down to your site plan in your plat that's approved by reso um so as you can see there you can't you definitely can't just put it anywhere um there's a lot of leg work and a lot of levels of review and approval and protection that the town does have within the current ORS so would you say that the Pud and the mlu give us more control I think it offers tradeoffs and benefits but yes you have a lot more um discretionary approval at the land use plan Amendment level than you do with quasi items if someone were to just come in with a site plan you don't have the same level of discretion um to approve or deny with the types of applications that would be required to approve a new PUD so without those two things in place they come in at the quazi level with those two things in place they have to to come in through those whole complete laborious processes that you just yeah B based on the analysis of the properties and their current form there's no one with or without it in place they can still come forward with any right yeah the the town has a process that would allows someone to come in and propose a text Amendment a a math Amendment and they could bring forward an ordinance that they write and you could deny that because it's a legislative decision right so gotcha okay any anybody else have any questions I think I got mine Laur sort ofish go ahead um so basically what you just presented to us can only happen on Southern Boulevard correct okay and can we go back to the the color blocks PUD can only happen on Southern Boulevard now does it mean somebody can't come in who lives on North Road and apply for a PUD right you would have total discretion to deny right they can come in and apply for a PUD whether we have a PUD ordinance or don't have a PUD ordinance they can apply for a PUD no matter what that us having the ordinance is not the Avenue that allows them to apply right anybody it's just like anybody can sue you for anything anytime anybody can apply for a ped anywhere anytime you have or don't have ordinance we still have discretion with the Pud ordinance in place we seem to have a little bit more so what what happens when somebody comes through and says I want to make my equestrian Estates PUD does that have to be on Southern or like uh the mayor just said uh we just purchased X number of lots up off of of oh I don't know pickle lettered Road north of okobe and now we have 60 Acres and we want to make an equestrian so so the equestrian an equestrian PUD isn't currently contemplated in your comprehensive plan that would be a new land use designation that would need to be created a new land use category and again you would have total discretion to deny that because it's a legislative decision would they have to go through this whole laborious process it depends on how they crafted that land use um process but they would need to come in for a text Amendment to the comprehensive plan which is legislative they would need to come in for a map Amendment which is legislative and then they'd have to create a new zoning District probably again you could absolutely flat out deny the creation of a new zoning District it's your zoning code then they'd have to come in at least for a site plan you know I would think if you created a new PUD you'd definitely want a master plan similar to the Pud that you have now so it's not an easy process and you have many times and ways to say no okay thank you you have your light on lady so thank you for bringing this and I think this evening was a very important meeting to bring this up in because um what I'm hearing out there which is very concerning from for me from the beginning of the meeting is that there's people that want to cut us into smaller Lots than 5 acre builda and that concerns me because that's the death of lahache groves that was the death of Davy that was the death of Plantation Acres it's the death of Jupiter horse equestrian anything Farms we are not a commercial we're not a commercial town you know and and tonight was really scary and a big wakeup call so I'm I thank you for bringing this I personally still feel that anybody could bring a PUD to our town anybody could bring an application but I the town has told me over and over and over again with our planners that with this we do have some control because it's already on our books it's on our books somebody comes to us we take this out and somebody comes to us with the Pud then we have nothing to go on at least right now we have a standard we have rules we have a process is that correct and to take that out or to do a moratorium with would we be at with that if if there was a moratorium on puds so there's restrictions on how long a moratorium can be in effect you typically The Guiding rule is about six months and coun with a a longer time but yeah there's there's restrictions on how long you can have a moratorium so we're going to put moratorium on the one PUD that can happen along Southern Boulevard no no because that's no I think somebody was suggesting town why moratorium on puds well you also have you have an existing PUD um and this ordinance regulates that correct that's right and so when they're coming in for modifications or um changes to to that or new development in there they follow the process that's outlined in this ordinance so solar Sports right stay under those regulations so we would have to exclude them so they would be right so we would change the rules for everybody else but doubt for them can't do that and M council member there there's a moratorium and then there's also zoning in progress which would be two different vehicles that kind of accomplish two different things but um to your point