So, welcome to the um July what day is it? 9th. July 9th, 2025 meeting of the um Titusville Environmental Commission. I'm glad everybody's here. Um let's go ahead and have for roll call,
please. Lori, chairman, vice chairman. Vice Chairwoman Thompson here. Member Berdett here. Member Tucker here. Member Walter. Member Delgado here. Member Browning
here. Alternate member Young. Alter Alternate Member Coy here. to the flags nation indivisible justice for all.
All right, let's move on and have approval of the minutes. Um, can I hear a motion for approval of the minutes? I move approval of the minutes. Okay. Is there a second?
Second. All right. So, um, the motion was made by member Tucker and second seconded by member Delgado. Does anybody have anything that needs to be changed or I have added I have something I have I have a
question about. Okay. On um Miss Galgo this question I have is on page the top of the page the second paragraph it starts off with member Browning explained his work. Um,
talking about member Berdett's comments, it says, "Member Browning stated that this is an example of an urban forestry plan." Um, and then it goes on to say, member Browning said the city needs an overall
communitywide tree canopy project. Uh first of all um what I said and I think this just needs a little clarification. um
member Berdett's comments uh on his research that there were four or five different major areas and um what I stated was that those looked like typical areas of work in an urban forest
management plan. and um that I put those that research in the context of a sample urban forest plan. Okay? Which is a big
difference from stating that those comments are an example of an urban forest plan. You see my my question about the difference there. the comments of that research was not an urban forest plan. I was saying that it
would be easier to understand where those might fit in if we fit those in um an urban forest management plan. So what I did was collect an a sample
um out of the municipal specialist ISA municipal specialist handbook and using that sample I plugged in member Berdett's comments to sort of give the commission an idea about where those
things I thought might fit in. Okay. So it's it's not this it's it's that those comments fit within the context of that urban forest plan. Then I I canopy plan but a project suggest a project one
project not a not a communitywide plan and I would like the if the verbiage could be amended very simply to say plan then I I'd be okay with that. Thank you.
And and so then would you be okay with changing the word example to the word sample? A sample? Yes. Okay. Those two easy fixes. Anything else? Anybody else? All right. Um all those in favor of um
the minutes, please say I. I. I. I. Any opposed? All right. So, the minutes are done. Um now in the minutes you'll see that um there was a request to add the open space ordinance discussion to in talking
with um Brad and Lily. Um they suggested that it would be better to move open space ordinance discussion to the August meeting because last night at the council meeting staff was going to give some direction to the planning staff on
what they wanted to see in the open space ordinance and so they um it was it'll be better if we have those in place before we look at it and make our comments. So that is why it's not
appearing on the agenda for this week. Um and then second, um so that Kim doesn't have to sit through all of the rest of our um um conversation with your guys permission, would it be
okay if we move um agenda item 8 A to follow petitions and requests? So it would go in front of seven old business and I'll need a motion for that if somebody can if you
so moved. All right. Second. Second. All right. Motion was made by member Browning and seconded by member Tucker to move agenda item 8A um to follow petitions and requests from
the public which we are now going into. Is there anybody from the public that would like to speak? I would. Yes. Hi, Stan. My name is Stan Johnson, and you've heard this uh too many times, but I'm
just going to mention just two items, just two. The first item is something we haven't talked about, but I've sent you information on is that's Mockingbird Lane. So, Mockingbird Lane has got a concrete apron 20 ft wide to a a a dirt
access where my wife and I used to own this property and we gave we gave and and the path that goes to two houses that have no other access to um anywhere else. That's the only that's driven access where they used to have uh mailboxes and they have a mailbox at uh
right at the beginning now. So, uh, the city did something strange. They said that the people have no access regardless that it's on the city road maps and regardless of what I say that that uh they've been allowed. went ahead
and converted it from a two-way access to a one-way access only 10 ft wide which is in violation of fire city fire code that a minimum is is 20 ft wide and it serves six slots
and now the last house has absolutely no access. The um stabilized access ends before it reaches the last house. So as if the last house doesn't have any access and I I'm just saying to you this is unacceptable.
Now, this second item going to say, and I sent you an email on this, and the second item is something that you don't like to hear again, and that is I'm when I'm talking about, and I didn't bring a sign this time that says
spraying people with u sewage is not appropriate. And I would like to talk to you as adults. They everybody says that we shouldn't spray people with sewage. I had a conversation recently with with
Tom Abati and uh I said, "Well, what do you think? Do you think we should we should spray people with sewage?" And he he hesitated and uh I said, "You
know, do you think we should spray people with sewage?" And he said, I'll have to check with and I said it again. He said he will have to check with Kevin Cook. So I'm asking Mr. Abati
which I believe is is an adult and he says he has to check with Kev Kevin Cook. I talked to Kevin Cook and he said Tom hasn't talked to him about it
and as a professional engineer he and I are both professional engineers, civil engineering and um we used to work together and I left in 2008 from the city. So Kevin
has to say to me that it's not the right thing to do. But he will not say it in public and he and I have discussed it repeatedly. Why won't he say it in public? because he knows as a professional engineer if he says it in
public I have told him engineers and he will be disciplined for that I hope you understand that so that is why one of the reasons why it continues today before the election we had five council members
who said it's it's okay to leave the fountains turned on the TEC approached council to turn it off. They didn't do it. I've approached him many times. Laura Lee talked even to city. None of these
so-called adults would do it. Now we have four out of five council members say it's okay to do it. The first time I I uh we had a response from council members was about six months or eight months after the sewage
was flowing in in December of 2020. So, what I'm saying is that is that uh someone emailed Julian Nelson as she was running for office. Why did why did uh you not turn off the
fountains? And she gave an answer. So, I'm going to stop right there and see if you have any questions of me because this is what I call something very unacceptable. Any questions? Please ask questions.
I'm asking for help. Uh, Miss Galo, um, correct me if I'm wrong. I believe I had heard something about fountains last night in Fountain left that they're looking into uh,
putting an air raator in. senior pond I think is the last cityowned fountain that they're trying to put the airators in for the purpose of circulating the water. Okay. Is a better means than the fountain. That's the only one left.
Yes. Of the city owned ones. Okay. There are many many more not city owned ones. Okay. That was all. And that was what I was going to say, Stan. They they approved the cost share um grants from the Save Our Indian River
Lagoon Fund um for a bubbler um at the senior center pond. So that's the last one that has a fountain. Mhm. And understand is that is that is that they will not say that it's the wrong thing
to do or it's even the right thing to do because anything they say will admit that what they did for many many months was wrong. In other words, it would it'd be admission of guilt that
the right thing to do is to turn the fountains off. I hope you guys understand that. In other words, they're not acting as adults. They're un acting acting as unreasonable children. And notice I didn't use the
word shy or anything like that today. All right. Please think about it. Thank you. It's a bad pro. It's a bad situation. Anybody else? Yes. Um, okay. St. Anland Avenue. Uh, last night, council approved the
proposal of Eocene Environmental Group for an urban forest management plan. Eioine is a national company with 600 employees, 200 certified arborists working in 28 states. Excellent proposal to council. It was in their agenda
packet. I don't know how many of you have had the chance to study it, but uh it's it's a good read. Yeah. And I'm eager to see and participate in this urban forest management plan for our community. So, I'm going to go over a
few things that are in the proposal per EC's proposal. This urban forest management plan will use recent data from aerial images identifying key changes to canopy coverage since the
2021 assessment data to help establish quantifiable goals for the city's urban canopy expansion. As we all know, a lot of development has occurred since 2021. We've lost a lot of canopy and now it
should be measured. We like to measure things, don't we? So now we should receive recognition of what percentage has been lost since then. The plan is to identify areas of interest or priority for
strategic planting. Provide timelines, strategies, budget, and specify responsible parties for achieving each goal. Performance indicators will measure progress, including the recommendation of an urban tree canopy
assessment every two years. Residents will have plenty of opportunity to in for input to the vision of the plan. Canopy percentage goals and priorities for plantings. The role of TEC as a tree board should
be established in this urban forest management plan. We will need to make sure that happens. Oyola County's urban forest management plan, which is excellent. You can look that up online, establishes an urban
forest advisory board. Well, we have one. We have you are our tree board. We already have one, but what will be your role in this plan? We need to make sure that that's determined.
The proposal mentions the possibility of incorporating the 33300 rule in the plan's vision statement and utilizing tree equity scores from American Forest that we've talked about a great length to set canopy goals.
Staffing to direct the management will be necessary. Typically, from what I've read on the internet, such an urban forest program has an urban forest forester an urban forester or an
arborist to s supervise a crew needed for management and expansion of the urban forest. I stumbled on that. I'm going to read it again. Typically such an urban forest program has an urban forester or arborist to supervise a crew
needed for management and expansion of the urban forest. Somebody has to be responsible for this plan for the implementation of this plan. Partnerships with community groups. Perhaps the garden club tree farm could serve as a staging area for the tree
giveaway program. There's just lots of possibilities if we get engaged and and and have input which we will have the opportunity for. The completed urban forest management plan will be presented to TEC for the recom for their
recommendations to city council sometime according to the schedule on the proposal around December or January. That's not too far from now. The plan's budget may include funds from the current landscape trust fund, which is
the mitigation fund for when they remove trees that the fund the mitigation goes into the landscape trust fund. According to Lily, as of April this year, the landscape trust fund had about $28,000 in it, and it continually grows and
fluctuates. Um the resolution for the use of those funds indicates that they this is to be used for uh beautifification through landscaping. The management plan budget could also
draw upon the Tree City USA requirement that the city document at least $2 per capita annually towards the planting, care, and removal of city trees. Funds from the general budget can be utilized and grants for tree planting are available. I have a couple more
paragraphs. Do you mind? Are we good? Okay. Let's get behind the urban forest management plan and at every opportunity engage in the process to ensure the plan enhances and expands the urban for tree canopy, including a
proactive street tree planting program and an ongoing tree giveaway program. Let's consider a vision and goals for the urban forestry program. A good example of the urban forest management plan is Acyola County. Take a look at that. Also, for some of you that are new
on the board, you might look at American Forest Tree Equity Map. You can look that up online uh which shows canopy percentages in each of Titusville's neighborhoods so that we can ask the uh consultant to look at that. they're willing to. Thank you for all of those
who participated in the Isaac Campbell Community Center Park tree planting event. This event was quite a success due to the enthusiasm of the children and the volunteers. The tree team is now organizing another tree planting event.
We're going to squeeze another one in for this summer. We can only really plant trees in the summer when it's raining a lot. So, we're planning for it for August 2nd at 9:00. as a Saturday at the Blue Hole Park on Cheney. Uh we have
approval to plant 40 cypress trees and about 20 live oaks. I hope some of you will be able to participate in this event and I will be sending you emails about it. But um mark your count calendars. August 2nd 9:00. The mayor
and the city managers approved it last night. They told me it really isn't a city park. It's a county park. I've already met with the county at the park and t talked about the plan. So it looks like and 98% is to go forward. So August 2nd at 9:00 at at Blue Hole is just a
halfacre park. Uh and part of it has a lot of trees, but it needs a lot more on the other side. So thank you very much. Anybody else want to speak? Anybody else want to speak for petitions and requests?
No. Okay. Well, Miss Gibbs, you are up and I'm really looking forward to seeing your presentation. Thank you so much for putting it together for us and for all you out there in TV land and it'll be on tape so people can go
back and look at it. Is that right? Are our televised meetings on tape or super? Huh? They are. Cool. Okay. All right. Well, thank you. Good evening, Chairman Thompson, and members of the board. I am
so happy to be here. Um, I'm Kim Gibbs. I live in Bvard County. I live on Merit Island. Um, and I, um, I created this pres. And Michael uh, came to see it when I presented at
the Native Plant Society meeting. And so that's why he was familiar with it. And then at the last meeting he asked if I would um present it here for you. Um the agenda says uh on trees that survive the
hurricane. That is mostly partly true. Um the title of this presentation is stormcaping in central Florida with is focused on trees. Um but there's a a big se section where I I'm highlighting some of my favorite shrubs as well. Um, if
the presentation goes a bit long or you need to cut it off, just, you know, just give me the sign and I'll I'll wrap it up. Um, okay. So, just a little bit of background. Um, my contact information is on this slide. This presentation is available for anyone who would like uh
like to have a copy of it. There are a few slides that are ref reference mater enclosure that just happens to be in my parents home over in Dade City and Pasco County. And so the reason I um the focus
of this presentation is really on central Florida, how uh um from Brevard County over to Pasco County weathered the storm in terms of the plants because I happen to spend a lot of time over in Pasco County, 90 miles due west of here.
