WEBVTT

METADATA
Video-Count: 1
Video-1: youtube.com/watch?v=APwPUr2GEjU

Part: 1

1
00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:16.960
I don't want to see your back John. >> I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

2
00:00:17.685 --> 00:00:43.760
>> [clears throat] >> Can we have a roll call? >> Chair Siciliano. >> Here. >> Vice Chair Plant. >> Here. >> Member Betts. >> Yes, here. >> Member Danowski. Member Austin. >> Here. >> Council Member Danowski said she was

3
00:00:43.760 --> 00:01:01.960
going to be running about 7 6 7 minutes late, so she's on her way. >> Also in attendance is Community Standards Director Karen Gardner Young and Board Clerk Erica Lining. And former >> [laughter] >> And we have lots of public hearing

4
00:01:01.960 --> 00:01:20.620
today. Um additions, deletions, or modifications to the agenda, anyone? No? Okay. Having none, moving on. Let's look at the minutes. >> [clears throat]

5
00:01:22.840 --> 00:02:00.000
>> I think the >> The only thing on the agenda is portrayals. Right? >> No, we're Minutes from last meeting. >> From last month. >> Mhm. >> The the the I think there was something I uh Well,

6
00:02:02.080 --> 00:02:25.560
>> 483 straight. >> The committee also discussed representation taxes on some Yeah. So, do I have a motion? >> I'll form a motion to approve. >> I'll second. >> I have a second. All in favor?

7
00:02:25.560 --> 00:02:51.760
>> I >> I Passes 4 0. All right. I guess now we've moved on. Yeah, to this next agenda, which is Did everyone have a chance to look over

8
00:02:51.760 --> 00:03:07.800
the agenda? >> Yes. >> All right. Do do cuz I did a lot of kind of brainstorming on this subject, and a little bit of just a tiny bit quick bit of history is the first committee that I served on when I moved here in 2013 was roads and

9
00:03:07.800 --> 00:03:24.200
trails. And we have been talking about uh a trail system, greenway system, a uh I was involved in that conversation since then, and I know it was going on prior to that. So, I just did a

10
00:03:24.200 --> 00:03:40.120
bunch of digging on what other communities do, if they're doing it, how they're doing it, and how we might be able to >> [clears throat] >> follow along. Welcome, Laura. >> Welcome. I'm going to chime in on you

11
00:03:40.120 --> 00:03:56.280
have been spearheading trail system in the community for probably 15 years. And personally, I'm a little irritated that we're sitting here talking about it again. So, >> So, hopefully

12
00:03:56.280 --> 00:04:13.200
I'm loaded for bear. >> I'm I'm with you. >> Okay, so I don't know. I did a bunch of homework that I'm going to just I tried to keep very succinct and sort of in a a manner that we can all just sort of

13
00:04:13.200 --> 00:04:28.160
cruise along with it. And and um I don't know, maybe you want copies of this for so you guys can follow along. >> If you want, you can make copies. >> Can we do that? Do you want to This is all This is a bunch of research, house bills, and what other communities are doing.

14
00:04:28.160 --> 00:04:45.400
>> I I think it would be great for staff who's not up to speed to have this homework for sure. >> Um Is Jeff not with us? >> No, he's he's out of town today. >> Okay. Cuz he's been with the town what?

15
00:04:45.400 --> 00:05:01.120
>> I think it's 5 years. Yeah, I think so. >> I mean, he would be a decent reference at this point as well. But >> So, uh chair, if you don't mind, um so uh at the last council meeting, I went to the council and I basically said the

16
00:05:01.120 --> 00:05:16.800
ULDC, the materials that we review and evaluate is uh what the what the town council provides us. So, I said, "Okay, we we kind of worked on line of sight, we worked on signs, you know, where where where do you want

17
00:05:16.800 --> 00:05:32.240
us to go at this point?" And then that was the discussion that came up with um Council Member Cain, who had mentioned that she's been trying to get trails defined as parks. So, to narrow the issue a little bit because we're not the trails committee,

18
00:05:32.240 --> 00:05:48.640
right? Um our function is how do we see the trails being defined under the ULDC? Okay? The ULDC presently does not zone those trails of any particular

19
00:05:48.640 --> 00:06:06.080
designation. So, they're just trails. So, the idea, I think, of the council or some individual in the past, and certainly chairperson would be able to further clarify or help out, was the idea that if we could define the

20
00:06:06.080 --> 00:06:21.680
trails as parks, potentially, if that's where you want to go, it will help in getting funding because obviously parks have a lot of potential state federal funding that we can get. We talked about equitable access because

21
00:06:21.680 --> 00:06:38.640
some of these trails are not public. They're private. So, do we How do we, you know, get them into the fold, as we say? I did provide a map that came from the public works department outlining, you know, which ones are usable trails,

22
00:06:38.640 --> 00:06:54.400
which ones are not, which we'd like to see trails. Again, that's a discussion the trails themselves really for the trail committee. Really for us, it's Do we How do we want to zone these trails? And if we do, do we want to put any

23
00:06:54.400 --> 00:07:10.480
restrictions or regulations regarding the trails? Cuz I'll give an example. If you were to put it under a governmental, like an institutional, that means that a fire station could go on the trails. I'm not saying realistically it could, but that's a permitted use. So, maybe we

24
00:07:10.480 --> 00:07:26.200
want to put it under parks or put it under something, and then just say, but a trail, it can be no wider than 5 ft or whatever it is. So, that way we're restricting it so it stays in that trail designation. So, that's kind of what this committee has been asked to

25
00:07:26.200 --> 00:07:42.960
evaluate is How should we designate those trails as? Turn over to the chair. >> Uh okay. So, while that all is probably accurate, what I'm thinking more is a little outside of the box because for 14