having something in place might be beneficial versus just kind of scrapping it and having folks who are interested coming with their own yes their own plans their own ordinance that their you know planners wrote and they're putting it in front of you again if someone did that you have full attitude to say no because that is legislative so there isn't so one thing I would like to say is we have a very strong community in this town and we don't always agree but one thing I think most of us agree on is our rural lifestyle and I don't think anybody's going to be able to change that so I I kind of agree with Anita regarding keeping this in because it is only on Southern Boulevard and they can come in well I it's only on Southern Boulevard Cassie do you want to come up I'd love to put this to bed and make you feel comfortable we we could change everything we can make us an acre and a quarter if if you want but I don't think anybody sitting here is gonna do it I I don't think anybody here has the interest in making us smaller sorry Mar what what is the benefit of a PUD leading into an mlu one ml one's a land use one's a zoning classification one's a land use classification that's right okay married does does one lead into another the comprehensive plan always takes precedence over the zoning and the comprehensive plan informs the zoning so you can think of it as the comprehensive plan here drives your zoning regulations and your zoning regulations in turn are informed by your comprehensive plan okay so so which is stronger your comprehensive plan always takes precedence in a place of conflict okay and the Pud is not in the comprehensive plan I mean the Pud is a zoning designation okay it's an implementation of your comp plan the mlu the mlu in part and they're both in place to protect us the way I see it or to give us more control that's just how I see it okay okay but what about our rural designation and the mlu and so forth um does that have any bearing one on the other um are you talking about your rural designation that the town can you just expand on that question a little bit right the one that uh Francine orchestrated yeah um I'm not as familiar that I don't know Jeff if you can speak to that well I think is uh to your question um the rural designation doesn't prohibit um some uh level of um commercial development I think in any town you really do need some level of commercial development what lockah hatchee Groves has um done thus far is to say um that area of Southern Boulevard is going to be where uh our main commercial development is going to be and then other commercial activities um that EX exist are going to be agricultural in um uh sort of background or or have an agricultural interest or be able to be homebased I mean that's principally where you're you're uh um allowable commercial is and then you've got the vestages that uh still exist out there so what would have to be changed in order for a PUD to spread through the rest of the Town off of Southern all of Southern has to be used and then it's open field again what would have to be change what would be have to be changed is um I think a super majority of council's Minds yeah you you'd have to do a text Amendment and to Jeff's point you need four out of the five of you to approve such a thing and it doesn't sound like there's any interest in doing that with the current Council and the current position doesn't sound like that's realistic at this point it's totally in your control the council's control to approve a text Amendment okay so the um the fear of a PUD or an mlu um opening up on okobe can only be initiated by an act of the Town Council that's correct four out of five of you would have to have a change of heart and agree that that's something that you were interested in okay so so once all of the Southern Boulevard is used up we're kind of safe well and not even all of Southern Boulevard is eligible you know there's different criteria in terms of the minimum amount of acreage or Frontage along Southern that you have to meet um there's partial depth criteria so there's other that she showed us are eligible they have 750 ft of front which is a lot yeah so there's a I would say most Parcels in their current current form under the current assemblage are not eligible to take advantage of the Pud now not to say someone in 10 years hasn't aggregated a bunch of um properties but again they'd have to come through the land use plan amendment to get the correct land use designation they'd have to go through rezoning master plan they have to get site plan and plat approval um so you're probably looking at just the solar Flex some of these partials that may be missing one of the units let's say they're missing the uh 750 ft from Southern MH can they come in with some other bait and switch that well anybody as has been mentioned anybody can come in and ask for anything so somebody could come in and say I want to do away with the southern access requirement or I want to do away with the 7 50 ft and once again in order to accomplish that they would have to convince whoever was sitting up on Council that that was such a great idea um that a super majority for of you um would say yep that's a winner um so there's there's nothing that's in there's nothing that's impossible but there's a lot of things that are unlikely Robert yeah thank you how do we address the conflict between the comp plan which says a thousand minimum a th000 linear feet on an arterial roadway and this ordinance which says 750 feet or I'm sorry 600 feet on Southern Boulevard so one's for the mlu Pud and the other is for the CL clo so for the CL clo PUD um they would have to have a CL or clo