Mayor Young >> here, >> Vice Mayor Sartorii, Council Member Brandon, Council Member Painter >> here, >> Council Member French >> here. >> Thank you. And our first agenda item today is a discussion on code updates
presented by Jay. >> Good evening. Jay Hubch, community development director. Um I'm going to break my presentation up into two different presentations. Um the first one is on ordinances 326, 426, and 526. These will be coming to you at the next
council meeting. Um due to the sheer volume of of code updates we had, Dylan and Keith wisely advised us to break them up and and have them over two separate meetings. So um those first three ordinances will come to you next uh next week and then the remaining
updates will come to you at a future meeting either in April or May. Um and my next presentation will go through those those other ones. Uh so first uh ordinance 0326 touches on uh hours of construction. Um as you
remember we amended the the hours of construction in 2025. There was one code section that did not get updated to reflect the new uh the new hours. So this is just kind of cleaning that up. Uh so it's really just a glitch. Uh the second one is green building incentives.
You may recall I workshopped this with you guys last year. Um and that's creating a a green building incentive program. The EAC has kind of prioritized this and I think the council has as well. Um, common green building incentives, property tax abatements, expedited
permitting, reduction of permitting fees, grants or rebates, density bonuses, height bonuses. Um, again, because we're not a uh, you know, I would say big or welloff city like like Miami or Chicago or some of these big cities that offer uh, robust financial
rebates for green building. Um, we had to kind of get creative. So, what we are really proposing to hone in on is um expedited permitting, inspections, and reduction of permitting fees. That box is actually wrong. So, it's uh reduction permitting, expedited permitting, and
then the things that we do not want to do are density bonuses and height bonuses, right? That's a non-starter to Questa. Um so, we are really not able to even attempt to offer those in exchange for green building. Um, we have I've talked to Wayne Cameron
and he's agreed to do expedited plan review and inspections for qualifying green building projects. So, the way that would work was if someone um was going through this program, they would get bumped up in the queue, right? If you had two two different sets of plan review to look at, you would look at the one getting green building first. You
kind of prioritize uh inspections as well. So, you know, it's not a it's not a huge deal, but it's, you know, it's a small carrot. The bigger one would be to um offer financial incentives by reduction of permit fees. So we looked at what the
general cost is of uh the actual certification itself. So of course you're people that are doing green building going to have to spend a lot more money to actually you know become qualified. But not only that they're also having to pay money for the certification itself. Um you all may be familiar with lead.
That's kind of the gold standard of green building. Those are the most expensive. uh the Florida green building council and national greening building are a little bit less and then energy star is even less than that one. Um so again same thing on commercial projects lead is substantially more expensive
than the others and because of that we created this tiered system. I think I showed this to you all uh last year, but basically so there's four different tiers of certifications for each of the green building, right? So lead you lead platinum, gold or silver or certified.
And so the um the reduction in your permit fee corresponds with the level of certification you go to, right? So if you're doing lead platinum, you're you're obviously spending a ton of money and you're paying a lot to certify it. So you know, the idea is to to give it a little bit more of a permit for your
production. and Wayne Cameron has also agreed that the building department could handle um you know a small permit fee reduction like these. Uh another one is construction site requirements. So the building department has a manual for construction site
maintenance. Um they do implement it quite a bit. Um so when you're seeing new homes and tearowns happening, they are, you know, trying to enforce this. However, it is not actually codified. So, we wanted to put it in the code just in case someone was pushing back against it, they would be able to um take code
enforcement action on somebody. So, the um the manual requires a temporary construction fence. It requires all construction activities to take place inside the fence and it requires a silt fence on construction sites. Uh the next one is uh ordinance 0426.
This is public notice. As you recall, a few years ago, the state changed the law so that you don't have to do public notice in newspapers. You can do it on a public notice portal. This is simply just clarifying in the code that we're able to do public notice in that portal and not on newspapers. So, it's really
just a cleanup. Uh, another one is something that's come up a few times actually, which is um special exceptions. We're one of the rare places that has special exceptions only go to council and not be reviewed by uh the planning and zoning board when there's a site plan. The planning the planning and
zoning board has frequently asked for that when when we have a site plan that has a special exception. They've they've really said, "Well, why aren't we look getting a look at this?" So, we've added this in the code. However, we we've exempted the the ones that have the expedited review. If you remember when
we did the the commercial overlays, there's that expedited process. So, if someone was doing a a tenant change out, so if like Free Natives was changing out to be a Golden Juicery, that wouldn't um that wouldn't trigger going to planning and zoning board because it would qualify for this
expedited review that would go straight to council. Um ordinance 0526. So, this is something that came up in December, the December council meeting related to certified recovery residences. And uh as you recall, by January 1st,
2026, the governing body of each county or city shall adopt an ordinance establishing procedures for review and approval of certified recovery residences. And so it's essentially called a reasonable accommodation process. Uh as you recall, you adopted this through ordinance 1225. I came up
to the podium and said that I was because I think the council had said, "Well, is there a way to make this not an administrative staff review? can we make it a council review? So, I came up and said that North Palm had a council level review and that I would work to incorporate that into our code, which is
what we're doing now. Um, so, uh, just a little bit of a clarification on the process. So, a reasonable accommodation is a change or adjustment that allows a person with a disability to have equal access to housing, employment, public services, or education without causing undue hardship
or fundamentally altering the program or service. And so, uh, federal and state laws such as ADA, federal the federal and state fair housing acts and federal and state civil rights acts basically say you can't discriminate on handicapped people. People that have,
um, addictions are considered, uh, to be handicapped and therefore you can't discriminate on them when it comes to housing. And so, uh, essentially if someone comes in and asks for reasonable accommodation, the municipality is supposed to, you know, look at it and
give them special exceptions to to enable it to happen. So, this the new state law says that each ordinance has to be consistent with state and federal fair housing laws, establish a written process, establish time frames that has to be approved, and application
requirements. Um, our ordinance requires that the application meets all those state requirements. Um, one thing that we added in that's in the North Palm Beach code is it is to note that um, the applicant on this reasonable accommodation would have to demonstrate
that the proposed use is a sufficient distance from other reasonable accommodation requests so as not to create a de facto so social services um, district. And that's, you know, it's a legally uh, you know, it's a little bit of a
gray area as far as how to how you would enforce that, but it it would give the village a little bit of teeth if we felt that that, you know, we were kind of getting overrun with with reasonable accommodation requests and recovery residences. The council could at some point opt to make a stand and say, you
know, we think this is creating a social services district. Um, we uh also are requiring that uh the applicant will provide a floor plan that demonstrates that a proposed use would meet the village's minimum housing standards. So that would ensure that if someone was coming in to do a certified
recovery residence, they wouldn't be able to just come in, buy a three three-bedroom house, carve it up, and turn it into a 12-bedroom house, and just pack people in there. So, um, they would have to demonstrate that during the reasonable accommodation process. The state law requires that village
council review and approve it within 60 days of submitt. However, if village staff ask for additional time, like if if we think it's not a sufficient application, we can go back to them and ask for more information, that would reset that clock. Um, and also the uh
the ordinance allows for an appeal of a decision to the special magistrate. So rather than going directly to circuit court, the the if we were to deny somebody or if we were to actually approve somebody, someone would be able to appeal that decision to our special magistrate before that really bubbling
up to a lawsuit. And it also, I think this is important, it allows the village staff to revoke a reasonable accommodation if someone's in violation. So, if the certified recovery residents lost its accreditation or its certification or if the police
department was aware of of issues that were happening in there and and we, you know, kind of deemed it to not really be operating properly, um, we have the ability to revoke that. And that is it for the first one. Any questions? Uh, Councilwoman Brandon, you
weren't here, but the first presentation I gave are three ordinances that are coming to council next week, and then the next one I'm going to give is going to come at a future date. Split them up because there were so many updates. >> No worries. I have a legal question. >> I was Let me ask Jay real quick. Do you
want us Do you want us to give you comments on these ordinances now and then do the half of your presentation? >> That'd be great. >> That way, we don't lose our train of thought on any of the ordinances. Okay. Go ahead. Regarding the recovery residences, it's very echoey today, isn't it? Um,
is there anything regarding them being close to churches, schools, parks? >> Great question. >> As written in in this current ordinance, no. and and state law generally. Um,
no, the the ADA would apply equally regardless of where the particular recovery residence was planned to locate. Um, I mean, >> okay, I have two points to that question.
One, because churches are known to host certain recovery groups. Maybe they at some point purchase properties and but the fact that you actually brought up not creating territories. Thank you for that. That's one of the things I was
thinking. Secondly, and it might tie into how you were talking about if police start having consistent reports of issues at a property. That might tie into my next part of that question of when it becomes a safety concern. If a property is close to a church or a
school, and I've seen it in other areas, what is our legal backing for addressing that? Because if that happens and we have children walking, parents coming and going, the safety of churchgoers on Sundays and Wednesday nights, and youth groups hanging outside, shooting hoops,
that's where my level of concern comes is what is our process then going to look like? Will we wait for it to be a issue property like from police reports or do we put something in there now? So, we have there's some stuff in there that says as long as well they they'd have to
maintain their certified recovery residence with the state, right? So, it's a it's a registration. So, if they lose that registration, we can automatically revoke it. Then, if let's say that they're a bad actor, right? Now, we have a something in the code
that says we can do inspections annually. >> Okay. And one thing that is in the staff report for next week's meeting is the PZB members brought up that they would like us to to see if it's an opport if there's an opportunity to to allow more
than an annual inspection. Um Dylan and I still need to put our heads together a little bit more on that one um because that's a little bit of a gray area, but that would give us the opportunity to to find out if they were bad actors. I suppose one thing that
council could do and we can talk about this offline too is if you get a certain number of of complaints that maybe maybe that could be kind of a criteria for for revoking it. I know we had in North Palm we had a
nuisance code that said if you if something had like three calls within 90 days it starts becoming a nuisance property. So we could we could look into that. >> Gotcha. And I'm also just for the record, I'm not picking on like recovery presence. We discussed something similar with Airbnbs just because of the
transient residency kind of coming and going and not really having a good feel cuz again Toquesta is a small town or more like roots um for people's homes than a touristy. So that's kind of where my thought process is. It's just what is our protection for our residents who are
here year round for decades and again for the children and people outside and I just don't want to lose that. So I just make sure we have are uncovered for how to protect our residents if something became a problem. >> I I will say we are fortunate that we
don't really have anything that would even be like a lower middle class neighborhood, right? Like so it's not it's kind of cost prohibitive for people in the recovery residence business to to even come to Tquesta. There's so many other opportunities in Palm Beach County and
probably even Martin County too. So I don't think knock on wood we would ever really be on the radar for it. Um it never hurts to be extra cautious with these things but I knock on wood think that we're we're probably not ever going to be um on anyone's radar. And also if
we have a process that requires reasonal accommodation to go to council rather than administrative approval, that's another hoop they have to jump through that would deter them from coming here. >> Okay. I'm going to just my my biggest overall is just safety for the surrounding areas. That's it for that
one. So that nuisance um kind of a nuisance provision, is that something that you can look into that we could if we could add that? >> Yeah, absolutely. Uh I I I totally understand the issue of you know maybe the the call for service if there's if there's too much going on at the site if
there's recurring issues the need to maybe be able to take some action. There's only so much you can do with you know while still complying with the ADA and FHA. We'll absolutely take a look at you know maybe adding in some nuisance language into what's being presented
here for sure. >> Does the majority of council want that to be added? Yes. >> Yeah. >> Okay. So, yeah, I'll look into that one. >> Sure. >> Thank you. >> Any other comments on what Jay just went over?
>> Uh, I support as many inspections as legally allowed. However, that works out to you guys. Support recovery residences, but I don't think our neighborhood and our our resources could handle a bad actor. And then I kind of lost where we were on the all the code
changes. We didn't talk about the single family definition yet or artificial turf. >> That's my next presentation. Split them up. >> It's all I have. Uh >> oh. Special exception not going to P and Z first. Why is that?
>> So just that's historically how the village code was set up. Uh it's not like that in most places. So trying to kind of bring us in line with everybody else. Okay. Thank you. No more questions. Council member Painter,
>> I'm good. >> Um I on the the recovery residence, again, I think we all are align like it's nothing against recovery residences um because they are very important. Uh but it is like protecting the village from the bad actors. So I think it's
great that we can have it come to council, but I'm not clear on the criteria that council will be reviewing it against. you know, we have a variance, a special exception, site plan, modification or application. We have very set numbered criteria that we
review it against to cuz I'm assuming this would be quasi judicial in nature as well. What is that criteria? I mean, is it >> is it a rubber stamp? I I'm just kind of trying to see how this is going to come across a diet and how we could approve or deny. So there's honestly there's not
a ton of criteria that you can apply to it because of all the the ADA and the Fair Housing Act laws and and the things that we put in there like the not creating a de facto social services district and complying with minimum housing standards. That's more than most
people would have. Um but I think it's still good to have these come to council just so that you know you have a you know you're having an eye on it, you're getting to know the certified recovery residents, right? So the operator would have to come to council before you and
um you know kind of on the record say we're going to we're going to be operating things you know properly so that if they aren't doing that it's it's uh you know much easier for us to kind of um enforce any issues
against them. But there's but but to your point, there's there's we're open to any legally defensible criteria you can think of, but because of the protections, there's really not too much you can do. It's it is somewhat of a a rubber stamp the same way that
like plats used to be, you know, a rubber stamp. >> Yeah. I guess if there could be any kind of criteria cuz I mean I guess we all understand that now and what you're saying and maybe what our obligations are there but when we're all gone like you know I guess we rely on staff and the attorney to make sure future council
members know like you just can't be denying it because you don't want it. I mean you can not you can't but you could you know um expose this to litigation. So if there's some kind of criteria that could be clarified in that I think it'd be helpful helpful for future councils
council members. Well, if I could, under the FHA, straight from the case law, something is not a reasonable accommodation if it imposes an undue financial or administrative burden upon the local government, if it would fundamentally alter the nature of a
zoning regulation or if it is not linked to the disability or is not necessary for the equal use and enjoyment of the property. There's a lot of different case law going into whether something fundamentally alters the nature of a zoning regulation. And just because something
there is case law that just because it's a typically a residential area, it does not rise to an alteration to allow recover there. So it's a very and you're right in that you have to apply these um and it could be challenged.
