All right. So, it's um 5:30. I'm going to go ahead and call the meeting to order. Um Lori, can you call the role, please? >> Chairman Mek, Vice Chairwoman Thompson, >> here. >> Member Bernett >> here. >> Member Tucker here. Member Delgado,
member Browning >> here, >> alternate member Young. >> Okay, thank you. So, um, we do have a quorum. Um, can we stand for the pledge of allegiance? Hey, Bill. I allegiance to the flag of the United
States of America and to the republic for it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for Okay. So, um, moving on. Um, has everybody had a chance to look at the minutes? And if so, can, um, I have a
motion to approve the minutes? >> I'll move to approve the minutes. >> All right. Is there a second? >> All right. Does anybody have any changes or anything that that they um they have? If not, um the motion was made by member
Tucker, seconded by member um Michael, and uh all those in favor say I. >> I. Any opposed? Okay. And the minutes are approved. Um petitions and requests from the public present. Stan, would you like to talk?
>> Yes, I would. Yes, I would. Uh, thank you for turning this on. U, I'm going to call this one uh, something y'all don't like to hear about, but pollution and dishonesty. So, there's Agent Orange that we're not too responsible for, but there was a lot of dishonesty there
after people were dying and so forth. And I've lost some friends and I mean, I was a a veteran and it's very difficult to handle that. Tetraethylled, an additive to gasoline. Uh tetrath lead is known to be very harmful to u our
thinking and thought and yet we've had it uh in the in our gasoline for years going back I don't know to the 20s or where wherever it was added the tetrathalled for octane um
control of the gases from so the thing is is now if you look in YouTube you'll find that tetraethylled has been in the atmosphere even to uh people in Nepal in India uh even on top
of Mount Everest people have tetrathyl in their blood pas was so much I'm from West Virginia and apparently was that was where was first uh made uh a big deal of although it was in the 40s but uh POS these
forever chemicals. They're doing terrible things. And now it's in the environment. Where is it in the environment? Worldwide. It'd be interesting to see it on YouTube, but it's worldwide pollution. Everybody here has got POS forever
chemicals in their blood big time. Fact is is this uh ju just watch YouTube you a farmer in Michigan um who had dairy cattle and then he changed to beef cattle. Michigan had a big farm there. He got a notification
from the government says your farm is closed. You cannot sell any of your meat from your cows because of forever chemicals. He said what? How did this happen? So what he did is he got sludge
and uh from the u uh sewage waste plants. They said it was everything was fine, everything safe, certified safe and everything like that. He put it on the ground. He grew alpha alpha and so forth like that. All these things for his cows and it was heavily
polluted with forever chemicals. That's a sad story. So uh we have a situation that uh we have a a high detected rate of of POS in our water supply that was notified by the uh
Guardian uh newspaper and uh city's done nothing about it. They're just not doing anything about it. And uh I don't know what what are happening to our sludge where it's being put, but that's another question. I'm bringing this to you
because it it may be of interest to you. It's of interest to me because TEC is uh we have some dishonesty in our in our city and I'm just going to spend the rest of a few minutes on that is that uh as you all know probably all know that I was arrested I was going to say falsely
arrested. I was taken and questioned at the police department signed a paper went to jail visited by the police in jail signed another paper. So, when I'm going getting ready for to go to court to uh defend myself, I say, "Well, I'd
like to have the uh uh interrogation and my paper I signed from the police inquiry doesn't exist." Okay. Well, I'd like to see uh I'd like to get a police report of the police officers who visited me in jail. And the
paper I signed doesn't exist. I want y'all to understand is right now is what I I have I have been exposed to a training center to a to a training episode in the Tisville Police Department and as far as I'm concerned
they are trained to be dishonest. I'm not pleased with that. I mean that's just the beginning of that. Not only that, the police report uh although I was uh interrogated with my address and everything the police report says that in capital letters that
I'm a homeless person homeless person professional engineer known here for many years lived here for over 50 about 54 years said I'm homeless. There's two the other police report there's two police report other police report says I have an address on
pointet avenue. I'm just sharing this with you because there is horrible dishonesty in our police department. Okay, that's all. Any questions? Okay, thank you for letting me share with you.
>> Thank you, Mr. Johnson. Okay. Um, old business Native Landscape Public Trust Fund Resolution. Were you able to come up with anything, Member Brownie?
It should there should be something in your packet. So what is in your packet is a one-page paper um which basically hopefully um does what I said that I
would commit to which is writing a basis for um the TEC um committing to um landscape management trust fund being mostly
uh primarily for the purpose of uh supporting the um developing urban forest management plan. Um so I think if you read the paper that's pretty much what the paper is all about.
What it says is it gives some history of what we've used landscape trust funds for in the last 20 25 years. Um, and it's a it's a it's a call to consider um
hopefully the city will consider the trust fund as being um the main revenue um support for the new urban forest management plan. Um it it's a little bit
high level meaning that it doesn't get down into the weeds. I I um did talk to K St. um about it and I think she would have preferred that somewhere in the one-page
paper that it's it's more specific about well the landscape management trust fund needs to go for planting trees and I think that if the city council takes up the um the intent of this the purpose and the
intent of the trust fund and does devote the trust fund towards supporting the um UFMP then what's going to happen is um eventually it will support planting trees but
upfront there's probably um personnel hires software uh development um those soft costs are generally upfront not on the back end. soft costs being administrative, design, planning,
those kind of things that um it takes to get the ball rolling. And hopefully the soft costs are not um that much. And the hard cost, which would be planting trees in the right place, um is what um the um
the trust fund eventually does. It helps plant trees in the right place all throughout the city. And that's all I have to say about it. Um the only other note um I would be happy
um to um add something more specific like we would hope that the the trust fund would be devoted to planting trees as much as possible as opposed to design and planning for trees. that that was
basically Kay's intent was to say I it we need to buy trees and plant trees and if if you want to add something to this um >> I just had a question >> more specific I would certainly go along with that >> a clarification question because I can't
remember if this is this the pot that the urban forest manager comes from or is that a different pot? It it could. >> Okay. >> Why not? >> Well, I just didn't see it in here, so I just >> No, it's not it's not specific about >> specific. Okay.
