##VIDEO ID:kQVYxpTwinU## good evening everyone I'd like to call the meeting to order it is 6:08 p.m. December 2nd 2024 and this is our Council Workshop meeting Maran can I get roll call Mayor Young here vice mayor Sor here council member French council member Brandon here council member painter thank you and our first agenda item tonight is to discuss a resolution to support the sloweed minimum wake zone within the jupyter Narrows area and tonight we have Tom from FWC that will give us an update on this thank you yeah for the record Thomas Riner Regional director for Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission um yes so little history his the the juper nerys has been proposed for a uh alteration of the the current speed zones the boating safety and manate zones that started a few years ago uh with a proposal and um which passed our commission it was to make that a stretch of that area slow speed year round uh that was challenged in court by Palm Beach uh marine industries Association and a judge ruled in their favor and it was based on a technicality not on the merits of of the Zone whether the Zone should be there or not be there uh but a technicality in our in our rule structure uh so following that we uh adjusted we went through the rul making process and and um uh addressed that technicality that is now fixed and so we're we've come back and actually done a second vessel traffic study in the area and that was completed and now we've proposed again a very similar Zone uh as to what was previously proposed and that was uh up from uh the end of the boating safety zone that that is around kados Bridge because we often on Bridges with pilings we enact a slow speed zone there for safety reasons uh it's about um yeah it's just a little you can see on the graphic there a little bit north of of K's bridge and uh so the Zone was proposed to be from that point up to County Line uh and our data suggested that weekends and holidays were the most uh congested and that we would then apply that only uh during March 15th through October 15th that was our our initial proposal uh we held a public meeting here uh a week or two ago and uh actually in these very council chambers we appreciate uh your hospitality and Jeremy setting that up it was well attended uh 15 or 16 members of the public um some of them are here tonight and uh they provided their commentary and and large part people were very favorable for having a Zone but thought that uh county line was was too far and and unnecessary but that uh the the very narrowest part of the uh of the of the study area uh needed to be three 365 it needed to be a constant zone for safety purposes and there's a lot of uh you know user con potential user conflict there a lot of lot more paddle borders and kayakers there now than there were a few years ago and so the overwhelming uh sentiment was to to have a shorter Zone but make it uh not intermittent you know weekends holidays for half of the year and so we we've taken that feedback back I uh personally took our the major um in charge of our boating and Waterway section took him out there and we observed the area we went up up Beach Road and went back and conferred with Lieutenant Colonel uh in hasse and uh we will be proposing a modified zone that does not extend all the way to County Line it only extends to just a little north of marker 58 that's the U second one from the bottom the red triangle just a little bit north of that and that would cover the southern part of the study area which had the greatest risk uh per Atkins the company that uh did the analysis and it would cover um all of the U the brakes and the mangroves where a lot of people will recreate or launch kayaks or paddle boards so uh it goes up to where just about where the the water was starts to widen out a little bit more and based on the data we have and I think you have a handout there with some of the some of the graphics from the report uh we feel that that's uh defensible we feel it minimizes the amount of Regulation and I think it also um minimizes the amount of confusion uh slow speed March 15 October 15th weekend in holidays you got to have a calendar and know what day of the week it is and is it a holiday does this one count it's Arbor Day is that a holiday I don't know um you know so those are all defined in rule but again open up the rule book so I feel this will um this proposal will uh increase safety for uh the general public in the area both boers of motorized and uh and paddlecraft as well as lot of the swimmers and people who actively use that area so that is a The Proposal that we're going to bring back we're going to have another public meeting it'll be a virtual meeting so everyone can just tune in they don't have to come to uh the council chambers or any other public spot and uh that will be uh December 17th I believe it'll start at 5:30 just like the last one uh that will be announced on our website it'll be announced in the Florida administrative uh record as as we always do uh so that'll be the next opportunity for the public public to comment uh to see the proposal and to comment on it but we always welcome comments to our website to our boating and waterways website if if people want to uh support or oppose uh these changes and then following that meeting uh again we'll take public comment into consideration and see if there's any other changes that we feel are warranted uh and then our intent is to bring it to our commissioners at our February meeting which will be in Tallahassee I believe the 25th and 26th the Wednesday last Wednesday and Thursday of February and at that point we usually have to do two visits in front of our