##VIDEO ID:vUUQ9ylGMW8## e e e e e e e e all right everybody the mics are on mics mics are on um did we hear a call to order yes okay we're as orderly as we're going to get yeah okay got it um roll call we are actually all here um can I get a motion for approval of minutes approval of the July 18th minutes I'll second that okay all in favor I I all right we're moving on to um my favorite word quad I'm so glad these are recorded it's going to be memorable moments we love you I know I know um so love me and then give me like how word assemblage that I can do I don't know why just like the Q and The U and gets me anyway um I mean Tennessee have a hard oh is that what it is because I'm from Tennessee thank you Florida Gator um all right so we're moving on to n ph-1 Pepperwood assemblage P see I told you I could got that one um zoning master final um we' like to ask any interveners there are no interveners okay expar I have no expar communication I gentlemen I have none I do okay recuse yourself do you speak to somebody about it no okay then you don't but um Mr Hartman does have a conflict his son was the broker and is listed on the disclosure of Interest so he has filed his form 8B and will not be voting on this okay understood oh I'm going to talk he's has a soap box he's always got to get on it all right um so at this point I would like to introduce um staff to present their we need to wearing the witnesses oh I'm sorry yes I'm sorry I'm a little off today please wear on any Witnesses say that will be testifying today raise your right hand do you swear or affirm that the evidence you're about to give will be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth one of the many reasons I know one of the many things um okay yes now back to this um staff will be presenting all right project at this time thank you uh members of the LPA sorry I know sometimes the names are not right so hopefully you're Brian so I'm Brian okay for the record Brian elim principal planner with the growth Management Department a copy of my work history has been filed with the clerk this is a request by hja Design Studio LLC on behalf of jam Z Properties Inc for approval of a planned unit development PUD zoning agreement including a master and final site plan for an approximate 29 and a/4 acre property located between Southeast Cove Road and Southeast Sera Road West west of Legacy Cove and south of Fern Creek included with this application is a request for a certificate of public facilities reservation the proposed development includes 43 single family lots on approximately 29 and A4 Acres resulting in a gross density of 1.47 units per acre which is below the 2 unit per acre density Allowed by the estate density 2 unit per acre future land use this proposal includes approximately 2 and A2 Acres of rideway dedication to Martin County for a rideway along Southeast Martin Cove Place Southeast Pepperwood Drive and Southeast Cove Road the proposed master final site plan includes a total open space of 76% and 6.95 Acres of freshwater Marsh Wetlands 4.41 Acres of wetland buffer and. 29 Acres of Upland habitat creation protected under a preserve area management plan that includes the removal of Exotics and resta ation of these areas with Native plantings the property consists of three undeveloped Parcels lying within the primary Urban Services district and will have access to the full complement of Public Services parcel of buts a single family lot to the southeast undeveloped um lots to the West the north side of the parcels about Southeast Martin Cove place which is only partially opened across the two northern part parel the east side of the property ABS an unopened Southeast Pepperwood Drive RightWay that this application proposes opening a distance sufficient to provide access to the east side Lots subject property has the estate density 2 units per acre future land use designation and the re12 a residential estate District zoning access to the site is proposed from Southeast Cove Road down here and Southeast Martin Cove place the 22 Lots located on the west side of the property will have access from the southeast Cove Road while the 21 Lots on the northeast side of the property will have access from Southeast Martin Cove place 10 of the Lots on the North side will have driveways on Southeast Martin Cove place while the remaining 11 Lots will access the site via the the extension of Southeast Pepperwood Drive to the development's private roadway Southeast Mandy Place excuse me article 3 division 5 of the Martin County Land Development regulations defines the purpose and intent of the planned unit development as follows planned unit development PUD is an alternative to the standard zoning District in which the landowner and the board of County Commissioners negotiate the zoning standards that will apply to the specific parcel of land such that the resulting development will be of superior quality and design while protecting the health safety and Welfare of the general public the Pud zoning allows flexibility in regard to standard zoning requirements found in the Land Development regulations but must be consistent with the requirements of the comprehensive growth management plan the plan unit development is intended to be mutually beneficial for the landowner and the board of County Commissioners the Pepperwood assemblage PUD proposal includes smaller lot sizes and setbacks compared to the existing re1 12a zoning and an increase in allowed height of 5T from 30 to 35 ft which is allowed by the comp plan all property owners have the right to transfer one half of the Wetland acreage density to Upland areas on any site which contains Wetlands if they comply with the provisions of Martin County Code section 4.2 F of the Land Development regulations in the comprehensive growth management plan policy 9 .1 g. 2.8 address these requirements this proposal was submitted for review as a plan unit development the property contains wetlands and the proposals within all the allowable thresholds necessary to allow the use of density transition provision in return this proposal offers the following public benefits a multimodal sidewalk within Pepperwood Road rideway and the 30ft existing Road easement from Martin Cove place to Cove Road this includes the removal of Exotics and path lighting construction of an 8 in gravity sewer along Southeast Martin Cove this extension will provide the opportunity for future connections by surrounding residences to the north and requires the existing road to be reconstructed entirely to install it and the owner will purchase a traffic preemption device it's approximately $6,000 this is an over riew of the proposed uh 10ft meandry multimodal sidewalk which will provide a pedestrian path from Martin Cove place to Cove Road and includes path lighting also really it uh provides pedestrian axis I think from Salerno it'll be a path from solo all the way through to Cove development review staff have found the jam Z properties ink ation to comply with all applicable regulations in the comprehensive growth management plan is detailed in the staff report staff recommends approval of this application which includes a resolution for rezoning PUD zoning agreement preserve area management plan and resolution accepting rideway dedications along Southeast Martin Cove Place Southeast Pepperwood Drive and Southeast Cove Road and that concludes the presentation I'll be happy to answer any questions Gan open for questions the buttons don't work you got to get close like this so you mentioned that the Intermodal pathway would connect uh Salerno to Cove I I don't think it actually does I don't think that this applicant is proposing that but we'll hear from the applicant well there's there's a road you know from Salo to uh down to Pepperwood so they are not constructing the path all the way up to Sero but right now there's no path through Pepperwood down to Cove Road so by opening that up there are there is an access for people on solo to come all the way down the existing Road plus using this but you're not calling that a part of the public benefit are you the multimodal path that I showed you here this is that's a that's a sidewalk that's a sidewalk and that's not the proposed sidewalk that would go to there now cuz there there's no there's none there there's none there so you can't call that part of the public benefit if it isn't there that's exactly my point well this is what the owner is proposing to construct so that is a public benefit they're constructing that they're removing the Exotics in there they're planning it uh with Native plantings per our Direction and they're creating that pathway down to Cove Madam chair yes sir Paul Schilling growth management director for the record so that the applicant is opening the the RightWay with the opportunity for the multimodal path there are existing facilities I believe and they can speak to this in just a moment to the north that will provide what is there is no pedestrian access there at the moment but it will provide for that opportunity understood thank you any other questions gentlemen um so can you tell me what the uh the traffic uh controlling device is for $6,000 I was going to ask that question too I believe that's a a device that the fire department uses that interacts with our traffic system open the gate so it's a gate opener it it changes the light the actual traffic light when they drive by traffic light that's going to be there no they're just buying one for the area not for right there it's just a public benefit they're donating it to the fire Department to use in the area so it's not going to be used in that development but Cove Road is already a disaster it's a terrible place and the school is expanding yep and it's it's right across from Anderson Middle School so because the road's not where it needs to be in a service way then you're going to tell that this property owner they can't do what they want to do yes that's not the count that's not the property owner's fault that's the County's fault for not planning ahead but maybe we could get to the point where I want to develop a property I have the money to do it and I have to pay a tax I have to pay a stamp tax that's going to go to develop those roads the way they should be I think we should go back on okay let's go back to the not talking among ourselves Madam chair Elise Elder Deputy County attorney can I just speak to that issue