26
00:07:42.960 --> 00:07:59.320
years that I've been around, we've been told how we can't do it, and I'm going to try and figure out a way how we can. >> Sounds good. >> So, instead of us I think there's two ways to do it. One is an overlay, which which would speak to your

27
00:07:59.320 --> 00:08:17.200
conversation about a conservation or uh What was the other one? >> Activity. >> Yeah, yeah, the green with something. The other way to do it The other way to do it would be to have a land use designation, a future land use designation, and then UALDC

28
00:08:17.200 --> 00:08:33.520
would write the permitted use. So, change a land use designation to something like My thought was something like the public greenway and canal corridor initiative, making it so that it's not just about greenways, but it's also

29
00:08:33.520 --> 00:08:49.480
about preserving, restoring the canals and themselves, the um water quality within the canals, and and trying to make it it connective not not just to existing parks, but throughout

30
00:08:49.480 --> 00:09:05.600
the town as best we can. Like you said, all of those properties may not belong to the town. However, House Bill one It's in my notes. HB 111335 and HB 1337 is um

31
00:09:05.600 --> 00:09:21.240
language that this that the governor signed that says easements can be considered greenways and trails, and can be designated as such, and that uh the land use the would would be under a

32
00:09:21.240 --> 00:09:37.680
recreational on public lands, meaning that this doesn't change a recreational so that that's not going to allow for any scary other things to come in, but it also would allow for things like benches or

33
00:09:37.680 --> 00:09:55.960
fishing um docks or crossovers, let's say, where somebody doesn't want to allow a a an equestrian or a pedestrian or bicycle down their piece of property that runs too close to the canal. Maybe with some funding we could make a crossover that

34
00:09:55.960 --> 00:10:13.560
can double as a fishing pier or net cast netting pier. Let the horse, bicycles, whatever go out and then go back in. I'm again the feasibility, this is a long-term vision. And and also this whole idea does nothing but

35
00:10:13.560 --> 00:10:30.360
complement our comprehensive plan and our strategic um our strategy a framework that was that we established in 2025. I mean, all of this for open spaces and conservation and preservation and and repairing and

36
00:10:30.360 --> 00:10:45.600
maintaining and our our canals. I mean, this is all part of our rural identity and I think that those canals could easily fit into a historical legacy um category that would also give us some

37
00:10:45.600 --> 00:11:01.320
availability to funding for through the the Greenway Trails Act that was established and I believe it was 1996 and the last implementation into it was in 2023 where the governor said towns can be recognized as trail towns.

38
00:11:01.320 --> 00:11:17.080
So, there is a lot of opportunity out there for us to start pushing towards having a a a connectivity, you know, for public health. I mean, I think everybody in town should be within a reasonable distance of being

39
00:11:17.080 --> 00:11:32.400
able to walk somewhere without having to be on B road or C road the you know, and be hit by a sod truck or manure truck. [laughter] I mean, it would be really nice if I could ride my bike safely to Publix.

40
00:11:32.400 --> 00:11:48.480
>> You can the trails. There's too many dips and divots and everything in there. >> But but I mean okay today, but I would I take my chances on the trail over B road. >> I've ridden on them. They don't have a problem with it.

41
00:11:48.480 --> 00:12:04.920
I would take my chance on there rather than the trail. No, I'm telling I've fallen in the hole today. >> I I okay, clearly I don't mean the trails in the in the in the in the in the condition that they're in now. Right? And I don't think anybody does. I mean I'd really like to see water and fish back in the canals and and the

42
00:12:04.920 --> 00:12:20.200
kites and you know. >> You got fresh water level first off. >> Right? And so maybe we'd get some funding to fix our weirs because we're we're contributing the canals into a conserv- a park. That That is the whole idea. It's it

43
00:12:20.200 --> 00:12:35.839
it's the canal system as a whole and where the trails can go would be a would be an added benefit. >> When you're speaking of it being a public area >> Public means the town owns it. >> Okay, but it's not

44
00:12:35.839 --> 00:12:52.720
>> privately owned property. >> Okay. >> Here. >> Well, my thing was is okay, somebody from Wellings I didn't get the thumbs over. Does that make sense? >> Oh, oh these are my originals. Thank you so much. Yeah, it's like >> What are you doing? >> I don't know.

45
00:12:52.720 --> 00:13:07.360
I'm sorry, go ahead. >> Somebody comes from Wilmington and they want to go up and down there, where are they going to park? >> That's part of it. We figure out where trailheads go. Right? And at this moment right now it's C road. They can pull their trailers in and park there.

46
00:13:07.360 --> 00:13:24.320
>> And there's also a trailhead in the Wholefoods Plaza or there was one slated for us to use months ago in the center. >> Right. So the so we we also there that's a for future on on lands that the that the

47
00:13:24.320 --> 00:13:40.400
town acquires, those could be things that we look into. So, this this little piece of property that the town acquires for whatever reason would be in a nice spot for a trailhead for horse trailers or you know, how whatever that I'm not

48
00:13:40.400 --> 00:13:55.960
talking specifically horses, either. I mean, I like this to be a multi-use greenway. >> Well, I know my grandson goes out and fishes in the canal out front. >> Right. >> On B Road, he walks up and down. >> Right. >> You know, so that's not a problem. There

49
00:13:55.960 --> 00:14:13.120
is plenty of fish in there. Um not necessarily the kind you take home and eat, but >> On B Road, but let's go up north. >> C Road, also, to see and collect them. >> South, all the south roads, but the the northern canals, I think, are are pretty lackluster as far as water

50
00:14:13.120 --> 00:14:29.920
level goes. >> Okay. >> I'm I'm pretty certain they're all >> South Florida Water Management uh control the height of the canals. >> If we had a properly working weir. There's a lot >> We have our own water control district.