And so that was my view of the world following Hurricane Milton. Okay. uh unfortunately a lot of the plants the trees especially are common so we have common plant communities between here and there. Okay. So thinking back to uh last year
uh remember hurricane Helen came through central Florida uh through the Gulf Coast area on about uh September 26 27th really heavily impacted the Big Bend area. um it was less forceful here. Less
than two weeks later, Hurricane Milton came through on about October 9th and uh was really an unprecedented storm over in Pasco County, even far inland where Dade City is about 50 miles inland. And
so I happened to be there at that time. It gave me a very good view of um how the trees especially performed under really intense um storm conditions. Path of Hurricane
Milton, a lot of lot of wind um in Dade City. We had sustained winds of about 100 miles an hour, very high winds and also an enormous amount of water of rain. And in fact, Pasco County endured
flooding for many many months after the storm. And those those two things in and significant damage in that region. So this led me to ask how can we protect our homes and properties from extreme
weather events? And I highlight five principles here. Um, we're going when in our home landscapes, we're going to choose those windresistant trees and shrubs for loca for areas located near structures. Put
that right plant in the right place. Um, plant trees in groupings. It makes them stronger. Their roots lock together. Um, create layers and groups of plantings. They were they are stronger than specimen plantings. And then we're going to take proper care especially of those
big trees such as our live oaks. So, uh first of all, choosing our uh native uh windresistant trees. Um what's a native plant? Just a quick reminder that our native plants are those plants
that were here prior to um the Europeans coming over and prior to um uh that did not evolve here. Uh just a note that our authentic Florida landscapes are environmentally friendly and they support our native
wildlife unlike the non-native introduced plants. So this is a reference slide and it just highlights um uh some of my favorite trees that are common here in this area. And
I'm going to go through a few of them in alphabetical order based on their the llmen here in Bvard County and throughout the state. Um we have many of these on on our property. Um turned out to be not particularly windresistant,
especially when planted as a specimen. So for our red maples that are so well suited for the wet moist areas, um they will fare much better if they're planted in groupings. um very high uh value to wildlife and to
our ecosystems. I love watching the squirrels in the springtime just just rake off branches or the the leaves, the new growth and eat them. And of course, they make their nests there. Um I just find it very entertaining.
The gumbo limbo. Um such a beautiful tree here in Bvard County. Extremely windresistant. also very architectural. Um there's some good specimens on uh in our coastal hammocks. Um this I'm sorry,
this one is taken at the Field Manor House on Merit Island and there are good specimens over at the Maritime Hammock in Cocoa Beach. one of my favorite trees because it is such a dense tree. Um
where that I looked as I was out walking through the neighborhoods and surveying the damage. The southern magnolia stood out as the tree that um survived with minimal damage. You can see here on the left, there's a
magnolia that's part of the existing forest canopy and on the right um a magnolia that received no damage even though the pool enclosure right behind it was completely demolished. And that's the same pool enclosure that we saw on
the first slide. Here's another example walking through Dade City. Two specimen southern magnolia planted in the front yard. Uh, and even though they're specimens, they were not damaged at all. Notice these are limbmed up. An
alternative way of planting is to allow the branches all the way down to the bottom and to plant around the apron with our uh, wonderful selmet. Slash pines are very common here in our pine flatwoods. oftentimes an associate
notice kind of a mixed uh mixed results in this neighborhood which is all slash pine and you notice it's not a forest um many of the other oaks and things have been removed they still performed very very well um but I did see some damage
in other locations the sand live oak um this is an excellent tree for windy um dry sandy soils Um, and it's smaller than the the regular live oak. So, this is a very
good choice for for home landscaping. Okay. Our big live oak is um uh major supporter of many different kinds of wildlife. Um, I did not see very informal shrub uh that the birds
will be flitting about in all winter long. deserves more um ex planting in our landscapes. Very damaged in the storms, but you just cut off the branches and they're fine. The American beauty bear point out that
when you see this plant out in nature, it's spindly. It's uh untidy and you would think, I don't I don't think I want that in my yard. But in reality, um, when you bring this into your yard and give it a little care, they're very nice and tidy shrubs that, uh, will
bring birds into your yard. The fiddlewood with the Itala butterfly there. This picture was taken over at Maritime Hammock. And the fire bush, which is a a wonderful shrub to have here. Um it's a
good nectar uh shrub for the zebra long wings and the gulf fridillary butterflies. Last year we um we finally saw a lot of those butterflies in our own property and uh this year there's
twice as many. So they really enjoy the fire bush and they if you plant them you will they will just be whole flocks of these butterflies. the wax myrtle. Probably one of my and um the painted buntings really enjoy uh
hanging out in the wax myrtles. It took a few years for us to entice the painted buntings into our yard, but now they're they are many there in the wintertime. Yeah. So, it's a highly regenerative
shrub. Um and they're surviving well after the storm. mercine. Great for narrow uh lateral constricted areas. And this is just a tall a tall narrow shrub. Our shiny leaf wild coffee.
Everyone needs shiny wild coffee to go with the beauty berry. And uh even after the storm, it didn't uh it wasn't affected at all. And here's our velvet leaf coffee. Uh this is a composition of the stall palmetto with the fire bush. And this is
from the maritime hammock over in Cocoa Beach. Saw pomemetto the day after Hurricane Milton uh unfazed shrubs and uh trees don't require any supplemental irrigation. Oh, that's the filerend demolished.
Okay, so that's the end of the shrubs and I have uh maybe just a few slides left to kind of focus on a emphasize a couple of key points. Um it's essential to put the right plant in
the right place. This uh this photo shows the house on the left, the live oak which has been pruned quite a bit but is planted maybe thick. So, it's not the ideal location. Especially when planting trees, we want to emphasize the
importance of planting the trees in the right place for their mature size. Strive for five. We want want to plant our trees in groups. Striving for five in a group. Um the trees will be
stronger and um and kind their roots will knit together and create just a stronger um group than than a specimen planting. Creating layers and groups of trees and shrubs around the property um including
the perimeter and around the foundation. proper pruning and care, especially of our um live oaks and specimen oak trees. Um having them pruned by a qualified arborist is really important. This tree
has been lion tailed and been badly pruned. Healthy cabbage palm with a full crown. Oh, this is the way they should be. Um the palm tree should not be hurricane pruned. This is very harmful to the tree
and uh more education is needed in this area. Yeah, we don't want to plant our trees under the power lines. This ends up happening where the utility company comes through and just um kind of wax everything down.
Okay. Oh, and that's it. That was our little tour through stormcaping and hurricane resistant trees and uh some of my favorite shrubs. So, thank you all for uh listening and um I'm available if you have any
questions. Thank you. We appreciate that really beautiful presentation, Kim, and we appreciate all the trips that you have made to come up here and help us with our native plant lists. And I know that you
we can depend on you and we really really appreciate you. We really do. Thank you so much. I appreciate you all as well. Thank you, Miss Gibbs. Old business. Old business. the native municipal tree
canopy and landscape management trust fund. We can have some discussion if y'all want to chairman. I'll I'll start off if if I may. Okay. Um,
first of all, um, th this may be going a little slower than you all anticipated. I'm not sure. Um, when when we left the last meeting, um, Chairman Mjack had suggested that
maybe we ought to break this up into chunks and eat the elephant one chunk at a time. I'm those are my words, but um I think what his words were to let's let's break this up into pieces and try to
maybe divide it up into um pieces so that different, you know, members could tackle it, which I thought was a good idea. Um I I think we're we're yet to sort of figure out what those pieces are
exactly. I I know one of the things I've been focused on is of the pieces um being and the major pieces being large canopy trees that that they're most important. um Miss Tucker's notes and um
I I kind of got the impression that maybe what I'd been writing about initially was um too much of a focus on large canopy trees. I didn't mean to suggest or insinuate that we didn't need to do
native shrubs or native ground covers with native trees, but in terms of what we spend our money on, I think I made the comment that um um you know, if if we have money and we
have an urban forest program in place, it makes sense um to me to spend money on the most important workh horses of the of the um you know the the native plants and that's the large canopy
trees. That's not to say that work with other native plants isn't being done. Um it's just that um it it's hard to mitigate heat islands with shrubs. you might get some, but um if you recognize
that um a lot of the work uh that Canopy Shade Trees does is um minimizing energy consumption in buildings, which is a huge um energy suck, if you will. And trees can
um throughout the year can, you know, knock down energy uh consumption by 30% or more. just depends on on where those trees are located. So, um I I need some since the last meeting and
and um being proactive in breaking this down, but um Michael Mack sort of started off talking about, you know, breaking it down into um he broke it down into as far as, you know, large
trees to mcelium and talking about the you know, the organic properties of soils and Um there's there's different ways, you know, the plant hierarchy and you can go large, medium, and small, that kind of
thing. But also, um you know, perhaps we ought to be uh one piece of this, if you're breaking it into pieces, might uh need to be soils. Um are soils important? Um for sure. Um,
one example of of importance of soils is that a tree, a canopy shade tree's roots are mostly on top of the ground. And one of the well, the most um uh critical and uh common source of a
treere's death on construction sites is allowing um you know, heavy equipment into a tree protection zone. and they crush roots and that kills trees. If if the roots are not connected to the
transport if the feeder roots are not connected to the transport roots that are connected to the structural roots, then the trees are not going to be able to take up water and survive for very long. So, um you don't fill over those
roots because th those roots need the oxygen that they've been living and growing on for decades. and uh you take a large tree and you put 6 in of soil over the roots or cut away 6 in of soil, you're either starving the the roots of
oxygen or you're removing the roots. So either way, we need to um leave those soils alone. Um do they need to be enhanced? Probably not. I think the best thing you can do almost I had a landscape architect boss one time that
told me um if you don't have a big budget the best thing you can do is put the right tree in the right place and just vegetate the ground plane. Right tree right place and you know if it's not
grass it's native grasses or whatever you have that's native that that you want to fill in the ground plane with. And you do need to vegetate the ground plane um to deal with erosion of sandy soils. Right. Um since the last meeting has been to sort of flush out the basis
for this urban um this landscape management plan being focused on large trees. Um I'd like to ask a question of the commission. Are are so far do we seem to be heading in the right direction?
Can I get some feedback on that? Um, I I I tend to talk a lot about trees sometimes because I was a certified arborist and um I like trees and I understand how
they work in the environment typically, but um they're not everything and there may be some members that feel like they would like to, you know, there's a piece of um this landscape management plan
um or trust fund that um they would like to f focus on 6:21 p.m. By focusing on I mean establishing a basis for why we need to say uh devote funds to
uh let's say um we were to uh preserve or devote um 20% of the funds to a certain um portion of the landscape shrubs and ground covers.
I'm not in favor of taking down trees and getting recompense for that. Um, and then buying a lot of flowers and doing a lot of flower beds at the entrance to the city. Even though I think that's important, I I don't think it's a good trade-off for the city to be uh taking
the money from developers who cut down trees and to take it and devote it to flowers. So, u maybe a certain portion of the trust fund could be devoted to gateway enhancement.
um flowers need unless you're doing all perennials there, from what I've seen so far, there's a certain amount of flowers that are being planted that are not perennials and maybe they need to be regenerated next year and so a certain portion of your landscape trust fund
would go to beautifification at the city's entrances. Um any thoughts on um from anybody else about breaking this up so that you know each member could
focus on one piece of it. I'm I'm not sure what Michael was thinking when he said break it up, but I would have preferred that um if we could have sort of taken a section last meeting and and um broken it up then and on all of us to
come back today and sort of uh contribute some notes to it. I appreciate Bethanne her notes um on this and um LI maybe um you know some of the funds that we get from developers need to be
aortioned um to um the city's contribution towards LIID work. It could be a model LIID project in a city park. Um something like that and that ends up
being a partnership with a developer on a model project. I I don't know. But um I'll stop there and sort of open the floor hopefully and there'd be some other comments about how we eat the
elephant one chunk at a time. But I let me say this. Um I I think at some point and when is that point we uh we need to wrap this up and give a recommendation to city council
and um at that time what is it we're going to feel comfortable with? Um what what do we want the landscape trust fund right now from since 2001? It's it's been uh basically devoted to planting public spaces. Beautification
is what the 2001 ordinance talked about. Um it actually used the word beautifification. So you can inter that's pretty broad term. You could you could say flowers or you could say well it's a beautiful uh live oak. All of
that's beautifification. So, it's pretty broad. Um, your thoughts? I' I'd appreciate hearing anything you have to say about um breaking this this trust fund thing up because at some
point we we've got to recommend recommend to council um more specifically I think uh taking it from just beautifification and really how much of that money needs to be devoted to the urban forest plan
or gateway landscaping or What else do we think it should be devoted to which um hopefully does more environmental work rather than less? Thank you, Mr. Browning. Uh does anybody
have any comments before I start? I don't see any lights. Okay. I I have struggled with this ever since it's been proposed. Um because I feel like, you know, I'm an old boat captain and I feel like I'm in a rudderless ship
that's just yawing around while the clock ticks and trees get bulldozed in town and we're losing trees. And I just don't see any direction on this and I I really don't see a need for it. in in
the beginning and I'm frustrated because we have spent a lot of time talking about it while we're fiddling while Rome is burning I feel like and and you know we can always come back to this but um
you know we've got beautiful copies now of the sustainability action plan and the natural resources plan. So we've we worked on those and they're done. And so we've got we have a a a plan. I I think
we should be trying to work on our you use our natural resources plan that the council approved and and try to um you know there was some things that were pointed out in in the natural resources plan
like that are desperately needed like a penalty for a homeowner that cuts down a big huge oak tree, you know, without without a permit or um you know, we need a legitimate way to to chastise, you
know, people that are just cutting down trees. We we need a a registry for arborists in the area so that if a developer does need an arborist, they they can go to our register and and pick
a arborist. Um, but I I just I I feel like, you know, we're talking about this. We don't have any direction on where we're going with it. We need we need, you know, we need we should be instead of talking about this, we should be
talking about um the h how to how to save our tree canopy in town. And I don't think that there this does this save trees. We should be working on ordinances and methods to to save trees. And like you you can see what happened
in New Mexico where they had a flood, you know, like the the flood in Texas, it took out a lot of trees. It just flat out did. But the one in New Mexico, the reason that so much damage occurred there is because they had wildfires that
have burned up all their trees. And so the trees weren't there to soak up the rainwater, you know, and function like trees do. Therefore, they had massive flooding. Those are the kind on um
that's just my opinion. I I I I think that we can we can work on this thing, but I I don't think we should spend a lot of time on it because we have a lot of other important things that we should be focusing on right now.
