he married sh rash you know weeks real EX on the the next day like but you get inside building you know what I'm do
25 father your surve and John and I we stais all back in the0 six months ago he jimy
I yeah I work a lot they brought secret my good the February the February 5th 2024 meeting of the environmental and natural
resources advisory committee is being called to order I would like to thank gindra Dare for borrowing this G recognizing the the fact that were being dissed for not having a Gabel and I would like to
thank Our member Jack SED who I hear he didn't tell me but I heard the rumor that he has provided us with this very handsome very appropriately weighted yeah now that we have that out of out of the way would you like to call
the all missam here SC here miss BR Mr here M
Jamon she's not online either but us know Mr here here Mr lber herey here here GI
and have that's a good reminder thank you that is a good that is a good reminder um did everyone have an opportunity to read those fabulous minutes I did read were they knocked
down would somebody like to I was I was like I had better get here on time because it says I didn't show up till 102 yeah so um with someone I would
entertain a motion to approve the minutes from our January 6 2025 meeting soov moved by Mr bomberg second in by Miss morisy any discussion questions comments all those in
favor any oppos minutes are approved thank you and we will get into our business for today with our guests who have come to share their knowledge with us okay so um the first thing we have
for you today is a presentation by J Feldon from the e centr FL Regional planning Council want to present some of the work the planning has been doing related to predicting the future rainfall so I'm going to turn it over to
him and then if you have as we go say to the end have prence yous so you guys have any questions stop excuse me could you speak a little Lou I can thank you again so if you guys have
any questions throughout just stop me and we could go over and dive into more detail anytime comes up okay so I'm John and I'm the GI director with centr for Florida Regional planning Council and what I'm going to be presenting on today is planning for
Future Extreme rainfall and this project um came through a big cdbg ni gr and this project is nam mitigation assessment and planning through Regional collaboration um and for those who don't know what a regional planning council is so in 1962
there were pen Regional planning councils that were found throughout the state and we are an areawide association of governments and we conven assist in for plan and collaborate so we work with local jurisdictions we work with
regional scale projects and we also collaborated with other Regional plan councils to do some Statewide Assessments in the East Central Regional planning Council um we serve eight counties which is card Mar Lua orange
seel suer L aola and our regional planning Council it is the second largest in population and first in land area our major program areas are Community Development economic
development health and food system GIS emergency preparedness and resilience one thing that we really focus on the regional planning council is we don't work in Styles we think all of our projects every SE away we collaborate
with all of our departments to make sure we're planning for a holistic approach and making sure that the plans that we come up with um all have each we appli to that so the project that we've been working on for the last about two and a half
three years now and it's been going longer on that planning phase is um a big cdbg Grant so this grant was awarded to us in 2022 and it's a $1.5 million Grant and with that we're working with us and five
other Regional planing councils we're looking at um flooding as it pertains the Future Extreme rainfall so how the current 100 years will be projected out the plan of Horizons in 2040 and 2070 and whatx and with that we're doing some
assessments so some background on this project in uh 2021 the resilient CLA legislation came inv about and it um requires communities to look at blood hazards in the future looking at Coastal
hazards as well as looking at this Future Extreme fr flooding and this is for a lot of usually flooding and these assessments have buil Coastal communities but with this legis push that um initiative Inland so more Inland
communities could understand future extrem flood RIS and with that um the Peril of flood statute moved forward in 2015 which um was very heavily geared towards Coastal communs however part of that is looking at um the future exem
rainfall blood risk so this project um the big question and reason we went about this project is looking at the future of sham rainfall with all this legislation so much was
focused on postal communities there is really a big gap on England communities and what future of clood events May look like and this has been made very evident through recent hurricanes with herma Ian and know seeing these more future shim R events
and see these F spread impacts of both people and uh people's profit and then with that um having a better understanding of these features and bring fall back is really help um jurisdictions and counties cities plan
more holistically and be more prepared for these uh rainfall events in the goals and value of this project we've been working to build Regional Regional stakeholder collaboration develop technical applications to analyze vulnerabilities
to extreme rainfall risks um this complements the vulnerability assessments that went through with resil Florida legislation um we're trying to develop a regional approach to medication where we Overlook the boundaries so blooding is a
multi-jurisdictional issue so we're really encouraging that collaboration of working on mitigation projects that that the positive impacts are felt between multiple jurisdictions and then we're also working towards building a consistent
Statewide approach to looking at this Future Extreme R also so you can compare different areas of the state utilizing the same data sets so with this project um we've had a lot of stakeholder engagement we have done a lot of
modeling looking at Future Extreme brainfall as well as ground tring it to a lot of our more recent uh brainfall events to see how it look on the model what the impacts have been in real time and then with that we're doing a
regional mitigation leads assessment where we're coming up with mitigation priority areas which are bigger areas that Encompass multiple jurisdictions and then in those areas we're working with different project partners to come
up with some project ideas and uh with that we're creating a regional project this a projects that can help mitigate against blooding that benefit multiple jurisdictions at once and then part of that as well we are working on two small area conceptual
plans in those priority areas and we're making some well bed res schools and coming up with these St publicly available for everyone toti and with that um we have not been working just with the regional planning
Hees we've had a ton of stakeholders with multiple universities and state agencies throughout so as we've been going through this we've been getting the stand from different change factors that we're utilizing for the spray fall flooding um the methodology that we're
using um we uh broke in a fdp FD we spoke about the blub work with FIU to to make sure that these change factors are in line with the data that's around and that everyone is tolex so with that one of the first
steps of this project was creating an argis school where we could put in all of our base data sets and it essentially spits out um flood outputs for the 100 Year 24 hour storm what projects that through 24 year 27 using up different
change pracs and with this um this is a planing tool this is patient age model that is utilized to um be able to point more resources where it's necessary based off of these thingss though we have done some comparisons of the different CWI HH models
and um um it's essentially blood modeling and it U um it has all Stone water put into that blood model so and water where here we're utilizing the latest lar ples and then from there where we take all
the ler and go through and draw Lins on where water should pass through like C Birds if we um know there is an overpass so we make sure that water fls properly but it doesn't um Encompass the entire Sol water
system and then with that we create flood alant that can be utilize and visualize and those areir with deps so with that we did a big Statewide study to determine these change factors because at the time begin was project
but they are Curr working on some other change factors to utilize in flood modeling however the goal of the project was to utilize those change factors but because they been for a while we had to go another Direction but we have looked
at all these technical advisory committees and people are going to be cre negotiating factors were involved with that and stand for forward so we used um the CeX median
that was the main thing of change Factor so we have those um change factors uh predicted out to 2040 and 27 and then with that um a lot of the times change factors they're more of a countywide but we Ed some different GIS
tools to make more of a Statewide raster so you get with all the rain stations and all the um SES of you kind of create a Statewide dat to show different amounts of rainfall it's more of the site by
bance so going into the modeling on the big thing that we're using right now is the 14 bra service and we're focusing on the 24hour 100 rainfall event uh we have our change factors that we created that
we're utilizing we're looking at soils L land cover um weally made link points to determine what's flooding whether it's l filling up and where that flooding occurs we're looking at the major roadways and per surfaces the burn lines
which I explained we're going into the DMS to make sure water flows correctly and the latest L plates that the stay and then these are what all these layers look like and then through modeling these are
results of like where we have a new rain raster of both near and far ter rain events ask question what ask a question yes um back on the map where the sensors are
yes are the were the sensors placed for the purpose of the study or are we dealing with Legacy sensors um Legacy sensors because it seemed to me it looked sparse for the size of our region and as you said the second in population so just thank
you so um with that looking at the data sets on we pulled all the brain and then with all that projected out we have some predictions of what the current t 25 15 100e storm will look like and just how
those numbers increase over time so looking at now in 24hour 100e storm you're looking about 12 in of rainfall and then with the change factors um you're look 17 in the 20140 2015
planning Horizon and then 19 in the 27 planning Horizon however with more R all this we are starting to see more of these brainstorms around this range than what is currently occurring so with that going into this
modeling um we're talking with lu County we kind of took it a step back we have these outputs but getting down to the data that really drives the decision making so what we did is we took the um safe wide wing ball raster and then with
that the calculated Val um those change factors so you can get more of a whole Statewide approach to need what and extreme brainfall event could look like at a site by site basis so um for testing purposes I just drew a
random polygon Inu County to show how these status sets could be utilized in future um planning and policy decisions but so we have this right here and then paired with that grass here just the GIS
tools you could see what the minimum maximum and average amount of rainfall look like that 24hour 100 Year rang EV event and then you can also see what those future conditions may look like at that s Excuse me yes if I'm reading that
right is it looking like it's going up 5 Ines per year um give or so that would be the 2040 2050 planning Horizon so that would be about
um 15 years from now looking at and then the other one's 27 okay so it's maybe an inch a year then and U with those change factors and R it's like a multiplier of like 1 2 to 1.7 but it's um you know
because it's a safe line Ras it varies from foot thank you significant number and then with this project looking ahead um we have we're selecting projects for our regional mitigation
project list um we're coming up with two conceptual small um area mitigation plans we're creating these Regional based web exposure tools we are upgrading our GIS tool to the most current version of GIS because that
version is Suns sitting in the next few months and then we are now trying to work with jurisdiction rter Mion to implement either our outputs or different parts of the MoDOT process into their decision making PL and then do you guys have any
questions Wy okay um two questions and I just about to write them down but um so I'm not sure if I'll remember the second one would it be your recommendation as an expert to that policies at the county level should be um Rewritten to
accommodate a 17.4 in 100e storm event given that it's only 15 years away and most things we are building now we would expect would persist for at least another 15 if not 35 years 45 years should we be having should we be
developing policies which is what we're here to do that account for these projections I do believe so especially when we start looking at these p and see spr events happening more more frequently with the housing on we do
have I purchased a house recently and it was built in 1959 so a house is a long-term standing structor and investment so we do want to make sure you are planning for the future my second question if I may um my second
question is can you go back to the map that you shed very briefly about um with fuchia County a map at fuchia County with some think flood zones maybe represented yeah um yes so these are blood outputs and the dark blue are
bodies of water and um the teal color go about the swamps right so the red and green are those areas outside where the plooding URS okay so you know thema does flood
maps get updated every so often not sure how or if they will ever be updated again um should the county be using Model results like this to redraw their own flood plane maps to ensure that we
are building in not building in flood planes or building in flood planes building in areas that we know are flood planes in appropriate ways I don't think we should be building in flood planes that's just my personal opinion but um but if we are going to build building flood planes which we do seem to keep doing it would be nice to know if indeed
it's a flood plane before we're building it so we can do the compensating storage and all the other things we're supposed to do should we be using these results to update our Maps um I think um that's a bit of a tricky question is um flooding occurs in so many different
things for different models and different products share with different flood areas so I really think it can't be we only use this it has to be a multifaceted approach to make sure that we're playing forever like a lot of the
fale bloodstones um yes they do have that flooding but a lot of the post factors are um put into the where this is only what so I think with all these models there just a bunch of different tools in
the tool Bo and everything has to be looked at De plan for thank you uh Tyler then Tom first I want to take a guess it's H&H hydrology and hydraulics maybe okay um
which should make sense so the question I have is looking at the uh storm rainfall prediction there seems to be a plateau being reached you have a 15-year period where you're showing the a pretty big jump in storm size and then a 30-year period with what
is relatively speaking not a very large jump is there a reason behind that that's explained or um I'm mostly just curious to the state drives out um so looking at State Statute so a lot of
the Florida legislation you're looking at that 2040 2050 planning Horizon and then the 2070 280 is so that year isn't an exact year it's just that planning Horizon looking to on that well I mean
I'm more wondering why are we seeing like right now we're seeing the acceleration of the size of Storms and it seems like all of a sudden it's just going to stop in 20 years oh you know I'm I'm curious if there is
like I don't know the validity of these models I'm not at all familiar with the models that are being used so I'm wondering if there's explaining factors in there um certainly we're seeing storms now that have in 18 20 Ines of rain we saw that with Milton um and and
it comes down to statistical Anis question and I think we can all figure out that if we've had more than one of those in 100 years that our percentage chance right here might be more than one in 100 but um you know that gets
into I I kind of want to also have a response that we don't set the rainfall values the county identifies the design storm off of a rainfall valueing chart that is done at the state level and so if the county starts getting into that policy that as you know we've discussed
in the past I think that's dangerous from a you know what if we're setting rainfall that sets us up for something that we have to defend legally um so I wouldn't talk about altering our defined rainfall values from the state
definitions myself if we want to plan for more I would say just pick a different storm off of the list as the way to get there but um could you repeat that please get what off the list there's a list of like there's a matrix there's like 100 storm events rather
than try to change the values in The Matrix just pick a different one okay thank you yeah know like that's in a sense like I'm not trying to take a position that I think we should do that but I'm just suggesting that like if there's going to be an approach towards