51
00:14:29.920 --> 00:14:45.960
>> We we do. >> Well, I know that, but I mean we're talking about the height of the uh water in the canal. If I have it as 3 ft in mine in front of my house on B, and it's 1 and 1/2 up on North B,

52
00:14:45.960 --> 00:15:02.120
then who's controlling >> Well, I'm just talking about water as being part of the whole program, not exactly who's going to pull the lever. That's for bigger, better minds than mine. Right, I'm no lawyer. So, and I and I I'm these >> I hear what you're saying.

53
00:15:02.120 --> 00:15:17.520
>> Right. >> I think it's a good idea. I'm not into the horses. I don't have horses. >> Right, nor nor do I. Not anymore. >> take away from someone else who does have >> Wait, but you have grandkids who like to fish on it. So, and you know,

54
00:15:17.520 --> 00:15:32.080
>> And it's a good place for him to ride his bicycle down the easement, so that he's not having to worry about being hit on B. >> Right. >> One question. Now, the town has access to easements, right? Because the

55
00:15:32.080 --> 00:15:50.240
easements for water and earth, but they're owned on property. So, if you make it to a public park's destination, do we have to buy the property? >> We've already purchased I would say approximately 70% of the the easements um along the canals

56
00:15:50.240 --> 00:16:06.880
belong to the town. >> I think the biggest portion is the path along next to the canals. >> Yeah. Well, it's the canal and the easement. >> So, we already own 70%? >> I That's a guess. That's a >> Or close. >> That's why I did the map. I figured it

57
00:16:06.880 --> 00:16:22.480
was easy to kind of tell which ones we own and don't own. Um >> But, if we have first state statute access to any of the easements anyway, then how can people block us from using the easement? >> So, the question ultimately comes to what is the purpose of the easement? If

58
00:16:22.480 --> 00:16:39.920
the easement is just for maintenance, for example, the canals, that's not necessarily open to the public even though it's an easement. The easement would have to be open to the public for the purpose of whatever we're planning, whatever that is. >> For access. >> To you know, access to horses or fishing

59
00:16:39.920 --> 00:16:54.839
or whatever it is. So, we just have to be careful on on how we word the easement. I know there's a lot My discussions with Craig was basically that there's still a lot of um area that we do need to obtain access to, whether that's through an

60
00:16:54.839 --> 00:17:10.920
easement or through ownership. Um you know, ownership is probably easier cuz it's easier to control. You can put signage up and things like that. Um you know, but I And I think it kind of goes to the chair's point, which you know, if we define it as greenways or however we

61
00:17:10.920 --> 00:17:28.319
define it, you create a plan and that plan is then how you implement it, right? So, you figure out priority, what we prioritize, how much it's going to cost us, you know, how we get the funding, uh you know, in order to cover those costs. Um and that would then

62
00:17:28.319 --> 00:17:45.000
include what the trails would look like cuz I think that's been part of the conversation here, particularly like on B where the signage isn't very good. Um you know, how do we want to put this and you know, a good good point that the chair brought in, is it a multi-use trail? Is multi-use trails are

63
00:17:45.000 --> 00:18:00.080
particularly wide. >> It would be considered a linear park, multi-use trail. I mean, if you look down on my notes there, I don't know what I don't have them numbered. Um there there's a page that starts with separate the land use designation from the permitted use.

64
00:18:00.080 --> 00:18:16.160
Right? This is where you you Karen wrote um institutional or whatever. Uh instead, it it would be the future land use designation. My idea was public greenway and canal corridor. >> Okay. >> The purpose for that would be a public

65
00:18:16.160 --> 00:18:31.600
land use designation of publicly owned canal rights of way, drainage easements associated with lands intended to preserve water resources, restore native habitat, preserve passive recreational opportunities, establish linear parks and trails, protect scenic rural character, and service components of the

66
00:18:31.600 --> 00:18:49.880
town's official parks and official parks and recreation system. So, then ULDC, what what we would do as permitted uses would would would be linear parks, multi-use trails, equestrian trails, walking, biking paths. The that's how I

67
00:18:49.880 --> 00:19:07.200
sort of envisioned it. I you know, I don't know the language as far as the designation itself. I imagine goes to P&Z. >> Well, how it if we're creating a land use, then we'd have to amend the comprehensive plan. So, we'd add in a

68
00:19:07.200 --> 00:19:24.000
brand new section, which is what I think you're recommending called public greenway and canal corridor. >> Right, it's either or the overlay discussion if there's if there's a lot of pushback on on a new land use. >> Right. >> I don't know, you know, I don't know which way the wind's going to blow this on that. I'm not

69
00:19:24.000 --> 00:19:40.120
>> Plus it's it's timing also. Um, you know, land use um we adopted and it goes to the state. And the state has the option, only if it's a state interest, I can't um I don't want to say they never comment, but something like this is really within

70
00:19:40.120 --> 00:19:56.440
the local control. I mean, if it's affecting an airport or affecting a port, you know, that's where they generally have comments regarding comp plan amendments. Um, but it's still they have 60 days to review it. So, this to a to create a new future

71
00:19:56.440 --> 00:20:14.400
land use category is going to be at least four or five months before we can get into place. Again, not saying we waited this long. >> [laughter] >> But, versus having an existing future land use and amending the zoning code to

72
00:20:14.400 --> 00:20:31.200
address what's in the land use. So, there's two ways there's no right or wrong to the answer. I mean, obviously if you do a land use designation, that's a stronger um category than than doing something just in the in the ULDC.

73
00:20:31.200 --> 00:20:46.600
So, they each have their advantages and disadvantages. >> Well, the overlay is um goes to Article 35 uh and the um Florida State Law, which says parks and rec zoning district, also Article 4, which is a

74
00:20:46.600 --> 00:21:02.520
a conservation district. I mean, those are both viable overlay options for um consideration. I mean, I I don't I Again, I suppose it all depends on which way the wind blows.