um that would be better for the trees in town. I I mean I I have this we have a very developer friendly council and they're going to be reluctant to put any
additional burdens on the developers and and I still haven't figured out whether whether this is going to replace the existing um tree funding mechanism that we have now or is it going to be an
addition to it? I I I don't I still don't have a vision for what this is supposed to do and that that okay so I'm not the tree guy so but I don't think we have a goal period
and a sentence whether it be short trees little trees little bit big bush little bush doesn't matter we don't have a goal we have ideas but we don't have a goal. We don't know what to do with this money. We want to
do a lot of things. We want to talk a lot. We have talked a lot about it but we don't have a goal and and and the goal is not a one word thing. Okay. Uh it's it's got to be very broad.
And the one thing that I would hesitate to include is the word beautifification. Okay, this is not about beautifification. This is about vegetation. And this is where I think we should
with all the realms that Lauri just presented because there is a thing about how do we control it administratively? How do we control it budgetary? How do we control it in in terms of
people's rights to do what they want to do in their land and so we got to take all those but we have to go up with a goal and increase by 10% 20% I don't pick a number
and then let everything come in. How do you what do you need to do that? Because right now we're we're going to have a contractor come in. But if they don't know that we approve 4,000 units
south of the city, not south of the city, but within the city limits, but on the south side, that canopy is going to come and they're going to give you a big beautiful picture of uh of Titus. But there's no
connection, no integration between what we say here and what zoning is approving and what council is approving. There is no connection whatsoever. And so we can come up with the big tree
program, okay? Or native plants program, but there those are standalones and we need to come to a comprehensive for Titusville. What is the goal that we're trying to do here? Because we got
realities to deal with. Those 4,000 units are going to be built and you know what? A lot of trees are going to are going to be gone. no matter what we do. And so, so therefore, now now we're going to
hire a contractor to give us a great aerial picture with a bunch of drones of trees that are not going to be there. So again, my point my point is where and Mike and I have talked about this. Uh
it's all about what is the goal and this is why we're meandering from the different things like Laura Charie was saying so to me what I propose is that we spend some time on what is the goal
that we're trying to do. Don't you think there's more than there's numerous goals? Numerous goals. The urban forest management plan is going to hopefully define a list of goals that are underneath the grand
vision. So So we're going to let a contractor define what those goals are. Right. I think we need to support the ordinance and staff. When I say we, I'm talking about environmental commission, but staff and the community large team.
Everybody needs to support the ordinance that we have and keep working to make it better. And that's fine. It you know, so the trust fund maybe what we need to do is is take a couple of step backs back and
um just keep it a very simple one or twopage document and say to council this is what we think the trust fund uh money needs to be mostly devoted to.
Um that's one idea. Yes. And and that's it. And and that could be three or four areas and then we're done. And and within that area we stuff whatever we need to stuff for those areas. But if we don't do that, we're going to
be given goals from a contractor who doesn't live here. Well, we're on the trust fund right now. We're talking about I know, but but all those things are playing. These are rotating circles that are that are all moving around. Okay.
And so my point is that we should come up with the goal and and if we can for the trust fund for the trust fund, right? What is the trust fund going to pay? What is the trust fund going to do? What
what are you going to get? What are you council? This is what you get for your money in in very plain English. Council, this is what you get for your money. city. This is what you get for the money that has been paid into that fund.
It's going to have the most value for the dollars that we have. Exactly. Okay. And and what do we need help in? What areas do we need help? Do we need help in integrating uh zoning? Do we need help in uh code
management? you know, who do we need to bring in to make, you know, we can say, "Hey, we're going to plant 100 trees all big, uh, you know, in the city and use the money for that." Okay.
I'm not so sure that's what we're looking for because we need to provide a system. Hey, I I'm a plan to work, work the plan kind of guy. Okay. And I think the plan that's coming down the pike is the urban forest
management plan and the grand vision, all the goals that come under that and that's going to lead hopefully to council deciding where's the best place to put the money. Um, but right now getting this landscape
trust fund business out of our hands and getting it to council. I'd like to do that in the next couple of meetings if possible. Um, and the only way I see to do that is to simplify this all this stuff we've been writing about
and condense it down into a one or two page document and not worry about all the mycelium and everything else um at the moment. Not that we're not concerned about that. Um but um we need to move on to other things
and give the broad recommendation to council and let the staff that we have run with it to the council that we have and let them run with it and us help reinforce team team treat team
Titusville in trying to get the ordinance where it needs to be because it's still not there. It's a work in progress as most ordinance. This is the case of tree ordinances all over the country. They get they get they evolve over time and hopefully you know they it
was a way when I worked for the city of Atlanta planning department. Um that was the way it was there. It it evolved over time. Um it's not a it's a work in progress and it it's not a snapshot. It takes a lot of work to develop the tree
ordinance initially and of the best things we could do is support what we have and keep trying to make that better. So, so going on your thought if we could come up with some areas uh to concentrate
the focus of the future developments, the future trees, the future uh studies uh and go to council and said this is those are the areas that we should look at in including obviously uh regulations
and and all of that that goes with it because we do have ordinance that we have to deal with and that's part of it. We have zoning that we have to deal with. Sure. If you don't if we don't integrate all those things and maybe five or six
areas that that we can bounce around and say this is the areas that we want to concentrate and go and go and go to council and say this is what we need to do and and again I'm all for leaving the word be
beautifification out of it because they approved the the entrance year years ago No, 04. Yeah, 07 in that neighborhood. It was it was a long time ago. Let's let's let me remember Berdette
talk. He's had his light on for a long time. So anyway, I So my my thought was just um um as far as goals,
um I'd say one of the most important things that we could definitely do is is have the um full-time urban forester really because, you know, we can come up with plenty of goals ourselves, but
they're really going to be one of the people who implements a lot of things and possibly things that we haven't even thought of. Uh they're going to know hopefully right tree, right place and a lot of these things um that we can
write about but we might not be able to go out and actually do ourselves. Uh so I think the urban forester is is probably one of the first pieces of the puzzle. Thank you, member Tucker.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't this all started because we were asked to give input on an urban forestry program. Is that right or wrong? Is that what started all this discussion? Do you mean the the native municipal
tree canopy like line item input on an urban for establishing an urban force program for this city? It is in your includes the landscape trust fund. Yes, it's in your plan in your in the okay natural resources. So that explains why we're talking about
it. But I agree it we can get bogged down in the minutia. So, I'm just saying we're doing what we were asked to do, but let's keep it uh simple, I guess, and
give them what they want. Well, I don't even remember being asked for input because it it all Well, we were That's right. We were asked for input on an urban forestry P plan and Miss St. an came up with a really good plan that we all approved but and it
would have been free but then when the city council talked about it they said no we we want to pay a consultant so they wouldn't even they wouldn't even look at Kay's plan and um they said no we we were going to hire a consultant so
then um the lady that was here before you went out and got a was she was the one that got the grant Right. Um and um so she got the urban forestry grant. So we got the money to hire a consultant,
but in the meantime, this was just like thrown at us by member my jack. And we didn't ask for it. And so, you know, I'm we we have spent a lot of time talking
about it. In in my opinion, the remnants and all the history of the money collecting entity that we have in place right now and work on that. I think we should take what what we have and we've
got some there's a lot of good stuff that's happening. Um, you know, but member Berdett is right. We we need an urban forester. We have two people that have certifications that are on the planning staff that are buried with all of their
own work work with the with the consultant. But I I just um I just feel like we have spent a lot of time talking about this, but we should be we should we should be
taking a look at the thing that's there now. and and if if if staff can find all the documentation of all of the um by by the the city council, I think we'd be better off to
come up with a strong reasons for why the money that is being paid by developers for cutting trees down should not be spent on planting flowers out by
I95. Five. I I agree with you um that it should focus on a large canopy trees and it should be used it it's a tree it's money that's being paid for cutting trees down and it should be used for
planting trees. And that's that's what I think we should do is attack the existing mechanism that is in place now and fine-tune that and you know do what we can do with that rather than trying to create a whole new thing that it has
grown and blossomed and and you know I appreciate all the work that everybody has put into it. I really do. But I don't we're not going anywhere. that that's what that's what I think we should do
question. So we have um the comp plan that mentions trees and certain more than one section of the comp plan it talks about trees. We have a
uh sustainability action plan. We have a natural resources act action plan if you will. What else do we have Lily that talks about trees? You well we have tree ordinance of course
the land development regulations and things like that. Yeah. So I have a question. This is the question I have. if it would if it was possible to reference or or site, you know, this section or that section in the comp plan
and the natural resources and the sustainability action plan where in those documents it references the importances in a one-page document. one page, maybe two, but no more than, you know,
some people don't like to read a lot of stuff. We got a lot of things going on these days, but um this this is this is good work. This is a lot of work. And it already talks about uh how important large trees
are. So, um why can't I what's already been done and make a concise recommendation to um council uh to use the trust fund for this
for what we see are the workh horses of the natural environment. And that doesn't mean that the urban forester won't decide to use native shrubs and ground covers in certain areas where landscaping is being done with um whether it's connected to an LI
project or not. Uh it could just be you know native u trees being planted along a roadway um that need some native vegetation below to control erosion. But um
I could craft a one-page document that focuses on the trust fund and what the TEC would like to have it focused on. Um is it allowable for me to take that draft of a document, a one-page
recommendation to council that could could I share it with the other members of the uh TEC? before next meeting and have them or or how would that process best work, Lily? Well, I don't know. I don't I was going
to mention this under reports, but at the last city council meeting, it was asked that someone does does come up and speak um or we sorry, let me find my notes that um I asked TEC to recommend a speaker to follow the presentation um on
trees on the July 22nd meeting that Brad's going to give. Is that what you're talking about? You want to talk to them then to have a conversation talking about trying to get it on that agenda? That's the next council meeting. So July 22nd.
Yeah. Oh, you just want to bring it up in general? I mean, I could try and put it on I'm not concerned about timing of submitting it as much as I am getting it done and off our plate. So, Lily, would it be
I hate to ask there, would would would staff be able to find the existing language of the I don't even know what it's called anymore. Um, the the
resolution. Thank you. Resolution 30-201. Yeah, I sent um I can send it to you now. That one. Okay. Well, I don't think we want to see it right now because we have a lot of other stuff to talk about tonight. But if it could be sent out to us, if you
can email it out to us, then we can look at it and then bring it our ideas to the next meeting. I've looked at it multiple times over the last week and I can tell you it's but all it does basically is authorize
the city to spend that money on beautifification of public lands. That's that's pretty much it. And then recently uh this year um solution
um talked about well we're going to take 50,000 out of what's left which was 65 grand or something out of that original uh landscape fund and put that towards the urban forest grant. And then the 15
that was left over a after that would go in into the larger uh landscape management trust fund is that so what Kate Yeah. explain the 65,000 that was remaining in the fund from
2001. Okay. You've got it a little confused. Uh it was a different fund. There was a program I believe it was called the landscape enhancement program. It has nothing to do with this landscape trust fund. Okay. And it was suns setting.
