Right. Good evening everyone. It is 6:02 p.m. I'd like to call tonight's meeting to order. It's February 2nd, 2026 and this is our workshop meeting. Maryanne, can I get roll call? Mayor Young >> here. >> Vice Mayor Story >> here.
>> Council member Brandon. Council member Painter >> here. >> Council member French >> here. >> Thank you. And as we are waiting for the consultant to present on agenda item one, we are going to flip-flop agenda item one and two. And we'll start tonight with item number two, villa
quest utilities department backflow prevention and cross control connection program. Cross connection control program. Allison, thank you mayor, vice mayor, council. Um, thanks for having me tonight. Allison Felsburg, utilities director.
Uh okay. Um so just a quick overview of the presentation. Um we'll review backflow prevention and cross connection control. I know we had a presentation um in March of 2025. So we'll just briefly uh go through that one more time. Um we'll
review our current compliance and practices. Then transitioning to what this program entails and an overview of this. Um and then how we plan to implement it with a phase 1, phase 2, phase three, phase 4 approach. what those projected outcomes are and then we
will have some time for any questions. So just a review of what backflow prevention and cross connection control are. Um a backflow device typically you'll see on a property it comes up above grade goes like this and goes back down. It has usually it's like a double check valve assembly. So it'll have like
little valves and everything on it. Kind of looks like that picture right there. Um and it's supposed to stop any water from going backwards through the pipe from the house. Um, and typically this can the possibility of this can occur when there's a difference in in pressure um like a water main break. All of a sudden you see a drop in pressure,
there's still pressure at the house so the water can siphon backwards. Um the the real issue comes into play when you have pools, irrigation systems, um facilities that do dialysis, any type of
um change in the water chemistry that could introduce bacteria or other chemicals back into the water man. Um that so that's the whole purpose of what a backflow prevention device is for is to prevent that backflow. Um they are required to be tested. So
non-residential properties which throughout this presentation we'll call commercial properties um they have to be tested annually while residential properties are bianually or every two years. Um this is required under national law but under Florida
administrative code 62555360 and then we also have our code of ordinance section 5186. Um and all of this is basically just to protect public health. Um, and like I said, those opportunities for backflow
are are more concerning when people have swimming pools with direct plumbing, irrigation systems, fire sprinkler systems, private wells with shared plumbing or reclaimed water supply. Um, it it kind of is a little bit of a gray area sometimes when you say somebody has a private well on their property, they
abandon it. As long as we can ensure that there's no direct plumbing connection to that system or a direct plumbing connection cannot easily be made um then we would not require a backflow prevention device. So current compliance and practices our
current compliance is pretty low. Um you'll you'll never see a utility typically with 100% compliance. It's very difficult to achieve. Um, but obviously you want to try to get as close to 100% as possible. Um, we
currently use a provider called Aqua Backflow to administer the tracking and compliance for these backflow devices. Um, so we do submit the data for all of our backflow compliance um to FD annually. Um, and all of that data is
pulled from Aqua Backflow. So, a resident or commercial property, they get sent a notice um 60 days before their testing is due and that's a mailed notice. And then if they still don't submit results, they get a second notice
14 days after that is due. We do email them and we do call the residents as well or the commercial property owner. Um but typically they'll get this notice, hey, your testing is due. They'll hire their own plumber to go do the testing on their device and that plumber submits it to Aqua Backflow. The
plumbers that are certified are all very familiar with the process. Um, and then Aquabacflow does track who is certified in our area. So they do have to submit their credentials for testing. Um, so all of that's tracked through Aquabacflow. Um, and that's the notices
that get sent out. Um, we do get reimbursed $5 per test from Aqua Backflow because we have to administer it on the back end when it comes to submitting that report. So, we do get $5 per test and typical testing varies, but typical testing for residential property
is $120 per test and obviously that depends on what type of backflow advice the person has. That can change. Um, so we do have an issue with compliance. We're trying to increase our compliance. So we have been looking down different avenues. We found HydroCorp.
They collaborate with a lot of different communities in our area. Um especially when it comes to cross connection control. They do other things as well as like hydraulic modeling, mapping. Um but what they would do is partner at this in the same sense that Aqua Backlo
currently does except when it comes to the past due um tests that's where they would step in and help us ensure compliance with those existing account holders. Um, and the way that we plan to phase this, and you'll I'll dive into a little
bit more detail, but we want to start with commercial properties and just getting current commercial property accounts up into compliance. And then we're going to look at residential properties, get those up into compliance that are existing, and then eventually phase into doing surveys and identifying
properties that do not have backflow prevention devices, but would need them. Um we understand that um this may be a difficult process. So we do plan to go very slowly um and constantly checking up on the progress and seeing how the community is feeling, how the
information is being relayed because right now there are some issues with the how the communications going out, ensuring that residents are aware of the requirements, aware that it's the village that's sending these communications out um and making sure we're being as transparent as possible when it comes to this whole process.
So phase one program launch. So this is 0 to 3 months and really this is all kind of on the back end. So we would finalize and execute our contract with hydrocorp outlining the responsibilities and procedures. So based on the feedback we get tonight, we plan to bring that contract to the March council meeting.
Um and then we'll establish an internal team to coordinate with Hydro Corp. Um and then we start we'll start notifying commercial residential customers of the updated compliance program. So a lot of education and um the proposal that we would bring be bringing in March has a
education component that's specific to building our website building the interface for um residents to start understanding what this requires why it's so important because it's really protecting the health for everybody for their water systems. Um and then setting
up the billing and cost recovery process. We will um have to update a resolution for our fees cuz we will be adding um the co test of the cost of testing um directly onto a water bill for someone who has failed to do their
testing. So there's some responsibilities outlined and the deliverables would be the signed contract um the customer communication package. So, the letters that are going to be going out, emails that will be going out, updating our website, making sure we have a lot of educational material available, and then
our internal reporting structure for how we're going to start seeing compliance on the back end. So, then once we have the groundwork really set up, we will transition to commercial account compliance. And the time frame is 3 to 12 months. Um based
on the the feedback we get um we'll obviously change that timeline. It'll either be shorter or longer. Um and just a reminder commercial accounts are required to test every two or every year. So we would get the full set of commercial accounts that we currently
have registered tested throughout this phase. Um and so Hydro Corp would start the compliance tracking system for all devices commercial and non-resident or commercial and residential. Then they start identifying non-compliant commercial accounts. So those accounts that have exceeded that two to two weeks
to one month mark after their past due notice. And then they're going to conduct direct testing for non-compliant commercial accounts. So that's HydroCorp working with a plumber contracting with a local plumber to get the testing done and then submitting that online and then
submitting that information for reimbursement. So the the village would have to pay for the testing up front through Hydrocorp and then have the cost of that testing included on the water bills. So Hydrocorp would be responsible for the testing and then we would be responsible for oversight and billing.
Um and through this proposal, Hydrocorp would provide monthly compliance reports. Um we would have an updated compliance database and then we would have to do billing records for cost recovery. for residential compliance, which we're looking at over a year window after we
kind of go and see how the commercial side works through and and fix any kinks or anything. Um, we would start monitoring residential compliance through Hydrocorp system, which we would already be doing, but now start looking at those accounts that aren't in compliance. Um, and we'll already have a one-year history on those that aren't in
compliance, plus moving on forward from that, the ones that are continuing to not be in compliance. And then we would start um tracking the impact of re reallocation on residential compliance. So the funds that we are recovering from the com the commercial side we can
reallocate those funds to residential testing and support. So going back through now what we just did with comp or the commercial side going and doing that on the residential side. So identifying the accounts that are overdue, sending out a plumber, completing the testing, and then
including those uh costs on the water bills. Currently, we have no financial way to require the testing. Um we do have the ability to shut off water. Um when it comes to the commercial side, it's a little bit of a a difficult
situation if they have a fire line because you don't want to shut off a fire line to a building. Um, so this would allow us to have those funds go on the water bills and then similar to a previous agenda item, start collecting on those water bills, having past due notices on water bills, and then
eventually shutting off water or putting a lean on the um property. So deliverables for this would be quarterly residential compliance reports. Like I said, residential, you're not going to see them testing as often, so we wouldn't do the monthly reports for residential. It would just be quarterly. um documented reallocation
of funds and then updated compliance rate projections. And so at this point um at this phase in the process, we should see a pretty large spike in compliance as we're um almost requiring compliance and and putting compliance really in our responsibility and and helping to
encourage the compliance and um working with property owners to reach that compliance. And so then once we start seeing that increase in compliance, then we would start going into an ongoing evaluation and continuous improvement. I did not include the phase for surveying
in here cuz it would be over um a year out and that would be something I think we would bring back to council on our way in approach that we would complete surveying. It's not part of the current proposal with Hydro Corp. So it would be included in anything that you're seeing brought to council in March. Um, but it
is something that down the road we down the road we would like to do because we do know that there's some properties that need to have backflow devices that currently don't have them. Um, so that is something that we would plan on doing down the road but is not part of this
current phased approach for compliance. So our projected outcome is commercial compliance baseline of 80%. Um, that's it's pretty good and it compares with a lot of the municipalities that have already implemented this type of compliance approach where they're partnering with someone who's directly conducting or who's directly conducting
the testing instead of fully relying on the property owner who may not have the education or understanding to know that it even needs to be done. And then a residential compliance increase of 3 to 5% via that reallocation and then hopefully a full cost recovery of program investment.
>> Thank you. and I will take any questions. >> Thank you, Alison. Council, open up for questions. >> Just have one question. Um, great job going through that with us. A lot of the stuff I have written down for questions you answered, so thank you on the backflow device for commercial. If it
does fail the test, and maybe I missed it, but the test was what could be placed on a lean or charged, but if it fails a test and it needs a new backflow device or whatever repair may be, is that the same approach where you plumber makes the repair and then the lean goes
to the commercial property? >> I believe that's correct. I can double check, but I think that's correct. Yes. >> Okay, that's it. Thank you. >> Thank you. Um, just one question. I apologize if I missed it, but do we have any idea of I I guess I'll speak mostly to residential the cost that would be
added to the utility bill roughly. I mean, >> so it's about $120 per test and then we would add a 10% administrative fee because we're going to have to be the ones making those phone calls, sending out the emails, and then manually entering on the water bill that cost.
>> So that would that be spread out over 12 months or that just one hit to one month? Typically, it's one month. Um, one hit on one month. If we wanted to look at payment plans, payment options that we can look at that. Um, that was going to be my suggestion when we start doing surveys is to look at payment
plans because the installation of a new device can be pretty costly. Um, the only issue with spreading it out is your chances of recouping those costs go down. Um, just because it's a it's amount that you're hoping that the property owner stays. Therefore, if they
move in the next year, you're losing that. Um, but I think that I mean it's a possibility. We could definitely look at especially for residential I think commercial it'll be a little bit easier and it won't be um as much of an ask but I think for residential we could look at doing that. That's
>> does it have to be and again I apologize if I missed this. I was reading over it again but do you does it have to be a specific backflow pretor to be able to to run? Like if I have a ABC back backflow prevent or hydrocorp
would it still the test still work? >> So there's different types of backflow prevention devices but they're all like certified under under law like they're not going to put one in that's not that won't work and hydrocorp is going to um contract with just a local plumber. The local plumbers when you I mean they'll
know how to do all of the ones that are installed in this area. >> Okay. I'm just wondering because I know I have one. I just I haven't tested it, that's for sure, but I'm hoping it's working. Um Okay, cool. That's all I got. >> Just like last time, my biggest concern
is going to be when we get to the point for residents in the older homes. >> I have a feeling we either don't have one >> or they have one that's going to fail the test. So, just >> I'm hoping we're going to be just very mindful how we approach that because it
is going to be very costly if they have to replace it. And again, we aren't there yet to figure out what the cost would be in our economy at the time and with the plumbers. So, I'm just hoping when we get to that point that we really do work with residents on how to make that feasible
>> cuz I that's my fear is many of our older homes are not going to have one. >> Yeah. I think even if if we start this project, kick it off with commercial properties, we can come back in 6 months and just see how it's going with commercial properties and decide if we want to continue to move forward. Um, I think that this is a very important
thing for us to protect our water system. Um, but I do understand how sensitive it can be for a lot of people. So, I agree. >> Yep. And I agree. I think it's important. I just think cuz it's new. >> Um, and we you have control over how we the timing you want to do it. So, when we get to that point, that's really the
biggest part for me is just how do we approach our residents who've been here a long time in those houses. >> That's it. And I guess I'm I'm still confused on the purpose of this. This is for every residential connection. It's for the water.