75
00:21:02.520 --> 00:21:17.000
>> Well, I get your idea. Your idea sounds great, but then And sounds like it would cost a buck buttload of money, which our town doesn't have. Unless we get funding from the state to support I was uh redoing these trails, making them walkable like Karen was saying.

76
00:21:17.000 --> 00:21:32.520
There's no divots, there's sugar sand. You're not going to be running on them, walking them. The horses can go on them the best of all. So, it would take a lot of money. It's a great vision. I just don't see us having that kind of money unless we get the state money. >> Exactly, but you can't get the state

77
00:21:32.520 --> 00:21:51.480
money without having the plan. It right. So, you got to start somewhere. And >> But what about the naughty people who already use the trails? >> It And this is where it I love the vision of it being formalized. What

78
00:21:51.480 --> 00:22:08.520
What simple step can we take to advance your vision? What would be the first logical step? And I don't mean to put you on the spot. I mean this as a question to all of us. What is the first thing we can do because historically, just to bring you

79
00:22:08.520 --> 00:22:24.640
up to speed, we've had council people sit up here and say like, "Yes, we've got it." And then at the meeting where they go to vote, one of them says, "Oh, wait. No, we need to discuss fencing." Fencing? You've been talking about this for months. Now you're going to talk about fencing? So, fencing gets thrown to the side, Tom

80
00:22:24.640 --> 00:22:41.720
Goldsbury, and then they bring it up again for a vote. And now all of a sudden we have to have formalized footing, so bikes, pedestrians, kids dragging wagons, bicycles, and horses can use it, Tom Goldsbury. So, it it's almost like

81
00:22:41.720 --> 00:22:57.120
there have been roadblocks thrown at this perpetually. So, and God bless Joe for hanging on for 15-plus years. What's the first step that you see to solidify this? >> I think the first step is for

82
00:22:57.120 --> 00:23:13.320
I suppose for us to figure out a plan in either direction. A, if it if if if if it is going to be a comp plan amendment and a land use and land use change as a designation, then we write language

83
00:23:13.320 --> 00:23:28.120
that would support it in UDC. And or if that's not the way the wind blows politically this time this time around or both. I mean, I guess we should do both. Right do the same for if it's an overlay.

84
00:23:28.120 --> 00:23:45.760
>> Which is stronger, the land use? >> Correct. >> Which has more of a potential success rate? >> Politically speaking, I'm thinking that's a that's going to be the holdback is where everybody's going to lean on that. >> Politically state, politically local,

85
00:23:45.760 --> 00:24:01.640
politically >> Locally. >> I Again, I think the chair made a great point, which is I think the state is actually looking for the local governments to implement these things. So, I I'm really I'd be surprised it was if it was a

86
00:24:01.640 --> 00:24:19.520
state objection. Now, I hedge that because all you need is one person to write to the state and it derails it, you know. But, um you know, certainly stronger with your comp plan designation for the greenways

87
00:24:19.520 --> 00:24:36.560
and then to amend either as a district or as an overlay in an existing zoning district. Because what we do is the land use basically says we're creating a greenways and corridor canal corridor and then says these zoning districts

88
00:24:36.560 --> 00:24:54.560
would be compatible with this land use. Right? Or we can create our own zoning district to be compatible. You can do it either way. Am I making sense? So, you can either take existing and saying these all existing

89
00:24:54.560 --> 00:25:11.320
zoning districts would be compatible with whatever the new land use is or you can create your own zoning district. And again, it's the land use that the state has the option to comment, not on the ULDC amendments.

90
00:25:11.320 --> 00:25:28.040
>> We have a paragraph in the comp plan about greenways. Yes, we do. >> Yep. >> Sections I know it's not I don't think it's one cuz that's all the special provisions. But anyway, can we work with that? What

91
00:25:28.040 --> 00:25:43.520
language we already have or is that no bueno? >> It's going to help you to adopt a new future land use designation, but you do need that that There's a chart that's actually in our the comp plan that outlines the different land uses and

92
00:25:43.520 --> 00:25:59.320
what, you know, density is allowed. Obviously, here we would put none in, but you know, what density, what what its intent is, and you know, what ultimately the zoning district that would be compatible with it. Could be one, could be more. It's really, you

93
00:25:59.320 --> 00:26:15.320
know, up to the town to make a decision on what it is. And I don't think it's going to be from a perspective that can all be done in house. Jeff and I can certainly handle that and present it. So, I don't think it'll cost anything from anybody outside to do it. It's just I think you Joe is

94
00:26:15.320 --> 00:26:30.320
and Laura both said, you know, the political wherewithal. You know, what what is it that the council, you know, is willing to go forward with? Um, you know, I had There were no objections made when I was asked to bring this forward.

95
00:26:30.320 --> 00:26:46.920
Um >> Right. >> So >> You just used a great word, wherewithal. So But seriously >> March >> Yeah. >> And and then the next March >> Exactly. So, we as a group of five come up with something

96
00:26:46.920 --> 00:27:02.800
staff runs ahead with it, and then now we play political football with Well, I don't like that. It wasn't my idea or you know, whatever dumb thing comes up like you just said March. How do we safeguard it? >> I don't like it.