This program was over and done with. It had its time frame. Met its time frame. And there was money left in this fund from this landscape enhancement fund. It was an old thing. And there was like $65,000 in this. and the city decided to
use 50,000 of that to match the grant for an urban forestry program. And there was 15,000 left over that they generous generously gave to the landscape trust fund to augment the mitigation funds for
resolution 30-201 which indicates and I paraphrase the city desires to beautify public properties by landscaping and these funds received as a result of tree mitigation are be to be used to beautify
publiclyowned or maintain properties. That's what the landscape trust fund that we currently have, the mitigation fund, the resolution basically, that's what it says. But it it was 65,000 from a landscape enhancement program. I don't
know the details of that program because it was old and it sunset, you know, I don't know how to find it. Maybe Lily knows more about it, but um then 15,000 went into this landscape trust fund that now has 28,000 or something like that or in April
continues to grow because the trees keep getting cut down. As Hector said, you're having a very dis interesting discussion and I do have a put in a card and I'd like to add to the discussion if possible, but I'm just answering your question right now. That sounds good. I was going to ask
Lori if anybody had filled out a card on this. Now, we're This is 7A. This is 7A. This is not the multifamily. This is This is the native municipal tree farm. All right. Hey, I get to come back up.
I'm trying to follow protocol. I'm not very good at protocol. really a very good discussion and you're hitting on a lot of different kind of bouncing around on a lot of different things. But this to answer your
question, the city's land development regulations pertaining to the TEC says it is your responsibility to be the tree board and you are to develop and administer a urban forestry program, a community forestry program. Now the city
has got a consultant to do it and and I'm tickled pink. My attempt at it was to spur them forward. You know, I knew it wasn't glossy enough. You know, I don't have glossy paper to print on, but
it spurred them forward. Okay. Uh and they went with the assessment and they went with the tree canopy, the urban forest management plan. Honestly, I can't even remember the title. I have to look at it every time. Native Municipal Tree Canopy and Landscape Management
Trust Fund. And what you guys are saying has been what's going through my mind now for months. The first page I love, but when we get to the second page about assessing mitigation fees, I agree with Laura Lee. I do not think this council
has the mindset to assess developers more uh burdens. Uh, no. I don't believe recommending to council to assess new mitigation fees on developers through this native municipal trust fund is the
right approach. I don't think that's the way to go at all. I do not. Um, I do agree with the front page, but I don't think this is a way to come up with funds for the urban forest management plan. The proposal by EOC talks about a
budget. Uh if you were to go onto the Oyola County uh their urban forest management plan, they have two or three pages on the budget that will be worked out and I think it will probably include some of this landscape trust fund like I
said and the Tree City USA funds and and also uh the general funds and then tree grants. Um, and hopefully the well I don't know that I want to say the trust fund is growing because that means they're cutting down more trees, but they're doing it anyways. And so let's
take the money from that and and let's put I like your idea of of considering changing the wording of resolution 30-201. But as for the for this um landscape management trust fund, I don't think it's the right approach. I believe
following the process already begun by the city that is an urban canopy assessment. They got the grant, they got the assessment and following those recommendations, following the recommendations in the urban forest management plan will bring the best
results. That is how many municipalities throughout Florida are trying to enhance their uh I mean this development is not just happening in Titusville. all throughout the state and throughout many places in the United States. So this is
the approach. This is a roadw way forward. What is needed is for our city to go beyond the planning stage though and implement the urban forestry management plan to expand the urban forestry canopy as per EOC's proposal
and the UTT assess UTC assessment. It is not just a plan. It's the implementation of the plan that is critical. We can have all the plans in the world on a bookshelf, but if you don't implement them, they're just a bunch of paper. This plan needs to include a strategic
street tree planting program and tree giveaway programs with funding from the current landscape trust fund, Tree City USA allocation and general funds. And there are grants for tree planting. So um
the proposal by EOC EOC goes step by step by step through this. They say a staff member will be need to be held responsible responsible parties they call them. Okay. And it talks about it specifically and the city will need to
find the money for a staff member dedicated to this purpose. Otherwise, the pay the plan is just a bunch of paper worth nothing. We must have staff to implement it. We must have somebody to implement it um to and and likely a
crew to evaluate, plan, prune, and remove the trees that are are detrimental and and not healthy. This is the way forward for many communities. So, uh and and that they will have these community engagement meetings. This
we've seen this before with the tree canopy assessment. We saw it with the natural resources plan. They will ask us what we want. They want the community to develop a vision goal. So this is what we need to start
thinking about. How will we respond in this community engagement meetings? What would you like the vision statement to say? What goals to be? The consultant is not going to tell us what the goals should be. They're not going to tell us what
the vision statement will be. We must create it. We must sit at home and think about it. What would it say? What will it include? I always have said things like tree. We
want to expand our canopy for the benefit of residents, wildlife, the aquafer, and the lagoon. That little phrase to me has a lot of value. Okay. So maybe we could put that in the vision statement along with some broad broad picture. So So that's something I I I
just I'm not trying to force it down your throat, but what would you like the goals to be specifically? We know that we're going to hear that the canopy goal has gone canopy percentage has gone down. We can ask for canopy percentages or we can ask or or we don't need to
focus on canopy percentages either. We can just ask uh we can tell them where we would like native trees planted in Titusville. Where would you like native trees planted? Okay, we know they're going to cut they're cutting them down. But if we can strategically plant them
to provide the most benefit for residents, wildlife, aquifer, and the lagoon, then we're ahead of the game. you know, we cannot help that huge development on, but we do have landscaping laws that they will have to abide by to plant trees up and down the
streets and all. So, that's good that we have those. Um um if you look at the tree equity scores, we know that certain neighborhoods have less trees than other neighborhoods. Is that something that we want to go by? However, there are certain neighborhoods that people have
spoken up and say, "We don't have a lot of trees, and that's the way we want it. We don't want to have to worry about the trees falling on our house. We don't want to maintain those trees. We the trees that we have currently aren't being maintained. I've heard people stand up and say that. So, we have to think about that. It's it's not just a
matter of numbers and put those numbers over on our neighborhoods if they they're not inclined to have more trees. And we have to think about that. Um we have to think about maybe we want trees along the bike trails. Yeah, that would have to involve DOT. But guess what? We
can involve DOT. Sure. What about in the medians in in on the corridors and make our our be our town more beautiful? That involves FDOT, but that can be done. Yes, we have uh mutual agreements with F
DOT for many things. It doesn't mean that we can't do so with for the trees. How about along Barnes Avenue? I go up Barner all the time and it's so barren. I would just there are many places along Bara Avenue that we could have trees planted in the along the street and make
that a beautiful thoroughare. Uh it's a very you know north and south place that people use all the time and it's so barren and sad looking to me. Um so how about some pocket parks? More pocket parks where people, you know, to have that 330
where you could just walk to a little park and get sit in the shade because your house is sitting under the baking sun. Maybe you could walk to a pocket park and we have two or three of those little pocket parks in our town and more of those would be better. So I would like to see some of those. Those are just the ideas that come to my head.
What do you think? What would you like to see happen because of this urban forest management plan? So I look forward to working with you the TEC to press forward with a proactive implementation of the urban forest management plan to benefit the residents
wildlife aquifers in the lagoon. to start thinking because this is going to be rolling out soon. They got the money. They got the consultant. They got a proposal by the consultant. It's on the agenda for a council last night. You can look it up and you can read it online and it's right there. It's beautiful. I
think the Oyola County one is just is even more beautiful. Has all beautiful pictures of how they have lovely oak trees. But we have those in our town as well. We just need to pick put the pictures in there and and we can have show that our town has gorgeous trees
that need to be preserved and and they're cutting them down right and left. So So I'm excited about it. Uh far more excited about the little one that I wrote up, you know, but it was my attempt. I never said that I had I was a consultant. They didn't give me $50,000
for my pieces of paper that I wrote up, but I think it did spur them forward. I think the tree plantings spur them forward. Uh and so um my goal by establishing a tree team was to set an
example to the city as far as planting trees and to influence the city council and to influence you and the planning department uh the planning department and the planning and zoning. Uh we influence uh the city government and the land development regulations, but we
plant trees. We've now planted 200 and we're going to plant 60 more coming up soon. So the the city has no excuse not to plant trees. Our little group cannot plant street trees. We cannot deal with
the infrastructure underground. Uh you could even call the number and find out where it is. It's just too much for us. But we can plant in parks um forest management plan and then we have the sustainability plan, the natural resources plan. And yes, you could try
amending the resolution 30-201 and that might be very helpful, too. So, I'm really excited moving forward and each of us can have a part in this and and speak up. Um, and I'm I'm just real keen on it. Thank you for letting me rattle on.
Thank you. Are are there any other cards? No. Okay. So after listening to all of that, I think that probably the easiest thing to do is
come up with our our own version of 30-201 and just just do it. you know, take out the language about beautifification, make it stronger about trees and say this is where we think this is where we
think our money should be spent. We don't think it should be spent on flowers by I95 or plastic flowers in baskets hanging from the poles on US. Um, we we want to plant trees.
That's my opinion. I have a question for K. Um K, you were you were going pretty fast and I it some of this went right over my head. Okay. Um, would you clarify what
you said about the landscape management trust fund not being it sounded to me like you said that would not or should not be a primary source of funding for the urban forest.
No, I think it should be. I think it will be. I do. Okay. I I think that there will the the EOC scene that the the consultant in his proposal says there will be a budget that that is formulated with this urban
forestry plan. They're going to look at all the possibilities of revenue. I do believe I think that's their goal and I've seen that in the Oyola one that I studied as well. And so they will look to see where the resources are and they will see and if they don't see we will
bring it to their attention that we have this fund that has over $200,000 in it. So if the TEC um made a recommendation very short and concise about the landscape management trust
fund being uh the major u the source of of that of those funds being placed towards the urban forest management plan. You're in agreement with that? I I'm not so sure I'd say
that it' be the main source because maybe they're willing to donate a lot from the gym fund. We don't know, you know, and also a community budget for that. They did plant a few more trees this year, but they're not following the Tree City USA
uh $2 per capita. So, all of these resources should, you know, be considered for this urban forest management plans funding. Um, but yes indeed, I think that you should include that, but I just wouldn't make it so
exclusive in my opinion. Maybe they're gonna donate, you know, $500,000 to plant trees. You could always help be important in the language of resolution 30-201
is that we add language in there that that funding can be used to pay the salary for an urban forestry person because that is where we're hurt right now is that there's nothing in that resolution now about using the money on
anything other than beautifification. All right. So, we need to bring this discussion to a close so we can talk about something else. Um, what do do you guys want to do with
the Native Municipal Tree Canopy and Landscape Management Trust Fund? Do we do we want to put it on the back burner for a while and concentrate on resolution 30-201? Isn't that one and the same?
No. The Native Municipal Tree Canopy and Landscape Management Trust Fund is this document that Michael started and then member Berdett added to it and you've been working on it and member Tucker has worked on it and this is the ship that
is yawing around sideways in the waves right now. And we talked about simplifying that, condensing it greatly and coming up with a thrust if you will, creating a focus of that fund and saying this is what we
recommend that most of the funds be used for. Um to support the urban forest management plan. Um and isn't that what we are talking about taking 30-201
resolution and and creating um a a document uh or the basis for a document a basis for a resolution if you will which says this is our recommendation. We want to encourage you to use the money in the
native landscape management or trust fund for this purpose and that's it. And then we get it off our plate and move on. Yes. Did I oversimplify? But but I don't I don't know how you can simplify this. I unless you want to just
take elements out of this and Yeah. And cut a lot out of it. Yeah. Like like 95% of it for for right now. But let's come up with a suggestion to council of how we think
the the developers now for cutting down trees, how we think that money should be used and how we think I don't know if we should include a reference to the $2 per capita in in
in our new resolution. I think we should because that money has been being misused for many many years now. you know, while we call ourselves a Tree City USA and um that money has been
side, you know, it it it's been bushwacked by the um public works department and and used to trim trees, cut trees down, do everything except plant trees.
that $2 per capita is can be for maintenance, right? Yes. So, cutting down a dead tree is part of that program and u if that's what it I I can't speak because I'm not but um
um that's not a separate it is separate. I thought it was a separate fund. Yeah. Can I stand up for a moment? I got the latest version. Lily gave me the latest version. It It is two separate funds and
I don't suggest trying to merge them at all together. Uh the resolution 30-201. She could probably read it for you. I almost have it memorized. It is to you. It is the mitigation funds from cutting.
It tells you what section of of the the LDRs that the money comes from by mitigation of trees. When they cut down the trees, it specifies and that's so that's where that money comes from. And
now you're you're considering changing some of the wording. And I think that's a good idea of how to use it, but still for use of planting uh vegetation. And I'm just going to say vegetation on publicly owned land. I think that's the
whole purpose of that fund. Now, now this fund I'm going to hold up. This is a community force budget plan that the public works puts forth every year in order to be reertified to be Tree City USA. So this is the $2 per capita and it
tells you exactly, it has an outline of exactly how they use the money. Okay. Well, last in 2023 they don't care. In 2024 they spent 1,900. Well, that was an improvement, you know, maybe. And it actually tells you how many trees they
planted. So 2024 they planted six, the previous year zero, the previous year eight, you know, and it goes back to 2013. And we've been getting this and and the TEC has been looking at this. So this is Tree City USA that says that
we're a member of and because of Tree City USA, the city is supposed to allocate $2 per capita towards the the things that are itemized here. Not only tree planting and initial care, tree maintenance, tree removal, tree
management. Um and it talks tree planting, tree pruning, tree and even volunteer time. And they utilize some equipment uh on for this $2 per capita. They util sent this to me and it has an appendix
on it that tells that they utilize some of the salaries from from their employees and they when you take I used it for five hours and so I'm going to add that onto here. You know, they they um I forget the word for it right now.
