Melissa Lamers here Jessica gal Wendy Anderson here Tyler mberg here Sarah Lee morresy here Bob Fitz Simmons here John hobick Jack seret here Bliss Jameson here oh I didn't see you come in I didn't expect you I'm glad to see you not on uh Bill lights here Alex silin pleas up Suzanne Shyer here oh and you moved oh you know what I was no I saw the back of blist and I thought it was Suzanne I'm all confused uh Donna brosmer here all right we have a quorum do we have anybody joining us or attempting to join us online no okay thank you my supervisor trying to ah okay any committee members no but no thank you for answering because that that could matter as well um so our first order of business is approval of the minutes from June 5th that everyone have a chance to review them any motions to approve I'll make a motion to approve Sarah Lee thank you I have some suggested changes and would you like me to make a second to his motion and then suggest changes I think that's the order right second and discussion so that would be discussion fire away then I just seconded it thank you is there any discussion am I the only one go ahead go comments because I don't want to belabor it I think these were very hard minutes to to take because the conversation was so technical um but um I'm gonna start on page one and uh I actually ended up having to go back and listen uh because the the lines 34 through 36 which is me um when I read this I couldn't understand what it was I said um and I apologized for that um so I went back to listen and now I understood why Chelsea didn't understand what I said um because I took way too long I'd like to because I think this paragraph is important for the action that we ended up taking um I'd like to suggest a rewrite member morisy stated she did not think we should rior reprioritize or lose momentum with Council and reminded the committee that the projected timeline for liid as previously stated by staff is soon I'm sorry uh SAR could you please tell us again what page in paragraph I'm on page one okay lines 34 through 36 yeah do you have recommended changes yeah I would prefer that the paragraphs say member morrisy stated she did not think we should rep prioritize or lose momentum with Council and reminded the committee that the projected timeline for liid as previously stated by staff is soon that's a summary statement obviously but I think it reflects what I said better and also sets up the rest of this discussion in this first section better any further discussion and I guess then the person making the motion has to move to accept it the minutes with changes if nobody else cares is that all you have I don't care Sly Sly is that all you have no but if nobody else cares I'm not going there we do care sily somebody's you know it's summer well then get ready gang all right and I'm sorry but you know there are some people who later in life are going to read this and I do have to note that these were very challenging minutes for staff because because of our microphone situation and because it was a complicated discussion it was a very complicated disc thank you to staff for making such a Von I don't know who you are but I'm sorry um engineer did it right I'm married to one uh page 2 line 42 second sentence Mr casbeer we need to put the word stated all right page three line eight we are missing ing from the word outstanding it's outstanding Florida waterways um actually not waterways outstanding Florida waters okay outstanding Florida waters um all right page four um page four on line one I believe that first sentence should be um Mr casbeer explained that rules should be based on scientific evidence as opposed to in um and then what's that this when scholes [Music] um I didn't go there but I could have Tad do not poke the bear um okay on line 16 I think that um the statement it says Geotech to add and then I think we need the phrase a safety factor to the elevation on line 22 we need to remove the word add and then on line 23 it should say what degree not water degree uh line 29 take out the word the' which is the first word on that sentence okay also on page four lines 40 into 41 I am I'm really not sure uh cuz I was like I am not going to listen to this whole meeting again but requiring graphs depicting Bell of water table for site development something is missing there bell curve I think it was okay yes so after the word Bell lets add curve yeah yeah okay all right next page five line five it's just a typo it says you need to just change the word rice to rise are you sure pretty sure yeah um on line 23 I believe that we should change the word with to when and then I just have one more you guys on page six very last word on line five I think is this is this correct spelling are we talking about plumbed yes we're talking about plump it is the incorrect spelling is it plumped or you know could have been pumped see could I wasn't I was like I'm not going to listen to this again but it doesn't sound right so we need to change the word plumbed to pumped I think it's supposed to be Plum a plum and Plum with a he said it what's the right word plumbed or pumped the sentence reads sorry just lost it that this now I lost it microphone please yeah wouldn't Plumb have a b though it's based off the word plum but it looks like Plum yeah this is plumed plum not plumped but it should be pumped yes should be pumped I don't I don't think well usually when you pump you're going to need pluming but the word plum go back and listen and find out what word was yeah I'm I'm this plumed is or we could settle it now plumbed and pumped I wasn't sure and I didn't want to listen to it again okay is there any further discussion of the minutes I just have two quick questions I wasn't here so I'm not making any modifications uh but there were a couple of references to staff providing uh references um uh in the uh on line five page three and also 50 and 72 I thought we already had those but there was something that uh Tad said you would make it clickable portions of 50 and 72 available not really sure but that was it for me that was just requirements from staff I don't know if that stuff we can bu out or not I have not got minute where was that again please uh first oneop oh there are some hard tops passed out I didn't get um yeah one was uh one was on line 21 page two and the other one was on page three line five and also page three line 31 there it is I found Sor and just items that minutes reference would be pass okay so the first one you said on page two U Miss West stated the goal will be distribute the package for review in August that is um something that will be distributed for the for a later meeting so and then line five on page three the presentation continued with information for the manual which staff will send out for reference that is I think the storm water manual yes that's the new storm water rule manual I um have we seen the new storm water rule manual St John's or yeah that that's what it looks like we're talking about here take a look I don't they've got a draft the existing storm water handbook then they've also got the draft modifications for the uh rules changes they were making for treat and I know there's a public meeting maybe this week or next week about the new storm water rules so we may get some more information um I'll make a note that when we get that we'll send it out or a link to it it's probably pretty lengthy so it' be more likely a link so to recap last one was line 32 on that same page I don't know why they were referencing 50 and 72 I MEAP yes so Tad that says that that you move to review the county rules and that you would make chapter 50 and 7 to available um we can certainly do that if I don't think anything went out that we had the highlighted version and I provided a hard copy of one of the two of them you did 72 72 think that's this was just passed division8 okay to recap any materials that were distributed in the last meeting or should be distributed for the next will be distributed in the interim between this meeting and the next yes okay we have a motion to approve the minutes it was seconded by Sarah Lee discussion brought some substantial modifications to the minutes bill would you like to I'll amend the motion to include the revisions last second Bill lights moves to approve the amended minutes jacket seconds any all those in favor I any opposed the minutes are approved from our June meeting thank you Jinder yes ma'am are you going to be our MC for our continued storm water no I'm not actually I'm going to move to the staff table in the back and Tad is going to take it over and I know he has some guests here and I'm sure he will introduce them as we go along thanks good afternoon uh and Tad gbear County engineer and uh microphone please sorry about that good thank you for the reminder uh Tad cier County engineer uh with me today we've got uh Ben Bartlet who's the Public Works director and uh Dan Stanfield with GC he's a geotechnical engineer to be able to uh discuss any of the aspects that are related to to that type of business and I'll call on Bill lights some of you might know to discuss any of the uh biological elements of today's discussion uh what we discussed last time were the regulations for beluchi County overall the portions that we can actually make changes to and uh as such we discussed uh what it is that the county regulates for storm water um remembering that there were two aspects for storm water you got the attenuation which is just a very fancy word for flooding uh however it ends up in the minutes uh either one works but uh it's really about making sure that you're not causing uh flooding on your neighbors either upstream or Downstream uh based on what you're doing on your property and then also uh water quality which is basically treatment of the water restoring it to its uh uh predevelopment uh runoff quality is the goal overall so we have regulations that uh that speak to both whether or not they're fully appropriate or not it's obviously open for interpretation we' tried to mimic as much as possible uh the rules that you see at the estate level uh obviously with some tweaks as it relates to how we would prefer to do it uh being a little bit more uh uh strict in certain aspects of it but uh uh County minimum standards are standards that are applied countywide whether the development occurs in the unincorporated section of the county or in uh in a city um we do uh require that the cities follow those requirements this is part of the charter and uh they cannot relax set requirements uh overall they're still the ones ultimately making the interpretation of the rules themselves um that's what we've got on the book so how do we go about doing that storm water uh for the attenuation aspect the flooding portion of it we take a look at again at the the pre- and post rates of discharge and volume we want to make sure that we're not sending the water any faster than it was previously going because that may cause flooding down stream and we don't want to send more than what was previously going Downstream uh in the overall total may recall from our first uh discussion on storm water there are two different types of basins and each one has a different storm for calculating those to uh uh checks on the pre versus post uh closed basins have a bigger storm they have to deal with because there's nowhere for that water to go but to the bottom of that Basin and then sit there you certainly don't want to flood the uh Property Owners at the bottom out the methods for holding that water so that you're not exceeding the precond condition on the discharge of the volume are typically referred to as best management practices retention detention uh most of the time if you're looking around at uh newer developments or developments have been developed under our current storm water rules you're looking at basically either wet or dry storm water ponds as the prevalent method of choice U most of them is because at this point it's the cheapest method for addressing uh those requirements so we talked a little bit uh at the end of the last presentation leading into today's discussion of about what are the different things that we can do to modify the existing storm water rules to uh to improve um or reduce the likelihood of flooding on adjacent properties uh Downstream Upstream anywhere around uh the proposed development one of the first things that we had chattered about was about the seasonal high groundw table elevation as you recall from the very first presentation this is the most important elevation when you talk about setting your elevations in your subdivision because your seasonal High sets your pond bottom elevation which sets your uh Max stage after the storm has occurred which then establishes your Inlet elevation which establishes your center line elevation for your roadway which then establishes your finished floor elevations for your residents or uh Commercial Business whatever you may be building overall so all of them ultimately tie back to this seasonal High high elevation if it's wrong then all the rest of those don't matter you're going to have problems whether it means you're flooding or whether it means you're causing flooding on adjacent property so uh in terms of setting a seasonal high it's either done by a geot techical engineer somebody like Dan or by a biologist somebody like Bill and uh it's set based on whether or not the water table will be above ground or below ground one of those two so if it's below ground if uh during the seasonal High wet season water table does not uh exceed the existing ground elevation then the Geotech would be the one established in that portion if you see surface waters you see water above grade then it's usually set based on a biologist by taking a look at evidence uh on plants and uh those types of markers overall so one of the things that uh goes into that is that uh uh one of the things that would make sense in terms of setting that to make sure that we don't have a problem was adding a safety factor to that particular elevation the um I asked Dan to be here today talk a little bit about uh what they do when they set that seasonal high water elevation because you know as much as we'd like for this to be very clear and evident hey that's exactly where the seasonal high is unfortunately it's not that uh overall so uh Dan if you got uh if you could give a quick explanation of what it is that that a GE technical engineer would do we could uh discussion okay thank you T uh yeah we do borings on the site for ponds but also buildings and paven areas and many many other elements that are being built uh so we like to get as many borings as we possibly can talk to Tad like for pond areas like to do at least two borings an acre as a minimum unless it's a very small pond maybe a half an acre in area or less uh one thing too uh we didn't discuss T but uh hopefully we get uh good elevation information so instead of saying well I think it's 3 ft down we can get the ground service elevation we boring look at all the encountered groundwater elevations and then try to set a good elevation instead of a depth so rather have elevation information if possible or even borings don't necessarily have to be surveyed but at least a good DTM model or good topographic information uh what goes into the seasonal High U experience the longer you've been doing it you get a better feel for it uh the seasonal High groundwater elevation is not exactly the same every year some years we have more rain some years we have less rain some years there's develop and things are changed this development may be adjacent to us is put in a big storm water Pond that could influence the groundwater levels on our side so we try to take all that into uh consideration uh we can't set the seasonal high for Noah's flood you know that's uh once in a whatever event but we do try to set it for say a 75 or 100 Year storm event whatever that may be uh we set it for an extreme event you know nobody can afford to to build or we just couldn't do it so we try to probably set it for a 100e stormy de that most of the time we're not going to have flooding going on but can't assign for the absolute worst case event we cons we look at quadrangle Maps the NRS so survey any other adjacent boring we may have and then we try to set a water elevation that we think most years it's we're not going to be above that with a huge rainfall event unless there was a a hurricane Ian I don't can't remember what hit County was that Ian yeah I and that I don't know how much water that dumped on yall but good amount yeah good amount uh but any we then the drainage engineer storm water engineer is always very curious about that and the civil engineer was setting his roadway grades you know we don't want the bottom of the base we want that to be at least at least a foot above the seasonal high so the roadway base lasts longer and if you're doing dry ponds the seasonal High needs to be at least a foot preferably more for dry ponds to work so when you're looking at a boring what would be uh the best indications for you and obviously have the normal water level established as a part of you know whatever they identify out there and it could be the existing water level when you take the boring and maybe slightly off from that then what uh what other other items do you use from that boring to indicate or decide on what the seasonal High well the soil stratification uh a lot of times you're going to have Sandy soils at the top and eventually you're going to hit a Siler or clay layer if you're familiar with Clay obviously that doesn't allow water to HT much and water's just going to sit right on top of it silty soils can do the same our what's called hard pan if you're familiar with that it's just cemented soils water pretty much sits on top of that we we try to consider that if you didn't have those soils maybe the seasonal high would be below it but if we're trying to design we water's going to sit there maybe for a few weeks to months you have to take that into the C all right and if we were to uh consistent with the potential recommendation to add a safety factor to that elevation how much of when you said it is based on Visual Evidence versus you know your input with regard to what's arounded and those other items well um I've had discussions