land use not um mlu land use so um if you're doing an mlu land use you would have an mlu uh PUD which just has the 50 acres requirement um versus if you were CL clo land use you would have do a cl cl PUD and then you have to have the front edge um and the depth that speak to those standards so they're two different things so they mail you you have to have a th000 feet and of that th feet some of it can be can uh not be Zone CL or clu it can be yeah you have to have the three different or whatever sounds like a lot of letters so we don't have to fix that it's apples and oranges thank that's correct yeah and one thing about having these rules is when you're sitting up here making a decision you got the ability to recite a rule that the applicant doesn't meet and that's it it's a standard you're done yeah you know you're reasoning if if you don't have rules now it's your opinion why you think that they shouldn't have to or be able to do what they want to do and you have rules if there's rules they don't meet you can quote the rule and and and if there was an approval that was not in compliance with those rules people can challenge it they can challenge everything no no but they can challenge it and win legally um phis do you have something else to say before we wrap up I just have one question um what if we did a moratorium for the rest of the Town less Southern until we could come up with a way to make the residents feel protected against gu developers coming in because I'm looking at item 10 and I'm looking at several puds GNA be on the north side of collecting and the south side of okobi well they doesn't mean they're going to be there I understand but to detour I'm not sure what they're gonna try to do there right but um one of the one of the hazards of giving you all as much information as staff attempts to to give you um and alert you to potential issues is that that aitis in the butt no it's that we we have these very undefined things out there that may or may not be real in any sense until you have an application in front of you you don't really have um any decisions to make or or ability to weigh in and say whether or not it is good or bad but putting this putting this out there does um allow the public to go oh my gosh what could this be and when we don't have um a picture of something our minds will take us to the worst thing it could possibly be happens all the time yeah and every meeting and and so um that there is there is no application for uh either one of these equestrian puds and Caitlyn can tell you um the extent there was a a meeting or discussion with staff um what it was well that's why I'm I'm saying maybe a moratorium so we could have six months to figure this out but a moratorium the problem the problem is it would be a moratorium against what we it's a phantom at this point in time um you don't want to have a moratorium on all development um you we have this against planned Urban Development okay so if if if I was out there uh representing somebody else and you said okay I'm GNA have um a moratorium on a PUD well guess what I'm going to come in and ask for a land change that is not a PUD but gives me exactly the thing that you may be afraid of I can rename things just like when we were talking about classifications and things like that if you set out there and you don't have something specific in mind that you're trying to to stop or or more importantly with a moratorium you should be working on regulations um that are going to address the issue as the basis of the moratorium um don't do it because you're you're working against questions and I'm asking it's a tool do we want to use that tool my recommendation would be no because it's we don't have anything that's definitional at this point in time um if if you want to ask Caitlyn what she knows about these two things they are they may come up in front of no I don't want to ask and I didn't mention and right no I know I understand La you have your light on just a just an opinion like a belly button um I don't support the idea of a moratorium um only you know for the very reasons that Jeff just said and we've just spent half an hour showing that there are all these hoops at rigers that depend right now on the five of us so it's kind of plating a fear of something that doesn't exist yeah I agree okay so can we all agree that our consensus is that we leave this ordinance yes Robert L Mar okay we we would like to leave this ordinance Jeff okay okay moving on to number nine mayor oh I'm sorry it's okay um I did have a public comment um from a resident in the audience that asked me to read a statement into the record that it's from miss Karen plant uh she says please sorry she went home she had to go home yeah okay please repeal this ordinance for PUD if not push it to a townwide referendum vote by residents do what is right for our town okay thank you you're welcome all right um okay so number nine is the presentation of the rural Vista guidelines got you too Mr fleshman okay handle this yeah thanks um the the uh this document was was created a long long time ago back now back pretty much at at the time of of incorporation and um it was never formally adopted um there are some references in the comprehensive plan uh that say that when when you uh when you review for example a commercial uh project uh take a look at it in terms of consistency with the rural dista guidelines um and we we've never really had um any specific Direction in terms of what that means so uh in an attempt to try to uh comply with that that directive each time a commercial development comes in we we ask their architect to take a look at the rural Vista guidelines and and