Um but anyways um so this is a totally separate thing. I do not suggest merging them. And where does the money come for that that that $2 per capita from general funds? General fund. Okay. Yes. And and there this is just an outline of how they
would use two the $2 per cap per capita. It's not like there is actually the mitigation fund is actually anyways I don't know how to say the right words because I'm not a financial guru who he probably could use say the right words
but it's to be allocated you know um so tree city USA I have the standards right here and here's how it's it's worded I will read it to you standard number three City trees provide
many benefits. Okay, it's going. By providing support at or about the $2 per capita minimum, a community demonstrates his commitment to grow and tend to these valuable tree assets. To meet this standard each year, the community must
document at least $2 per capita towards the planting, care, and removal of city trees and the planning effort to make those things happen. So, that's what this is. That's the document. It's not like they have a bank account that that's for this.
Anyways, did that make sense? Was that helpful? I hope so. Okay. So, this is what we're going to find. What we're going to find is for the last a lot of years, maybe 15, 20 years,
this revenue streams have been used in different ways to provide services under the canopy uh label, under the tree label,
all trying to meet the requirements of Tree City USA. Okay. So, this is this is why we should not mingle these streams because I'm not so sure that anyone and I'm going to go on
that limb. The person the only person that probably knows how all this was done was the last city manager and he's know what what needs to happen is they we need to peel this banana
because all these revenue streams are intermingled to support certain things that the city has been supporting and therefore but the bulk of the money 200 somehat thousand dollars is is there.
Okay. And that is where we need to concentrate. We we we can bring the revenue streams later on and we can try to understand it in the meantime and short of auditing the city. I'm afraid that we're going to be very
hardressed to find out all these revenue streams that in the past have been used under these uh headings. So yes, I I I will not be in favor in in uh trying to mix and match things
that we do not understand. We do understand the 200 the 200 somehat thousand dollars that we understand that we understand. Okay. And then if we get lucky and with the help of staff and revenue streams might be pouring some money into the
budget, we may get to a point where we can look at a bigger picture of of how this thing is being funded. But keep the 200,000 out work on the on the words of the
resolution. Okay. Improve that. and uh and take that forward. I said this is how we're planning to use this there other revenue streams and we can bring it to their attention because it's
the city budget at the end of the day and let's see how that's going to be compiled now that we have a new city manager and that will be my proposal to this commission. Can I just say one quick one thing? Um
The urban forest management plan has management in it and it also has planting in it. So if we just make the resolution say use this money for the urban forest management plan, the city might just use it again for management. You know, we need to make sure they use
it for planting trees. The planting part of the urban regards to the tree city USA that community forest thing uh community budget that I showed you just a few minutes ago October three four years ago. I asked Peggy Basaka. I had a
private meeting with Peggy Basaka and I asked her, "How do we get to the public works to plant more trees using that $2 per capita?" And she said, "Get TEC to tell the to recommend to council to tell
public works to plant more trees with that $2 per capita." Okay. Well, that's a separate thing than the the resolution. But there's no reason why you can't do what Peggy Basakus suggested. Um, if you can get the
council on board with that to tell public works, because that's what happened to me last night. I had problem with lift pump in front of my house. The fences falling down. I've talked to everybody in public's works about it and they won't do a darn thing about it. Uh,
so I sp stood up in front of council last night and the mayor and agreed with me and he told public's works to fix Miss K's fins for her lip pump and they were out there today. Yeah, that's not the way it should work.
Uh, if it takes the mayor to go fix a fence, we got bigger problems. And I'll leave it at that. Not a big problem. Okay. And so again, I'll go back to the 200,000. Madam Chair, I think we ought
to concentrate on that. I think we had to come up with a set of goals that we're going to how we're going to meet out of that money. These are the things that we want to do. Okay. And we go forward with that.
And then if we need to propose that with that money we fund uh city Kevin's people said here is x number of dollars for x number of trees and these are the locations that that we think you ought
to start with that and make that a proposal directly to the city and then let them chew on that. We do propose we have that latitude. We do not we don't have the zoning and
the zoning board uh power of rejecting things that are not on the zoning and planning. We don't have that. We we send recommendations. So therefore, our recommendations will be based on
that budget and this is how we going to plan. This is our goal to budget this and this is how we're going to spend the money. council. It's up to you because that's all we can do, right? Am I wrong?
Yeah. No, that sounds good to me. So, as far as this thing, if we if we take no action on it, then it just kind of Well, no, there's there's no money in this yet. No, I'm talking about the the
funding. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, we we can just take no action on it and then Mike Mike can bring it back up again when he comes back, but right now we don't even have a champion for it. Um
no for for the N 7A item 7A the native municipal tree can that's this thing that you and member berdette member Tucker and me remember my jack
the this was the council did not ask for this no nobody asked for this and so you know if we just take no action on it then we can bring it back anytime we want to
but again I think we'd be better I think we would make more progress by trying to strengthen the existing resolution that is the that
is the the the enabling language language for right what is right now $200,000 and and growing because they keep cutting down more trees. So,
so do we want to produce a a draft uh for the next meeting and include Michael Mjack in the draft uh that's
sent to all the members for review and comment. So that yeah, you all have that. Everybody has it for comment. Um it's just a draft that's being uh prepared to clarify and and uh
it's the evolution of the 30201 resolution and we're going to put that forward as our work even though nobody asked for it. That's what we think should should be done. Okay. That's a lot easier. Yeah.
Um and a lot more focused, I think, than where we were. And it's a lot I I have no problem working on a draft for the next meeting. So, I'll be That would be great. Member Brownie. Um, you know, I mean, you've heard heard
some things that were mentioned tonight, like the the one thing that keeps coming back and keeps coming back is that we need to hire our own urban forest manager, a qualified person to work with
the consultant and, you know, run the program for us. So, that I think that's one of the most important things that and planting trees. That's it. It's pretty simple. We need a we need a urban forest manager and we and we want to use
the money that is being given to us by the developers because they're cutting down tons of trees that we want to use that money to replace trees. Pretty simple.
All right. So, let's move on to um 7B, old business, the multifamily ordinance and definitions. And Oh, good. Thank you. You're awesome. Thank you.
Yes. What an improvement. She doesn't care. All right. So, let's I know we have cards on this. So, why don't we start out um with the cards? I made enough for everyone. Mary Spar
Coco. Um, pardon me. Uh, it's it's getting better. I went to PT today. So, um, did you what are they called? The the
computers up there of some I sent an email and it had um, you know, um, for I'm sorry. If you downsize the agenda, you'll see a folder that says Mary's far and all her items are in that folder.
Okay. Yeah, that's it. Okay. That's what we're going to talk about. So, um, just to review, um, if I can have your attention.
Uh so just just to review um last time you know I'm I had some conclusions that the majority of multif family projects don't prioritize saving existing trees and they're not using low impact development
and the trees are um preserving mostly in the buffers. Now this is really important. Um we had proposed in the multifamily canopy ordinance that we were going to
go with a 25% requirement for canopy area. Now um that was done for a couple reasons. one because Peggy Busaka chose the 25%.
Which happened to be based on um the county task force recommendation and she wanted all the residential together at first before before uh we had a council meeting and one particular council member uh had quite a
bit to say in opposition. Now this 25% I'd like you to realize that I did an analysis of this was uh basically
mostly the single family subdivisions and how much of the 25% would be taken up in the buffer and Brookshshire would have about 40%
if if they complied. with the uh with the with the ordinance they would have put 40% in the buffer forest trace would have had 11% park preserve
uh 17% of that 25% okay I'm talking uh the percentage of the 25% so Brookshshire almost had half of half of that requirement satisfied by their
buffers. Forest Trace 11% Park Reserve 17%. Riverwalk which has got a new name, they had a lot of large buffers. So they almost could satisfy
the 25% by having 17 70% of those trees in the buffer and south carpenter estates 25% of the 25%
and Verona phase one 26%. So a lot of the requirements could be satisfied um by using the buffer. So that ratcheted up the percentage of
um preserved can preser preserved canopy areas because you want some trees saved that are not in the buffer. So
that is just something that I want on the record before uh this discussion happens on the 20. Our object here hopefully is to get the council to now look
favorably on the multi- family canopy ordinance. We don't know what staff is going to say about it, but we know one thing. Staff would like something to change in
our recommendation to make it more palatable to um council and them too. And I found a problem.
The problem is that there's sites that have very little trees that would be called redevelopment sites. And what I'm hoping you'll do is make some sort of motion tonight
to say that you would like the the U percentage of can or the or the canopy area percentage that is required for multifamily
to be adjusted for redevelopment sites. with little or no canopy. And that was in other words, if they don't h if they got almost no trees,
they don't have to get 25% because they're redevelopment and it's just going to make their their project impossible moneywise. Um, so that's what I'm hoping that you'll
do. Look favorably on an adjustment um for redevelopment areas. And in fact is me um on August 24th, 2021,
Peggy had put the suggestion of um Dwight Severs um with regard to commercial and industrial in that ordinance. So she was looking favorably on it.
Um Dwight and then Peggy put in the ordinance the words in order to encourage redevelopment of existing developed commercial or industrial sites that may not have any canopy or very
little canopy. The canopy standards set forth may be reduced by 50% of the requirement above. Now we don't have to reduce their requirement down to 12% K. We just want
the concept to be known to staff so that they can get the point across. The TEC is aware of these the redevelopment site
problems and wants to give these developers a fair break because if you got a full um they'll have a lot more trees that they
can save than if you got just a couple. So, let's go on. We'll just briefly go through the pictures. The first one is um of an apartment complex that was built somewhere around
1969 or 1970. It's Deleó um village and that's your first picture. Does it look like an old plan? Is that what you got on your computer?
Does that look like an old plan? Yes. Okay. Um, does everybody see it? It's the first file I sent. Dion Village.
Okay. Well, let's go to the Which one do you have first? We'll discuss the first one. Okay. This is an interesting one. I have two um pictures of Christian Court.
Uh the first um looks a little less complicated than the second one. The first one um it says Christian Court condominiums. If I can just Okay. Does it say
construction plans? Wait, it says um up at the top. Is there a bunch of stuff in very very small print on the right hand side? Yes. Okay. That's This is the original plan they had.
Okay. And this is what I think is a multifamily condo project. Well, um, Kay went by this place and she said, "There's a couple trees in the middle of this, otherwise it's just just
barren. There may be a couple on the border." Okay. So, this developer wants to put this project there. Now, it's not our job to figure out if he's
asking for too many units or not, but whatever the case may be, the only trees that he's got showing in this diagram are planted trees. And they're basically around the edges
and around that um little circle um that um kind of that roundabout circle. So he's got a problem and that's that's the main point I want to get across. And then what happened is the next
picture. Um, it says Christian Court condominiums and on the right, but then under about six lines down in the fine print on the right, it says project scope to
construct 72 town homes. So, this to me looks like a single family subdivision. Now that that is very that's why we need this
terminology because and it's and they I mean it's kind of shows me that there's really no good reason not to include multifamily because you can do
the same development with condominiums um which is multif family and and uh uh town homes, which is supposedly single family, but there he he asked for some sort of
variance. So, he's got a little different plan. And what I want you to realize is this guy's got a problem. He has no basically no trees. And we need to
um promote redevelopment of these barren areas that in this case I believe may have been illegally cleared and um get something nice in there.
And he's not going to be able to do it with 25% canopy, which includes 15% preserved canopy area. He doesn't have 15%
um preserved canopy. Okay. Um now what do you have for the third for the second um project there? It should be the third file. Second one is Deion Village. Okay. Okay. Deon Village. Okay. That's
the one. That's the one. You got an old plan that, you know, was originally um given to staff in 1969 and they've just marked it up.
This is um evidently an apartment complex that the trees seem to be all gone basically. And what they want to do is replace the palm trees and the um
exoraum which were the standard 1969 plantings. So they're not I I was looking at this and I'm thinking why are they planting all those ugly queen palms? So they're
not planting queen palms. They're and replacing them with something. They evidently it's Yeah, they're replacing them. Replace missing 24 to 30. Wait, replace missing coke
plumosa. Um, so evidently they need replacing. They're they're they're I don't know if they're there or what. Why? Why couldn't it replace the old queen
poems with sable poems? Okay, you're at to me. I mean, I think it's a bad plan to do that. Uh I mean 1969, you know,
um that was a standard landscape. I know because for 30 years I lived in a house in Merit Island. What did it have? three these bomb trees and some Exora on the side. Um what what we're not going into is should
this guy get away with this? Personally, I think he can do a little better than that. But we certainly would like an apartment complex which has problems and may not
be livable. I don't know. Um, we'd certainly like that to be developed, redeveloped, right? But the guy just doesn't have the 15 requirements.