>> Um so it would be incumbent upon the council to sort of give advice as to whether they thought you know you were complying you know at least giving a recommendation based on the application received. I would think. >> Yeah. So I I don't know if what you just said is outlined in the ordinance or not.
>> Perhaps we can add that. I like that so it's clear. >> What was that? >> What our capabilities are. >> I mean I heard what you said but that you're saying add that whole >> the criteria that we would have to justify it against just like we do with our variance and special
>> exception. I think that's good. Yeah. Um because I think anytime, especially in a quasi judicial matter, um when we leave it too subjective, I think it can get a little um off the rails sometimes. >> I agree. >> When we're reviewing it,
>> is that a change they could make to the ordinance on the fly without having to go back to first reading again? >> We'll come to that. >> So, we'll have that in the presentation next week so that you can just make it part of your motion if if you choose to. >> Oh, that's right. Because the agenda was stuff was due today, right? Yeah. Okay.
All right. And I'm kind of moving backwards now with through my comments on what you presented. Um, we've talked about this. I support the special exception going to PNZ first. I always thought it was weird that it didn't. >> Um, and I know we've talked about this as variances. So, council doesn't see
all variances. Is it just residential? >> Family residential go to PCB only and then multifamily and commercial come to straight to council without going to PCB. >> Okay. And what was the reason for that? Is that typical throughout like Palm
Beach County municipalities? >> I'd have to look into that. I I don't think that's the norm. I think I think a lot of times they go straight to council with without a PZB vote, but I'd have to I'd have to do some some research on that one. I'd be open to Jay
looking into that because I've always thought it's weird that not all variances come to us, but I don't want to, you know, make the process more burdensome for uh the applicants if it's just a residential. But I would be interested in what other other people
do, other cities do. >> Be good to know. >> Yeah. >> Dylan, do you have any um examples from other places? you know, we can take a look, but a lot of them are very formulaic and just
follow basically the process laid out in case law. >> I can I can take a look and see if we can come up with some suggestions. >> Yeah, I I if I remember correctly, I think most cities they only go to council. They don't go to PCB at all. >> Oh,
>> yeah. >> Interesting. >> I'll revisit that. I mean, I like having PNZ board, you know, recommendations. And I mean, I guess if they went if it came to council, like if we had all variances come to council, how much more time would that
add? Like two weeks? What is what's the timing between their meeting and ours? Is it two or three week? They're in the middle of the month, right? >> I think a lot of them don't don't even have a recommendation from PCV. I think a lot of them have just come straight to council. >> Variances. >> Yeah. And that's how they are now,
right? So if if a variance comes to council for in multif family and commercial, it does not go to PCB for recommendation. It just goes straight to council. >> Oh, but then they so they review the residential ones. >> They review the residential ones only. >> It doesn't come to us. >> Yeah. >> That's weird.
>> So the timing would be the exact same. >> No. Do you guys have any thoughts on that? And also we we don't get a lot of single family residential variances. I think we've had two in the two and a half years I've been here. There's not a lot.
We generally deter people because they don't meet the legal standard for them. We we tell them you're you have a very you're not likely to succeed here and generally people don't go forward. >> So if there's not a lot then it's not that big of a deal to add in to review
it. No, they be coming to us. They don't come to us right now. The residential ones. >> Oh, >> so there's some variances that just >> I still there's not a lot anyway. So, >> just leave it how it is. >> I'm fine leaving it how it is.
You know, for a single family. >> Yeah. >> Okay. council. >> Um, >> if I can interject, >> it does make it easier on council this way because sometimes zoning variances
in single family neighborhoods can sometimes become like a neighbor dispute. And so then if you if you take counsel out of it, it becomes less political puts and it makes it so that the PCB is just making a purely legal judgment on it and and not having to put
you guys in that tough position. So bear in mind that it's it it probably works well as as written. >> Yeah. Well, we'll still hear anyways cuz I have on several different issues issues with variances at home. So we'll still hear about it regardless. But no, I'm okay leaving it if the majority.
Like I said, I just wanted to bring it up cuz I didn't hear that we didn't get all the >> bearings debate. But no, I think leave it >> leave it how it is. >> It's usually the size of the jurisdiction. So a lot of the smaller jurisdictions I see, they go mostly PC
and council and then the larger it gets usually more more authorities given solely to the PCB board. >> I would agree with that. Yeah. Okay. Um, this might be more of a question for Wayne, but on the the temporary construction fence, um, I think like you
said, it's not really codified, so maybe this will help, but you know, you see projects that remove their fence well before there's some obligations in here that need to be in place before the fence can be removed, and that's currently not happening. So, is this going to allow him to enforce that?
Because it's becoming an erosion and dust control issue. And I I mean that was even some of the comments in our uh citizen survey which we're reviewing later tonight. Um so is that is that what's happening? It's not technically codified. So he can't if they take
defense down, he can't really enforce it. >> Yeah, it gives him more teeth for code enforcement to actually cite somebody and take him to special magistrate if they're not complying. right now it's kind of like he's he's using you know kind of the good faith to get people to
to to comply >> but I like hearing people have to go to special magistrate that's the worst case right but that he'll be able to have something to enforce it cuz um yeah I mean I've been walking and I get like a face full of sand because you know
there's a gust of wind and the fence has gone out and and it's just sand everywhere it's not even rock right >> so um So hopefully that will alleviate that and you guys can relay this message to uh to Wayne. And then um on the green building incentive
on the the sentence says certification must be obtained within 12 months of CO to obtain the full value of the incentive. Why does it say the full value? Is is it I mean there's a percentages, but could they get less than that? >> No, that's just how it was was written.
So if you don't if you don't qualify, you get none of the percentage that you qualify for. >> So maybe strike the full value of and just to obtain the incentive. I mean that's nitpicky, I know, but it it made me think like, oh, could they get like part of the, you know, um feedback but
not the full percentage if Okay. And then I'm only familiar with lead and I know USGBC is always um making LEAD the requirements more cutting edge because the you know construction industry catches up to that standard and so LEAD
and USGBC are always upping >> that. Um I don't know about those other organizations though are they are they doing the same thing or has the industry caught up with them and they're not really as relevant? So they're actually it's the opposite. So LEAD and the US
Green Building Council actually started off as the gold standard and um set the tone for everything and and started the whole kind of movement, but it's very cost prohibitive to actually do it. I believe there's only like two or three lead certified houses like in all of
like North County. It's very it's just very cost prohibitive. The process to go through is is tedious. And so these new ones have come in and they still have very good standards, but the the qualification process is smoother and more streamlined and it doesn't cost as
much money. Um cuz US Green Bill and Council is such a behemoth that they charge, you know, through the roof and it's really it's very prestigious to qualify for that, right? But you're making people pay a ton of money for that level of prestige. And so these new
ones are coming in to kind of try and create an easier path but while still having a lot of really good criteria that you have to meet to be qualified. >> Okay. So they're they're always upping the ante too as the industry catches up to the standard. Okay.
>> And the Energy Star one is the standards are a little bit lower. It's not the same as like when you have like an Energy Star certified appliance. You have to actually have a lot of things in your house to become Energy Star compliant. But the bar on that one is lower than all the other three. So that's why we made the the percentage
you get back, I think it was 2.5% of the permit fee. So that one's the smallest you can get. >> Okay, great. I'm good with that. All right. Any other uh comments or questions for Jay before he moves on? I just have one other question going back to the um recovery homes and guess it's
more of a hypothetical but because one of the criteria um that we can look at is the floor plan to make sure they're not chopping it up and >> so if somebody and I guess this question revol completely revolves around how
code compliance could could um could get uh resolve an issue like this that comes up. But if they came in with a floor plan that was fine and later on it's, you know, whether they're accusations or truth, >> yeah, >> from neighbors stating that, hey, what
they presented is not in fact what's happening here, >> what rights, given that ADA is kind of the overarching issue here or the governing body, what rights would code compliance have to even enter to inspect
what the layout of the home is and how many people are in it and all that. So, as written, it's just the like an annual inspection just like we have with with like a vacation rental. >> Um, and that's what c that's what uh the PCB wanted council to consider and Dylan
to to further consider is a is is a path for for more proactive. But then it's also a slippery slope, right? Like every time someone calls on a recovery residence because they don't like it, >> do we have to do an inspection? So, it's
it's slippery slope that I'll let Dylan answer. >> The answer is it's it's tough. It's like any uh it's almost like any police action. Someone calls and says, "I think Council Member Painter has a uh has something going on in his house. I can't
just show up to your house and say, "Council member, >> someone called I need you to let me in and show me your house." And we won't be able to do that. There is a process actually through the court system where you can actually apply for a code enforcement warrant
>> if there's sufficient um evidence that a violation has occurred. And it's not it's very seldom used, but a a a judge can actually issue a code enforcement warrant that a code officer could then take to a structure and require entry for an inspection. But that's kind of
why we at the very least have a annual inspection. Uh just to make sure that you know if like you said it has been chopped up, it's still uh complying with Florida building code and relevant building provisions. At least you get to take a look at it um yearly and that
usually coincides with the BTR inspection. >> And so yeah, I guess to council member French's point is more the more inspections the better or however you put it. um would we be putting ourselves at risk? I mean, is it even an option to
um shorten that annual to something shorter than that or is that because it doesn't comply with other code? It >> It's something we can definitely look into, but it's difficult for the reason >> and maybe not a shall but a may kind of thing. You know, I just I mean that's the common thing that you hear that
happens, right? I mean, >> we could try I mean by annual inspections. >> Yeah. Or maybe or maybe you say, you know, there's an annual inspection and the village may do a bannual inspection if if
>> Yeah. I just not that I hear a lot about this, but when I do hear about it, that's typically it. You know, you were told there'd be four people in the home and there ends up being 15 and you're kind of stuck for that year or the neighbors mostly are stuck with that for that remainder of the year or even
longer. So, okay, that's all I got. So with I mean with that potentially adding a nuisance provision and then adding review criteria, do we really think this is ready for first reading next week? I mean can those modifications all be made at first
reading and still have the second reading? >> Yeah, I think they can. >> Okay. >> It's of course at the the pleasure of the council. want to discuss this more, think it needs a little bit more time to be worked on, happy to bring it.
>> Well, because you're not I mean >> the agenda hasn't been published, but has the ordinance notices gone out already? They don't go until second reading. But the the problem is I don't think we can actually can we change the ordinance between PCB and council without
>> if you're if not fundamentally it's still a ordinance regulating certified recovery residences and accommodations. As long as you're not completely off topic, you can make minor changes to it. You can't change the ordinance title if it's already been advertised or else you'd have to
readvertise it. I mean, Dylan and I could probably do some changes tomorrow before the agenda even gets published. We got we got what till Wednesday or Thursday? Got a couple days. >> Okay.
>> I'd like to get it by Wednesday at the latest, but I'll let you guys slide a day this time. But if but if not, we can always have everything listed at the in the presentation next week so the council can make that part of your motion and then just bring those changes back on second.
>> That's what I was thinking like at a minimum like just have it to present as part of the presentation. >> Yeah, that's that's the easiest path for us. Gives us a little more time to work on things >> and then Yeah. And then hopefully it's fine to just edit it for second reading. But I mean if not if we have a second
first reading it's really not that big of a deal. Okay. All right. Anything else? >> No. Thank you. >> All right. You can continue. >> All right. Round two. And feel free to interrupt like jump in if there is something on each individual item that you want to talk about.
>> Uh so additional um I broke these out into the type of update. So the first round is building department updates. Um one of them is waterway control. Uh Wayne said there have been some issues sometimes with what the definition of a
boat lift is. Um they've had people I think pushing the limits on interpretations of a boat lift and boat lift setbacks. So this is just kind of taking a standardized boat lift definition and it'll help him enforce things. Uh the next one is cleaning up a glitch
in the location of accessory buildings in section 78289. So, the way the code is currently written, accessory structures and our single family neighborhoods uh can be located can potentially be located four of the front face of the building structure if it meets building setbacks. The way the code's written, it's a
little bit ambiguous. Uh and that could open the door for someone putting a pool or accessory structure in front of the front setback. We've had somebody push back about this interpretation and so we just wanted to clarify so this never is even up for
debate and uh what we did is clarified that accessory structures must be located behind the front face of the building regardless of where the actual setback is and that's consistent with our fence code. Our fence code has that language in it but the building the accessory structure didn't. So, this
will just preserve the front yard character of our single family neighborhoods. I think you guys might have seen the there's a pool in the front yard uh in Riverside which has drawn some >> some eyes. So, this will ensure that things like that that don't happen.