with people who are called soil scientists and they look for what's called a spodic horizon in the soil gray streaks were historically it's then season been there but again that you may be getting into Noah's situation then I've been up in Maran County where we didn't have groundwater to 20 ft and I I set it on top of clay soils at maybe 5 or8 ft I can't remember but he wanted to set it at one foot because they indications and maybe millions of years ago it was there but I don't think we personally should design for that situation but you you can see indications in soil stratification I me indicate yeah historically it's been here normally most years it's not going to be there okay so adding a safety factor to that elevation yeah uh that makes me sleep better the developer or people who are trying to make things work they may not may not be as enamor that but I would love to set us same what uh what's a reasonable thought process on a factor 6 in a foot 3 in I would say six Ines would probably be reasonable most geotechnical Engineers if you ask them if if we can get it within half a foot we think we're doing pretty good so that would be the margin of error yeah just adding that margin of error back to okay all right and you'd already spoken to a little bit on the number of boring uh right now the county does not specify much like any of the other agencies that uh that regulate storm water we don't specify the number of borings that would occur and uh the issue is what you have is a lot of times uh if somebody uh is developing they're obviously watching their pocketbook and every time you do a boring you're paying for that boring and uh most cases even then the borings you're paying is generally per foot still yes so you you go out there and do what we call a storm water Pond Bing is generally about a 20ft depth unless you know your water table is going to be 20 ft down in which case you'll probably go a little bit deeper um and doing multiple 20ft borings gets a little bit expensive uh overall but uh we certainly recommend um that uh do does two Pond borings per acre of storm water storm water Pond site it's less than an acre and it's uh as Dan had already kind of noted that you get to a little half an acre then maybe you change that overall but you any Geotech will tell you that uh storm water Pond boring or a boring in general is really just an indication of what's occurring in the location of that b you can just as easily go 5 10 ft over and have a totally different um totally quite a different uh uh soil in uh in that short amount of space overall if you get a drastic change that can have a heck of an effect on what you would set for your seasonal high elevation which is really what we're trying to uh identify with that so gaining more borings would give a geotechnical engineer a better chance to set a more accurate seasonal higher it's like taking a survey anything the more Point data points you get the better you can feel about the number one other thing too uh especially for dry ponds and it's a can be a dirty word I'll hate it but maintenance dry these ponds what they're supposed to do is trap or get the stuff nasty stuff and if it's a dry Pond over time the bottom is going to have things that aren't necessarily permeable so to speak just like if you never clean your bath tub you it's going to get nasty so uh dry pawns every now and then should be scraped or scarified or whatever the right word is to clean off that little layer I mean we're all homeowners or whatever we have to do maintenance sometimes we don't like doing it but same thing with ponds you can do maintenance sometime and keep them in their best performing yes do you also have to do that kind of dredging for a wet Pond every so often because it's also accumulating sediments and stuff part part of the reason it's it's different for a wet Pond versus a dry Pond is your dry Pond generator covers by filtration and those materials that Dan is speaking about stop me if I'm speaking in turn Dan but uh a lot of those materials will actually gum up the permeability they'll actually decrease the ability for the water to move through and uh when you're talking about a wet Pond percolation is not what's doing that particular activity it's the uh the water's coming in it's usually getting out by a structure your predom and the treatment is occurring it's being held back in both bonds it's not leaving that particular space um it just doesn't take up any of the volume you're utilizing overall now should it be done probably every so often depending on what type of uh pollutants that you're getting if you're at an industrial site or an area where you're getting uh you know things like benzines or Oils or any of those other types of things it probably makes sense over time to go ahead and pull some of that out because you may get some idiot that's out there fishing or swimming or doing something like that you want to get rid of those types of terrorist I know there's been some wet ponds that I've been involved with but where they're putting in uh something they call naked flock Allen and I know every now and then they do have to clean up that out that's usually if you've got a situation where you got uh uh something that suspends in the water so so not everything that hits a wet Pond percolates into the ground or settles to the ground BL sometimes you get certain materials that are either lighter or about the same density as water and so it just looks cloudy you may actually get some algae blooms and so you put the alum in there to mix with that and then cause it to fall out uh pardon me Tad sure sorry the U in the case of the safety factor and uh I I assume there's a lot of variation in the in these water judgments in other words across the county or state for that definitely and if that's the case why would we deal with something like a flat rate 6 in versus a percentage of the distance between the two it seems to me that if something's real shallow or really deep a percentage would be a better safety Factor than a flat number like 6 in the uh I'm not really sure you would specifically apply a percentage what that would be a percentage of what may be the dep right uh 6 in at the top which 6 in at 10 ft would be considerably different and that's a possible solution part of uh part of what we look at is that uh uh let's say you've got a larger Pond let's say we're doing a 2 acre pond so if you were following the criteria that we're establishing you'd have eight Pond boings and uh one of the problems that you have is uh as Dan had noted is you need to have the elevation information at each of those particular locations so you know you they'll do the boring and the boring will have ground elevation at just for E of discussion elevation zero and then everything below that is minus let's say you water at -3 -2 -4 over those different spaces over all and you're not just taking an average of those you still need to figure out what the elevation is at each one of those spots so because it's not actually zero you know it may be one it may beus so it's not an average correct which well ultimately you find the elevation for each of the borings then you do the subtraction of the elevation that minus four that minus three to figure out what those are and then they generally do take an average but it's not generally that simple either if they take a look and half the pond borings come back and you've got an impermeable layer two feet down but on this side you don't uh and then it depends on how deep you're going to go with your pond I me there are other factors that go into it what I'm trying to get to is really the safety factor of just adding six in just makes it a heck all easier to calculate overall and I'm not well fair enough no I understand um but uh I'll let you wait I think 6 in is a good place to start but you do bring up a good question but again hopefully the geotechnical engineer the stormw waterer engineer can maybe have a discussion and might could adjust it a little bit here there I think 6 in is a is a good place to start Fair thank you and I'm certainly not uh not saying that that needs to be the be all end all some of this stuff will be should be uh because we don't have necessarily all the signs we'd love to have behind it we being conservative recommend we throw these out there use them for a few years see if there's a problem you know may be too conservative may not be aggressive enough uh it could be either way but it certainly recommended uh when it goes to the council that this would be a trial basis that would be revised and modified as appropriate going forward well it's a good start period yes so if I've understood correctly we can have quite a bit of variability in conditions in a relatively confined area or defined area did I get that right correct so POS and what we're trying to do here I'm very glad Tad that you just clarified that this may be a trial period and an adjustment period we're trying to balance using the best possible science we have with costs and we're trying to plan for the future so that the future us don't have the future County Council all upset about citizens going in and yelling at them because their properties are flooding um so we're trying to balance these factors so the I I trust what you're both saying because you're experienced in your Fields but it sounded and Jack just addressed this just a little bit arbitrary is there no other way to with the borings we can we can be prescriptive if we want to you can say we need to have X number per acre but it sounds like the 6 in wouldn't I think Jack was getting to this isn't there some kind of a measurement and formula that that might be a little better without being too owner that's that's the question and and right now did I also understand that there's no requirement for borings at all this is volunt no you do have to do I mean you have to do at least a pond boring you have to be able to establish that aspect of it regardless of size correct okay thank you for clar we don't specify to them we what uh the way it's basically left at this point is that an engineer of record geotechnical engineer and a design engineer so if Dan where your geotechnical engineer and he was doing your pond borings he would go ahead and do the boring and then he's inter in the results of that boring and then telling you the information that you can use in your storm water Pond if you're the design engineer he's signing and sealing that to say this is my professional opinion and what I'm doing um what we're doing is really just uh establishing more of a standard so that the geotechnical engineer you know they'll some some Engineers just like any other professional sign anything for money others that are a lot more you know diligent of making sure that uh you know their license is important they don't want to cause any problems so on and so forth uh so you this just makes sure that there are no questions about what's being provided and it's there's a bare minimum and there is some standard in Department of Transportation uses this as you said two borings per acre F dot um thank you I think I just think it's important that if we're going to set up a rule let let's make sure that it's the best we can do even on a trial basis that it's the best we can do and that it's based on the best information we have we know we can't eliminate all risk we know we can't plan for every single eventuality but it's important to hit it right and I don't disagree in any way shape or form and that's part of the reason we recommended not really getting into treatment standards because we have nothing to back that up in this case uh with regard to setting a set elevation moving forward from there um Dan can certainly speak to it I'm sure pill can speak to it to a certain extent when it comes to setting the elevations above ground you know you're it's not you love to say it's a science but when you're doing an average of eight borings over a 2 acre Pond and the elevation may not be exactly right you know there's a 6 in amount as you heard in terms of uh plus minus uh for error on these things to me that seem like a reasonable amount to go ahead and set it forth you're you're encapsulating that reasonable amount of assumed error potentially across that average and uh putting it in there as a safety Factor so so what would be because the consequences of getting things right or wrong are not necessarily immediately evident what would be we do a trial period what would be the metric how would we gauge that we did something that was over kill or was it adequate or was it inadequate how would we how would we measure that post implementation sure that's a good question what I would take a look at is that is different developments that occur with that safety factor in there uh I would take a look to see what it uh it potentially does to the amount of fill the density counts and then uh any of the flooding potential around those that uh that has occurred we do get General pretty good amount of rep on when flooding occurs at uh Public Works and uh we'd certainly take a look at uh the results of that versus what may have occurred prior again if there have been no reports the assumption would be made that the flooding was not occurring on the adjacent properties so uh we do things like that we can also uh set it up so that we're reviewing Aerials to determine whether or not uh there are any changes to the uh water table on the around there if there's a b flooding evidence those types of things so another I'm sorry another big factor and what we do is the timing if say we did five borings and it's in October we've had a normal rainfall year maybe even had a hurricane and we found the groundwater like 5 ft on average I say well uh I'm not I don't need to bump this up much because we've had a fair amount of rainfall we even had hurricane and every boring is around 5 ft it's a flat sight say elevation 20 maybe I'll bump it up half a foot to a foot for the seasonal highight cuz I'm in the wet season or the peak of the wet season if I did those same borings in April or May was 5 ft I'm probably going to bump it up four feet or so so you have timing really comes into play when we do the borings and what how much antic and rainfall we've had that Year and have we had a big h something like [Music] that H we can certainly give that more thought I think that's the best answer bill so it's probably important to understand for the committee that every time you add 6 in let's just say it increases the cost because you think about now you add 6 in of fill across the entire 500 whatever acre property and it also makes Li more difficult because now you're raising it up so that you can't have trees anymore so there's there's a lot of factors involved and I would like to talk about how biologists do it too if we that's part of your thing yeah that's definely um I don't disagree with Bill you know add the 6 in it certainly has an effect I don't know that it changes your Li possib uh overall depending on what methods for liid you're doing if you're doing bioses 6 in doesn't change anything when in fact it actually probably makes it better if you're proposing underground storage it probably makes it better because again now you're creating separation between that underground storage and the uh seasonal high water table so on and so forth so um it certainly is an expense there's no doubt about it but if uh part of the state requirements are that uh and and County requirments are that if you're building something that you're not negatively impacting your neighbors the expense is the expense so um and given the factor for error the danger for error in this particular elevation that's uh more so than any other factor that I could think of this gu the potential for causing problems not just to the development but to the surrounding properties as well Tyler and then will let bill go ahead and explain that so I wanted to kind of respond for one of the reasons the IC challenges with Jack's percentage based idea versus an inches of approach or foot approach type of take uh one of the projects that actually Dan company did the Geotech for uh us that we designed that it's built down in apka we were dealing with somewhere that we had to drill 50 ft in the ground to get effectively 20 ft in the ground when we were done with the project we were probably over 25 ft at the location had been previously filled with a bridge ofman for an expressway a section of 429 that got realigned later when they came back and went to the West with the new alignment and so on that project we encountered water pretty substantially deep on those borings and we were throwing away the top half of the boring I the water table and the performance of The Ponds extremely consistent with what we got in our Geotech um right now those ponds are dry and they stay dry and they recover correctly and and we only had a couple feet between our seed andal high on a lower Pond that we designed and one of the things that I noticed when I compared his report with other reports is that there is a difference in quality of Geotech engineer that you get and the amount of analysis that they actually write into the report and if when we read these there's some of it that's rubber stamp language that makes a end to everything and there's some of it where really a quality Geotech engineer and having them get enough boring so that they can tell you something about what those boring mean and read mean and read some of how the water surface is forming topographically I mean right now we're working on a project that we've been laying in all of our borans and looking at what's our effective groundwater surface and what's our seasonal high surface and how do we set our road profile and work from there um a percentage basis adjustment is not really consistent with the patterns that we're seeing we're typically kind of seeing that it all Rises together falls together you have a little bit of difference in hydraulic grade line with your slopes but um the the way that the water table that kind of tends to fluctuate on our sights and when we get these multiple borings is more consistent on a vertical basis could I just ask one quick question of clarification on that so the VAR variability could be in soil soil types and not necessarily ground