And I I I mean I really think it'd be a great idea if you know the guy could redevelop that, but not necessarily with more of those queen palms and exora,
but he does have some places where he could plant them. Maybe he'll choose something a little bit more native. Right. So, the last um
file I have, if you go on to the next one, um do you what do you have? Which picture do you have on top? Do you have the one with apartments or do you have the one with
the um tree series for the next one? Is that Evermore? Yeah. The tree surveys. The tree surveys first. Okay. This was an apartment complex which I don't think is going anywhere because
the property was sold after um after it got um yeah approved um by the council. They did. In fact, I thought it was great.
But the um they had a tree survey and you'll see that that area that's not the um retention pond. It's, you know, just that big
area. You can see all the um the lines which tell the elevation that that is completely barren. This this is on um park in Harrison.
That that part where the apartments were going to go is completely barren. But by the existing storm water pond, he has some trees,
but it's not enough. It is no 15%. And he would need a break, too. And you'll see as you go on to the next file that he
really had an excellent project that council loved. Um I mean I think everybody in the room thought, "Wow, nice job." And you'll see that he had a lot of
planted trees there. I mean, he was going to really he doesn't have the reserve trees, so he would need a break as well. And these are the three examples of projects that would need an
adjustment in the preserved canopy percentage in that requirement. And that's what I'm hoping that TEC will let staff know and staff will note that
in their presentation that we want to we want to do the right thing and improve the ordinance when we see a problem. And we want the or the multifamily
canopy ordinance to include this provision. It's not quite done yet, but we're we're trying. So that's what I hope you'll do. Any questions?
I I'm sorry. I have a lot of questions. Sure. So So are we going to do this by exception? Uh yes. It would be okay. It would be what it would be is a provision in the ordinance. Um and there are um provisions in other
ordinances that if I would suggest that you know you not get into the weeds and try to come up with definitely put a percentage of um that that if your site has
less than you know let's say 5% canopy that that site is eligible for a reduction in the preserve canopy requirements
and it would need to be carefully worded and that's and the thing and because you don't want to miss make a mistake asking you to come up with some wording is you need time to consider it and to top it off we need staff's
opinion staff needs to work on this wording they're going to be able to do it much better than a than a an advisory board on the spur of the moment because
um it's complicated to get the wording exactly right. I mean, Dwight Severs had some wording that Peggy put in um you know to encourage in order to encourage redevelopment of existing
developed commercial or industrial sites that may not have any canopy or very little canopy. Any canopy or very little canopy is is um a general statement. you staff may want to
may or may not want to know a little more specific. And then it says, this is Dwight, the canopy standard set forth may be reduced by 50% of the requirement above. That
50% of the requirement above was 50% of the 25%. because in this version that went before council on August uh 24th, 2021,
um all residential had that 25% requirement and I'm everybody knew at the time that those buffers could satisfy part of it.
So that's you have any other question. I don't know how to get around that because get around what? The exception. Oh, I think we should have it.
No, no, I know. But I guess what I'm what I'm struggling is so you don't meet the 25%. Okay. You don't meet the 25% which is what you're saying. So my piece of property I'm going to come in and go,
okay, so let me see what's the lease that I'm going to be allowed. I'm going to gain the ordinance since you already took away the requirement. You took away the requirement because my property doesn't meet it. Okay. So, I'm
going to come in and try to game it so that I only I put as few trees as I can until you say, "Well, that's okay." Oh, you got to get the Okay, you see where I'm going? Okay, first of all, um the way the
ordinance reads is this isn't the redevelop thing. And you may want to put the staff may want to put on how long this par redevelopment parcel is sad there empty because you don't want somebody just
uh but but but I know what you're saying. So what what I want to say is the ordinance what the ordinance says it is if you do not have is you do not have the 15%
um canopy you know on the site. If you don't have that you have to make it up with all planted trees. In other words, you would have to get the 25% planted trees. And that's a
little bit impossible for these guys. And that's a very good question, by the way. So for example um you know that apartment complex
he would have to um have 25% of his development area in planted canopy. and that's a bit much
um for this particular project in my opinion. He doesn't he doesn't have when I looked at the when I looked at a couple multif family when I looked at those back in 2020
uh and actually visited all these properties um I did not find one one you know area that didn't have um
It was I mean that I didn't find one that was basically barren of trees. They they all basically I'd say the average amount of trees that they had before
clear cutting which we don't like um was probably 75%. This Titusville's very wooded. Now, that's not so true in in all areas
of the county, but I didn't find any any um that that that um were lacking trees. Now, I know I've seen a couple properties that, you know, maybe are right near the river or something that
that don't have, you know, 20 25% uh or even, you know, 35% preserved canopies.
um and were slated for single family subdivisions or in that particular time frame the multifamily. I I just didn't find it. And so
the only ones I'm finding right now are these ones that somebody cleared trees and there may be some properties that don't have it. But we're talking about redevelopment. If they if they just
don't have it and and they're, you know, able to support trees, that's a different matter. We're trying to solve the problem of a a kind of a blighted
uh site. I mean, let's say somebody had, you know, 10% trees on their and it was all natural area. Well, they would be
required to you, you know, whatever they couldn't um have as preserved canopy areas, they would be have to plant, let's say they could, so they wanted to plant like um
they wanted, let's say they had um they could they wanted to preserve 10% which was re you know, preserve canopy um if they couldn't for some you know
reason good reason save the 15% um preserve canopies. Okay, they wanted to just do 10%. They have to supply 15%
plant and canopy. We're not trying to give a break to somebody with a good piece of property. We're trying to get the like the Christian Cove Court. Not Christian Cove Courtourt. Christian Court condo. Um
I live on Chris I live on Clifton's Cove Court. Um anyway, um so what we're trying to give a break to is the projects like um Christian Court. And that's
where it dawned on me. a problem. A problem. We need to solve it. And then um Kay had made that list. So I looked at daily owned um apartments. This is something that would be great for the city. Let's let's see if we can
get just improve this apartment complex. Do what we need to do and and have it nice. Give him a break. And then Woody's Woody's, this was Woody Grace's apartment complex. Sorry. Uh Woody's
apartment complex that everybody loved. Um you know, I don't know if he just, you know, if he could really pull it off and everybody liked it. Um, it's just
that uh he had all this bare area with the whole apartment complex was gonna go. So that's what I'm saying. Any other questions? Does that make sense? I hope so. All
right, I'll get out of here. Thanks for listening. Next part. Um yeah, Casey Naj, um I hope several of you will attend council's special meeting on July 22nd on the multifamily
ordinance, CRZ ordinance, and native plant ordinance. You will have the opportunity to speak to council on these proposed ordinances. And I think Lily's going to tell you a little bit more about the timing of that. But each of these ordinances will have a big impact on our community's environment and the
lagoon and wildlife only if adopted. We have to convince them to adopt it. So I I I staff is going to give their presentation, but I think it's crucial for you to be there and make and make your point of why you're recommending it
and and I I will be speaking as well. Um Mary has a valid point. Okay, we have a lot of building sites in Titus. We have a few like the ones Mary presented to you that have very few woods, trees at
all. We want to save the ones that are heavily wooded. Let's build on them last. Let's build on these that have no trees. Let's build on them first and their inner city. The ones that are heavily wooded and more on
the outskirts, right? We want to encourage developers to build on these that have already been cleared like Woody's uh Park and and Harrison. That would have been a prime site, but I think the ordinance actually was
requiring too much of Woody to plant so many many trees. I don't know the whole story behind it, but that's something to consider. So, um, you you very well want may want to ask staff and a ask for a motion on that tonight. Um, but my ma
main concern I sent you all an email uh about these definitions. I don't think I have to read that email to you again unless you really want me to, but but I thought I would just itemize what it is. Um the the definitions provided you on
condominium and town homes. It's not giving you a definition of a condominium complex. It's giving you a definition of a building and the units on that building. Same with town homes. It's
giving you a definition of a of a unit. uh and it's not telling you what a town home complex is or a condominium complex is. And so I I really think that you need to um I'm going to list these in order.
Number one, please ask staff to consider amending the proposed multifamily ordinance to say beginning at section 3031B1 res quote residential subdivisions including town home condominiums and
multifamily projects and then it goes into parenthesis excluding properties 2 acres or less that satisfy the comp plan are required to meet the minimum requirement of preserve total tree canopy areas and associated reduced tree mitigation requirements. As it is
written now, it does not include condominiums. Well, why not? The definition it says of condominiums that they are individually owned. So, that is basically a subdivision. So, but why don't we have it listed there unless
they already say that think that that falls under residential subdivisions. But I think it's important to list it to to actually use family ordinance. Then I think we need to amend the proposed family multif family ordinance to provide definitions of town home
developments and condominium developments to indicate that they are individually platted subdivisions. So the condominium here it does say that it's individually owned. Okay? So it gives you an idea that it's individually platted. But the town homes it says
nothing about being individually platted. But I gave you individually platted that are considered subdivisions. So, I do believe that's how it's being done, but we just need to have a definition so that when a developer is considering building a town home, he knows that it's individually
platted and it's a subdivision and therefore it must meet the current tree canopy requirements. All right. Town homes must meet the current canopy. So, but we need to have this in the multifamily ordinance um as
well. So, because we do not yet know if the multifamily ordinance will be approved, I think we need to suggest to staff, you need to suggest to staff that section 37.1 defining town home developments and condominium
developments as individually platted subdivisions. We need to change this this wording here to not just define the building or the one unit but have definitions about condominium complexes, town home
complexes and say that they are individually platted subdivisions in case that multifamily ordinance doesn't get passed. The important thing is residential subdivisions, multif family developments, and multif family developments are subject to the tree
canopy requirements as single family subdivisions as all Titusville residents deserve the benefits of living among tree canopy and all the benefits that it provides you. So, um I hope I provided you some clarity of of what I'm asking
that you do, but we need definitions. We need in the proposed ordinance. I do think you should have the word condominiums in there. I I do think we need clear deflements in the multif family ordinance. And just because we're not so sure that that will get approved,
let's just amend section 37.1, the current 37.1 or ask staff to amend it. Ask staff to recommend to council to amend it. That's it. Any questions? I really think it is
very very important to require canopy requirements from multif family and I don't know that council's on board with it yet. I think we need to make our case. We need to let them know that without
requiring the same thing in multifamily town homes and condominiums. We are in fact discriminating against people who do not have own a home. they are not receiving the same benefit
as homeowners and there could be a cast a class action suit brought against the city. I do believe that's true that it could happen because we're discriminating against renters and and many many people now are having to be renters because of the
price not just in our town of single family homes but all throughout the nation. the cost of building materials and labor is so high that people cannot afford to buy and they can't accumulate that much wealth to get make the down payment and all. So they're living in
multif family town homes and condominiums but they deserve to have trees among their buildings so that they can sit outside, you know, under a shade tree or stand under a shade tree. It makes such a huge difference. I was at
um Blue Hole today talking to a couple people and the sun beaten down on us. That's why we're planting trees there and I we just had to find a tree to go stand under while we had this little chat, you know, because we were sweltering. Oh, people who live in
apartment complexes of all types deserve to have a tree to stand under or to sit under. uh they deserve to have the trees reduce the temperatures so that they don't maybe don't have the AC as much. Maybe there's a tree over their car so
that it doesn't get 145 degrees in it. Uh they deserve the res uh the reduced flooding that we seeing happening right now. Trees help reduce flooding. Yes, dangerous trees need to be removed from over the houses, over the cars. Um but
healthy trees um Okay. Okay, please. I'm sorry. Yes, you went to great length. Okay, to define a condominium
and a townhouse and a subdivision. Yes. What about an apartment house? Where where is that defined? I think that's something you'd have to ask her. I don't think that was included in here. It's this is this is just a definitions of condominium town homes
and subdivisions. Um, we could have asked for duplexes, triplexes, quads, definitions, but I she's the one that came up with these definitions. I believe the city land development regulations have definitions for multifamily and single
family and tripods and quads and probably all those different things. But the thing is in or for the tree ordinance to work well, we need to know what a town home complex is. that you know that it is
individually platted and actually is a subdivision because of that. That's how these SSA and that's how it's being done and I give you an example of that Royal Manor. So she's going to answer your question. I understand. But
a lot a if I go down Sis Road a lot of the new construction are apartments. Yes. That's not included here. No, multifamily the it's a multif family ordinance. Multif family is apartments. So is that where is covered?