>> So it goes on your portable water supply. So after your it's after your meter. So the water goes through your meter and then it would go through this backflow prevention device. Um and that's because nothing stops the water from going backwards. It's not on every residential property. It's only if you have those like high-risk
um situations where you have maybe a reclaimed water that is directly tied in. You have the option to either do portable water or your reclaimed water going into your property and there's a direct plumbing connection if a valve accidentally gets left open and that reclaimed water can go back into the water man. So, it's a situations like
that where um typically through the building department when you're building a house, they will decide when it's required and they'll make them installed when new houses are built. But then when you have older homes where you have a pool that was installed and it's directly plumbed into your system or
something like that, um it may not have been identified um for you to install one. And so it's those types of homes. It wouldn't just be a typical residential property that doesn't have any of those high-risisk situations going on. And it's not um is it is it tied to any type of irrigation system as
well? >> If you've got a if you've got a well >> to irrigate your lawn, is that where the backflow is for that or this is >> so it's no it's just on your portable water system. >> But if you have a private well on your property that has plumbing that's
connected to your house somehow, then yes, it would count. Now, if you can sit there and this is where this I don't know how they would do the surveys. We can go into that down the road, but they'd have to find out whether the plumbing is connected or not. So, it's really sight specific. If you have a private well and it's completely
separate plumbing, there's no way that the plumbing could be connected, then you don't need one. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Um, so how do we It doesn't sound like we do, but I just want to ask, do we know how many commercial properties are not in compliance? And do we know how
many residential properties are not in compliance? I can it's a graph. It changes like it fluctuates pretty frequently just because the rate everybody's on a it's not like everybody on January 1st has to do testing. It's all over the place. So it's changing all the time because it's
whenever somebody built the house or got theirs tested that new compliance state starts once they had it tested before. Um so if you can see the non-compliant are the orange bar. So domestic for residential properties it's almost 50% that are non-compliant and that's existing accounts. that's not doing a
survey and seeing properties that are not in compliance because they don't have a device. That's somebody who has a device and just isn't testing it. Um and then you can see there's some fire lines, specifically irrigation lines and then miscellaneous. >> So for residential too, we know the homes are not in compliance.
>> Yes, for those for the >> that's only if they have a backflow device. >> Correct. I guess maybe I should have uh let me re ask this for the answer I'm trying to receive is if they don't have a backlo but need one do we know that
that's what I was looking for >> on both commercial and residential >> most commercial commercial it's not as much of a concern it's mostly residential most commercial properties have a back >> we have no clue >> for the resial >> okay um and what are we doing now that's not working I mean we send notices I'm
assuming do we calls like How do we approach it? >> So, we send the two notices, we do phone calls, and we do emails. So, Tracy, the front desk will call them and say, "Hey." But most of the time, they don't answer um or they don't get back to us if we leave them a voicemail. And um and
then there's no way to enforce it. They could just not do it. The the issue arises that when somebody is in non-compliance and they're not testing their backflow, we are if we know that that's going on, we're supposed to go and shut the water off. um
we have that ability. Is it enforced 100% of the time? I think it's on a situational type of basis. We try to continue send the notices and get the communication out there. Um but there's no way to enforce it without shutting water off. So I think especially on the commercial side, that's there's a lot of
hesitation with that because of the fire lines and just shutting off the safety. >> How many backflow contamination issues have we had say in like the past 5 years? actual contamination issues. I'd have to go and look. We don't The issue with
backflow is also you just don't know necessarily when there is actual backflow going on because it's a residential property. We have no way of knowing when water went backwards through the meter. We could get a negative read possibly. Um but it's just not a typical occurrence for us to know
if there has been a backflow incident. Um, the other thing that helps is that our meters have a back a type of backflow device installed inside of them, but you there's no way to test them. So, they don't meet the requirements for Florida administrative
code, but it is another layer of protection for us. >> And those are both on commercial and residential meters. Yes, both of them. Okay. Um I want to can you elaborate on you
you said full cost recovery from a commercial program then you said hopefully full cost recovery. >> So can you elaborate that like what's the cost of the program? How are we paying for it? Can you explain a little bit more how we're going to fully recover those funds? I'm assuming we're
going to flip >> maybe foot the bill up front. Okay. So can you elaborate that and what the dollar amount we're actually looking at here? So, the proposal will be bought in March. And don't quote me on the number because I haven't looked at it recently, but I want to say it's between $50 and $60,000. And that's for one year, the
very first year that we're using HydroCorp. So, that would be all of the educational material. Um, them coordinating the tracking of all of the compliance. Um, and then that does not count the funding for testing. So, we would have to budget a certain amount of
funds for the upfront cost of testing. And then hopefully, especially on the commercial side, I think we're more likely to have the testing done and then include that cost on the water bill and it just
get paid. I don't think we'll get as much push back on that just cuz they're commercial properties. Um, and so then once we recover those costs plus the 10 minute 10% administrative fee as we slowly build that back, eventually it should should we should gain money over
time and then be able to use some of that funding the next following year to start getting residential properties in line. And we do have the option um so typically once one customer or a commercial property starts on this program of testing they'll stay on the program of testing but we will give the
option for them to complete their own testing if they want to use someone else after that. >> Okay. And out the gate though we're going to give everyone the opportunity to come in
compliance before >> Yes. So, we'll continue with our typical notices and time frames, but then once a commercial property goes out of that compliance window of the past due notice after I think it's 14 days after it's due, we give the phone call, we do the well, we do the email, we do the phone
call, and then if we don't receive a response, that's when Hydro Corp would be sending somebody out there to do the testing. >> Okay. And then that would get tacked on to their water bill. So the so you said there's the option to do their own if they don't want to pay for it through us but then would we maybe end up in the
same situation where we're at or would we give them like x amount of days and then we're automatically going to do it if they opt out and say they want to do it on their own. >> So there wouldn't even be an opt out typically. So they're going to be they're responsible for it up until it's past due by 14 days and then we'll try to contact them. If we can't make
contact that's when we'll send we'll hydroqual send a plumber out there to do the testing. So that at that point, we've assumed that they're already stating that they will not do the testing because we've sent the notices, we've tried to call them, we'll do the testing, include it on their water bill, and then we'll continue to do the same
notices next year, but if they don't do it again, we're sending somebody out there again next year for commercial properties, residentials every two years. >> Okay. Do you know um how many utilities, water utilities in our area use this service? >> I can double check and get back to you on that.
>> Okay. And then how many other companies did we look into? Um I don't I don't know how many had we had looked into it. I can I can find out back to you on that. Okay. >> This is a very well-known
company from what was the information that was provided. >> Okay. Thank you. Council, any other comments or questions? >> No, thank you. >> Is there any public comments? >> Marsha, >> I'm going to pass because I'll talk to Alison. I'm totally confused.
>> Okay. Any other? >> No. >> No. Any other public comment? >> I wasn't playing, but I just >> Okay. If you can come up the podium. >> Talk to the microphone. >> Yep. Come on. State your name and address, please. >> Oh, well, this is about commercial. It's
not about residential. That's what I live at 72 yacht club place. Kimberly Windish. And I just wanted to tell you that I do have an office up on US1 in the West Marine. Kimberly, if you can you address council, please. >> I have my office up in the plaza where West Marine is, and I get a notice in my
mail slot to the previous owners of that plaza, which is 2 years ago sold to still to Russell Properties for the backflow. I've called the water department and Steve told me as the tenant, I don't pay for it. The owner does. But you may want to check cuz
they're not getting the bills. There's still and I've noticed like just with selling real estate when I go to look up permits and stuff on you guys' building department names and ownership doesn't change. It's kind of funky. I don't know how that works, but you may look into
that plaza and see if you're sending the bill to the right person for the backflows because other tenants have gotten it and think they have to pay the $100. Steve told me I do not have to pay it as the tenant. I don't know if they addressed it, but it still keeps coming to Russell Properties and they don't own it.
>> Okay, so just a little FYI. >> No, thank you for letting us know. >> Thank you. Thanks very much. >> Elsa, how do we address that if there's like a change in ownership and maybe there's some confusion? I mean, is that a do we try to assist with that or is that a private property matter? How do you >> Um, no, we would try to assist with it.
I'd have to look up in a specific case by case situation. Sometimes it's difficult because um the owner of the property is the one who is responsible for the testing. Sometimes they decide to pass that testing cost on to the tenant. Um in the case where you have a
plaza has multiple tenants. It's probably getting sent to each tenant because each one has a backflow instead of sending all of them to one owner. Um but we'd have to look on a case by case basis, but we can look into it. >> Okay. Yeah, we could look into that that way. And I think if we did do this transition, it would actually make it
better because it would be going on the water bills directly and so um all of that would kind of right now the systems are kind of separate but they would be a little bit more intertwined. >> Okay, great. Thank you. Any other public comment? Okay, council. Any other discussion?
>> No. >> All right. Thank you, Alison. >> Thank you, Alison. >> Now move back to agenda item one. Dequest a park master plan update from Kinley Horn. Greg, >> thank you, mayor. Vice Mayor Council Greg Corbett, parks and recreation director. Um tonight, uh we have
Jonathan from Kimberly Horn to give us an update on uh the Toquesta Park master plan. Um if anybody has any questions throughout the presentation, just I'm here to answer them if you >> Thank you.
>> Thanks, Greg. Uh Jonathan Heg uh senior landscape architect with Kimley Horn and project manager for this fun project for Tquesta Park. This is our update. Uh we've been into some concept design and felt this felt it was a good stopping
point to update council on where we are today. So as a reminder, this is the master plan that was approved in 2022 um by NC Consultants. There's been some little tweaks and updates made to it since then and we just want to review
those with you today. So, this is the current site plan uh that we're looking at. It's a kind of conceptual development stage. Uh you can see that most for the most part we stayed with the same general layout what was in the original master plan, but we made some tweaks. Some of it had to do
with uh kind of the spatial relationship between some of the elements, some had to do with requirements. um for those particular athletic features um and I'll review those here piece by piece if this thing
>> try the next slide see what happens >> one more >> well I mean I can I can talk off of this slide if we need to for some reason the other slide didn't show up very well. >> Either that line or this line.
>> I've got to the >> the agenda of our agenda. >> All right. Start there. >> There we go. So, just to highlight a few of the changes, um, one that we made was addressing the parking. Uh, the original master plan didn't really address
parking at all. It was a relying on the original parking lot to serve the entire park. Um, with all the new added improvements and to better serve the park in general, um, and to meet Martin County code requirements, we really
needed to add parking and nearly double it. So what we've done is we've added uh 111 new parking spaces. There's 118 remaining for a total of 100 or 229. Uh this will better serve uh the uses
especially if you've got a lot of things going on there at once which we hope this park is going to be really really popular once it's done. Um but you can see where we've taken up over some of the space where some of those uh original elements were. So, for example, on the on the right hand side, we've got
a parking area where where you currently have basketball courts. So, we've we've relocated those. Um, and then we've got the maintenance facility uh that's replacing where the current caretakers, residents, and those sheds are located. And I believe Doug has brought before
you, wherever he went, Doug has brought before you uh the new maintenance building, which will be coming forward uh or moving forward as we get into the uh project. Um, you want to go to the next page? This thing didn't work.