water level of of across that area cuz you're what I understood you to say was was there was little variability at least in that particular case of where groundwater was encountered so we have a half mile stretch of binges right now the there's roughly 8 ft of elevation change from the high point to the low point and the groundwater in the low Point areas is within a foot of grade and in the high areas it's more than 5 ft from great the groundwater surface is relatively flat and consistent throughout the LAN and so we see a little bit it's a little more depressed where the ground surface is lower and a lot of that has to do with vegetation transpiration um but we also see that the error is going to be more or less did we get that level right not did we get the depth from the surface right and is this not sort of an unusual case where you're actually removing soil because there was additional soil added because you needed a that was well what I'm saying is I have two different projects with very different conditions and what we're seeing is relatively flat water tables but the the room for error would be mostly consistent across it it's not very variable from boring to boring I think is what I'm trying to communicate yeah what I would add to that is that in Tyler's situation removing 20 ft is a little bit a little bit normal uh in this state um you don't have as much exactly you're going to Georgia cutting out 20 ft on know get rest but there are other situations than just a bridge above it where we do cut quite a bit overall and uh because the state is generally so flat and subdivisions come in or a large elements come in they're generally trying to get to a flat condition for the most part overall so you can have those situations um one thing to certainly note and I should have mentioned earlier when I talk about Bill's portion of it if you've got a water table that's 20 ft below ground you're setting seasonal High 6 in is not going to matter anything shap it's not going to be positive or negative and it's really not going to have an effect on the overall side where you're going to see the effect of a 6 in uh increase is when groundw is within a few feet uh overall one of the things that Dan mentioned and actually I was going to speak to it here in a minute U was that uh when you set a dry Pond one of the requirements is that you have to have a certain amount of space between the bottom of that dry Pond and where the seasonal eye elevation is if you don't then you can't go with the dry Pond water's got to be able to percolate into the ground and if the water table is right below the ground bottom of that Bond it's not going to parate it's going to sit in there so um adding 6 in in a case like that can have a dramatic effect on what you're doing but at the same time if you try a percentage or some other Factor where you're doing 3 in on this side 4 in whatever you still may have that that same effect or you're just as likely so thank you yeah so Bill if you would then kind of skipped over moving into parts of this conversation go ahead and detail what it is that uh you do for setting a seasonal high elevation when it's above okay so um to talk about the difference in our County in high and low groundw water table we have basically Sand Hills and Flatwoods and so in the sand hills were water table is really low in the Flatwoods it's really high close to the surface um we when we set the seasonal highs using vegetative indicators we usually set it based on lyan lines and lyans usually die within about 3 weeks 2 to 3 weeks of being inundated and um then it takes them a long time half a year you know maybe sometimes even more to then recolonize down the tree Tre so um we have uh indicators on normal pool and seasonal high and also extreme events like flood events so we had a project um in Port Orange along the b19 canal and it had been drained for years and um we were trying to do the Wetland deliniation using the seasonal high in the groundwater with our um soil scientist and um we got the lake uh hurricane Ian which staged it up and we recorded the elevations of that that extreme event on the head wall um of a culvert and then started to watch it we had already actually set the seasonal high in the canal um before the storm and then the storm staged it up and killed the lyans but didn't kill them all because it was only about staged up for maybe 2 3 weeks and then started going back down so we look at those Likens and um use our judgment about whether it was an extreme event or whether it was um something that is really uh average so when we set the seasonal high water level we're setting the average wet season the wet season average uh it could go above it could go below um you have two different situations on Wetlands that have an outfall usually through a ditch or something it will be very close to that elevation of the ditch outfall and there just won't be much difference because if it stages up it doesn't stage up for too long and then it goes out the ditch but in a closed Basin you do have some really extreme variabilities and so the the seasonal High we will set will will be based on the average wet season over many years and um will you can see the extreme events but uh we use the lyan lines recolonizing down the slope to um do that and then the Water Management District always checks our seasonal highs and and um approves them so we always have the state agency reviewing and approving ours and we are not really motivated to set them really really low because then we will have problems with our design we try to get you know at a really good spot um now when you're setting the bill you're uh you're flagging the elevation or identifying you're not actually you're not dealing truly with an elevation you're just dealing with a marker and then the surveyor is coming in after the fact and identifying those so you've got the same potential issues that uh the Tech does just for different reasons where your elevation may be based on L lines over here at zero and then over here AT3 and then over here at minus point2 and those types of things at that point are you actually establishing the seasonal high or is the design engineer taking those and making an estimate no we're we're establishing it and it we'll do like if a if we're in a wetland we'll do two or three in the Wetland like if we're setting a tail water elevation for the seasonal High we'll set two or three in that weing and those all three of those we'll put a nail in a tree or something like that and the surveyor will then get that elevation and we usually average those two or three and they won't be really 6 in apart they might be a couple of tents apart and then we'll average those um in a situation and then your wellons can have different seasal high elevations depending on if you're in a Sand Hill um you know you could have your Terrace landscape and you have a seasonal high in this vland at a different elevation than the seasonal high in this well or if you're in a canal where it's you know half a mile down the way you can have different elevations of that seasonal high as it runs down the canal um did that answer your question mhm and then also there is mounding effects between the Geotech if they're in an Upland and we have a wetland down down here they may say the um the groundwater table is you know the seasonal Highs at a 10 and our Wetland might be at a 8 and a half or something like that because groundwater does mound as it you know goes towards its Alo I'd like to pause for just a moment because Jessica and Bob I know you're you're waiting Jessica gal is on remotely so we have to I'm sorry but we need to take a quick vote so that she can ask questions and participate um a motion that we thank you Bob second thank you Jack uh any discussion all those in favor opposed thank you Jessica May participate thank you sorry about that thank you everyone can I can I elaborate just a little bit sure um also when we have culverts we will set the seasonal high at the edging on the Culver because that way we know it's really a longterm average instead of some Peak event um and finally we did we do use soil scientists I think the so scientists look at things that are um not immediate but have long-term 10 year 15E um averages like stripping in the soil where the water goes through and strips out the Organics so we get very precise or our solo scientists do very precise on the uh long-term seasonal High average and we debate those with the Water Management District and their soil scientists so I think one of the things that's important to take away from what both uh Dan and billage said sorry give just a second uh is that uh there's quite a bit of variability over time on what those SE Highs are they aren't necessarily static we refer to it in the engineering World it doesn't stay the same it's a dynamic thing just like anything else out there so you know you go through a period of drought your seasonal high is going to change to lower you go through a period where you got uh a regular rain schedule not even you know a large number of storms it's going to come back up it's going to be established but it's a a 10 12 15 year potential storic look back at what things are and we're using that to project forward in some way shape or form so I think that important yeah um first off I want to say that I'm certainly in favor of some kind of a safety factor involved here um my question and is going to be more about the mechanics of how we would Implement that um you know as Dan and Bill pointed out you know there's science but there's also a lot of judgment that goes into their science so it's it's as much of an art as it is a science and I think that you know our regulations as a body we need to encourage them to be as precise and exact as possible uh and not put this safety Factor you know in a policy presented to those experts rather that's a safety factor that your office would apply after their results I guess what I'm trying to say is I wouldn't want to put a policy out to to to Bill and to Dan and to their industry that hey Valia County we want you to put 6 Ines on top of what you where you think the number is I I would much prefer to have a philosophy where we're saying guys give us your exact number once we have your exact number what you feel confident is the seasonal high water table then we're going to add 6 in to that elevation and we're going to do our engineering from that basically doing the same things they are establishing they're establishing a seasonal H and you I'm expect you establish nearest 10 nearest 10 yeah so they're establishing something to the nearest 10 and we're telling them put six in on top but so we've got 50 guys out there doing Geotech work and 25 of them don't know about this I know that's what we're talking about putting in as a rule well that's what I'm suggest I I guess I'm yeah I'm saying that as opposed to directing the Geotech bi biologists to add 6 in to their number we want them to be as exact as possible this 6 in buffer if that's what we use that's in the code I'm sorry if I'm not making sense may we saying the same saying the same thing okay that's what we're doing this would be a rule modification that would require that the professional whether it's the biologist or the Geotech go out there and do their best inter a of the the the uh the uh existing condition establish seasonal high and then uh add the 6 inches is that point and then their design engineer takes that specific elevation plus those 6 in and then uses that for their design model for storm really really the design engineer adding the six yes that's what I'm trying to say it's the design would be in the rules bi not thech yeah we wouldn't specify whether it's the biologist and the gech our rule would basically state that the seasonal eye once established by the appropriate professional shall add 6 Ines before modeling as part of pre I do think uh as far as the geotechnical engineering if your code or whatever policy is two Bings an acre should be established and that we get a good uh topographic survey or your survey I think that that does add some cost but that's a fairly small cost we get the best dat we can get and then maybe uh which I don't know County engineer or review board may want to have a followup meeting to say go over our season High I don't know well I think that'll come up when we review the calculations and then yeah I don't know we need to specify anything different than what we already got in the Cod for that portion of it but yes we CH recommendations on this would be to change rules like we just talked about with the safety Factor then also specify a minimum number of borings in this case two two borings per acre and if it's less than a certain size um less than half an acre something along those lines we' be potentially willing to accept one acre of the engineer of record or biologist uh is agreeable to that's the best professional estimate of what the conditions are something along those lines so that's what we Rec all right did we have any more input on the seasonal ey discussion question for do you have recommended boring links that we should include with we're describing two do we have minimum standards for type of boring or depth of boring that you would recommend we look at uh than can be open for discussion too but starting point would be 20t deep now if you if you are in an area where you have a hill and maybe you're going to cut maybe you're going to put in a 15t deep Pond I know that's very rare in Florida but I probably want to do a 30 foot boring again that's where the Judgment comes I mean would it maybe be a minimum yeah remaining valuable boring depth or you know we need to have at least 10 ft of the boring left after the get done or something you know I I don't 20t minimum and at least 10t viable after construction or something yeah below the pond bottom and for what we're talking about with groundwater spt versus augur doesn't make a real difference in the value you get or we haven't talked about the difference sorry you you can go either way some people want the SVT some people are okay the boring sometimes they're not as accurate of boring if the driller is lazy so to speak and we're not there in the field with them I do want to be careful about uh taking away the engineer of Records requirements to uh be able to back up and justify what they've done I think specifying a number of borings makes it clear have you've been on the private side I know one of the discussions always between the Geotech engineer design engineer and the client is the number of borings because again every foot costs you x amount of dollars so you know the financial side is always trying to push that down and uh you know there are good reasons sometimes where it makes sense sometimes where it doesn't and we go ahead and establish it it sets the proper precedent for what we'd like to see and then both the design engineer and the uh geotechnical engineer have the correct amount of information uh available overall so we get a good uh good decision something that can be supported flooding conditions so but in terms of an SBD versus an auger some of that I'd like to leave one one of the things I try not to regulate too much is exactly how you're going to do something because the methods for doing things may change Lord knows 10 years from now Dan may go ahead and invent the X-ray machine that uh clearly tells us exactly what the hell is underground down to 20 plus fet I know working on it right now and uh then the methods may not we don't want to have it in our code that that's exactly what you got to do and have to go through a code change in the future to do that so I prefer not to get too uh much into the weeds overall that aspect so unless you no I hope I'm reti years you get that x-ray machine retire soon all right uh the next next item that we talked about that has a large effect on the storm water is the uh the curve numbers if you recall the curve numbers are the percentages that aren't percentages of the amount of water that basically either percolates or runs off overall and it's another area where there's quite a bit of judgment exercised uh overall um it can be uh any number of different types of things um the impervious surfaces basically 98% of whatever falls on an impervia surface generally but off and uh you got other areas you get Forest you get open grade areas you get uh agricultural uses any the different types of things uh can have an effect of the amount of water that runs off uh even down to the types of soils that um that area is made up as we noted we discussed this before as soils again being well- drained soils uh they allow water to percolate very easy and then you get into D type at the other end ABC D and D being the worst you get into clay and uh Organics and things like that that'll uh not just impede water but in case of Organics they may actually grab the water and hold on to it overall so uh between those two types of things the curve number and the the soils types you can get quite a bit of variability um I don't know that there's any way to add a safety factor to this uh overall but it certainly is one of the areas that uh is open to interpretation by the design engineer as to uh what area to fall under uh overall in particular one of the things that uh that you'll see we didn't go over this previously but this is a yeah sorry I do apologize more boring no it's not that it's boring it's that you need this particular soil survey book do let me see just full of data and tables and useful information is not so we'll just all walk up there and take a quick chart of ocular humiliation all right well I'm going to there there we go that's a little bit too blown up probably all right what this is is uh Dan mentioned it Tyler but uh uh there is a USGS uh soil survey that's done they did it for all the different counties in Florida and across the country and uh as a part of that they take a look at uh um large areas not uh not usually smaller areas like you do for uh small development but much larger areas they basically group the soils types based on certain characteristics that uh that make them similar overall so um basically got a big map looks like a puzzle and they've got the different uh soils mapped out that way and some of it's based on