under Florida law a local government cannot deny an application just because a road is is failing they can't require the applicant to even bring the road up to standard the only thing that you can do is require the applicant to pay its proportionate share so for a roads failing that's under Florida law that's not sufficient grounds to deny an application technically so and is the is Road considered failing not that I'm aware of no I'm not saying that road is asking it's a D minus but we on one second the Florida law does not mean it's failing correct no concurrency no longer seems to exist okay okay as we've talked among ourselves we would to welcome our applicant please introduce yourself hi everybody good evening and thank you for your time tonight I'm Erica bitler with HJ design studio and thank you staff we've been working a diligently together for two years on this project because um we believe that it is a good project and meets the criteria of the area um and to speak on the multimodal path yes it is just uh expanding the opportunity for the existing Road in the neighborhoods to the north to have access pedestrian wise to Cove Road and it will increase the safety for the kids that are um going to Anderson now um and and the ability for the parents and stuff to help pick them up uh via a productive way rather than uh limiting the road usage of Cove Road so people who live in that Northern neighborhoods they don't have to get onto Cove Road per se and they have a safe access um to pick up their kids um that's that's one of the benefits but also another benefit is the utilities uh we're extending the 8 in sewer along uh Southeast uh Martin Cove to modernize that area and to give um an opportunity for the existing houses to be able to connect to that if they choose to what year oh I mean you they did such a good job on the presentation it's a little redundant yes how many existing houses are there so there's um existing you we proposed on the same no not proposed you said it would help the existing housing how many existing Creek PUD I don't know how many per se are in there um uh legacies are already on the legacies are already on there but it's really to connect to the Fern Creek properties there's I think a couple half acres out there and some I don't I don't really know I don't have the property appraiser on thank you yeah Erica do you have your notice I do that you need to turn in thank you see that's why we have I knew I I knew I needed something I skipped thank you uh oh I have extra information in here we met the requirement to the 14-day notice for the record all right fellow board members any questions for our applicant yeah um you haven't really told us much about what you're going to do to improve the drainage in this area this is the headwaters of fern Creek um it is already constrained it is already an area that is prone to flooding and it's getting worse um what what does your project do to improve that that circumstance and you know some of some of what was in the report to me indicated that there was going to be some reconstruction of the wetlands um as well as just removing Exotics can you go into some more detail about that um yes I'm not the environmental or the PE on this but I do know that there is a perimeter burm that will be in the back of the Lots uh to help you know keep all the drainage in um not just going right into the Wetland so there'll be some sheet flow there's a chain of dry Retention Ponds um do you have my presentation Brian that you can that we can pull up the graphic slide yeah thank you I think it's slide seven we're all visual Learners here well I don't know about that but I am I like drawings Learners oh I'm not a Wordsmith so feeling I it's a long day that next yeah okay so in this graphic you can see um the orange Lots there's 22 on the let's just say the West Side uh that axises off Cove and then there's 21 off of uh the Pepperwood and Mar in place so for the west side there is a chain 1 two 3 4 um and one small one behind lot 22 uh dry retention areas that will capture tree and then I believe discharge into like the the typical system uh does for these developments but um we will definitely I can't really speak onto the exactly how the storm water works but it will be treated and um keep the existing flow as as it needs to because this is an important place um for that that flow to go north and to South so we're we're really not um going to be impacting that area and it's going to be you know signage and and upkept so there's not public access to it at all um then you can see on the east side there's up by Lot 23 there's a drriver uh retention area by lot what is that 30 36 um by the um roundabout and then into that lake so there will be discharge into that Lake as well and um so it's an open flowing system not just going to be pooling water in a certain area and then discharging into the Wetland does your preserve area management plan go into those areas that are not shaded by the the coloration like the existing Wetland areas yes I I there'll be exotic removal and um I I don't have the pamp in front of me but it the county is always so good at making sure that we well they the in the in the document they you all indicated that there was going to be substantial replanting not only in the Upland areas but also in the Wetland areas and I didn't see a planting guide or any part of that and and often that is part of a PUD agreement certainly well if we need to we can have our environmental consultant uh put in a graphic a typical of what that planting would be um and as necessary we can make sure that that's addressed appreciate it thank you gentlemen any further questions for Miss Erica public comment I'm on it thank you I I told Jim to remind me of what I need to do um any other questions for um the applicant at this time okay we're going to move on do we didn't have any interveners um do we have any public comment Miss Erica you're dismissed okay I like the judge be you're dismissed I do not see I do not have anything in front of me for public comment so we'll move on to the only public comment was was this but we don't read it right yeah I mean amongst ourselves we do but no one's here to present it so um acknowledge that board members they've looked over that and any other comments or questions Jim you have this I i' I'd make a motion for denial I'll second that okay discussion why why would explain that I I don't think it it serves any or enough public purpose uh I think that the uh damage to Fern Creek would be substantial I don't think that um any development in this area is a good idea I think that cob Road has been allowed to become uh the problem that it is because that we have been permitting these developments and I have been pretty clear for several years that that I will only approve developments on Cove Road that meet those very high standards and I don't think this one does and I seconded Jim because I'm not talking about whether you can develop here or not I think you can I think this has just been a poor presentation no questions that Jim asked could be answered no questions I asked could be answered so I don't feel comfortable in supporting something where I don't have answers to my questions okay well well I don't get to vote because I there's public comment here saying that my son was part of the sale and this lady had the audacity to think that that would imp impact my V part of the public record huh it's part of the public record but it's in the it's in the comments and that's just you know that's just uncalled for just for the record we would have declared the conflict even if we didn't have public comment just for the for somebody to make a comment like that in a public comment and send it in that's just ridiculous and as far as a project I've spent a lot of money removing pepper trees and anytime somebody's going to take a project like this and if you've ever tried to walk through there you can't get through there you cannot do anything in a pepper and if they get rid of the peppers and they make the water flow easier and better that's a big environmental impact anytime you get rid of Brazilian Peppers that's a good thing and if you can get kids that can come from the north and walk through all the way down to Cove Road and go across and get people off of Cove Road that's a good benefit to me so and and as far as holding the water I mean I kind of know the engineer on this and and being able to to improve Fern Creek I think this will improve F bur Creek I me and you're not an engineer and I'm not an engineer that's correct and you don't have an Eng ER here and so well okay but it was engineered by the county the County's passed on the engineering I don't see anything that would make me want to vote for this right now so let's let's let's let's stick with a question in a second I know and I'm dealing with discussion so just a second um let's not have opinions just at the moment and I understand where youall are coming from um Paul you were fixing to say mad thank you Paul Schilling growth management director I just I heard a couple things but what I want to make clear is that this application is in order and qualifies for an action of approval this has gone through the full development review process for two years uh with multiple rounds of review it has been reviewed by all the agencies in the county with compliance findings so I I don't want that to be part of the any confusion that that may have come about um I'm not confused okay so so every you've done your engineering studies County the county believes this is going to be a good thing your staff I mean as far as the environment water flow the the development review team has analyzed this application and found it in compliance there is there there there are no unresolved issues associated with it that's why it's here tonight and the reason why we're up here is because at the end of the day we're supposed to look at things not just staff otherwise it would be administrative review so I think that Jim has a very good po point and I I can't support something when I don't understand how it got here except you're telling me you did do it so you don't trust staff it's not trust or not it's why we're here we're here to check staff and make sure that the boxes are checked I don't I don't know whether all the boxes were checked what okay um go ahead Mr Shilling if it helps at all our we have a full