>> U planting trees or buying uh inventory software or anything else that's going to take to keep track of all of the trees that we have throughout the city. How many do we have? What do they look like? What's their condition? What do we need to do to prioritize maintenance?
um you know, scheduling all of that stuff that an urban forest management plan does. Um I I don't know um right now what's the best way to um schedule and distribute, you know, the funding that that that trust fund um has in it
for the urban forest management plan. >> I guess my point is someone's going to have to oversee the software and the data. >> Absolutely. And the tree planting. I just wonder how that worked together.
>> Did I answer your question? >> Yes. >> Was that >> Yeah. Well, I think it's beautifully written and um and tactful rather than attacking the city. I think he did a really really nice job. Um perhaps I
mean I I like the last sentence that they could consider repurposing the trust fund to provide the lion's share of support for the um urban forest management plan such as
funding the salary for the urban forestry person um software and mainly planting trees. you just have to add um
for example or such as and add a few more words and then I think it's good and and so then um we would submit this to the city manager and hopefully he would put it on an agenda at some
close point in time and we could all show up and and and ask if they would consider doing That does that sound like a plan, Lily? >> Yeah, you can make a a motion if you want to about bringing this. I think
it's what you said, bringing this recommendation to council and then I'll pass that along. Well, I think that um I think we need to craft the last phrase of the last sentence, you know, and have
that added and then I I'd be ready for a motion. So, how how do you want to how do you want to add the specific things that we want to make sure do not get left out? Um, >> let let me say that I would would like
to avoid spending another month on this >> and and I'd like to move it off the TEC's table tonight if possible. So, I would suggest whatever we add to it to be more specific that it's short and
sweet. >> Yeah. Um, >> so I I suggest that we put after after UFMP, we put a comma and then the word including um and then
including um a a salary for an urban forest manager, planting canopy trees throughout the right places in the comma um
software, you know, for the for the you software for the urban forest manage me plan management plan. And what do you want to end it with? And and
any other any other things that are necessary to to implement and manage our urban forest. >> How's that sound? >> Sounds pretty good to me. I was trying to take
>> Okay, read me back what you got. >> Software. Excuse me. Thank you. after software for administrative purposes. Um I think I was a little bit behind you but but >> okay put a a comma and any other
any other yeah tools necessary for implementation and execution of our urban forest management plan. Can I read back what I think you said? >> Can I read back what I think you said? >> Yes. >> Um,
>> still writing. >> I was writing too. Just trying. >> Would you like me to read what I have or would you like to do your >> go for it? >> Okay. uh after uh after the urban forest management plan that where it says
period that would be a comma and then including salary for urban forest manager planting the right tree in the right place throughout the city.
software for administrative purposes and any other tools necessary to execute the urban forest master plan.
>> Sounds great to me. >> You see any red flags in there? Lori, have you got it? Read the very last sentence one more time. I mean just the and any other >> tools necessary to execute
the UFMP. >> I had implement. >> Well, actually I said implement and execute, but execute's fine. We don't need implement. >> Thank you. We We've got enough implement
implementation talks. Let's execute. >> Can I get a motion? >> I move that we >> Do I need to read the whole all that verbiage? I I move that we uh submit this paper and the additional verbiage
um to uh staff for uh consideration of um moving this toward towards council for approval. >> Second. >> Um all right. So, we had a motion by
member Browning, seconded by member Tucker, um to um take this document along with the um add additional verbiage and and submit it to staff uh for their consideration of um submitting
it to the city council. All those in favor say I. >> I. Any opposed? Okay, the motion carries unanimously. Good job. Great job, Member Brownie. That was awesome.
Do you do you want to talk about um the the report that you have here or >> my members report? >> That's your members report. >> Okay, great. Okay, so now we're on to new new business um project planning. And so your homework
last week was to review the natural resources report and this we need to decide on um what we want to work on as our next project. I think that you know we've we've got an urban forestry master plan
in the works. Um and all the tree stuff that's going on and um I think it's time to uh find something new to to to work on. So, does anybody anybody want to start out?
>> I can give you my brief. I just went general to water quality and there was like four or five general topics and I coincidentally attended a
presentation today by Jesse Wales. You know her? It was stellar. And I asked her if she would speak to us and or counsel and she said she would be glad to speak to us and she'd have to check and see if her boss wanted to come speak to council.
>> I can talk to her boss. >> Okay. Anyway, it was it ties in with water quality. It has specifically this presentation was about shoreline restoration and it's very positive. They
give examples of successes and she they they've done their homework. They have um you probably know all this but they have a like a consortium of people that um they give money to
and also contribute to their funding. I just think it's a good um reminder that um shoreline restoration is a good uh what do I want to say? What word I'm looking for?
It's a good example of water quality restoration. >> It is dear to my heart as everyone knows. Um the loss of the sandy beaches um system ecosystem in the lagoon is tragic for the animals that need sandy
beaches such as horseshoe crabs, shore birds, waiting birds um and humans. You know, human recreation is so important and we need sandy beaches. So, that's good. All right. So, we got water quality. Um, does anybody else have a
suggestion for what they want to talk about? I know that ties into your nanobubble thing, too. I I have a couple of uh things that stood out to me as priorities that um
consequentially all of these relate to water quality. And um I'm not sure if we should focus on any one of these specifically or somehow focus on a bigger picture,
but um consider that these things that were in the um under recommendations in the natural resources plan. Um
septic to sewer conversions. Um I know the there's a program and it's ongoing. I don't know where we are with that. Um I don't know that we need to have Mr. Cook come and give a presentation. I'm not asking for that.