something let's do something that involves less legal defense assessment um so I am curious though if there is a reason that we're seeing that slowdown in the growth rate or if that's just something that's unexplained in models um so a lot of that it just
looking at the data and way process tracking and looking about past 270 a lot of that data isn't available it's too unpredictable to really long past 27280 we um for some of our future stor
surg events we go with 2100 but anything after that so um the data is not predictable enough to go far out sorry just a second to Tyler's point about pick a different design St um
we're we use the county uses the Noah 14 as the amount of rainfall presumably hopefully maybe know will at some point update that because right now that data is from 2013 so the rain predicted rainfall doesn't look like what the
rainfall actually looks like but that's what we use because that that they're the experts right it's just not updated but if you picked a different designs form let's say oh everybody decided everybody needs to design for the 100 years form and then the whatever bigger
storm in in a closed Basin if Noah then updates the rainfall amounts for those storms now you're design you're double desig high right so um that that could if you change your code to they were design a different storm and then know
and changes what the rainfall is for that storm now you may over to be continued on that one um Tom Bill Jessica then Wendy then not Wendy thank you um to par to answer your
question with about should we be using this information as our leg regulatory tools when you do that you accept a certain amount of liability I'm thinking at the present it might be a good idea to let Fe accept that liabil that liability as these are
the flood zones if we say when to use these it May Chang this is still moding um another thing that what call me part of our charge is to help County staff rewrite rules or amend rules to make it us more resilient and one of the major
tools that we use it's in our Cod is that we should be relying on the official luch County soil survey which is 50 years old the soil survey unlike the modeling you're doing here most of that stuff is projections based on current Trends what's on the soil is going to stay that way are those Maps
available to us to use as a as a as a model as a as a tool for development regulatory at this point because that is much more readily I don't know got to be a lot more science behind it thank you
um I I go online and P these up if Tyler here wants to go online to get a site first thing he's going to look at one the soils and he's going to go to the official soil survey which like 50 years old if there's something newer can he use that right now if you go on County's
website and utilize our intera M you can get the soil information 198 USGS right what yeah 198 sculfield I sculfield part as was I so we those
were paperbacks about this thck used to hand out the anent so really haven't done much since then but they have something here probably is more current and if we could use that as part as a design tool shouldn't we be doing so we agree that any kind of updated
data that's defense should be utilized okay that's the liability by the defense thank you appreciate that thank you Tom um so it was the standardized speed live data set that we're utiliz in for
this modeling I could gave you the source and dat on it most one we do utilize that dat compl but it is from the authoritative source and
from but I get that ultimately if I can just try and end on this the soils don't change a whole lot other than what alterations our manbe alterations of soils the the dirt doesn't pick itself up and do too frequently on its own here it's
fortunately been left units ground as much so it is fairely batt in that perod than still so in coastal areas you've looked at the increased
rainfall um but in coastal areas if we have sea level rise also it will keep the water from going out um have you combined this with the um sea level rise so not at the moment some that compound
leing that's definitely a next step we want to work on as Regional planning counil toare those um but we are doing a lot of studies and we just finished up the vulnerability assessment here County SE level rise down storm surge and we're
also looking at Su day flooding through that um play post project other so one of the things that actually working on we were talking to um L County and they have a lot of L Out Pass I'm sure you guys see as well we kind of
want to look at this modeling and look at um some ver play and see how those together you know um this is definitely the start of what we want do the thank you Joseph then s yes two quick questions and one has
been touched on which is the the note on rainfall my question is well how how do we already build it in nor levels and it sounds like the answer is no so is there a process where a region if we have this study can go to them and
say we have updated information can you update it basically like what we do with FEMA with a a regional math amendment is there a way to say no what we've got more data to share um with that um longterm through the state the hope is that will definely take
over you got ENT hous on models just waiting on that timeline when that was and then just to keep everyone or me and looking at the numbers and we may not have to right off the back do we
remember the record entes of rainfall during the last hurricanes that we were looking at like during andco yeah that me uh Ben had had that information based on different stations
throughout because again not a uniform so specifically me that was more a rain event cold and we sawes so that then that's the 270 right and I think we saw
some I think PM 20 and 21 in some spots right I did too okay that but on your your first point um so the flood Hub is funded by the flid res P program and and the intent of the
data in the model that ultimately be H with them is that then it could be adopted by the state and used for regulatory purposes and it would be consistent right each place in the St of course won't be the same amount your
train but it would be like data set right that that then I guess the local government could use to say isn't the rainfall we're going to design to and and just a little like put note in your brain um later in the meeting we're going to talk about comparison with
other city and counties swarm water pools and there are some other places that have adopted here's with swarm not not like we're going to use the no 100 Year 24 hour but this many inches of rain is what you're so there are places that not will
just touch on that probably today um and more to follow and the last before turned over is that I think that when we look at interest in the projection to 2070 given that the local feedback right now is that we're facing a reaction to large
adverse weather events I think will probably catch up faster than planning for 2070 to respond to those thank you um SAR and then Mista um my question is kind of some of your last
comment Ginger and um based on some of the discussion about whether or not as we consider future policy will Direction change the STM event I can't say I'm understanding all of this um
particularly the variables that go into the model but I'm curious in terms of we're East Central but you talked about a lot of the other Regional planning councils are doing similar work I'm
curious uh what if you know where are they in process are they seeing similar like are they using the same variables in their methodology are they seeing anything
consistent like across all these regions so that making a change at a state level is something that we might actually
see happen um yes so all of us reing the same variables and as we calibrating BL we made sure that work everywhere throughout the state so as we were speaking in we f one area and kind of SK somewhere else and we essentially all
work together to make sure that we all come for ARs and everything does look really good and right now we're definitely The Familiar side of working with the jurisdictions to implement some of the results that we've
had but everyone is working different like well we just started talking with um and want to seez this some of their CRS do that they're doing so we are
trying to we don't want to make sure these status that just kind of live and just AR do anything we really want to work with our jurisdictions to consider investment and um I thought at the
beginning uh completion was September 2025 yes um is that a common uh completion date for others or uh yes um we might have putting extension of the
modeling at this point is complete and draft ones with the projects finalized but I don't see those out now it's just more important and additional analysis and how are the water management districts
working with all of this um we have they've been in most of our conversations um we have talked through some concerns with them a lot of it came from the south water district with different control structures model but
with that as a engineering like this is more planning approach and in some cases with without taking into um account some of those control structures down there um scenario work but they have given
us and if where they have issues world through I think the work is really important you know 15 years that is not far away my question is kind of for the room so we worked very hard staff worked even
harder to get the storm water ordinances ordinance redone it's going to Council next week and we were left with some lingering concerns about whether we had gone far enough with our because of because of the flooding that
is already 2070 level here we've already experienced that and we decided that we would go back to the minimum standards which is what we're kicking off today and we asked for you to come and help educate us what's new news for me today
and I'm trying to understand is the concern that Tyler brought up that if we can't justify a stricter standard it opens us up to Legal challenges compared to what Ginger
and then we are using Noah tables and then compared to Ginger saying that other jurisdictions other municipalities or counties do have stricter standards so I'm just trying to understand if we have a way to move forward and be stricter recog if we believe if we net
out that we need to be we've been concerned fairly uniformly up until this point that I misunder stand the only thing I would add to that is T's in the back of the room but
um most of us are not storm water engineers and so um I've heard T have good Arguments for maybe the design SP isn't the thing maybe what you all did already with the 6 in safety Factor covers that right and so there probably
not a discussion maybe for today it's probably more down in the beads but I at least would be interested in hearing like what are the pros and cons from the engineering perspective but changing this standard is the
design is it the safety factor that you've already you know recommended so I think that that's a discussion I have thank you so one quick thing to add on to that we start talking about it you have to talk about different levels of
Regulation and so what you're seeing is that from our comprehensive plan where I think a lot of the data that we're talking about is appropriate because it's planning level data once we start getting into
land use regulations that's when you have to have stuff that is much more defensible much more ground truth and being able to do so so if this group comes forward and sees that there's some things that they want looked at for our comp plan it's it's perfectly okay to
sit there and say staff please convey that over to the planning and development services staff I also want to point out what we have done at the county level in regards to some of our more Antiquated data
and wetlands are a prime example when we developed our future land use maps in 1990 we did not have near the technology and accuracy that we have today so those were based on INF you know old infrared Maps basically
uh and crayons were basically the lines that were established so we did put in the comprehensive plan that um you could ground trth it based on specific data available there so again as we go
through this there are ways that we from staff perspective can implement the overall go through our comp plan then put into regulation for example if there's better data when I was hearing South Florida Management District was Obed because certain
elevations on some of the control structures there you go you have your standard and if someone can come in and say know you got had the control Str set six when R is at six and a half so therefore we've got a halfway of storage in this area etc etc so there are ways
that we can work through it we just want to make sure don't throw the baby out with bath water and real there may be a way to adapt some of the information great thank you very much that's exactly what I hope to hear Tyler and Tom I learned I think is up
for start by saying guess there's ways we can increase the design forms by changing right now we use a 2524 or 2596 or 124 is kind of our standard design storms depending on whether you get St John's or BL County as your Agency for that they get up to about 12 in of rain
we could say that we're going to use a th000 your storm event that's on table and you know it's just the threshold of where do we want to decide to be um so that it's not the main is talk as I understand the County's got flood studies that are getting started that would effectively be the further
refinement of modeling the H&H type of modeling the um would give us a pretty fine resolution of detail on where blood areas are would allow us to establish those blood map changes I imagine the council with that information would
recommend that we apply to change the FEMA Maps so that it requires those folks to buy flood insurance they're protected in these events so on and so for so I I kind of feel like the ball is somewhat rolling on this path to do a lot of what's being discussed from a modeling side I think that you know
there was a pretty good point that maybe we need to ask Noah like are they in process of making an update if they haven't updated for over 10 years maybe there's something that's pending and we just don't know I I don't know anybody know to reach out to you myself
but yeah um that might be something that is worth us kind of Keeping Up full on as a you know group of folks in terms of modeling for different storm events duration is a
big factor that comes in here and I can say like I was running storm water models this morning so I plug and different storm events project and leberg won't be coming to anybody here and I had 25t orings we never encountered a combining layer didn't encounter water table did not encounter
any markers of water table and was 25t the Geotech said estimated to 10t below grade I can't like I can make my pond tiny I can make it almost useless because water just goes in the ground so fast on a project and so it's one of those things where I'm following my own
rules that I suggest here and trying to make sure that you know I account for graceful failure and other things in case it Sals up or other we run into these challenges and the right way for me as an engineer to be more comfortable isn't just to throw 30 in of rain at it because I can actually make handle that is to have that
Regional flood study so from the from my professional perspective what is already not on the ground yet but already in process of being developed as I understanded got the approval from Council right last
Council um direction to move forward I thought that Direction the so if we have these things that are already going on then I think it's a little bit of a hey we don't necessarily need to keep telling them that they need to do this we just need to say hey we want these results and we want to make sure that
when these results come in they're put to good use thank you John and Tom yeah I just have a couple questions one on the modeling there a whole smash here um how updated are those
does that include Milt and most of the time so those don't model specific hurricanes it's more looking at that 24 event spe K back so you're not taking the Extremes in um no but um with the
amount of rainfall does most of those extreme numbers so we have magic and U we had SP with folks around our region and where theyve seen play that they've never seen before personally we
have seen a lot of are um and then is there a public website that we can look at that that you all developing and modeling that is progress however the DAT is done and we
can pass it to the county and you guys to I to have up on the next all you know project getting that uh
we're also working on um resilience is Portal May public facing um par GIS tool that'll have like all of the information planning so vulnerability assessment that the regional planning council did
um and any other publicly available data that we have so you anybody will be able to go on there look at our regional res stute plan look at where projects are look at um predictions of storm surch
look at predictions of vulnerability based on the vulnerability system so we're in the middle of doing that right now it'll be you know maybe month or two ready but then that should be able use tool and then when this rain data is
allowed to be published also have that and then my last question is I would assume with all this data that we're collecting and Gathering and especially what the work that youall are doing our Basin study that we're doing in valou
county is that inclusive to this data as well probably a t question do you know what the Scopes are for the basic studies and are they going to in some of this work that's been done around the state
Etc uh the scops have not been uh formalized done as a part of bringing on the particular consultant for that particular Basin uh in terms of the storms that are going to be run I would assume that they would go ahead uh based on discussions I've had with Ben Bart about the situation it's going to be