identify uh C certain features architectural features that uh that are mentioned in the rural Vista guidelines how they might be incorporating those uh uh those Architectural Components into their project now now I'll be the first one to admit that if if you take a look at um at the elevations of uh buildings that have been been built along Southern Boulevard and that's and that's really all of the development that's that's uh taking place um and you go look at the pictures of of uh uh types of preferred buildings in the rural Vista guidelines you're going to say well that doesn't that's not rural vtic guidelines um so uh uh you know we've we've attempted to the extent that we can to to try to incorporate certain features every uh every project sing Boulevard has some architectural features of of of a an architectural element that's in the rural Vista guidelines um now the rural Vista guidelines uh was also emphasized and I hate to use this term um when we were we were attempting to get the the okobe overlay past um we we uh we incorporated the uh rural Vista guidelines more uh into the okobi overlay recommendations because okobi Boulevard is is more of a rural more of a rural character than Southern Boulevard um so uh if we're going to utilize um the RO Vista guidelines on okobe uh I think I think probably the best way to do it is is not necessarily look at architectural Styles but uh more landscaping and buffering uh things like that if if you recall when the uh uh when the daycare center was approved uh last year or or the year before we we required uh uh a very large uh uh buffer and uh the incorpor ation of multi-use trails and and heavy duty landscaping and I think that um rural Vista guidelines maybe um if we're going to make any changes to it should should concentrate its efforts on on buffers Landscaping thing things like that now now we do we do still have some um uh pretty good architectural elevations in the rural Vista guidelines but there really is it is not going to be uh any nonresidential development on okobi because commercial zoning is not allowed on okobi so I don't Sur why we talking yeah yeah so I'm so so I don't think that we necessarily if we're going to if we're going to uh uh take another look at at the rural Vista guidelines I think it should be primarily buffering landscap and signage um the the uh retag advisory committee uh recommended as um when it was looking at at okobi Boulevard a a prototype Sign Pro a prototype Monument sign that that any land land owner uh putting up had to conform with that with that rural Monument sign look and there was a church that that came in just just recently for for a sign permit and and we strongly recommended that that they use that prototype and they are going to use it so so I think we have we have some features that we probably should be looking at the Real Vista guidelines um to uh to incorporate I'm not sure that architectural guidelines so is necess necessarily the way to go yeah so Jim there there are references I think in the comp plan to the rural Vista guidelines correct references yes and this has not been formally adopted right okay so one I think one of the reasons it's here is um how do you want to advance this so that it can come to you for formal adoption in whatever form it it happens to be right now you have a comp plan that says there are guidelines that are supposed to uh to be there but we really haven't implemented these and I'm not saying that you necessarily have to implement these but um there should be something that folks could look at and say what are you talking about specifically with respect to rural Pista guidelines and that that uh um definition would be helpful to staff and applicants um or um you know do you want to get rid of uh the the guidelines and go back and and look at that on the on the comp plan basis so I think that's why this discussion is is here not to resolve it tonight but to educate people as to where we are in respect to adoption or non-adoption of them okay fellis you've got your light on yeah there's no I'm trying to find a reference date on here when was this written Dennis yeah they were finishing it in 95 when I arrived so do you really think we need to adopt something that is 20 years old actually older it's 30 years old and I think that we can use it as a guideline without right and my question is why did we never use this on Southern Boulevard we did not a whole lot of it the uh the Everglades and building right next to the on the orthopedic center made him change several things made him change like the high hats or whatever those the orthopedic not the orthopedic center but this building right the EAS n but also when I'm my concern is also is that you know these picturers are 30 years old you know I would suggest that if we're going to incorporate this that we need to update yeah I don't think it's on here for adoption at this point in time it's a um a document that everybody kind of needs to to see and um I think if you could give us some direction on you know whether you want a committee to review this whether you all want to see this back um in an updated fashion um what do you want us to do with this put on here so maybe we'll let her ask her question question maybe that'll some light are you done yeah Laura asked for three meetings ago is yes how many times how many times have applicants come before us with their drawings and plans and we're no no no no hell no and they're likew what do you want well refer to the rural Vista guidelines and it's kind of like referring to something out in space and the reason I wanted it to come forward was one so that people aren't wasting their time