Apartment is that what are apartments covered under multif family? Yes, that is the main definition criteria of multifamily is apartments. Please define what an apartment complex is. I I'm going to let Lily speak to that.
When you say multi when the land development regulations say multif family, are they referring to apartments? So what I pulled was specifically the definitions from the land development regulations as they exist currently. I
think you're talking about when you talk about multif family, you get into residential zones R1, R2, R3. That talks about density. How many people? It's a density issue, right? It Yes. But I don't know if that answers your question. Okay.
That's what multif family is about, density. And you can have density in v various ways. Condos, town homes, things like that and apartments and apartments. Yeah. But all of that is under multif family. But in in in the in the proposed ordinance, it is a multifamily
ordinance. It says residential subdivisions including town homes and multifamily projects. When you're talking about the multifamily projects here, some of them it says on the building apartments. Okay. Are those
multifamily projects? That's what he's asking you. I do believe. Yeah. Yeah. Apartments are are multif family. There's your answer. Does it say that in the code somewhere? I didn't pull I I can look through it, but I didn't pull that definition out. Yeah, I know. She was only asked for
these, but That was always my understanding that multif family included apartments. But why would you make a different definition for a condominium which is all it is is an apartment building with
the exception of ownership. Condomin condominions versus apartments. The difference is ownership. That's it. It is the same building with multiple multiple uh apartments.
I don't know. Condominiums also have uh homeowners association fees. Condo fees. You can have homeowners association in a in an apartment complex. Okay. I've never lived in one that did. I'm sorry. Again, I'm not What I'm trying to look
for is clarity. Yes. And and she's trying to find the clarity for you. I I can't look it up right now. You know, I'm trying to find clarity on definition because you went to a lot of a lot of, you know, thought on the condominium,
but all that is is an apartment complex with ownership. That's it. Well, that's the difference. Okay. So, a subdivision is a subdivision. This our ordinance right now only the tree canopy ordinance only applies right now to residential
subdivisions. Okay. Okay. And and so now the proposed ordinances says residential subdivisions including town homes and multifamily projects are required to meet the minimum requirements of preserved in total tree
canopy areas. So we were asking well what how do you define a town home though? Then the question moved on to how do well how is a condominium defined? Now you're asking how do you define a multifamily? Okay, so currently
it's just residential subdivisions. Town homes, if town homes indeed are subdivisions, they currently are included in residential subdivisions and currently are required to have the minimum tree canopy.
They're required to do so. So the question is, how about condominiums? Well, it says here that condominiums are individually owned and so they're uh I believe they are individually platted that the land that they I believe
they're subdivisions. No. Okay. Well, that's what we need. I don't think so. Okay. So, therefore, they need to residential the condominium word needs to be put in here. Residential subdivisions including town homes and
condominiums. Condominiums have a footprint, right? So, let's put condominiums in here. That's what I'm asking you to do, to put condominiums in here to these different residential types of dwellings have meet the canopy requirements. So
that's why, you know, we I think the word condominium should be included in in this amendment uh in this. Um I I'm thinking that it should be amended. It never when Brad wrote this including town homes and
multif family project he didn't put in condominiums but I think it should be in there unless they are con already considered residential subdivisions or already considered multifamily projects but even so for clarity it'd be nice to have condominiums in there that word
condominiums and that's what you're asking for is clarity so Lily's trying to look it up maybe she has the answer for you again it's the same issue with apartments unless apartments are defined within the multif family. Well, I think that's what she's about
ready to tell you that apartments are included in multif family. So, I actually couldn't find apartments in the definition. Okay. So, we need apartments, but I I can say to your point, yes, the con condos are not platted individually
as town homes tend to be from my Exactly. And it is about ownership on the land. to the sky land. Yeah. So if you own the land, you don't own the land. Yeah. But you could still technically the owner could rent it out after then it could be an apartment. So then it
gets really weird after that. But it gets weird after Yeah. Yes. At the beginning. But because it's weird, let's put the word condominiums in here, you know, so it becomes less weird. The easiest way will be just to if if town houses are
going to be town houses and and subdivisions because I can have condominiums within a subdivision. Well, I can have I I How would you like to word it, Hector? That's what you need to say. Tell us residential subdivisions including
what? Multif family housing. Period. And then under multif family housing, condominiums fall in just like apartments. Okay. There. Can I say something? Yeah. Because I'm confused. Somewhere in the LDR there is um
there's some descriptor of multif family and it talks about um people living on top of each other. Okay. I I can't cite the section in the code, but I've read it recently, and it it it
differentiates between single family and multif family. And one of the ways that it differentiates is on top of each other. Okay. And here in Titusville that this ladyy's
shaking her head and um do you want to please this is a fascinating discussion Miss Gibbs? I don't please tell us why you were shaking your head. Okay. But I was very quiet. All right.
So let me just add a couple of points for consideration. Um keeping in mind that the context here that I think uh tree canopy and landscape require requirements um differently between
single single building homes. Okay, single family homes, which includes a single family home and it actually also includes a duplex because they're often times built um
on a quarter acre lot or a standard platted lot versus multi-unit. And I like the terminology of multi-unit instead of multifamily because it's more precise precision of language. So multi-unit housing can be an apartment.
It can be a condominium. They have the same structure or they can have the same structure but different ownership. A town home is a multi-unit um living uh it is a multi-unit housing unit, but typically a town home
will have the living space in a twostory unit. So there's no one living above the unit. And that's why I was shaking my head. It's still multi-unit housing because there's a difference in landscape requirements in my mind
because of the way that multi-unit housing is situated on a larger parcel of land. So I I think that's all I wanted to say, but I just wanted to clarify some of those terms. town home is an apartment with shared
walls, but typically built so that you have two levels. One thing I've learned um regarding the uh proposed plans on the Royal Oak Golf Course, there are villas and then there are single family
detached. There are no multifamily units on that 550 unit proposal even though there are town homes um and other I think duplexes what villas whatever they're calling but none
of that is considered multif family in Titusville um that was point I was trying to make there is some reference in the LDR about um related to multif family and those types of construction where people are
stacked in multifloors on top of each other which you do not find in fe simple town homes or um it's possible that condominiums can have obviously I've lived in one a couple years ago a six-story building condominium unit
um so there are those which would be multif family but um you can have condos and they're not multif family they're common wall perhaps and they're all over the place. But that doesn't
I I think the real problem is, you know, we're dealing with this wording here. Residential subdivisions, including town homes and multifamily projects, are required to meet the minimum. Well, really what all we need to do is say all residential
dwellings must meet the projects or all residential projects must meet the canopy requirement. But this is what has been presented to council so far and I think this is what will be presented to
them on July 22nd. So we're trying to make this work because this is what Bragg came up with. But really what we want is all residential projects, complexes, developments meet the canopy requirement.
that would be ideal so that all residents have the same benefits of living among but now Mary's throwing it you know if they don't have any trees on the land to speak of then we might want to give them an exception so I don't
know how to make Brad's wording here pretty um and inclusive unless we have say residential subdivision including town homes homes, condominiums, multifamily projects, including apartments. You
know, we're just going to keep listing all the different kinds duplexes when what we want is all residential. So, I I see the problem and I don't have a solution. Okay. Do you do you want this modification to be communicated to staff
before the 22nd? Is that what you're trying to do? Yes, right now. Communicate. It it seems minor to me, but to staff does is that what you're trying to do is have staff make a minor modification to what they
present to council on the 22nd? Well, I don't think saying all residential should meet requirements is going to pass Brad Parish, you know. I don't think so because this is what he's come up with and I think we need to make
some minor adjustments to it. Yes. So, if you made minor adjustments, she could, from what I understand, she could probably pass that on to Brad and and they might add it in. But if you try to throw it all out and and just say all, I
don't know that they can make a minor that's not going to be considered a minor adjustment. But I don't know how this amending it at this point works. Those are questions for Lily. So on the 22nd as I understand presentation meeting they'll come up
with Brad will bring his suggestions it'll be there'll be several of them and with the intent of c want to move forward that's also the time where I think you were asking about having to pick a speaker to come up and say what
tec would like to say on behalf of what's being presented. Does that make sense? Yeah, that that that is correct. We because it's because of the format of the presentation meetings. There are no speaker cards for the
individual agenda items. The only time the public gets to speak is at petitions and requests at the end of the meeting. That's what I've been told. and and so it it it doesn't make it's not going to
help us, you know, for staff to make their presentation and council to talk about it and then we have to wait until the end of the meeting to be able to make our comments. That that's why we that's why I requested what I did last
night. developments is pretty simple, but I I don't know that that might be what we want to recommend. I don't know. I don't I think but sorry to jump in because the current current canopy requirement and
that's being talked about was intended to add multif family because it currently reads residential subdivision some meet tree canopy requirements and the way that was being interpreted was for single family started rolling again
that we're trying to add more specifics so there aren't as it's not just being interpreted as just single family residential. Okay. Well, so then K's request, I mean, it it it sounds all complicated, but it
it seems pretty simple. K K is requesting that we ask to add condominiums to to the language.
And Mary is asking that we ask staff to come up with some kind of a reasonable um exception for redevelopment lots that don't have very many or any trees on them so that so
that the developer doesn't have to plant 25% trees on a bare lot. And I think those are both good good recommendations. I don't I don't know if that can be included by the 22nd or whether we just
wait and then th that would be our comments on the 22nd. Um okay. So TUC wants canopy requirement exceptions for redevelopment or low canopy land as well as adding condos to the multif family canopy ordinance as it's defined.
I got that part. Excuse me. TEC wants canopy requirement exceptions for redevelopment land area. I put in parenthesis areas of low canopy currently low canopy land.
And then so the developments that can't meet that don't even have the trees. Yeah. For redevelopment Okay. Um, first of all, I think that this is going to be a highlevel discussion by Brad. That's what they wanted.
They're they're not going to get into the weeds like condominium. So um what I'm recommending that you recommend
is that for redevelopment uh projects uh that on land that has little or no
canopy existing. canopy that adjustment be made. We're not asking for an exception for an unbuil built pristine parcel
with low canopy to have an exception. only redevelopment as an exception for redevelopment if somebody's wiped out that canopy.
And um I think we need to keep in mind that what we want out of the council is the instruction to move ahead. We do not want this ordinance
killed by a vote of forgiveness. So, um you can ask yourself whether it'd be wise to get into the weeds now about the
definitions or if it would be smarter to ask for clear definitions. And um that's my thoughts. Does that make sense? Okay. So,
if I think I understand what you're asking, the only lots that will be available will be redevelopment lots. The only ones that are for some forgiveness. Yes. Okay. And who determines the
forgiveness? That's what we need. staff to help work on. We're not going to get into into the exact We're talking percentage 25. We're talking 25%. I can't meet it. I bought a piece of land. I cannot meet.
You cannot make the 15% preserved. Yeah. Okay. I can't even meet 15%. There's nothing on that lot. US one across from public. Okay. I bought it and therefore there are no trees, right? Okay. The guy already paid. The owner
paid eventually, you know, when he bought it to get all the trees out, but now I'm buying the land and it's got no trees and I want to put a condominium there. But has anybody developed that beforehand? Yeah. They're putting they're putting lines in and all that now.
No, but I mean, has has this been a building that they tore down and it was a building there? Yes. Bar. There was a bar there. Absolutely. Okay. There was a bar. It's no longer there, right? Yep. Okay. That has no trees, right? Right. Okay.
They bulldozed the mall. Exactly. And they bulldozed the mall when they built the bar, right? No. They just recently build bulldoze them. Yes, sir. Yes, ma'am. Okay. That's for staff to make sure that
if if uh it's it has anything to do that's a staff problem because that's called gaming the system. Yes, that's what I'm And you don't want them gaming the
system. I'm talking about Christian co Christian court which was bulldozed back in 1996 or the 70 or Woody's
apartment that you know they they had something there and they bulldozed. I'm not talking about somebody who just decided that wouldn't it be nice if they got all this land cleared and
cleared all the trees. No, they don't get any exception. No, they don't. But I'm going to go buy the property and then I'm going to put a condominium there and I don't have any trees because TEC is not TEC is not responsible for that. We want to we want
what we want to do is is get them get council. I could talk on and on. I'm going to sit down, but you got the point. Well, the point is that it's very few exceptions. That's right. There's very few. I found none in this. And when I went through
all the single family development, there are very few exceptions. Exactly. If it's done correctly, you can put a date that it was cleared. You can do something like that. But I think that goes back to the part in
the natural resources plan that states that we don't have an effective fine levied as a result of violating the trees like after you buy it. I think not not to muddy the whole concept of what we're talking about, but again, yes,
that is for something like across public on 50, you know. But if we're talking back in before Apollo program, okay, for whatever reason, then we're talking very few exceptions.