So, the central core of this park is, I guess, is what we're labeling the family fun zone. And it kind of combines a lot of elements, which is kind of neat. We we were able to move the volleyball over there. We still have the large picnic pavilion. Uh, that picnic pavilion size
about 40 by 80 ft. Uh, think about the one of the larger pavilions at Carlin Park in Jupiter. It'll seat about 100 people at once with picnic tables. Um, we have a splash pad with a little more uh dry space around it than was in the
original master plan for parents to sit and watch the kids. Uh, we've got some more shade there with a we're putting a looking at doing a fun umbrella, which is one of those really large like 20 foot diameter umbrellas. um and some picnic tables where you can put some
other umbrellas with it as well. Um playground area will have some shade sails on it for shade. Uh it's we've got it configured in this design with kind of a pod design where you could have a pod for smaller kids and a larger kid area. Get that separation in there which
is really nice. Um also in that space in the middle is a standalone restroom building which will kind of serve the most of the park. Um, and then there'll be another restroom building and kind of a concession area with the baseball
field. I'll get to that in a minute. Uh, I think that's about it. We couple of other small picnic picnic pavilions around the around this area as well. Um the main act athletic activ act
active recreation zone. We have a 300 ft and a 225 ft ball field uh with a concession building. And then off to the left of that you'll see the little rectangle piece that'll be batty cages for the for the kids to practice. And in
meeting with JTA uh the sizes these one of the fields at least changed from the master plan from 200 to 225. So, that was one of those things was a little bit larger field. The artificial turf multi-use field is sized for a fulls size soccer field. Um,
it's also includes a little more out of bounds area. We're tagging that right now as a artificial turf. Uh, so it'll be a nice yearround use facility. You'll never have to put it on rest. Um, if it's Yeah. So, you can schedule games,
you know, constantly back to back. Uh we have moved the or reconfigured the dog park just slightly. It's staying it's in general location where it's at right now. Uh and then you can see where we've moved the basketball courts just south
of that. Um we've also got in the plan to do some improvements to the pickle ball and tennis areas. Uh there's some um I guess some wear and tear on some of those facilities that needs to be addressed. We're going to do that in this stage as well.
So, we've kind of got this more technical site plan we're working on. We're gearing up towards uh we know we're going to have to go through Martin County uh zoning and plan review eventually. Uh this is the site is up in fully in Martin County. Uh you can see
where you know we've got the parking tabulated on this sheet. If you want to review that, I can. Um but next steps will be more like looking at uh the design of more detailed things like the design of the splash pad and the
playground with some theming to those elements and uh you know picking out the uh playground equipment. Looking at how the site's going to be secure with infrastructure for security systems. Um obviously we haven't got into the
landscape design or any of the irrigation or anything like that yet. still a little early. So, to kind of review where we are on the project schedule, uh we're looking at finalizing the site design and I think we've kind of gotten there a little bit with by the end of
January. Uh by February 2026, have our preliminary site plan uh prepping for a a preapp just to review, make sure we're on the right track. Um looking at our environmental assessment this month as well. uh going through February through
April, looking at preparing the site plan package, you know, per the county checklist and doing our environmental assessment update um in the uh PAMP update as well. April through June site plan review and going through responses
to comments and then getting into the 60 and 90% plans production uh with the idea of delivering the 90% plans to village by December. Any questions? >> Thank you, Jonathan. Council, open up discussion.
>> I have two questions. Uh, thank you for the presentation. Very excited about the park. Uh, the first question, security-wise, is there anything in the plans for the wooded areas, the path, or just security in general for the park um upgrades? >> I know that the in talking with Doug and
Greg and the team uh that we do want to do security out there. So we will work with addressing that as we move forward. Um that can be done in a variety of ways. You can add cameras in spray re readers at the at the entrances. You can
do cameras throughout the site, you know, mounting them to light poles where we're adding area lights and sports lighting. Um whether we do it through the the trail on the perimeter. Uh we haven't gotten to that point yet, but if that's something the the council would like us to look at, we can certainly add
it to our list. Yeah, if you don't mind considering how that would work. I mean, I've young girls, they love to go off into the path and and take off. Um, and I've seen other municipalities do that out in the woods with different hunting cams, things of that nature if there's an issue with uh getting the wires out
there, whatever it may be. >> Right. Would be great. And another question is artificial turf instead of sod. Uh what's the thought process behind that for the multi-use field? And like I mentioned, uh the the decision to go from artificial turf to sod is one
that would allow if if it's a popular facility, let's say you're running soccer games in leagues there uh a lot. Um this is only one field, so you wouldn't have to have any kind of rest or turnover that would need to be done
to to keep that sod in good shape. um a little less maintenance on the on the requiring, you know, obviously no fertilizer, no mowing. Um there are other tradeoffs that are made there, but if you're going to have a very popular
and highly used um soccer field or multi-use field, it's a direction to go where you don't have to put your fields to rest for months on end or month on end to to recover from a lot of use. >> Okay. Thank you.
Thank you. Um, so I I agree, you know, the parking out there's a little like depending on where you're trying to go in the park, you can end up pretty far from where you're trying to get to. >> But I heard you say that um this the parking is also for to meet Martin County code requirements. Is that
something we'd have to do regardless? It's just a matter of where it would go in the park. Yeah, right now the the park is underparked by quite a bit. Um, just based on, you know, use requirements. Um, for for example, let's say you had
youth soccer going on and you had you striped that for two sideways fields and you had baseball games going on at the same time, family reunion going on in the in the big pavilion and people were visiting the splash pad in the dog park. uh you you'd have a hard time fitting
everyone in the 111 or 120 spaces that are right there right now. >> Okay. >> So, that's why we're adding quite a bit more is to take care of not only the uh the required parking per, but also there's some turnover that's going to happen. Like if you're scheduling
backtoback games uh on the uh on the baseball field, you're going to want you're going to have some exchange period of time where people are arriving while people are still there. So, you want to make sure you have, you know, the infrastructure in place to be able to handle that load of people.
>> Does anything uh I know we're just it looks like we're just kind of moving a few things around, but is there would there be any required additional clearing? >> No, we're we're looking at um in fact, if you want to pull up the that main drawing, one of the main drawings of our
newer plan, um you'll see that we kind of kept the same outline of the existing cleared area. Um there is an area right near the maintenance building where there's a lot of exotic invasive plants
that we can take out. There's several um I notice carrotwood there. There's some uh um earleaf acacia. Um there are several mango trees in that area that I know beloved by some people, but they they aren't the best thing to keep in a
park. Yeah. Especially if they're not being regularly harvested. Yeah. And then just on the uh on the the uh not the saw, the turf, what like what would you expect? I mean, this would could be a a field that is used quite a bit. What
would the typical lifespan of a turf multi-use field like that be? >> It depends on the product and how again how much it's how much it's ultimately ends up being used. Um, and there's there's different um things you can do
with it, but I'd say depending on the product between 10 to 20 years. >> Okay. >> Okay. Thank you. That's all I got. >> So, I see we have the majority of the same facility usages in there for activities.
I see batting cages were added. >> I'd like to know why. Um, and I I'd like to know what is the plan for that because I I go back to when we originally did the master plan. There was feedback on how to manage it
because the one batting cage that's in Jupiter public can't use it already. So that makes us the only batting cage publicly used. Um, so I'm just curious how if there's a plan for that, where that came from, cuz I do remember it got brought up when we created the master
plan. Second thing I got feedback about clearing and I've been looking at it and standing at the park. It's the two baseball fields that you guys moved and you guys tweaked them this way. I disagree. I think it's going to require
some clearing. So, I'd rather see one baseball field than two and create a more effective batting cage if there is actually a need for it because then we can manage it more productively and have one baseball field versus two and less
clearing of the natural space. Okay. >> Question for staff because this came up when we designed the master plan. It was something with the state like we can't actually clear any more than we needed to. I mean, I feel like I don't want to lose what we're trying to do right now
if we do end up clearing and I don't want to get in a tizzy with the state. The parking also, I understand from the feedback I got regarding this agenda item that Martin County Cove will require us require us to have more
parking. Again, I go back to when we were designing this. There was parking on the west side of the park and it was not favored and confusing because you had to drive through it. So, with the back with the parking lot
now on the east side in the middle, have you guys looked at is that excessive parking or is that meeting exactly what Martin County code would need? >> We have not yet gone through Martin County code. So you wouldn't even know
what the would be. >> But we've gone through their plan the requirements that are on the in their code requirements and we are just meeting them with what we've added >> cuz it says on here 229 existing plus proposed spaces. That's a
lot of spaces. >> 229 total parking space. Yes. >> That's a lot for what that uses would be realistically cuz again we have maybe two baseball games going on maybe. And again, maybe we look at taking out one field. That's one game. And then the
center field, unless you have two different practices going on, you're splitting the field in half. There's not six, seven teams coming in with parents and cars. So, I I I don't agree with the parking. I'd rather look exactly what we would
need to make it happen, to make the park actually happen. But I don't think we should be putting in excess over what we need. Um, Astro Turf, I'm against it for multiple reasons, even having my own kids as athletes. I can get into that if you guys need it, but I'm just a
straight no on that one. I'd rather just do um saw and maintain it. Um, that's it for now. I did try to go through each one and comparing one. So, thank you for not removing what we did have. Um, I go back to
>> what was the need for adding batting cages? What's the plan for it? Cuz I can't see the size of it on here. >> Right. We've got four bays in there for batting cages basically. >> Um, and it could be more. Obviously, you can see from the the space there,
>> that that shape, that kind of rectangular cleared area that's in the lighter green, that is the exist that's the outline of the existing cleared area uh that's out there today. And you can pull up an aerial and and and >> it just gets confusing cuz we have we have ours, we have yours, we have the
satellite, >> right? The the one that was done by Enzy consultants was an in inaccurate portrayal of what the cleared area looked like or else they were proposing to backfill more plantings to cover that
area. Okay. I I don't know what the choice their choice. >> That's right. And nothing on you guys. I'm just putting out there that as little things get tweaked, I hate for us to be constantly given something that's very inconsistent because now we have we're looking at three different things here and I just want to make sure that
because also I do remember we got brought up from the state that we can't go in there and start clearing a bunch of areas >> and we that's >> so for being careful about that. >> Yeah, we didn't we didn't want to clear any more area but you can see where they've there's a huge area that's not being that's underutilized.
>> The back field on the far north. So, by pushing that big 300 ft field up to the north and taking advantage of that space, it opened up a whole lot more room for you guys to do some more um within the park. >> And that included right sizing that that
multi-purpose field. Uh the one on the previous master plan was >> really undersized and you would not have been able to play a a uh older kid or even adult soccer game on that size field. >> Okay. Well, thanks for explaining that.
I appreciate that. >> The as far as the decision for the batting cages, it was something that I brought up and I think when we met with JTAa, they like the idea. I don't know how it's going to be managed. Maybe Greg could answer that. We haven't really discussed it yet. >> And and I don't even expect like an answer for that,
>> right? >> I'm just putting out there. Um, in the beginning of this whole thing, I am an advocate for batting cages, but it did get brought up when we were trying to squeeze all these different amenities in there that the sizing we originally had, we were going to get something super
tiny and then how do you regulate people? Do do they have a timing? Cuz then you're going to people fighting it's my turn and it just became a nightmare. So, I think that's originally why it got removed, right? >> Um, but if it's if it's something that is able to fit in there and it makes
sense, like I'd rather not halfass it. I rather make sure it makes sense because we would be the only ones that people could actually show up and use them. >> And it's got room for expansion. If it's popular, you could add more bays to it. >> That's why, but again on here it's not really super detailed for me. So that's why I wanted to ask.
>> Um that's pretty much it for now and I'll listen. >> Okay. Um thank you for your presentation. Um and we this is well before my time so I'm asking a question that I do not know the answer to. um talk about the master plan that was done for Tquesta Park and
the comments that were made. I'm assuming we had cheretses that was memorialized somewhere. Are we addressing and meeting the needs or the comments that were cuz I haven't seen those or if I have I don't recall them. Are we meeting the needs of what people expressed they wanted to see if we were
to redevelop Questa Park? >> Yeah, we haven't changed any of the program of this park. All the elements that were there before were there. We just added again parking. Uh there was a the original master plan called for at the time they wanted to keep the
caretakers house and some of the sheds that were there. Since then the direction has changed for a new facility. Um and then the addition of the batting cage is really the only big difference. >> Okay. Um I understand the need and I support the batting cages and I support
the two different size fields only because you you cater to two different age groups. under 12 and then >> 13 to 17. >> Um, and I think the batting cages and any municipality that that runs our program and I would imagine that we would be more engaged with JTAa or start
to quest baseball or something. Um, it the scheduling is done really through the league at that point, you know, and public has access, you know, when no one's there, but you know, an hour before the game time, it becomes the property of the fields and things like that. So, I understand that. I the the the parking I do understand especially
if you're going to have four teams there and if it's a double header on a Saturday you've got four more teams coming so there will be some overlap in the parking so I hate to see us pave grass now or where hasn't been paved but I do know that we have to we have to we
don't want to have a park that is unfunctional >> right >> so you know whatever we can do to find to fit um the minimum what whatever the county Martin County would require I'd hate to see us above go too far above and beyond that. But I at the same time,
you don't want to handcuff any type of logistics at a at a for the for the park at all. Um, I too do not I understand the value and the benefit of artificial turf on the multi-use field, but I I just find it and this is it's maybe the wrong word, but it's probably one that
comes to mind quite disingenuous for the effort that was put to stop development of golf courses, which are natural grass in Jonathan Dickinson State Park. Here we are trying to get this donated to us from the state of Florida to put artificial turf there. I understand the benefits of it. I just think that we're
just we're asking for something on one hand and we're just we're not doing consistent on the other. So I don't support the artificial turf for that. I just think it's a slap in the face of anything that's ever been done to try to maintain the integrity of Jonathan Dickinson. Uh so I don't support that.