It says so concerning. microphone. Sorry, >> my pardon. It raised a question in my mind about our land uh acquisition program. Um have we started to outline
acquisition targets? I would think that an area it's going to take a while to come up with a program that protects uh areas of critical concern by buying those properties. And it seems like there's two strategies
really that would help to keep those areas from being developed over uh in the future. One would be obviously to buy the land. That takes a lot of money. Another question I had about that that
though was why couldn't we not reszone those areas so that um we really limit the amount of impervious surface that we can put in those areas of critical concern. So one is acquisition, the
other is um reszoning. I I don't know what we're doing to reszone. Have we had any meetings? I'm talking about staff. staff had any meetings to talk about these areas of critical concern. You know, what is uh
is there any focus now by staff on those areas? Um I can understand how perhaps um a project got away from us. Maybe it had to do with ownership and the land was already zoned and somebody um that
owned the land wanted to work with a developer and develop it before we had a chance to acquire it or reszone it. Those things happen. But going forward, are we in the process in any way, shape, or form of beginning to target
where those areas of critical concern are on a map? We show those on a map and looking at what the land use is for those areas. Uh it could be multiple land uses in those areas and what would it take to reszone and or acquire and
you can't put a pencil to it and talk about acquisition cost until you identify those areas of concern and look at the ownership. How many acres are we talking about? Um what's there now? Um you know those kinds of of questions.
So, um that was another area. And then um I I agree that the Indian River Lagoon is the probably the you know the number one priority. And how do we get there? Well, it's a multistrategy list of things that we need to do uh to
protect the lagoon. And I think the lagoon and our drinking water aquifers are hand and they're hand and glove um working together. We we can't allow the aquifers to um degrade and we need to do
everything that we can to protect the watersheds around those and around those aquifers and those wells. So those are the big things that I had on my priorities list. going forward. >> Okay. Thank you very much. Um, member
Browning, member Berdette, do you have any any um burning things that you want to talk about? >> Uh, it mostly just had to do with the water as well. >> All right. Thank you, Mr. Young.
Uh, I'm glad to see we're doing that and I think we should push reszoning first the easiest and then buying the second. So, if we get the areas of the where the wells are reszoned, work on that as we then push for acquisition.
Um, in 1957 when I'm my dad brought me to Titusville, um, we put down a well and, uh, we hit Carl at 5T. And so I stood in the hole being a
little kid and I was like five foot tall and I could just barely see over the dirt and my feet were in mushy water. 40 years later, before my dad died, we had to make the
well. We put down a 20 foot pipe. 12 years later, we put another 20ft pipe. We put another 20 foot pipe. So, the well was 60 feet deep. Before we died, it went dry. So in my lifetime I've seen the aquafer water level on
Garden Street go from five feet below surface to to 55 60 feet below surface. So this is a very important issue to deal with. I just thought I might mention that for those who may not have been here that
long. Thank you. Um, so we got like, um, I don't know the legalities of just reszoning someone's piece of property
out of the blue. Um, I don't know if we can legally do that. Um, Lily, do you have any idea? >> No, but I'm looking at I think which line item you're talking about. Um, and it it checks off I mean a lot of boxes in the comprehensive plan, the
sustainability plan. They all kind of align with prioritization of the acquisition of lands identified as areas of critical concern or wetlands and create a plan to prioritize purchase and fund maintenance. Is that the one you're
talking about? That is something that I don't believe has any direct attention on it at this point. I mean there are entities and things working towards water quality. Um but in terms of city land acquisition or any of the things you're talking about I
don't know of them if there are >> yeah there's a lot going on with water quality. Um I I there's a a lot a lot of organizations and a lot going on. Um the only reasonzoning that's happening on the areas of critical concern are when
they get reszoned for um housing developments. That's it. You know, um there's no doesn't seem to be any appetite from the city council to turn
down reszoning requests, you know, for for the areas of crit critical concern when they come up. And like, you know, the biggest one that comes to mind is Brookshshire at the at the intersection of um I95 and Garden Street, the
northwest corner. That was a beautiful, you know, and that's our area 2 wellfield. And now it's got houses and streets and fertilizer and pesticides going into our drink and water supply.
Um, but like I said, I don't I don't know. I don't know what the law is on reszoning properties. So, for my my um homework thing, I picked wetlands and
the um and this might be something we could get done while while we were working on some other like the areas of critical concern and trying to figure out how to for land acquisition, we'd have to do a bond.
We'd have I mean we'd have to go to a a referendum and let people vote on whether they want to pay extra taxes to buy property because the city doesn't have money to buy property. So that would entail a lot of work there and
some time. So, our wetlands policies in our comprehensive plan in the future land use element and uh the conservation um element are a mess and and they are
um there's a lot of confusion. They don't really jive. There's it's not written in black and white of exactly what you can do with wetlands. um are are are and developers are using
that confusion in the language to get away with developing our wetlands. And and so the the the comp plan has been ever since 2011 um when some changes were made um to
allow more things to happen on our wetlands. Our wetlands policies have been a mess and it's hard on staff because they have to spend a lot of time trying to interpret, you know, what does this mean? when this developer comes and they want to do this or that on a piece
of property, you know, h what is what is the language? Um the county, Bvard County, we could we could copy BVAR County and have black and white set in stone. This is what you're allowed to do with wetlands instead of
having these vague v the vague language like what we have here in in um Titusville. Um Brear County, you know, their wetland policies would be a really really good um example, you know, to try try to
emulate. And I don't think it would take that long for us to try to wade through those two um elements in the comp plan and try try to do something to um line up the the what's being said in the
future land use and what's being said in the conservation element so that they jive and and that would make it easier on staff. um like our um open space and recreation, that's a zoning category, but there's a
lot of confusion over the open space and recreation zoning thing, too. But um and then, you know, if a wetland's less than five acres, there's they don't have they can pretty much fill it in and build houses on it the way it it is now.
There's there's almost no protection at all in Titusville's um comp plan for wetlands that are less than five acres. And then there's confusion about large wetlands. So if somebody has a piece of property, they have a five acre piece of
property and they have an acre of uplands on it and four acres of wetlands and the four acres of wetlands adjoins 20 acres of wetlands. then they since they're technically on their five acres,
it's less than five acres of wetlands, they're they're developing them. So, something needs to be clarified about that. Um >> Madam Chairman, and the county um regulations are addressing that. Yeah, the county
uses a um formula where they they use percentages and I I I haven't studied it. I don't know about it. I can't sit here and say what it is. I just know that that is how they do it. There they
there's some percentage that can be developed. Um but it's very it's very clear on on what can be done. Um so um right now you know I think we I
would like to see us work on the comp plan elements for um future land use and conservation to clarify and clean up any policy that deals with wetlands and get it fixed. you know, because it's confusing to the developers, it's
confusing to planning staff, and as a result, a a lot of our smaller wetlands are just being covered up with houses right now. Um, and then one, you know, once once you fix the comp plan, then you can go back
and look at the land development regulations and make sure that the land development regulations, you know, are in place to to accomplish what the comp plan says we should be doing. Um, and I also would like to see,
you know, if if if we decide to do that, I would like to see somebody other than Kimley Horn end up being the consultant that works with us and the planning staff to get this done.