Uh this is another EAC update. They had the green building one. They also have this one which I believe I spoke to you all about last year which is when it comes to our invasive our prohibited species list just referring to the Florida Invasive Species Council's list
of prohibited plant species. They update this every other year. They are the gold standard for um invasive species and prohibited species in the state. And we workshop this quite a bit with the EAC. We also use Steve Parker and uh I think
we've got a a good process and this way we're also not having to update our our code every 5 years to figure out what's what's the latest prohibited species or invasive species that we want to keep out. We'll just always defer to that list. And a few other cities also do the same thing.
So, as you all know, state legislation the past few years, there's been a lot of things that have required us to make updates. I'm I'm sure I'll be back in front of you next year with even more um based on what's happening right now. Uh I think you guys have heard about this
one. House Bill 683 last year required the D to establish minimum standards for installation of artificial turf and single family properties that are under 1 acre. The D has adopted these standards in rule 62308
100. It is it has not been officially adopted yet, but it has been vetted and through the the D's adoption process for for a few months now. I believe it's going to become officially law in March. Um, but we have already taken everything
in that rule and incorporated that into the the artificial turf regulations you created a few years ago. And so we've exempted we we've retained a lot of the standards that are in there, but we've simply exempted properties that are under 1 acre.
Basically, the ones that that the state preempts us on. Um, interestingly, I will say the DP created a few decent new standards in there that that were not, you know, required. So, they they have a thing where um artificial turf can't be
within 10 feet of water bodies. So, um, we've incorporated that into the code and that way at least someone's not having artificial turf that's just flowing right into into our waterways. So, they did a few small small little things like that. Um, but we will be
bringing this to you uh with the next round. Uh, also plat in 2025 the state required that plat approved administratively. We legally have to do that right now even though it's not codified. Um, we have, I
think, approved one small lot combination, um, that would have normally gone through the plat process to village council, but we legally had to administratively approve it. Um, this does not impact site plans or or PUDs. It's it's just platting, right?
Typically, someone will get approval for a site plan or a planning development, and then after that's approved, they then come back for the plat. So generally plats are supposed to be more of an administrative ad and ministerial type of review. Um really where the the
village is supposed to look at things is during the site plan process. So it shouldn't alter too much from from our normal operations. It's maybe one of the state laws that's tolerable. Uh there's a few community development
updates that um that I've done. Um, some of them you may have heard of in past workshops or things that have been kind of kicked around. Some of them are just cleaning up glitches. One of them is creating a waiver process in our PRD code. Um, we currently have a waiver process in our planned commercial
district code, but we do not have one in the PRD code. The village has historically allowed there to be deviations from code standards in PRDS. So, in the reserve, there were deviations from code requirements. They weren't called waivers. They were just
they just kind of happened as part of the PRD process. But what a lot of cities do is they highlight every deviation from the code as a waiver. So that when so if for instance um if the reserve came back to you and you were
looking at it, it would say waiver 1, waiver two, waiver three, waiver four, and waiver five. And the council would be able to look at those waivers and determine if they're, you know, worth granting. And what we did and what's also in the PCD code is create a
criteria for waivers. So what what that waiver section says is that waivers the majority of of um they have to meet the majority of the following criteria which is consistency with the comp plan that they have to lead to innovative design where other design standards are exceeded. They have
to demonstrate public benefit. They have to have sufficient screening and buffering. They have to not be based solely on economic reasons, be compatible with adjacent uses, result in preservation of natural resources, and not be detrimental to public health,
safety, and welfare. So, I know the idea of like creating waiverss is sometimes a dirty word, but we already have them. This will actually give council a little bit more teeth to and a little bit more of a criteria to apply when you're looking at a waiver. So you can you can
look at at those waiver requests and determine, you know, is there enough public benefit here to grant this or does it lead to a better design alternative? Um, so I think it's a good a good provision to put in there. Uh, there's a couple of definitions that
have been changed. Um, one of them is to define what an accessory dwelling unit is. It's not currently defined and also note explicitly note that they are prohibited. However, the state may preempt us on that. There's currently legislation saying that municipalities
have to adopt ADUs by right, but we're at least trying to codify this. It, you know, as a good faith effort. We're also uh changing the definition of family. This is something I did mention to you when I workshops and code updates
last year. We do not really define or create a cap on on what's considered family. So, what the council decided when we workshop this was to to make it no more than three unrelated persons can occupy a single family home. Um, I don't
know the numbers off the top of my head, but it's it's generally two two or three or four that other cities do. So, I think council landed on three. And this will prevent houses from turning into rooming houses and you know things of
that nature or uh also one thing that's come up is that our definition of fast food restaurant and um carry out restaurant are basically the exact same thing. Um, so we wanted to add and note that a that a
drive-thru or I'm sorry, a fast food restaurant either has a drive-thru lane or a a walk up lane like the that Chipotle proposal. Um, because it's relevant because carry out restaurants are permitted by right, but fast food restaurants require special exception.
So, I think the intent of that is to only require there to be a special exception when there's a drive-thru lane or a walk up lane because as as the code is defined right now, things that are carry out restaurants like like three natives
might be considered a fast food restaurant the way our code is defined. So, it'll it'll clear things up to make it so that true fast food restaurants require a special exception. And as previously noted, we um are noting in the definition of waiverss that they are allowed in PRDs just like they are in
PCDs and zoning overlays. There's a kind of a glitch in the C3 zoning code. It says that automotive repair uh establishments are permitted uses and special exception uses in the C3 district. So because of that, I'm
proposing to remove automotive repair establishments from the list of permitted uses so that they would just default to special exception uses. And because those can cause noise and odors and issues, they're they're a better fit as a special exception. We're also creating proposing to create
an outdoor seating section. Uh we don't really have any outdoor seating standards in the code. Um there are a lot of ADA and fire issues sometimes when people do outdoor seating. So, we took uh some of the best practices from the Palm Beach Gardens code. They they have a lot of outdoor seating requests
there and and can kind of rolled them into our code and I think it'll help us um to ensure there's no ADA and fire issues and then also outdoor seating is is screened. I think I showed you guys a a picture of the Greek restaurant where you can pull you can pull up and you can
back your truck in and the exhaust could be blowing on people eating 2 feet away. So, it requires screening and buffering. So, you'd at least have to put a little bit of shrubs in between. Uh, this is one that I think has been mentioned a little bit, but I don't
think we've ever done a deep dive on, so I anticipate some discussion on this one. And that is to give the village manager and or designate maybe myself uh the opportunity to um call to to have a
special workshop with a project when it's a little bit more complex than a normal project. So, for instance, something like Paradise Park or 250 300 Beach Road, you know, which is being talked about now or uh the rude property when it when a
complicated project like that's coming in where it might be a little bit more of a in-depth discussion than a normal conceptual. You know, I'm thinking something that would have 10 or 15 public comment come up and that there'd be a long
presentation and discussion. It would give us an opportunity to have it at a workshop meeting. The public would still be notified about it. We'd actually probably do more to notify the public about that special workshop than we would a normal council meeting. And then it also would not just
completely dominate the regular council meeting, right? So, I know I' I get flack sometimes from my other department heads when I when I have like two hours of items and they have to stay until 9:00 or, you know, and so it would it would let us kind of hone in on focus on
on special projects. Um, chapter 11 is just cleaning up an inconsistency from another landscape code provision that wasn't changed previously and to remove a diagram that was not changed when the code was last updated. So that's that's a true like
glitch update. Um section 78701 has been amended to note that a phototric plan may be required during the site plan uh process. So phototric plan is is just a plan that shows how how many foot candles or how much light
is on a property and it's often used in projects just to make sure that there isn't a lot of light flooding onto neighbors properties. So most codes have this and as a requirement. We do typically get them from people, but it's not codified. So we think it's helpful
to have just in case anyone pushed back and said they didn't need one. Also in the village master plan, there was a recommendation the village start adopting dark sky friendly lighting fixtures. this is somewhat of a movement in Palm Beach County and South Florida
just um you know just because we're in such a big metro area that you you don't even get to see stars sometimes and especially when you're next to Jonathan Dickinson if we can if we can somewhat limit the light that's spilling over um you know you you have a lot more of a a
dark sky friendly views there or maybe even at the beach. Uh but we wrote it to say that it's not mandated but that we're encouraging it. So, we would try to work with people to do dark sky lighting. It It's basically you're just you're shining your light down rather
than letting it go up in the air. I think this is the last one. And this is just uh codifying something that's in the comprehensive plan. So um the comprehensive plan says that in all non-residential projects
requiring them requiring a minimum of 20 or more parking spaces that bike bicycle rack should be provided. So um now we are we'll have a code standard we'll actually be able to require people to put bike racks in. We try, again, it's
not codified, but we always try to get people to put bike racks in, but it's always helpful just have it codified and especially since it's already a county plan provision. That's it. >> Thank you, Jay. All right, council. >> Can we go back to the beginning
>> and do you want to just go through each one? >> Sure. >> I kind of have like comments on little comments on each one for the most part in general. >> Nothing great. Oh, is that the first one? That's the first one. >> I'm good with boat lift on that.
>> Oh, you said setbacks with the boat lift. I'm actually curious what do you mean by that? >> So, there's >> with inside the pilings. >> I don't know off the top of my head. It's a building department thing to enforce, but I think they have to be 20
feet from something. >> Um, but I don't know. >> I was just curious because I've actually never heard that. It's I think it's more necessary in canals and some of our got you know some of the the tighter properties not necessarily
like in the locks when it's water. >> I think that has to do with the depth too cuz you can't get on the lift and there's not enough depth. Okay, that was it for that one. >> That's the accessory structure issue. My question for that is you said this
something triggered this. What are you seeing that is an accessory structure that's coming up in our area? >> Somebody has a huge lot and wanted to put a tennis court in the front yard. >> Okay. So like another another use.
>> Yeah. So, is this referencing some of the older properties have like light pillars out by the driveway? Cuz they've been there forever. >> No. No. So, that's not >> This is This is preventing things like
pools. >> Okay. Big items. >> Big big things like that. Not not smaller things. We We have a thing called um a minor structure. So those would not like a minor structure just like little things like like a light pole or something like that.
>> One well first great job on the all the updates you put in the summaries and then just with that you've answered a lot of my questions already. Thank you. When I think about this when you said larger lots it made a little more sense to me and they're not just trying to fit a a pool on a corner lot. What about g
guest houses you know in the front or security houses for some of the larger? Would that prevent that option? You know, we don't have a ton of those, but we have a I would say enough to fit one. >> It just it would prevent one from being put in the in the front yard of the property. Yeah. >> But if somebody was designing like if it
was a tear down on a big lot, they would have to put that that in the rear, which is kind of generally where they happen tend to be. >> You mean like at a like a gated drive? >> A gated drive. Sometimes you have a >> like a security whether it's armed or
someone in it or not. Yeah. >> Yeah. Oh, you somebody could still do we still have a gate provision that separates that that's in our fences and wall section. So, somebody could still do like a gated >> structure, >> but there's a house like on Riverside >> that has the package house.
>> Yeah, I don't think there's ever Yeah, maybe that's what it is. It looks >> That's what we're told. It's where packages go. >> I mean, it's on the Jupiter side, of course. >> Okay. >> Kind of near the pool in the front yard. um >> on the Jupiter side.
>> But that's what I was saying. >> That's what I was thinking too when you were talking about accessory structure. So when I hear structure, I think something that's definitely bigger than a light pose, >> but those are popping up with some redevelopment. Not on our end yet, but that's why I was asking what triggered
it. >> The gates, some of those are variances though. Those those are variances that have gone through PNG. >> Some do require a variance. >> Country Club doesn't. Aren't you allowed to have a fence in front of the house in Country Club Drive? Like there there's >> there's an exemption on Country Club
Drive for from the fence in the front yard. >> But I think like Riverside, I feel like those are variances. >> The fences I know P&Z sees fences for gain driveways. I know they do. >> I guess my next question would just be
along with that is that if I purchased a home on the water, I'd probably want my home close to that for the view. Um, and then if I wanted to put a tennis court or something else ultimately in the front of the house, I mean, I could see somebody wanting to do
that. I would want to do that opposed to blocking my view. And is there an ability or a variance if if a person did you, you know, if it's a halfacre lot? Okay. No. >> But it's 2 acres on the water. You know, I would like to do that also.