uh you know soil's conditions the chemistry the the makeup of the soil some of it's based on the water table uh some of it's based on the vegetation associated with it overall but um as a part of those Maps uh and creating the different uh soils types or naming the different soils types that you find in there they also give them uh an explanation of what criteria it was that that grouped those soils together one of the things they take a look at is a what they call a hydrologic group uh you can see for example that I've got uh do gal soil types 20 and 21 circled for their hydraulic group hydraulic group is what we were just talking about with regard to A B C or D A again being great D being terrible and uh you can see for example on oal 20 and 21 they've got them a b/d so under certain conditions they're B type soils so they uh the amount of water that runs off isn't very much it uh it grabs not nearly as good as as a but it generally retains things pretty well but then you got other situations where that same exact soil type may act as D in which much more of the water would run off overall and uh so when a uh engineer is going ahead and establishing his curve numbers as we saw from on the other table the soil type A B C or D has a large effect on the amount or the curve number that that uh gets established overall and having something like this where it may be b or d can certainly have a large effect on may have a large effect on uh what the curve number is that's established overall um so certainly in those situations uh whether or not it's a b or a d can have a large effect so for example let's say on uh dense forest if that were the uh the use type and it was a be or D type soil it could be 60 or 79 so you basically got a 20% difference as again it's not technically percentage but you know in terms of the amount of runoff and that can have a large effect on uh how the soils or how your storm water calculations get done for your pre versus your post overall so a large number of times one of the requirements is that uh you know geotechnical engineer would take a look at that aspect that generally hasn't been done but putting something in there that if youve got a multi-type soil a/d in some cases or B /d and others uh that the geotechnical engineer would be consulted to provide uh a recommendation as to whether or not it's the good types of sort for Recovery or the bad types so uh certainly would recommend that aspect I don't know that there's anything else that we can tweak on curve number even though there's quite a bit of judgment put into it I don't know how we can anything else I certainly don't know that a safety Factor would make sense in uh in a situation like this but time so with the multiple hydrologic soil type uh things in the manual section in the front of the book it talks about what water table depth you have to achieve to use the lower runoff higher percolation soil value and what it is is the soil will support the storage of the rain runoff because it will perk it in but it has nowhere to perk it to in these soil types because the groundwater is so high and on that chart that was zero to a foot from the surface was the estimated seasonal High groundwater table and if you looked at the non b/g columns they were all greater than 2 and 1/2 3 ft and so this is where we get this where the seasonal High gets set starts to impact what which one of those soils we choose as well and then you know pre versus post we usually fill to above that threshold so one of the other areas that often you know we can game quote unquote our uh calculations as we can say predevelopment or runoff is wetland it's a high water table everything is running off post development we've put this filer in that created soil storage on the site that wasn't previously there and so just through that soil storage we have decreased our runoff and depending on whether that filter is compacted or just placed loose that may or may not be an accurate statement and so that's one of the things that all of this kind of ties together that there is a lot there's a lot that falls into the professional engineer that's doing the storm water Design's responsibilities as well so you bury the Wetland that's what that would be I no editorial there just was putting it into lay person's understanding yeah so um one of the other factors too is that uh a large number of times again the soil survey maps are actually generally uh pretty good but they were done in the 40s 50s and they don't have the U information we have available when a Geotech goes out there and does their boring um it's not that uncommon that you go do a boring and the characteristics that are identified that boring may not match the overall General soil type that's identified on the uh on the map overall and uh unfortunately I don't think most Engineers uh necessarily put in the time and energy that it takes to go ahead and confirm whether or not that boring matches up with the solar characteristics identified and as such just go ahead and operate under what they've identified on the map so um it's not as big a deal if for example we're talking about asoil take a look look and uh you take a look at the variability for example for the soil types for D you for dense forest at 79 light Forest canop tree canopy 82 Bush uh you're at 77 so there's not a whole lot of variability but when you go from a d soil down to an aoil that 79 becomes 36 the 82 becomes 43 77 becomes 35 so that the hydrologic scale is far more important than the above grade scale so getting a Geotech to make sure that that's that you're really in that aoil versus the D soil aspect in those situations where it's a versus D is important if it's uh this type of asoil versus that type of Bas soil again the numbers don't change enough to really have uh a large effect on 99% of the jobs that are done count so you have a question on that page oh this is ior reason no no no I apologize this is I borrowed this slide from the very first uh presentation and did not pull that off but thought it was uh made sense to have as a reference for this particular portion of the discussion so the wetlands run off I don't know if anybody remembers but it's basically it's already wet so any water that falls on water off so it's raining on the 100 somebody said that all right um tail water elevation this is another one of the large factors that has an effect on your storm water system and design uh overall uh as Bill mentioned um most of the time water conditions are set either by discharging into a wetland which case somebody like Bill would go out there and establish it or if you're discharging into a canal and uh the canal had uh uh some type of man-made structure head wall uh uh box CT miter in section something along those lines that gave Visual Evidence of what the water level Rose to you would use those to establish it U but also as Bill noted with both of those there's quite a bit of judgment and there can be a lot of flexibility uh when you take a look at the etching the etching it takes a long period of time for that to establish and do we necessarily want to go with that or do we want to be in a position where we really takeen you know if there's a line above that you've etched to this but you see that there's indications above that that water has been used which one's the reasonable and appropriate one to use if we're really trying to tackle a potential flooding situation some of it depends on where you are no doubt about if you're in an area um for example uh over in Daytona Beach where they're dealing with the flooding conditions uh Midtown and those other areas tell you I think I would use if I were the design engineer it wouldn't be theing like the highest indicator was uh of of any note uh but you get into an area where you're uh uh in the middle of nowhere or uh don't have a a water table that's really a note outside of a couple of ditches and you're well above that then the tail water elevation itself is not that important um something like this may be as simple as instead of putting in a safety factor that that may be arbitrary that the tail water condition or tail water elevation has to be reviewed and approved by County staff to uh to confirm that it's appropriate for that particular location in the county something on all those dos um and that way they're presenting the evidence that going out take a look at evidence uh maybe they identify the etching and then they make a reasonable professional explanation of why they think that's appropriate for that particular location and then they move on from that or can they say again in this area we know we got lots of flooding problems and uh therefore it's going to need to be at the best evidence possible the most conservative evidence possible something on so that's what we would recommend for for that I'm not sure I understand right now you have no authority to question the tail water no we do but in this case what we' be establishing is a we'd add language in there that basically notes that uh uh the tail water conditions need to be evaluated based on uh flooding conditions in the surrounding area and uh water table elevations uh overall so that it's understood that it's uh County staff's review of The Professional Engineers opinion and provides for more input along those lines if we don't have something that says that we get to say or have that type of input overall professional engineer to come in and say look we survey it we think it's this is that how it works today for the most part okay so there there isn't we wouldn't uh because because of that we wouldn't put that much more effort into it in a case like this really what it be directing the staff to do is we know it's in a flooded area we need to go out there take a look at the marker uh take a look at the Headwater or take a look at the weapon in particular and uh confirm for the purposes of tail water calcul ation that that's the appropriate or reasonable uh decision for that location so by going be Devil's Advocate on that does that language I'm sorry does that language is it too loose and give the staff like too much Authority on something would that be I mean certainly the in the details and how it gets worded don't disagree I don't know that uh certainly the staff has no interest in going out there killing developments or anything along those lines or or being the opposite either we're trying to be as fair and reasonable as we can and base everything on the on the evidence possible but uh we could certainly take a crack at wording something and then get the input from the counil or the committee on on that aspect of it but think some of the directs the staff and C locations um and it may be a case that uh once uh our storm water group has finalized their Basin reports that we specify particular basins in which those are identified but we don't have that information at this point to be able to specify that aspect so we be a little bit uh open to a certain extent do that and and just since I didn't get it on the record before to confirm what I thought you were saying right now now the way the rules are written you don't really have much authority to question what the tailwater elevation that is provided is is that a correct statement correct yes so two or three things on that question that's really good um the Water Management District reviews those tail Waters all the time every single project so somebody is looking at that from a regulatory side but about um talking about like setting the seasonal High we still want to set the seasonal High even in a flooded situation you're not suggesting that you would say oh the the storm event that that extreme event that's now the seasonal high right you're still saying in flooded in areas that EST have where we have established flooding conditions I am saying that oh so then maybe what would happen is um for instead of just setting a 6in standard um addition to the seasonal High which I think we should still say the biologist or the Geotech sets the seasonal high and then the design engineer adds that safety Factor onto it but maybe you because saying that the seasonal high in a in a an area that floods occasionally is changing the seasonal height to that flooded elevation that's just not accurate scientifically accurate but maybe you put the safety Factor on the flooded areas the say seasonal highs here this Basin floods all the time we know it floods up to you know 2 feet above the seasonal High the SE the seasonal High though that we're talking about in this case is not for tail water conditions in terms of the uh safety factor that was in terms of setting the designed normal water level for your storm water pond so safety factors would be in the pond design in and of itself overall it would not that's why tailwater is listed as a separate item so if your tail water condition is a seasonal high in an adjacent Wetland no we would not be placing safety factor to that aspect we were coming in and uh where that Wetland that you're talking about is is part of an area that's being developed and a storm water Pond is being established at a location we wiping out the Wetland and putting in the storm water Pond then yes then we would be taking that elevation because we're using that as our to identify our pond bottom or our designed normal water level if it's uh it's a wet Pond and then we'd be adding 6 in of that but not outside of the pond Network itself that's not what we're establishing basically we're saying that that the group of elevations established by the seasonal High design normal water level in the pond are based on that the tail water conditions though would still be a separate item I was going to say anecdotally I haven't had a lot of dry ponds that are discharging to surface water so typically if I'm dealing with a tail water calculation that's kind of critical it's on something that's a wet pond in the keys that we want to make sure that our re is set above the stage of what we're discharging to discharge so that our calculations are valid that that's kind of part one and so part two is for a 10year event I try to figure out what's my 10-year stage in that Canal or lake or whatever I'm disch charging to 25 I use a 25 if I'm modeling a 100e storm I go to a FEMA map and see if I can get an elevation from the FEMA map and I use that 100 flood plane elevation as my tail water coming out of my pond so that my pond performs right in that event that water is coming down everywhere at the same time and that's conservative but you know some level of criteria on how do we establish tail water what is it based on I think is a good idea was my two sents thank you for bringing the technical jardan level to the appropriate height and I'm going to keep trying to interpret it is 2:30 and we typically take a 10minute break at 2:30 um it's a good spot to do to check on how we're treating our water so everybody back at 2:40 cover thank you app heyler good discussion e going thank you we are back in order [Music] I think I'm sorry I was okay all right the uh the next aspect of this were some other modifications we discussed last time um the uh storm water storm water ponds uh particularly with where they're located on the site uh in the very first meeting we talked about it I'd shown uh something that we had done uh on the north side of Dand here where you got uh uh a storm water Pond a wet pond in this case uh that's immediately uh along the property Edge such that uh when the pond recovers when the water percolates into ground it's going to want to generally move Downstream following the lay of the land and when the pond is located immediately adjacent to somebody else's property even when that pond may not discharge as above groundw or runoff it uh certainly will percolate through ground and become groundwater and if the slope is steep enough can have a negative effect it may actually uh perch and uh come back above ground if the slope is steep enough so um locating the storm water pond on a newly developed site is important there are things you can do to mitigate and in this case we went ahead and put a clay burm clay clay liner inside the BM that would not allow the water to move through there um at uh in the same manner that it does uh percolate elsewhere around there so uh there are things can be mitigating that can be mitigated for that um but uh I don't know that there's a set specific rule that could be worded appropriately for something along those lines other than uh just a note in the rules that storm water Pond locations have to be intelligently located on the site um such that they do not cause um uh negative impacts to the groundwater or surface water elevations on the adjacent properties uh with this being the intent uh as I said there are certain things that you can do mitigate it and so you know it would be a uh judgment between myself or the Land Development engineer and the developers engineer design engineer for the project um to make sure that uh that's being considered because right now the storm water uh regulations do not say or speak to any aspect of where a pond is supposed to be located on the site and because we don't require groundwater modeling and neither does the Water Management District or or the federal government uh because that would be rather honorous um there's no check on this aspect so even though you may follow all the rules that are clearly identified uh you may still ultimately create a problem overall uh so that's what what we'd be targeting but again I don't know that there's a a way to just specifically say that youd want to specifically say hey the ponds have to be in the center of the site because that may not make a lot of sense but Bill just normally it's desirable to have them on the edge of the side isn't it just for planning and are you going to have like a no actually I me when we generally located I as as uh as it's I would hope makes the most sense we generally located our storm ponds at the lowest spot on the propery unless Architects I have had an architect put up on the top of a piece of prop before I had to shoot that some but um we fixed that problem but uh but yeah no that's it's not we don't shoot for the edge of property we do shoot for the low spot it's cheaper you know if you're discharging offsite and I think that's why you're probably