I'd like to see um the uh the company that did our natural resources report. I'm looking for their name somewhere here in my notes, but Jay Axom who did you know the wetlands things in our
natural resources uh report is very very extremely knowledgeable about wetlands policies. Um and that was inspire placemaking. that was the company that came, you know, did our natural resources report. I I' I'd like to see
us work with them because if when Kimley Horn works on changes to our comp plan, they they're they get like the inside track, it doesn't seem right for the company that could eventually benefit
from the recommendations that they make to our comprehensive plan to be working on changes to our comprehensive plan. That that doesn't seem that doesn't make sense. So our our wetlands policies um
you know they they should be made easy so that everyone can understand them, the developers can understand them, staff can understand them, the staff doesn't have to spend a lot of time working with the developer and arguing with the developer. And it it should
just be made streamlined and easy so that staff doesn't have to spend a lot of time working on who's going to develop, you know, how how our wetlands are going to be
developed. So that that was my vote. So how do you guys feel? Time for discussion. We got three things on the table. Water quality, um areas of critical concern, land acquisition, and that that could be for wetlands too, the
land acquisition. Um what in our um meeting um last week, Lily sug suggested that um what she would like to see was uh she would like to see us work on an
inventory and a master plan for all the connected green space that's in town, which we do have a lot of wetlands. and and if you throw in the um the crit areas of critical concern, there's a lot
of connected green space in our community which really makes us unique. I mean, you think about when you go down south and you go to Melbourne and Palm Bay and it's just all developed. We are blessed with a different kind of topography here in in Titusville that is
unlike any other community in the county because we have these very high ancient rolling ancient sand dune systems which are our areas of critical concern that have wetlands in between them. It's kind of like a corduroy pattern. You've got a
rolling hill that that that has, you know, an old beach sand type ecosystem on it. And then you go downhill and you've got a wetland. And then, you know what's happened? Um, you look at what happened with Brookshshire. You had
these beautiful big hills out there and they pushed them over into the wetland and they flattened everything out and and then and then they started having they filled in the wetland with the beach dunes, you know, that were there and flattened everything out and then people started having problems with
flooding in their homes that were close to where that old wetland used to be after they filled it in. But but that that's that is what's happening, you know, to our really unique topography that we have here. And there's there's
not enough protection for it. >> Sounds like um you know, wetlands and uh areas around wells u areas of critical concern are interrelated. They're linked. Yeah. >> Um does it make sense to come up with
land development regulations that clarify and um you know um delineate uh an action plan for protection. That's a big that's a big ask. It's a
big project, but so is cleaning up the IRL. A lot of it's a lot of different partners. uh a lot of different projects, a lot of different funding sources that are coming together to, you know, work on a big problem. Um
and protection of wetlands is I've only been here two years, but I've heard um most of the comments I've heard are of coming from citizens are about trees and flooding
and um certainly wetlands um and storm water management in those areas of critical concern are all as you say that they've been linked and um there's been cause and effect uh issues
um related to land development. Why can't we I I I would love to work on that and make wetlands a priority project, but it seems like it's really not just wetlands. It's it's our drinking aquifers and the land that's
related to those and um that those are big items in the comp plan. Why can't they be clarified in the land development regulations? Member Tucker. Well, I just wanted to weigh in that um
that I totally agree. it it's almost to we're approaching the tipping point to ruining it forever >> if we don't take some positive action towards um your point about the wetlands and changing the topography
and all all systems are connected. So I don't know if the developers don't understand that or they just choose not to for their end result. But once you start messing with one part of it, it's going to domino.
>> Me too. Go ahead. >> You fill in wetlands and the water that used to go there and be stored there, it has to go somewhere. Yeah. And so that's that's the danger of developing the edges of those big
wetlands that we have on the west side of town. When you if you start if you start getting rid of the the upland borders around those wetlands and you take down all the trees that are sucking up all kinds of storm water and
rainwater and you replace those trees with houses and rooftops and streets, the water has to go somewhere. And and it's not going to go into a street. It's not going to go into a house. It is it's
going to go into the wetland and the it's going to flood the neighborhoods that were built in the 1960s in the wetlands before there was any wetland protection all along the west
side of Park Avenue at the bottom of the hill at Park Avenue, Overlook Terrace, um Greenwood Street, Carol Avenue, all all of those older subdivisions when you come down the hill on Park Avenue and
you get to the bottom, they're right up. I mean, they they were they filled in. There's little ponds where they took the fill out and filled in the swamp and built houses on top of it. And if you take away the the the thing that's protecting them now, which is the
uplands around the edges of the wetlands, then then the water has to go somewhere. So, it can go in people's houses and in their streets. And there and then there's also um the restoring the natural flow from those wetlands
west instead of into the Indian River Lagoon. But I think you know the the way to start is with the comp plan and the language of the wetlands elements themselves. We need to get that
straightened out. take that burden off of the planning staff and give them a way to logically deal with the the development requests that keep coming in. And then once once we get the comp
plan straightened out, then we can start looking at some other things. Just bite off a little bit at a time, starting with the wetlands language in our comp plan. Oh, I just wanted to make the point about um how the city council is is is
focused on economic value and um in the long run we see economic value in the naturalization and keeping what we have natural. But I just wanted to make the point about the lagoon. If we if we
pursue that as we will that um that has big economic impact on tourism what draws people to Tisville and they're um from what I've heard they're they're
pushing towards bringing more of that draw from the nature point of view >> to to bring more economic value to Tisville. Well, if the water's not clear, they're not going out there to kayak.