team that looks at these applications we have the County engineer and his whole whole operation that have reviewed the storm water done the storm Water Analysis done the traffic analysis we have environmental scientists who have signed off on The Preserve area if there are areas that are devoid of vegetation associated with the removal of the invasive material then those areas will be rated as standard throughout the county the uh utilities folks have reviewed this application the whole team has reviewed this application so I don't want it to be misconstrued as though something is a miss here the application is in order now if the it's at the board's discretion because it's a PUD I acknowledge that but I I want to make that clear now we don't typically have the 12 to 20 people involved in an application at the LPA meeting to to testify but I would suggest by Mr elam's testimony and my testimony that the application is in order I I don't think anyone is saying that it's not in order I I think it's there's a major storm outside these doors in the community and it's about all the yellow signs going up and the way that things are going and this is great to put this in to get a sidewalk but we could probably put a sidewalk in for those kids ourselves and should well okay and I will speak to my knowledge I not an engineer but I I'm an architect and um do not hold that against me but if you've ever been in a pre-application did you laugh about that you know when you go in front of a staff it's 12 plus staff members that give you report some conflict some do not and you would not be able to move forward with something like this if you did not meet those requirements I'm not in chastising if you want to I'm not approving or denying it per se but I know the regiment and regulations we have to meet to get through this and I've challenged the staff many many years over projects I've had to do to meet these requirements and we have to hold the water and things like that it's not impactful and the requirements we've had in place for quite some time now will require is requiring them to do these things that you're looking at and I not knock anybody's opinion and I'm not um because that's not where I'm at I'm just saying stating code regulations and things that I've had to go through and applications I've had to put in and what they're going through right now and it's been a two-year process and I know what that is like and I don't see the impact of things that have been mentioned and I won't even go there because I mentioned we are not getting to each other's opinions um and thought process per se but you know let me ask the staff Cove Road is a Martin County roadway or is it NF doot Mar County I'm County roadway I believe I'm just I'm bringing it up because I know sometimes I know the answer but I want it to be said okay so again back to some points that were made illustrating the traffic studies and things like that that's one of the requirements you have to do with a preapplication Andor Paul correct me if I'm wrong they probably did a pre-application for this we may be getting huh we may be getting somebody from there there's a full second I'm sorry no go ahead there's a full traffic analysis that was analyzed as part of this application signed and sealed by a u PE okay understood and reviewed by the county Engineers office understood okay so that is my my more than my two cents on that and um gentlemen you move forward are you fixing to come to the mic we have a public comment that that's the applicant oh applicant I apologize okay so it's it's up to the board's discretion since you're in the middle of a boat in discussion to bring the applicant back up to ask I know we have a vote and a second we're still discussing right still discussing I know understood so you know I think it would be it's it's always best to get more information than less and so if the applicant wants to speak I would be in favor of that uh Gentlemen please step forward and announce uh your name and your company yeah uh Donald Barnes we're the uh owner of the property jams development jams properties can you just confirm you were swor in yeah I was swor in thank you very much and and I am also just sidebar professional engineer uh registered in Florida North Carolina South Carolina Georgia and uh Michigan I think it is um a lot of talk about storm water up here if you if you look at the existing flow rates versus what is gone off the property you know after development we're actually reducing the discharge uh certainly cleaning it up uh so so the project is reducing the discharge from the site through on-site SES retention are stuff like that um like Mr Hartman um I said we're we're doing substantial work in those Wetlands to clean them up because they're um they're impassible at the moment they're they're well they've been as far as I can tell they've been the way they have been for you know 100 years doing whatever you know nature would allow them to you know we're going in we're moving the Exotics we're spraying them out um as far as traffic you know the the traffic and I'm not a traffic engineer civil engineer but not not specializing in traffic but our traffic report denotes that our contribution to Cove Road is dominous I mean this is a very few number of of units pushing out on the Cove Cove is not overburdened at the at the moment I mean mathematically it's not overburdened at the moment right I understand what goes on out there with the schools but adding these units out there is is not overburdening uh the roadway and then also we are proposing less units than we are allowed to by code you know if we went out there you know ba based on the current code we were allowed to I think it was 50 I think we're allowed 50 units out there and we're you know we're putting in less than that so I think we've been you know good neighbors we've been working with the staff on this thing for two years I think it's a good project uh we're we're doing more good than harm um so I would I would you know urge you guys to reconsider any other sorry sir before you walk away um board members do we have any questions for our applicant no well I mean I think that removing um the Exotic inv bases that are there is something that's necessary um I'm pretty sure that hasn't been a hundred years but it certainly has been a long time um you know I think that those places while exotic invasive are natural and there is some benefit that those natural systems provide regardless of whether they are exotic invasive or not um I I don't know how to quantify the negative impacts of development versus leaving an area natural um I I think that there are certainly ways of of estimating those natural Services regardless but uh you know it has been a systematic drainage problem that is compounding on itself and none of the new improvements out there have done beneficial things to the way Fern Creek drains nor the water quality of the outfall from Fern Creek into the South Fork of the St Lucy river is that well to your point you don't know how to quantify it you're not an engineer we've got an Engineering St I'm not sure an engineer would I think an environmental and I don't think that really matters because well it does matter because we're trying to figure out is this a project that really works and does it some good well I'll tell you and if and if we're cleaning out Exotics and I and I have done it and I have seen it if it does it will improve the water flow the other thing that's really really important is that what the community thinks is not what's legal and and I'm cognizant of that and but if theyve spent two years and I'm like Nikki I've been working with I've worked with the county before it's a full-blown  I mean it's no fun at all to work with the county we should all go but this is a PUD and this is this is a a legal Arrangement yes where the count the water flow it's worth doing but okay so we don't want to argue I know so let's not arguments ourselves here okay so any other questions for our applicant at this time I do have one for you um so as the retention on the site what is the requirements of the county to retain a the outflow of storm water on the site are you talking about cubic feet per second I'm trying I know what it is 25 year storm days question I know well that's what they said in the report okay so Jim answered it for you oh this is a quiz no it's not a ABC or E all the above question all right um anyway I just was talking about that we have any other further discussion any other questions for applicant at this time thank you for your time you are ex excused I don't know what to say that I just want to make a statement okay we're here to make a decision based on the evidence that's before us if the evidence isn't there we shouldn't be making a decision because we're told that we looked at it and it's great the applicant should have came tonight with his experts to answer the questions and or with his studies I see none of that so I don't know whether what you're say is true and I do believe you have the absolute right to develop this property and I have the ABS you have the absolute right to look at uh to put more units on there if you so desire but I can't support something with without the evidence so so so when the county staff we've answered that I'm not going to go there again you g to have to why we got them here for just a second Elise before you vote I just want to remind the board that this is a PUD agreement this is not straight zoning there is discretion because you're agreeing to the terms of what they're proposing so it's this is a little different from straight zoning so I just wanted to make that point clear understood okay any you wish for well let's just be kind right now because I need a little kindness in my life at the moment so any other further discussion at this point nope you gentlemen are quiet for once all right um can we go ahead and Nikki sir so that we're all clear a yes vote is for Denial in this case that's correct based on the motion that is correct so everybody understands right thank you for clarifying all right um so all in favor of the motion that has been made I I okay um you want to have a roll call just right I just wanted to clarify it no that's fine okay yeah and I'm not saying that staff hasn't done their job at all but I agree with Tom that we just want to see the Carfax sorry the traffic study okay whatever it's not