>> Yeah. They would they would um be able to apply for a variance. And I I probably wouldn't be and I don't think Wayne would be opposed to creating like if you like an exemption on larger lots >> because to your point that this is where
this came up. Uh somebody has I think it might be the biggest lot in the village and there's an existing tennis court there and they wanted to add a padel court and some other stuff next to it. Um and it's a huge lot. You don't even see these things. Um so wood makes and
we It wouldn't be the worst idea to create some relief for someone with a large lot. >> Yeah, I'd be in favor of creating a mechanism for a special situation like that, not your average single family home where you're forcing things onto. >> I mean, that would be a variance. They
could they would apply for variance, right? >> Yeah. But it's it's just so hard to to get a variance. So, it's it's easier to to create some sort of exemption for them. Like if it's a certain size. >> Yeah, I can since this hasn't been
drafted yet, I can work with Wayne and Dylan and create something where maybe on lots larger than like an acre and a half or something. I'll I'll run the numbers on on the type of lots that that would be able to accommodate this. >> But then also like what kind of structures though? >> So you're just talking about like a
tennis court or >> maybe we need to be like you don't want to get >> ones that wreck from the ground, ones that don't. But then I'm also thinking you're saying tennis court that's a hard surface. I mean does that tie into the landscaping code? >> Yeah. It would count towards your
impervious. >> I see this as very layered. I'm not knocking it but I don't see it as like a measurement of your lot is this much. You can do this this and this. Cuz I can see already multiple things tying into that. Like the landscaping code. Is it erect? Is it not? Is it 2 ft high? I
know there's something cuz I dug for my own kid. There was something about you can't go over two feet high. >> And then depending on on the use too, like if you have a pedal core or pickle ball and the noise like >> we should define how far away it needs
to be from a single family home if we're going to allow them well in the back or front of the house. I mean, I was a little worried about what the noise is going to be with the, you know, country club ones because there's houses nearby and that's becoming a big issue now. Um,
and I know I think there's some standards out there now, suggested standards with how far these should be from like, you know, residents. >> So, I don't know. You could go down a rabbit hole with that. >> You could probably prevent pickle ball because that's that is the one that is
louder than the other ones >> versus tennis. Yeah. I don't It's a pedel. I don't know what a pedal ball looks like. Is it >> I don't think it's as loud as the others, but I'm >> Yeah, but there's funny reels because it's it's not two people and two-sided. They got the four. >> Oh, >> so it's multiple bounces and it's not as
far a bounce. So there's those funny reels where you're doubling the bouncing zone. >> It's like a noise problem. I don't know. Maybe look into it. Think about what would be appropriate, what wouldn't block lot. But like I said, you can go down a rabbit hole there. >> Yeah, we'll come back with some ideas
and options when this comes comes to you for an an ordinance. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Oh, sorry. We're on this one. Okay. I have nothing else on this one. >> Invasive species prohibited species list. >> I'm good on that one. I think I was
surprised like a banyan trees and invasive species. >> Like those are banned now per our code. >> Wow. Well, they >> they're lovely. >> They are. They have been >> right. But I didn't realize that until reading this. I was like, "Wow, >> super old trees."
>> I don't hate on them. I mean, I'm from here. I grew up climbing them and swinging in them and >> and a fus like a fus was on the list. >> They're all amazing trees, but I think they they grow out of control systems. >> They take up the root systems are crazy. They take up a lot of water and they
they grow like crazy, >> but they're beautiful. I mean, it's >> big enough for >> a tennis court. >> And a tennis court, but I don't think I want to play tennis in the back on the water. >> All right, everyone get Oh, did you change it already? What are
we on now? >> Artificial turf. Okay, >> turf. I do have a few questions on turf. Um, let's see here. So, on the it's sections 13 and 14 of C. Well, let's say
section C, it talks about installation, repair, and maintenance. Um, it almost was like an instruction manual on how to install turf. And to me it seemed a little bit of a reach. So my first question would be do we have that much
detailed information on sod? Because this comes down to um let me read one of them on here. Artificial turf shall be maintained like new. No weathering, stains, weeds, free of dirt, debris, tears, holes, ruts,
depressions. So, I mean, I get that, but I think that's a little bit of a reach in someone's backyard, and we have no way to enforce it, check it, or anything of that nature. So, I think for me, olive C is a little bit of a reach, but I don't know exactly where you got that from either.
Jimmy, bear with me. >> What page are you on? >> Uh, so it's page 54 of 120 >> in in our um agenda. And what what item number were you? >> So that's right. Uh agenda item one, but
it's 783965 C. Yes. >> C. Okay. >> So all of C or just certain >> Well, I mean, some of it makes sense, but I just don't know after it's installed, how is any of this going to be enforced
or checked on? So, I feel like it's a little bit of a reach to someone's backyard, but I'm open to the history and maybe because I think when you install saw, there's not that much regulation, you know, and obviously turf has to um
flow right and things like that, but I don't know the saw has the same. >> Well, yeah. And I think I'd probably be more opinionated about it if we allowed it in front yards, but since it's in backyards >> is now that's a That's why like this would apply to the front yard too.
>> Yeah. So >> think from an aesthetic reason like I don't think you want to see turf. >> No. So I didn't realize that. Okay. >> That's what the state is doing pretty fast from doing anything regulation. These regulations are coming from are
coming from the state. They work they've worked on this for over a year now. And so this is what they came up with. >> Okay. Well, in that case, >> and we knew I I know we sent out several emails to council saying, "Yeah, you know, we got people with turf. We got rate, you know, we got notices out soon.
You know, we won't be able to enforce that in the front yard." >> I apologize. I didn't hear that. >> And to your point, Councilman French, we we do have a property maintenance code that would require saw to be maintained. So if if somebody had a patchy yard that was just dirt, code enforcement could
likely take him with a special magistrate for a code violation on that too. >> Okay. >> Okay. Thank you. I take that back. I'm glad we had the conversation. >> And a note that is important that the state does not allow u turf in the rideway
because that's city-owned property and so it has to be on your own private property which we've had that discussion a little bit too. I believe is that you're going to have, you know, you may have somebody that has, you know, saw in the rideway and they're going to have artificial turf on the rest of their
yard. And how's that going to look? And, you know, so, you know, we'll we'll have to work through some of that. >> There's some houses I've already done it >> with the real sod. And I mean, it doesn't look that bad. >> Now, there's ones that have put other product in the rightway that's not supposed to be there, right?
>> But that's that's code enforcement problem too, I guess. Not sure. Um, was this the one that talked I mean it's about the artificial turf, so about um a budding up to a waterway. Is that the same? Okay. >> The state actually put that in their in
their um guidelines. >> So if there was like a a backyard on the river and they had a seaw wall bulkhead, they can't go right up against the edge of that bulkhead. >> 10 foot um >> Okay. >> zone there. Yeah. >> Okay. It's got to be to prevent like
direct runoff or something, right? I would have to assume >> and and we have similar stuff in our code too um about about like a 10 foot buffer. Um but it's challenging to enforce sometimes. >> So one thing and I don't I'm not saying I disagree with this. I just uh I guess
enforcability particularly in the the backyard. Um, I do know a lot of people that have artificial turf do do either modify their irrigation so that you know that you don't want irrigation heads like in the earlier turf because it looks ugly. So, they'll
put it on the outside to cool off their turf during the summer months. >> This would eliminate that. We that would no longer be permissible. I believe it's inground in ground irrigation systems cannot be used to irrigate artificial
turf areas. I'm in uh subsection 15 of C. >> Yes, 15. Yeah, that is a state requirement. >> And that's all new. >> Okay. >> No, >> basically anything you see underlined is is an addition to from the state's new
guidelines. And then there's a few things we had to take out because of them. >> Okay. >> Did you say people water their turf? >> I have heard I we have turf around back. We don't have irrigation on it, but like during summer it gets so hot you can't even step on it. Like to me it's like
get out a hose, spray it off or just don't >> I've heard of it from some of our neighbors because it helps >> dogs. >> That's what I've heard. Our neighbors do it. They they do it so it rinses it consistently if we aren't having rain. So that way like dog urine.
>> I can see that dirt. >> Yeah, >> trust me that does not get rid of the urine smell. >> You have to use products. Um, but um, okay. I don't have any other questions. >> I'm good at this one. >> Our next one.
>> Plats. >> Not much we can do here. >> Yeah, >> right. >> Sure. >> Waivers. >> Good. >> I like that you said they'd be detailed out for counsel. >> Yeah, I like the objectivity the objective standard here.
Okay. definitions. >> The family one, I remember talking about it and two questions. Does this affect short-term rentals? So, if you have four bedroomedroom house, you have some couples that get together, they all rent
the house, they're not all the same family. Does that integrate into that? Is that separate? >> This is that would be a separate preeemption over this. This would just be for longerterm rentals or ownership.
>> Okay. I was trying to find a way to >> Yeah. >> regulate that. Um and then why not two people? I know we we talked about three and four, but why not two? If you have a three-bedroom house, three unrelated people, you kind of just created that.
>> So, kids kids are exempt from it. >> The way the way I see it with three um And again, we're not there yet, I don't think, in our area, but our college kids come back, it's really hard for them to
get housing, whether their rents are too high or buying a home, and not everyone's going to buy their kid a home. So, I could see someone owning a home and maybe it's one parent and then three of the young 20-year-olds come and get together.
>> They're three separate. I I can see four being excessive, but I'm looking at maybe it's an opportunity to get some of our younger generation back >> and let them build some roots here. >> Okay. >> I mean, I definitely see where you go four or five could get a little hairy.
>> I'm okay with three. I think two is more challenging cuz it's really low. >> Okay. >> Um I'm hoping this works out like at three. That's how I'm seeing it right now. Three could allow some of our younger generation to figure out roommates. >> Sure. and get like get their feet back here rather than just being kicked out
like you don't have a million $1.2 million go away. >> Sure. Okay. Thank you. And I'm asking I don't know. I just want the why the three. Okay. >> And I think most of the houses around here are like threebedroom. There's only a handful. They're like four. >> Well, all the new ones being built are much larger, too.
>> I don't I know. I mean, I could imagine 20-year-olds retina. >> So, I'm quite staying with like someone's parent, right? and they have it's like empty nesters and a couple college kids come home and live there for a little bit. Or >> I have a question on that subsection C
up there um with fast food. So something that's recently come before us is the Bank of America Chipotle there. >> So that would because I think they were coming in for special exception because it was fast food. This would now remove it from that
category. It would not be fast food if they eliminated the the walk up lane. Chipotle lane. Okay. So, that Chipotle lane would still be considered a Well, it's a drive-thru. Okay. >> Yeah. >> But if it if you eliminate that, then it's just a fast casual restaurant just
like the new guac place or >> I thought it was weird that they and I guess it was probably code related, but that they kept calling that fast food. But, okay, I got you. >> That's it for me. >> No questions. outdoor seating.
>> Nothing for me. >> And I the way I read the code for outdoor seating, um, it still allows for, you know, some of our current establishments have like a couple tables out. So, it looked like it still allowed for a small percentage of tables to be on the sidewalk.
>> Yeah, you can do a dimminimous one, like if it's just like three tables and it's not, you don't even have to meet this criteria. Um, again, I think three natives has a couple out there. Um, >> wild has like the quest table mood. They all have like a couple tables out front so they won't have to deal with all that
or >> No. And it's just when new people come in or or a new restaurant comes in and tries to do new outdoor seating. It's just to make sure that they don't go over the top. Um, cuz some people will come in and push the limits. They'll block they'll block things and and so
that sidewalks aren't ADA compliant. And so it's just it's good to have on the books. >> Okay. >> But we're not going to be going around >> citing existing restaurants. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Conceptual.
>> This is the the workshop for complicated projects. >> I'm just I want to question this one a little bit. So I I'm trying to understand what this accomplishes that our current process
doesn't because we do have our conceptual review process which is pretty unique. I don't think anyone in the area has that. So it's already one extra meeting and step we allow for council feedback and public feedback and then you know as as here and which is
very common throughout Palm Beach County you know the developers request one-on-one meetings with council they get feedback then I know you guys have encouraged with the larger projects for them to have you know community meetings again which is another way appropriate way for them to get um feedback. So, I
guess I'm just trying to understand what this is going to accomplish that we already can't. Um, I think there's there's there's a balance between working with developers versus really catering to their interest over our own
constituents. And I want to make sure we're not crossing that line. Um, there was a in the waiver section, I really like the quote that said, "The request is not based solely or predominantly on economic reasons and there are special circumstances and conditions that
warrant the waiver." Like, should that requirement be here? Cuz I know a lot of the projects that are coming to us now, they're looking they're coming to us cuz they're having issues with their performance penciling out. I mean, it's really wellnown in the
commercial real estate industry right now that like no one's performing or penciling. It's very tough right now. It's a tough market. So, it's like, are we meeting with them because it's more of an economic reason and they're trying to get something from us so their project can pencil out versus it's, you
know, something that is really aligns with our vision and our interest. and we're really, you know, meeting having this additional conversation for our constituents behalf versus the developers because of economic reasons.