So, I just wanted to add that point. >> Member Young, >> I agree with everything you're saying. Um, part of what you're saying was we're pushing for things and somebody undoes what we tr push for. uh the planning and
zoning committee or commission are they we've had times where we ask for stuff and then they change stuff and so it's like we're in competition with them and by what we're trying to do here are we going to be in more competition with
them if we're trying to push this that shouldn't they be a more serious about what they're doing um you know we have hurricane season and I my being in Florida so long. Um I I've seen where
developers develop something and then later the hurricane comes flooded and then you see people drowning and water up to here crying that saved me and I don't see anybody suing the developer
for getting rid of the wetlands that then cost that person's life. Uh shouldn't there isn't there some kind of uh lawyer or legal issue of if the city undoes wetlands and they develop on
it and someone drowns in it is that our are we liable legally for that person's death is a planning and zoning committee is the city council I mean who you know who approves these things that allows developers to develop places that
shouldn't be developed and then then during a hurricane or whatever whenever someone dies is where is that legal where do we fit in with that problem? >> I can't answer that question. I don't know. I I don't I don't know of any city
council that's been sued because of a land use or a zoning change that they've made that resulted in someone being flooded. I I I'm not aware of it. Could it could be a case like that. I know that all around us, all around us in Valuchia
County, they just tried to do a moratorum on any new development because the flooding in their existing neighborhoods has gotten so bad that they they're having to try to slow down development so that they can address what's already been developed that's
being flooded. And it's happening in Orlando. It's happening it's happening all over around us. And so, you know, right right now we do have some flooding issues in in in our town, but um not as
bad as what I've seen up in Valuchia County. But that doesn't mean that it won't get worse if we keep filling in our wetlands and and displacing the water. I'm in agreement that we should focus on wetland policy and land development
regulations. So, um you mentioned starting with the comp plan. Um I'm not familiar with exactly what's in the comp plan now related to
wetland. I I know that we don't exactly administrate wetlands um the same as the uh St. John's Water Management District. My understanding is
that um you can go above and beyond that, but that's the baseline. And um we have some uh I think what you were saying we have some inefficiencies here that are due to
lack of clarity. Um and so how do we focus on clarity and tightening up the ship a little bit? Um, I'm trying to think about what we come back next month with as far as what we supposed to go back home and look at the
comp plan and um pull out what's there regarding uh and maybe the land development regulations as well or just the comp plan and look at what it says. I'm ready to get into the weeds as soon as possible. So, I don't I don't I'm not
sure that we should jump right into land development regulations, but um I'm not sure I'm qualified to assess what's in the comp plan as being um
where we start. >> Okay. So, um if you look at if you know what Jay has put in the wetlands starts on page 31 in the natural resources um report he starts out the
first thing he says evaluate the LDRs to identify opportunities to clarify or strengthen the city wetland regulations. But the LDRs are put in place to um you know to implement what's in the comp
plan. So, I think we need to start with the comp plan first. What do you think, Lily? >> So, the comp plan is more of like a visioning document and um in the sense that it's already intended to be a goal
in which we have no net loss of wetlands. I think the reason he put this here is because it just jumps in right in to try and achieve that goal. I think the the note at loss of wetlands has the part that talks about the comprehensive
plan policy CE strategy 1.6 2.1. Um I'm not sure at this time if if the changes really need to be focused on the comprehensive plan. That's a future visioning document. I think it needs to be probably what you were mentioning
clarifying the LDR because there's a lot of confusion there. >> Well, I think you know I I had a couple of long conversations with Mary Spar and she is there's probably nobody better than her as far as you know knowledge of
wetlands and she's been working with the county you know for over 20 years. um the the percentage that that she you know she said the county has a percentage it's right there on page 33 it's 1.8 maximum wetland impact for
developments based on the threshold used at Vieira so that would be v you know what they used at Vieira would be what the county is using. So if you have a a a piece of property that is is I guess is all
wetlands and you and you have no way to you utilize it, you can you can you can impact 1.8% of it. I that's how I would interpret that. Um but she feels like we needed to because of the opportunity
becau because the city's ear rec uh submitt got rejected by the state and sent back. Um she felt like this was a really good time to try to address the comprehensive plan. Um, and then once
you get the comprehensive plan language straightened out between what it says in the um, conservation element and what it says in the um, future land use development and make sure that they're both saying the same things. And once
you get that straightened out, then you can start on the LDRs. And I'm just I'm paring what what she said. She said the Titusville wetland policies are very confusers confusing and developers are using that confusion to
get away with filling in wetlands. So they're they're arguing with staff and getting away with um you know filling in our wetlands. Yet the county very clearly has has a has um you know a a
stipulation that you can only impact 1.8 maximum impacts 1.8%. So that was that was her recommendation. um she felt like it would it would be better off to start with the language in
the comp plan because it would have to be submitted during the resubmitt of the year and and that's what they they had Kimley Horn was is working with um the city on their re resubmitt of the ear
policy and they actually had the Titusville natural resources report on a slide. that they showed at the city council and and recommended that the city um look at the the recommendations
of the natural resources report and and start trying to implement them. So, this this would be a good way to start question. How would we actually begin this? >> Well, I don't know. I Lily showed me how
to find the comp plan in in in this on the city's website by just doing a search and go to the s search and say comprehensive plan um future land use element and then it and then it would
come up and you could you can look at what's in there in the language right now. Uh, I'm not sure how we would do it. I whether we would like look at the comp plan ourselves and um try to figure out
where where these discrepancies are and then try to recommend ourselves or would staff be involved? What what what do you think, Lily? >> Yes. So I'm actually looking at it as if you want to go forward with developing
or amending existing wetland policies to clarify and create more limitation on wetland impacts that whole segment. Um we can take that and run it through the decision tree for prioritizing which
actions funding and staffing should be um taken taken first. uh obviously with your uh input on focusing on if you want to focus on the comprehensive plan changes um and bring back to you sort of the aggregate of that result really if
um because there's a decision tree after I believe it's on the following 38 that we can run through all of these options on and see which uh areas we can tackle. I mean this is just formally bringing attention um you'd be the I
think primary body bringing attention to this um issue and just iteratively working on where the problem problems are because I don't think we've really given a lot of direct attention on this issue. So it would have to take some
some time but I can bring this back back to the planners. Why couldn't we run something through the decision tree tonight, right now, so we can see how it works and see what surfaces?