whatever stop you guys just would you be nice I'm do I did it roll call Bob Jim Tom said no or said yes to the denial I am opposed okay so it comes out 3 to one 3 one for denal with Mr Hartman abstaining yes we are clear with the denial there Tom got it okay thank you the last time I have to say quaz Jal tonight yep now I won't say I mean doesn't say that on here all right we are moving on to the next item up um N ph-2 Land Development regulation 24-6 uh article 6 and pack fees and we have Clyde I know you're Clyde so I can say Clyde is going to be pres good evening members of the local planning agency my name is Clyde Duan comprehensive planning administrator with me is uh what is your oh yes samanth samanth lady like a I don't know looking at me like a don't that's on you tomorrow you have I actually do remember name but I am legendary for not remembering names so um Samantha love lady principal planner um she's got a lot of experience with impact fees over the years so um we're going to do this together and um shall we yeah okay you got the floor thank you thank you uh we're going to try and do this in two segments um as you may know uh in December of 2023 the board of County Commissioners uh reviewed an impact fee study uh that had been conducted by Martin County and it had a whole schedule of of impact fees to consider and um that was part one part two was amending article six of the Land Development regulations that controls and regulates the imposition of impact fees on development um so what we have here tonight is both parts we have the proposed changes to the Land Development regulations article six uh there were numerous changes that were necessary to comply with Florida Statutes and uh because then there have been a number of changes in Florida Statutes over the years um the Florida Statutes have emphasized and I'm going to try and go to the section of the staff report where it says that uh where is it the rational Nexus I'm looking for uh no Florida courts yes no no it may have been when Tyson was doing his analysis I'm sorry Mr moer I'm just trying to remember where the the uh rational Nexus deliberations wasn't it may have been up before Tyson was doing his analysis above the it's above the D it's above D it's um one paragraph up here anyway I'll read it to you the rational Nexus test also requires the development that pays a fee benefit from its use that's an issue that's emphasized in Florida Statutes and that's one of the reasons why you see a lot of stricken text in the in the LD is to take out any text that might not be consistent with that so um there's yeah there's the Dual rational Nexus test that determines the validity of the impact fees uh it must be based on a connection between the need for the additional facility and the growth in the population that will be generated um that's an important factor in this and uh Florida Statutes as I said have changed a great deal about that subject so um section 6 8 uh is on page 10 of the package come on num loock there we go and it boils down a lot of it to um the there are there categories for impact fees special Revenue categories for each category libraries public buildings law enforcement Fire Rescue uh parks and wreck conservation and open space Transportation some of the names have changed instead of Emergency Services it's been recognized as fire rescue because that's the way our department is identified um as you can see a lot of the impact fee fund language has been deleted and it just boils it down to that uh the impact fees the the impact feed districts will be uh applicable to the un Incorporated and Incorporated areas of the county and additional direction is provided in the individual interlocal agreements that are established between Martin County and communities like the village of Indiantown and the City of Stewart um I'm not going to go into all of the details of the changes because they're pretty uh they they're spread out over the entire document but they emphasize the same issues that I've mentioned and uh it's um been revised to to focus on just these districts second part of the presentation I want to go into is a discussion of what the impact fee changes are in the impact fee schedule so let's go to five so Florida Statutes permit the impact fees to go up by a maximum of 50% and our consultant went in and and did the calculations in the impact fee study that's attached and looked at the the the cost and the necessary fee for each um use such as a single family residence 2300 ft or greater single family residence 800 squ ft or less hotel motel and looked at the cost for each of the the facilities provided in this example transportation in another example building so they literally dialed in and figured out the cost for each each Square in the grid looking at both the the facilities on the one and the and the um the the land use on the other and so this table is intended to show you how your the existing fee for a single family residence of 2300 ft or greater for just the transportation is $4,063 the proposed maximum can go up a M maximum of 50% which is shown here in the 2028 of 6,094 that's 50% over the existing fee the actual fee that the that the uh consultant calculated is it should be a 78% increase but as you can see in this table the proposed change doesn't go that high and in this this proposed table it demonstrates how the fee would actually be going up 12.5% per year year over a 4-year period to get to that maximum 50% and that's all dictated To Us by fla statute even though the study showed that the cost is $722 a 78% increase for this particular land use and this particular service this is the maximum that can be done by the fee GL can you tell me what that term is 50% over how long is that a fiveyear window is that a 10year window fouryear window fouryear window and so we are permitted to every four years increase our our impact fees by 50% no what it we would have to go back and do another study and to document so the study already says that we are 28% low what do you so you're allowed to impact increase your make an increase once every four years that increase can only be 50% of what you're currently charging so you have to do a new study but what they're doing is they're breaking up the increase over the four years so it's proportionately increasing and so the last impact fee study was done when it was 2019 we hired someone to um that was the nickel study that was the 2013 was the last study the last but we also did one to look at um conservation lens conservation and also um fiber optics and that study didn't go anywhere that study just covered those two subjects the last study that looked at the whole package was 22 13 right so so we're behind on collecting impact fees by a lot yes and is there a recommendation in here to do whatever study is required to make sure that we can increase our impact fees as much as we possibly can in the next cycle that is not our recommendation at this time our recommendation is the fees that you see in the attached schedules because that would allow us to go forward and then four years from now do another study and at a 28% deficit and and try and improve and cover any deficits at that point I I I see we're just digging ourselves I mean at that point we're already 50% behind ourselves it's a requirement of State Statute I I I understand what the requirement of the state statute says but I don't think we're doing our citizenry the justice that they deserve I think we should be recommending to the county that they do the impact study as fast as we possibly can so we're not perpetually 25% behind ourselves we'll be happy to convey that if that's the recommendation of the local planning agency the downside of it I will mention to you is the the threshold for such a study to to go above 50% is an extraordinary lift we would be starting all over again and I believe statute requires an extraordinary circumstance since we have to do a study anyways to raise the fees there is no reason to to Cloud this to to Cloud this uh article with a requirement it should be up to staff to recommend it to the commission the commission should vote Yes or no it's not shouldn't be in in there in case something else develops in those four years I before um I would like to go on and finish uh this this what's presented on this page finish your presentation and then we'll continue with questions Jim thank you um another example the impact fee study recommended that the uh fire rescue impact fee for single family dwelling 2,300 feet or less should only increase by 24% not 50% uh and so in this example and in this Matrix you see the current fee is 780 for just that service on just that particular land use and the proposed fee would go up to 875 in 2025 and 969 in 2026 and it would stay at that same level for the remaining years so in some cases we're way behind in some cases the we can go as much as the fee as as the fee study would allow and and that's what the proposed fee changes would be over each of the next four years in another example um single family greater than 2300 square F Feet Again the public building impact fee actually is a decrease so we are collecting 809 at the moment and it would go down to 752 for each of the following years so it's really a mixed bag as far as increases and decreases um for the fee schedule and that's looking at the individual fees for these are just some examples of individual fees on on an individual fature land use designation now if you uh if we can I'll turn to page 39 where we have a bit of a comparison between the cumulated the accumulative and this is just an example of uses there's just not all of the single family uses are here not all of the non-residential uses are here but these are just laid that as an example for comparison purposes where we are totaling up the transportation public buildings and so on like that all the way across so the total in this column in green is the total that would be paid in 2028 and the you see next to it is the current fee being paid and you can see for yourself in this sample of land uses how the fees would be up and down depending upon the useage yeah the percentage is on there and so you can see the percentages over here in this column in some cases we're going down like in this one 28% in some cases it's only a 3% increase in some cases it's showing the maximum 50% increase depending upon the use and the cumulative application