So, I just want to throw that out there. Um, you know, I just I want if we do open this can of worms, I I want to be really careful and make sure it's not for like developer special interest because they can't get their project to pencil out. I I would I think that's a
great point, but I would argue that this actually will lead to better citizen input. I think the general public is less likely to come to a general council meeting when they know that they're going to have to sit through everything else. They know there's probably going to be a bigger crowd there. It's going
to be more formal. And so, you know, a lot of people the biggest fear is public speaking, right? So, you're more likely to get people, I think, to come and talk in a in a more relaxed environment. Um, and like I said before, I think you're not going to completely overwhelm a
meeting. I've seen I've seen and felt it before where, you know, you you're looking at the agenda and you're like, man, we've got a lot of business to get to tonight. Let's like let's hurry this thing up, but it may be a really important project. Like we said, this would only be for extremely important projects. So this way the council staff
wouldn't feel rushed to hurry up a discussion so that they could get to, you know, all the remaining items on an agenda. You could really do a deep dive on a complicated project. And these are things that would happen once a year, once every two or three years. These are, you know, these like big picture
projects. I also like that it I mean I'm sure a developer could request one of these meetings, but ultimately it's Jeremy or perhaps you that has the authority to say this is going to happen or not, right? Am I okay? >> Yeah. And I think there's also like depending on the developer,
I could see what you're saying. It could, you know, they could, I don't know if taking advantage is the right way to put it, but for some developers, it's also it could be another hoop that they have to jump through and thus discourage them from even looking here, you know. So, some developers love our
conceptual, some hate it, you know. So, um I I I I think I would be I would not be in favor of it if a developer had a right to request is the right word, but they could um they could make the judgment
call as to whether this could happen. You know, this is strictly within our village manager or Jay to make this determination. Well, too. And if you're calling a special meeting just for one development, I mean, every I mean, unless you live under a rock right now,
you see how it's going on other northern municipalities and Martin County. So you're going to be put like and then you thinking in the developer's favor like you know you could really stir the pot and you know are you really making
progress when you have you know maybe a bunch of people coming out and speaking against the project which we which is stuff we would want to hear but like I said I mean it could go both ways and I just I don't know what we're really achieving that we can't already do with the individual developer meetings if
they're requested with conceptual plan um and then you know finalize it through a site plan or whatever. I mean maybe we move the conceptual plans to workshop meetings instead of council meetings. I mean that could be be another option.
>> So our intention was to to have these at regular workshops not at special call workshops. Oh, you made it sound well, it says special workshop literally in the language right there, but you also said it and like you would you would notify the special workshop meeting,
>> but I think like tonight if there had been one, you know, we're not broadcasting like, "Hey, Jay's got code updates." Um, no one cares about that. But if there was a special project, you know, we we we could put it in social media and the newsletter in advance for it. >> Here's my two developers like that.
>> I'm all about I'm all about transparency. I think usually if there is development on our agendas like people are paying attention and we do hear from them. We get emails, we get phone calls, they come to the meeting. Um but I what why I know that Wayne and
you push for um them to have community meetings like why can't that just happen and they can get the feedback? because I'm what what feedback are they not going to get from council via meeting with them individually having a conceptual plan and um also you know the
a formal vote on whatever application that they put through like I don't think they're going to get additional or different feedback from us the public maybe like you said if it garers more interest so why not just have them hold a community meeting that doesn't run
through us and the developer can get that feedback back, choose whether they want to, you know, apply any of it or not, and then bring it back to us. >> I like that suggestion. I I've uh worked in a place where we had mandatory public meetings for certain project types. So,
anytime you did a PUD, you'd have to have a public meeting and and we would actually be in charge of putting it on for them. So, they so that it was it was usually held at a at a church or at like the rec center or something like that. So that could be a good suggestion that
we make all PUDs cuz I think that's what we put in there. So anytime someone was doing a complicated project or a PUD or PCD, they would have to have a special um public meeting with residents and work with village staff to to set it up
and to publicize it. >> I would prefer that because then you guys would bring that feedback back to us as well >> from the meeting, right? We could also even have a a notification on it too. Uh I believe that process had it where you had like a 300 foot notification. The
same way we do, you know, if you're doing a zoning barance or a special exception, if you if you live or own property within 300 ft, you'd have they would have to notify you that this special meeting was happening. >> Yeah. I mean, I think I think that would be a better route to take and and it's really put on them for additional
feedback because they're going to get enough feedback from us through the process that we already have. And then also you don't have, you know, the attorney sitting up here, the manager, the clerk, the police, like you relieve some people from having to sit through yet like another meeting too. >> I don't and I hear your concerns. I
think they're valid. I don't mind the especially now that I know it's not a special workshop, >> right? And I I thought the same it was a special workshop, but if if one of you two think that need is there, I don't have an issue with you enacting that. um
especially something like Paradise Park, you know, I don't think you're going to be using it all the time. So, with the additions, I think they're good ideas also, and they're good tools um that you can have for these projects, but if you if you believe you need that just in
case, um it gives you that nice option for the future development that we do have, I'm still in support of it. And the community community meetings are great. I think the last one on county line though is blood bath. And uh you know, I don't
I don't know how productive that was, you know, and it was more casual. So, I think it has a lot of potential, but that current structure was was not it. >> I guess I'm still missing the intent, though. Sorry, you go ahead. >> No, I understand your your concern about
the intent. I sit very strongly with I I still think it should stay and start at a general public meeting. And I say that because that term up there unusually complex Paradise Park in particularly
for the most part most people will understand that's a very sensitive complex project. However, there is a former council member that didn't think that. They thought it was just boop boop check. Go ahead. So for anyone sitting up here in regards
to the people getting a chance to get some time to review it, I would like to have it come forward at a general meeting first. If it gets triggered as going on and on and on and a lot of logistics being brought up, a lot of legal issues being brought up, a lot of
public feedback or people even expressing during public comment, hey, like we just looked at it. Are you guys voting on this tonight? If it goes down that road, council can obviously go, can we move this to a workshop? Just like we
do with others. If a developer, in my opinion, doesn't want to continue the conversation, that's a red flag for me because they're just basically saying, "We don't care what the people are concerned about and we don't want to sit and workshop and partner a conversation about going through all the concerns and
feedback you guys have." So, I would rather see it stay on a public meeting. if it gets triggered like it's going down a rabbit hole to wrap it up, put it on a workshop and go from there. I like council being at workshops hearing
because and it's not easy on you and staff, but in the past it's we don't get very detailed minutes. I don't hear every single thing that a community member said if it's in a community meeting. I I'm going to have to vote on
that. So I need every little thing that someone says for me to make a very very educated legal decision and vote. So again, I'm going to sit strongly with start at a regular meeting. If it triggers a lot of complex feedback, we
move it to a workshop and go from there. I I can get on board with that like go through a normal process. that already have conceptual at the council meeting and then if we deem it necessary
move forward with like another workshop. I like that because like I feel like this way you're just opening up out the gate for that special workshop when we haven't even gone through the conceptual cuz we granted I guess you wouldn't deem them complex projects but we've had two very successful conceptual presentation
conversations. Um so again like it's not like the process isn't broken. I think it's working very well. agree. >> So I could get on board with that like go through a standard process then council condemn punting it to workshop but I I still wouldn't want a special workshop. I want it to be like our
standard workshop meeting like just have it. Can we not do that already? >> Pump it to a workshop cuz you have >> I think we could I mean why >> we could clarify in the code. I I like the suggestion. I think I think we could easily just tweak that in conceptual code. just say that council council may
elect to have a continued discussion of conceptual presentation at a future regularly scheduled council workshop meeting. >> Didn't we do that for Paradise Park when we were going through the overlays? >> No, we talked about it, but we didn't because it was about density and height
and we didn't want to that was so we didn't bother with that. >> We're good with that. We're good with that. I think we we just wanted to have an opportunity to have a more thorough and in-depth project. >> Well, looking at some of the survey results from residents like they
>> they uh and I don't blame them want a more transparent and more communication particularly around development. So, I don't see this coming up all that often, >> right? Um, and whether it's council who makes a decision or the village manager
or Jay, I just like that it's within our discretion, not the developer to come in and like invoke this process. So, um, and I do agree there has been times where perhaps we would have liked to
give more time to a conceptual and we do I don't think we rush necessarily, but we are cognizant of, hey, it's we're an hour and a half into the meeting and we got like eight more agenda items to get through and we rush a little bit maybe. So, I'm fine with what with what
everybody wants to do. So, it's really just changing this to council's discretion, not the >> Well, well, kind and flipping it, requiring the conceptual, like you said, have the formal, follow the process as we currently have. >> Yeah. >> Cuz it's working well. >> Yeah. >> And um but if at that conceptual
presentation, if we deem it's going too long or we need to discuss it more, it would be more our discretion to like, hey, let's table this and workshop it at our next workshop meeting. Mhm. >> And then that way like the public has
one more chance to come and talk about it. We can talk additionally. I mean I guess at that point it's a time >> time thing, >> right? Um but I still really encourage the community meetings I think cuz you're going to get people that are going to go to that that aren't going to come here. >> Yeah. So, I understand what you're
saying. Like, we're not hearing everything, but the developers are, and I mean, if they want their project to get approved, they're usually going to typically, you think, would take some of that feedback. But, um, I I mean, I really think it's a good idea. I've been involved in those, and I'm
telling you, like I I' I've seen so many people show up in them, and like half of them don't come to the actual council meeting. >> Yep. >> I agree. I'm not against them. My disappointment is that we don't get all the feedback. Yeah, >> we I mean we get general this is how
they felt the rule. >> And again, it's not making us staff because that's not staffed jobs to sit there and and give us very detailed even our minutes for these meetings aren't exactly detailed. So I mean again sometimes the development like RDE's property I mean I have to have residents
call me but I didn't get a chance to hear everyone so I pretty much get only those that are going to contact me. >> You guys record it put on Zoom or use those >> and I would say record it. I don't know how that would happen, but >> well, there's a bunch of different AI apps that will do that. I mean, if we if
we notice the the notice everyone that the meeting is being recorded, can we do that? I guess that's more of a question for you. >> I think as long as everybody gives their consent >> if we notice if if there's like a community meeting and we notice that we're recording the meeting, just audio for minutes, is that permissible?
>> No. So, I would >> I think Yeah, the audio is fine for minutes as long as it's it's recorded. There's a recording of it. >> We could do that. >> As long as that doesn't deter anyone from attending. >> I still like workshop, too, though.
>> Yeah. >> Yeah. Yeah. But I'm saying I'm saying we should still encourage the community meetings because I think they're really important. Mhm. >> Would you be okay with us in addition to the workshop idea that you're all on board with mandating or giving staff the opportunity to mandate that meeting
>> the community meeting? >> I think we should so right now it's written it is if you if you're doing a planned unit develop or a PCD or PRD or unusually complex project >> and we always encourage people to do it right with the 250 300 Beach Road project that's coming up. We're
encouraging them to meet with the Beach Road Association and residents and we're and we encourage the rude people to do that. We always encourage and fortunately everyone has been nice and cordial, but there are times where people are say if it's not required, I'm not I'm not paying my consultants $5,000
to do this. I'm not I'm not walking into a horn's nest. They will they will push back on it. So, it it is helpful for us to have that that in the code if if council's okay with it. Do other municipalities have it in their
code? Because I know a I mean it's done in a lot of others, but I can't honestly tell if it's actually in their code or if it's like what you >> I used to work in St. John's County and anytime you did a PUB in um certain overlay districts, it it was mandated
and it was a very formal process. I think with a big development coming in Jupiter that they are required to do a community meeting for PD because I think I just saw an announcement for it but
it's a I don't know how they measure that if it's for size what's around the property cuz like the roads is going to be different than the beach road building. >> That's a PRD. So it would be a PRD. What what are the criteria that you >> PRD or an unusually complex project? Or
we could just say projects over certain acreage and and the zoning overlays. That's probably the easiest >> idea. Language stuff. >> Yeah, I like the idea. >> Maybe think of a language that you can add. >> PCDs, PRDS, anything over two acres in a
in an overlay >> and then >> capture anything coming off >> without naming them. >> Is it just the community around it? Because if it's if this our entire village community that's a workshop >> anyone can come can come to to anyone
>> but they would only have to formally invite people within 300 ft. >> Okay. So there's a measurement on it. >> I think it's with some language and then maybe in the code where cuz it is in our code um the conceptual is it the 78-332. So yeah, maybe maybe just word it reward
it to where you know you have to go through that process, but if council deems it necessary to discuss further like we have the discretion to um >> you know punted to the next I would say it has to be the next available workshop
or the you know so it's clear that we're not delaying it like two workshops out right I mean I think we would owe it to do it for sure the very next workshop. Yeah, that's a good point. >> And and then keep it formal. I mean, we're still a formal process, formal public comment, you know, all like that
won't change, >> right? We're not trying to delay. >> No, it's been great feedback. We'll we'll bring back some some language the audience. >> And then number 11 is a glitch. The other one is phototric plan and dark skies. Any
issues? >> So why does it say maybe required? Shouldn't it be shall be required >> for >> photoometric plan? Sorry. Um item 12, the first sentence. It's phototric plan. Maybe >> there's sometimes where a project
doesn't necessarily need a phototric plan, but I'm okay with changing to shall if if you want to. >> What project would require one? >> Trying to think of an example. a project that's that's right next to a gas station that already has bright lights
there like on a commercial corridor where you know it's there's already a ton of lighting around >> but for instance like on the root property we want to make sure that they're not adding light pollution on their the single family neighborhood that's right next to them. I think I
should say shall, but then if there's I don't I don't know. It's >> just easier for staff to to give some leeway because otherwise if we say shall then if it's not in their agenda package, someone can say there's not a phototric plan. They didn't meet they didn't meet our site plan criteria.