running the4 uh and then also running an event oriz event just to give us a so I guess the reason I asked that is that are they going to G and Hall
with these maps in these flood areas versus your your Basin studies are they going to line up are we going to have two sets of data once once different level this is a different level and then
you're in the position of well who you believe so they're using two different storm but what I understand of his description they're using 100y year 24 that's been modified based on whatever they did to modify it and they're
projecting it in 2040 we're basing everything on the current size 100-year 24-hour storm and today's conditions so they're not they're not St their 100 years going than your 100 years that's and we're projecting it they've
basically gone back through and and I that's part of what what they're looking at is identifying what amount of inurance for a 100y year 24 hour we got the Noah data which basically says in to land for example it's
11.3 and they're modifying it saying looking at I don't know what they used to modify they came up with the modification to it that added either they added 12 in or it was 12 in I don't know but
so I guess to me then how do we make the rational decision um if if we're getting all the different sets of that's why Tyler was recommending instead of adopting appreciating and understanding
what their study is saying and uh not necessarily arguing assuming that it's that it's good um that instead of saying okay adopt their 124h hour which says 15 in just throw a number out there he's saying look we
should take a look at what a 15inch storm equivalent is 100e 72 stor again 15 inch is the important factor of the the amount or for the Moder purposes and just use that and
then that way you do have a marrying of the two so to speak just a different way to skin the cast and get back to that same location then this way you don't have to get into an argument about whether or not what they projected for the 100y year 24hour is actually correct there's a lot that goes into it
and well that's why you saying we're potentially at risk if we go out there and say use their 124 hours she doesn't agree with anybody else 124 hour right and then Engineers start or developers start suing us for putting us in by going back and cheating so to speak and
using the right side of storm or that side sure you thank one thing I do want to add about all the different models um everyone who models something the results are going to be different but I think with all of them the more you have
you're Expos the better some models might pick up something where others don't so essentially all these models are just another tool polic thank you Bill then Michelle
yeah so um what he's doing is modeling the 100-year flood event in 2040 and 2070 right so more extreme rainfall events is what I'm understanding and
then Tad you guys are going to do a blood study basing study well we're going to do a modeling study on a on a much smaller scale than what they're approaching Enough Tom has an as the
online so what you're doing is we're basing it all on the existing stor so we're taking models we're using basically the same whitear for for the most part if we have more specific information at like tail water locations like Bridge certs or you know pipes or
any of those that we have the benefit of then we would plug that information in so ours will be a little bit better along smaller detail sections um but when you're looking at the scale we're talking about it won't make that big a difference between theirs and ours I it's just the basically the size storm
the different storms we apply uh I'm assuming that they've looked at the 10 25 and 100 which is what they had displayed I don't know if they've looked at anything more we're going to be just looking at the 124 the uh like I said the extreme condition based on Ian or Nico or Ian or
Milton based on which side of the county you were on and uh now we're also going to actually run a another set at least on one Basin because there's been a lot of question about whether or not development creates a different flooding condition uh much like new beach when
they had their consultant take a look at it indicated that there was no personal change uh over the entire city length uh for uh bling so we're going to go ahead and do that same concept where we take out any development that's occurred in a
last 10 15 20 years I don't know what the cycle is going to be they'll have to determine that but that way we'll get a better answer as to how much developments actually have an effect on a particular
Basin so my understanding is that um you will when you uh model the extreme ones like Ian you're going to be looking at basically that 2070 because that's about how much rain you got we got in Ian so they will be comparable in some way I
would think right am I thinking that I'm thinking the way okay so we must be Wendy's next but clay you have your I'm sorry that's all right um Wendy and
then pause again well so yes um the modeling for Ian the modeling that we're going to do for Ian will you would hope match up with what with what Josh has done here um I guess more philosophically should you be planning
for the future or planning for the past right and so we cannot assume and Josh back me up here we cannot assume that the rainfall events that we're experiencing now represent the rainfall events that we
will have in the future we are living in a climate altered reality and so we can't just say oh it's going to be an extreme event Ian and Milton will no longer be extreme events they will be 100 Year events which are not extreme
and so and so we need to be planning we need to be setting policy based on models that are based in science I mean you just make this stuff up I mean this is based in science and so we should be planning for scientific projections of
the future which is an excellent segue because we Andra through this representative were asked at the meeting yesterday how can we make sure that this doesn't happen to a future Council what we've been going through with citizens
coming in and being upset um it's 2:00 we have quite a bit more people to hear from we have quite a bit of ground to cover and a discussion of the meeting yesterday does anybody have any additional questions at this time
more discussion on what we've learned thus far just keep things moving along I'm just assuming the presentation will get posted yes thank you so very very much and with
love it if you say but I know you planed I'm going with GIS right now pass very expensive data right here well thank you very much for for coming in sharing with us and answering our questions much appreciate it and my
emails in the presentation so if you guys have any other questions after definitely feel PR for jat or if you want to see some of the model results we P those up on happening thanks everyone thank you so next on the agenda which I don't
have in front of me um is I believe the discussion of the January 14th meeting and then the direction we received yesterday at the council meeting presented our annual report and our work plan I guess i' I would like to kick it
off just by a show of hands how many people watched the entire January 14th except for maybe all the public comments I quit at 8:30 at night okay so there's a pel of us that that
attended that that meeting virtually or otherwise um who Vice chair would you like to kick off comments on what you observed and heard and saw sure so it was a long night I think I was
speaker 87 of 90 or something so it was a I think it was a good discussion we've heard I think a lot of the points that were raised but I think there was a focus on being solution oriented by all the speak speakers um no matter what
kind of sector they were from I think that the I'm going to jump to the end result of the council discussion um which is a little bit of we've got some things in the Works um but I think they had a work plan put together with some
critical thoughts that they'd like to explore moving forward um that council member Kent put in his motion and I think that you know some of those large picture items are topics that we've talked about before but I
think that um need a lot of technical insight and so I you know some of them maintain and improve all of our drainage canals and Facilities great um when they mentioned Creek systems plus great because those are natural water bodies we can't
maintain no impacts to Wetlands you know talking about avoiding of minimization and where that impacts and what you know level we want there um I think he said no fail in any development which was excluded because Santiago said he wasn't
sure about the legal there were two separate first of the six items identified by council member K which uh were no impact snow use the W Banks then again
also separate discussion was the proliferation of air multif family along Williamson and other areas uh also looking at the use of County owned land to help with storm water improvements maintenance of canals and
ditches and and purchas which is in our legislative priorities anyway we're asking to have that Grant process streamlined and so we're right now pulling that
together it's not a final product it's justd to and realizing that there's some additional research that was one motion and there was another one second motion was uh proposed by the chair and it passed as
well which was restrict filling sites for development so in other words uh I own 100 acres I want to put on some there I'm going to bring in three to four feet of Bill onto the property have that and I think it was
what the motion that was passed if I can clarify a little was for staff to bring back whether or not we can do that correct not a proposal to that cor and you know do
from a staff perspective a lot of the things that you've identifi as part of your l or actually address that issue um I'd like to add to Jessica's report too that the
tenor the temperature in the room seemed to be much lower because there was actual discussion about Solutions going on and the people that are so upset and so Afflicted were so great it really moved me and I was just watching it on
my tablet screen and and it was a heartwarming that we had taken our work so seriously and for which I thank all of you the other thing that was interesting in that meeting that I hadn't heard at any other meeting was
the recognition that we all know that flooding can come from that there are many reasons that we experience flooding and that it is very sight specific specific and that we need many Tools in our toolkit to deal with that because
that recognition I had not heard from the council before I don't know if anyone else did but I it was missing an action in my view so that was a really um take it run with it Wendy I agree I I sat through the whole
meeting in person to the to the very last minute and um I agree that there it was it was a much more solutions focused meeting and um I mean there's been some critique of it after the fact oh they kicked the can down the road once again whatever but I felt like there was good
progress made I really did appreciate councilman Kent coming in with set of solutions that could then be sort of you know bed round um you know I think chairman Brower was you know he kept saying the phrase drain and Phil you
know which I had suggested to him earlier in the day was maybe not what he meant to say um you know fill and build I think is something that we you know we like to harp on but you know draining is about draining Wetlands we don't really drain flood planes we drain wetlands and
we treat flood planes and wetlands differently in the ordinance which is a different question whether we should or not but you know it's like okay well we're not if we're going to protect Wetlands then we've already covered the Dum drain part of his concern um and
then and we have to have this convers about what it is we are filling and why we are filling things and um you know of course part of the storm water ordinance we've got going forward is to add six more inches of fill which of course I questioned and challenged when we
brought that up at the time so um so anyway it was you know I thought it ined on a good note as they have done so many times in the past they are putting an awful lot of faith in what we are bringing forward Ward next week and you
know and I feel a little anxious about that because I don't feel like what we're bringing forward is um a it's not complete and B it's not enough and um and so I have a question to staff or to
legal or you know whoever can answer it we are an advisory committee and even PL DRC in you know in reviewing the ordinance to serving in an advisory capacity just because we have written or staff
has written on our behalf ordinance language does the council have to adopt it as written or are they the legislative body and they can change it as they see fit that is my understanding and yet clay correct me if I'm wrong um
somebody asked that question I did my councilman Johanson asked this question during the January 14th meeting where he he said you know are we going to be able to that me um are we going to be able to make changes in what's being brought
forward I think it was attorney I think it was PA who said um it depends on how it is noticed yeah let me clarify pertain to the actual ordinance because when we advertise a ordinance for a public hearing we have to use the
heading that is of that ordinance so if they deviate from anything in there they can act that they can say staff we want to add X Y and Z we just P an act on it at that meeting we would have to be at the next meeting so they can modify their coordinates to properly notice it
okay but it's going to have to have two readings anyway right right well so okay these would yes these would require two readings not all or county level require two these changes would require two readings and I'm speaking
for the cor so yeah and and so the fact is that the County Council let's just talk about what's goinging on February 11th we've got three specific items the changes to the storm water that uh tab has helped navigate through this body and through
the pbrc as well as the comp plan amendments to and the ordinance changes for the uh voluntary Li standards um if they change any one of those three
substantially they would not be able to act on the ordinance they would have to be re advertise it and at the next meeting take action so for the comp plan it has another little bit of time because we have to we have to transmit
those to uh fora Department of Commerce for review under the department under the Community planning it doesn't stop it in the tax on another 30 days okay and thank you for clarifying
because that was really my point is that I got a sense from the January 14th meeting that they want ordinances with some teeth and are they going to be allowed maybe with you know delay and getting it approved you know to maybe
take the the voluntary L ordinance that you know is moving through the pipeline right now and upgrade it back to hybrid which is what we as a body originally wanted and recommended but then of course you know we've gone over this a million times you know would it be
useful for us today to say you know we still believe that the hybrid to fast as a body and you know and kind of encourage them to take that extra 30 days yes I'm pardon for
interrupting one thing that staff is going to say just so you all understand is that right now you have a bird in the hand so adopt what you can right now and if there's specific changes that you want done tell us so we can come back
and get those going because unless they have very specific standards that are going to be ready to go at the next meeting that could just send this back into and please don't take this wrong way an extensive discussion here an extensive discussion at the planning and
Land Development regulation Commission and while that's happening all the work that this group has already done for the volunteer work and all this work that's been done where the storm water changes is going to sit there and languish I would say that from our from staff perspective take what you got get that
in place and tell us what you want change so we can come back and bring it to you in the format that you would like and again that's you know where we're I I want to jump a little bit to
yesterday's meeting um I spoke on our behalf for the work plan and for the the annual report and I reminded them that our original recommendation for low impact development had been
hybrid I didn't share with them that the reason for that was because we were told by our external advisors by the Consultants that a hybrid approach had excuse me that if you didn't have some mandatory aspect it wouldn't happen um
but I did I did say that that was coming back um they did ask about and I want to level set for all of us for storm water just tell me if I'm misremembering something um we agreed as a body that we
needed to send them a bird in the hand now that we needed to get that done for all kinds of reasons including public sentiment but we also recognized that we needed to have this meeting that we're having today and we needed to hear outside voices because maybe we go back and say
you know what we do need to put more teeth into that but we already kind of said as a group that we were going to go the bird in the hand way um I hope there is appetite for strengthening there was to me a great
change in the way the conversation went on the 14th and and yesterday the only question um that I received was from from Member Santiago but it was it was about an L ID and I also surfaced in that um back and
forth with him that when he said we don't want this to happen to a future Council in in other words are you sure that you've set the standards high enough and um it kind of indicated that nobody has a crystal ball but that it