of the fees to the each of the um uh facilities to give you kind of an overall view of how the fees go up and go down depending upon the the subject yeah um so that's the overview that we have for both the changes to article six necessary to be consistent with State Statute and an overview of the proposed changes to the fee schedule um we are we would be um replacing with the proposed changes I want to go to 32 30 this fee schedule I don't it's not shown stricken is the existing fee schedule and um when attached to an ordinance it'll be shown stricken and then below no's no by the way I wanted to mention no change to the impact school impact fee schedule because that's dictated by the school district not by uh the board so the way we've set it up is that there would be an individual table for 2025 and then an another individual table for 2026 and 27 and 28 so that you can see each and whenever if this is if these proposed tables are adopted um people will be able to see in each year what the fee is and there won't be any math having to be done from one year to the next to show uh to understand and know what the proposed impact fee would be for a use uh when is the impact fee collected at time of building permit permit right yes it's it's not at Co though no it's a Time the building permit is issued and that's one of the other changes that's happening in the ldr that I that I did not cover uh formally in years past impact some impact fees were collected at the time of final site plan approval in the in the um U after the site plan would be approved some impact fees would be collected then and other impact fees would be collected at building permit Florida statute changed a few years ago and we've already been doing what Florida statute required and some of the changes in the ldr right now are just really catching up with the changes we had to do in compliance with Florida statute some years ago that concludes the staff presentation on the changes to article six and the impact fee schedule staff recommends approval of the proposed changes in strike and under line 2 article 6 and staff recommends approval of the proposed impact fee schedule shown for 25 2025 20 2026 2027 and 2028 uh We've set January 1 as the start date because the Florida statute does not allow the impact fee changes to occur uh less than 90 days after adoption and we're scheduling this for board accounting commissioner's presentation on September 10 and 90 days plus a little bit would put us right at January 1 2025 thank you for the other years going forward it would be January 2 okay January 1st on each of those years as well okay Madam chair a couple questions of course so we do we do impact fees is there another way that we could collect for the impacts of this without having it as a standard in a PUD could we say we want X to do this or must we or would that be against statute you're I think you're you're asking if we could creatively come up with another way of I'm not asking you to do it for the impact um I don't know what that would be at this point I'm sure that somebody out there has probably contemplated it but there definitely is not Florida statute uh available to guide us on that one thing about puds I'm might add is that um in a development order I know for example Newfield they're installing um Parks I believe and they're getting an impact fee credit built into that development order for the improvements I don't know if that's what my question is if say we need a traffic light because this project is going to impact the roadway and is and it's and it's gonna create a problem is there a mechanism as part of the Pud process part of the to to have them pay for it they can offer that as a public benefit can we require it it depends on the traffic stud be to negotiate it that should J can I get an answer from staff yeah uh relax Madam chair Paul shelling growth management director the there are a couple things with that one is to answer your question yes there could be a fee collected and historically that's been associated with a PUD and it would be on X number of permits so for example the 50th permit or whatever the case is or 200,000 ft of industrial that would be the trigger for the for the traffic um traffic signal the other question was and I it escapes me now I don't know if I had another question there is a mechanism under the Pud for the county to say we're going to need this because of your impact and we can charge in addition to impact fees yes sir something else that was really my question that was the recommendation that would be correct Tom Jim I didn't mean to shut you down no no no I I just was saying that you know the the essence of a PUD is a negotiated agreement agreed um my question and I'm I probably should know the answer and I just don't is is it possible to with within a category of uh single family dwellings increase if if we are showing a deficit of 28% on the 2300 squ foot area is there a way to throw credits from an area that is not collecting full impact fee within that within that category to to allocate a an increased impact fee for those 2300t units I'm answer I was sorry I'm not my head I believe the answer is no okay I have another question and I do know and I do know the answer but I'd just like to get it out there if there was a home already on the property then do impact fees apply there impact fees run with the land so for example if there was historically a residence a single family residence in this case on the lot and it's demolished it runs with the land in perpetuity okay so um quick example so if you demolish a 2,000t home and you want to put 5,000 foot home on it you would pay for the difference no does that make sense no no you don't that's what it historically been or pay for the original that years ago but that's not how it worked okay so it used to have like a 50 you can you can mow down an 800 squ foot house and put 10,000 square fet if theot allows it no oh the impact was already there that's why I was asking the question uh question okay I is that excuse me is that because of State Statute or is that just the way we do it it's in article six you get an exemption in article six current current code is there a reason why we shouldn't change that because an 800 square foot house would is is definitely not the same thing as a 5,000 or a 6,000 sorry gave a example yeah it's not proposed for change in the ldr if that's your recommendation well I'll hold my recommendation until the vote but okay any other questions at the moment I do have some I just want to let the other board members have ask any questions per se so there is a when you say a transportation fee are we um adjacent counties and cities not necessarily the city of Stewart they have a Mobility fee and how are you handling that amongst the inner agreement that you have with the city and things like that and how that Transportation money is deciphered you want to take you guys look at each other I didn't mean to give you a load of question but I need to ask because it's not a it's it's a bit complicated in that understand the the municipalities like the city of Stewart in the village of Indian toown can set up the application of their fees in their own way for Mobility um ours do not are not set up to work as a Mobility fee ours are set up to work for roads and as well multimodal paths and someone like that okay and they there's a percentage of the county impact fee that they will retain and then they can apply towards their Mobility planning okay no and I was asking because a lot of that stuff has been intermingled and there's a lot of lawsuits that are happening because of it in general um of that so please miss Stephanie um we have an interlocal agreement with the city okay and that's what I they P their City fees right and they pay County fees but not double dipping but not double dipping in the interlocal agreement um you can have um the city paid 33% of a certain category each of the categories are laid out in the interlocal right and if like say for libraries the city pays 100% for the libraries because they don't have their own Library facilities yeah and I was they do have their own active Park so they don't they don't pay for that no I understand that Mobility is really been kind of a contention of the whole entire state it makes um sense for the village and for um the city right but that doesn't really it it doesn't really make sense for um for the county understood I I don't I'm not knocking their transportation term per se I just bringing it to what I've been they do pay their fee and then they pay sometimes 100% of our fee sometimes a percentage of our fee understood okay any do you do you do you have to pay the impact fee when I look at what it cost on a 1100t home and you're what is it like $6,000 I think I'll go back to the and if you put the school board with it you're at $11,000 and if you put $111,000 on a mortgage for a young couple which that she's going to buy that 11,100 ft home and if you put that on that mortgage at 6% interest it changes your payments dramatically is there is there any way to to um soften that for young people trying to get started a credit back to them or something it's it's a big number when you figure a mortgage several hundred a month year mortgage the only deferral on impact fees is for affordable housing uh the impact fees on affordable housing can be deferred for a period of time well Define affordable housing it's there's a the know the extend the definition covers a number of r u income ranges and so I I can't recite them to you off the top but that's fine I and then that number changes annually through HUD yeah and it's a square foot number too by the way uh the it's but you you bring up something I'd like to point to is the numbers in this table are the county impact fees the school district impact fees are in addition to these numbers here understand if you put that on top of yes on you put the school impact fees on top of our impact fees and you change it $1,000 whatever that number is on a mortgage on a 30-year mortgage it it adds up really fast yep it does all right any other questions question for staff at this point I'll make a motion to accept staff's recommendation with with uh them at some point looking into whether it's whether we should change the way we collect impact fees on an on an existing lot that had a building on it that had less than what the proposed new I'd second