commissioners for rules but they've already seen this before we're going to say this is a final a one and one and done unless someone does request an additional public hearing which which can happen um but if it doesn't then the rule will be adopted after that um then we'll go about seeking permits required we'll probably will have to place a piling in order to put that sign up because we cannot use the red triangle uh we can't put our signs on those we could only use the green ones uh so we'll probably have to put an additional piling and that'll help us put it exactly where we want it uh and and then put that signage up so that can take some time but um once it passes we we will be you know doing every um thing we can do to get that done as soon as possible um so that's kind of my general summary of it um certainly will take any questions that you might have uh and see what can if I can answer thank you Tom Council any questions for Tom yeah thanks Tom um when you say just north of of channel marker 58 like does that get get us closer to the Seaglass condominium or is it's probably if you're looking at the screen you see that uh the first 707 I think it's Highway 707 little sign mhm I think Jeremy will put a yeah I think that's about where we believed it would make the most sense because it does has started to widen there uh and that's past kind of the last break in the mangoes where people are recreating um and and the reason we want to keep it kind of in that area is the the southern part of the the zone that was studied that demarcation line is right at the 58 marker so that's where we have the data that shows uh significant risk due to congestion and that that central part which is essentially 58 to 59 I think on the on the in the study um had less uh less occurrence of congestion and and the risk was lower there so we don't want to overreach too much um because that's a good way to get sued and uh uh but uh we feel like that that spot where Jeremy has the the pointer is about where um it would make sense thank you any other questions so where the pointer is that's where you're thinking about ending it that's probably about yeah that 707 line that about there is about where we would probably put in that where the Zone would end correct yeah and then beyond that the zone that is currently existing that that this would overlay is um slow speed year round of channel 25 miles an hour so at that point boats would be able to get back up to 25 mph none of that would change the the existing manity protection Zone there that that slow speed year round uh Channel exempt when I say Channel exempt I mean channel 25 miles an hour um as you see there um that would that would remain in effect and that goes up to I believe up into Hope Sound okay just questions and they're just questions out of curiosity have you guys ever disussed I know it's no wig zones per mile per hour on the boat and boats miles per hour different than cars and but obviously we all know the boats have gotten bigger many of the boats have three engines four engines which may create they create different wakes than a little Bay Boo or a little Boston wheeler but this would be just for General it's not pertaining to if you have a vessel over this size or x amount of Motors you have to go all the way down Idol it's not referring to that right no the so when we have a um a numerical um miles per hour that is it it's speed speed gun you know radar gun we which we use out there in fact we were out there we did a a fairly long study with our officers who were signed to that area and they noted how many boats they saw what day they were out there when they were there and they were they were basically taking radar of everybody and and for the most part let most people proceed through unless it was an egregious violation if people were going 30 32 they probably just let it go noted it so they could stay there again and collect continue to collect data uh although when guy was going by was going 60 we did pulling over because that is ridiculous okay uh so we our officers were collecting some of that data The Vessel traffic study was a different study but we did our own data study on how many boats were actually violating that 25 mph Zone in the vast majority of them were not or they were very close to that leads me to my second and last question when you refer to your data and you go to present your data that you redid and present in February is that just data on paper or you guys have actual visuals pictures videos of these holidays and weekends yeah the Atkins report is very thorough and it's on our website and it it it documented a fair amount of congestion uh during weekends and holidays um the study was done in May and June so we don't have data during the winter time um and uh so but with the other studies that we used that we feel like that we've conducted pre previously we feel that this uh new proposal of a a shorter Zone but 365 is warranted okay I was just curious because I just want to make sure that any decisions made whether it's the state or fdbc or whoever makes some you know well-rounded decision because we have plenty of no wake zones not saying I don't support near the bridge but I'm very sensitive to creating more W no wake zones because literally we have our boers today spending four and a half hours trying to get through the waterways up to Stewart I agree and we hear that all the time and that's why we uh use the are in in rule it says we use the least restrictive means to achieve the goal and uh we don't feel like we need any restrictions other than the existing 25 mph Zone uh all the way up to County Line uh but in that narrow stretch um that