But I think overall I think we're in the right direction and I look forward to seeing this thing if it gets cleaned up. Sure. >> Um, in regards to the new plan and the scale of it. So, I
personally know from experience conceptual isn't always precisely to scale and when you actually start laying things out and designing it, things can adjust. So, I understand that. I do just um and I think you guys have done that.
you're being very respectful and staying within the bounds of the of the original concept, but I I do know sometimes things have to adjust when you start actually designing it. >> Um, for the parking, I mean, you have to meet code, right? Period story. So, I'm
fine with that. If if through the design or through staff thinks that we need more parking, I need something to back that up, like a parking study, something to prove it. because I don't think um I'm not the expert, so I'm not going to say no, but if you're asking for more
parking than code, I need data proving it. Um I saw there was a no for fitness stations around the trail. I don't remember talking about those in the shrimp. Maybe we did. I'm not a fan. They get rusty. They're not used. It's more maintenance. I don't think they're
I don't like them. I don't know if that hasn't been brought up. I don't know what council's opinion is on those. I don't know the cost of them, but I would agree with you on the lack of use, but maybe the researchers, consultants know better on the use. They look like they would be a high cost, so I'd
probably rather have that somewhere else. >> I think they were part of the original master plan. Um, we left that in there. Uh, a lot of people are going to a different configuration nowadays where they're combining everything into like one little like outdoor gym space where
people can do like a circuit workout in one spot instead of around a trail. So, there's kind of two different schools of thought. You could do the one where you've got everything spaced out and people stop while they're walking and do pull-ups or push-ups or uh sit-ups or whatever they would like. Uh, but, you
know, you can you can tackle it two two or three different ways. But yeah, I just I've seen them at so many parks and they're thrusty. No one's on them. So, I'm not in favor of those especially like I rather save the money because you could tell from this plan already costs
have increased from the original concept, right? The addition of the batting cages, which I support those. Um, so I think, you know, something that maybe doesn't have a high potential to get used, we should not not include on this. Um on the I know you haven't done
landscaping yet on the maintenance shed. I know at the council meeting that we approved that we landed on like a beige and color with blue trim and roof. Um it's really really exposed. I don't know if there's any landscaping we can do around it to kind of hide it a little
bit. >> Um because I mean pretty much everything is fa going to be facing that maintenance building. So it'd be nice to to hide it. the the dog park location. What's the thought point in between the the multi-use field and the basketball
courts? I almost feel like you should flop the dog park and the basketball courts because I don't think it's in the same spot as the existing. That's completely new, right? >> Uh it's generally in that same spot and I think there's some shade trees in there that we might be able to try and
uh keep in place, but we can look at flip-flopping it if you'd like to see that. Yeah, I feel like it'd be nice to kind of have the dog area off on its own a little bit and not smack between two fields or be loud on you that maybe could disturb dogs. I'm a huge dog lover. Not everyone is, right? So,
people might not, you know, want to be around dogs either. Um, so I don't know. I think maybe just flipping them and having a little more separation from those coming for >> more of the um active wreck would be good. And yeah, the the size of the field and the
batting cages, I I do support them. I mean, we we don't want to invest a bunch of money in what hopefully will be the future construction of this project and have it underutilized, right? >> So, I think we we want them to be used. We want them to accommodate the uh
different parties like, you know, age groups, youth and adult. Um, and again with the batting cages, I don't think that's a bad thing to add, and I trust that staff will figure out a policy to manage that. Um, I think I have two more comments.
Oh, the trails. I haven't walked those trails in a while. Last time I did, they were sand. Are they sand still or are they gravel? >> They're still sand. >> Yeah. >> So, I think on the the Kimling, it says that they're existing gravel.
Oh, did we we might have mislabeled that. We can we can make them either gravel or whatever surface we need to. >> I would like them gravel. I don't know um if anyone else like I've walked them a couple times. It's been a while since I've I've done the loop, but um I think
I know it's more maintenance for one of the two people sitting in this room to do gravel, but I think it it really lends for a nicer show. Kind of like what we just did at Remembrance Park, >> right? >> Yeah. And then when it comes to um picking,
you know, the the themes, the playground equipment, all that stuff, it when are you guys plan on bringing that to council? Are you going to bring us like maybe two options to choose from? Cuz again, we're like our community is so invested in this project. We're all up here very invested in this project. So,
it'd be nice to at least maybe have like two options to choose from. So, we're part of that decision-m process to make sure it >> really is that vision that we all are looking for. So, I don't know if you were planning on doing that and what stage or month that you would bring that to us. >> Uh, we can probably be ready to bring
something by either later this month or next month at least. >> We're pretty close. >> Okay. Council, do you agree? Do you want to see some options there and be part of that selection process? >> Yes. Can I add one little thing to that? >> Absolutely.
not try to add to the project and budget. >> Yes, >> if it is possible, I'm assuming we'll be watering this monstrosity to some degree. Having a water spiget near any playground and do it like the schools where you need the key, but this allows
our staff to quickly bring one of those flexible hoses and spray a playground down for sanitation more often. That's it. Now, now going back to the playground and the splash pad, does there any is there any themes you'd like to suggest?
Like a water theme, a beach theme? >> No theme. >> Pirates. >> I say no. I don't want a theme theme, but I'm maybe uh color scheme, I should say. Sorry. Again, let me rephrase that. >> Okay. >> Yeah, maybe color. I think we wanted to be tasteful and aesthetically pleasing.
>> Okay. >> Um >> Yeah. I mean, right. That's really >> It blends in. >> Exactly. Um, and I I am against artificial turf field. Um, I don't Are there any artificial turf fields in this area? I can't think of any.
>> I'm not sure if JCP has any. >> Jupiter has plans to do so. >> I mean, the high school deal itself. >> Which one? Juper High. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Artificial. >> What if I could talk about artificial turf is not on him. It was on me. So, I take the blame for the artificial turf
because I'm just thinking long-term maintenance and overall use based on the history of the fields that are being used out there and other places. They will have to be shut down. They will have to be fertilized. They will have to
be watered. So, it all goes with your with regular turf. But my thought was, you know, if we get to this point of doing this park, you're going to start to see probably more and more artificial turf on municipalities using it. Um, the
town of Jud, I'm not sure on them, but uh back a few more than a few years ago that uh Jupiter High School converted their their field over to artificial turf just based on the reasons that we're talking about right now. Um, but
you know, one outweighs the other. At the end of the day, it's costwise. One's going to pay off the other eventually. So, but I'm just thinking of, you know, not telling a user group, I'm sorry, the field is closed down for two months. Um,
and it happens all the time at the town of Jupiter. They close their fields down and then they come to Dquesta looking for field use. So, we can, you know, we can barter with Jupiter somehow with the closing of fields. Um, but I was just thinking long term, you know, with the artificial turf. I can go either way,
but I'm just, you know, wanted you guys to, um, hear from Jonathan and see it. And, you know, when we get to that point where we make that decision, we can, you know, we'll probably have a little bit more um, research and numbers for you so
that it'll kind of help you, you know, make your decision. >> Awesome. >> Yeah, that would be great. on the bat in cage two. Um uh us three including Jeremy, we met with uh we had a conversation with JTAa and we said,
"Hey, if we if we do any improvements to this park, what would you like to see?" Because they're kind of like the predominantly users of that baseball field and they had uh along with Jonathan um agreed with the uh batting cage.
Um yeah, I agree with the dog park switch. Yeah, it would be much better um on the parking thing just from like in the past two years since we've added the pickle ball. So, you'll have 50 people playing pickle ball. There's 50 spots
right there. And then if lacrosse is out there on a Saturday morning, they're bringing in 100 kids. Or if they're on their Monday, Wednesday, or Tuesday, Thursday time frames, they're bringing anywhere from 50 to 100 kids for one
group. So, um, and we're adding a lot of really, um, nice things to this park. >> Um, you they he put together some designs for the, uh, the water feature and the playground, did they?
>> Well, we got to look at them and I they I I think you guys will be really happy with them. Yeah. So, if you want to see a different couple versions, they're u coastal vibe type water feature. And um I think the playground is more like a a
fork or something like that. So um and the company that he's using to to give you guys samples per liner is like very very good. So >> Okay. >> Maybe we could have those on our next workshop agenda. A quick item to just look at those. >> Yeah.
>> And we'll and we'll have to we'll probably bring this back in March for approval since we don't have a consensus with with this. There's, you know, we got um turf, parking, fitness stations, dog, basketball courts, gravel trail,
playground. We'll make some changes to that and we'll have to get council approval. So, we'll bring this back in March. Um, and then we'll also bring those designs back in that process in March for them to look at. So, um, one of the reasons why we did it this way is
cuz we didn't want to pay our consultant a whole bunch of money to start doing designs and then we didn't like it or we, you know, didn't have a consensus and then we have to pay them additional money to change the plan. So, this is the right process. We'll bring in March
and so that way when they are drawing these things up, it's what council has approved. >> Okay. We still take public comments. There might be some potentially some changes based on public comment. Any other council discussion? >> No, thank you. Can I ask one more thing?
>> Yes. >> Uh our playgrounds, um a lot of them that today are going to an artificial turf as a place safety surface and I know that's something that we're looking at here. Is that something that an artificial turf application that we like or for for the safety service for the
playgrounds? >> I'm not super against it for the playground. I mean, what it's mulch at Constitution Park, and I know like, you know, my daughter's school, it's mulch, and then she um uh it doesn't seem to bother her. I know she comes home with a ton of mulch in her shoe every day that
I have to clean, but >> I mean, I know sometimes rubber is an option, but I think that would be my last choice. I I don't know. What do you >> I don't I don't have a problem with it. I mean, I think it's safe. I think you can pat it so the kids, you know, um,
you know, just artificial turf. I know it it is a little controversial. I will say all of the I I can't speak to parks, but in my other job, we do a lot of schools, both high school, college, they're all going artificial for that
very it's the the use. I mean, they just get so overused. And I get it. There are totally positives and negatives to it, but I agree. I mean, it's it seems to be the way to go if you want to have year round use of a field. >> And as a as a safety surface, you would
have it the the turf layer is just the covering over like a series of like foam layers that do that take care of the fall height off of these. So when you when a kid falls, they're it's made to address the height of the equipment next
to it. So you might have thicker pieces of foam around some equipment and thinner pieces other places, but it's meant that if they fall down head first, they're going not going to um have a serious injury for them. Whereas sometimes mulch can be hard to maintain
at the right depths and levels to keep that keep that system um compliant with the fall height requirements. >> Yeah. And kids kids love to play with play with mulch. >> I know. Well, yeah. >> Yes, I agree. But they also throw it at
each other and >> it ends up on the SL like we'll go to Constitution, it'll be like a pile. >> It's a lot of pros and cons for me. >> Playground. >> I I see a lot of the benefits some for some spots to be an astroturf. I'm not a
fan of astroturf. I in the sport world, it's not safer. There's way more injuries. That's why for the general field, that's a big no for me. playground possibly. Again, it depends on what's the
I mean, how much are we really going to go into it because there is different padding. So, for me, it would have to come down to what's underneath it. The rubber is a big no for me. It's disgusting. It's hot and staff is not going to be out there sanitizing it and cleaning it. And it does get sticky.