that but i' also think we should do a study on increasing impact fees as quickly as possible right that's not a second to that well I just I was hoping that there could be a modifyed motion I I don't I don't want I that I don't want to do to my motion okay so he has a motion another motion all right sorry you're seconding the motion to Tom we have another motion from Jim no I'm was just throwing it out there because I think it should be done but I'm willing to accept the the motion as is okay any other further discussion on that after the motion I will say Obviously in um my line of business and living here in Martin County obviously um the impact fees do encroach on that I do agree with with Tom and getting the credit and something that was already built in general we can't make that change today um we could just make the suggestion um for for that impact so um without further Ado can I um get a vote uh all in favor all in favor I I rick yeah I I oh you did okay all right it passes all right we are thank you st thank you thank you thank you for your time and remember her name next time just kidding all right um I I called her Stephanie I'm sorry I did that no better than Clyde um I didn't call her Clyde yeah all right uh yay moving on N ph-3 uh comprehensive plan Amendment 24-2 overall goals and definitions so bring in the fun stuff let's do it thank you members of the LPA I'll just do the introduction this is the uh first of three public hearings that must be considered on chapter two overall goals and definitions uh the next public hearing will be before the board of County Commissioners for consideration of transmitt and a third public hearing won't occur until next year uh for adoption uh the primary consideration here is making sure that this is internally consistent with other chapters in the plan um not only are we looking at um housekeeping issues with this particular chapter but we're also looking at making sure that it's consistent with the other chapters that you will also be considering like chapter 8 and chapter 9 later tonight and so on and with that I'll turn it over to Jenna Nai our senior planner good job you never name go ahead Jenna good evening members of the local planning agency as Clyde mentioned my name is Jenna knobby a senior planner with the growth management department and before you this evening we have proposed text amendments to chapter two of the comprehensive plan as part of the ear-based process for revisions to the comp plan many of the proposed changes are housekeeping but on pages three and four of the staff report part of the agenda packet I'd like to bring some of these changes to your attention many cross references are being made to other uh elements of the comprehensive plan for internal consistency That's the basis for a lot of these proposed text changes so proposed change number two revises policy 2.2 a with reference to policy 9.1 G27 in chapter 9 regarding the exceptions for altering Wetlands proposed change number three outlines a new policy policy 2.2 A7 with reference to policy 9.1 G4 also in chapter 9 regarding the exceptions to Wetland buffer zone Provisions proposed change number four revises polic policy 2.2 c91 with reference to policy 8.1 C1 in chapter 8 of the comp plan proposed change number five revises policy 2.2 C 992e to include a sentence about storm water design and this proposed addition is reflected in chapter 8 as well uh in regards to resiliency planning that is mirrored in um those proposed changes can I interrupt you for just a sec absolutely um the the 2 three4 items that that Jenna mentioned are are internal consistency issues between chapter 2 and existing text in those chapters but the last one she mentioned is a new policy that's being proposed in chapter 8 you will see later tonight as a as it's a result of board direction to do resiliency planning so it's an example of how we're proactively addressing something here in this chapter understood proposed change number six revises policy 2.2 C10 with reference to the applicable Land Development regulations for Shoreline protection and Shoreline hardening standards a new objective is proposed uh objective 2.2 F and this is also referencing that resiliency planning language found in chapter 8 and proposed change number eight is a revision to policy 2.4 C1 and this is to change the planning period time frame from 15 years to 20 years and this is consistent with Florida statute Section 163 3177 there's two new definitions proposed for uh chapter 2 including enhanced nutrient reducing on-site sewage treatment and Disposal system in addition to the term resilience since that is a major theme in um some other proposed editions in chapter 8 and the remainder of the changes for chapter 2 are housekeeping in nature updating definitions accordingly and um grammar and spelling so staff proposes to uh recommend approval for these changes and we are happy to go into detail about anything outlined in this staff report but that concludes staff's presentation okay any questions gentlemen one where did we get the resiliency policy from that you're implementing where did that come from uh we'll get into a good deal of detail about that in the next one but but I can tell you that the board considered uh an agenda item back in 2021 uh that was presented to them by Kathy Fitzpatrick our Coastal engineer at the time um they it was an extensive study they Kathy and her team undertook and uh it was back then in 2021 that they directed staff to initiate an amendment to chapter 8 of the comprehensive plan to address resiliency issues and uh as I said we've that's attached in your next agenda item but we're proactively addressing some of those changes in two was only an internal study that we used no I believe they went out and they had a consultant that went out and do a lot of work on this and it it it also went into the regional impacts of resiliency plan yeah the Treasure Coast Regional Council y so faring public comment I'll make a motion to approve okay I'd second that motion second all right all in favor I just we need to call for public comment public comment anybody want to bum rush us up here come on make it exciting yeah we're only on item number three all right no public comment all right moving on are all in favor let's do that again I I I all right unanimously passed all right we are thank you members of the LPA you're most welcome Cloud um we are moving on to n ph-4 comprehensive plan Amendment 24-8 Coastal management element car uh again for the record Clyde Dulan comprehensive planning administrator with me is darl duoo environmental planning administrator good evening um the text changes to chapter eight that we're uh going to discuss with you here tonight are really twofold one ear-based amendments which are and there are very few there there're just mostly housekeeping on that respect most of the text changes that you're going to see in in this uh in this chapter are really based on a resolution that the board of County Commissioners did you want to go ahead uh the board of County Commissioners as I said previously in adopted resolution 21-33 2 and after looking at presentation and approving a presentation uh or approving a a resiliency study in uh March 23 2021 umad excuse me yeah it's fine um the board felt strongly enough after seeing the sea level rise um and resiliency report that they initiated an amendment to chapter 8 and unfortunately Kathy left us she's I think last I heard traveling New Zealand um and so that and Co I think really got in the way of us completing this amendment to chapter eight and the ear-based plan amendments is an opportunity for us to complete it uh Amy een has come on board and is uh doing the coastal management engineering um and she is really responsible for a lot of the changes in here she's gone in and and made a lot of the changes based upon the study that uh the Kathy Fitzpatrick had brought forward to the board previously so uh this is really twofold compliance with Florida stat I should also note that some of the changes in Florida Statutes since 2016 emphasize resilience and we attached some of that changes in Florida statute to this agenda package so this resilience is BAS is really to comply with Florida statute changes this is our mandate for the year and it's to comply with this uh agenda this amendment initiated by the board in 2021 so this study Daryl's brought up and darl if you want to go in and talk about so this is the uh sea level rise report that was discussed with the board in 2021 and I'm going to just quickly scroll through this but as you can see here it's a there's a lot lot of data and Analysis and information in this report and I'm just going to quickly scroll through you think you passed the part that you it okay so when you get to this page of the report this is why we're here tonight how do we use all of that information we just scrolled through planning and prioritization so that's what we're here for tonight we're here to do some comprehensive planning so uh there are Concepts planning Concepts primarily introduced and this is kind of the start of a process that's going to be ongoing with future changes in the in the comp plan Coastal element and in the Land Development regulations and when we get into the Land Development regulations that's probably where we're going to get into regulations and Regulatory criteria but right now we're at a planning stage and we're just introducing when you look at the list there's a lot of items enumerated but they're basically sprinkling these planning principles for resiliency throughout chapter eight of the uh of the comp plan and there's additional uh resiliency language as Clyde stated provided by um our our Coastal uh engineer who's now known as our environmental resource engineer Amy Ean um and those are also required uh as mandated in Florida statutes for counties to put in their Coastal element of their comp plan so with that um Clyde thought it might be helpful to start with one um new policy that we wrote in chapter 8 and that policy in if you go to your list in your staff report there's a list of proposed changes uh there are 50 proposed changes in here but again these are mostly minor uh resiliency planning Concepts that are provided but I want to go to number 27 uh of a proposed change in your staff report and that's provided here as item number four as a proposed new policy and to put