I'm I'm like member Browning. I I'm ready to jump on this right away. I mean, this has been going on since 2011 and and it's it it is it's time to fix it. I think my ability to give you full and
complete answers to these questions is kind of what might limit >> our ability to go through this list if I'm being honest. >> I mean, we could guess what the answers are. Like number three, does the city have
existing funds and staff to achieve the objectives? No. Proceed. I'm on page 38. We could test it or do you want to bring in Brad and make him come next next month? >> I'm feeling like Brad, maybe even Sandy
might want to be aware that the TEC would like to focus on this as their priority for the foreseeable future. Mhm. >> And I think sending that signal is is a strong indicator that this will start.
>> Okay. So, so for our homework then this month we could look we could study the future land use element and the conservation element in the comprehensive plan. I'm going to see if
I can even find them. I can get on the computer on this on this or on the internet on this computer, right? Yeah, there it is. Google Chrome. So then I go to titusoul.com. >> Some of some of us have a copy of the
comp plan in our office. >> You you have a copy of it in your office? >> I do. Ah, my office is in is in my bedroom and it is a complete disaster and I don't have a copy of the comp plan. We could charge
the G, if I may, Madame Chair, we could charge the GEC members with um going to the future land use section and the conservation section and the comp plan, reading it, and then um
you know, also reading what the land development regulations say about um I know we could review and comment for homework. Um, you can just review the comp plan and comment on that or we
could review the comp plan sections that you mentioned, future land use and conservation and um, read what those sections say about wetlands and let that be it. But bottom line is we could ask staff to or tell
staff that we want to focus as our next priority area is um wetlands wetland conservation. >> Yeah, I could get that in a motion. That would be really helpful. >> What?
I move that um we let staff know that the TEC would like to focus our next um efforts and and uh time on uh wetland uh conservation
and I don't know that I need to say any more about it than that. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> All right. So, the motion was made by member Browning and seconded by member Tucker
um that we notify um Titusville planning staff that the TEC would like to focus on wetlands um and and uh the language of the wetlands in the comprehensive plan and the land development regulations.
All those in favor say I. >> Sorry. So, not specifically the elements in the natural resources plan. I'm are are you asking to work on the wetland portion of the natural resources plan? That's kind of
the >> I I think that's what we were thinking is that the natural resources plan is the base document. >> Okay. >> From which um our work would >> you know emanate bring forth. That's
that's the basis for we've done I mean there's been a lot of work on that already. So why reinvent the wheel? >> I agree except there there's nowhere it doesn't it doesn't it doesn't recommend making
changes to the um elements in the comprehensive plan. And if you look at the um at the top of the page where it says comprehensive plan policy, those are all blank spaces except for no net loss of
wetlands. That's the only one that has anything to do with the comp plan. And I think that might be why Mary said we really need to start first with with to make sure that the comprehensive plan
land use element and conservation element have the vision that we want and that they are compatible. Then we c then we can start on the LDRs that are all outlined in the natural
resources report. >> I think that that was the process that she recommended that we do >> and not >> try to get a an overview of what the comp plan says first. get a basic
understanding of of what the comp plan is, the vision and and um as a guiding document. If we don't understand that, difficult for us to start getting into the weeds a little bit. Um no net loss
could be taken as no net loss. You can't fill in over 1.8% or is 1.8% allowed? Really, no net loss? What does no net loss mean? So, >> right, >> um, again, it kind of starts with the
comp plan and let's understand what it says and be knowledgeable about that for the next meeting. >> Um, so we can start to discuss it intelligently and work with staff to go from there.
So Lori, can you read the motion, please? Member Browning made a motion that the Titus environmental commission will focus on wetland conservation and the comprehensive plan, land use element, and conservation element for the foreseeable future. Member Tucker
seconded. Okay. All those in favor say I. >> I. Any opposed? >> Okay. So, that motion carries unanimously. So, Lily, can you walk me through how to find the comp plan on the computer? Because I am. I've typed in
comprehensive plan in the search bar. >> If you go to Google and Titusville comprehensive plan, that'll get you there, too. >> I was trying to get to it from the city's website. That's right. You went to Google. Okay.
Let me try that. I did. >> I did in the last um email. Yeah. Thank you. That would be easier. Okay. So, so Lily has sent you a link to the um comp plan. We're going to be focusing on the
um future land use element. All all of the wetlands references languages that are in the future land use element and all of the wetlands language that's in the conservation element. That that's your
target. Got it. Okay. Does anybody have anything else um on the project planning um agenda item 8A? Anything else? And and we will keep you know we'll keep all this other stuff
that we talked about. Um you know that but these are great. I think we've got a a really good roadmap for how we want to move forward as as a body and and and I appreciate appreciate Lily. Um, yeah, I
do. Lily rocks. >> Okay. Um, petitions and requests from the public. All right. Reports. Member Young, do you have a report?
>> Um, no. I'm back in town today. So, um, I hope to catch up. And sorry I can't hear very well but I I do have um October 4th, 5th and 6th. Uh I'm a member of the
American Solar Energy Society. It's a national club uh association and uh in October they always have a solar tour of solar powered houses and it's free. It's a ASUS is a club an
organization to educate and inspire people. They don't sell anything. So, it's a membership. It's a $30 membership dues. That's how they run their organization and they publish all kind of information. So, if you're looking
for solar information, uh you can look up ASUS, American Solar Energy Society, or you can come to my house October 4th, 5th, and 6th, and I'll show you my solar stuff that I have at my house. Uh, and
so there will be about 2,000 houses throughout the country on exhibit that uh, weekend. So I thought I'd talk about that that I'm part of that and I'm part of this. So there you go. >> Nice. Yeah, you can see your stuff from
US1. It looks really impressive. >> Yeah. When you get to South Street and US at the red light now that my neighbor cut down the trees. Did you notice that? >> Yeah. >> Yes. >> All of his trees. to let him do that. Um, but uh I I my trees are still there.