Again, I'm a Florida girl. I grew up with pine needles and mulch and dirt and sand. I grew up in in Oklahoma with dirt and sand and rocks and stuff allowed these days. >> I have very playful children. I've had splinters. I get it. You can fall. No
matter what a kid falls on, they're going to they're going to hit something. So, if we're going to talk about in the future playground having turf for me, it's going to come down to what's underneath it. >> Yeah. >> And how is staff going to be >> clean? You're right. There are um national safety requirements for
playgrounds that that everyone needs to meet. Um, whenever we would specify a turf system, it would be a system made for playgrounds that would have the correct depths and amount of foam underneath it. >> I love that you understand it because that's what it's going to come down to
if we talked about playgrounds. >> Y I'm good with teroam playgrounds. >> Cool. Okay. >> All right. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Any comment cards? U Marissa Perry. My name is Marie Superior. I live in the country club. Um my comments tonight
have a theme. Uh and it's why is the village bringing forward proposals that are contrary to the clearly stated wishes of residents. Um in the case of Tquesta Park, the proposal is a layout that ignores essential pieces of the plan that was created from the public sharet in subsequent meetings. Two items
in particular are totally unacceptable and should be rejected. the doubling of the parking spaces and the failure to reduce the non-natural footprint of the park. First, the plan ignores the sharet's critical decision on parking. I was at the Sharet and everyone agreed that the existing parking should not be
expanded under any circumstances. This is very important and you need to honor the wishes of residents because they were very clear on this point. There was no mention of that the existing parking would be outside of the code which was major oversight in the sharet moderation. If residents had known that
all of these amenities, some of mo most of which we have now, would require doubling the parking, they undoubtedly would have said to reduce the amenities. And I agree, the place to start, I think, is the two baseball fields down to one. Um, given how the Sherat was
conducted and out of concern for the increased costs the new parking will undoubtedly impose on this project, the answer here is obvious. Reduce the amenities in the park until the existing parking is sufficient. There really is no good reason to spend taxpayer dollars on parking lots when no one wanted that
and expressly wanted the opposite. I guess one option too is to ask Martin County for variance here. Um the sec second the proposal does not follow the sharets footprint for the area. This was a key part of the plan and it has been totally ignored. This park is supposed
to be for nature-based resource recreation and that's according to our lease. Accordingly, it was a desire of residents at the Cherret and the multiple meetings that followed and in the final design from that long and expensive process that the footprint of the developer developed area be reduced,
not the original footprint be maintained. There were additional reasons for this, including that the natural area is much less expensive to maintain than the developed wreck facilities and the fact that this park has one of our water wells in it and residents wanted more natural buffer around that well. The proposed design
has totally disregarded this clearly expressed wish of residents and extends instead uses every square inch of the existing footprint for things residents did not ask for. Um, this is also unacceptable. Like many many residents, I'm sure, I'm very glad that we have an
opportunity to have Quest Park beautifully renovated. I think it's long overdue and I'm looking forward to it. I've personally invested a lot of time into the process to make this possible and reasonable. But having seen how the plans for this park have been co-opted over the years, first by a former council member who wanted to turn it
into a huge sports complex and now in part by this plan, I ask that you honor residents clearly expressed wishes. That means the plan needs to conform to the essential elements of the sharet. Both of which I think will also help reduce the costs for taxpayers. Um, and I do want to say I have no objection to fake
grass underneath the playground necessarily, but you definitely don't want it under swings. And you can look at Constitution Park to see what happens if they grass under swings. >> Yes. Thank you, Marie. >> Thank you, Marie. >> No. Any other public comment? >> All right. Thank you, Greg and Jonathan.
>> Thank you. >> Thank you, guys. >> Moving on to our final agenda item three, discussion of unified rideaway, swale, and driveway standards. Doug. >> Good evening, Mayor, Council. Uh tonight I'm bringing back this item
for conversation and recommendations. Um we took this back amongst staff and we took some suggestions that we received and our goal was to make sure that our core concept was not compromised. And
the core goal here in recommendation is that we're protecting our rightway, the village rightway. We're protecting our underground infrastructure. We're protecting our roads. We're protecting our sidewalks and we have a place for water to run off right into our swailes.
So, we're protecting our drainage which is also part of our um MS4 permit and that we're maintaining our swailes and there are certain requirements that we maintain our swailes. We hold back water and in the same respect uh that water
can flow freely uh to our storm system. So tonight um we spent some time uh in conversation with Dylan as well and we have a draft ordinance here and and the goal here or the recommendation is to unify multiple ordinances in particular
it re it would repeal and replace chapter 74 74-181 and then chapter 66-347. Um it does allow landscaping in the rightway. Our recommendation is allow some landscaping in the writing rightway
by permit with clear rules to protect drainage, utilities and visibility. Uh trees would be allowed at the top side of the swale on the house side and prohibited at the bottom of the swale side slopes and along the roadway. If you take a look at that first picture on
on the PowerPoint presentation, an example of where trees would be allowed would be on the resident side on the high side of the swale. Um, it allows uh we're recommending specific grasses, wild flowersowers, and ground covered in the swailes. They must
be staggered, properly spaced, and kept out of the flow line to allow for uh drainage and flow. Um, the ordinance uh does not allow um artificial turf, invasive species, shrubs, and hedges in the swailes. They
are prohibited. Um the the select the plant selection that we chose are all Florida friendly native plants and trees. Uh this is from our first presentation. So again our goal is to align village codes to protect infrastructure safety and aesthetics.
Right. Um I I uh I gave you the two codes uh the two codes that we're looking to the two chapters that we're looking to uh repeal and replace. And again, the goal is to protect storm water drainage, infrastructure, and public safety.
These are allowable plantings that we're recommending in the village rightway and swelles. If you look at the top side of the swale, these are the trees that we're recommending. These are all uh Florida native trees. Uh the grasses and wild flowers would be allowed in the swale, not in the flow line, but in the
swale. Uh they also allow wild flowers and perennials. And then ground cover would allow um in the flow line, just these specific plants in the flow line. Again, these are a lot of plants. Just
uh putting together some pictures that you can see the variety of different uh plantings in the right. >> Again, I talked about >> I'm sorry. >> Can you go back one slide? >> Yes. >> Sorry. >> So, no oaks in the at the top of the >> Right. No trees on the top of the swale.
They would have to be outside right away. >> Correct. Yep. Thank you. >> So again, one of one of the goals in this recommendation, right? It's essential that we protect all the important services, right? The essential service that we provide to the
residents. Um, as you can see, there's a small footprint in the right of way to allow for these services. Um, and when we're planting on top of these services, it's hard to maintain those. We have root systems that grow into the services. They break pipes. They cause
damage to water manes. They cause damage to storm water systems, Florida power and lights, sanitary sewer systems, everything that you would find uh underground in the right of way. This was an example that I provided in the first workshop of an infrastructure
project. And you all know this is on Tquesta Drive. We're replacing one 8in water bank. And this is the impact to the rightway just replacing one 8 inch water bank which is why it's important that we're monitoring and we're
inspecting and and we're we're providing um uh plantings that are accommodating to the infrastructure and and and for our drainage as well. So the next step would be to um
prepare this for our uh council meeting in March. Um adopt the new revised ordinances and then from that point uh launch an education program handouts, websites and and answer any questions
that the residents might have. I'm here to answer any questions that you might have. >> Thank you, Doug. Crap for discussion. I have a couple questions um for you, Doug. Great job on the presentation keeping it simple and straightforward.
Uh the first I think your opening statement makes sense and um we understood the intent of this language. I think we do got to add on there that we do that with balancing our neighborhood aesthetics, right? Because that's sort of up here on the council.
You have your mission. Um I greatly understand that. And then we have ours and we're balancing in between. So, I want to make sure we continue with the neighborhood aesthetics that does make Tquesta, you know, a beautiful place. Um, the first question I have is on the 12ft tree when I try to picture a
resident and I was able to have some beneficial conversations with residents that um asked great questions, some things I didn't think about, but as a resident, if I want to do something in my sway, I think in the current form, I would just walk into the permanent well into building and say, "Hey, this is
what I want to do. Help me with this." Right? because this is kind of confusing and that's okay if if staff is is ready to do that. I think to do that on our own um do that on my own and and make sure I followed all the the the policy would be tough. And the first one
question was this 12T tree. What's the meaning behind that and can we alter that? So as a resident, especially DIY, I'm not going to be able to handle the insulation of a 12oot tree. plus my costs are going to be greatly increased. And I'll set that
just for the first question if you could address why it has to be 12T height minimum. >> Um that's pretty standard depending on the tree species that you're selecting. Um you could you could pick a smaller caliber and a and a smaller tree. I mean
that that's open for discussion. Um but as far as um you know guidance when any resident comes forward and wants to make modifications to their property that goes to the building department and then that is sent out to the public works department and the utilities department
and we are there step by step reviewing uh the permit documentations any plans that they might have any work that's going in the right of way and we're out there meeting with the residents and guiding them along the way and giving them suggestions and making sure that they understand you know a little part of little piece of is education. A lot
of the residents when you go out there, they believe their pro they own the property right to the road. They don't realize there's a right of way. And that's that's something that sometimes we may think is very simple. Most of the residents I meet are unaware of where their property line ends and where the rightway is. So, we go out there and we
talk with the resident and explain these things. A lot of residents don't realize how many um utilities are underground in that rightway and the purpose of that rightway. We don't put those utilities in the middle of the road other than possibly sometimes you have your sanitary sewer system in the middle of the road. So once you go out there and
educate the customer, the resident, they understand what the purpose is and why we're there. So we walk them through the whole process. Putting this in place just unifies the code that we already have and and what we're doing is allowing or suggesting recommending
plantings that will accommodate. You know, you think about the money that the village is investing in their infrastructure, right? You're replacing some water man that's almost 60 years old, right? And you know that's going to continue, right? There's a lot of aging
infrastructure. There's a lot of boring and construction projects going around throughout the village and you're investing a lot of money in that infrastructure and it's important that you protect that. you know, just on sidewalk in the last 10 years I've been here, you spent a million dollars
replacing sidewalk throughout the village because of underground infrastructure. Um, >> understood. Thank you. >> It's it's an investment that's going to continue, right? So, it's it's it's important to do your due diligence and
protect that infrastructure and protect your dollars, protect the taxpayers's dollars. I understand the aesthetics and the importance of that, the charm of the village. A lot of the residents that we talked to and come forward, they love the charm of the village and and we understand that. We're just making suggestions and recommendations to
protect that infrastructure as well, protect your dollars. >> Absolutely. And thank you. And and I support that as well. Um if you ever driven through a neighborhood in like Coral Gables, you'll notice the the swailes, the rideaways, right? They've put a lot of intention and uh love into
that aesthetic. And I want to be able to support our residents that if they want to spend their own dollars on keeping that aesthetic or improving the area even that we do give them a way to do that. And I think you spelled that out. Um although it could be a little confusing how do I apply this? I believe
that is your intent to stay along with that that a resident can beautify their area especially when they're going to maintain it themselves and invest in it themselves. So, I think um going back to the tree, I would like to see the 12T tree minimum uh reduced to a much
smaller uh doable height. And I don't know if that's if that's a twoft or a 4ft. I'm not an expert there. In my head, I'm just trying to think what would I do? Um I'd probably buy a 4ft tree um from a tree farm and go through the permitting process from there. Okay.
>> Um I'll I'll stop my questions there and just see where the conversation goes. Thank you again for putting a lot of work into this. >> Just real quick to piggyback on that, would the size vary in the species though? So it wouldn't be like a flat minimum, but maybe depending on the
species like the oak trees that we planted on Questa Drive, what size are they? >> Those are 10 to 12. >> Okay. So there's a good gauge, but maybe depending on the species. And was our landscape consultant, the landscape architect we used, was he
consulted for this list? >> No. >> No. Okay. So, it might be good to have him opine on that cuz he could probably do maybe cuz there's several trees listed and and each tree could be different size minimum depending on the tree.
>> Yeah. I mean, I was just trying to keep it simple if we're cuz right now it applies to all trees 12t. >> Piggybacking on trees. If someone did get approval to put a tree at the top of the swale, but it's still in the rightway, are we counting that or not
counting that towards their tree code for the front yard? >> That does not count um when it's in the rightway does not count for Okay, >> tree code on private property. >> Thank you for clarifying. >> And if you're, you know, and if you're planting at the top side of the swale, obviously you're going to plant on the
flat side of the swale, >> not on the incline. Yeah, >> I have more but we were talking about trees. >> So you were done correct? So yeah talk about go ahead. >> I did I wanted to mention one other thing too. So some of the conversation and the feedback we got from the last
meeting and in the meeting itself was that if this ordinance were going to pass residents would have we know we'd go out and we tear apart residents properties and you have to take everything out that's in the rightway. That is not the objective and the intention of this. So,
if you're a homeowner and you are going to do some work in the front of your house on your landscaping or you're changing your driveway, uh you have to meet the code. We're not going to every resident saying you don't meet the code, you're going to get a violation, you're going to get a notice, uh to fix your
landscaping. But if you come forward and you're taking out your landscaping and you want to plant in the front, now we have some guidelines for those residents and to help them through that. That's our job to help them through that. Thank you.