sort of depended what we struggle with is whether we believe that storms like Ian and Milton are anomalies or we believe that they're The New Normal and I said I personally believe it's s normal that's that's what I would take into consideration and the last thing
that I said to them and then Jessica gave some some very good remarks that I hope we also get to um was that we are not about the past you know there may be tools in the toolkits we've talked about
things in liid that can deal with flooding from older development but really we are focused on the future doing ordinances and speaking to the council through those ordinances so we can't go back we don't have a time machine to go back and fix causes of
flooding now because that has also not been consistently clear in in meetings and in what the Public's understanding is so um those are the things that I remember and and that I'm thinking of and just
thought I sure and what happened yesterday and our work plan was approved I was a little surprised that that member um Kent didn't move storm water Wetland sorry Wetland up in the in but they they approved
it Jessica yeah just to add briefly to that discussion because I do think way is in is that the the additional commentary other than reiterating that looking at Land Development codes is is looking into the future rather than the existing
problems um is a reminder to the council that this body is directed by our enabling ordinance and the policy direction we get from C and reminded them again that if they would like to change that policy direction or give us additional Insight we would be happy to
hear it and work with it um there was not additional given um so take that as it was it was a long meeting for a morning meeting a short um but I think that when we're looking at what's coming forward part of the discussion does have to
be you know the LED structure was brought forward under this circumstance we think having it in place is great and might have you know some projects move through and if you direct us to come back and structure a hybrid program we will um the same thing with storm we've
got some updates that we think make sense they've gone through our review um if we want to do more we will direct us to do so we can open it up and make it broader or whatever people are going to end up doing so I think that that has to be I can sense the fear that we bring
this board Council adopts it says we handled it which is not I think what this board thinks that we are doing and those actions so just having that out there and the rhetoric is important and just to add I also said that we developed our priorities it was prior to
the January 14th meeting so we hadn't with it in input which was significantly different from all the other meetings we listened to and as Jessica says both of us um stated a complete willingness for them to direct us with with different
priorities or stricter priorities that we work for them as an extension of their vulnerable responsibility to protect the environment ah oh and then p and then Bill a ginger read
okay CL that was spoken like a true person person was truly had to address body poliy many many times uh we we uh it's important that we look at it from their perspective also the these are politicians they are subject to
influences and forces we can't begin to understand and they would like to see results that they can actually hold up to the public saying see we are doing something and we also need to understand that whatever we do now is also subject change these codes and these rules it's
organic it never stays the same so what and and I'm very sure play will also tell these Commissioners Council people the same thing this is not the end of our work there's more to do thank you so first I want to say play I thought she did a great job I thought
Don all did a great job of presenting the information that you guys presented you had a substantial amount of data to put forward and listening I thought that you guys did a good job of setting the planing field at beginning of that conversation pretty fairly um
listening to the public one of the things that I observed January 14th versus the priority there were a lot more people against the moratorium from the public side it wasn't just the people that were complaining about issues there was the I'm going to call it silent large group I don't want to
say majority be minority but there there was a large group of people that had previously been silent that came out of the Woodward when we talk about l l to me feels like an Omnibus spending bill it feels like we're taking all of these things and shoving them together and saying that they're all good and I fully
disagree with it I I've been one of the quietly outspoken opponents to L from the beginning on this committee and as I hear more of it it is one of those things that it's like tonight is inly here it's just getting louder and giving me a headache so there are things that L
encourages that are good practices there are things that it encourages that aren't going to at all solve the problem with flooding there are things that it mandates that don't have anything to do with flooding and so I think the idea that we treat the solution of this problem as an Omnibus spending bill is
short changing the public and I also hear members of the public tell me liid is the answer because they've heard it from everybody that L is the answer I hear the County Council memb say l is the answer there is a subdivision under land and I'm not going to pick but the that designed it used full liid within
the development of that subdivision and I've heard all of those same people complain about that subdivision as an example of what's wrong because there's towers of dirt and clear cutting and everything else with it so as an engineer I don't really like it when we have disingenuous communication to the public which is what I feel like that conversation is and one of the things
that I'm going to suggest is pay attention to the Silence of Engineers on the support side of Li there's not very many of us that you see advocating for lit as our solution to these problems we're advocating for flood studies for specific flood related actions for
buyouts of recurrent flooded properties for things that are solution oriented Li therefore there there's somebody pushing it and I've said in the past that there are a lot of companies that develop filter Technologies rain Garden Technologies specific soil augmentations
Landscape Maintenance plans so on and so forth those companies are funding the studies that support liid it is going to Simply make things more expensive is not going to wholesale make things better most of the time that an liit storm
water technique is better than the traditional storm water techniques that we use as in Redevelopment we're in a constrained Basin area where the original standard that we would use a pond a lake you know whatever is not available there's not space or the
geology is supported so in support of let's move forward with what we have strongly I I feel that we should because you're going to find that myself and a whole bunch of other people are going to come and speak out against the you know strengthening of what we've already done
and I think what we have is a pretty good compromise point for us to move forward with I think further conversation is something that going to happen but I I do want to throw that out there because I think that there's been a silence around this and there's more people that are in my ear agreeing with
me on that than you guys may realize so just mechanically um when it goes to the council it will be as we suggested it but the pdrc comments of making it hybrid and taking away the incentives will just be a suggestion to the
council has all of the history basically what work of the consultant the grant the recommendation that all made the council's ultimate determination to make it entirely voluntary up through the
pdc's recommendation but the material itself the ordinance the manual the compl all Remain the way that they were before pbrc with the total
voluntary the staff has not made any changes based on the the pity recommendation but we will inform the council that there are these you other things and then you I'll let them know what the original recommendation was you
know just the facts right the history this is what recommended this is what you all ultimately did what's happened since and then there are options you know really for them to nothing adopt it the way that it is
adoped with PC recommendations they have several options there out in that which I think might be going out public today that's the goal um so got second
question on the storm water um to you um Jessica the vard comments that were supposed to come to enra it was a sheet Chris sent to me saying can you take it to enra did they already get that months
ago you know so there are a lot of St water things happening right now I know that this is my vard hat um I know that vard sent formal letters on storm water updates to the city of new samna beach and I know that we sent initial
comments to the county prior to pulling in the latest revisions um so I would have to check bill on who it went to but I think it it was shared prior for L the visual v card letter is
in the agenda packet which is basically support that's written um I don't know the answer to that do you know is the is there a v card letter in remember I just like to to mention
um I'm glad you try to read the KE leads of the public I do too it matters to me in a letter I sent in personal capacity for January 14th council meeting I urged them to look at the various causes and potential solutions
for flooding precisely because if the public doesn't have any understanding that it is a variety of things they will not be able to participate in Solutions and I said yesterday on the day there's no magic bullet There's No
One Magic Bullet for this because there isn't um I don't think I it certainly hasn't occurred to me that LD is the one bad bullet either to me it's a series of tools that can be
applied very well and many of which I'd like to see utilized and applied and I'll even hearken back to a vCard meeting where I met Jessica I met you and I met bill before this body had even been reconstituted and we discussed the
things in the ordinances that prevented the adoption of certain things that were liid practices that we agreed would be good practices to employ so I just you know my hope is fine everyone should
speak out about what they believe in and what they care about and I think we've been forthcoming in this meeting with one another and if we haven't I encourage us to be certainly but I also think we have
um we are more on the same page than we are not and I would I would urge us to try to keep us on the same page I understand that there are things that trigger all of us um but liid isn't just
one thing either and as and as Ginger just uh run up it's going to them as purely volunteer just clarify there is a January 22nd 2025 amend from
vard and yeah regarding technical review on boring determ the methodology for borings the impact fill requirements a variety LS so those that is included in the packet for every
thank you I up to just to summarize it is basically just let's independently verify this let's do a ver stability analysis it's nothing hugely different than what's proposed to the clarification there's a big formula that's got I know there's there right past that my
attorney square root of that get out that what is it slid rules um when they Jessica can you clarify the the letter from Bard about the LED portion
of the ordinance they were they were saying that they supported as is even though the sort of summary page that we discussed last time says that they support a hybrid approach the continued statement of vard is that we support the adoption of a voluntary system and we
have recommended review of a hybrid system but that what is currently drafted cannot be easily converted to a hybrid system that it would require a whole new kind of review dropping to SC and so we can't at this time say and we' support this being hybrid because as
it's written we can't say that um so it would have to be re an analy okay Ginger else say um so anticipated at the meeting yesterday that the council would change
their priorities because of conversation on 14 they did not in fact do that um although the men that clay and the legal team and and then are putting together um I just want you to know the staff um
took what they said about well as perhaps our best chance to get some well ordinance changes through that um you know we've been working on I've been working on for 20 years um so we did take the opportunity to summarize those Chang
um the ones that you all already looked at and voted on and then also um propos changes that you hadn't yet gotten to so there will be a m for this Council where we've um tried to take a whole lot ofs and say hey he said you impacts here's
some suggestions for how to do that right how to talk about there are unable impacts you know not no we imp ever from here on out right um so just so you know we we took that opportunity we tried
very hard to make sure we were clear about which things enra had already voted on and approved versus suggested changes that you hadn't yet approved because we didn't want to misrepresent your work um so longwinded way of saying um we are
going to address what the council said and that may trigger um an opportunity to get the we we Stu done sooner and then we'd have to talk about what we want to that up because we're half more than half way done maybe with the wetlands and maybe this is an
opportunity to you know bang the rest of it out and get something done so just want to throw that out there for consideration um it maybe our best chance but they didn't officially they did not change the work plan of
anybody thank you um clay do you are you do you have okay Tom and then I suggest we do our subth inning stretch out of what I've heard the last few minutes um whether clay knows it or not or
whether he's even conscious of it planning directors they will lean towards preparing staff for reps an agenda meos in a direction that they think that the council and commission wants them to go uh so you know it's
true certain certain words praise dialectics you can make them lean one way another there are people in this Council right now probably don't really know what they want but they want something they want results and so I would implore you clay when you do these unconscious activities and you use
certain words and phrases and buzzword use the ones that would get uh get us to a a place where he they can actually hold up their hand say look what we've done here I'm speaking like a politician just have to listen to these presentations and as a planning director who have to write these
presentations thanks okay is everybody open to a 5 to 10 minute oh yeah I in those yeah well I don't know then told me to make sure we're nice to
you'll try you sit through it it's the onlyon you know that's a picture yeah that's carnivorous okay so we found it's Frost back
because it so yeah we're keeping on so it's got good mosquitoes and stuff there we haveo problem with her and we keep it in water but I don't I don't know what she has so it'll actually do
better I mean my yard is p s so that's no problem so I need to yeah we saw think know actually was and it's one of those things where get killed supposed to
take that would only be proted like some I've seen multiple FWC TRS out there they were like two hours it was one of those you don't want to don't hurt yourself in certain places
if you do you better CF actually cfpr right across so my I can fourer k so
[Music] k fing the meeting to order once again thank you very much the first item under new business is just a little discussion about how um
chapter 50 changes might occur um just s already so we've got the storm water changes to chapter 72 going to Council next week talked about that you said we're going to still want to address chapter 50 and so this meeting is just
the beginning of that U but typically what happens when we try to when we propose changes to the m need is that there's an extended uh public we will have to send out any proposed changes to all of the Cities
allow them an opportunity to comment you know complain cheer whatever they might do um my experience is usually not the cheering but um so it takes a little while longer so uh just sort of an FYI
in terms of how this committee would work it's not really any different you you be looking at those standards talking with experts which in this case is Tad and Ben and deciding where you think we should go as a countywide
minimum standard there's just that extra pered FAL step of getting the comments from the cities my suggestion would be that once those comments come in from the cities that the staff Cay those collect them
you know and provide them to you all for for sort of riew about what you think about the comments that right why or not that changes what you want to recomend so um that's really all I wanted to say there is just to as we're going through
think about the fact that there's going to be that extra revie when it's AUM standard so that was it questions comments bill so do you think that you will um
draft the changes show them to us and then they'll will'll debate them and then they'll go to the cities or will they go to the cities first and then we'll come back and review the no the way I Envision it is that just like we've been doing you all make
recommendations on ordinance changes um it wouldn't be necessarily drafting in this case it would be the the Public Works folks and and legal but what would go to the cities
would be a a revised version of the ordinance right not just conceptual so you would all look at that making recommendations that would get drafted into ordinance form and would go out yeah I how is that resed with cities it's been quite some time since we've