short narrow stretch we feel like it is warranted that's fine and I would appreciate if you had some visuals because I think it'll just help everyone and all sides understand what is trying to be achieved here absolutely and so geography has taken a large part of this we're looking at actual width and that's one of the that's the narrowest part I mean it's the Jupiter Narrows it's in the name so um uh that's that's why we we chose to make it shorter to really cover that narrow spot but then to to not go with additional restrictions further than that thank you for your time um the location where you're suggesting that the um the um no wake zone would end I'm not an expert in this matter nor am I suggesting where it should start or stop but you know it's kind of in the middle of where there's still a lot of recreation with you know paddle boarders kayakers so you're going to have a both that are going to accelerate you know where there's still a very busy Recreation Area is that actually going to cause more like issue with rough weake and stuff or I don't I don't think so not any more so than what currently exists there because right now it's 25 miles an hour there um the reason we chose that spot is it's it's past where we like I said had the most uh open spots those Brakes in the mangroves where people will go and sit in their lawn chairs they'll launch their kayaks or their paddle boards so it's a little north of there along a a mangrove Shoreline and it's where the area actually starts to widen out so um we're trying to thread a needle with uh respecting U people's rights to vote and to enjoy that and be able to actually get out and do stuff on the water but also with the public safety aspect and so I think we're trying to again find the least restrictive way to achieve that and and if if data as as time moves on and and it gets busier there and we find that that that we need to expand that zone that's always a possibility uh but we want to start with the the smallest zone possible we want to do something before something actually happens we have not had a major accident there you know knock on wood uh and I hope we can prevent it okay and then um are there any known or perceived negative impacts to the boating community besides just simply having to slow down there uh we think it might add four or five minutes of Transit time at the most okay and this question is probably more for um our staff you know I part of this would be in our jurisdiction is that something that um our marine unit is going to be enforcing the speeds there or who I guess who's responsible for enforcement and if we are is that going to be any cost impact to us so we we would be able to enforce it we have interlocal agreements in place Plus we also have the grant money that we do for the manity for for enforcement already and that's part of why we get paid that that $30,000 a year don't quote me on that but to enforce those speed zones so this would be in addition to that so yeah we would be able to enforce it okay yeah FWC uh PBSO uh Jupiter in Colony Jupiter Island all all have enforcement capabilities in that area it's a little convoluted I think along that whole stretch with they can whether they choose whether they choose to or not is is up to them but FWC is there for sure to was the um the biggest empist to for this to to bring it back or in the first is it to protect the environment or was it speed and safety it's speed and safety FWC is only allowed to regulate boat speed for two reasons and that's Public Safety and manity safety but there's a unintended benefit for those mro violins that we're looking that we've had discussions about um potentially there's a benefit to to the environment by reducing uh the boat wake on the shoreline there and there's some Mangrove Islands there that are are washing away for sure we've noticed that but we're not allowed to to okay legislate or rule make for that or for someone sea wall we can't do that either yeah thank you any other Council comments or questions no all right thank you Tom okay appreciate it and Jeremy has my contact information if you have any questions just he'll be able to get a hold of me and I can answer any of those questions and I look forward to maybe seeing you online on the 17th great thank you thank you Tom Maran do you any comment cards no comment cards any public comment and uh real quick I know Mr Po um H had reached out to request additional time I know you speaking on behalf of the Beach Road Association tonight uh tonight I will speak on behalf of the Beach Road Association and so since he is speaking on behalf of a group I would uh want to ask Council if they would be okay increasing his time from three minutes to five minutes needed yes absolutely um the handouts that I provided you more or less outlines uh the Beach Road Association position um we were part of the uh discussions that were held here a couple weeks ago that Tom referred to um I can say at this point uh we are supportive of the fwc's uh revised position and uh we will we will be sending um letters out or messages out to uh members of the association um reflecting that uh we just hope it goes forward uh smoothly um but we're um we're we're quite pleased with what the FWC at this point is doing U with respect to the preliminary decision that he's just announced to you and uh it shortens my uh presentation considerably so uh unless you have any questions of me um I will turn your give your time back to you oh well well thank you you did not need the time all right thank you Mr pal appreciate it have one can you read it who the uh Jessica namoth hi Jessica namoth um 20 Shady Lane and I was just going