this in context this policy uh is part of policy 8.1 C2 construction activity and estering systems and vegetation requirements so this this this policy in in the plan is established uh to address uh Shoreline stabilization methodologies be they uh nature-based Solutions vegetative Solutions and Shoreline hardening that may be required so we wrote a new policy here for Shoreline hardening that may be required when we suffer extreme storm events um and emergency authorizations are issued by the government and emergency permits are issued to deal with uh major property losses in certain areas and we have a a poster child if you will for for this uh policy here in this development that started to come online after 2000 so as you can see we're looking at a 2,000 aerial image of this of these Waterfront lots that came in to be uh platted and developed and with that they platted a 50ft shoreline protection Zone along the St Lucy River here and then we were hit by the twin hurricanes of 2004 and 2005 and when you look at that and let me turn the pamp layer off now you can see what happened and and some of these houses were under constructions there were pools under construction there were pools that were kind of sitting out into space on pilings where all all the land had washed away and when you look at um this after the emergency permits were issued permits were issued by the state that created seaw walls along a portion of the shoreline and then it transitioned into rip wrapper revetments uh along the shoreline and then when you got to the last two lots in this development they really didn't suffer much damage and they had native vegetation and mangroves along the shoreline so it's a kind of a poster child also for why vegetative Solutions sometimes are better as you can see I add a a question mark here of course would it be okay Madam chair of course um in in some of your your language here there are new technologies that do a really good job of wave attenuation and would would actually be very appropriate right here and if in that if in this language in this chapter in particular you had the availability to use some of those new technologies it might be very helpful because right now it's very difficult to get those approvals unless it's under an emergency permit and and I think this is the kind of place where the ear really should be used and I think that this kind of of technology and Innovation is exactly appropriate for this kind of circumstance so that's a recommendation we could take my recommendation I mean just you know for instance Reef arches um would be ideal in this place can you say that again Jim Reef arches okay that's why I was going to ask you to repeat it as well so I mean that's just that's just example of of a new technology that didn't exist 5 years ago that does exist now that is showing really good promise I'm GNA make some notes Here what was the first thing you mentioned wave something wave attenuation because that's what I mean we're unfortunately in the coastal element not a lot of language is spent on erosion and erosion control but seaw walls are exactly not that yeah and this is a scenario you know this this development when when the storms hit had a preserv very management plan and typical language in preserv they 50ft setbacks at least and yes they did they they won't well the as you can see the property line's out in the water now yeah mean I can tell you in in and sorry for going offline here but in an experiment this summer we had 10 ft in 2 weeks of accretion yeah it is really the shorelines move that there's no way to for us to control it and and mother nature takes over in some cases like this this is an example where they got the emergency permits under a Governor's order um and now it's inconsistent with our plan it's inconsistent with our site plan and so this policy that we're proposing is provides some means of recognizing and accommodating and dealing with the situation after the fact that otherwise we're looking at it and saying well we can't really permit it since it's conflicting with the plan yeah we do we did add some language uh to the Land Development regulations to speak to amending preserv very management plans in these circumstances but these are are offshore rather than onshore and so there is a there is a navigable water issue there's also probably going to be a seagrass issue but under these emergency orders that's the place to allow for these um new technologies can you go back to page uh um page 34 or page 21 that we had you scroll up just a little bit I think you'll see some of the language that I that's what's your aiming for uh Mr Moyer is in the instance the seaw wall is permitted the design shall incorporate native PL revegetation rip wrap materials perious interlocking brick systems filter mats Etc it's all onshore unfortunately and what I'm proposing is Nearshore outside outside the mean High waterline okay yeah oh and the the challenge potential challenge with that is when you're going offshore you're going over sovereignty lands and and it's going to be an Army Corps issue and just say that like but and it's a seagrass issue I mean there's a lot involved but this is why under an emergency order it has a lot more potential Merit than it would under normal circumstances well we'll discuss this with Amy um but I think we're we're Our concern also like you've you've identified is the below the mean high water line we have much Authority we don't have authority no no you don't we don't have zoning and land use in lands yeah all right um darl does that conclude your presentation or you have more to discuss that yeah that concludes the introduction and then you have a staff Report with a number of changes if You' like to discuss any of those we're we're open to I I do have some more comments on no I wasn't I wasn't shutting you down I was making sure he was concluded and any any questions from the board members please so one of the problems with just talking about resiliency and sea level rise is you miss a lot of the other issues that have to do with climate change and one of them is heat and part of the sea level rise issue is thermal expansion but also a lot of the environmental degradation that is happening is because for instance we can't hold as much oxygen in the water because of the heat so ignoring the other issues that have to do with human caused climate change and calling it just resiliency and sea level rise misses a lot of really important points we miss the capacity to plan for carbon sequest for instance but that's not necessarily in the coastal element but mangrove swamps are an important piece of that um when we talk about a reluctance to lose uh Mangrove Marshland because of mosquito empowerments they also are very important habitat and we need to preserve that habitat for wildlife as well as for resiliency and I think the two are hand and glove I mean I don't see how you can separate conservation land and green space in the margin between us and the ocean as being anything but resiliency as well as an attempt and an effective attempt at protecting ourselves against climate change including heat rise because the you know the more concrete our shorelines are the more concrete our our urban areas are the higher the heat gain we're going to have um and and that's going to have not only bad effects on our weather bad effects on our health but bad effects on the environment and I and I really think that that the more we can integrate climate change rather than just resiliency planning the better off we're going to be okay um so yeah if you have any recommendations for for language um again we will discuss this I think that heat is an important piece of this okay um because it really does have Major Impact I think you know really the the heat issue is probably as as the the carbon sequest issue really is in this the next chapter that we're going to be talking about I was going to say but in the coastal element mangroves in particular are an important carbon sink as well as being a very important wave attenuator and I think that the more we can talk about energy attenuation along those shorelines rather than than hardening the better off we're going to be I think this because it's not just I mean it's also human induced erosion we've got a lot of boat wake erosion happening throughout our waterways right now and and seaw walls aren't going to help us they they're they're just not yeah correct me if I'm wrong staff I think this chapter kind of defines what you can can can't do for Shor you know uh hardening their shorelines it doesn't mean they have to be a seaw wall I think it's just kind of defining what they can and can't do and I understand where you're coming from on that and the energy code side of it and in general so our code changes every three years and and so that's going to be difficult for staff to follow along with that and a lot of things you're saying are in the Florida building code but I'm not sure that that's appropriate for this chapter Edition I mean sorry revision per se and I'm not crediting your thoughts on that and and this is an initial you know attempt to uh address some of those issues that were in the sea level rise report that we required to put in the comp plan as well as what's in Florida Statutes but there's going to be opportunities to readdress other issues right that that Amy will be bring bringing back and in particular um right regulations and Regulatory standards that for for permitting and and and development because virtually everything is going to be affected in coastal Florida by sea level rise I mean every inground storage tank every inground pollutant is going to be affected by rising sea levels yeah and we have every drainage issue you can think of is going to be affected by sea level rise we have staff in the public works department that go to those meetings around the state and discuss those issues because it's a state issue Y and yeah so so unfortunately Amy is not here tonight but that's that's really the person that can kind of speak to a lot of those Concepts and you know this is kind of hardening the language between the two chapters per se and it's enforcing what we want to continue in in Martin County and you know obviously what what you're proposing is going to be a whole another language and and thought process we would have to bring up in in in general because I mean we're going to be an island