done a chapter 50 minimum standard change the last time we did it was a change to the water wise ordinance that just went out from me as an email to the city manager and what the highest
official so typically mayor whatever in each city um with the material you know an explanation and welcome your comments please let us know whatever that was a really easy mon so there wasn't really
anyy um what we have done in the past where we were trying to make moves and Inter changes to things that were maybe a little more controversial we actually um offer to meet with each City and explain what the proposed changes are um we have in the past used vard as sort of
a a partner to get together with folks from different municipalities to do a presentation made to aocc so um you know I don't know exactly how this one would work my guess is that we
would offer to meet each City whoever from their City wants to hear presentation um and anybody that wants to do that then we would go let me kind of add to that um
we no longer have the league of cities as an operating group but we do have the marriage group as meeting and so the Roundtable elected officials they have established a committee that is
committed to flooding and storm water issues I believe what will happen is once this group has been able to work through and identify the specific changes they're seeking in chapter 50 and we have confirmation that that is
what we're going to be going with that that group would be engaged before we finalize Inc to the council right so so in other words you can go there and kind of as a preamble if you will and then and then you go City by city with
specific folks right at the heart of it remember these are County Light standards that are established under the chart and the whole point is to allow for the cities that would be impacted by it to provide us comments there will be
a part statement Pi made situation where County councils that we have the appropr stand even though maybe some objection proce right well my main point was just that it's not going to be a surprise I mean it's something to be built up to
dealt with and then dealt with further I mean there's there's some salesmanship in this in law and uh at the same time uh they want they want to show action against this problem so I think it's it's in a good position U I just don't
want to I don't want to blow it on the mechanics you knowre all right so next uh on the agenda is a discussion of the um different store standards throughout the county and through in other counties so
at the last meeting you asked for information to help you in your deliberations in chapter 50 so um what we did is hired the firm Kenley War to compare the County's ordinance of minimum standard and implementing
ordinance to the jurisdictions within the county and to some other counties um I will apologize in advance that you did not get this information ahead of time significant amount of information you go through and we it all
to get it out to you so um I have printed copies of two matrices one which is the comparison with the county with other counties and one that is the county in the cities I'm going to preface that by saying the city Matrix
is still in a little bit rougher draft format than the county one t really went through the county one that's probably and about its final iteration the city1 is maybe a little
more rough I printed them because we didn't get them to you in advance we certainly don't expect that you all have you know the ability to um get clean all of the information and a printing copy that I'm going to hand you right now that was the best we could do in the
time that we had so um with that sort of preface Eliza Juliana with Kim Horn is going to give you a brief presentation of the work that they did and and um I think the the homework will be to then
digest these matrices which I will email right so you only have the printed copy um and have a more detailed discussion about any of technical standards that are in there and I'll I'll go ahead and steal a
little bit of Thunder um isn't going to be the expert in answering technical questions Tad is our technical expert so Comm is here if you real specific SP Engineering typ so I'm going to hand it over to Eliza and I'm
going to pass out the few documents that I have and um sorry I didn't get them before now um good afternoon everyone my name is Ela Juliano uh I'm an urban planner we along with Jesse Stokes also from Kim
Horn have been supporting the planning department a variety of um planning reviews for for last uh the year yeah um so we were asked to jump in on this to do some cod comparisons as jender stated we're not the I'm not the engineering expert we
did call I did phone a friend to make sure that that this PowerPoint reflected things that that makes sense from an engineering standpoint but um the hardore engineering questions um as in you mentioned those to the staff so the criteria that we were asked to pull from um these different codes
for volume of retention design storm projected rainfall Hond design and maintenance requirements we looked at all the jurisdictions in bua County the only one that sticks out here a little bit is that new is actually looking at some revisions to their ordinance and we
aware of that so we both versions both adopted and proposed changes um and then we we identifi counties um across the state to some extent as well as within the region that might have um standard worth comparing
either counties that were known for having more restrictive and more Innovative standards and those count that bit further away and counties that are that are just be Adent to bullsh Grant um as you it seems are well aware
there are two different types of uh standards which County's code chapter 50 which applies to all municipalities within the county um in chapter 72 which only applies to potion counties um on incorporate area where projects are reviewed by the county So within this
PowerPoint we've marked green text um standards that are chap standards that apply to everybody and the black text is standards that are only [Music] inable um I'm going to go through these so this is not comprehensive you know
you will get the dri which is comprehensive but we try to pull out so the material differences between the different jurisdictions um and I would say you know your earlier conversation you'll see some things in here that it's probably debatable whether it's a
material difference but whether things are calculated by the the jur ahead of time or they're tul Bally so um County in the green here is the the countywide standard um for 24hour 25 you will see
storms um we do have some jurisdictions that compare to De and Sarasota that use 100e storm storm as their standard um we don't have an analog for this in the counties but have the must work 72
hours that's one of the county standards for its own projects um again County uh regulating unincorporated projects requires a half inch um of attentional over the entire site some other jurisdictions are more restricted than
that so um these jurisdictions to land at Water Dela and nor require one in and new stor a beach even before the rition requires an inch half design stor so luch found again this is just applicable to area um
requires a both basing hydrograph if you want that's sad for a 24-hour 100e storm event um the other some jurisdictions do call out specific numbers that describe what the 24hour 100e storm event is and
that's the 10.6 in for the married um they also have a recovery time for a Clos Basin in 14 days that's they in their but it's also the same as the Le Management District standard so it's not necessarily different um rainfall intensity which
county as been attendant doesn't does specifically refer to this um I will also just say as part of this analysis we were focused mainly on the codes I think there's a couple instances where we looked at the engineering standards manuals but we didn't necessarily catch all of those be
analysis um so jurisdictional comparison um pelis County they use the fdot's model rather than than specifying the rainfall intensity versus um couple fictions new SP is actually proposing we
add specific inches to describe the 24hour your starms and um Bard County already does that and of course those numbers are different but that's that's locational it shouldn't be the same necessarily um maluan County so again
this is applicable C the water table can be lowered more than 15% of the site up to 5 ft so this has essentially to do with um when the storm water Pond goes beneath the water table so they're they're able to do that that's not something that happens very often but
County does have a standard for that that applies to everyone um so none of these areil one to one um just called out a couple examples standards within the comps um the county talk SL requirements one of those ponds which is not necessarily
specified in all the city codes um poly fi out maintenance bur be the Orman Beach this was the only jurisdiction that we saw that called out the need to have um the P bottom above the seasonal high water table again this is pretty typical for St John's water DeMent
District unusual or different um yes it's it's too big oh sorry thank you Jessie that's why see um a couple jurisdictions describe what the
minimum Pond depth is pelis county has the specific standards for infiltration rates of dry ponds Sarasota County deals with again the dry retention SP ponds having um concrete channels andenes and
the Barry um again talks about the side slopes having maximum depth four feet from the average I got a question sorry can you go back on so first what is the what does that mean on the 15% of this can't lower the
15 the groundwater more than 15% T the fush county what is that mean well what you can do to create volume sometimes in your storm water go ahead
lower that uh design normal water level the seasonal high elevation that we talked about in the past uh you can do that by draining those sections so and that uh keep it as a wet Bond put your orice at a little bit lower elevation so what
it allows that water to do is always be moving into a downstream section in advance the storm so um you can do it in certain occasions generally prefer not to do that we know that that can change but uh if you're in the middle of nowhere you're probably not going to get
it if you're next to a canal or something like that where the elevations in that Canal are quite a bit lower you can possibly that wet you wouldn't want to do it have negative effect there are different things go into that overall they set a a hard
limit okay and then next slide I think I have no I forgot all right thank you so this short presentation so this we very near um so bu County talks about the ownership of SMS um to the county
for maintenance they Peach is specific about requiring an eement of 15 ft for dry ponds and 10 ft for wet ponds for orange requires mainten 20 ft that's centered over pipes and structures one quick point
also first page should be the first page we but is something that this group may want to factor into um and all of the public discussions we've heard concerns about
homeowners association or Property Owners Association that are not properly following up on that and so one thing that y'all may want to think about you go through this is do you want to put in
specific monitoring requirements and Reporting requirements so that County staff is aware of potential lack of mment or other type of things that imp
yes hello I off there for a second um you were hired to do a report and you did a good job that said I question the the utility of this report I'll give you an example I would imagine that designed
considerations for Dayton be Shores are a whole lot different than the denied considerations for South to VAR on the St John's river so some of these comparisons are app that um but they are all pretty much the same and a lot of these uh rules are based on the worst
possible case some place like uh let's say day on beach you have an ocean but you also have a river so I just wanted to throw that out there so that we all know that that putting too much value and emphasis on comparing is
not really going to do it a whole lot of good so I don't spend too much time with this thanks Jessica yeah I think to that point something that stood out to me is that I think the stronger standards you see at least from the eyeball review is along
coastal areas in community so they have the inure standard there but I think that in previous discussions we've talked about do we make a rule for the overall County or like we've talked about the benefit of basis studies are there certain areas within our County
where it makes sense to have a f yeah I will mention I think the Barry also had so my side as well um the Barry also seem to have pretty restrictive or extensive requirements just if those of us who've
been around a long time de Barry was the county for up until 20 25 years ago right and they Incorporated all of the county standards were immediately became city
of De standards but city of Tober went through flooding much earlier than what we've been talking about with Ian and Irma I cannot remember the year but the Barry
went through extensive flooding and that would have prompted them to amend their rules and and do something more restrictive I do know Ed also okay thank you I don't remember which one I just I've heard that edgewaters also
going through the similar process of trying to to be a lot more restrictive on their on their development so you know what you had asked for last time was was comparison I think that um you we have probably a little bit of work to do to tighten up
this the city Matrix but I think this is just sort of going to be a reference for us as we move through you know when you're looking at 50 and looking at se code you're curious oh I wonder about this I wonder you know there's another County that doesn't be different so we
have this it's less of a um thing that we need to all look through an agree on right now and more of reference material as we move through the discussion session by session I think we were we ask for it we were curious
about what communities were more restrictive and this gives us screen and they already ask questions about why recognizing the the differences as we come through it and is that something that should apply across the board or or
not [Music] John so this is all ear marked around retention BS and Recovery systems that and in a sense of trying to fix
blood issues and problems wouldn't it be important to look at where we have failures in these structures design those structures of
the future to prevent those failures I mean we can look at all those comparisons all day long but if you get to the four of it why did Victoria Park play how do you prevent that um do we
ordinances around that versus well I should build another foot higher and that should take care of problem excuse me for jumping in for just a second the minutes from our last meeting were in so many ways almost that
was a really deep dyed discussion that we had and it was about many many many factors but it was kind of getting to that right Point um it's almost like a a road map to to follow for discussions or
to pick things out of the only thing is it wasn't about one Nets which is what we keep so rning up El so then looking at what we have currently and what may currently be in place Victoria Park lies within one of
these ordan where did it fail and how do we correct that in the next series of ordinances or how do we try that legally do that I'm not saying fix Victoria but I'm just saying for the future you know was it design
maintenance and rainfall right right I think that um if you've been listening to some of the presentations that Ben B has been doing I think he's trying to get to part of that I think a lot of the work that you already did on the chapter 72 Farm
water things were in reaction to things that happened right you try to talk about location the fond and some of the failures that Happ catastrophic failure of the fond so um what's that mean okay may we don't let on the and those sorts
of things I think you've addressed some of that um and I think T's been really trying to educate about like there are some things where things flooded some places where things flooded and the system didn't fail the system was only
designed for a 25 years Mar and we got a 500 years Mark so so those are for the policy questions we'll have to wrestle with here in the council which is um we probably can't design to the worst case scenario right then all of
your property is taken up in the storm water system so what is the acceptable level of risk that's a big question right um so it's not really a failure if the system worked as it was intended for
the size Farm it was built for there are examples of fa that are true like that system didn't work because it wasn't maintained or it wasn't designed well or whatever um and so those I think are the things you're going to have to kind of grapple with is are are we
designing to the right thing right and that sort of discussion we had earlier about we design to rount rainfall and what is the acceptable level that we designed to that you know protects people from most of the time but still you know allows of the
property for intended use so I I certainly don't have the answer but that's I think where these discussions are going to have to go the next next meeting maybe one after that to just obviously anything that was
constructed that wasn't very very recent may not have been constructed under the current standards of that jur Tyler and John it's kind of two things based on uh what you just said John the first being
Victoria Park what caused the flooding there I think that the Bas studies that eventually get conducted May identify and was it a failure that that's something that without the base of study I'm not willing to make a professional statement of opinion um but one of the