suggesting that it's cheaper to go ahead and pipe that distance than it is to try and regrade and force water to go where it doesn't naturally go um you'll you'll end up with a lot more grading costs and damage by trying to do it that way in this case again the the the site that uh that I brought up um everything falls from the right to the left from the East to the West pretty dramatically and that's the reason I chose it it made it simple to understand what the what the situation was but uh if you have any situation most of the time this crops up is when you've got a piece of property that uh is either already naturally higher or because of the uh uh grading that's proposed for the site it's going to end up in a higher situation over for example you on the downstream side and you put your pond next to their property and it's 8 ft higher well that's not a problem uh it's going to be a problem for you because you probably get more groundwater infiltrating your pond than you expected necessarily but uh uh it's more in a downstream situation that's why I would put it in there more as uh County engineer n development engineer uh need to coordinate uh with the uh engineer of record to confirm that the pond locations uh as I said before do not create an a a natural or negative effect on the adjacent properties overall something along those lines that would allow the engineer record to develop different strategies if they had to like we had to for this particular property there would have been no other way to locate the pond uh on that property such that uh you could do anything with it so all right um one of the other things that had come up was the uh design storms and we talked about it before you there two different uh two different Basin types which dictate the type of uh design storms that you utilize uh open Basin uh we look at the 25e 24hour uh open Basin again means that the the water that uh Falls in that Basin ultimately makes its way to the ocean closed Basin is the opposite the water falls in that Basin and it doesn't go anywhere else but percolate in the ground or evaporate and and uh closed basins have a bigger storm with which they have to handle water uh overall um this had been recommended from a different couple of different groups uh ultimately I'm not in uh I don't know that this provides any change to the existing condition part of what we're trying to do with this is um make sure that we're not causing problems for the adjacent developments overall and I don't think that the storm sign ultimately has that effect uh for what we're willing to design to if we were going to make everybody design to a Thousand-Year storm or 500e storm then yes it probably would have a a positive effect it would also kill any development that was ever going to occur either um but uh I haven't seen anything indicates the design storms need to change overall uh I think the other factors that we've been pointing towards are a much more effective way to mitigate or um uh avoid affecting the adjacent properties overall uh other things that can be done is the frequency of storm recovery uh one of the things that the uh County does not do that the state does is we do not monitor recovery or the frequency at which storms uh generally occur uh Water Management District will make you once you've um modeled your pond and identified the elevation at which the water level rises to during that storm you have to go in and show how long it takes or you have to recover from that elevation back down to that designed normal water level elevation within a 14-day period um the idea being that the next time that a storm of that magnitude a 25e 24hour 2596 depending on which Bas you're talking about uh would likely occur um again the county does not regulate it predominant state does uh but that is something that could be uh could be added overall um it they're already doing it if there was some the only reason I would recommend adding it is if we were going to change it and increase or shorten the recovery time uh overall I can't tell if you are recommending that uh I don't know that it has as much of an effect as say making modifications to the tail water and making sure that those aspects are covered um for where I perceive most of the flooding in the county it's in the areas where you already have a high water table overall and when you do the recovery on a wet pond it's really as we mention discussed a little bit earlier those ponds recover by discharging water out of the structure into a u Canal or ditch or Wetland something the water body of some type or system of some type uh dry ponds percolated with the ground you do get some percolation with the wet Pond but not much so all of your recovery on your wet Pond is just sending more water Downstream and if you increase the frequency of the shorten recovery time and you're just increasing that pipe size and you're sending more water out sooner which is great for you but it's not great for the downstream people and that's why I'm not for that reason it's not something I would recommend at this point in time uh I don't know that the Water Management District science is 100% but I don't see any reason to change it that would actually be a positive for us so and then the uh last item and and this one is a uh not just a storm water related item but uh Redevelopment standards uh right now the way our code reads uh if you recall from last time that um it does not care whether or not the site is an existing developed site or an undeveloped site when you start your calculations if it's an existing site something that was built in the 40s 50s 60s whatever uh if uh you want to come in and make modifications to it or tear it down and and put up something new uh to redevelop that particular site you have to treat it like the site that was there doesn't exist like it was uh you're starting from scratch so what that means is that uh if you have the existing site right now let's say half of it is asphalt so basically 100% of that water that hits that asphalt that we talked about before is going to run off and your storm water calculations are generally based on a prepost requirement so if 50% of your side is asphalt now and there's no storm water on it in the first place and and it's been that way since 1952 I would argue that's the historic condition for that site all the other developments all the other things that have occurred have accepted that that site is half asphalt and that that amount of R is going to run off and therefore when you come in to redevelop you tear it out and uh let's say you're going to put in 60% all the storm water you're going to do is just treat the difference in the amount of asphalt that 10% difference as opposed to doing the 100% our calcul our rules right now say you ignore that 50% you treat it like there's nothing on it so now you've got to provide a storm water system that uh assumes that 60% all of it needs to be treated and while that generally helps in certain aspects of things uh certainly would improve the flooding condition to a certain extent what it also creates though is a situation where people just won't redevelop you you have to entice them to come in there and take what may be a an ice War piece of crap site and tear that down and put something up and uh and I'm not saying Hey give them full credit maybe you give them half credit something along those laes uh certain cities have done aspect done certain elements of that I'd recommend that uh the committee direct staff to go ahead and take a look at some of those there are other aspects um as I mentioned Beyond just storm water in those Redevelopment situations in some cases it makes sense to uh uh because the zoning may require a certain size front yard setback uh landscape bu so on and so forth but the existing site doesn't meet that if you tear all that crap down and you got to meet the current standards again it may not be a reason when everything else around you is developed under that old pattern now you've got to go do something else again somebody will probably just move on and go to a different site overall so it's beyond just a storm water element certainly think it's something that the county should uh take a look at and I'm sure clay can uh can speak to the aspects of outside of storm water but um this is not an uncommon situation and uh uh other cities have done it even here in the county go ahead CL well T and I just joined the county when we were dealing one of these same sites if you'd ever davel down Derbyshire and no the road or excuse me lbga you saw over there there was a storage area that was old gas station that today is now a Dollar General you know that almost didn't happen but because we were able to take it through the DRC the development Review Committee where the de development Review Committee had to go through a series of waivers in order for them to even squeeze that in it potentially would not have happened and the reason why is as Tad was saying we don't take into account existing developed sites in our code we treat everything is this uh basically Green Field project and it's and as Tad is talking about coming up on the workshop on the 23rd one of the discussions that has been asked to be brought forward is a discussion about infill development incentives identifying those areas so we can map those out identifying what we have to do to ensure that we can facilitate Redevelopment of these areas so that that way again one of the number one tools you have against urban sprawl is urban infill um and as Tad was talking I heard behind me from somebody I don't know where that some of these storm water things that are were talking about are actually implementing our low impact development standards so when you start talking about trying to utilize you know uh existing Landscaping to funnel the storm water in there for treatment those types of things putting in under drains and and those types of uh will work to help address and make but is right now if we don't approve the Redevelopment you still have the problem it's not going away but if you can help facilitate getting some of the problem removed you've at least made that advancement so Tad's hting it right on the head we need to be looking at what can we do to help facilitate Redevelopment in those are B actually my question um is going to be about infill and Tad earlier you just mentioned um underground storage M and so I I wanted to ask you we don't hear much about underground storage and so I was just going to ask you to explain that a little bit more especially when they take a an ugly site U that has lots of asphalt in the building and just very little Landscaping um and you know the the project is going to use underground storage um if you could just explain the difference and um how the underground storage is a benefit to the community and the surrounding land owners okay [Music] um so underground storage is basically uh um taking water that uh would normally go into a pond and the reason you choose a pond versus Underground storage is usually the expense uh picture on the slide denotes those yellow Chambers that's what underground storage for the most part looks like it's basically a uh upside down U uh with the to create the volume surrounded by uh uh larger Rock of course uh Aggregate and then you have some form of Filter Fabric put around that so that you don't get uh the smaller soils infiltrating and taking up the volume so that's you know storm water is all about volume so creating the amount of space as much space as you can is important of course at the same time when you're talking about underground to get more space you have to get more Chambers and um so that means that you got to pay for the chambers you're paying for the rock you're ping paying for the uh uh the Filter Fabric those types of things so you don't see that um very often in uh non- highly urbanized areas you get to a point where the property values are such that um land is incredibly valuable then it makes sense to go from a storm water Pond which is the most predominant because it's generally the cheapest to construct and maintain uh by far um but if you get into highly urbanized areas where land values are through the roof you will see that on a fairly regular basis overall because at that point the cost is offset uh I've seen it in other locations where you uh you have some type of size constraint uh uh we did it over at Stetson and a couple of locations uh overall but it does not just in terms of construction but in terms of Maintenance the cost of underground storage uh becomes an issue because because it's below ground um getting in there and uh cleaning it out uh is more of a problem you do have to clean that out much more often than you do with storm water ponds because uh it uh you get sediment in there and it fills up that space a lot quicker in volume volum is is King and uh it's all underground so you can't when somebody drops a a Big Gulp in there on a storm water Pond you just go out and you pick it up gets into here you got to go find it in the recesses and all those different things and uh take care of that aspect so that's part of the reason you don't see underground storage very often so that'll have a large effect when you talk about Redevelopment it'll come down to again the cost of uh whether or not it makes sense to buy that particular parcel and utilize ize underground storage on it or go to another location um and uh put a storm water pond in so the biggest determining factor is that then you also have issues with regard to uh your water table because this is going below ground then the seasonal high water elevation has to be quite a bit below that um just as with we talked about uh wet Pond dry pond on a dry Pond you have to be generally at least 2 feet below the bottom the pond with your seasonal High otherwise the water's getting in the the normal groundwater elevation will infiltrate into your uh into your system and take up volume if uh you're going with an underground storage you've got the height of the underground storage you've got a certain amount of fill you have to place above that and then you still have to be 2 ft above the uh the water table you know for example most of the east side which is lower and close to uh to sea level there just isn't that type of space available to do that uh you the West Side you get in more of that but then again the property is cheaper uh overall so that usually cancels that out so it's um it's not that it's bad it's usually pretty good um it just uh depends on what kind of space and and costs what your performer may be for for utilizing it okay the other question when it comes to um the underground storage is um you know we know how the retention pwns work right but the underground storage the big question is at what point in time does everything underground then get discharged into the system the uh even though it's underground it basically operates at the same principle so um as a dry Pond let me put it that way uh so uh as we said with a dry Pond the water gets in and then basically percolates it may it uh have a discharge structure that allows it when it gets a a vastly uh greater amount of water coming into it uh because the storm may have been bigger than you know uh what was designed for you may have an outfall for it you'd have that same setup on this in which that water has the ability to move on Downstream it would just be uh you still have a structure much like you would on a pond um and it would usually probably be a manhole as opposed to what you see from most of those where we have a great on top overall but it would be that same concept and then it would discharge to the system so really the biggest difference along those lines is that it's underground but otherwise it operates as a dry Pond there's a real world example of it Andy Romano Park Morman Beach that that entire parking lot serves as a storm water pond because there's a vault underneath it and so all of those uh catch basins drain directly into it and the city does have to go through and do a a fair amount of maintenance there okay was Andy Romano Park it's a basically by the Harvard approach a little bit north of Del thank you I Tyler I wanted to add to what Tod was answering the the big benefit to the public on why do you want to have under pavement stor is that you're effectively allowing the rain to go where it was running off from in your parking lot or your large and herous surface areas so it's mimicking our predevelopment hydrology patterns on the site better when we have more infiltration area it's just very expensive to achieve the water table again too so and in East fua we have a lot of high water tables you Bill talked about we have uh flat Woods those high water table areas we have to fill substantially to make this work and so depending on what or adjacent sites are the size of our site that may or may not be possible we have Bob Dill T you said uh we should direct staff to look into the Redevelopment standards do we need to make a motion for that I think ultimately you need to make recommendation for everything we've discussed today each of the different ones probably is separate motions but but yes I all right going to make a motion that we investigate Redevelopment standards please it's on ah okay um hit anyway sorry I said hit him anyway that uh that we uh direct staff to um you know look into Redevelopment standards uh for storm water um you know zoning environmental I I mean all all the aspects that are affected do we have a second yeah I'll second I think Donna jumped right before Jack fine any any discussion yeah I I have a couple things about it you know I I think it's a terrific idea that we do that for a lot of reasons one is that it's a it's a good balance of what doing here we try you know our overview here is to try to address flooding in total right I me it's storm water but it's flooding and so by looking at something like that that's that's kind of a pro development position it's a reasonableness to me and I think that's a real balance against raising our standards for instance this buffer that we're talking about on top of of where the water table is I think that it's a real good and solid way to say hey we're taking a reasonable approach to how to address this flooding and and so I I like