97
00:27:02.800 --> 00:27:18.760
>> At all? >> No. I mean, I don't know anybody here who lives on one of those parcels next to a trail, but there's a lot of people that come there, hang out, bring their coolers, party, and throw their garbage over my fence. And if you think I want a

98
00:27:18.760 --> 00:27:36.600
bench there and more people? No, I don't. >> Okay, benches can come off. That was just an example. >> No, I'm saying you're going to make it more for people to hang out and that's the last thing I want on the corner of my property. My Sorry but >> My My argument to that My argument to

99
00:27:36.600 --> 00:27:52.240
that Karen really and please do not don't know this is no of no disrespect. But I gave up my property for a road that everybody drives on. >> I did too. >> Right? So and and >> And do you Do I want more? >> And fair and like what it's already an

100
00:27:52.240 --> 00:28:07.920
easement. Let's make it beautiful. And and and clean so that people are >> Trees that were there would have been beautiful, but they killed everything that was in that easement to make it that trail. There used to be beautiful oaks, pines,

101
00:28:07.920 --> 00:28:23.480
uh gopher tortoises, and everything living in there. But this town killed it all. >> Well, now we're trying to fix it. You can't live in the old. We have to go forward. Forward forward forward. We have like the only way to get there from here is that way.

102
00:28:23.480 --> 00:28:39.240
Just add leg. All right. You know, and and I I I get it. >> Okay, I I want to say that on the easement on the road in front of my house my [clears throat] neighbor put up a gate.

103
00:28:39.240 --> 00:28:55.080
Gave the key to the guys that, you know, cut the grass. But anyway, he put up a gate. And the reason why he put up a gate is because somebody from one of the horse areas around the corner

104
00:28:55.080 --> 00:29:11.160
decided one morning they were running a little late and they had six horses in tow riding one horse >> That's Poland. >> Mhm. >> and and almost ran the man over in his own yard as he was out there doing his yard work.

105
00:29:11.160 --> 00:29:27.280
Granted, he was in the easement, but still he was he was doing the yard work out there. Okay. He spoke to the guy about not doing that again. When he spoke to him that if he was going to exercise the horses at least when he got to his place, would he walk them?

106
00:29:27.280 --> 00:29:43.200
>> Mhm. >> So that nobody would have an accident with my baby going to you know. And and he really went out bought the gate got a permit from the town put the gate up and that was that. That stopped the guy

107
00:29:43.200 --> 00:29:58.760
from being able to come on the property. Now granted that's a one-off just like the people that you have that throw their trash down. >> Mine's not a one-off. It happens regularly. >> Same people all the time. >> It's not always same people. We have a lot of traffic on that corner because

108
00:29:58.760 --> 00:30:15.600
it's a big area and they park there. >> Okay. Okay. Basically the the rude people and the nasty people are the ones that ruin it for everybody else. >> Yeah. Um if we let them >> I know when I moved out here, I wasn't used to horses and I'm still not really

109
00:30:15.600 --> 00:30:31.480
used to horses. I mean we had a pony at one point, but that's the closest thing I got to a horse. And whenever I would see people on horses going down the road I would always slow down to a crawl because all I could think of is here's

110
00:30:31.480 --> 00:30:47.600
this you know, 2,000 lb beast the person riding wasn't experienced you know, we could all be in an accident. And so when we talk about the um greenways here and and using the

111
00:30:47.600 --> 00:31:08.200
easements and the roads and stuff, okay, who's going to be responsible for if somebody has an accident? >> Florida state's no-fault equine. >> Uh who's going to have >> Florida state is no-fault equine. >> All right. >> So, you you you you you know when you

112
00:31:08.200 --> 00:31:24.560
ride a horse that you are taking your life into your hands. That's the That's the sign-off. That's why when you if you drive through town, you'll see that that that um ordinance posted on um every equine equestrian property throughout town. >> Okay, well, what if I didn't know that

113
00:31:24.560 --> 00:31:39.640
that's what it was? >> That's >> Not that I would initiate an accident, but >> it you would still find out. I mean, the law is not going to >> Um fact or fiction, so I'm out riding on the easement, I lose control of my

114
00:31:39.640 --> 00:31:55.520
horse, and you know, it causes an accident or property damage, I'm liable because I have taken the assumption of that statute. I ride at my own risk, and I am responsible.

115
00:31:55.520 --> 00:32:10.520
>> Exactly. >> So. >> I guess what that statute covers. >> Okay. >> All right. >> Yeah. >> So, the chair has proposed two options. So, option one is a new future land use

116
00:32:10.520 --> 00:32:26.560
designation entitled greenway canal corridor. >> W- I mean, we Any other names are completely >> [laughter] >> This is just a week. >> So, we with that with a new I think a new zoning district is what you were suggesting, I think. >> Yeah, that's one way.

117
00:32:26.560 --> 00:32:42.280
>> The other way is to use our existing land use, and then create an overlay district in one of the districts that I provided. More likely, probably the parks one is probably the most appropriate. Or you can go another direction. So, I

118
00:32:42.280 --> 00:32:57.720
just want to give you again to get back to what direction does this group like to do? Do you want to bring back the the more uh supportive The most supportive is the comp plan amendment.

119
00:32:57.720 --> 00:33:15.080
>> Mhm. >> The quicker one is the over minutes. >> I vote a comp plan amendment. >> I vote >> want to see it all get unraveled. >> I agree. >> We've been unraveling for 15 years. >> I vote. >> I agree. >> Now, if it goes under the parks though,

120
00:33:15.080 --> 00:33:32.320
wouldn't we be eligible for more state funding to help pay for this? Or >> 100%. >> So, >> Did you see all the Did you see the list of all the fundings? >> Yes, they go together though. I mean, if you do what you're proposing and then call it a parks plan. >> It's the use that would that would drive

121
00:33:32.320 --> 00:33:48.120
the um incentive for us to receive funding. >> Okay. >> Well, what we'll do is we'll do in the land use. We'll call it a linear park. >> Yes. >> And that's the magic language that will get you the fund. >> Okay. >> Do people acquiesce

122
00:33:48.120 --> 00:34:04.800
their land in this linear park? >> In some districts they have. In some they've let it over time be turned over and some people have even done some districts Not suggesting, don't misunderstand me. Some have done They've even donated.