going through the land of no but also for preservation of what these folks did 30 plus years ago did a great job yes um this is not all of it it well well by God then where's the rest of it well well drag it in Marge I I I understand the concept of all right yeah there's a couple of things in here that may need a little updating per se but I certainly don't want to reinvent this almost perfect wheel I I you know it as far as I'm concerned this should should be its own section in the ulc period refer to the rural Vista guideline period and and that's why I'm trying to you know and again not necessarily approve it tonight I I I don't want to send it backwards I don't want to exclude it from a committee look but you know I committee look is probably the next step and then just check it for legal to make sure there's consistency after 30 years but beyond that yeah I think it's brilliant well done and and it's certainly Gonna Save Us a lot of time and energy and aggravation and the people who come before us okay so is the consensus that we're going to send it to committee yes and and maybe legal at the same time to to just make sure that there isn't anything that's changed egregiously in 30 years or um I think some of these roots bring it back might not be yeah yeah that's what yeah that's what I'm saying yeah yeah that's what I'm saying is that yeses that sound good everybody yes Y ulc and legal yesc their next thing was the sign well they better get working the sign code will be quick they kind of go together they can go to yeah I mean they can go together because signs are part of this yeah oh yeah it can be it can be part just that sound good you consensus do you need anything else from us no I just uh wanted to let you know that there's a possibility that these guidelines could be adopted by resolution to give you a little bit more flexibility to update them it's requires a little bit less work than an ordinance every time oh perfect so let's let it get get a little Gander by both of those agencies and then there be an ordinance but the the document itself would be you'd reference a resolution so that it could be updated all right all right perfect we'll put that one to bed let's move on to item number 10 which is what's next meeting schedules all right we got um I'm not I'm not going to go through this in in detail you all have it there um we are going to do our best to to meet these schedules um the the question I have I won't tell you uh what answer I want from you but the question I have is um with respect to the possibility of a July um work workshop um that would typically uh take place on July 16th um if we were to schedule one are you uh available that's the first question because there's no sense talking about what might be scheduled if you're not available on July 16th yes yeah I mean I I can make myself available those are some pretty important issues of FEMA you know as came up tonight really needs to be fully explained and vetted well I think that's what we would try to try to get there um I would defer at this moment to to consultation with Francine as to what else she thinks is going to be ready if anything um for that uh meeting and we would need to looks like a nice short one as it is let's leave it how it is and do that on the 16th July 16 yep to confirm the time six o'clock six o'clock yeah yeah um there's also uh reference in here uh to your participation on government committees um I don't know if want to discuss that at this point in time and um talk about or not you want to do reports uh not now but uh have them scheduled for for meetings um I believe that item is going on the agenda for July this item is on the agenda for July correct I think it and it also needs to be updated um with the appointments to the fmit I believe okay um and then uh there is um an item with respect to uh reimbursement of attorney's fees um in is for informational purposes you've seen it before I don't think it is meant to be discussed tonight but it is a question as to whether or not you want to put it on a future agenda it is coming forward in July all right and I don't have anything else to report on but I will take questions with respect to all right anybody else from staff have anything that they feel like they want to report on before we end B you good no no mayor thank you H spoken all you wanted to speak to said everything you want to say okay well then we'll do our closing comments Laura something to ponder um since form six has now received an injunction and that was due to the law firm of SC scarola Weiss and somebody s than thank you soda um they were initially looking for a 10,000 contri $10,000 contribution from each town I don't know if our town wants to consider giving them any money toward the adventure Ponder um and then my other comment is a resident brought up this this idea of appealing to local foundations to adopt us for some of our needs hey I'm just bringing it forward but you know that talking about saving the tree canopy what a great headline for some Foundation to say we're helping the town of lockah hatchee grobes save their tree canopy so then the next question is how do you get it done is this a grant proposal is this a somebody going knocking on Foundation doors and saying hi sponsor us actually one of our citizens actually identified a pre canopy Grant this week and is working on it with the town and me right now so sweet so I not that more up more is better I'm just saying there is actually a grant a state grant that we're looking into as we speak so again something for us all to ponder and how to get it done and what would be the best Avenue and that's all I've got okay phis