one day right I kids I was teaching a I was teaching classes I was just was teaching classes last week to these kids in a neighbor of State College like why don't we have basements and I'm like oh let me talk to you about groundwater level and I get it we were re already yeah yeah yeah go back over and over and over a motion to approve this yeah yeah yeah I I really do think though that being bold and talking about climate change in bold letters rather than just resiliency is where we need to go there's a motion yep I'll second it okay the motion I'm sorry to approve to approve yeah you got a second all any further discussion all right all in favor comment oh wait we have what public do we have public oh public comment do would you like to bum rush the microphone okay nope she's not getting up all right so um all in favor we said I and has passed okay we are moving on to the another exciting item open space n ph-5 uh comprehensive plan Amendment 24-9 conservation okay and open space give me a second to change my paperwork and my comments from the last section are pretty much going to be repeated again here okay well if you said them what you don't need to say them again it's getting late that's what I just said um there's a lot less ditto so we're going to go with that all right hit it Daryl there's a lot less in this ch going on um I'll just do a brief introduction and Daryl can hit I think there's like three high points that need to be discussed here um but this is mostly cleanup and this is not uh anywhere near as involved okay all right I don't have 70 items in this one thank you darl for keeping it short um do we have any questions from our gentlemen here did board members fellow say anything at all yeah yeah I so just to start you you've got a staff report here and and the items are briefly noted under the issu section and uh so we have these particular issues um identified here and as you can see it's it's pretty brief and I was going to go into one particular item that Clyde thought we should talk about which involves um redacting and old map that we have uh on our website and in the comp plan that's called the wetlands composite map um figure 9-1 mhm so let's see where is but this the hydri soil map stays the same we would continue to use the the data but not you're going to drag out the old hydrix oil map the same way the hydrix soils are still useful yeah they are from the 80s yeah yeah that's a useful layer um the the NWI layer that was created as part of this composite map is from the 85 and now we have stuff from 2022 so it's very dated and then there's a satellite layer that was used in here that is almost worthless at this point it's it's from the 90s and it's very granular I think it was done at such a high level that when you zoom in it's very blocky and we don't even use that anymore different chlorophyll levels so the and the other consideration and concern is putting a map out there saying that these are the wetlands of Martin County is very misleading somebody sees their property and this is just data showing where there's a probability to have Wetlands this is not a map of wetlands but if you look at the title and people over the years have said well the county has a map of all their Wetlands that's not what this is is so we're suggesting some changes to the language um that I can go through very quickly um let me go to that page so the gist of it is you're replacing the map so we we're we're continuing to use the concept of using a composite of different data to look for potential Wetlands but we don't want to use that static and and dated data that's in that old map understood so so this is where it's addressed in the comp plan so we're proposing to strike this this information so it is referencing the 81 hydric soils which are still useful uh the 1985 National Wetlands inventory which has been updated um the satellite classification data which we don't use anymore it's it's it's not good um and then we're suggesting just to kind of supplement the language here to recognize that we're still using multiple data sources that are modernized and updated on a regular basis um to do the same thing um so we use aerial imagery to identify the presence of wetlands typically and then we use this other data to look at areas where there's a potential based on what's shown in an NWI lay or what's shown on a um uh topography layer a digital elevational model um on a infrared aerial and other types of information we have so so delineation still requires vegetative speciesid identification yeah yeah and that's that's in this section and that hasn't changed so regardless of what any Digital Data Source will show you you have to delineate wetlands in the field in accordance with the methodology established by the state y but if this South flid Water Management District is the one who certifies the wetlands why why is the county getting so involved in it we're backing away from getting so involved in it we're just referring to data sources as a as to as a means of pointing people in the right direction and not trying to make a static map once when this map was created the data sources weren't on the web and widely available as they are today so I mean Daryl can show you on the web how it's widely available and you can turn it on and turn it off and and see so much more than what this static map from I've got that queued up if you'd like to look at it the the district's new mapping system is just pretty amazing what you can do with it yeah yeah it is so is ours you know um oh look at him us it is if you do you there's layers to it and everything else so I I get it the gis system is pretty pretty amazing so so I'm just going to go into an area of the county here and again we usually start with just looking at the Aerials and and Visually interpreting what we're seeing with these low depressional areas that pop out to us as as you know Wetland scientist says you can kind of after you look at this for many years they just jump out at you um so we have data going back to the 50s so we can go back in the time machine and see where the wetlands were and we can go back when we have violations and look at a wetland that shows up in 2022 that might have been impacted by excavation and filling and do that comparative analysis but speaking to the composite layer that we had we we still have parts of it here available so to show you that um the hydric soils are are still pretty good and it's still used and and still used in delineating Wetlands as well in the field um the NWI layer is this layer is from the old composite map from 85 and those areas are shown in blue but we have new data for for the uh NWI from 2022 and and you can see it's a bit different and it's more modernized because it actually identifies the types of wetlands um in the layers as well um and then again we talked about the danger of having a map um saying that these are the wetlands of Martin County well when you look at a map like this and you're a lay person perhaps you're like well I'm seeing all these Wetlands here but when the Water Management District goes out and does a proper delineation this is this is what was actually delineated in the field so like in this area for example you have areas of false positives here and areas of false negatives where nothing was shown but a wetland was delineated here's a composite layer that had everything together as a composite as a high predictability but no Wetlands were delineated there they were delineated here so so we we're still using this uh data for informational purposes and evaluation but we we just want to move away from that Old map said all right d the only thing we would add to this presentation is the uh to acknowledge that there's a new goal 8.3 which goes into resilience as well as the resilience language that was sprinkled through the uh goal 8.2 already uh we also want to acknowledge that the we are updating the maps the figures attached to the um oh I'm sorry the this one chapter eight yeah never mind me we're done okay that's fine okay we have a motion and a second discussion I think honestly I do feel that the carbon sequestration and heat absorption by Green Space is a really important component of why we should be protecting these areas so just Jim are you looking at putting in things in the comp plan just as something to prepare for regulations to write regulations do you address that concept or I'm not discrediting it I don't know that that this is the appropriate space for what you're saying it's part of the policy for why we should protect I understand but this is a a map it's like a regulatory information I'm not speaking about the I'm speaking about okay that's what we have we have a motion in a second what element conservation open space okay well that's not here that's what no that's what we would be making a motion on okay the map is a part of this okay so we have a second I have a motion in a second so are you modifying or I'm requesting that it be noted I'll I'll amend my motions so that it will be noted and so will you will you yeah I'm going to okay it get silly was that a second I'm like both am I don't know okay all right all in favor I okay gentlemen we are I'm sorry public comment you just feel like gonna hit the mic okay no all right um we are moving on a motion to adjourn please I just want to say one thing no I I had a basement in my old house and I live on the river and it was dry as a bone there's ways to do it must have been way up high then now I there's hydrostatic pressure and the water and the walls and I explained it to the kids and so anyway well the only thing that was in that were rats oh well then there you go yeah okay fantastic all right so real quick just while I have everyone here so hold on will not be here the first pause pause pause gentlemen this I'm talking about the the 12th is everyone going to be here for that meeting oh September 12th y yeah yes no sounds like a day that we should go to a concert I you guys were that last time not the probably the same one but I'll be here I have it on my calendar and I will be here as well thank you I don't think so and you guys can call me and remind me so I'm good with that too all right did we get we didn't get a motion to adjourn yeah we did we did okay fine all right adjourn we're going home thank you thank you thank you staff appreciate your time thank you thank you our our sheriff who's always here h