the fact that you've got these positives uh for somebody that can really rework that gas station uh on the corner I think that I think it's a terrific idea and we should we we should try to incorporate as many of those as we can in into the recommendations uh continuing discussion bill I agree we want Redevelopment right we don't want to always be pushing development to the green fields we want to make it easier for redevelopment inside the the built environment um are those under drains considered liid yes okay Suzanne then Wendy then back to Jack so I have a question about um are there any incentives for the underground storm water storage which I guess comes in handy in certain situations like he pointed out and separate from that is there any incentives for any of these storm Waters just in general because I wouldn't know but but I'm asking specifically first about the underground stor sure our rules do not uh do not dictate to the development what type they have to do it's it's we leave it to them to make the call and what they're going to do to meet the requirement we just spell out the requirement says that you can't discharge more or faster than what the historic the original condition was so um it's left to the designer whether or not they want to do underground or above ground um so no we don't dictate and no uh because of that our code does not give any incentives but that's what this group has looked at with regard to Li uh overall and that is one of the suggestions I know we reviewed some aspects of that uh at my staff level just uh today so but no that's one of the things that potentially be changed did that cover what you're and I asked yes and I asked specifically because of the L conversation when it comes so I would know yeah thank you just to kind of follow up what has happened is uh Samantha West has been putting together uh a series of matrices that talks about the different type of low impact development strategies you can utilize and Associated incentives for them um once that ordinance is passed wrapping it in with this what you would see is talking about that developer of the Dollar General there would be an incentive for them to utilize the vaults or the underground uh storm water at that point be it either a reduction in parking uh a modification on Building height setbacks those types of things that would be administratively handled so therefore we're doing their review review reducing the ril we have Wendy and ginger and I don't know if Ginger needs to I just wanted to say about the L incentives um you we had plan to bring that back to you in September depending on how far we get here today we have an August meeting so um you guys will set the priority for August if we're done with storm water or if we still have storm water discussion either way IDE is scheduled to come back in September you'll see all the matrices all that before it goes to uh Council for adoption before goes to plan board um and we'll provide that information in thank you Dr Anderson thank you um I just wanted to add to the to the infill conversation I know I've said this before and I don't mean to be playing Devil's Advocate but there is a value to having Green Space inside of our urban areas I mean green storm water parks are All the Rage now and other cities are using them they're actually taking down buildings and putting in parts to manage storm water in flood prone areas and so before we start giving direction to staff to maximize and prioritize Redevelopment inside urban areas which I agree clay I agree that obviously infill is better than sprawl but find us ways also that we can have greenstorm St water parks that aren't just for storm water management but are for public amenity as well that can be you know gathering places and places for mental health and and those things that we value that increase property values so and uh that's certainly a good point one of the things that uh can always be done in the Redevelopment area uh if we're going to give some relaxation to some aspect of the storm water or maybe um well here good example if you were going to redevelop a lot downtown uh overall and uh you know under the current standards you wouldn't be able to construct what you see in downtown Delan so if you're going to come in and uh wanted to change one of the buildings um you couldn't put back something that mirrors everything else there you'd have to tear it down you'd have to put in a landscape buffer you'd have to put in setbacks that don't match what's around you and would potentially put you at a either competitive disadvantage or something that just doesn't match which is clearly not what I think most people would like to see um but you so you can allow your going LAX the rules such as that but you still do need to try to address the storm water in some way shape or form but it may not make sense to do it on such a small site overall it just may not even be worth you know if it's a 10,000 ft lot which I think some of these are you know what's uh what's a th000 foot of square foot of a storm water Pond going to get you or something along those lines it's not going to get you much so it may set in there the possib ility on those heavily urbanized areas uh you know to contribute to the storm water fund a certain amount such that uh you know if you get enough of those together you can put together a a location that does something along those lines because it it's going to be Beyond one parcel to do in terms of Redevelopment you're going to need several different Parcels 10 15 whatever it may be to to get to that point in time by itself but that may be the way to go about it but that's we can certainly factor that into that aspect of it uh overall we have Tyler Bob then Suz so what I was going to say is what we've got motion for the um ex thank you the motion that we're discussing right now is for having staff look at recommendations to give some credit for existing development against Redevelopment sites um um right now those sites are contributing whatever runoff they're contributing and most of them are not doing anything to treat the water so whatever nutrients are running off pollutants otherwise are running off what we're talking about is making that better about asking staff to create some allowances in the rules where we still have to have Improvement on those redevelopments but it incentivizes the owners to redevelop the site instead of keep it as it's existing rehab the building so on and so forth which is what we see a lot lot of in our community as a result of the way that the rule is structured today I think it's a great idea um I I think that when we get into some of the other topics a lot of what we're talking about becomes more relevant Yeah Wendy I certainly agree with you um that you know those kinds of parks those kinds of you know amenities are phenomenal and they add a lot of value to the city that they're in um I really feel you know that Tad hit on a bunch of issues that make it a public works issue and not something that can be intertwined with Redevelopment standards because that's something we need to put pressure on the leadership whether it's the city or the County Commission and Council to set aside enough money to do a tax you're going to need a half a dozen of these sites to accomplish anything and that's not going to be practical from the private side it's going to have to be something that may respond okay I I I know I'm not going to this you're not going to like this answer but a property owner may be more likely to sell to the city or the county if they can't redevelop so easily can can I Ben and I are saying here and I I can tell you one of the things that you see especially with repetitive loss properties is there's uh Grant programs available through FEMA uh where you can go in and get your house raised or completely de demolished and reconstructed we're taking on the policy of if you're in areas and I'm going to name an area specifically shne Drive near Orman Beach we're not not going to support any kind of Grants to elevate your house we're going to support the grant for acquisition and turning it into Green Space so we are making uh targeted efforts to do so in those areas where we know there's flooding repetitive loss and a need to do some sort of green infrastructure and so that's where Ben's folks are being really strategic in looking at where we can go and I just want to say that kind of cue him yeah so we've actually done that um may have a storm uh was probably the second or third time it flooded a series of homes on a horseshoe shaped Road in unincorporated area between Holly Hill and Norman Beach uh we partnered uh actually we um went through the same program um that clay referenced with FEMA where we were able to provide the 25% match the homeowners would normally provide provided they sell us their home and we had those homes uh the feds kicked in the other 75% we had them demolished and then we went out and got a grant and constructed a large Regional storm water Pond um that was tied to an ex that's tied and connected to an existing dog park and um basically turned it into exactly what you're describing and um and so that that type of stuff does work we focus more on the repetitively flood flooded areas like clay alluded to uh commercial it's a little different on the Redevelopment side if uh I don't know I think Tad's idea of paying into some sort of fund where you could go acquire property and do something similar is probably not a bad idea but it does happen and it's a good way to go and when you but when you go through that program you're required to leave at Green Space you have no choice so um but that's that Regional storm water Pond provides a certain amenity but it also has protected in storm since then the surrounding areas that also flooded thank you we have Suzanne followed by suzan Suzanne followed by Donna Follow by Jack so the example given was Andy Romano Park and for for underground storage and I also know of um the new SM Beach City Hall parking lot that's underground storage that's another example that I thought of that I I know of and I just want to say by Fluker on purpose the those areas of the parking lot around the parking lot are more attractive than other parking lots as far as some Greenery goes just saying but are there any examples of residential or commercial because the city hall the their government there do what do You' got for private property owners for commercial or residential for underground storage is there anything that the only other the only other side that I'm aware of um and I had experience with myself was uh we did something like that at ston for one of their buildings there but the one common thread you hear with those Andy Romano Park you're trying to minimize your impact to the uh natural areas around there and uh you know the city hall on you you're pretty well space constrained uh overall and then it studs in you were definitely space constrained so you again it comes down to when is the when the physical conditions of the property allow it which is the cheapest way to generally go because for example at ston we did it in that one location but everywhere else we we did wet or dry ponds um because we had the space to do so but it's certainly uh you got to have a good reason to put that expense in there overall is what it comes down to so the so continuing with the question the underground storage is in the comprehensive plan but no one has utilized it is that no I have a couple examples maybe the dairy green and the land we did with underground storage da Queen and and de Barry had to be done with underground storage cuz we were allowed Zero Storm water discharge cuz everything was flooding there um we've had like hide Park the storage Suite site that went on top of the old uh motorcycle mechanic Institute Building right by the tamoka river that entire thing is underground there is a little pond on some of these the frequently we'll if we can we float a pond and then into the underground we get some of the dirt and other stuff to go into an easier to clean place but I I can't speak for all the sites that have I know we have designed some here yeah yeah and the majority of the properties in downtown Orman Beach uh that have gone through Redevelopment uh they're not using vaults but they're using basically French drains so they're coming in and and it's it's draining into aggregate that's protected with a geofabric so it's still sort of same concept same concept it's just a different technology it's a little bit it was done earlier before a lot of the products you see there now the Vault that's used over at Annie Romano they're parking on basically open space over it and it's got the structural strength to be able to hold up Asphalt from Cars um what was done previously over in Orman Beach El aware it was just basically digging a trench and utilizing the rod for the structal aspect of it it's a maintenance issue though I mean all of these whether you're putting in a traditional Pond dyon or any of this the maintenance is the critical aspect of the long-term protection we had Donna call question oh okay yeah because I think we're getting into thank you more discussion than we intended um could you please readback the motion is that POS you or Brianna and Chelsea I'm the old guy in the room my memory is not that good take preag uh and I didn't take my post this morning um the the message was just to direct I mean the motion was to redirect direct staff to look into Redevelopment standards um that are different than what our existing standards are for storm water zoning uh environmental and did I miss something there that covers the basis yeah for the infill areas yeah and that had been seconded by Donna and all right all the no more discussion Jack sorry all those inor I still had something for this yes okay sorry at least I think so at least I think so I wanted to go back to Bob's point about um what essentially are pocket Parks because I think that's a fair point to include in this discussion there are going to be some areas where it's practical in Redevelopment to um to put in a retention Pond or you know something I I owned a landscape nursery for 10 years so you get no argument from me about adding Landscaping but uh that becomes a maintenance issue for the local government and so I I think as those policies are developed we need to be practical about where it is reasonable to put something like that and and where it doesn't make any sense um and I I think a a discussion at that point with Public Works would be a good idea to to have some idea of how it expands their workload if we start creating a lot of those okay um Jack did you have something very I'll come back okay thank you all those in favor of the motion that Bob restated for us a moment ago all those in favor all those opposed motion carries thank you all right and and a question T you said that we probably needed to move on all of it and actually I think that's where we are cuz that was the that was the last okay last element we had so okay so all the things we talked about at the very beginning right right so I'd be looking for a motion uh on uh establishing a seasonal high elevation uh another one on the number of borings um we just start with with those two so so just as a reminder we had decided that the seasonal after much discussion correct uh the recommend ation remained at a 6 in correct app applied for the design normal water level okay so that is what the motion would yes so if you'd like I can go ahead and word it I don't know that I can make a motion I was yeah I would like to make a motion that we direct staff to develop the language for the rule change to include minimum geotechnical boring standards and requirements for the establishment of a seasonal High ground water table from those borings and the safety factor of 6 in that would be applied by the professional engineer during the storm water design process do we have a second second do we seconded by Bob do we have any discussion yeah are you saying that um the minimum number of Geotech borings is going to change or that only right now we do not have a rule that dictates that aspect uh what was discussed and what I'm assuming that Tyler is is uh alluding to in his motion is that uh two per per acre like unless there's uh unless it's under half an acre I didn't want to include all of the Nuance in it but exactly that we would have a minimum size for the two per acre the two per acre the effective depth requirements I think that was what we had discussed with any more discussion oh Jack yeah I I need it listed out I guess you know are we going to do more of these like is there going to be a long list of these that we're going to do individually or is this will this capture them all this uh all all I'm expecting on this particular motion is that we talk about the bullet that identifies right okay addressing the seasonal High okay and is there going to be another one when we get to curve numbers uh there is yes okay and there's going to be another one with tail water elevation and and we've done one already and so you know I guess what we're doing is compiling the list that we will then look at at the end I'm just thinking I'd like to put these together versus looking at them all independently but that's fine and and perhaps we should make a motion that just covers them all so that when we look at the list in Final in total we can say okay and discuss any fine details on each one I'm good with either way I it we have a motion so the motion needs to be amended if we go no do independently doesn't matter I'm just I'm just interested in in Saving Time at the End by putting them together understood I think I think it's easier if we keep it broken up because there isn't that much overlap between these items and then we don't draw the conversation on forever to Sid track so did we have we have a second to Tyler's motion did we not and do we still have one two three four yes we still have a quorum for voting all those in favor oh I'm sorry Wendy I'm sorry um so I I just wanted to bring up that I've I've been sitting here listening all day and having some heartburn about the 6 in um safety buffer because if the outcome of that is that we have more fill brought in that that could ultimately be and there