you're next so I'm hearing we got our 750 from the governor yep sign but he I'm also hearing he signed it because we were not part of the towns against form six so I believe form six is I was not against it I was ready to fill it out I feel corruption starts right here at these levels and if you don't want to fill out and your your um financials don't run you know we're we're we're we're here for the people and uh would you be okay having to disclose every single commission as a client as your client to disclose every single commission it's the form is not made that way it's not it's not made that way no not I did well you had to because you were running no but it's accurate I just you guys had to fill out the form one when you were running no we didn't have to run out and fill out anything yes we fill out form one yeah six because I thought it was going to have to be submitted soon I did a month ago two months ago yeah I mean it's really not it is a little bit more invasive and then that you have to you have to systematically list instead of just saying I owe x amount of monies and I have X amount of monies you have to say I owe this amount of money to this person and this amount of money this person and this amount and I received this amount of money from this person so it's it's a little bit more laborious that way but you know something like let's say her real estate business or your equestrian business you don't have to list client X gives me this much client y gives me this much client Z it's through my equestrian business I make this much money that's that's it's really not as bad as I think everybody made it out to be that's wild because I was scared I went into my account you know I paid my account to do it and went in and you know that's my one of my questions which I I'll bring up at the by the way the league of cities lunch in next week which I'm going to I if anybody else Val and I are going but anybody else is certainly willing to come they're having a discussion by that law firm about the form one and the form six at after the lunch in or during the lunch in or right after at the meeting part so that's really wild because when we went to the league of cities meeting last year they said if you run a business and if you have a client who provides more than $1 % of your income you had to list that client I mean it was grueling and I a lot of people to not run I know and that and that was one of the questions I went to a league lunch last week that was one of the questions that one of the things that came up is like well what about a Schmucks like me who did it because I'm a ro follower and I did it already and now mine is disclosed at that level but everybody else is going to be disclosed at a lesser level but what about a schmuck to incurred legal fees fees um you know should be reimbursed and then what about the people who get didn't run again and what about the people who gave up their positions I mean there's a lot of ramifications of this the fact that they the injunction went through and remember it's just an injunction it doesn't mean that it's gonna go away there there's a lot of there are a lot of things so you might want to come to that lunch and on what is it Wednesday um whatever Wednesday yeah the 20 you might want to come to that luncheon because there's going to be a in-depth people who were in the pits so and if you're unable to make it whatever materials we receive we'll share it not done all right go ahead PHS so um the FDA so today I asked for and I made sure you all got it all all my fellow council members um I got a list of all the f F that were in code enforcement and by the way that list is not complete because there are people still not signed off on that their FDA that are not on that list that have paid $81,000 in fines and that their properties are underwater so the fact that we have people in front a magistrate for an FDA that our own town engineer said she did not agree with the code the FDA that we make people do um regarding filling in our historic ditches Etc I think it's gross that more than half of our docket for magistrate is FDA so if that I I brought it up two weeks ago I was expecting the town Engineers back in front of us actually I think today um it is time sensitive and we need to get this fixed because what's happening is people's land is is being destroyed it's worse it's worse than if they would have just left it alone they're flooding their neighbors so this is a priority for our residents in this town and it cannot get kicked the get cannot get kicked down the road anymore it needs to be done what we're um uh what we are going to try to do is make the process more efficient um and bring to you um suggestions as to uh where the code can be amended um we've got a staff level meeting on that on Friday um and I I hope uh that we're going to be able to to bring that to you on um the 18th for comprehensive discussion we will have a discussion no question I hope it will be comprehensive at that point you are the experts put your experts together and come up with something that these residents can digest because the engineering alone just for the average person just wanting to build a house it the engineering alone you know is is is disgusting and there's no there's no boundaries for these Engineers there's no guidance please I'm thank you I'm sorry to sit here with a giggle um you don't mind I it was and this is this is this is flat out relevant to what Phyllis just said I know someone who is an engineer he works for himself and he was slow so he took a position where one of our firms and I saw him not too long ago and he says you're with lockah Hatchi Groves