to also point out um for example this is started while there are added benefits to the mangroves this this we've been doing for years and years long before the project to kind of restore those had come up so this was something um that Public Safety is of up of the utmost concern here and I think that with the new uh suggestion to make it year round it takes some of the pressure off of our law enforcement that enforcement has kind of been the whole issue um to begin with for a lot of the concern out there and so um and obviously everybody's got places to be and there are a lot of Sandbar things going on there's a lot Patrol out on the water um and so this is something that you know I I know that there was one drowning that was not attributed to uh it was a drowning but the people that were there and witnessed it saw somebody get knocked off their balance by the wakes that had pulled somebody under um and I and again I know that the manatees and I've tried to fight for the turtles and we've tried to bring up different things and concerns over the years but Public Safety when you're out there and you're looking at it at at low tide you can walk out to the channel marker basically and the boats are flying by you right there so this is something that I know the previous councils had supported and written a letter of support for and we very much appreciate you guys considering supporting this because it is Arch Quest and God forbid something happened to any of the many many many people that recreate there so we're very appreciative of FWC and their efforts through this long long process and you know everybody coming together for this so we appreciate you guys um considering your support of this thank you thank you any other public comment okay all right Council any um neither additional comments or questions I know there was a draft resolution attached to our backup I don't have any further comments um I think my only uh on the very um the Bold part on the beginning it's very specific about uh for a distance of8 miles I don't know if that's what that is so I may just want tol in fact and and there's multiple places throughout the document that references um going all the way up to Coral Cove Park so if the council is um desires of supporting the revised FWC position that needs to be um adjusted down to um the way it was described just north of um channel marker 58 which is which is a different location and I can make that adjustment if that's what the council would like to do I would like to do that agreed okay and is there consensus to move this to our uh would it be on the December meeting I what do you got going I can I can make make that change tomorrow and get this uh back over Village Hall tomorrow for inclusion on your December agenda if that's what U if that's what you want okay sounds good you get the paperwork so okay all right moving on agenda item two Council discussion on resolution 25-24 supporting the procurement and oversight of consultants for the development of a countywide transportation plan Jeremy so this has been discussed for several months now I know I've introduced it to the council but the coun the county has a desired to put together a countywide transportation plan uh going back several months I believe starting in August the County Administrator came to the Palm Beach County manag Association and ask the cities to partner uh in this endeavor uh after several months of discussion with staff from um discussion staff from Palm Beach County and selected municipalities have drafted a scope of services for the countywide transportation plan effort it was reviewed by a committee selected by the Palm Beach County maners Association the draft scope has has been prepared and reviewed the process is that the inter Cooperative ICP multi-jurisdictional issues coordination Forum executive committee is proposed to serve as the oversight board um for consulting firm hired to craft the county wide transportation plan the formation of this expanded version of the the I park is proposed be adding Municipal and County Engineers Public Works it and other deemed appropriate um for the technical advisory committee um if approved this proposed resolution will provides the Palm Beach County Board of County Commissioners into the other 38 municipalities um and the school board um as of right now the resolution you guys have in front of you has been supported by 16 other municipalities and I'm told a couple other municipalities have it teed up for discussion as well um so this is not tied to any transportation tax or any other funding at this point it's just simply for the county to put out to support the idea of a countywide Transportation uh plan the county is going to be uh putting the RFQ out I believe in the next week or so I think sometime next week um and so this is just in support of the of the plan to move forward with the with the plan I guess so and I'll just add some um a little more color to this because Jeremy's been very involved with the Managers Association with this for months now I mean when did you guys start talk first start talking about it I guessed August but yeah I had to Rack my brain without going back and look at my notes so and we've been talking about at the league of cities since probably since we started talking about um when we were first trying to Advocate to extend the infrastructure ctax we knew that this Transportation ctax might uh you know the county might want to replace it and so we were kind of up against it so the conversations kind of even started then um but you know not just the cities League of cities the manager association there's a bunch of other organizations like the