>> Okay. Um, I'm not a fan of this thing. I wasn't a fan of it last time it got brought to us. I appreciate the compromise of at least the permit process of working with each property individually and the swale because not everyone's swale is the same
either. We we've talked about that how some are wider, some are not. I I totally disagree with the list of approval plans only because when I first started with the EAC when it was originated, we were given this book by University of Florida that literally is
like this thick and it's all Florida approved plants. So I have a concern with we're going to shrink this bulk down to maybe 10 and we're going to look like an HOA everywhere. So, I'd rather take away the list completely. And since there's already going to be a permit process, which actually already exists
already, so I'm a little confused again, if you have to have a permit, no matter what to plan in the rightway, you have to come talk to staff and figure out what you want to do. And it was just brought up here, and I think you even just said it. Someone walks into building and says, "Here, this is what I
want to do." And then staff starts the process. So if someone comes in and they have a a plant absolutely is not good for the right of way whether it's in the swale or not then staff would bend and say you can't plant this because xyz
with actual facts and data. So for me I'm fully against an approved list as long as staff is working in the process already. The process already exists with having to get a permit. There are things in the rightway. So for me, if this is such an issue, where has code
enforcement been 30 years? So I understand we're moving forward. And for the record, I do fully support not planting things right on top of our piping, especially since we're spending like $80 million replacing it all, but again, I go back to I don't want to over
complicate this and I don't want to shrink it down to 10 things roughly. Don't quote me on that number. Um, that's pretty much where I sit as a nutshell. Again, I'm going to sit and listen and see what else maybe gets clarified for me because again, I think this is over complicating it and too
much government involvement. >> Um, thank you, Doug. Appreciate it. No, I I do get it. I mean, I we have to protect first off when I when I this is what I said last night. When I moved to Sequista, um it's possible I just never
looked at it where I lived before. But I remember being surprised, you know, how much of my what I thought was my property wasn't really my property. But I remember coming to the village and just saying like, "Hey, what can I do here? What can I not do here?" And it was pretty, you know, at the end of the day, I knew whatever I put in that right away, there was always a chance that if
the Questa decided to put in a sidewalk or utilities, if they had utility improvements, that whatever I put in there, there was a risk it could come out. And that's just part of it. So I I get it and I also understand the importance of all the utilities that run through that right away. Um
so I'm I know again controversial subject. We've gotten a lot of emails from residents and I I certainly understand their position. Um but one there's one thing that I've seen in a few emails that I just want to get on the record that I don't think is accurate. Um, so if a resident wasn't if
they're not doing any kind of improvement in the right away, let's just say um I'm not touching my property or anything in the right way. The v would the village have the right to require um that resident to remove any trees or
anything and let me to remove anything any trees or anything as it currently stands? >> No, >> I didn't think so. Okay. So, unless there was perhaps an issue with like the utilities or something running through there, >> right? >> Okay. See, that seems to be the
misinformation I keep hearing is that the villagers is going to come through and tell people they have to rip out, you know, >> existing. >> Well, >> they're doing it right now. >> SIR, I'LL we'll take public comment. So, we'll definitely call you up so you can
comment at that time. Thank you. So yeah, I think that needs to be made clear is that this isn't like a a malicious act on the village of like we're going to come in and clear out the rightway and it's to me that's not what this is. But I I do think that that
needs to be made a little more clear. >> Yeah. For instance, if somebody comes in and they're redoing their driveway >> Yeah. Yeah. >> and they're not touching their landscaping >> Mhm. >> you don't tell them, well, you also have to put a swale, you know, in your grass as well and then absorb that cost. We
recommend that, you know, you're you're putting a new driveway in, whether it's pavers or concrete. And matter of fact, and and tonight we also have asphalt driveway on here. >> Yeah. >> As a recommendation for >> um for areas where they don't have any sidewalk or any plan sidewalk,
>> so you don't have to put asphalt and then concrete. So asphalt all the way to the road. >> Yeah. But if somebody comes in and they're just replacing their driveway and they're not touching their landscaping, we don't make them build a swale. We recommend that you're now
putting a swale in your driveway and the water's going to pull and sit in your driveway. >> Mhm. >> Unless you move it into the grass. So, we make that recommendation to them, but it's not required that unless you're touching your landscaping, you don't now have to build the swell as well. That's an additional cost that they didn't think of, right?
>> Yeah. Yeah. >> Didn't plan for. >> Yeah. I think this is just one of those, you know, changes in our village that are just going that the residents just going have to be there's going to have to be a lot of education that goes out there because I've heard everything from you can't plant any trees, shrubs, or
anything anywhere in there. And I', you know, I've I've read it. I know that's not true, but there's just certain things that are, you know, going out in the community that, you know, >> well, there there are folks that have recently planted Yeah. in their right ofway without permit and you know they
received notice from the building from code enforcement >> that they've planted without a permit. >> Yeah. >> Um >> yeah I guess at the end of the day I look at it it's not really my property anyway you know so I I guess I might have a different perception. I I perceive all of this differently. Like
who am I? If it was directly on my property that's a different story but this really isn't my property. So I and I agree there are certain instances when you you have to get a permit. That just is the way it goes. And if you don't, then you know, you might have to deal with some, you know,
>> and we understand that it's it's not the resident's property, right? >> But we're also sensitive to know that they maintain it, right? And it's not unique to Tquesta. Every municipality requires that the homeowner, occupant, resident maintains the property to the road. >> Yeah. >> So, of course, they're maintaining the
appeal, the curb appeal that's adjacent to their property. So, >> yes, they don't physically own it, >> but they maintain it and they take pride in that, >> which is great. That's awesome. I love that. Um, >> okay, that's all I got. I just wanted to get that make that clear that the
village isn't going to come through and just start ripping out people's trees and shrubs um that have been there for 5, 10, 15, 20 years. That's just not what this is doing. >> So, I again, I just think it's it's a change and with change, you know, there's sometimes controversy. So, we
just need to, you know, there's needs to be a lot of education that goes out in our newsletters and otherwise. That's all >> it was, it was very different in the past. >> Yeah. >> You know, I think you've all touched on it that folks just did whatever they wanted to do. >> Yeah. >> Just there were no permits and >> plant out into the, you know, right out
on to the street. Um, plant on top of sidewalks and infrastructure and and there were no standards or if there were standards, they weren't being followed. Right. So this is what this is about is unifying the code, making it clear not only for staff but for residents.
>> Yeah. >> And having having a standard that everybody can follow. >> Yep. >> Thank you, Doug. >> Yeah, Doug, thank you for your presentation and the hours and hours and hours of work that have gone into this. Um,
I appreciate and understand the need for what we're trying to do because we I don't like to see standing water for two or three days on the road. that has a to do with a lot of things. There's like my my my I I think my front
door and the crest of the street are I love them and uh I think when they came in they put sewer in North Dotober. Um they never replaced the swale. You can tell where the cut goes across. So there's a lot of reasons why I think we're having this
conversation. Um and so I I I understand the need for this. But when I read through the code, and I took the time to read everything, um, it seems like there's a lot of gray
area here that I that I really would prefer that we clean up before we it comes back. And I can be not to go through everyone. And I'll give that information to Jeremy. That way, you can kind of see it. But like it starts with, you know, the the the grandfather
clause. you know, uh, we have a grandfather clause 63-2A. It says that all plings, you know, they're they're going to be there. But then in the same paragraph, it says a village res reserves the right to remove or require any existing vegetation if
it's determined to obstruct. Although, right above it, it says that we're not going to do that, that we're not going to touch people's if we're not if we're not doing it. So, that's kind of where I'm where I'm going with that. And and I don't >> and that would be that would be a case where you had something happen in the right of way. Maybe you had a pipe break
or >> whatever's going on the right ofway that village staff has to go there and they're digging in the rightway. Whatever was planted there is coming out. The intent would not be put it back, right? >> So, vice mayor, if you don't mind, I I would like you to read out your cuz I
mean council might want to open them too and that way I think cuz already to me like I'm disappointed our landscape consultant hasn't reviewed this. I think he needs to. I thought he was. I don't know if our attorney's reviewed it or not yet. I think you've been involved. But again, this might be good for him to
hear now too and then if there's any clarity and we all agree that we can handle that now >> because I my my concern and I'll preface it with the the the bigger paintbrush is that we allow flexibility.
But I think in code flex the code shouldn't be subject to interpretation about oh that's that's a that's a an oddshaped riderway. Well, define an odd shaped ride of way cuz whose opinion is that? Cuz I might think because when
they put the the sewer through North Dober, they destroyed my sweat and I can't do anything. So, I think I've got an odd shape right away, but that's what I feel. And we're going to put the onus on one person or one department and to
which could be in direct conflict with a homeowner just based on that that that word alone. like we're going to impose reasonable rules. I might think something is unreasonable. So these are examples. Okay. >> And I'll give you an example of that. So
right now we're on Eastwind Circle and we're replacing sidewalk damaged sidewalk. We're going to be taking out concrete road and replacing with asphalt. Um we're trying to mitigate flooding in the area in the culde-sac. And the last two homes in the culde-sac
at the end of Eastwind Circle, the way it was built, um, and the way the rideway is, you have a sidewalk and then you have an approach apron to the street. And that approach apron doesn't give us enough room to build a swale there. Right? So, here we are replacing
the sidewalk, replacing aprons where we have to, but we can't follow the standard swale detail because we just don't have the footprint and we're not going to go into private property and start constructing on private property. So, that would be an exception that you would have to make based on uh conditions that you have out in the
field. I'm not familiar with your property, but you know, maybe the catch basement was in a spot where a swell couldn't be built or I don't know what what it is, but that would be based on what you see, you know, specifically to that property. You know, is there underground or above ground
infrastructure? Is there something impeding um staff or the contractor from following details that are approved or you have to make an exception? >> Okay. It just I I think that it it it's open to interpretation, but I think I have an odd shaped rideway because I've
got a manhole cover in my middle of my front yard. There's nothing I can really do cuz that's one example. Another way here, it's a violation for an individual to to disturb, dig, construct, install within, or in any way modify the village zone right away.
explain modific it doesn't go into detail where if I'm want if I'm reading this at home at night it's not telling me what I can and cannot do at least that's not the lay person that I as I read it um
the village shall be responsible for maintaining any village installed landscaping with the rightway to ensure continued compliant does that mean our existing tree canopies like on country club drive with all the Beautiful. Everybody comments when they come to League of City Sweet Host. They
say, "Oh my gosh, the tree can the canopy row is unbelievable." Um, aren't those tree canopies are they oak trees? And some of them don't I mean, are they all outside? I mean, are they planted where we're not we're not allowing other people to plant?
>> The village maintains those oak trees. Yes. >> Okay. Um, and why can't we have why do we have to have staggered groupings? What does that mean? Staggered groupings versus a solid row. Does that mean we can't have a hedge >> in the flow line?