could be an unintended consequence from that and um you know I think one of the things we've been seeing and I know we've gone back and forth on this in in many other discussions you know is is that often times it's adding fill in Wetlands that exacerbates flooding in adjacent properties and so you know it I brought it up last month that you know if you're looking at a property that used to be lower elevation than the property with the houses built in the' 60s and now we've brought in a bunch of Phill and and increased the elevation above the houses built in the 60s the natural hydrologic flow ways have been altered and so and so water water's going to back up in those lower properties and so you know I understand the reason for Phill I understand the why we do it that way now but I'm not sure that morill is the goal and so I'm I'm I I am not going to be in support of the six in um increase in elevation when it when it comes down to actually vote on it right now we're just giving direction to staff but um but that part is giving me some heartburn and I and I just wanted to bring it up and it's and it's partly because I just just yesterday I was driving down Lake Gertie Road Lake Gertie for those of you who aren't from the land is kind of the drainage basin for West Central and Northwest Land and it is permanently higher now because there has been so much more development in the entire Watershed but also because one development has not only encroached on the boundaries of Lake Gertie but has blocked flow ways from the west and southwest into Lake Gertie and and it's a problem so I I I don't know when we're going to talk about that element I don't feel like we've addressed that yet directly in our conversations but I would like to at some point get to that and um but I think that the increasing fill is is giving me heartburn the uh increase in fill at this point though is placed on top of area that is already above the water table so you're not increasing the uh effect on the adjacent water tables along those lines so you know if you uh in point of fact really what you're doing by putting in a um safety Factor what you're assuming is that the water table is higher in your model but your actual conditions generally speak to being lower than that are they fully 6 Ines lower than that again that depends on the Judgment of the Professional Engineers uh that have interpreted or the biologists that have interpreted the conditions out there uh so what we're doing is trying trying to offset any errors that might occur or any growth that might occur uh because that's far more dangerous than uh an extra 6 in of fill that is occurring above the water table line so um you know you can go put a mountain in and it's really not the height of the mountain that matters it's the base width of the mountain that matters if you're putting that 6 in on top as long as your tiin slopes do not change you haven't altered the conditions in the adjacent property you haven't taken up volume and none of this is geared towards taking up space for uh if you're the lower area and somebody is draining to you you always have to accept their water this has no effect on that requirement in any way shape or form you are still required to take any water that comes to your property that's state law we can't alter that uh for the negative anyway so that would be my answer so any further discussion of the motion that Tyler made all those in favor I opposed next did you vote I did I was I the next item was curve numbers and there wasn't a lot in that would you like to really with the with the uh recommendation to the committee from the staff was that the uh the curve numbers if they are uh set for spils types that have multiple hydrologic conditions that the condition be verified by the geotechnical engineer or the uh appropriate engineer of record and that would be the recommendation and that was due to the tremendous variability correct that water to percolate or not um who would like to make a motion I motion I motion that we said exactly what Tad said I'm not repeating it do we have a second but I will read the minutes do we have a second I second thank you Jack any discussion all those in favor I any opposed motion carries see if Jessica's still here oh hav heard I'm so sorry Jessica come on yeah sorry I've been an eye on both I just didn't want to interrupt on the computer thank you very much all right uh and on the tail water elevation the uh discussion on that was to identify um a the worst case tailwater condition based on evident conditions uh at the location of the tail water in uh basins that are potentially flooding concerns and we direct the staff to review and approve that um so that the uh design Engineers know what uh what they've got a design to so it really lets them know they need to come talk to us before they go finalize their their model so would anyone like to make a motion on that and got a question first how do we identify the flood prone areas is that something that you guys have to work out the well we certainly have to take a look at that aspect with regard to uh the Basin uh which our Road and Bridge group Stone and water group is uh is addressing right now until that is set recommendation I would make at this point is that uh uh it would be based on the reports that we received uh for flooding in that particular area at our storm water group okay so you have to so on the design side we would have to contact and it' be a coordination right effort right and that's the intent is contact us before you move into the design so we can both agree as to whether or not it's a it's a flood prone area based on the information we've got uh a lot of Engineers like yourself that have worked in the area have a feel for where the uh flooding has occurred overall um as well and uh then we work together to establish the appropriate elevation for the tail War commission no and is this a um that you are making the rule now in those words and worst case or that you're going to bring the revised rule to us to review well you're directing us to to write that in a better manner than I just stated I'm parhas at best I don't play an attorney on TV I don't do any of that crap so did anybody move to can yes I'd like to make a motion that we direct County staff to evaluate the to write a rule that discusses the conditions for Which tail waterer elevation coordination will be required and the process for establishing that water elevation on storm water systems well and that's the the identifying the conditions is what I was Me by that yeah do we have a second I'll second thank you both any discussion all those in favor Jessica I any oppos okay motion carried and be that's that's it right for I think the only other one would be uh with regard to the storm water facilities Pond locations on a site overall um there's a less specific wording on this aspect uh overall it would be that uh uh storm water Pond facilities uh are required to be located on the site such that they uh do not negatively impact the adjacent properties paraphrase of course but would anyone like to make a motion I have a question um I understand what you're you just said but I'm I'm sitting here listening saying is that really necessary yeah it's going on in my so yes it is necessary and the reason that I'm sitting here in my head hesitating is June 28th the new storm water rules got well they got posted like the 29th but they're effective the 28th on the St joh so I've been you know unable to fully digest it but they have included a lot of the things that we had as really good ideas during that conversation in the new rule including rules on analysis of BMS impounding water and things of that nature where you're in fill conditions or otherwise and so I'm I'm hesitant because I don't know the full extent of what has and hasn't been included and this was one of my favorite ideas that we had was to make sure you don't stick a pond at the edge of a site with a BM that's going to just per through and cause issues and it's not going to perform the way that it's designed so I like the idea of having staff look at this but I also have the hesitation that they need to look at how it would interface with the new rule that has just come out and make sure that we're not creating a a weird double standard to me of some kind or an honorous extra step for the county to review no that's fine I I'm not as familiar with their new rules so I'd have to go take a look and see what this is but uh certainly then we can make a modification to what i' stated such that it doesn't conflict negatively with the uh Water Management District rules proposed War well I don't think yeah we had made a motion yet I was just I was in my head trying to figure that out before we end so I figured i' throw it out there for everybody else did that answer your question bless yes it did thank you so would you like to proceed with making motion I'd like to make a motion that we have County staff develop a rule centered on encouraging well let me take a step back we have County staff develop a rule on where storm water ponds May and may not be located within sites and the may not would be based on an engineering evaluation so criteria of groundwater impacts to adjacent sites and or proximities to property lines based on fill and established Pawn bottom and pwn top Heights mine was much shorter but yeah yeah but those are the things that you guys have to look at we not going let Tyler write these rules six pages long to say hello AKA don't flood the neighbor do we have a second I'll second thank you je do we have any discussion all those in favor I any opposed motion carries very good so I think that gives us clear Direction on on our portion of take a little bit of time obviously to uh go through digest these particularly the Redevelopment I think that's uh probably much longer term we'll have to work with Clay shop on what a schedule for that might be um I don't know that we'll have the storm water uh recommendations at the next meeting necessarily but potentially the meeting after that um um I think the only things we've got left to cover under this were anyi topics that the council or committee wanted to bring up but Ben has come by because there was a question at the last meeting about the storm water basins and uh when the uh U modeling for those basins would be complete he's prepared to answer those questions and then I know there was a question about uh reclaimed water can't remember is it you Wendy think somebody had asked a question about that aspect and that's all Ben's fault so I'll let him answer all right um so my understanding based on the last meeting there's some questions about basically what is our um work plan for storm water projects at rad bridge and with our stor it's going to take me a second so and um so just for a little bit of background you know we're this committee is focused on changing uh some of of our rules as it pertains to new development and Redevelopment uh what we're kind of tasked with on the storm water Road and Bridge side of things is to look at issues that are we're currently facing um from areas that are currently developed and try to come up with solutions to hopefully mitigate for flooding and or water quality so our storm water utility was established in the 9s the direction uh from Council was at the time to perform a series of storm water studies a series of storm water studies to focused on urbanized areas in the county and um and we did accomplish that a lot of those studies were done in the uh '90s as well as early 2000s and um Tad's pulling up the map you can figure it out um that shows all of our storm water basins and it keeps messing with it it goes away we all have oh you already have a copy of the map okay great and so um basically they went out and they did a series of studies developed a series of projects that were based on the issues of the time and they addressed a lot of them not all of them and um as time went on as we had storm events whether it was the 04 hurricanes 08 Tropic storm Fay May of 09 we you know encountered flooding issues like I talked about with the Rio Way project uh tropical storm Fay we did a major project over on Miller Lake down between Orange City and de where we had multiple flooded homes we purchased and dug out to increase capacity so we were always constantly working on addressing floody flooding issues within the county as they popped up and um really in the last after the May of 09 storms we really had a a period where we would encounter some onesie TWY projects where you had a house that was in a low area that may have flooded and we would go out and either purchase the home or construct a storm water system to you know in areas where there was no storm water system um to to account and try to mitigate for future flooding events but really for about a decade there we were focused mainly on water quality um projects uh really associated with the establishment of a lot of the B maps in L County whether they' be related to surface waters or Springs and we did a series of those projects um we still had a few flooding related projects that were on our uh chalk our to-do list so to speak and then we were able to gain uh some funding through the arpa uh um bill that came through that provided direct funding for those types of projects there there really wasn't you know I'm to digress a little bit recently we went before Council and and kind of gave an overview of the storm water program and one of the things we discussed was the amount of money available to us from our revenue from the storm water utility for capital projects and how our Capital program was almost entirely uh I mean we would get money for design and we would have a certain amount for a match but it was almost entirely funded through grants and really for the last decade the focus of the grants that we were able to get were mainly for water quality purposes and so um that was really where the state had kind of directed a lot of the focus for storm water and that's where we had uh directed our uh program there wasn't a ton of money made available in the last decade uh for specifically flooding projects and so you have no consistent sustained overview of how to deal with this holistically well um I'm getting there I mean with the funding I'm getting there yes fund and so that that was one of the things we discussed is is you know since hurricane Ian and and Nicole resiliency can be tied to flooding and there has been an influx of of of money available for those types of projects um as far as our current work plan we've utilized the arpa funding to fund a series of projects that were kind of the last ones on our to-do list from before that we had identified before Ian and Nicole so one of those would be uh a project down in Orange City uh called puer Pond where it's a closed Basin Pond that has uh breached its banks multiple times and even flooded a couple of structures so we've got a project in design currently for that and um we identified North Beach Street which routinely goes underwater due to title events fortunately the the permitting on that is proving to be extremely difficult so we actually pulled it off the arpa list we're going to continue the design and pursue other funding mechanisms that don't have quite the time line the arpa funding requires us to do and so the discussion at Council was you know we we had a utility uh rate study done that looked at the different aspects of our program one of the focuses was capital projects and and what do we do and how do we get that funding and so Council directed an increase in the storm water utility and they directed us to come back uh with a uh with a tiered increase plan tied to uh prioritization of looking at all of these Basin studies that some of them were done in the 90s some of them were done in the early 2000s some have been more recent um but to to develop a priority list of of basically updating these studies and focusing on the areas that flooded that we saw flooding during the uh the the 22 storm events and things like that so um that is our plan is to I can tell you we are staff and I haven't presented the priority plan to council yet but we're in discussions one of them is with the city of Edgewater uh we don't have a basinwide study for that ew area we had a minor study performed but um we're working with the city they're looking to do a a large master plan storm water I'm sorry go ahead will these studies so you're looking at are that have already flooded and updating but will you also be taking into consideration the sea level rise projections that are going to impact groundwater so these studies you know it's interesting you go back and you look at the studies from the '90s and a lot of the focus was flooding and then you started as the studies progress they take into a water quality account so yeah you to answer your question yes these studies will look at a multitude of different things from flooding storm related flooding sea level rise you know title yes water quality all the kind of comprehensive correct and so when we performed these I was mentioning with Edgewater they're looking at a very they had a lot of flooding and that's one area where we don't have a kind of a real comprehensive you know it's mostly in the city but there's quite a few storm water County storm water Assets in terms of mosquit control canals and things like that so they're going to be the lead agency we're our plan is to participate from a funding standpoint but we're looking at areas like Spruce Creek where you had a tremendous amount of flooding uh during Hurricane Ian and there's some other areas in the county we're going to present a a prioritization list to where we can start ticking off these storm water studies and from those studies we'll generate a series of projects that we can move into a capital program and start addressing those issues and so you know it's important to remember when we had hurricane Ian and Nicole um a lot of the areas that flooded were in the Incorporated areas parts of the city and so a lot of our moving forward and addressing these things are going to be working with those cities now we've got the transform 386 program the cities have uh all the cities have been invited and and a lot have submitted um requests for grants for