yes well maybe maybe I I'm going to just say maybe because what I'd really like to see is what does the Basin study say would have happened with Milton with no Victoria Park that that's an important thing but we talked about waterers getting pumped in we talked about that it's maintained Pond
elevations so I'm going to point out specific ordinates and and I I want to Circle back to the idea that when we have these conversations we need to have specific ordinance identified before we had the conversation I think that that's that's been derailing a lot of good
conversations and I feel that's something the Cher ambers you've been bringing up repeatedly as that has been an impediment to this conversation concerned about it frustrates me because I would rather have a holistic discussion and then see which
ordinance well and so I think that might be a point of clarification for the purpose of our body with Council um but I'll get to that in a moment so looking at the Dand ordinances and blah blah blah I'm not seeing it but but I know the standard for the pond is that you
have to have a 1 to four horizontal uh a vertical 1T 4T horizontal slope until you get 2 ft below the water line and then you can break it to 2 to one so if we let the pond water line get too low then we have a safety condition for
people that could fall while Fring the pond so one of the questions that I have is why don't we just require 4 to one on bonds that are in close Basin like that so that we don't have a need to artificially maintain the water level within the pump so we don't have a
safety need to pump water in there there's little things like that that could come out of those conversations so um you know the bigger picture on this is if we don't have the ordinance identified so right now most of the ordinance changes that are being suggested are coming from our
environmental and planning staff we're dealing with storm water code that is is pretty intricate this Matrix you know you guys I agree with Tom you did a good job putting it together there's a lot of information here but the INRI sees of these differences are something that as everybody stated Tad's going to have to
explain it's professional engineering Le that we're playing with right now I think if we're going to be reviewing ordinances they need to come from the people who are the experts in those areas and if not we need to be having the open-ended conversations as a
committee so that we can find the ordinance areas to task staff with looking at and when I say task staff I mean the specific expert staff that would be dealing with it so then Tad's groups would be who I would be thinking here um you know that's just my opinion
I think that we're we're going to not get the results that council is expecting us to if we don't change the the formula of how we get to ordinance changes so are you saying we didn't we haven't identified what specific ordinance we're
going to be looking at that so last month yeah the conversation got cut short and we we didn't move forward with suggested ordinance changes because I didn't at the time have the ability to specify which ordinance I wanted to disc but so today's meeting we were starting
to discuss the chapter 50 storm orance right okay so I just want to make sure we're clear like what Orin we're talking about today are you referring to the discuss we had about like the irrigation I think that our value as an
advisory committee to the council to help deal with the current issues at and extends Beyond just the ordinances that are mean the way ordinances are being presented and I think that we shouldn't be saying that we can't have a little
bit more of an open ended conversation I think that's what John was saying is you know we had a very fruitful conversation last month we were starting to get specific causes once you identify causes you can start looking at what the solutions to those could be which of those could have unintended consequences that we don't want to consider and which
of those could work better I can't pick the ordinance that's going to solve the problem until we have a good discussion of the problem and and so I feel like it's kind of a chicken and egg issue I put weeks of time into developing and vetting the ordinance ideas that I
brought forward for storm water and I I appreciate most of those are getting carried forward to council now um but there's information that Wendy has for example I can't go talk to Wendy outside of this meeting so if I can't have an open-ended conversation at this meeting without knowing exactly what we're
working on it's very hard to actually be effective that's I think the point I'm making so and excuse me Tom I am recognizing you Jessica in a way brought this up at the council meeting so we have it an here's my problem as a chair
we have three hours together a month and our enabling resolution says that we have to make recommendations that are ordinances or that are minimum standards so we do have a work product that we are
tasked with producing I did ask at the end of the year last year if we were okay with the meetings being very discussion heavy rather than being like the pdrc here's the paper say yes say no move on and we agreed that we wanted to
continue discussing personally I'd love it if someone I am actually kind of looking for to Legal I think to crack the nut um and Jessica brought it up is our remit to talk about everything I got go
ahead thank you um this is fun this this the good part as as a former City Commissioner I had uh multiple investigations luned against me uh for violations and sunshine rules uh um all of them went away there was nothing to them I've served on plannings loing
boards other boards for decades under sunshine and here's here's the advice I have to all of us there are fewer rules than you think we can talk to each other I've investigated I've been I've become the expert the main thrust of sunshine the Govern government Sunshine is that
we cannot profit from our discussions beyond that we can pretty much say what we want you can take and the lawyers will take you to the Other Extreme they'll say if you even say is it going to rain you may be talking about flooding you can't say stuff like that the other the other option is how are you going to vote on this we're not
doing that but to just be TI in the hallway and say did you what Edge what do you think of that that is perfectly legal and legal I know SAR looking at Morgan Morgan is legal and that's different the guidance we got I know
I've been coached 15 times on this and no offense man but a lot of what they tell us is because they don't want to get in trouble for our coaching this problem but there are truly fewer rules in you think if you really read the sunshine rules carefully if you don't
scan a profit chances are nobody's goingon to file a claim against you I maybe maybe that's the 60s talking anything that could possibly come before the board uh should not be discussed amongst two or more members outside of meeting no as done in
sunshine so no uh you're talking about the weather is much different that you having a conversation that may involve storm water and County City Etc are doing you say it's a nice day out that's taking it to an extreme um but you're
saying hey this other you know is doing this maybe we should bring it up the meeting things like that should not be discussed outside of notice meeting you just made my point okay but I just want to throw that I have become for to become something of
an expert on the subject and and if somebody says this is a sunshine will you just say Pro it and they'll go away every time so but just kind of moving back to how we want to operate considering that the that the product
because one of the things that was recognized when I asked the question at the end of last year do you want a tighter meeting or do you want to continue to have conversations one of the reasons was that we learned from one another because there areas of expertise
Michelle um I sh ears a little bit um just thinking about her GES in the past and other firstect country like Texas party I'm sure they changed their from water regulations after they've had their and there were something that we on look at what they their water
regulations and how are they how are they exed now if they actually improved they haven't had any big storms since then but her har was 15 17 around then that might be as well
from what they the Houston area is that something we'd like to ask staff to look at PR post Harvey in Houston Texas area I personally done the expert on I could get in
here through the magic of Technology yeah [Laughter] why are you talk now um right here so Dr Sam Brody he
teaches for Texas University at the Doon campus and um I will read you his bi really fast but he is a colleague of mine and Dr Jason Evans at ston he is the director of the Department of marine
and Coastal Li science he is a his PhD in urban planning he from North he did his PhD in North Carolina but he did his PhD dissertation many many years ago in Florida and Texas and um his deep roots in Florida as well so I've been talking
with him about possibly coming sometime this spring to do some public presentations on the east side the West Side possibly even one to council if we can get that scheduled and and he was actually instrumental in writing leg
ation for the State of Texas after Hurricane Harvey um to to change how they do their storm water dis so um I mean we've got a guy and you know he's midle white guy so you know in terms of
whatever that means um he just saying he's he is a known expert around the country that um that we could get here for in do in our Institute
pay for it does anybody want to move to ask Wendy to make this happen I don't mind I can jump in just one second um I don't mind bringing in the experts but where are we going um we
we can get experted in debt and still not come to any solutions what works in Texas might possibly will appear but that would be a presentation for FL of legislation not County um I'm not trying to disagree
with you when but I do think we can export ourselves out the door and not get anything to tge which is why I haven't really pushed it because um I mean I talked to chair Brower this back in October um right
actually the day that Milton was heading I was talking to Sam going um I think we're going to meet you here in the next couple of months and he's like let me know and I talked to Jeff afterwards I'm like hey can we get this guy in maybe in time for these meetings that we've been
going through in January February and you know and S was willing to come it's willing to come this week next week and um and Jeff just said you know I think I just really want to keep it local and and here from inrock and he didn't really bite on it and um I mean he's interested but not interested and so I
think it's to John's Point like ah how many experts do we need to hear from maybe all we need to do is read the ordinance that depend and see if that's something that applies here ourselves the travel in the cost and just review that that's further than you know your analysis but if there's something really
inovative there we must got it oh I'm willing to travel to Texas and hang out for a couple years to see an [Music] okay I agree with the last thought you had I think Step One is let's look at what the ordinances and see I mean you
know what I don't know is what the ordinance before or after the change was I'm extremely ignorant on the topic of what Texas did I do know that Florida tends to have more rain than most areas and the rest the country so when I compare our stormm water standards we tend to
have much more mature standard sets than most of the places that I compare with so I'd be curious to see if Texas is ahead of us and their regulations or if maybe they modeled some of their changes after what we do and that would be
interesting to hear from him however I think before we John before we spend the time on that we should look at where it goes Jessica in ginger yeah my only attorney comment there is that one I
know two facts about Texas maybe three but one is that they don't have any state mandated growth management laws um or like zoning rules um so they have very different structure and two they have a completely different basis in their case law system on rights to water
um which is they're the opposite system as we are which is we say you cannot impede the flow of water through properties they say if you capture it you get to keep it forever and people are very focused on that element and so it's a consumptive water law system versus R so that definitely has trickled
up in fact do more reculation so I guess from a staff perspective um you know we want to know how you want to proceed um so the way I say it we have a couple of options there's the we have a chapter 50
storm water standard that we have made available but can again and you can look at that standard as it exists now and contemplate ways you might like to see it
modified it seems to be the first an early thing to look at is would you want to implement the changes that you've recommended to chapter 72 in that minimum standard right that's sort of an easy button and the answer
may be no we don't but that would be at least in my mind a place to start like are the things we recommended in 72 do they make sense to do countywide um and maybe there are other things in addition to that so the alternative to taking that you know sort
of maybe narrowly focused here's the ordinance that we have what do you want to see done to it is the maybe the Tyler model which is here's the problem let's find the universal ordinances that address that
problem um and we can do that if you say here's what we want to do the staff collectively not just envir management staff can say all right we are all the places in the code that address that particular issue and and bring them and I think we did that last time when we
gave you the landscape code we gave you the irrigation code and we gave you you know all the things we can certainly do it way um it matters not to the staff what we want to make sure is that we have clear enough G that we're providing what you need for the next
meeting so that we don't spend meals because you don't have what you need or you know so that's from my request is that just whatever it is let us know so we can do the best we can
get build so I heard that um two options one you could just bring the chapter 50 with the changes we made 72 as a starting point seems logical to me or we could get you
storm water Engineers on the or with Dad and suggest something but I do think we what I'm hearing is we want a draft change ordinance right to start debating
eventually right I mean pretty soon that's what I that's our finished product is ordinance it has to be I mean I don't disagree that's what we do so we need a draft right of the changes is that what
you're saying or we need to debate first and then go into the I think we have to have excuse Melissa said something earlier that think that's really insightful which is that as much disagreement as we have on the committee there's a really large amount of commonality in what we think are good
ideas and to that end most of what was suggested for chapter 72 I would agree should move forward with chapter 50 there's a couple of items that I think we should drop out for now when we wait to see how they team um the thing that I heard from the
public was there are three general areas of flooding that I heard repeatedly one is World um areas that are marginally above flood plane that maybe the access roads aren't maybe they aren't publicly maintained roads maybe they're in
Daytona Park States as well um some areas like that that were built in Flatwoods so that that's a challenge that that is an existing entitlement challenge that I don't think enra is going to really successfully solve so I'm going to kind of ignore that I heard Miller Lake
that's Orange City common flooding problem that's existed for two decades at least I heard Victoria Park area um that we kind of talked about last month I think that the discuss the problem look at potential Solutions draft some
potential ordinances that would support those Solutions and then debate those ordinances direction is what I would suggest and I would say let's pick one of these two let's pick Victoria par or Miller Lake and let's have a discussion of what went wrong what wentong what are all the complaining factors that go into
it and what can Luci counting as a government agency do to prevent that from happening elsewhere we here again and that's what I actually did when I was trying to come up with storm water ordinance suggestions for chapter 72 I
we had a pond failure here we had a pond failure here we had flooding here we had flooding here what are things that I as an engineer in laying the projects out that are adjacent to could have done differently to make it better the end result better and so I started writing
those down and a bunch of them I couldn't I couldn't figure out how to make the ordinance work the unintended consequences the the the challenges from you know one year for the other too much yeah and so I think that that is an important part of the process is right
now we have a lot of answers that are being brought to us as suggested ordinances and kind of like I was complaining about L there's people who don't don't like those answers but they're just not fighting because they don't want the conflict so they're going to come out of the woodwork if we just keep talking from it these are the ideas
that we have approach and that's what we've seen from Council it's why there's been an action and lack of success and otherwise is because the common ground in the past was on we need to have a 15t buffer around all the edges of our development so we can get a 30 foot Wild