123
00:34:04.800 --> 00:34:23.280
It depends on where you're at and what's going on in the situation, but you know. >> Well, I think we have enough almost shovel-ready areas that if this were to go through, that it could

124
00:34:23.280 --> 00:34:39.679
we could have start the project, you know, for start the search for funding and and have some really stellar um examples of what what it could look like and then hopefully, you know, others will see the vision.

125
00:34:39.679 --> 00:34:57.480
>> What would you use the shovel for? I'm serious. Would it be for landscaping? Would it be for signs? Would it be for >> I you know, honestly, Laura, I got this on what, Thursday? And this is really where my concentration has been as far as what the first step would be.

126
00:34:57.480 --> 00:35:13.120
I I don't I mean, I don't know. I identifying the next spot to start and then then then looking at that and letting it tell you what what the shovel would be used for, I guess. I don't know. I mean, I haven't been out on a on a trail since I retired my horse, so I

127
00:35:13.120 --> 00:35:32.560
I don't know. It's so sad. [laughter] >> Our next meeting, the land use, you've already done the groundwork, so thank you. I'm not on this and the zoning cuz we have to actually do four parts. >> Right. >> Cuz we need to adopt the land use and

128
00:35:32.560 --> 00:35:48.800
the zoning district and then we need to change our maps. We need to change the land use map and the zoning map now to designate the areas that are under these new land use and zoning designations. What I would suggest is why don't I bring to the next meeting Craig with me

129
00:35:48.800 --> 00:36:04.880
and we can talk a little further about what his vision is, what your vision is as far as the map is concerned. On what we're going to designate cuz we have to do those two parts. We have to do first create the land use, create the zoning

130
00:36:04.880 --> 00:36:20.920
and then we have to change the maps. >> Well, don't we have a PA PA um, printout of what those purchased easements >> The map I have is the map I was given. To be honest with you. >> Kashabar

131
00:36:20.920 --> 00:36:37.040
has got to have something in their archives. Yeah. >> It's is much when I asked around on this, you know, obviously not really long enough to put in a map. That's why my suggestion is I'd like to, you know, cuz again, I think some of the emphasis

132
00:36:37.040 --> 00:36:53.560
has been on the canals, which I believe there's been some resistance from higher people about getting that place. So, I want to make sure What do you mean the resistance has been the canals? Putting a path in by the canal because of the liability.

133
00:36:54.240 --> 00:37:11.240
Because I don't recall all that. I don't recall that ever but it's a possibility. I'm just looking at the vision on, you know, again, the designation doesn't guarantee payment, doesn't guarantee anything's going to be done. Right. It's just the

134
00:37:11.240 --> 00:37:27.480
late work so that if we want to go forward, we've already started, right? And I would say to me the next step after we get all this done would be then for both or the trails committee to now create your greenway trail plan

135
00:37:27.480 --> 00:37:43.720
and then present that to the council for the council then to approve that to go forward. >> I have a question about the map. Maybe it's a little question but why isn't the south side of Okeechobee there pink or green? Is it that they're not allowed to not allowed to use Okeechobee cuz that's a

136
00:37:43.720 --> 00:37:59.880
whole big area? I've seen horses go down there all the time. >> 100% and it could be used in the except for that >> Connect everything right there from the green. >> going down some of these. >> No, it's the south side of Okeechobee. Actually, it's a big area. >> Okeechobee's

137
00:37:59.880 --> 00:38:15.800
southern? Southern is actually part of a >> system. >> trail system. >> Exactly. >> We're the only section >> Yep. >> from the water to the other side of the state that actually has the multi-use trail in place.

138
00:38:15.800 --> 00:38:33.120
And again, that's, you know, this is also the discussion that you have to have. I mean, we talked when in the planning terms and you talk talk a multi-use trail, it's typically 10 to 12 ft in width. That may be not something you're thinking of. You may be just thinking of multi-use just means it's a person, it's

139
00:38:33.120 --> 00:38:49.800
a it's a horse, it's, you know, whatever you want to put in >> So maybe that vernacular comes out and it's just a greenway. And then we can make it whatever size we Okay, so yeah, okay. >> That's your zoning code book. Like I said, I want you to think about things like we talked about, you know, do we

140
00:38:49.800 --> 00:39:05.560
want it to be a certain width so that it doesn't become 20 ft. Do we want to have it um you know, in one of the jurisdictions I was in in Parkland, they required all the paths not to be concrete or asphalt. >> But we're we're but we're working within a finite area

141
00:39:05.560 --> 00:39:21.800
already because it's 50 to 60 ft that was dedicated and the easements and part of that's the road, part of it's the canal and the other part is the easement. So we don't have a lot of room to pick we get it's just I think the trail is going to have to be a little organic

142
00:39:21.800 --> 00:39:38.280
but not to exceed blah blah blah. >> Exactly what I was saying. >> Okay. >> Our preference would be to be blank >> Mhm. >> if we have the right of way and easement to do that. >> Yeah. >> So that we have a standard in place so if anybody somebody wants to dedicate

143
00:39:38.280 --> 00:39:53.480
you can say, oh, we want 5 ft cuz that's what our rule is is we have 5 ft or whatever it is. >> And can we just go back? I'm sorry. I'm but to the map problem. This there's got to be a map somewhere. Like like Laura said, Kasha Varas

144
00:39:53.480 --> 00:40:10.440
because they did that whole study for the roads and and um >> Yes. >> there has to be a >> I'll see what I can find but again >> And then we could overlay that onto yeah, cuz I believe I don't think C roads got enough room, period.

145
00:40:10.440 --> 00:41:11.680
Like we like C road may have to just be completely, you know, you can walk down it like this. >> [laughter] >> Right. 100%. Right. Well, we would have to, I would think. I mean, I I see.