>> I guess I just want to ensure that if if it stays maybe that like I don't want someone that really should need to turn one in argue that they don't have to per the code. like I I don't I don't know that's a technicality but >> so I I'll say I'll say shall and then I'll say change it to say the community
development director may uh wave the requirement to to provide phototric plan and in a unique circumstance where the applicant can demonstrate that one is not necessary. >> Yeah, I think that would be good. >> Yep. >> My Yeah. And then I have a question
about lighting. When you talk about light spilling over, so the McMansions that are going in, they have lights underneath their roof lines and then there's lights halfway down. So those do shine on some of the
neighbors. Is that kind of what this is referencing to >> cuz those are on all night. They're not on a timer. >> This is just commercial and multif family site plans that would come forward, not for single family review. >> Okay.
Yeah. >> All right. And then the last one is just that it's the comp plan provision about bike spaces. >> No question. >> Thank you for your time. >> Thank you. Great job, Jay. Thank you. Appreciate it. >> Any of course I was just going to say a
public comment. Chatter box over there. >> Come on up. >> It wouldn't be complete without us. >> I know. I'm sorry. I can I just want to reiterate you Jenny you sort of mentioned it if you have this uh
workshop on your agenda a regular workshop agenda let's say or even the council agenda and you it's it's sensitive enough that you have an unusual amount of people here and they get started speaking just think you need to put the qualifier in the agenda that
should the item get excessively along you will take it to workshop if somebody sits for an hour and a half and they don't get to say something, they're going to be really aggravated. >> Thank you. >> Thank you.
>> I just are the same thing as Pat. I think it's a bad idea to do it with the council first. First of all, I know you're not intimidating. I'm here all the time. I'm not intimidated, but a lot of people are. And the second thing is
that um I think that people would come to a workshop if it was pretty much that project that they're interested in. And supposing you know you've got a whole bunch of people and they're really riled up. You're going to say, "Oh, oh, we're going to stop and you have to come back in two weeks."
I mean, is that going to work? Is that going to bring people back in two weeks? they're going to say, "Well, they didn't listen to me or I didn't get my time to say what I wanted to say at that at that council meeting because there was so much else on the agenda." The other thing is the community thing.
People are, believe me, when it hits the the the you know, the dust that there's a project coming up, there's a lot of community things that are just kind of happening. You're not getting, if you're not there, you're not getting the whole picture. You're not getting people's language. You're not getting anger.
You're not getting yes, it's a great idea. You're not getting any of that. You're getting a synopsis. And that's not right. So people have come to me. The US1 project is a perfect example. People said, "Oh, we went to all those meetings and they didn't listen to us
because that's was the perception. A community meeting, they're they're going to perceive that you didn't listen." >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. All right. Moving on. Agenda item two,
review and discuss our latest survey. So, um, every other year we, uh, since I've been here, we've done a communitywide survey. In your guys's backup, we have summarized the results of this, of the survey. But one of the
things I think it's important is that we have tried to keep very similar questions uh from year to year which will allow us to compare to see how we're doing from survey to survey. So what I have done is put together a presentation um just to kind of highlight the
differences between a 24 and 26 citizen survey. Um and with that I have um a couple points or just some things to point out. you know, this presentation compares the the results. Um the percentages that you're going to see are basically either if the if the results
were neutral, satisfied, or very satisfied. Um and that allows us to get our approval ratings for the specific areas that we're looking at. Uh the most important thing I think is to point out is that we did uh receive 41% less
responses. What that means is, you know, whatever that 190 different um less people uh it's not from lack of trying. I would say that we actually probably put out more stuff or equal stuff and we have a further reach now than when we did even in 2024 because we have more
people following us. Um, however, we had less respondents. 268 is actually um you can get into the question about is it significantly a statistically relevant survey. Um, and so the less results you have, you
actually have a a margin or a a margin of error that increases. And so now we have with this results, we're looking at 6 or 7% margin of error when we when we look at it. So just keep that in mind is that, you know, less response means that
there is a greater margin of error. And, you know, the recommended is that you should be within, you know, five or six% of your population. Um, and so we're we're probably just under it with the survey, but just point that out.
Um, our our demographics 24 versus 26. Uh, you'll see that we've grown a little bit at least with the respondents from 11 to 20 uh years has went up a little bit. We also went up um in our less than 5 years that has increased 18.2%. So a
little bit slightly a slight trend toward newer residents in 2026 but still dominated by the mid 10 year residents 11 to 20 years. Just an overall summary as we kind of line this out. Um when including the neutral satisfied and very satisfied
your overall sentiments remain very strong across most service categories. Even areas that declined in strong satisfaction like the water system will still show a high overall acceptability. Uh the largest which you know would you
guys have seen in your survey largest soft man's water uh system and quality um public and parks safety uh continue to perform exceptionally well. Uh so now I'll just kind of go through some of these and highlighted public safety.
you'll see that uh we pretty stable uh the satisfaction for police service 94.2% 2% and now in 2026 it's still in the '9s and the fire service uh 88% and you know in 2026 we're still at 87%
satisfaction parks and wreck and I won't read them all out but you can kind of take a look at those you'll see that slight increase in satisfaction parks facilities I would venture to guess that's probably because of remembrance park um and some of the work that we've done also some improvements to
Constitution Park and to Questa Park uh the key infra infrastructure and utilities uh question. Um the water system strong satisfaction dropped um and we say dropped you know 9% but or nine points but it still remains very
high 81%. Uh you know the question one of the questions that probably triggered this is you know we have a question on here I think like four or five that says you know name the top five things that you think are important for the village in the next you know five years and
water quality was the number one. So you'll see that um you know the satisfaction um is is triggered probably a little bit by how the question was was worded but um we're still seeing high uh high satisfaction rates across the board.
Customer satisfaction it's always warms my heart when we see the customer service part um has increased um and then effective communication remain high at 90%. Um we you know we did look at um in the survey and I think it's in your
guys's backup you know how people communicate u we are seeing trends you know you know increase um participation with social media and things like that you know we obviously the the more we trend that way the easier easier it is for us to communicate with people
because it's you know it's free to put it out on social media but uh we still you know um several different avenues to communicate with people village action on environmental concerns. We have increased on that. Um and then code enforcement is always a
tough one but we still remain high. Most important uh enforcement categories range between 65 and 75% overall acceptance dis satisfaction remains contrary among smaller but vocal subset. Uh no, we had did have a high no
experience um response to this question which is which is good. Um overall sentiment um areas that improve parks and facilities, street maintenance, environmental action, customer service, areas that decline
minimal. Um is water system, sidewalk mainting, communication effectiveness. um areas that remain exceptionally strong, police, fire and parks overall. Um when using the neutral satisfaction and very satisfied metric, the village maintains high overall service
confidence. Uh the community is not broadly dissatis dissatisfied and the shift appears to be from very satisfied to neutral in some areas. Um water quality remains the single most sensitive issue. I will say, you know, we you know, I I see that the numbers
dropped a little bit. is still very high. But I think we've done a lot of things with water quality. I think, you know, so how that is, you know, how they phrase those, you know, the I guess the feedback for that, you know, is because we're doing water projects. Is it is it, you know, is it inconveniencing people?
Um, or is it the, you know, the $10 search charge? I think there's a lot to be desired there, but I I remain proud that we still, you know, have almost a 90% in that or or over 80% with that. Um,
see, and then, you know, how do we use this? Um, you know, we have the strategic planning workshop that's coming up. I know in the past council members have uh referenced um the survey results and as you guys build your strategic initiative. So, you know,
protect and reinforce high performing areas like public safety and parks and wreck. We want to restore confidence in infrastructure systems. So, maybe it's some messaging that we can do better with our, you know, with our water quality that we meet all the state and
federal guidelines. We meet all the, you know, any of the regulations that need we have good water. Um, and so maybe it's a messaging thing more than uh more than, you know, spend a lot of money. Although council has made significant commitments to, you know, a master plan
that we're that we're working on and some um water treatment plan upgrades that we have coming online soon. Um improved communication strategy. We're shifting to a more reactive updates to to proactive and you guys have seen some of the videos and some of the things
really telling our story that the village is doing. Um, we're going to address quality of life enforcement priorities like golf cart, ebikes, construction oversight. Um, align capital investments with resident confidence gaps like prioritizing projects that directly improve the
trust. And then goal is to move neutral sentiment back to strong satisfaction. That would be, you know, the goal of this of this survey that we do it in two years. Hopefully, we're still seeing a high trend of satisfaction and we're moving in the right direction. With that, I can answer any questions. you
guys have the overall backup for this specific survey, but that was just kind of a comparison from year to year. >> Thank you, Jeremy. Council, open it for discussion. >> Thank you. >> I had a question. It said elaborate um
we're said mixed opinions on Toquesta Park. Was that just the opinions that were in the comments or was that something additional? >> That was in the comments. There was some comments that, you know, they were satisfied. I mean, I don't think eBay was like the worst ever. I think, you
know, some I think and I don't remember the comments right off the top of my head without going through them, but I remember some comments like, "Oh, we don't use it or there's no playground or there's not, you know, versus the passive park versus the active park." I think that was a couple of the comments, but I don't think they were completely
negative, >> I think. And there was something in there about like how much we improved it, and that would depend on whether we owned it or not. We saw that. There was some comments for that. Then it was interesting because it was one of the uh survey questions where was select one not you know input your own comment and
the quest park redevelopment >> um outlaid remembrance park phase 2. So I thought that was interesting like park ranked the highest redevelopment but then you had some comments. So I thought that was really interesting like how do you >> how do you measure those against each other >> in the demographics right I thought with
the the average age of the the survey submitted it would have been more towards remembrance park phase 2 what it actually ended up looked like to Questa Park >> I thought that was interesting >> uh actually I think that was my only uh oh
the one question on there it said non-residents can rent Constitution Park for birthday parties. Or I guess my question is, can non-residents rent Constitution Park for a party? >> Yeah, I believe they can. I believe we do that. I don't think we get a ton of
rentals over there. So, I don't think we're turning a lot of people away. So, I think if we ever got to that point where, you know, every weekend we were having something, we might look at the policy like that, but as right now, we don't have policy against it. >> Okay. Thank you. I like the overall
survey. Uh I like I liked reading the comments. I think some of people took time to to fill out that part which was nice. Demographic was probably swayed in one direction and there wasn't that many submitted so um taking that for what it is but I appreciate the information and
the summaries. Thank you. >> I think it's helpful. Obviously we all wish more people would respond but you know not much you can do about that short of doing like a uh what do they call it? like a like if
somebody gets picked, everybody who responds to the survey, somebody gets something like there's a >> Amazon gift card, >> whatever it might be. But >> RA is not bad. >> Um well, two years from now, remember that. Um but no, I I think it's helpful
and I just wish we had more more insight into where everybody else was at, but that's okay. My favorite part is the comments because again, just like those committee meetings and then I'm not just looking at numbers, I get to read what they want
to write and some are good and some are not so great, but we got to take it cuz that's our job. My only question to staff is for the comments that were in the sections where there's written comments, some of them are really easy. Like there's something about a pothole.
Like there's really easy ones. the staff's gonna just kind of go out and dress those like we don't have to sit here and tell you each one. >> I mean, yeah, if there's a pothole, we will address right away. >> There was SOMEBODY FIX THE POTHOLE and whatever. And there's some other like
blind spots with shrubs. Like I know if you're on Old Dixie, like you're going west on Bridge Road to Old Dixie, like the there's pomemettos growing under the sidewalk and it makes it really hard to see the cars coming northbound on Old Dixie. Like little things like that. And that was one of the comments like is
that something staff can just take care of? >> Um we if you if there's something in a pothole two months ago I guarantee you Doug's I don't say guarantee but I'm I rest assured that Doug will take care of it if he knows about it. I mean >> I'm not saying he wouldn't but I'm
saying is staff getting these comments. So when there's easy ones like that or trim this corner cuz we can't see. Can we just go ahead and have staff look through it and fix those things? >> Oh yeah, absolutely. >> Make it super easy. >> Yeah. I mean, I know that's not the most ideal place for some of these comments,
but they don't come here. So, our job is to hear them whether they call, text, email, or stand here. So, >> appreciate it. >> Thank you. I'll just say based on, you know, based on um the survey responses. So, you know, the the ones that you just slipped
and also the um comments that you can type in, like if you look at those compared to like our strategic plan, which we're going to talk about next, that that was done before we got the survey results. And I know we use those the survey results from before to put
together our strategic plan, but I mean everything even still with this new survey like really aligns. And so I think, you know, just council and staff really have a good pulse on what the community wants and needs. So I like that's what I got out of the survey like we're we're we're in the right direction
on all these things because I think some of the concerns or stuff we know about and we're working on and stuff that they're happy about is because it's, you know, a lot of work and effort we put in to make happen. So I thought that was great. Um, I'm wondering what maybe if
there's any staff ideas on how to get more people to respond. Like do we think it's is it too lengthy? Is it just people aren't interested? I mean, what are some ideas to get because it was disappointing to see the decrease? Cuz I think I mean it's just kind of a low
response to begin with and for that to go down this year. I mean, what are some ideas or best practices to maybe try to get it? I mean, I know we were I saw, you know, we were blasting out on our Friday newsletter and everything. It's like the word was out there. Um,
>> yeah. I think when we get ready to launch it next time, I mean, we'll try to be creative. I mean, it's going to be, you know, we typically do it every other year. So, before we launch it next time, we'll try to be creative. See if there's food truck events we can sit out. I mean, you know, special events, concert series. I mean, we can try to
do, you know, try to be as creative as we can with the Reese's horses that we have >> or a raffle. >> I like the raffle. >> Everyone loves a good loves a good raffle. >> Yeah. >> Have like a little depressed basket or something. >> It's great. >> Yeah.