B2B Economic Council TPA everyone is paying attention to this um there has been um an RFP scope of services as written that is not being shared at this time because the county does not want to um have it leaked out in the public and risk the uh Integrity of you know a proper RFP process so I think Jeremy sent us a summary of what it is um that was the scope was put together with a technical team um from kind of different regions and give me one second I want to find that so I can tell you guys who those regions were so it was um the north was uh Palm meach Garden Central was West Palm and these are just I think mostly it was staff Representatives not elected officials uh South was bokeh Midwest was Wellington Western communities was belglade and then the county um so they work with the county staff to put together the scope of services is that yeah to my knowledge no elect there hasn't been any elected officials in any of this process at this point and so um what I would maybe want to suggest is I think that the um Board of county commissioner meeting December 10th maybe weekend right of the ceremony um Memorial tomorrow so we I kind of want to see what the RFP says before we decide to vote or not vote on a resolution just because I think it'd be good to see if the RFP is in line with what the core technical team put together or if it was changed um between when they agreed to it RFP went out and then also with the resolution I don't know that we necessarily need to copy it verbatim uh like everyone else has been doing you know one thing that really popped up in discussions um I've had in various meetings that the issues form the count um intergovernmental issues form I can't remember it's a really long name we all met too and and just some words and and things I've popped in those meetings kind of caught my attention so something if we want to do a resolution I think we should put somewhere in there that um we need to be able to protect our home role especially when it comes to land use and our comp plan so I think some sort of statement should be in there that you know we at the end of the day we we're going to control our land use and our you know our comp plan so that's one suggestion um and then also there's a bunch of different uh committees and roles listed in the resolution with mcf I park 2.0 none of those have been formalized or CAU if that the like I park 2.0 is officially being um created or this you know roles and responsibilities for MFC is XYZ so I don't again since it's kind of up in the air I don't know that we want to be so specific in a resolution if we're going to uh do something in support of a countywide transportation plan I will say um I think it's fantastic what I've seen with all these all these different groups and um cities small and large coming together and kind of MiG greeing and the county working with everyone that you know the transportation is a problem the influx of people moving here is a problem and if we don't get ahead of it it's going to get worse and worse and worse um so just a little more you know color to what's been going on what's it mean more lights huh more lights just kidding who knows I mean that's that's why they're hiring the consult consult right there's many different modes of transportation and Mobility can mean a bunch of different things and so that's why they're hiring the consultant and um there you know they have so far said the consultant will be doing uh workshops all around the county you know public workshops to get public input so it should be a very you know open and transparent process the consultant will be doing those that's the plan all right so just for clarification we would be possibly supporting them to hire the consultant not necessarily the full project is that correct we would be supporting them using or hiring the consultant this way it's written we're we would be supporting the idea of a regional transportation plan and so the county has a million dooll budgeted right now for to hire a consultant they're going to put out an RFQ whether we pass this resolution or not they're going to go forward with this process us as supporting is like Hey we're in favor like we want to be included Ed we want to give feedback you know all those things which we even if we don't pass the resolution we'll be a part of we'll be at the table um so it's just really more of a um you know get support and everybody have some buy into this process that's what that's what they're trying to get from the municipalities okay because that was my next question last question was just what happens hypothetically if taquesta doesn't support it or passes anything that officialize the support shouldn't change anything change anything shouldn't change anything and I mean jery will stay involved through the Managers Association I would be via the league and we have requested um Jay to be put on I park 2.0 so you know we'd have multiple people requesta um you know engage in this process I agree with you mayor I'd like to see what happens at their next meeting when they review the yeah yeah I'm in favor of that as well waiting till that document comes out because you know I find it hard I know it's needed it's necessary I grew up in central Palm Beach County and but I just where we're located I just don't don't want I'd like to see the language before we are behind something that really either wouldn't benefit us or would have nothing to do with us um but I want to be part of that group effort to say we support you there's a lot of things in North County that we can that we we offer a different we don't have land we don't have industrial space there's a lot of things that we don't