projects um that that's in the evaluation phase the county has submitted projects as well so there's some projects um that I'm aware of that have been submitted by the city some actually intertwined with some County areas and things like that so there's going to be some Partnerships and and stuff like that but um we're really going to have to the the storm water doesn't stop at the city limits you know and um so a lot of the structure flooding and and when when we talk about flooding Road and Bridge and storm water and Clay kind ofed to it we kind of use the same criteria that the federal government used you know multiple occurrences of structure flooding a lot of people will say hey I got water in my yard you know and it rains heavy it's not really flooding and unless you're getting structures flooded multiple times there's not a lot of money available to kind of address those things now that's not to say that we don't want to work on what we call nuisance flooding but you know when it came to our Capital program being primarily funded to Grants if it if there wasn't some grant funding available it is really difficult to address so um as we go through and update these studies and um and we're we're not just going to rely on you know funding from the storm water utility the transport 386 has some uh planning funding available that might be able to utilize to kind of speed up the process of getting these studies going but the ultimate plan is to update the studies is generate those capital projects recommendation and develop a capital plan based on that now we're still in design and moving towards construction a lot of these arpa projects so that's kind of we're doing we're finishing those up as we move into the new uh storm water master plan updates and then you'll see a transition into those types of projects so that's basically where we are on the uh storm current storm water workpl happy to answer any questions thank you before we do question answering I just would like to mention before we adjourn um I would like clay just to say two words about the workshop coming up not right now I have four questions and also to clarify if even though our terms are up in October we stay on until the 31st until March no we don't know that okay we I do have to leave in 3 minutes so real quickly third Workshop is focusing on four items specifically the uh zoning whether or not to close the overly broad language that is contained in it that is U kind of brought the fuel terminal to light second is a discussion on 115 special exceptions that are identified in our zoning regulations as to some being made by right some being conditional use some being allowed so by special exception approved by the planning and development and then ultimately those that are approved by the County Council the third topic is identification of rules and regulations that the County Council can actually change uh you know be be for building code for fire prevention code so and then lastly is a discussion on establishing infill development areas and provide for incentives these areas it starts at 3 will be moderated by her Marlo we anticipate that three 3 to 4 hour time will it be online you know I I have asked but I didn't I got an answer probably and that's not the same as will be thank I I check right thank you thank you questions from mror specific okay is up first I mean I ask you the question about yeah I'll talk about replay okay Weiss then okay um my question is regarding Road and Bridge and we're talking about storms and everything and this might not be your area but it it's in the discussion um getting that you know we're getting ready to prepare for storm season um does the county have a program in place where they go out and check all of their roads and bridges and CS um for blockages and that sort of thing which can exacerbate no flooding yes we definitely do that so we have our routine maintenance you know we have hundreds of miles of ditches canals storm water inlets all that stuff that we routinely maintain and then um an advance of really we we know the areas that are prone to certain issues and which ditches are vital and things like that so um this time of year we're out there looking for that stuff as part of our routine maintenance and then when there is a storm on the horizon it is um just about everybody's out there checking those things and and and you know we always ask people sometimes you're your best you know you're the best person to help you yourself if you see something blocking call us and we you know we ask and folks are very good about that and we will respond immediately but you know we know that there are some vital conveyances out there that have to that are either prone to blockages or for whatever reason are very important we're out there checking really focused on them during in advance of a storm but it's also tied to our routine minuts as well than thank you s then Jack and then Ginger something U two questions one is was probably in advance of Ben's presentation compensating storage the requirement to provide It When developing in the flood plane whose rule is that federal federal law federal so who enforces that at the local level is that St John's or the municipality the municipality would enforce that yes ma'am St John's would not they have not in the past no okay there is some discussion in the manual but it's St John's sorry there is some discussion in the manual on it if you were building a pond in the flood plane but unless the retention Pond itself is built in the 100-year flood plane St John's doesn't get involved in the review of the calculations that might be something for some consideration uh as you review the storm water Rags because if we're counting on the feds to enforce it no it's a federal rule it's a federal rule but we enforce it right so when somebody so you do enforce it yeah it's a federal law but we mainly through our storm water rating system right we don't do it then we're subject to the flood insurance if it's within the unincorporated portion of the county when they do their sorry it's within the unincorporated portions of the county when they submit their storm water calculations that they're impacting the flood plane we review how they're mitigating and review and approve that aspect of it okay um regarding Capital um I'm making an assumption but asking the question do you include as a potential Capital project acquisition of prop properties yes and I would think you'll consider a prioritization of where acquisition should occur versus some sort of physical Improvement yeah we we've done that multiple times in fact uh a lot of the time it's cheaper to acquire the property and than it is to construct a stor system to mitigate for flooding some some properties are frankly just indefensible shockne being a good example of that okay um Jack's going to get the last question for the moment and Ginger's going to say what do we talk about next time and we might want to see you again because obviously there's a lot of curiosity about this aspect and we're running out of time we have to relinquish this room so so Jack yeah we are out of time and I think my question is too big uh but I I am interested in how you're prioritizing these things u based on how many times they flooded how many structures flooded you know how you're drawing this this list up relative to your priorities that you're going to bring and and that may be too big a question here but as a resident of Tomoka States I'm very interested in shock and I I uh live on CH I do not but I know people cuz I want to buy your house if you do well that would be great how do you determine the value of the house that it's really I can answer your prioritization question real quick um multi multiple variables uh the amount of time that the study was done like how old it is obviously the older it is the more things have changed um we do know in which areas of the county uh experience flooding that can be mitigated or could be I mean if you live in Aster or stone Island and you flooded along the St John's river I can't really do much for you you know it is what it is at that point the river staged up so that um you know uh maintenance thing maintenance things that we're aware of and and and identified uh prioritization from some of the Cities if they if they're in the process of doing something something we may want to partner with them on so that's some of the variables and when we present the priority list we'll go through and have a good uh explanation because I would think that would be part of the unincorporated versus Incorporated areas and the complexities of that I mean correct yeah if it's a highly Incorporated area probably we'll want to F because we can't really do much in there because we don't have a lot of assets in there okay our next meeting Ginger yeah we need to decide what we want to talk about next so um there was good direction today I think um Tad's group is probably going to spend some time drafting that stuff with the with the legal office I'm guessing that you don't think you're going to have that next meeting although okay so um on tap we had talked about talking about trees next time now it's a lot of jumping around so I don't know if you want to do that uh low impact development will be ready for you for your September meeting um which that would be the next logical thing to talk about but it's not ready um we have the draft of the guide book we have the draft of the Matrix um it's still in final staff review so um the intent was to give you a long time to look at that it's a lot of material so um I I don't want to talk about that in August and only give you a day or two to look at the material so that's kind of why we had tapped September so the question remains we can talk about trees next month it's it's sort of a mind shift right from what we're talking about now what we have ready for trees is what you asked us to look at all of the other counties and large local governments and see what they do for trees so the staff has been spending a significant amount of time interviewing People Like Us and other places and so we can have that ready if that's what you want to shift your mind to next time if you still have things you want to talk about with storm water I mean not the you know changes that you've identified today um that's another option so just need direction on that so we're ready for you question so trees could be short or long because you would have information for us in August and we have history with trees feel PTSD yes well we may need ice cream um but regarding storm water for regarding storm water we've we've looked at and and given instruction on new construction and on infill and that's going to come back to us at some point in the future what we were talking about just a few minutes ago to my mind anyway was dealing with flooding in existing areas and how is how is how are and what are we doing with that if we don't have additional questions I don't think we need to bring Mr Bartlett back if we do have additional questions we need to ask if he can make time in his and by the way thank you to both of you today um whether we need to ask for more time or not I was going to discuss the reclaim one other and actually to ask you if you have more you you feel we should know about yeah the uh the only other thing I was going to discuss was the reclaimed water um I I think there was a lot of interest in that actually am I wrong so we have two things that we could do reclaim water and the information about what other Municipal governments are doing regarding trees for August any objections to that or any comments to that or you'd rather go water skiing I think that a conversation on repl water as well as just irrigation regulations because we have and I don't mean just like everything that there is but just some conversation on conceptive use permitting because if we put a if we put a well into the oer that's a St John's permit that we have to get so using groundwater aquifer water reclaimed water what are irrigation sources what are the implications of them just some educational opportunity for committee and I don't mean that this needs to be a big formal presentation this me opportunity for us to discuss and I think with the experts we can probably answer most of those questions I don't think trees is a good departure for us at this time I would just regarding the water and the and the reclaim water I would knowing a little bit about the district at the aquafer I'm just I'm kind of wondering what would be actionable for us I'd like to make it something actionable if we're going to meet well I think the discussion of reim water that Wendy and I were having was around would we see there being a benefit in putting restrictions on the type or source of irrigation in new development projects and there's a lot of things that that's where be actionable and I mean and I was I mean I'm always like if you can't decide by both and so um so Ginger how long do you think the update on other Municipal tree ordinances would be I mean can we do you know the first half of the meeting before break you know finishing up with Ben and then the second half on trees uh we could certainly do that I mean it takes as long as you guys talk about it right so we can present just let me go that's a problem you don't want me around for that we we can we certainly have enough time to present it in half the meeting if you know if there's lots and lots of discussion and that's R I think it's really relevant to come back to trees at this point in the discussion because I know that this may not be kind of the focus what of what you're reporting on but you know again the value of trees in taking up and mitigating storm water you know is is not irrelevant to the discussion and so I wouldn't mind reminding us of the value of trees for storm water bill so um irrigation and all that that's really not on topic you know um from what we originally designed to pursue trees are and as unpalatable as it is to have to dig back into it maybe we should go ahead and maybe we do do both if if you can talk about um that first and then we can dig into the trees at least we might get something done yeah I would like to hear a little bit about recline for sure my interest is less in the nitrification side and More in we pumping millions of gallons of water around and changing where it goes into the ground and what Basin it drains to and I think that is extremely on top of to the conversation of Flo and minimum standards I I just want to go on record that I will not be at the August 7th meeting and it's not because you're going to put trees back on the agenda yes it is all right so if I hear you let me see if I can recap where I think we've landed so we want to spend the first part of next meeting digging in a little deeper on storm water flooding reclaimed water um you know any any sort of uh storm water water quantity related topics then the second half of the meeting we will present to you the research that we've done there may not be a lot of time for discussion but you'll at least have the research we've done of what other counties are doing for for trees September is Li and that's a lot of a lot of material for you to read ahead of time and it'll be a I'm sure a healthy discussion has anyone checked the September date while we're looking at for not no conflict with um uh Labor Day it is Labor Day week it's the week of Labor Day I'm on vacation that week I'm in another country that be here okay so Monday is my wife's 40th birthday oh so Monday is the the day off and okay your wife's 29th birthday H your wife's 29th birthday what it's her 40th bir so we are so did we agree on on next meeting or yeah can we in the case of trees will we will we have recommendations will we put a nail in it no it's going to be really the research that we've done because you you've given some direction we haven't gone all the way through we have new members since the old Direction which suzan if you want to meet and I'll I'll um say this to Donna to to be more get up to speed where we were before I'm not GNA be here sorry trying to blurred it out not in Aug be here August 7 no if it's August 7th no I'm out of town anybody else out out and we got so that's a forum if everybody else is here okay we just have to celebrate birth we V um but no it's probably not going to be actionable okay any further discussion Suzanne you're up it was just okay any further discussion about next month which will be a continuation storm water flooding uh reclaimed water first part second part just a return of fact finding on trees all good good all right nothing else September is L but it's going to be on the 4th or the 11th the 4th is what yes yes lots of lot lots of lead time on that um you asked the question about your appointments uh everybody or most people were appointed on September 6th of 22 your term expires two years from that the folks that were appointed later the expiration is the same so you've all been communicating with Carissa about whether you want to be um considered for reappointment and I I haven't found out from her but my expectation is that that discussion for all of the reappointments will go to council uh sometime before September 6th so that you're still so we may not me here for well the September meeting is before the reappointment date so we just have to get it done before the first meeting in October and we still have not given a report to council for I'm sorry when would we go in front of council for reappointment when you think that be I I don't know yet but it would need to be before the October meeting or we won't have any members could we yeah that's a good point the U we we need members and the um so probably if we're going to lobby with the councilman it has to be in the month of August is that right um yes I mean I I would guess the appointment is going to be one of the September meetings yeah you should have you should have already gotten I've already I've already got the application in I might might but I I'm wondering you know right if you want to speak to your appointing member to say that you're still interested in you'd like to be reappointed yeah August is the time to do that all right thank you all right the meeting is adjourned and thank you very much thank you everybody