>> In the flow line. So you allowing flow, you're not impeding flow in the flow line, right? So eventually it has to get to your storm system into your catch basin, right? Through your swells. So by putting hedges, shrubs, um planting in the flow line, you're impeding that
flow, right? You're collecting debris, you're collecting garbage. um that it's a standard uh you know across the United States that you don't impede the flow of your your storm water system. Eventually it has to get to your storm water system, right? And by planting the
correct ground cover um that will that will not impede your flow. So there's certain plants that we we have allowed because they're flood tolerant in in the flow line, right? You look at that list at the bottom there on the screen, but you don't want to plant hedges and trees in their flow line. that's going to
impede your storm water in your drainage flow. >> Okay. >> But we can >> which eventually is going to cause flooding. >> Okay. >> And again, a comment on the 12T minimum height. I I would like to see that reduced a little bit. Um and a root barrier shall be a minimum of
18 in deep and extend the full length of the infrastructure interface. Does that mean if I'm putting a tree on and per the code on the acceptable ups slope or the flat area I'm putting one tree I have to the entire
>> rightway has to have what is that >> what is the >> infrastructure interfacing >> okay yeah those are the things that I'm reading in those uh in circum this is one in circumstances involving oddshaped extended or otherwise unique rightway
areas the village may consider exceptions to requirement It could be a corner lot where you have more ride, more space. >> And just one last thing, uh the street intersections. So we have to have you
can't have any plantings, you have to have a minimum separation distance of 25 ft from the point of the intersection to wherever the first planting is. So a corner lot effectively can't have any type of
>> that that's standard. That's not something we've added to the code that's been in the code. >> All right. But so now it's in the code, but if something is currently planted within 25 ft of the corner, we're not going to even though it's against FDOT,
we're not going to go in and remove make somebody remove that >> cuz we've just said everything is grand >> unless you're redoing your landscaping. >> Okay. Let's let's just trigger trigger event. Okay. Um, but that that's some of the thing. I kind of stopped after that because I think there's a lot of gray
area still here that that needs to be cleaned up for me to get behind this. Um, again, I I understand the need for this and I support the need for that. But as it's with the language that's here, it's just a little bit too, you know, gray for me at this point. And I
think it's putting you, staff, somebody, a department in the crosshairs of an argument with a homeowner who's going to interpret some of this language a lot differently. And so I would I just want to make sure that we're cleaning that up that anybody could read this and it's black and white. And maybe that's not
how code can be written. Maybe I'm naive to believe that, but I think that way it takes away all interpretation or subject to whatever the the the building co the code officer goes out there and said, "Well, it's really not as bad as I think." Well, maybe it is. To you, to he
it's not that bad, but to the neighbor that's right next to it, they might think it's terrible. So, I just want to see it more detailed just cuz I think it takes away any um guessing any guesswork out of it and it keeps everybody's powder dry. I mean, it's not putting anybody in there cuz that's going to be
the most hateful. That's be the worst job in the world for the person that's got to go out and tell somebody that, you know, I think it's Yeah, it's not really an odd shaped lot. You know, I just think that there's some language in here that I'd like to see us kind of make it sharpen the pencil a little bit
more and get rid of any confusion because I think we're leading. We're we're going down a path of tremendous confusion with this. And I understand what we're trying to do, but I just think there's some things contradict in one part seem to be contradict because
maybe there's not enough information like you just explained the one example to me. It doesn't say that, >> right? >> But you you know that. Yeah. >> So, I just like to see a little bit. It's got to be cleaned up a little bit more for me to get behind it. If you have any and I'll be glad to to talk with Jeremy or you if you want to give me a call, I don't I don't mind.
Whatever is proper. Just some things that as it stands right now, I can't get behind this because I think it's really gray and there's a lot of confusion uh in trying to clean something up or creating confusion and I don't want that to happen. So, >> yeah. In an odd shaped lot, typ typically you're going to have more rightway than another resident and
that's it's usually on a corner property. So you you could have a rideway extending 20 ft and there's no utilities in that area. So that would be an exception, right? There's there's no utilities. You're you have a huge rideway. Some folks only have 7T, 8T,
14T, you know, it varies throughout the village and then you have this tight little footprint where you have all this infrastructure there underground, right? Above ground, underground. So you have to be, you know, extremely aware of that, right? Um, somebody who has almost
15 ft of rideway, that's an odd shaped lot with no utilities. >> And does the proposed code allow plantings in the soil area? >> No. >> For the the plants that are low roots. They don't have any root system in them
or so. There's there's absolutely no planting till you get to the up to the owner side of the soil. >> That's correct. >> Even if it's just a plant that is a ground cover >> right now. Yes, that's correct. Okay. All right. Thank you. >> So, um thank you for your efforts on
this to date. I think it's really important and as you know, I um a while back when a resident had reached out to me with a code violation, I identified, okay, well, I have to go here for this and here for that and this
chapter for that. So, this unified ordinance is very much needed. Um, and I want to be clear is cuz I know because I I went through all the different chapters and code we have in the state.
This is more flexible than how our code is written now with what's allowed in the rightway. Am I correct in saying that or no? Cuz I think right now like you can't even put a tree in the rideway and now we're saying well you can put it on the um owner side of the swale. So I want to keep that in mind. This is
actually less restrictive than how the code is written right now. Um, and I think that's the intent. Like we want to allow appropriate plantings in the rideway. We want to maintain the beautiful aesthetics that we have here.
Um, and I will say utilities is huge to protect and getting water off our roads, especially in a large flood event, is critical. Um, that's a health and safety issue. I know we've repaved roads and
have put in new infrastruct drainage and the roads are still flooding because people don't have swailes. So, it's it's a really important effort and I I do think the long game approach is is correct. Um but yeah, I do think there's a couple things that can be can be
tightened up. I think in regards to what the vice mayor said, some things might have to remain flexible um because there just might not be a way to uh clearly define it in the code. But I think between staff and the attorney that you guys can maybe fine-tune some
of those um because I mean we went through this is part of the reason we did our uh like the brow guidelines and commercial quarter guidelines because it was so subjective the way our code is written, right? So, we want to have those guidelines for both parties to be
able to use. Um, in regards to the plantings, I disagree with what council member Brandon said on no list because again, that just opens up to more subjectivity and I don't think anyone on our staff is a landscape architect or
consultant. So that's why I really would like um uh Parker to review this and maybe elaborate and increase the landscape list that you have on there. But he's the expert. I think he'll know best what plants can go in the swale and
then like said the different trees, different sizes on the property side, upper side of the swale. I think that would be a really good thing to have him review the the oak trees. I do cuz that's got brought up. I want to I'm trying to understand cuz we have our tree canopy
initiatives that we're working towards and if oak trees aren't allowed, how are we achieving that? >> There is a statement in there though about if it's a village approved project that we can plant. So there's a statement in that code that says that and that's what that's for is if there
is a cuz we're going to make sure it's engineered, right? Like we're going to make sure it's not hidden utilities. We're going to do all make sure it stays out of the swale. we're going to bring you guys a project like uh you know which is what we did with the other 60 trees we did. We made you know Parker you know did it and then you guys said
all right approved project let's do it and so that's how we would do plant you know more oak trees through that part of the code >> and that's to get that true canopy but I mean this doesn't I mean someone can still plant an oak right on that right outside that rightaway line on their
property side. So you're not we're not saying no oak trees just no oak trees in the rightway of course. So and I just know >> the swale you could potentially put an oak tree in the right way right if you're not outside the swale. >> No you don't have
>> shouldn't then oak tree would have to be so top of swell only. We'd have to add the oak tree to that. >> We can add an oak tree to that if if you have the room in the ride ofway and you're outside the swale. >> I would like that. Yeah, cuz there's um I there's Yeah, I've d been driving
around and looking especially at new construction homes, I have complied with the swale policy as is written now and aesthetically it doesn't look bad. So, I do think there's this rhetoric out there that it's going to look horrible, but when I look at some of these new construction homes that have followed
our code um and they have, you know, trees right on the, you know, outside of the rightway, um it it looks fine. It looks pleasant. I don't think this is really going to destroy the aesthetic of our community, especially when we are going to be allowing the right plans in
the rightway. Um, I really appreciate the uh enhanced public education campaign. We'll we can talk about that if this thing gets finalized. I don't think this is going to be ready for March. I'll just throw that out there right now. I think council will have to workshop it one
more time. Um, I know the routine maintenance, like if we're placed in a mailbox like for like, I don't think someone should have to pull a permit for that. And I know a resident has sent us a clause from the town of Jupiter, if it was like under $500 or something, I
might have that dollar amount wrong that they didn't have to pull a permit. Um, could you check that town of Jupiter code? I thought that was a nice clause. Well, when you put a shovel in the ground in the right of way, whether you're a homeowner, whether you're a village employee, you're required to
call 811 for locates, >> right? So, when you put a a shovel in the ground and we're not educating a homeowner, they're going to start digging in the rightway. If they damage utilities without calling in locates, without contacting the village, right, without a permit, and they break a line,
they're now responsible and liable for that break, whatever that might be, >> right? Of course, >> in some cases, you know, maybe there's going to be anything by that mailbox. But some folks are digging three foot down and putting a post in the ground or a metal sleeve in the ground, potentially hit a fiber optic cable,
right? An AT&T cable, an FPNL fiber optic line. So there are requirements anytime you put a shovel in the ground in the ride ofway. Now folks don't do it on their private property, but if you don't know where you're putting a shovel, you risk damaging pipe on your own property, whether it's your Comcast,
your AT&T, your water line that's going to your house, your sanitary sewer pipe, you're taking that risk without calling in locates. So there are certain requirements that digging a mailbox in the ground. Now, if you had a sleeve there and you're just pulling out the post and putting in without digging,
that's different. But once you put a shovel on the ground in the rightway, there are requirements. The very first is it's a permit. The second is that you're calling in 811 locates to find out what's in the area. So you're not damaging underground utilities. That's a huge liability.
>> Right. Can we just look at that town at Jupiter? I I know you have it, Jeremy. I forwarded it to you. So just let's just take a look at it and see um if it's something we can consider on the asphalt. Can I add something to that? So even we
get into like the fees. I mean we we can do all that with no cost fees. Like if you think we can define what minor adjustment are. But the important thing is they pull a permit. That way we can review it. We can help the resident. We don't want to change the swale profile
and now all of a sudden water is going out into the road. Those types of things. So I think we'll look at that code and I mean the fee is not the fee is not the important thing. The review is the important thing which the fee covers the review part of it but um and we can define Doug's already we've
already talked a little bit about some of these minor maintenance things um you know defining that a little better and you know if there's no fee and mayor I know you're aware of this as we've had this conversation um you know
the state is looking to um preempt or prevent local governments from charging a permit fee for anything under $7500 $00. Not saying that they can't do a permit, like we can require a permit. We just can't charge for it for under $7,500. I
don't know if it'll pass or not. Not a bad idea. You know, these minor things that don't cost anything, we don't necessarily have to charge them. That's a council decision and, you know, we can bring back those, you know, with for a decision. But I think the important thing is, and I'll say this, I was going
to save it till the end, but you know, right now our code, you have to pull a permit. That's nothing new. That's not what the attorney and Doug and I and Allison have put together. Our code calls for that today. Our code also says
that in the swale that and this goes back, we found documents from the '9s that you can't plant trees, hedges, things in the swale. So, you can't do that today. So, if we do nothing with this code, our staff is going to fall back on that. So, I think we've done a really good
job, listening from the last workshop, of trying to allow for these things. I know I hear it from council, hear from the residents. We're we're trying to allow for it. I I can agree. We do need to we can change some language uh clean it up. I think that's great. What in our
eyes when we heard it, it made sense to us, but you know, when when I hear it from Rick saying it or Mr. Story, yeah, it does need cleaned up. So, I think there's a lot of work to be done, but just wanted to make sure that everybody understood where where we stand today is that we don't allow that in the rideway.
How we got there, you know, that's that's debatable. I we don't know. But our code today, and I think the important thing is when we heard council is when you go as a resident, should you have if you just go like I want to look at my rideway, I want to plant
something. Should you be able to go somewhere, look in our code and find out what that is or do you have to go, you know, bother staff or take the timing of your day to do that? Like we're trying to make a document that you can you can open up and go like, "All right, I want
to do this, this, and this. Now I'm going to tell my landscape architect what I want to do." We're trying to create that document to make it very easy for residents. Do can we add some stuff? Sure. I mean, you know, can we have our landscape architects? Good idea. Like those are things that I think that's what this workshop is about. And
so not not scrapping everything, not you know throwing all away cuz I think we're doing a good job of trying to implement these things that today we can't do today the resident can't do those things and so we're trying to do it. So I didn't mean to interrupt you. I just I was saving a lot of that stuff but it
seemed like a good opportunity. No, no, that's I mean that's I I made that point in the beginning because I probably had Jeremy pulling his hair out when I was talking to my constituent like I was in all these different codes and yeah I was like reading stuff from the '90s. I'm
like this is like we got to we this can't be this confusing for our community when they're doing work and and like said this is actually our code right now is more restrictive than this. So, this is going to be a benefit once we make these tweaks and get it to a place that we're all comfortable with.