aren't you I said yes and he says can you tell me why I look at the same FDA for the same person four [Music] times he said I look at it I make my comments it goes forward it comes back to me negating my comments going back to what it was originally four times for this particular FDA what is is he saying that the engineer who we sent the comments to does not um respond to the comments it is within this firm that we have the Carousel of pass it to this engineer no okay so it's 30 days I mean right to the minute they take so you know I'm not going to disclose The Firm on record if this is something that you know senior staff would like to have a private conversation you know because I'm not going to fry anybody up here I said friend I cannot answer that question you need to call your boss or town hall so anyway so um I this was a busy meeting and we had a lot of important stuff but I did get a call from a resident that is tired of getting run off the road by tractor trailers so my I guess my question is is Broad the designated tractor trailer road that they need to drive up and down um I asked her if it was a saw truck she couldn't answer me but can we have maybe no through traffic on the rest of the roads and direct all these tractor trailers to vad if that's supposed to be the road they're on I I I don't know what to do because I I now she lives on eoad no C Road and also has on North Sea road so her complaint also was the phone poles sticking out so I mean I don't know if we could do something like that but and I don't know what that would look like if they were all directed to one road but hopefully we could get some of these illegal businesses out of our towns that are working on all these tractor trailers because I don't think it's all the sod farm and I don't think it's all the horse trailers you know I think it's a lot of some of the illegal activity um so I'll we'll try to address it with people who are better able to address it than I am um I do know that any through traffic any through no through truck ordinance um is really difficult to enforce because you essentially have to have cops sitting there cops sitting there well and when he when he or she takes off after one they got to follow them to see where they went to determine whether or not you know it was a through truck because there's a lot there's a lot of trucks or trailers in this town um that have business on a variety of of places and they'll make stops well what she wanted was the signs back that say the canal have the right away but now that we have the double striped lines I don't know that that sign applies anymore you know well I'll talk to to Richard and legal about that I I I I personally don't think the the that's a I think that's a good idea that's my personal opinion but I the signs go back up but that they're the that the have double yellow well it might be just considered a courtesy reminder I don't enforce it anyhow well something to think about um I'm gonna end it at that Robert yeah got several phone calls um about PBSO the contract um so they wanted to say thank you for voting 5 for renewing it they didn't call us a lot of people are well they're read the toal prer that said you know the first reading I was the only one that opposed the ordinance and I said it's not me I said the meetings are open everybody talks about it up here and we discussed at the meeting and everybody voted for so it had nothing to do with me voting for or against the ordinance that was my point to them when they called me and and I guess another point is the town the town crier is okay but you know get your information from these agendas they're right there on the on the town website if you can't find something either call a council member call staff and they can walk you through it sometimes it's not so obvious to find something I walk somebody actually I walk representative Ross through our agenda last night he called me with some questions I sameed to the computer went online went through found his information oh cool so yeah please uh these this is it these agendas the minutes um yeah form six if you read any of the information on the repeal it was repealed because the justification was from senators and representatives we have to do it why shouldn't they and the judge said that's absolutely not a reason to make Municipal elected officials bu out a form six another justification they said oh the number of Ethics complaint has gone up they actually proved that it actually went down in 2022 so the reasoning behind it was was completely there wasn't any and even the senators of reps that I called saying why did you approve it that was the answer I got I have to do it why shouldn't you so hopefully the stay stays because the difference between it and the form one is just numbers you know personal numbers on how much you make you still have to um tell them who you deal with and and that's the key I think with conflicts is you know my working for somebody that I'm voting on something that they're involved in so the form one discloses all the property you own discloses um certain business contacts if it's more than 10% and the only difference form six you had to put numbers with everything and list your value of your personal assets and correct a lot of stuff that has zero to do with ethics you know my comment was but this is like a identity the yeah it gets posted on the website which it's public record now you know maybe uh I I I don't know I'm not going to go down that road but hopefully he gets obliterated you never see it again I Sor people that I started filling it out I was in progress and doing some research on some things and then I got the email