146
00:41:14.400 --> 00:42:07.040
Yeah. What would Craig's input be? He would help us with this. I don't know the infrastructure. Craig's the public works director, so he should be able to let you know, just like the chair had said, um you know, does seem have enough width?

147
00:42:07.040 --> 00:42:23.920
Do the canals have enough width? Or whatever it is. I'm not saying they don't. I'm just saying he's the one who should know about all about the infrastructure and might be able to give some idea of, you know, where we are in this. You know, what what has he already done? What is he doing? Have

148
00:42:23.920 --> 00:42:39.920
willing to donate land? I don't know that either because that's not my conversation. It would be something he would have with the infrastructure aspect. >> Just my opinion, I don't think this discussion is ready for him. Me too. Me either. Yeah. Um

149
00:42:39.920 --> 00:42:56.680
>> Again, I'm always going to make suggestions >> But I still think we could we should look for a map. Try 2019. Yeah, because she they were purchased in 2017, weren't they? Yeah. >> I'll get a map.

150
00:42:56.680 --> 00:43:12.200
So, and then not correct yet. Uh and then land use and new land use new zoning? New land use? >> Something undoable. >> Something undoable. I force you to say there is no such animal. I need to say

151
00:43:12.200 --> 00:43:31.000
it. Harder in some ways and easier in other ways, but never undoable. >> I like the linear park language. >> Yeah. Yes. >> Okay. >> And I think that would be strong. I'm I'm not going to use the word very, but easier to implement.

152
00:43:31.000 --> 00:43:46.400
>> The more common terminology, the easier it is and then linear parks are pretty much all the time. >> And that list of towns that I that gave you, that's exactly what those most of those are. Linear parks. So.

153
00:43:46.400 --> 00:44:02.160
>> Hey Joe. Jog jog my memory. Isn't 40th already a trail? It's the blue line up on the top where it says town staff working and this goes back to the

154
00:44:02.160 --> 00:44:20.800
mysterious Mazelotti $40,000? Hey. bridge. Um >> I believe. >> Cuz with right you with we've got the connectivity right there from north down F over to the north down F again.

155
00:44:20.800 --> 00:44:36.800
>> And we connect to two parks. >> Yeah. >> And we connect to the Southern Boulevard multi-trail system, Florida state system. It's we've got it on three fronts. But I'm not sure north is completely done. >> I always was under the assumption that it

156
00:44:36.800 --> 00:44:56.800
was designated. But anyway, obviously could be wrong, needs some digging. >> Yeah, I don't >> No pun intended. But so we already have a connected linear We have the park there. >> picture. >> This park. >> This map is 2008. So it's not the newest

157
00:44:56.800 --> 00:45:12.000
map, obviously. >> This is This is 2008? >> Well on the bottom page, June 2008. >> With Oh my god, this is Giordano and Associates. Wow. >> So give me the opportunity in order to try to see if I can get a hold of Kish

158
00:45:12.000 --> 00:45:26.520
of ours and see if there's a later one. Like I said, I you know, asked out, this is what I received. I wanted to give you something rather than nothing. Because it's hard to talk about trails when we don't have a visual. >> And do you have access to

159
00:45:26.520 --> 00:45:44.160
YouTube recorded meetings? Because and I and again, I don't mean to simplify this. Um At the end of Jamie Titcomb's first year which would have been 2019, there was

160
00:45:44.160 --> 00:46:01.000
quite a discussion over B Road. And one of the things that he did was we had it was like seven or eight big maps in this room lined up along the wall.

161
00:46:01.400 --> 00:46:16.560
And it was everything from commercial, residential, parcel counts, land use maps, trail maps, and it was all lined up on that wall. >> Pretty sure and I'm pretty sure that's where the traffic circle that was

162
00:46:16.560 --> 00:46:32.440
supposed to go up by the college was. >> Mhm. >> So that was either that meeting was either November of 2019 or December of 2019. >> I'll see if I can try to find it. And it was some of those that were actually hanging up in our wall. >> Mhm. Huh.

163
00:46:32.440 --> 00:46:50.200
I'll dig through meeting notes, see if I can find it. >> Mhm. Anyway, sorry to go sideways. >> No, that's a good shiny shiny. Cuz I'm shiny shiny thing. Um do we need a motion for any of this or we're just

164
00:46:50.200 --> 00:47:07.520
Oh, you're okay with us just student balling direction out. >> direction consensus where I can go, you know, obviously a a vote is stronger. I'll give the message to the council, but I can take a consensus as well. >> How many steps, Karen, would would it

165
00:47:07.520 --> 00:47:25.160
would the difference be? Meaning I Meaning to do it, you know, the hard way, the comp plan way, and then just just Never mind. Because the the the the the ULDC's language isn't going to change either way. So our permitted use

166
00:47:25.160 --> 00:47:43.520
language is what we need to when we come back, right? Sort of think on. >> I'm pretty sure uh future land use designation with the language and how it would fit in the comp plan. >> Okay. >> kind of have a feeling for how we how it would mesh.

167
00:47:43.520 --> 00:47:59.800
Um and then my my question was, do we want to do a new zoning designation or do we want to take our existing zoning designations and modify those to address you know, the new land use.

168
00:47:59.800 --> 00:48:15.800
You can go either way. There's no right or wrong. Um either way we have to amend um you know, and my feeling is that again, the parks have presently I'm sorry, the trails presently have no designation. So, regardless of which way we go, we'd have to do a land use and a zoning map for for the trails.