Um, on the asphalt transition, I'm trying to visually, um, the concrete footer between the road and the driveway for an asphalt driveway. That makes sense. I can visualize that. What a concrete swale section. What is that going to look like
in an asphalt driveway? I can't picture that. >> Black and white. Well, obviously, but like well I mean is it like a try I don't I'm trying to understand. So the I don't know is this part of the res I think this is part of the resolution. Is it to the resolution
>> on page resolution? >> Yeah. So go to the the resolution and then 29 of 49. >> The code doesn't allow asphalt through the ride ofway. >> Right. So we're this >> we have a few residents that still have asphalt driveways. >> Yeah. And so the code only allows
concrete and pavers >> in the village rightway. >> Correct. >> Doesn't make sense for somebody who's redoing their driveway with asphalt allow them to go all the way to the road with asphalt. >> Yep. I don't disagree. >> So that's the intent. That's the sole intent of that. However, if you have
sidewalk, right, um or we're planning to put sidewalk in there. We're not putting asphalt sidewalk in. We're putting concrete. Right? We're not putting pavers. We're putting concrete. So, if somebody wants to do their driveway, rebuild their driveway in asphalt, when they get to the driveway, that has to remain concrete from the sidewalk to the
road, >> right? I support adding the this asphalt resolution for those certain conditions. But if you go to page 29 or 49, it talks about the the transitions with a concrete footer and a
concrete soil section. And the soil crossing, it talks about reinforced concrete soil section or culvert crossing. I mean, is that going to be It says a transition. So, to me, a transition you visually see or if there's concrete soil structure, does
the asphalt go over that? I'm trying to visually understand what that look like in a >> Right now, if you put pavers in your driveway, right? >> Once you get into the >> Once you get into the rideway, you have to put a concrete footer under those pavers to protect the the the road and
to protect the rideway. >> Correct. >> Same with concrete. When you're putting concrete, obviously they're digging to the six 12 in depth and across the road. So, we're saying is if you're going to put asphalt to the road under the asphalt, you have to put a concrete footer against the road. Same as we
would do for um you know, concrete or pavers. So, you're protecting the edge of road. Typically where residents have a problem is at the entrance to their driveway that transition from the road um into their driveway especially when you have asphalt or you have um pavers.
That's typically where you'll see the pavers settle and collapse or you see the asphalt crack and collapse. >> Correct. >> By putting and you'll have the road crack. You see a lot of homes throughout the village that the edge of road is cracked across all the driveways and that's just from >> so the concrete footer I that I
understand and that makes sense to me. It's the swale section. That's not >> right. >> So I don't know. I Does Are you guys Does anyone looking at this and following what I'm trying to say? >> Are you saying the swale and the driveway portion? So the swale
>> It's written right here. The swale cross construction. You have a reinforced concrete swale section which the swale is not the concrete footer where it terminates the road is one thing. the soil is the you know above that into the
property >> right >> where the soil is it's saying that there has to be a culver crossing a concrete soil section or concrete soil section and with with the um asphalt I'm trying to understand I don't think I've seen that trying to understand what that is
just building a swell with the asphalt I have to go back and take a look be cleared up but you're you're basically just building a swell with the asphalt the same you would with concrete or pavers >> so that means corrected Then the the concrete footer, yes, leave that, >> right? >> But the concrete swale stuff in, revisit
that. And then it sounds like it needs to be removed. >> But basically what you're saying too is no more asphalt driveway. So once someone replaces their asphalt driveway, they can't replace it with another asphalt driveway. >> No, it's really just those driveways where we left.
>> No sidewalk. And yeah, >> you can replace your driveway with asphalt if you have asphalt. you choose to replace it with asphalt, but when you get into the right of way, that has to be concrete. >> Yes. >> If there is sidewalk there or this plan, we're going to put section of sidewalk here in this community, then you would
be required to have concrete. >> Okay. I have um on section, this is of the swale ordinance. So, under section 63-2B, does irrigation need to be added to that? Because you list trees, shrubs,
signs, mailboxes, planters, ornamental decorations. People put irrigation the right way, right? Should we can we add that just so it's clear? And then I think I brought this up at the workshop. I don't know that I
saw it in the ordinance draft here. What about uh mulch or rock in the rideway if we allow it or not? And if we do, how do we prevent it from getting washed out into the >> It's not currently allowed in in in the current code or the new code. Is there a
reason? Mulch I can see is because that can get washed out pretty easy and and get washed in the roadway or get washed in the storm system. What about rock? Why is rock not allowed? >> Oh, rock and gravel can depending on, you know, the incoming rain event can
also wash into your catch basins and your pipe. And so we don't want loose rocks and and gravel in the rideway. We want solid structures, either turf, um, and and the driveways, concrete, pavers, you know, these are solid structures.
>> I understand what you're saying, but we have new properties that have rock in the rightway. So now I'm just confused on the hypocrisy being said. So I'm getting, this is why I get confused when I read this entire package.
Well, when I go out and I inspect and do my inspection in the right of way in the driveway, we're not allowing rock. And I know the utilities department is not allowing rock in the soil in the grass. >> Okay. I understand like pebbles, but not even like the larger like white river
rock that's like 3 to 4 in. >> We're not approving that. So, we'd have to take a look at that. >> Okay. Is that because some that's kind of be a aesthetic feature. Can that I think the landscape architect could look at that too and maybe like is
there a certain size that's appropriate that would not get washed away. I don't I mean just how >> Actually, there's another property that has the big black ones. They're larger rocks. They're not pebbles and those haven't moved for a couple years. So that just needs to be I agree that needs
to be clarified and cleaned up. And >> but then I'm thinking too though like what if we have a bunch of rock rightaways that that would not look good. Are you saying for the entire swale or rightway to be rock or just as that aesthetic lining to have different levels? You're saying the entire
>> the entire basically your entire >> There's a couple homes that I can think of off the top of my head that do >> because they do they will like if you have if we have large rains and the water is literally rushing down the road cuz it's one of those massive rainfalls, it could push some of that into the
drain. So, I get what you're saying. It's going to end up in your storm system and your pipe. >> Okay, >> we'll look at some zeroscaping options um as an option. I don't know what that looks like cuz I'm not a landscape architect, but we can look at that. But
today, I'm pretty sure our code says no non-living material in the rideway. I mean, I'm pretty sure it says that. I would I'd have to go back and look at it because I know we had some different code cases for that, but um currently there shouldn't be we shouldn't be permitting those. Now, if there are, you
know, we can look at those and that's, like I said, how it got there, I don't know. But, you know, we're just trying to correct the wrongs of of the past, I think. So, >> okay. Well, again, truly thanking your efforts. This is a good goal to be working towards. It's much needed. Like,
just you heard a lot of feedback from us. We're probably going to hear some public comment and we can tune this up. And I do, like I said, I do think we need a workshop. I would personally like to workshop it one more time before it goes because the next step would be LPA and then us. Correct. >> Yeah. Just so you're aware, this will
have to go from your PNZ board for their review as well and recommendations. Right. >> But we'll bring it back to you guys first for another shot. See if we can tighten up some of that language that Mr. Stori brought up and some of the other comments. We'll we'll bring it back to you guys. And you know, this is
good discussion for us and gives us some good direction to look at. >> Okay. Thank you, Maryanne. Any public comment cards? >> Marie Perry in the country club. Um, this 13page proposal, the way it's written, um,
should actually be one sentence. What it in effect what it does in effect say is that residents and businesses may put sod grass in the rightway with a permit and the village may at the sole discretion of the director of public works put in a tree which won't be in the swale portion of the rightway.
That's is the actual effect of this proposal and I'm happy to walk you through but I take way more than three minutes doing that. Instead, we have 13 pages that superficially suggest that landscaping that involves plants on the approved list might be allowed, but in
fact, it does not. This proposal doesn't merely make it hard to put plants in the rightway. It makes it impossible. In fact, the way this proposal is written, it would require a permit to trim a bush or even to mow the grass. This is because the proposal has so many caveats and requirements and frankly unusual
definitions that overlap and conflict in its attempt to ensure complete and total control over not only the function of the swailes but also the aesthetics the rights of way. It is not possible for a resident to know that even if they design a beautiful landscape plan for
the right of way area in front of their home or business that the village would approve it based on this plan. I would be happy to explain exactly why that is the effect that this proposed code has, but because my time is limited and this is a very long draft, um I will not
unless you would like me to. Um but I want to underscore that it is not possible for a resident to read this proposed code and know what it is that they would need to do in order to prepare a landscape request permit application for anything other than sodrass that would meet with village approval. And that is not right. The
this proposal doesn't require tweaks. It requires a complete overhaul. If the village staff needs additional cooperation from residents in helping to maintain the function of the swailes, then there are much better ways to achieve that goal. I think I can speak for our neighbors in saying that residents want the swelles and the
entire storm water system they part are part of to function properly. No one wants their home, their neighbors home, local businesses or any streets in the village to flood. But this goal of protecting the swailes and the infrastructure is not achieved by insisting that residents have saw it and
only saw it. Nor is it achieved by handing residents a short list of approved plants and ownerous requirements that actually cannot be met in the literal terms of this proposal for their placement. The propo approach to trees in this proposal is similar similarly unacceptable. The tree size
and root barrier requirements are unnecessarily ownorous. Every tree or large plant does not need a root barrier to protect sidewalks or pipes. And in fact, pipes are not endangered by trees at all if they are not already broken and leaking. In many cases, these types of requirements will just be an
unnecessary cost and deterrent to planting trees which are needed in the village and which it is your duty to promote under the comp plan. I ask you to please reject this proposal in full and direct staff to look to the existing swale policy from 2019 um for overall excellent easil easy to implement
principles to protect the swailes and the aesthetics of the village um and to potentially add language similar to Jupiter's code provision in section 20-278 to ensure that the intended uses of swailes are protected. Thank you. If you would like me to walk you through line
by line, I'm happy to do that. It had to take me a little while. >> Thank you, Marie. >> Thank you. >> Any other public comment? >> No. >> Kimberly. Yes. Come up and state your name and address again, please.
>> Kimberly Windish 72 yacht club place. I did not intend to talk, but I have my eye on every property in Quest Country Club. I drive almost by every property probably three or four times a day. I'm building a spec. I have other renovations. There is a house on GIA
Drive who this year or last year put in an entire rock driveway from the road the whole big circle. Um, so I don't really I didn't read what your code was as opposed to the new
code, but it has not been followed whatsoever. People have cluey edges that have just been recently planted literally about a foot from the roadway all around their properties. So, code enforcement's not doing their job and this is why the residents are upset.
Also, I think um Lauri, you might know this back in June when everybody got those um notices that were very aggressive about the turf and didn't realize they weren't allowed to have turf in the rightway.
um the residents in the Questa Country Club. I if you could go back and we could print them, you could read them. People do not understand rightaways. And I took a I was trying to be kind. And I took a survey that I have of a
house in Gothia that I'm renovating. And I took a red pencil, a red marker. And I took the survey and I drew out the rightway and I commented it and put it back to try to explain it. Nobody cared.
Nobody commented. And it was really crazy how many people said, "Oh, I looked it up. It's 10 feet. It's this. It's that." Um, and people didn't understand the rightway. I could tell you, you know, I don't know if you read it or not, but I could go back and find
it. So, the public is not as educated as some of you think they are. So, you've got to do a better job at that. And it's not anybody's fault in this room. I think if you live in a house for a really long time and you are not doing any renovations and you're not
in building or you're not in real estate or you're not looking at things, you don't know that you're not allowed to plant. And I'm not trying to make um cover up excuses for people, but I'm just telling you what I see from the public. But you
know, like uh Vince's house, he's had rocks to the road for years. I'm not ever sure why that ever happened. There's other places in um Dquest Country Club that have rocks, huge amount of rocks, big white rocks that are very dangerous if
kids fall off their bikes on them from the side of their house all the way to the road. So, I think that's where the confusion is coming from the residents. That's it. >> Okay. >> Thank you, Kimberly. >> Thank you. Thank you. >> All right. Any other public comment?
>> Okay. All right. With that, can I get a motion to adjurnn? >> So move. Second. >> All in favor? >> I >> Marian, thank you for this. You're my last one. >> Tax form. >> I just started printing all my
documents. I got my folder going. I don't get what I hate when I haven't until like September or something. >> I don't even start right now. This always seems >> water.