so I went in and hit delete and filled out my form one yeah I actually called him the next day and ask him if they'd be willing to redact the portions that were more invasive of those of us who had already delet you fill to form one nope they wouldn't are you kidding they should let you fill out of form one and delete form six really would not do it that is not right yeah well Wednesday maybe I'm not the only person I mean there's a lot of other people that that that fall into this category but up Wednesday with those attorneys maybe that'll be a good question I already the the guy who was in charge of the lawsuit was at the meeting I that he was said he would pass it along to them so another argument for procrastination yeah and I'm just not yeah not me yeah they should be able let you but I was also so scared of it I was worried about getting it done you know what I mean like how long would it take me so and being able to schedule time with my account and everything so I just did it when when I could do that so all right I won't be at the next meeting physically here I'll be able to call in how are we doing Callins is it video or yeah it's typically a a zoom is how we get okay so I can just hit the raise hand button then whenever I want to raise my hand that was a problem before with a call and there was no no way for me to tell the mayor that I wanted to speak yeah but I got I have a hard enough time noticing the lights but I'll do my best I got batteries I forgot to bring them but um so the zoom isn't up there right you're yes it is it's actually on right now there's a piece there let let's get together and test it out prior to to make sure that okay we're on the same page we'll ask the mayor to recognize you once during the meeting give me your three minutes okay thank you yes okay okay um I'd like to find out from rural cities that have um had puds um not work properly and find out exactly what what issues they had how would uh how would you go about doing something like that well I think Miss sui um referenced a a document and perhaps You' share it with us and then we could share it with you as a starting point share much job I I share with you you can share with me okay do I see her or you um uh we'll we'll talk to her about getting that document share it with you with Jeff and he could share I'll share it the whole coun all of us that' be good then we could all do it as a team we need to do it as okay um the second thing um and another thing that Cassie had brought up was the FEMA the uh the or do we need an ordinance a flood plane ordinance we we have a flood plan ordinance and Tra to get some and our Engineers don't like it what what can we do to to help the residents I mean Cassie mentioned a bunch of uh things that seem very negative toward uh The Groves residents so um is that another thing she needs to give to you regarding the FEA yeah we're making standards we told the engineers two meetings ago I'll I'll I'll be asking her for for that as well because I'll be asking her for that as well because she made reference to it or at least uh and our sure okay so we have a workshop the work the workshop is gonna be we're gonna try for for July 18th oh 18th I'm sorry I'm sorry July 16th yes I know yeah July 16th yes I mentioned um during the uh the RV um about the 43rd uh Street um near the uh a road going up a road to 43rd um there's the RV repair shop up there so I don't know whether that's something cod we'll check to see whether they have a BTR good look um because I saw a um it looks a very nice RV at first and then I was behind it and it turned up D Road and the whole side was a mess and they get towed all over the town they they were getting towed yeah I I think they were getting toed to be repaired though because the one side on the front back were fine I bet it was getting okay that's all I have can I make a comment on marg's make a comment on Mar's comment yeah you like doing that tonight you guys are you're just throwing them over the plate so if there is this RV repair shop why in God's name would the town issue it a BTR yeah um first of all because a BTR is a tax um and just like the IRS we tax illegal things um but business we don't approve uh but the the question goes to let's find out whether or not it is a legitimate business um that's where you start is whether or not they have filed for an application for a PTR so that you can see what's going on there I have ADD I'm I'm gonna add to so then six years from now when there're still operating they're going to come to the town and say just like the people from the county did that are operating not in compliance they're going to say my six years there's a zoning requir they haven't kicked us out yet um right oh no that's well that's what's what I'm tell what I'm suggesting is that the beginning of any analysis as to whether or not a business is legitimate or not is whether or not they have applied for and received a VTR or once they if they have done that then you can examine what they are doing versus what the code is if they haven't we can go out there and find out what's going on with the business so it's a it's a tool for us tool Bo okay up to you we're all done okay well I just want to say that this is the first time since I've been on Council and taken over as mayor that I feel like we all worked really well together tonight couple of tense moments but for the most part most of the snarkiness and fighting and all of that was there was not present and I truly enjoyed sitting up here on the day is tonight with everyone and I want to thank you guys thank you guys all and Robert 9:25 okay can I have a motion to adour the meeting oh we go