have but we still are always engaged in the process um I know so little about this Transportation I know it's been around it's not my not my specialty so I'd like to see exactly what we're endorsing or what we would be supporting so I agree with council member Brandon and you said mayor so okay so we'll we'll wait till that's issued and then um uh I guess I mean it should be attached their agenda for the 10th right yeah just maybe email that I hear it's like a 16 or 17 page scope you said December 10th I think that on that time 10th of the 17th I forgot it it it is on the 10th the meeting is on the 10th that's what the website said today okay all right any public comment uh Jessica D um and I feel I I appreciate and I'm interested to hear the results of what you guys are saying but I have been asked to speak I'm the community liaison for my HOA in Shady Lane and so on this their behalf I am expressing concern I'm sure they'll be happy to hear that we're waiting to see what this new updated um the park plant or is that what it is the the park plan right the scope of Services of services because there's I think there's just and I know uh we're adjacent to Bay Harbor and I've spoken to numerous residents there who some of which have said they may or may not have emailed or may have emailed um but I know that seeing fdot and Tri Rail and um Palm Tran is alarming and concerning to a lot of the residents who feel that we don't necessarily need that in this area you know it might be nice to have in some of the more populated areas but um again concerned and curious what we could be doing to not be included in that if that's even possible and I'm not sure if I'm able to ask a question or see you know what um what that is but I think that there's hope that that we would be fighting to not be a part of bringing public transportation into the village and kind of protecting the kids riding bikes and you know having our safe protected field that we all love about here so um and are hopeful that that will be what we defend and try to uphold for our community so thank you thank you and um I don't know if you can remember off the top of your head but I know there's um having I don't want to get too far ahead of things but having a transportation plan in place the next step would be funding this save happens Transportation plans put together next step would be funding and I know the transportation tax has been talked about for a while now what what can that fund do you remember off top of your head it's not it's not the same as the infrastructure s tax but no the the um the discretionary Transportation C tax um county has um the money would all go to the county number one and the county has the discretion to distribute up to 25% of that tax to municipalities the county is allowed to use it basically for um uh like light rail or highspeed rail or like a countywide Transit program not for basically not for fixing roads or making bigger or more roads it's for a bigger scop Transportation plan I I think municipalities on the other hand if they are given that 25% or or some lesser amount can use it for like bridge and and road work but the county cannot so we without reading the statute that's my recollection of how it can be used so yes it is um I think the county can use it to expand uh like Palm Tran the bus service not do maintenance work on the existing but to make it to expand Palm Tran is one of the things that can be used for as well again it's like a very long game way just it kind of tie it all together you know the biggest part that we're going to have whether we support it with a resolution or not is when the consultant goes around to municipalities and there's supposed to be resorb amount of public meetings that goes through this process over a year to 18 months uh that we give feedback and we're going to be able to give our comp plan give our transportation plan give our Parks plan and then the public will have plenty of opportunities along with our elected officials and staff to give feedback at that point you know depending on how the draft of that plan comes out or the the final plan comes out you know they're saying they don't want to tie it to the transportation tax but that would be our ultimately our endorsement to that plan is if our residents support that plan and then we put it out for a vote for the transportation plan it's going to be tied to it's going to be tied to this the transportation tax ultimately if it goes to about be tied to this plan and so if our residents say we don't want all that here then we then we wouldn't be in support of that I mean that's the ultimate long long long run of it I guess okay and then I think um I know our um we're not having a January Workshop because of the holiday I believe so the earliest this we would see this would be the February Workshop which is is it actually on February or is it it's usually like January 31st is I think it's going to be February 3rd and then our Council me will be on February 13th so we could like like Jeremy said it's not like the count is going to they're doing what they're going to do regardless so I don't there's no rush on this the I JY you so we could you know see what the county puts out and see what happens in between alls and then Workshop it at our February Workshop okay and then um did Council agree with making sure that there is some kind of statement protecting our home role and land use and plan I'm agre yes I agree with maybe you can add that I made notes with from your comments already okay perfect okay anything else no no ma with that can I get a motion to adjourn so moved second all in favor I nothing try to read the top of it to