Those lands are gone for the most part. So again, I'm Mary, I'm trying to wrap my head around what you just brought. you do a lot of good work and you put a lot of a lot of research,
but I'm trying in my mind to figure out what is it that we're trying to fix. Okay? I'm always honest with you guys and that's just me. If the definitions are too much in the weeds right now, maybe we should do that
after this meeting on July 22nd. Maybe if it moves forward then we can eventually add more clarity with definitions. Maybe that's a more appropriate time. But Megan Mscosao last night was talking and saying
in regards to something else needs more clarity of definitions. Needs more clarity of definitions because if you don't know what you're talking about then how can you make an ordinance if you don't have definitions? You know, how can you really? But maybe it's too
much in the weeds for now because it's just being proposed right now. I I leave it up to your wise decision making and Lily's input. So, but I do think at some point we need some definitions and we need to make sure what are we going to do with condos? What are we going to do
with town homes? What is we how are we going to make sure all this is clear? So, I don't think it's unreasonable to request that condominiums be added to the list. I I don't think that's that bad.
Okay. And then I think that Mary's request is is reasonable. Um, you know, we want redevelopment. Those those lots that she has pointed out here, Christian Court and U,
no, not the Leon. De Leon is the Leon is a it was an apartment building that was built probably in the late 60s, early 70s that is it be needs to be
redeveloped. Um and then and then of course that big sand lot at the corner of um Park Avenue and Harrison has been it's been sitting there empty for decades. So I I think I think it's
reasonable to to try to try to come up with a way, you know, to help a developer develop those those pieces of property. And I'm all for that. Okay, I'm all for that. But those are the
exceptions that I've been talking about. Those are ones and twoies or three or fours. Yeah, there's not that many of them. The thing is, somebody may want to buy an old shopping center and level the buildings on the old shopping center and build a condominium there. You're not going to
have any trees. No trees. But that's redevelopment. Okay. So that that's where we need to be. Lily, if if I may, what's going to happen on the 22nd? Is it a reading to council or is it a
presentation for approval? It's just a presentation and there's no action being voted on. Okay. There's a bunch of presentations on the 22nd. That's it. I I don't know why you can't just
make the comments that you've made tonight and and then this these emails that um you know there needs to be some more clarity. Um when you talk about all residential in including multif family well that's all residential condominiums
town homes single family detached it's everything. Um, but there will be minimal amount of time at the 20 to add some input there. Mary, I'm still confused about your presentation and I I seem to be I've
heard this before um from you about there needing to be an some kind of consideration or exception for sites that do not have enough existing trees to be able to put 15%
u preserved tree canopy on on site. If you if if you have it, you need to try to do it if it's reasonable to try to get 15%. But if they don't exist on site like Harrison and Park,
we have an ordinance that covers that right now. You won't be preserving any trees. You're going to have all new trees on a blank site like that. There are some other projects I'm sure like a and and I don't know these as
well as lifelong residents of Titusville because I've only been here two years, but I I can easily imagine that there are existing buildings 50 years old that um are being under new management, new
ownership, I should say ownership. and and the site in no way meets the standards of the current tree ordinance. So, and it may not be able to. So, what
considerations need to be given to a retrofitted project which brings it into compliance as much as possible? Um, I can't I I don't know how to make a motion to deal with that tonight. I just
don't understand enough about retrofitting um the ordinance to deal with that. But I'm still a little bit confused about what you're trying to accomplish. But probably a lot of my confusion because I don't
understand whether these projects are existing or are we talking about something that was recently raised? And I mean I I don't know. I mean, you I just couldn't get that from your presentation. So, that
makes me want to fall back and just say we got a lot on our plate for the 22nd to understand and to try to get our presentations together before council. And um um I'm not happy with the presentations
that staff is putting together on this um on these tree ordinances revisions and it's going to take a lot of effort on our part to convince council that um we need better than this. So, um,
I I'd like an opportunity to sit down with you at some point in the near future and talk more about what you're trying to accomplish. Can we do that? More about what you're trying to to do. I don't understand the exceptions you're
talking about and I don't know why I don't understand it. So, um, I' I'd like to meet with you privately if that's possible. Maybe I'd understand it better.
I I think what what she's trying very very costly for a developer who's who's already doing a redevelopment like in the case of the de the Leyon village that guy's going to spend a ton of money trying to clean that property up and
make it livable again. it to to try to to go from zero like at Christian Court there's no trees there. There's one one oak tree that's in their in in their storm water pond. I mean
there is literally no trees on that property that it would be very very costly to start with nothing and create a 25% canopy on that property. and that that might be that might be
enough to prevent a developer from redeveloping the property. Instead, he's going to go out on the outskirts of town and mow down 75% of a fully wooded piece of property. So, you're saying on Christian Court,
he's got a blank slate and he There's no tracing. Okay. So, so I'm a landscape architect and you're if you're charging me with uh getting 25% canopy, I'm looking at this site plan. I'm saying, "Okay, great. No problem.
I I don't see the problem. There's no street trees here." None. Um there's no trees in the middle of the circular area that I I don't I see a
Most of the species are um eyelia. That's not a tree. Oh, you're talking about I'm talking about Christian court. I'm talking about Christian court. Um I don't know. Looks like a blank slate
to me. Looks like a pretty easy trees. You know where Ace Hardware is on street and McDonald's at the end of that street. Okay. So
back in the 1990s cleared it took off. It was appalling. Water over the dam. Right. Right. They should have find them. And that that's old old news. Now we deal with the new owner.
And you've got an existing infrastructure with the roads. Is that right? Or is it just cleared lot? It's a cleared lot. It's just a big sand pile. It's on top of one of the dunes. It's It's But this is the plan they want to implement.
Yes. And I I just I don't see what the problem is, but um or why they need an exception for the tree ordinance, but um I mean, if they came in with a new plan that was different from this, why would it be any different than
implementing this plan? It's like, well, Bob, if you want to be in compliance with with the 20 25 codes, we have a 25% requirement for trees on this property now. And to get that, you
may have to lose a few units or something. I I don't I I've run into this problem before. It's not that insurmountable. I I just don't see the the problem here just because it's an old plat
and they're trying to resurrect it and I don't know why they couldn't comply with the tree or trees if you don't have them. But I could place plenty of new trees on on this and it's easier if you do canopy shade obviously uh instead of vomittoriia to
get the 25% canopy. That's my thoughts. It has roads with gutters and everything and it has fire hydrants. I assume that connected itself. Oh, in Christian court. Yeah. I've never gone out there. I've just seen it from ace.
Drove around circle and big open space in the middle with one oak tree, one large oak tree in the middle, but doesn't look like he's saving that. And then I I don't know what the property boundaries are that's it's treated around it, but I don't I assume
that it's pretty well cleared till you get to the next person's property, you know. But you can go out there. Yes. Right. Or you can just zoom in on Google and see exactly what it is. Google Maps, you can see pretty clear. You can go under applications under
developments under review under the city's homepage and it has it right there. So, you know, the developer is already is already got the roads and everything. That's going to save the developer a lot of money and the curbing and the fire
hydrants. Oh, I thought this was a blank. This site was That's what I was asking. Are there existing roads there? I'm telling you, I've been there and you can see using Google Maps. It does have a road clear around the circle
and it has the gutters just the kind that we have nowadays, normal smooth gers, and it has fire hydrants every so often and it has a storm water pond. So, it's not because it has roads
fire hydrants has some infrastructure there that he won't have to pay for. So, if he has to pay for 25% fee, I just got the vote on this particular project. I just don't see an issue with not being able to comply with the 25%.
Um I just don't see it. I I've been there before on this multiple times and um this is, you know, we've had recessions before and we had to um
come back after the recession and sites were already cleared, roads were built and uh now somebody else wants to buy it and come in and be in compliance with the current codes. codes may have changed
from 30 years ago. Bob, if this is what you want to do, we understand. Here's our current codes. Um, and then they make accommodations for that. So, K's right there. there is a there is
roads there that I just don't see why that would be an issue at all about bringing anything up to code uh now uh not to say that there couldn't be
some situations where some exceptions for retrofitted projects where there's maybe more built than I I don't know there I could see some situations where you would need to get them into is into into compliance as
much as possible. That's a staff. You leave that up to staff hopefully and they can manage that without needing to get into the we not the same. Sometimes you just can't bring things into compliance. Well, it' be far better if they develop
Christian than if they went out and cut down 30 40 acres of wood. You see ancient history. Ancient history. It's already been cut down. Let's wrap this up. Yes. Um, what's y'all's pleasure? You want to
just let let staff do their videos? Um if there's a lot of if there's a lot of um presentations on the 26, then I don't think it's I don't know if they're going to give us any time, you know. Um I
don't know if I don't know if we even know what staff is going to present. So how how can we rebut it or I I need I need direction here. Lily,
this is just going for a reading. Okay. So, no action will be taken, right? But they will have to show a card. Staff is going to have to show what they're bringing forward, right? At that point, we would know and then and then we can take a reading
of what's going on because if the meeting is for a reading, no action will be taken and wishes and all of that through the reading, but at the end of the day, this ordinance is going to continue
and then we have seen what staff is talking about. I don't know. It's just it's just a thought to allow the process to take place. Well, they they weren't real happy last night with me asking for us to be able
to do a presentation. I mean, you could tell they weren't thrilled about that. And um so if you if we just wait until petitions and requests after they've had their discussion then then council will
show their cards also. Maybe that maybe that's the maybe that's the answer is just sit quietly and not try to attract any attention and see see what comes out and then then we can comment it on if if
we want to. it. I don't want to make them mad, you know. Don't want to. There's no reason. It's like poking a rattlesnake with a stick, you know. Don't want to do that.
If I can weigh in a little bit on the concern about what Brad may or may not say, it's about this. It's the same that was on council's agenda from the 27th. They just asked to kick it to to the 22nd. So if you go back to the May
agenda, May 27th, 2025, believe it's under the native planting incentives. It's got a long coverage, multif family, residential development, and critical root zone of trees. Um, it's all there. So,
so what do you guys want to do? I just watch the presentations and then we can individually if we feel compelled to we can comment under petitions and requests at the end of the meeting. Okay, sounds good to me.
We have staff's May 27th presentation. So, um, they put it off until they wanted to hear it again on the 22nd, right? They put it off. They were going to it was going to be on a regular city
council meeting and then it got pushed to a presentations meeting, right, on the 22nd. So we can read what what staff is going to represent and and um be prepared to comment on that in our
three minutes or whatever we get in our comments. So can we go back and find the agenda and we would be able to find the staff report for that because they didn't have a presentation prepared for the 27th, did they? Yeah, it was it's on the
agenda and it will be on the next agenda um days before council when it gets published online, but I I can send you the council meeting link. Okay, that helps. That'd be good.
So, we can look at the presentation before the meeting or the same that you guys saw months and months ago. But what was Yes. What was going what's going to be on the 22nd was on the agenda on the 27th.
Sounds good to me. All right, moving on. Agenda. All right. So, we're back on to petitions and requests from the public. Anybody want to speak? No. Okay.
We're on to reports. Staff, do you have a report? Um, only that I did attend the uh along with you environmental impact study from Starship. That was very uh interesting from how they had that presentation. I
did get a contact from them. um potentially hopefully to get someone to speech out to them to see if maybe we can provide a topic of concerns or things to have them come out and and talk with us. So, wanted to put that out
there as an option. Member Berdette, you have a report. remember Brownie, remember Delgado? Yeah, I the only thing I participated in the Isaac uh planting of the trees and that was a great experience. The kids
the kids were great and the the whole atmosphere was was fantastic. So, I recommend it. Uh it's a worth couple of hours. You you get your hands dirty and you get to interact with other people. So, from that, thank you K. That was
that was great and uh look forward to support you in the future. Blue hole August 2nd. Yes. Member Coy, member Tucker. Member Thompson. No report.
I'll give you guys a break. It It was a long long meeting. A lot of lot of good discussion. Um, but Lily was kind enough and Lori were kind enough to get these printed for us. I I asked and and they and they did it and
they're gorgeous. Um, and uh so you can what they are. Yes, they are um uh printed and bound copies of the sustainability action plan and the Titusville natural resources
report. And um they go along with the thou thousand friends of Florida report that I printed and handed out. And so these are your Bibles, guys. We have a plan finally. We we don't need to be floundering around like a rudderless
ship anymore. We can we can use these documents and move forward. We didn't didn't Oh, okay. Future agenda items. So, what do we want to talk about in August? That's right. the the the draft of
resolution 30-201. Yeah. That's one. We also are going to get a report from Brad on the um
dear on the parks parks and open space ordinance. So that Brad should have should be ready to um bring that to us and um
this meeting. Yes, we can get you out of here before 9:00. Well, on a good note is I'm planning on being out for the next meeting. So, so hopefully you guys can
leave a little earlier. All right, with that. So, we we got um open space parson open space ordinance and then we're going to work we're going to finish for the
resolution 30-201. Okay. Anything else? Meetings adjourned. Huh? No.