Life border didn't actually result in a flooding prevention action so if we want to see a flooding prevention I think we have to say hey our ideas so far maybe aren't the best ideas that are going to solve this and we need to take a step
back and regroup them so I would you know I'll end this I'd like to make a motion that we do that you know I don't want to call it the Tyler plan but i' like that you know that we have a holistic discussion of let's say mother Lake Basin and what causes the flooding there
and what are things that are tools and are toolbx solid I'll set that discussion I have discussion just a little there's a lot to unpack in that so I like problem solving and I like
having an overarching goal and then getting to the specific tactics or actions or pieces that lead to the solution in our construct to me the topic would be perhaps flooding what are the things that cause flooding
where are the solutions to these things then draft the ordinance I think we're kind of in the same neighborhood on that maybe even better than the same neighborhood and then the ordinance becomes a specific that's a very it's the process
I followed professionally it's a messy process I think it Yoles good results often times um and there was another piece I wanted to oh on the L just to make sure I'm not losing my mind when we started working on liid yes
it deals mostly with water but I think from a perspective of Wendy's or mine it also deals with other environmental concerns that we might have so I don't look at L I agree with you it's being kind of marketed to the public as a feel and all
to to uh flooding I don't necessarily think of it that way I I do think it's important and I do support it as a tool in the toolkit very much but not as the tool in the
toolkit for flooding I do like it for other things so I [Music] guess on the motion that's on the floor to adopt the Tyler plan which is to discussed broadly and winow down
to an ordinance just know it's going to be a little more lengthy probably than than what we've been doing because it opens up right okay any other discussion uh John you're on um I was going to speak before
the motion so I'm not speaking to the motion okay Jessica are you disc after you get the mo I think it's a a great idea um I just want to talk about the practicalities of it not to take away from it to say I would love to do it um which is that I
think we need to get back to to doing some homework um and I think that I say that because I have also fallen off on providing track changes as we go like when we first started it I know call the dark days but on trees we did an overview on how trees work we had staff
recommended changes and we were asked to out a ro we went through all of those that's kind of where we're Ling back to a bit that everybody because it took so much energy and that's why we move to a different
model it matter not to me but we didn't like that much forgive an interruption to both of you when we did the track changes what we lacked and that was a good addition was an overview from step when you marry an overview to
attract changes maybe we're put them with guest there other we're all just chatting and I do like it and I think it is a good discussion but I think the disconnect that Tyler has pointed out is that we've now talked about this topic quite a bit Yeah and we don't really
have any endles or end Solutions so if we were talking about this in the context of here's the language Tyler recommended what are our thoughts and edits there that gives us Birch any more John still no I'm I had my uh thing of before the motion was
made oh I'm sorry we do have you did we have a second seconded so what is the motion so the motion is to talk about flooding in a specific Place yeah to look at
the to look at the Miller Lake Bas bling that has occurred we had it's one of the smaller basins I think there's going to be um EAS opportunity for us to have conversation of what the contributing factors are what the county has already done so for those of you that don't know in 2008 F
Miller Lake flooded pretty substantially there are a series of changes that were made that were coordinated with the city of Orange City city of Deber fbot in vucha County relating to the inter connection of a series of snorm water bonds that fump to one another one of them being a bomb adjacent to Miller
Lake that is serving the do facility um in 2017 there were changes to the Royal Oaks Professional Center storm water system which will result in an increase in discharge of water to Miller Lake that was one of the things that came up in discussion and public comment at the
January 14th meeting I think it's a Great Basin for us to look at because there's a lot of government action there's Orange City there's fuchia County and there's fdot as well as the agreements with the bar which is part of the um change that the Barry went through so I think we discuss that Bas
here's the properties that the county bought because they were recurrent flooding properties here are the solutions the county identified here's the study that Pegasus engineering put together back in believe it was like 2009 on this that shows all of the modeling for the area here's the changes
that have happened since then we had the development for Wawa went in and filled part of the RO Lake that was there and other things how has that affected us and did development make it worse or did we just get more rain and some of those
are things that you know I can't come in advance of that conversation with ordinances that's one of the things that I want to leave as an expectation is last month I couldn't point the ordinance because I was gathering the information to digest to go back to do the homework to create the ordinance the
on the on on what we were talking about which is pumping water into development and the conversation got cut short so I didn't have enough information in order to finish and develop a proposed ordinance because I still needed to get information from that Wendy was sharing
with us during that conversation and and Hammer out and find numbers I can then go back and say this represented about an extra seven in of rain over the base one of the things I did as homework was I found some beautiful uh infrared mapping data that NASA put together and
even the transpiration rates of all different ground PE types and like multiac study that included Florida and so what you see is the uh urbanized areas transpar about 30 in per year Lakes transpar upwards to 60 in per year wetlands are in the low to mid-50s
forested Uplands are anywhere in the 40s so if we really want to bring some science and there is a lot of science out there and I'm trying to educate myself and be up to date but there's a lot of conversation that happens and so any of these things are going to be a
two-part discussion if we go to this model there's no way that we can on the first meeting that we discuss a topic expect that we're going to know what ordinance is we should be changing I think that's where the homework comes at is after that discussion we all need to go back educate ourselves on the blind
spots that got illuminated and have ideas for proposed ordinance changes that we send them that we can discuss and debate through the next meeting there may have to be a third meeting where staff comes back to us with the combined mess of uh ingredients with the
proposed ordinance that doesn't to say that we can't discuss multiple topics at you know each meeting that the start with flooding I think we need to pick a base and start looking you know at it from a reverse perspective how we
have B Jack be just bre the um an advantage I see to Tyler's proposed is that starting smallo like this will expose people in this room to the words phrases and polic
and and and and and procedures get to an ordinance and it will be a learning experience for all of us if we move on to bigger things we won't be asking a lot of questions already been answered because we know what we're talking about that's the OS part of this
ja I I'm worried about getting into the details too much and uh and I think he's right I I think I think you know the more we know and the more we discuss the the better we are I'm just not sure that
we as a group were prepared to get that deep and and be thorough enough to to say okay that's it I mean we saw we saw what's happened before and this seems like we're digging back
in versus moving forward I thought we were further along with the ordinance work as we were going to present next week I thought okay you you're saying granted none of them are saving grace right all of them are just steps in the right
direction and I think we can go further but I think we should be smart about how we go further because if we just get into broad stroke discussion on solving flooding okay and then all the problems and get into these individually I think this can get really
encumbering and I'm not sure we get very far you know say the next meeting what I think that's optimistic because what happens is that we know how that goes it slides to the next meeting and then we're interrupted by something else that
takes place and the thing stretches on and and to me I I tend to want to get things done uh productively even if they're small steps and then another small step versus taking the holistic position whittling it down on and then
doing it so I I can't support the ti only because of its of its overwhelming uh need to to build the ordinance at the end of the day that helps to solve flooding
problem um so the Miller Lake one is Sand Hill West Side is that different from can we also look at something east side which has plenty of drainage and you know can we look at both I do support looking at something specific
and figuring out why it fails before we dive into the ORD reason I didn't suggest that I don't know of area where that has been I didn't I didn't hear that from
the public so I don't know where to pick and some of that is my own furance to those specific issues but I I don't mean this to be the only thing that we look at I just needed do we need to start somewhere and get a little bit tighter
because one of the things that kept coming up is Case by case so you're right the east side does have different challenges and I do think that's an area we should be looking at as well uh it was Michelle Van John um so don't we have bement studies
we do so would it make sense to hold and look at those Bas studies and get the information from that maybe just focus on one thing like I'm throwing something out there like the maintenance of it right the existing condition like maybe we just tackle one thing like maintenance right inste of storm water
design we focus on okay what in the regulation on the maintenance side can we do and move forward and get something and where would so excuse a a question really quick just following up on that this is an example of where where I I can feel some frustration
where does that fit um said we haven't let the B study contract no I mean something like requiring maintenance I believe clay mentioned that earlier today two options right like the same kind of two options
we always have there things that we do in chapter 72 that apply in the unincorporated count talked about those water and then there are the things in chapter 50 that would apply to everyone so those are really the two places that that we can look um I me you heard Clay
earlier say there are things in the comprehensive plan for instance that we need to be change that make those recommendations to the planning staff um maintenance is probably in a that's a detail it's probably not compl right but um there are things that you could talk
about that would need a compl change but really those are the the three places um now they you know point there you know 10 different is that might touch on a specific topic we we kind of got that last one you know where do we talk about
re well here and here and here and here and here or like doing the LI audit right you know all parts of the code then that's what we can help with is if you have an idea we want fix this thing where are all the places that that thing
exists in the code we can John and I'm from the point of efficiency and not the col processes and the valueable process but I just keep
reflecting back on tree ORS and I'm sorry I I I see that taking a year the council wants answers uh we need to come up with Solutions and if I'm not mistaken is 50
more overarching that is more General brush stroke versus the details 72 yeah typically the chapter 50 is sort of the broad standards 72 is sometimes more restrictive and it has all the process type things right because it's the way we implement the
ordinance how do you apply how do you a penal back so it wouldn't do us a lot of good to get into all the different basins it wouldn't do us to get into any good to do all the different water sheds
in 50 that should happen the either the 72 or better or even back into you know code I guess development Cod but I just think we should be more simplistic but specific in chapter 50
and then detail the the needs under those basic concepts back in 72 and so I I'm just trying to avoid going into another three I'm sorry by the other difference between 50 and
72 50 applies to the municipalities correct I get that just the the only thing I'll say that and I also love efficiency and I think this is almost getting back into a workpl discussion approved um but the
the key takeaway yesterday we've kind of talked about it is that there's I won't say pressure but a lot of eyes on this body to be the individuals who come up with the plan right and you just said something important which is the county wants
answers um and they want something fast but the discussion yesterday stated at Council was can we be sure that what you're bringing before us works and that's a balance
that I think we're P trees I understand this this is the one we use but look at you know what we have done since and we have been pulled away in some but we've made great progress since then with kind of a similar structure of Education going back looking at it and I don't
know that we can say let's toss out this answer to have a step um when that could have longl lasting impacts as Myler are you up because want to say then Wendy yeah I just want to kind of defend this isn't trees so trees came up it's a topic that some people are upset
they have an emotional damage by watching somebody else cut own trees on their property flooding is something that people experience physical damage as a result of we have been tasked with finding Solutions and recommending them and standing behind them by Council I
don't feel comfortable standing behind solutions that aren't properly sheded which without conversation of the problem that the solution is too I don't know how we can properly bet a a solution against other ideas that might out there so trees is dealing with a
feelings problem more than a physical damages problem in a large sense it's we we don't have an equal quantification from the public of what is a problem and what isn't but flooding if your house is underwater I think generally speaking the public is pretty unified that that
is a problem so I think the difference we have is the charge on it and because of that difference in the charge I think it is appropriate Force to take the more open-ended team dive approach to make sure there are solutions that we bring forward were appropriate that's the reason I'm making the recommendation and
the distinction I see I think that otherwise to some extent we're wasting our time to discuss some of the ideas if we don't have that more open-ended opportunity Jinder do you have your card up in Wendy John still waiting no I'll because
actually I think it it might have some uh it had to do with the data here um you know Nico and Ian caused in my mind everybody to think about going on here you know this is different and uh and the municipalities
started to look at that milon caused them to act every municipality at least the ones down in my area new new Sera Edgewater you know that's all that's all I talked about and actually they've been anything and in fact either yesterday
day before I saw the plan that Ed were implemented to deal with buing that they had I'm sure there are other municipalities that have already done some of this work I mean looking at a particular area you know to try and
mitigate what happened so I I would suggest we might contact I mean new SM is saying we need to change their they're saying we need to change the ordinance that's because of the stuff they've been doing recently so why while
I think this is in is very important I think some of the things that have happened just in the last four or five months would be valuable for us to know about them and I and I do think that we can look at in a particular area East West
whatever G and then Wendy uh two things one that at least in my mind that I'm hearing is different about the motion that was made is that we're not talking about any particular ordinance we're talking about a topic and then we're going to identify which ordinance is which is different than we've done so
far right we even our list of our workplans which Orin I'm not saying that it's not okay I'm just saying it's a different model than we've done before um and I I think that ultimately
what you guys want to talk about next week next month is about the chapter 50 storm water ordines right but it's been maybe um presented in a little bit different way like maybe it's not about the order about
problem um to John's Point um this did look at the proposed changes in beach so hopefully that's C their proposing um and I think you know we're getting back to this idea of the two parts of the co
the implementing ordinance in the county in theater maybe a question we ask maybe it's at the next meeting is based on the research that has now been done is there a need to change the minimum standard because cities aren't