>> Yeah. >> Okay. Any other questions or comments? >> Any public comment, >> Miss Watkins? It's just a thought particularly with the issues about water when these a lot of people read these surveys they see
whether it's water quality you're really addressing in their mind they're thinking my yard's been torn up for a you know they're reacting to the construction and not necessarily the water quality. So even at that I think it's a little bit skewed. It's um as far
as the response, it's notoriously poor usually and um I know when I was on council, the manager used to tell us all the time, you're not going to hear from them if they're happy. You hear from them when they're not. So, some of it is a bit of that. They like what's going
on, therefore they don't think they need to give their time to the survey. So, it's it's it's a hard nut to crack as far as response. I think you guys did a wonderful job. It was weekly the thing on there. Please answer it or whatever. So, I don't think that's the problem.
It's getting them interested enough to answer. Maybe it's it's to put it to them where it's really important for you all to hear what they have to say. Something along that kind of language. It's important for you all. We want to hear from you. Something a little more encouraging to please take the time.
>> Yeah. Like different messaging. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Any other public comment? Okay, moving on. Agenda item three, staff update on our 2025 2026 strategic plan. >> Thank you, mayor. Uh, so we've shifted,
you know, when we first started this 6 years ago, you know, I know, uh, when we had, you know, the council and the mayor, she at one point wanted us to do like a quarterly update. Um, we, uh, have since switched to where we have this very transparent online. Anybody
can see it anytime. I typically try to update these initiatives on a on a monthly basis. I I do them myself. So most of the progress on these initiatives are are very transparent, very open. It's a very good document for staff. I think for council too to look
at these. When we first started this, you know, when I came here and hearing from council, it was like, you know, I know staff was kind of chasing initiatives and so the strategic plan allows the council as a whole to direct staff through these initiatives and we don't chase chase things throughout the
year or you know something shiny comes across we want to do it. This is kind of our road map that we use throughout the year. Doesn't say that some of these initiatives might be over you know a year period, some of them might be over a three-year period. some, you know, some might even be longer than that, but
you'll see as I go through these results that um, you know, we're making progress on a lot of things that's important to council and some of these initiatives. So, as we there's going to be some that we're going to look to transition off. You guys have the survey results. staff will have some things that have come up
throughout the year and we'll tie all those things together and hand them to you guys and then we'll start the next year of strategic planning and hopefully to build on what we've done from year to year. Um so this guide just got uh you know guides our long-term priorities and resource allocation. You know um
finances are tough and they're tough every year. So this allows us to prioritize those things um and and make sure we're putting those resources to where it's important. um ensures transparency and measurable progress and and we are updating it regularly. Um if
you don't have the website, you just go to the village council uh on our website and go to the top and 25 26 strategic plan and then we also have the link um that that people can access. All starts with our vision and mission. So as we,
you know, lead into the next next year's strategic plan, you know, keep our vision and our mission, you know, at the forefront when we, you know, make decisions, we're trying to get to to those two things. Our core values, which is something we stress, you know, here,
make sure that we're, you know, we're striving for excellence, ethics, and transparency, quality of life, our employees, communication, and being compassionate not only to our staff, but to our residents. Uh as we get into kind of some of the tasks, overall plans task, we have 68
action items. So we have an initiative. Each initiative will have action items that go with it. Um and so out of those 17 initiatives, we have 68 action items. Uh 18% of it is complete, 38% on track,
24% not started, 13% minor disruption, uh and 7% major disruption. and we'll I'm going to highlight a little bit of why or what we're talking about when we do those. Um but I think you know generally we're making good progress with uh many of the initiatives that we're looking at. Uh we have four focus
areas which is the fiscally responsible government we're 74% complete there community parents and identity 26% municipal infrastructure 64% and operational excellence 80%. So instead of breaking our initiatives
down into those four categories, I've kind of spread them back out and took them to how we how we prioritized them when we did the strategic plan. And so we'll have the priorities as they as they came out um through that uh prioritization that the council did. So
our number one priority was provide additional funding for the state appropriations to Questa Park. We did that. As you guys know, we are working on the construction plans for Tustin Park identify additional CIP funding. We have accounted for roads and sidewalks
in the general fund. Uh obviously the build the vehicle maintenance, we have some of that out of the general fund and this year uh we've dedicated 21% of our revenues uh revenues in in utilities so we can do pay go projects instead of you know borrowing money. We've also um
allocated $135,000 to storm water projects out of the general fund that came from the utility tax. So, we've made some strides on trying to make sure that we have some money set aside for those additional CIP funding. As you guys know, December was the last date. I
think u February or maybe the 1st of March. We're expecting our very last check of the infrastructure tax. So, we will not have any more revenue. And so we're losing roughly $650,000 a year in in revenue that we were paying
for capital improvement projects. So we're really trying to change our pace and try to find other sources or allocate money so we're not, you know, get a couple years down the road and have no money for for our our infrastructure projects. Uh, number
three, I have it yellow because I think we still have some work to do, but we have allocated $135,000 out of our utility tax to which is 50% towards storm water maintenance. Um, as you guys know, our storm water fund, you know, we we still have some work to do. We have
made some strides this year. Um, really tightening the belt, not doing a a ton of projects and hopefully trying to build up that reserve and that fund. So, that's why it's in yellow because I think we still have some work to do. something that we should keep in our uh strategic plan moving forward until we
get there. Employee retention recruitment. We did a staffing study this past year. Um because of the strategic plan initiative, we we made some commitments in healthcare. We continue to see significant increases, but our council has um has pledged uh
that response to that. Um and so we also included, you know, very competitive wages and we've tried to always stay competitive with that. This is one that I think we can take off the strategic plan as we move forward because I think, you know, it's always been something that we've done and and we will continue
to do that. Um I don't know that we need to, you know, necessarily uh have it in our strategic plan. I think it was important that we had it on here last time because we wanted to make sure that we did the salary study. Um so that was important to allocate money for
that. Um but we continue to um you know through unions and you know through the budget process make sure that we're doing our best to re retain and recruit consider remembrance park phase 2. Uh we did decide to postpone that. Um so
that's why this is one of those that major disruption or haven't started. This is one of those. Um, and I know that the survey results will help guide you guys on, you know, when it's appropriate to do that one or um, and I know part of it was just trying to see
how phase one um, shakes out. Develop future master plan, facilities plan. Um, a couple things that we have done as you guys know cuz you guys have made that decision to move forward, you know, the village annex or station 11.
Um we actually had a an event a training going on with the police department for the first time over there. Um so we we have made a commitment and really got that building up. We're still haven't moved our move our code compliance over there but uh we have made strides. We
also have engaged um uh a firm to do develop a master plan facilities plan look at the future of the village and where we need to go so we can start planning for that. Um, and so that's that's underway. We should have that in the next couple months of at least a
draft of that that we can look at. 15-year road and sidewalk plans is fully funded. Uh, has been for two years now. I think this is something we can slowly transition off of the off of the the strategic plan. Not to say we won't continue to do that. We I think we have
the money in the general fund set aside for roads and sidewalks and we will continue to do that. ex expand and improve critical land areas that serve to maintain a village distinctive features through land acquisition and park improvements. This one we are waiting the 2026 legislative uh process
for Tquesta Park. I think we're checking a box on this one. U I think this one will be something that we you know I think it's important to the to the village council and and the residents that you know when there are opportunities for us to acquire land or or ask for more green space that we
continue to do that. But uh hopefully the sequesta park local bill um we are waiting for it to hopefully send hit the Senate floor for them to vote on it, but that's where it lies right now. Uh continue education toward policy on golf carts and ebikes. You know, I think
we've done a a really good job at doing this. We're obviously waiting. There's going to be some legislative changes we believe to the law about requiring, you know, the speed limit um on the sidewalks or on the roads. Um, but I think, you know, unless there's a clear
measurable for this, you know, I think it's one we can take off our strategic plan. I feel like we've been successful with at least education. Um, unless there's something different that the council, a different direction the council wants to give staff. Um, you know, I think it's, you know, there's
not a lot of measurable there and so it's hard to keep, you know, for me to say if we check the box or not unless we can put together something like that. expand the tree planting efforts. Uh, you know, initiate a tree rebate program. We still haven't had any takers
on that. Uh, I know Jay, Doug, and I, we were having some back and forth today about maybe doing a couple of tree a tree giveaway type things with Arbor Day. And so, we're we're looking at trying to, you know, I know I think we had $7,500 or $10,000 that we align for
the uh tree rebate program. We're looking at trying to do some different stuff with that. Um but this is one that we've we've waiting before we actually do a full phase another phase of the tree program. Um we've been waiting for the phase two or the next phase of
Questa Drive water main. Um so I I expect us to um you know come in next year to really look at are we going to take do another phase of trees. I think the last time we planned 63 trees along to Questa Drive and so that'll be a discussion, you know, during the
strategic plan if we want to move forward with that and budget for that in the future. Implement impact fees for development. As you can see, it's in red. As you guys know, you know, with Senate Bill 180, we can't do anything more burdensome. While
we did do um, you know, mobility plan, which is number 14, I think we've kind of checked that box. number 11. Um, it makes it a little tougher at current time for us to move forward with that. I know there's still there's some additional legislation going on,
mobility fees and impact fees. I'm not sure exactly how that's going to shake out. To be honest with you, I'm not 100% sure what it's going to do for us, good or bad. Just know that there's something moving. Um, so we'll have to wait until the state uh figures that out, see if there's any adjustments to Senate Bill
180. Um um so that's why that one's in red because you know there's there's pretty major disruption in that that particular initiative. 12 and 13 I've kind of combined them because they're very similar but improved village gateways beautifification all Dixie we have and I'm very excited about it. Um,
we have we finally received the final version of the interlocal agreement with Palm Beach County to allow us to start in a 50% partnership with them to do uh plans for medians and landscaping on Old Dixie. That has been in our strategic
plan since 1978. I feel like I feel like we're doing we're making some strides. It does not mean that there's not, you know, once we get past this stage of the planning, it's going to be 100% cost on us. And so that will be something that the council has to decide, you know,
once once we get that um the plans and the estimated cost, council's going to have to decide. But that that interlocal agreement will come to council probably in April because it won't make the March uh meeting. Um but and then the other one that you guys
are kind of aware of, we've been working with Martin County on County Line Road up there from um US1 to Old Dixie to uh put landscaping on the north side um near to on the Questa Park side of
putting some trees and some very lowmaintenance um plantings uh through there. We haven't even got to a shared cost type of a thing. You know, the original discussion, which was really rough, out
there on to Questa Park was that they had some funds that maybe they could um they can use Jordan and plant and then we would be responsible for all the maintenance and upkeep from that point on. So, there will be some, you know, discussions. We we received kind of a
and it really was a pencil drawing of what they wanted to put in over there. We're going to, you know, kick back a little bit and see what so, you know, how we can uh I'll say scope it down a little bit because we thought it was a little much for what what we were asking
for. But anyways, um that 12 and 13, I think we're a little behind on that one. Um but I think we are moving as of late. And then number 14, like I said, I think we've checked that box. Um and now we'll just await the imple implementation of
the impact fees. The other priorities that were on there um the last I think these are the last five was uh consider the policy for cross connection control as you guys know that came to council we're moving forward with that going to start with commercial developments um and education
was is going to be a key aspect of that funds to quest the bridge future maintenance we did approve that in the budget um council will approve the it will come to council for approval for the work authorization in in April um I I think there was still a few things
contractual that we need to work out. Um but it did come in over our estimated budget by I believe $130,000. Um but um I think it's important. We are trying to look at the scope to see if there's anything that we can that we can
get it down and we'll say value engineer. Um but it look it's looking like it's going to be a little over budget, but I think it's important that we do it all in one shot and and and move through that. um establish a safe and quiet railroad crossing. Um as you
guys have seen through an email that we recently got, funding is no longer available through grant funding for the those safety improvements on Questa Drive. That was uh anywhere from $500 to $750,000 that we've been chasing for a year and a half. And now that uh you
know Bridine and the railroad uh FRA is you know have have had their their issues the fun is not no longer available and so we are going to try to move forward with a quiet zone application um we we will have to engage um an
engineer um once we have this discussion with the railroad bright line F dot specifically um we we got a call from F DOT saying that we should try to apply again. Like the funding's not there, but go ahead
and try to apply again. Like maybe there's an opportunity now to have a quiet zone without going through all those other things. And so uh we'll see how it goes. I mean obviously I think everybody wants uh you know the the the crossing to be safe first and foremost.