He won't touch mine, but he cut down all his tree. Now anybody can see my solar system pretty easily. >> I'm done. >> Member Berdette. >> Uh, nothing to report at this time. >> Member Browning.
>> This will this will be short. In July, >> I did a report on the critical root zone uh which is mentioned in our tree ordinance. And this ninepage report
um was submitted to uh city manager with a request to pass this to uh all council members. And in their second meeting in July, um council discussed the three ordinance
changes that have been recommended by TEC of which the critical root zone is one. Um I I want to report give you basically a short summary about what this report says. It cites um
scientific papers and references from people like uh Dr. Kim Coder who's now retired from the University of Georgia Warell School of Forestry. It also cites um Andrew Dr. Andrew Koser University of
Florida and um he is a master arborist and an expert on um tree damage uh on construction sites. He's written numerous papers on um
that focus on critical root zone and this is a summary of some of his work and coders's work and basically I want to just put this sort of in a nutshell so that going forward as we get towards
a public meeting on this and I should say that at that um I think it was July 22nd meeting council um agreed to move these ordinance changes forward towards public meetings. Okay,
that's all they did. We still have a couple of um two or three meetings to go on this and it may start in October. Not not sure, but be looking for that. Um so,
regarding the critical roots, I'm not going to put this for you in a nutshell. I've talked about it before, but our current code says that for every inch in diameter of the tree you're you're trying to save, um the critical root zone goes out six times
the diameter of that one inch diameter. So if you have a 10-in tree, the the radius that the critical root zone is is um six times that. Okay. Now the code is a little bit confusing because it talks about the diameter is established but
everywhere else um that I've ever worked and if you read about critical root zone it talks about the radius of a circle around a tree. Okay, I've been before this body before and talked about the critical root zone. Um,
and what we needed to do here in the city is bringing up to minimum standards that being the uh American National Standards Institute. I referenced the standard which also is the same as the international society of arboric culture
standard which basically is um for one inch uh you go out 12 in. Okay. So it's 1 foot 12 in for each inch in diameter. That's the national standard. Not everybody in the country goes by that
standard. It's picked up by a lot of people uh here and internationally, but 1 to 12 is as much of a standard as we have. The major tree companies like Davy Tree, which is a national company, um
they use 1.25 ft per inch. Anyway, I'm going to get back to the inch per inch thing. Here in the city, we've codified six inches for every inch. Okay?
6 inches out for every inch in diameter. That's it. That's half of the national standard. What this report says is that we're going to create storm debris. We are not going to preserve trees. Our
code says now that we should preserve uh 15% of existing trees on construction sites at least for commercial properties and residential subdivisions are commercial activity. Um we don't cover
individual residences but we do cover new development and um the my whole focus has been on getting this thing upgraded. staff um made a presentation at that meeting on July 22nd and they made a an extensive
presentation and basically they're not agreeing with the science and they're pushing the 1 in to 6 in ratio. That's the battle. That's the um that's the thing that I would like for you to show up for in subsequent meetings here talking about the critical
root zone. It makes no sense to me if we go forward with uh extending the tree ordinance to multif family properties and require that multif family properties also preserve a certain
percentage of trees if possible and we're not going to preserve trees. We we have an overarching requirement for preservation and then we have a critical root zone which basically is the same as the structural root plate
dimension. There are scientists out there that have established for dicots not not angioperms like you have on your farm and not palms but dicots things that have buttress roots. Those are the
trees we're talking about. live oaks, maples, those kind of things. And because they have buttress roots, uh they have a structural root plate which needs to be preserved. Then they have transport roots, then they have feeder roots. And our code right now allows
transport and feeder roots to be totally removed. It only protects the structural root plate and that is totally unacceptable uh in any community that cares about trees. So, this report is for you. Hopefully, it'll explain why I've been
mouthing off about this for a year. Um, and I'm still continuing that uh issue. I still want to talk about it with staff and hope that we can um I hope I don't have to ask Dr. Andrew Koser to show up here at meetings, but
that would be very difficult. But there are other papers that I have copies of that talk about how large native trees protect housing in high wind throws. Uh not just how do we keep them intact and keep them from blowing over, but how
when when we save them in the right way, um large canopy shade trees actually buffer wind throws and help keep uh rooftops from blowing away. So that's what I'm concerned about. And um there's in particular a three-page letter at the
end of this by a um person I've worked with before. He's a master arborist in Georgia like Dr. Koser and um his letter is pretty striking I think and I hope you'll read that. >> So that's it. That's my report.
>> Thank you. Um that's a really really good um report. Lily, do we know when those three ordinances are going to go out for um public comment? >> Um I believe at the end the last meeting in October, but it's always subject to
change. >> So >> did you say November? >> October. >> Thank you. >> Uh the 28th, I believe, is that day. Member Tucker, you have a report.
>> First time. Okay. I attended the EIS for the super heavy presented by the FAA and in a nutshell, it was a fire hose of information.
Basically, all of Titusville is going to be impacted. noise levels, fly zones, not to mention the beach closer, which a lot of people were there for that. I can't begin. They had several copies of the actual um
study. It's in a 3-inch binder, but I did pick up four of these, which gives you the overview and the contact information. So if you want to research it yourself, you can know all you need to know about this EIS for super heavy.
That's it. Thank you. Yeah, it's uh it's going to have a big impact. I mean the the headline um yesterday for the Florida Today, you know, two-inch letters was uh
Starship may impact flights from Tampa, Orlando International, and nu and multiple South Florida airports from as little as an hour to as much as four
hours of layovers. it will be um it will cause flight cancellations um and really disrupt air traffic um in in the s in the central and south part of the state and I'm wondering you know
has has visit Florida and all the tourism leaders in the state really do they understand what two starship launches a day which is the goal is going to do to air traffic in central
and south Florida, you know, and and you know, right now they're they're only saying they're going to close the beach 60 days a year. Well, that's that's for this EIS, you know, and maybe maybe the um maybe the launches at LC37 aren't
going to cause the beach to close because it's further south, but they're saying 60 days a year, but that's that's only that's only this first bite out of the apple, you know, and that's that's how um that's how Mr. Musk does his
business is a bite at a time. But his goal is 200 Starship launches a year. No, I'm sorry. Two a day. That's his his goal is two a day from Kennedy
Space Center. So we'll if if that's if that happens, we'll never see our beach again. Um another >> this particular one >> focuses on 39A, >> right? Yeah. that 39A >> is further north.