doing enough right if the minimum standard is sufficient and the cities are doing sufficient storm water then maybe the minimum standard isn't the problem right and we then do what we do in chapter 72 which we working on and maybe
there's more to come I don't know but you know you don't need to change chapter 50 if you don't need to change it so that's part of why we wanted to do this like what what is going on in the cities cities are doing something more we don't need to change the ordinance that tells them they need to do more
right I just want to throw that out there a sort of General keep in the back of your head about the reason we have chapter 50 which is compel a minimum standard in the whole County that's not an
issue really have to go so sorry not a good idea Wendy I know we're running out of time but I'm I'm I'm kind of running through the process that Tyler proposes um thinking about Miller Lake
and I don't know a whole lot about that system you know but I'm I'm just what I do know so I just opened up chapter 50 not chapter 72 chapter 50 and I kind of just slid down into site alteration activities um and then designed
retention so let me look go a bit further this language is really General so chapter 50 is General a positive drainage system shall be provided which will not adversely impact Downstream owner through adjacent lands right big picture that's big picture stuff okay that was a
failure this this language does not need to be changed it needs to be enforced the ordinance but this langers does not need to be changed um where possible natural vegetation trees I will add shall be
used as a component of drainage design the water table should not be manipulated so it's to endanger natural vegetation beneficial to water quality unless natural vegetation can be replanted and survive with lower water to condition that's about more about water table than vegetation but you know
what it's both there um that's a great ordinance I mean these this is good language that's in here I mean I've said this at the podium so many times we have good ordinances if we would just followed so um you know run off from higher adjacent land should be
considered and oh so that's that's where you're going to build in lower land possibly in some Phil and you know that's an area that used to receive drainage and now you're going to fill it so the that dry backed up like it's
addressed right there don't do it and so I mean we could look at Miller Lake and we could say look the language in the ordinance or in chapter 50 should have prevented most of the things that happened there yeah there and it didn't but it
isn't because the language isn't correct that's one of the things we talked about at the last minute even just you know compliance yeah we don't enforce compliance necessary because we don't want the paper enforcing compliance can I something on that so what I want to
mention here is the the rythm presumptive criteria that we have as Engineers that it is if you follow all of that criteria it is presumed that you have met that pool and so I think we need to look at both layers and not just the upper layer because I find that
there are some cases I've encountered where I don't feel like the presumptive criteria is strict enough to actually meet the rule the way that it's written the the code that we have to follow says that we are not negligent as long as we meet that presumptive criteria when you
say presumptive criteria do you mean chapter 72 down describe discharge hydr 25 year 24 hour it's all in there that's in chapter 50 with the size which is the presumptive criteria that he's talking and so what I'm saying
is that presumptive criteria sometimes Waters down the effectiveness of that first set of language and because they're both there we're held to the weaker of the two standards thank you for clarifying so the one one benefit to
taking a look at M Lake for example or any of these examples you know as Tyler just said the design is done to the presumptive criteria open base and it's the 25 year 24 hour clo Basin it's either the 124 or the
2596 depending on whose rules apply um what you can do though is now you can take a look at okay well what level of storm these developments have been designed to but handle 100 years 72 hours would that have created that same
condition is the presumptive standard you write an appropriate uh storm to use so that's really the question that this came on overall the gis system was taking a look at slightly different terms but it's the
same exact concept is the storm the right storm that's the question and look at a particular location saying okay this is what we had what gets us there it also basically has you look at then what
your definition of flooding is because you know you have certain situations where look you got water in a driveway is that is that equivalent people's mind to water inside a house know one of the other things that you get when you take a look at the other
counties you see that some of them have established a level of service for their storm water and that level of service they say Okay roads are allowed to flood at this level homes or habitable structures never allowed to flood manure
that of the 100 Year storm and they give us size storm so they've gone through they've actually established what uh what level is acceptable overall we don't have them and so you know we basic basically say
blooding and blooding and uh we react to it our first concern is obviously watering homes and then businesses and then uh you know access to those that's something that needs to be considered and established as well so going through the process of taking a look at a place
like M gives you the opportunity to take a look at that because flooding on every parcel is not the same some people can't get to their homes U because they're 200 ft of water on the road they're almost fine so we tackle do we change the rules to establish different aspects some people's homes
are FL that's obviously a priority what do we do to make changes to the standards to make sure that that doesn't because there's different ways to skin that b our move the way we set everything if you recall from we talked about at the very first meeting we use
our C High that's that's our road elevation our road elevation for for building cods that's the finish for Elation reach out not all the rules end up in one location it's a group of rules and potentially something else should be modified not just chapter 50 or chapter
72 something else so looking at a case study gives you the opportunity to see what the natural effects are evaluate what happened what failed and what to resolve in the future anything else spat out guess we could change the storm but there's always going to be a bigger
storm that's always the way it is and so to say that it's never going to happen again that's just so going out there trying to actually figure out what the problems are solving those is going to be a much result it's going to take time Bas in studies could be done in a matter
of probably months but the results are not moving worth the craft because you really need to go out there and take a look at you know tail water conditions is the tail water condition lower because it's dry right now or is it too high because it's wet right now getting that over time and being able to compare that to different storms during a time
period gives you the opportunity to be able to set calibrate those appropriate so that takes time to do so obviously nobody wants pling to occur next year we want these done as soon as possible but you're going to get what you pay for if you're too
onti thank you Ted um Michelle's excuse me Morgan's been waiting to say something and then I think we should vote I just wanted to mention where the individual who seconded the motion uh is no longer in the meeting he will need to
have a second second to proceed second the motion Now seconded by Jessica gal all those in favor of I'm going to call it a case study approach for our next meeting I I I
opposed confused I didn't get the count I'm sorry but I believe it carried Sor the number yeah I just raise your hand the eyes
hi [Music] stud I have to vote give try so the names are okay so um I'm looking at T because what
you asked for is not what I'm going to provide so you guys are going to be ready on March 5th to do the case study from Lake oh we won't be able to do come on
okay I'm can I can I uh freestyle here for a second what I'm sensing from the group is we're not comfortable with our current product that we sent to counsil or maybe it was a good product but we're concerned that
we haven't gone far enough is that a fair statement okay okay for me it is it is I think what we have is a great product it's in thank you that is a better statement of it and so that's driving I
I I I'm glad we want to do a good job I'm glad that that's what what people are are are looking to do and at the end of the day we have an improved work plan and it's ordinal and we have a hungry hungry
public that is pressuring our Council so if we can't address our number one thing chapter 50 next meeting what can we address next meeting because after that it's I don't have it
in front of me thank you minimum standards doesn't well the minimum standard it's our chapter 50 that's why it's called the chapter is called environmental minimum I think yes while we're in Pre
for all next that was going to we we look at the 72 the chapter 72 suggestions that are going Council and discuss those for implementation on chapter 50 we still have that conversation I don't think it's a bad product to
start with I think that also between now and a few weeks from now I'm going to get myself three weeks I can gather some information on Miller Lake so that we can at least have an opening conversation of you know more what we
want Tad and then maybe put together because I think I need some information from Ben's group um as well on what they've done out there but I think that it's reasonable that we could have some conversation on what the history is like I said Pegasus to a study in 2009 so I
have that study I have a lot of permits that well I've already been putting a folder together on this topic so so Tyler suggesting homework jessicao I was gonna say I don't think we're off of our plan I think that this is just we said last meeting and I think it's good
to I know sometimes it feels like we're going back we said this is what we're doing now they're great safety improvements we need Council Direction on what else they want us to look at we got that so that's now part of what else we're going to look at so I think we're still following our plan I think Tyler just
said it'd be nice to have some examples and we have L discussion so I don't want to scare everybody that we're because we're presenting what we're saying is p plan next week in a workshop are we not is it it is a I
think it's I think it's a solid step I think it's a great thing that's what I think it is and and I agree with that but the fact is that we're presenting what we think is not thorough okay and we want to get it right said we want to get it right and all those things I say
it's step in the right direction and let's go to the next thing and and for that I'm up for it but what I'm not up for is say okay we're not there because this is this plan doesn't address it and yet we're going to County Council on Workshop next week and that that that
makes me very uncomfortable and we had agreed that we were going to take it Forward even knowing that it might change in the B of the Basin plans or or the information that that I still agree with that and I think the sentiment that you're getting at is
I think and we can all confirm that what is going forward to council is complete for what it does I think complete for what it does correct I do yeah and we we don't feel that it is lacking in terms of technical review or recommendation think that yeah
absolutely so my opinion is that there were about 30 ideas that I had that I didn't bring to you guys there were about five ideas that I brought to you guys those 30 I couldn't refine in my bubble I need that bubble to be in this
room so that we can bring those other things forward talk through if any of them are viable and if they're not they get you know ejected just like I ejected them I will say I I asked a lot of peers and I started getting feedback last week
from some of them 3 months after I sent original requests and followed up and otherwise so part of the challenge that I've had as my bubble just isn't big enough and so um my request here has just been that hey I think that everything that we've done are great improvements to our existing code I
don't think any of them are we going to walk back or modify but there are other areas of the code that we didn't touch yet so in the sense I think it's incomplete I think there's areas of code that could be strengthened to better provide the mitigation that the council
is looking for but I don't think we have near enough information to take action on those today and it would be Reckless to do so the or the ordinance is not incomplete but solving the problem of flooding is that's a perfect phrase thinkk well yeah but we we were never going to solve the flooding problem I
mean I wasn't oh come on Jack have Fai to get the ordinance better to include the ordinance and that's what we're I mean it's and but I don't know that the council thinks that okay I'm not sure they see
it as a stepping stone and that there's these other elements that's still coming down just just as we said that the uh lowb development the silver bullet and all that I mean I know they're trying to grab on of these things and show the public that in fact they're taking action but I I think it's it's a
stepping stone like anything else and this is the next step um but AB should be made to the council that in fact there's much more to come we did say that
when to bring us back to what we do right which is storm water management minimum standards which is Cap 50 I I looking at it and just pulled it out it's short it's not very long it's not like the tree chapter 72 it's not that
we should and what Ty had in Hisar which was we already have proposed changes for 72 number one let's make sure that things are mapping on to chapter 50 so we don't have in consistencies that's a pretty easy path
let's do it and if we if that becomes an opportunity to say hey maybe what we sent over for chapter 72 isn't exactly what we did or we want to change it it's an opportunity to revisit that but but chapter 50 is pretty straightforward there's not a lot that we're going to want to change because it's already
going really good except for the things that we already changed in 72 which at the moment are being consistent with 50 let's just do that work it's what's on our it's on our work plan it's a frood I love the idea of the case studies even though I voted against it they don't
want us to get lost in unpacking M Lake we're lost in Victor Park and not do the task at hand which is run through two and a half pages of language and make sure it's what it's supposed to say I mean it's simple it's simple we're
making it harder than it has to be and we can use the these studies for examples to explain like oh this is how it work in this case or that case but um I think that our nexted up is pretty clear and straightforward so um so then are we just diving into that or we we going to
have some case study or a hybrid approach yeah you're right go ahead sorry so what are we doing are we going to have a little bit of a case study and then motion to be we're G have the case stud
M but what I heard Trump T is that be the next meeting so so that couldn't happen yes you voted that we wanted to do that but they won't be prepared for it in one month on the table now in substitution because CAD
would not have Miller leg ready a very practical thing to do and wheny reiterated it Tyler and said look at chapter 72 look at chapter 50 see if they're matching up see if there's anything that is rising to the surface that might need changing for chapter 15
in parallel it is possible that through staff Tyler ends up in sending us something about ner Lake but right now what I heard was what we can do next time is having done our homework chapter 50 the changes we made in chapter 72 are
they coherent on storm on storm water storm yes on storm water just on storm water yes is that so what I will do what I'm going to send out up for this meeting are the materials that you
got today the stuff I printed electronically the power points could post all that on the website so that would take care of anything talked about and then in preparation for the next meeting after the council meeting on the 11 send out whatever got approved right
we don't even know yet what's getting approved for the stormat standards and I will send out again or post the chapter 50 stormat standards so that you can have all of that in preparation for the
meeting and then if Tyler has things that he wants to go out to obviously you yes Jess you going yes or okay I saw that all right s do we have to announce if we're going
to be at February 11th yes I'm going to be at February 11th planning to for now probably me too okay can I also just throw in a great a great big thank you to to Jesse and
Eliza for putting together this I mean I know at this no I think it's helpful and I think it would be good in this part of our homework if we would actually put our eyeballs on this and do it and maybe bring some ideas from the other counties
and municipalities back to the table so just wanted to yeah as well as checking are the cities going far enough as as uh% and if you guys have this in your can we get it yes there there is a more uh detailed section because I think what
I was trying to do was get just quick reference and there is like literally the language around it that you can get a little bit more context so those are different we have those that' be great thank you guys thank you for the extra time everyone meeting is a
Jour this is the first one