Everybody and I mean ride line, FRA, FOT. So uh we're going to see about moving forward with with a quiet zone application. I know Doug has reached out to an engineer because we will have to do a couple of um um site plans for them to be able to submit
utility project timeless and reporting. I think we've done a really good job of that especially have a project manager or you know it was an assistant utility director but I think you know I think everybody from my experience have been happy with in the response about the timeless and reporting. We're we're
obviously still working on the timeliness and trying to, you know, stay on track. We did have a set back to water treatment plant um just because of the the change in scope that'll be coming to you guys, I believe, next month um for um trying to get that back
online. the SRF funding and you know working with the with the engineer uh that's been working on that project which you know won't go into that but we've had some additional problems with the engineer with they've lost some staff over there
so we've had some turnover issues with with the staff that we were using um and then improved communication with development community uh we provide some you know health social for developers I think Wayne's done a good job trying to
you know email keep developers on track and and you know um with the information that we're doing and then we've facilitated some meetings uh with developers provide opportunities at rec center and so you know unless there's a clear uh measurable for us on that like
I would suggest we transition it off unless anybody else has any other ideas for that one and so this is just our steps I know you guys have this information so I don't know that need to go through it but you know we will consider, you know, um, a new strategic plan. April 13th is our
tenative workshop for that. I think it's probably a little better than tenative because I think we've, uh, put it on everybody's calendars. Um, and then I always got to add a quote. So, >> you're not going to read it? >> I'm going to read it. I thought
everybody else talking myself. >> If you don't know where you where you're going, you might end up somewhere else. So, um, you know, we don't want to end up down south or anywhere else. So, let's, uh, make sure that we keep request.
>> Thank you, Jeremy. Council, open up for discussion. >> All right. No, I'm uh, we have a lot of lot of stuff to talk about. I'm really looking forward to it and um, I think you hit it all. Good job.
>> No, I'm good. I got a couple on the items that it says, you know, minor disruption, major disruption. Is there any common pattern as far as uh is it funding? Is it outside influences? Is it us? You know, is there anything that
we can work on as a council or these outside influences? >> Well, if you just look at, you know, we'll look at a couple. I mean, and I only see two or three. Um so if you look at like consider remembrance park and that was something council decided to wait on um and then you look at um you
know implement impact fees you know we we couldn't impact you know we couldn't implement those due to the state legislation at this point um even the you know the storm water um being a little behind on that I think that's something maybe just keep that in focus
and a top priority for council is to make sure that we build that storm water fund up um the quiet zone of railroad crossing. Man, if I had an answer for that, we wouldn't still be talking about a couple years later. So, um you know, I think I think we have a direction now.
We've been kind of in limbo for probably the last year with this, you know, this carrot that we were going to have some state funding or we're going to have some, you know, grant funding for the safety improvements. You know, that that just ain't there anymore. And so now we have a direction and we're going to you
know go as hard as we can in that direction and see see how far we get. Um so those are I think the only ones that were really like major disruption or nonm moving and unless you have any thoughts on those that of how you guys could help, you know, I think the storm
water is probably the biggest one. >> And then there's a few comments on some of the items you had. the tree rebate program. I participated in the first uh program which was a little bit different. I filled out an online application, went to work one day, came
back, there's a giant tree in my front yard, uh 16footer, you know, and that was easy. Um this new one, great idea. There's a lot of red tape. I had it on my list of things to do for months and then I go and pull it up and like I had
all the time. And so that, you know, maybe I'm not the only one the only one with that feeling. I could be wrong, but uh that's the the immediate reaction, the real life reaction I got on Remembrance Park. I know that we were focusing well revisiting and focusing on
to Questa Park possibly in the future after owning it makes sense. One recommendation I would have for council, especially in case I'm not here in the future, is if we could connect just those two parks, it doesn't have to be elaborate, uh, the full phase 2, but
connecting those parks for Seabbrook and Riverside and everyone to connect through there, I think would be a huge benefit to the community. And I know it's in our mobility plan, but it seems like a pretty easy fix to connect those two um, and for the kids and the families to go back and forth. uh to
Questa Pine, Riverside in that area. The other question I had on post office status, I it wasn't strategic plan cuz it's a little bit out of our purview, but I feel like it's a black eye. I went there last night to drop off a package
and I was just like, what is what is happening here? And it's better. It's absolutely better, but it's far from, you know, our standard or what we would expect from our businesses or residencies. Uh so if there's anything we can do as a council or I'll not
volunteer everybody volunteer myself I'm happy to do that for the post office because when my kids notice something it's bad >> you know um so and on the quiet zone I feel really bad for
those people that are right next to it and I know we've done what we can and it's extremely expensive but at this point I almost think the uh the timeline line has run out for other options and and you're going towards an application and we'll see what happens. But I I
would suggest there's a plan to start funding the worst case scenario. Uh cuz those neighborhoods just can't be left with that horn on night. That's got to be complete just torture uh for them. I mean, I hear it enough as it is. Uh but it's very faint for me. So, I could not
imagine being right there on that line. I've lived in a condo in West Palm before uh right there next to the convention center before quiet zones and they didn't tell me about that. I was on the 16th floor with the thickest windows you could possibly imagine, right? You
can't hear anything. And when that train would go by, the place would just I mean erupt in sound and noise. So I feel really bad for those those people. And uh that was all I have. So I just a a couple things. You know, I
know our council in the past has said the same thing that you have about the post office and then we got together and we wrote a formal letter on behalf of the council. Send it not much. Um you know, we've reached out and I think they've been very responsive. Brian
Mass's office has really helped us and you know to get it even close to what it is you know and I know the mayor has you know been in contact with Mass's office too and so we've really you know done our best to to try to um compel them to
do it but there's really there's no real mechanism to make them and they're all always their answer is you know that they don't have the staff or at one point they didn't have the equipment was broken broken or you know there just seems like there's always you know some reason and I don't and unless there's an
answer I don't I don't have it and I and I don't know what else to do. I mean I could send you guys a lengthy you know um just chains of emails that we went back and forth and the mayor is going to be in in some of those those chains as
well. And um you know we've offered to to volunteer to go out there and clean it myself. you know, I'll take my kids out there and do it. And they said, "No, you can't do that because it's a union issue. The union employees need to be able to do the work." And so, it's just it seems like it's one thing after
another. And and I don't have an answer, but >> I'm all here. >> Yeah. And I'm not pouring any blame if and that's interesting. And for me, a union should um help a organization be more productive. And so I would ask
please put me in touch with whomever I can find out who is part of that and if that really is an issue um I'd enjoy to have a conversation with them and maybe move things along. Um >> and we have community members like I've had residents reach out to me and
they're like I will go do work. >> So like our own residents are willing to volunteer. >> We have residents that are willing to put money >> which is unfair. >> I know. I'm just saying. >> Yeah. It's And I don't know if you guys been there lately. >> Oh, it's >> Oh, yeah. It's bad. >> Hope Sound's the same way. I mean,
driving by Hope Sound, it's exactly the same. >> They took out They took out the drive-thru lanes and left it. And then everything with the drive-thru lanes, they don't even upkeep. They don't blow it, nothing. So, it just looks, you know, all the leaves and grass is just sitting there. It's the exact same way. They say they don't have the funding to
do it. I mean, that's the number one issue. And then that, you know, that obviously talks about staff and maintenance, but from the federal government isn't funding the maintenance of of those buildings anymore. >> Thank you. >> You said the Jeeper one looks bad, too. I'm from where that one is,
>> but I think I heard someone say that. >> I think it's white or gray, though. It's not >> Jupiter's a mess, too. >> Yeah, it's been a minute since I've been there, but >> I think Jupiter to Questa, that person may be over Hope Sound, too. I'm not sure. I know they're over they're over Jupiter and Toquesta branches. The same
person is >> gardens doesn't look much better. >> I mean maybe we can ping them again. I think it's been a what a couple months since we >> been a couple months their office. I mean like I mean this is going on for years before you were on council. >> That's crazy. >> Yeah. I mean I think Kyle Stone was on
council still when we first like first sent a letter, right? >> Yeah. I'm in the leaders. That's pretty bad. >> That's pretty bad. And I think for the quiet zone, I think, you know, the the path forward is trying to apply for the quiet zone and then at that point, let them give us what needs to be improved
and before we can, you know, or maybe they come back and say, "Hey, you guys are good. Go for it." Um, and then at that point, we can make decision on whether we're going to long-term fund those improvements or not. I think that's the step now. So >> the I mean we approved it what March
2024 proceeding with the quiet zone. >> Mhm. >> So it's been 2 years and I mean talk about government not working for you. >> It's it's absurd. >> Um and I'm I know we've done everything we can and is it worth reaching out to
like Mast and Moody's office to let them know what's going on? Because I do I feel awful for the people that live really close. I mean, in my house, I can hear I can hear not only the horns, but you can hear like the, you know, wheels on the tracks from my
house. Um, and I there's got to be someone else I can talk to to try to push this along cuz it's it's completely absurd. I I sit at the riverside light and they don't have near the requirements that we have been told we have to put in for safety. Like, someone
can easily turn off a A1A and weave through the arms while they're down. So, like it's just it's absurd the hoops that we've had to go through when I see other areas that have quiet zones that weren't nearly put up to the same standards that we were told. And I
understand there's some weird formula if you have multiple crossings, which makes no sense in my head from a safety standpoint, but I don't know. I'd be happy to reach out to Mass Moody's office as well, but I don't know. I think we're at that point cuz it's just been ridiculous what we've had to go
through with that. So, I don't know what you guys think about reaching out. >> I think yeah, we should do anything we can possibly do and I'm happy to help because I have all the correspondents and it kind of es and flows, but that's probably where we get the most and I I
certainly understand their frustration, >> but I I do believe we're doing everything. We have made great efforts to make it happen, but let's let's keep going. >> Yeah, I'm fine with working towards it. I just want to say too, I know we've had
public comment that we are doing this for five people, but it's not five people. You can hear it on the west side. You can hear it at all times of the day. So, I just want to say we are doing it as a whole. Clearly,
some live closer. I can't imagine what that's like cuz I can hear it on the west side. Um, but it's not just five people or a handful or one HOA. It is multiple people in the village that we are looking into this for >> and the businesses too. It's not just residents. There's businesses along
there as well, right? >> Yeah. >> How disruptive is that during the day for you >> and just hearing it all the time. But um I know >> National League of Cities is really involved at a congressional level with rail safety right now. Maybe look into what they're doing. I think they even
had some articles and their um I think their email blast goes out like over the weekend. Um I don't know if there's any kind of avenue there for us to but worth just checking. >> Um and then you touched on the storm water. So we we approved when was the
strategic plan officially approved? Was it May or June? >> March of last year. >> We approved in March or we we workshopped it in March. When was like actually formally approved? >> I think our workshop last year was in February. >> That was earlier. Okay. So technically it's been a year then. >> Yeah.
>> Okay. So for the storm water that was um on one of the questions on the survey where you can do like people could prioritize uh issues or you know items to work on improve storm water management was one
of the top. So like redeveloped park was one of the top improve storm water management and sidewalks those all scored high for priority to be done. Um so I think we should definitely strive continue improving that. Do you think
with what we did with some of that water utility tax, do you think that is going to show like a a visible improvement that the community will be able to see with some of those projects plan with those funds? >> I mean, I think it's a I think it's a
slow process. I think we're probably, you know, two or three years away from really being back to a a good spot with those um with those funds. We've made, you know, as you guys can probably recall, um, you know, we last couple years we
had some emergency repairs we've done. So, we've made a lot of repairs or a lot of work to the storm water. We feel like we're in a better spot with it, but now it's just about trying to build that reserve back up, you know, to where uh we can do some more proactive. We've
been very reactive in the storm water fund. Um, and so I think we're a couple years away before we like really feel comfortable with the same level of funding. I don't think we want to, you know, raise rates or anything like that. So,
you know, more than, you know, our standard 3% or whatever that we do every year. Um, so I think if we can continue down that path with the utility tax, um, and our normal rate structure, I think we'll be all right in a couple years to really feel comfortable again and be
able to do a couple projects a year, have a little bit of maintenance money. Um, but obviously, you know, from a staff standpoint, you know, the quicker we can get to those things, the the better we all feel. But I think, you know, from a just feelgood standpoint, we've still got a couple years of work
to do. >> Okay. I think this is a problem with survey results, right? It's so general improve storm water management like well where right it was ranked so high but is it storm water management because when it rains real bad you know how it floods um near
it's just it's on Questa Drive kind of when you Fiesta and you get close to Cypress like it always floods there. So it's like are people saying it because that floods when it rains real hard or is it someone it's flooding in front of their house? Like it's just hard to gauge from the survey. um exactly what
what's important to people and the issues that they're seeing and locations that they're seeing. >> Yeah. >> Um but yeah, I think that's really important to keep focusing on for next year. >> Okay, that's all I had. Any other discussion? >> No, thank you. >> Nope. Any public comment?
>> Sure. >> Sorry. Mr. French is right about the true thing. It was easy before and it's convoluted now. um on the storm water. You're right. It's now where I am,
there's a real problem on Riverside because the ditch is too low. And so some of your responses might have been that, but that's a county problem. I mean, we know about it and it's terrible, but we can't do anything about it. It's a county problem other than
push them. So, some of that could be just like regional. It always floods here, but they don't really know who has um jurisdiction over Thank you. Thank you. >> All right. With that, can I get a motion to adjourn the meeting?
>> So moved. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I might. >> Do you have artificial turf in your backyard? >> Mhm. >> Cuz I got this problem. So tell me about artificial. I mean,
>> I love you love it because we're >> the plan for that strategic meeting is April 13th. It's at 9:00 a.m. >> I see on my calendar. >> So much more. >> Are we kind of like guaranteed to be out of here by >> two? >> I I was on the >> That's a question for you guys, but
that's what we we shot for two last year. We like by lunch, you know, we