169
00:48:15.800 --> 00:48:29.720
>> I vote new. >> now they basically have nothing. Their AR is all they are. >> I vote new so it's specific. >> So, what I can do is um bring back a proposed

170
00:48:29.720 --> 00:48:45.720
future land use designation. And you and again, I'm for the time being I'm going to use the designation, which is public greenway and canal corridor. But you guys can next meeting you can decide do you want something different? We're not hung up on that.

171
00:48:45.720 --> 00:49:01.240
And then I'll bring back a proposed zoning district um designation. And do we want that? We have I think we have We have parks. Do we want and then and conservation? Do

172
00:49:01.240 --> 00:49:17.760
you want something like open space? Do you want specific Do you want the same name? >> Well, open space is Well, open space is where most of the other um towns had had had put it. But I think if we use um linear parks if we use a parks in a

173
00:49:17.760 --> 00:49:34.120
recreational language, I think it's going to have a little more cuz it is recreational. It it's passive recreation, right? It is not That's that I think passive recreation needs to be the language there. >> Yes, we're thinking do you want the

174
00:49:34.120 --> 00:49:48.560
zoning district to be named linear parks? Is that what you're looking? Greenways and linear parks? Are you looking for open space and then under that is defined as linear parks and open space? >> When you say open space, I think

175
00:49:48.560 --> 00:50:08.320
frisbee, softball, football, and What do we have? We have a open space and conservation. That's what we have. Those are basically our two choices at this moment or institutional which I I No. >> Right. >> And then we have parks and recreation.

176
00:50:08.320 --> 00:50:25.560
Um which is again um passive and active parks. It's both. Um and it's generally um I think ours only applies to publicly owned. >> Right. >> It doesn't talk about private. And then we have the conservation district. Um the purpose is to protect, preserve, and

177
00:50:25.560 --> 00:50:44.000
restore lands, the natural resources, and wildlife habitat which contain historical or biological resources. >> Uh conservation sounds like a Yes. >> Well, if you want to bring back the trees that everybody killed. >> Yeah, 100% native trees, native veg.

178
00:50:44.000 --> 00:50:58.920
>> I mean, what we would do on that one is that's where you want to go is basically we add another section in the conservation district calling it linear park. >> Right. So, we have the exact language and then we can go into >> And whatever you just would passive, you

179
00:50:58.920 --> 00:51:16.000
know, it's not meant to have, you know, opening up 13 beer in whatever we want. Um and you'll be able to put your standards then in there if you want to put any standards in. Or you can leave it general and let the town make the decision however you want to do it. >> If I was

180
00:51:16.000 --> 00:51:31.440
a government institution providing money for said project, I would be much more willing to provide in something that is clearly defined as conservation, restorative, linear park.

181
00:51:31.440 --> 00:51:47.240
So, I would think that the more specific we could be, the better. Question mark? >> Well, I it there I get there's a list all the list of the grant up um upper grant opportunities. I don't think that's all of them, but it we could look into the each if you guys wanted to do

182
00:51:47.240 --> 00:52:02.360
some looking look into those what the language is on those and see which ones But most of them are all about land conservation. Um restorative Florida Communities Trust, tourist development, even like

183
00:52:02.360 --> 00:52:18.880
even those GLASS which is Greenways and Linked Open Space System. GLASS is one and and I think that's that's a state again I might brain is a little mushy so >> Um ding ding ding on tourism. You know how many people come here four season

184
00:52:18.880 --> 00:52:39.720
with their four-legged beasts 100% when they're not horse showing. Oh my god, you can go out on the trails here. They're thrilled and even if they have to cross three roads they're like, "Oh my god, the trails are great." >> So yeah. >> [laughter] >> So I think we start with that and then

185
00:52:39.720 --> 00:52:56.800
we can work on like I said get back to how we want the the maps to look. We can get them done. So we need a base first. >> Yeah. I agree. All right, do do we want a motion or do we want you can you can live with consensus? Do we have a

186
00:52:56.800 --> 00:53:13.120
So what do I do? Take a vote or if we all agree yay's or nay's? How do I do that? >> Can you summarize your consensus and then we'll vote on it? >> Perfect. >> Thank you. >> You're welcome. >> [laughter] >> Okay, so um what I'm hearing and then

187
00:53:13.120 --> 00:53:28.960
again we can do this probably if you want to do it you just do it as a motion. I mean there's easier way to do it but um the um uh a motion in order to um propose an introduction of a new future

188
00:53:28.960 --> 00:53:46.960
land use designation noted as public Greenway and Canal Corridor but subject to change. >> The name in name. >> In name, right? And a proposed zoning district designation very specific particularly in regards to assisting in

189
00:53:46.960 --> 00:54:03.760
obtaining money and including linear parks as specific as we can be. >> I make a motion to accept Karen's consensus summary. >> Second. >> Motion in a second. All in favor? >> I.

190
00:54:03.760 --> 00:54:25.720
>> I. Passes 4-1. >> All right. >> Hey. Think. Facebook. >> Is it right? >> Do we have So yeah, we can let's wait wait wait wait I got I got to get my agenda.

191
00:54:25.720 --> 00:54:43.720
>> Hold on. >> Next meeting is August 10th. 4:00? >> Is it? >> Yeah. >> Okay. And then okay, we're really there. That'd be great. >> Bless you. Bless you. >> God bless you.

192
00:54:43.720 --> 00:55:02.720
>> Bless you. >> Love, money. >> One more. >> Oh. >> All right, so there it is. We'll wait. Okay. Helpful. Do I have a motion to adjourn?

193
00:55:02.720 --> 00:55:20.160
Motion to adjourn? Second? >> Second. >> Seconded by Karen. All in favor? I. All in favor five to zero. So it passes five to zero. Great. That was awesome, you guys. Indeed. >> [clears throat]

194
00:55:20.160 --> 00:55:26.440
>> That's so Thank you, ladies. >> Thank you. >> Yeah, thank you, guys. That was a great.