>> It's further north. It's actually 3.11 miles, which is it's outside of the three mile um danger area that is what NASA has always based based it on. And
so why if it's outside of the three mile radius, that's why they put the be the road to the beach where it is. It's outside of the three mile radius. So why um you know why is it why is it focusing on our
beach? I don't I don't understand. There's a lot going on across the river that's that's of a immense concern. Um and you know uh one one of the things is mitigation.
I I'll talk about mitigation. So when they do mitigation, they there's not enough mitigation in within the space center for all the activity that's going on out there. And and so um and the state just passed
during this last legislative um session passed a a a law that makes it even easier for developers to do mitigation outside of the area of their impact. So there there's they're doing ridiculous
things like talking about sending gopher tortoises from the space center to Alabama and Mississippi. Well, why why are they talking about sending our gopher tortoises to another state
when there's plenty of places on the mainland in Bvard County where those gopher tortoises could go? You know, why why are they talking about sending gopher tortoises out of state? Why are they talking about sending our scrub jays from the space center over to the
Lake Whales Ridge and to a a piece of property over by Fort Meyers when we have plenty of conservation areas um in Bvard County that those jays could be transllocated to the you know they're
going to spend a lot of money moving those birds. Why would they spend money moving them and and creating habitat for them in other parts of the state? Why can't they spend that money in Bvard County? We we need to um and there's
already a a group of citizens that are are, you know, trying to raise awareness about um losing our beach. I grew up here. We there for years when I was growing up, my mother had to pack us in a station wagon and drive us all the way
up to New Smyrna Beach so we could go to the beach cuz we could not go to Play Linda Beach. The whole time I was a kid, we could not go to Play Linda Beach. We don't want that to happen again. But we don't want to send our scrub jays over to the Lake Wales Ridge either. So we
need to be making equally as as large of a of trying to get attention that so that across the river these mitigation projects should not be going outside of Bvard County. The impacts from the space
center are affecting us in Brevar County. Our quality of life, our buildings, our our you know our ability to take a flight out of Orlando International there. certainly impacting our ability to go fishing offshore. So
those those mitigation projects, they should take place if they can't take place on the wild the wildlife refuge or at the seashore itself, then they should take place on the mainland in Bvard County. No mitigation project from the
space center should be allowed to to leave Bvard County. That's my report. >> Can I comment? >> Sure. Um, they have a timeline here and we're still in the public review,
part of the timeline. So, if if somebody needs to say something or to motivate to say something, you have until the fall, September 22nd to be exact. >> Yeah. And they are taking every they had court
reporters taking down everybody's comment, everybody's review, and so they're taking the the public participation seriously. >> Yeah. And it's really important that you comment and it's pretty easy. I mean, you you can go on their website and and
then click on make a public comment and type out your comment. Um, you can also make a letter and mail it. Um, I don't understand why you can't email for this particular EIS. Does it say anything
about being able to email Miss Evolon >> or just send her a letter? >> No, you can um Well, it says electronically or mail. >> Yeah. Electronically is like going on their website and filling out the form on their website.
So during the last EIS couple months ago for LC37, you could also email Miss Long personally, but >> that option is not available QR that gives all the information. Maybe not in this.
>> And I I encourage you guys to take a look at this EIS because um this is the one that's really going to impact Titusville. You know, 39A is like the closest launch pad to Titusville. And it is going to shut down our beach
eventually. 100%. >> US Air Force EIS. >> Are we talking about another one now? This is the FAA. Okay. >> There's so many of them and they're coming so fast and so furious. It's really difficult to keep up with them. >> But this this one is about this one is
the FAA and um and it's about 39A. I've got one at home. >> Yeah, all right. Does anybody else have anything else? We're good. Okay. Oh, I'm sorry.
We did our reports, but we didn't do staff reports. It's not on the agenda. So, there Lily, do you have a report? >> Yes. So, um Just as a update with the FAA since you brought it up, there are currently 79
um comments digitally submitted. So, um yeah, that should tell kind of tell you how many people have taken action so far at least. So, >> not enough. >> You can look that up on um regulations.gov as well. I also wanted
to encourage anyone on September 26th is the 100 year of service for the um fire department that little old truck that they have but our flood plane managers will be there to answer what >> I'm sorry to interrupt
the fire department that's being changed because national >> thank Yeah, that's just changing like in the last 24 hours. I just started interrupting. >> No, you're good. Thank you.
>> Yeah, that was news to me. Um, so whenever that 100 year service uh event does end up happening, um our our flood plane managers are doing a public engagement um to answer questions and help um citizens as well.
I don't know if many people know that we have flood plane managers. And then also on October 29th, I will be giving a presentation on the LI ordinance and basically lessons learned, everything that we've been working through up until
this point and potential future changes so that hopefully other cities can start adopting L ordinances. >> October 29th, 9:45 a.m. Where are you doing your presentation? It's >> at the MRC L conference.
>> Oh, you're going to be a speaker at the at the conference. >> Yeah. >> Awesome. >> If you guys have never been to that conference, um it is outstanding. It really is. Um I I learned so much. I've been three years in a row now. And
um what what is the theme this year? Last year it was it was massive information about storm water. Um, do you know what the theme is this year? >> I want to say it's like applied project something along like LA. It's in action. The project's actually an implementation. I don't know what the
words are for it, but I do know I tailored the conversation around that because they wanted to see more examples of proof of concept. But the whole speakers and everything are on their website. All the topics and stuff are published too.
>> Yeah. And so you can just Google Marine Resources Council Low Impact Development Conference. It's it's it's it costs money to go. I think it's about >> that's it. Oh, that's cheap.
>> I I think it's thought it was like $245. >> Yeah, I think it's >> Yeah. Yeah. It's It's expensive, but you know, if you if you got the money and the time, it it's definitely worth it. If that's it, I'm going to um conclude
the meeting. Thank you very much for coming, y'all. Appreciate it.