[0:00] The monthly meeting of the Broward County Planning Council.

[2:04] If

[2:37] you're online,

[2:39] we'll be starting in one minute.

[3:06] Good,

[3:17] sir.

[3:33] Good morning, everyone.

[3:35] We're going to call the May Planning Council meeting to order.

[3:40] Please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance.

[3:42] And Council Member Holden.

[3:43] Could you please lead us?

[3:44] in the pledge? Uh-oh.

[3:47] Got the only person eating at the die.

[3:50] Of course I did.

[4:05] Good

[4:09] morning, everyone. Karen, please call the roll.

[4:12] Ms. Jessica Abramson here.

[4:16] Mayor Felicia Abramson here.

[4:20] Mayor Angela Castillo.

[4:23] Ms. Denise B. Fernandez.

[4:28] Commissioner Lamar P. Fisher.

[4:31] Mr. Adam M. Giller.

[4:35] Mayor Michelle J. Gomez.

[4:37] Good morning.

[4:38] Ms. Ryan Greenberg.

[4:40] President.

[4:40] Mayor Rex Hardin, council member Denise Evelby-Horland,

[4:48] Mayor Josh Levy, Commissioner Latisha Nebel, here,

[4:55] Mayor Jackie Rayley, Mr. David Rosena,

[5:02] Mayor Michael J. Ryan,

[5:05] President, go Panthers,

[5:08] school board member, Alan Zeeman?

[5:15] Last again.

[5:16] Mr. Thomas H. to George O. Jr.

[5:19] Almost last. I'm here.

[5:20] You have a quote.

[5:22] Thank you very much, Karen.

[5:24] Ms. Blake Boy,

[5:27] you can send a agenda.

[5:28] Thank you. There are no additions to the consent agenda this morning.

[5:34] You received Mayor Raleigh's excuse absence request in your additional agenda material.

[5:39] Okay. So it asks for you to move the consent agenda?

[5:43] Excellent. Motion to consent agenda.

[5:46] Second.

[5:46] Motion by Mayor Harden, second by Mayor Gomez, all those in favor, please signify by saying aye.

[5:54] Any opposed?

[5:55] I'm sorry.

[5:56] This is the one where there was a biometallic sensitive blind that part of you said.

[6:03] I think you're on the, maybe the public hearing agenda?

[6:06] Okay.

[6:07] All right.

[6:11] All right. Excellent. Ms. Blake Boyne.

[6:16] Thank you. Item R1 is your proposed fiscal year 26 budget. The executive committee

[6:23] considered the staff's recommendation at its earlier meeting today and recommended approval

[6:30] of the reduced budget to $1.5 million for FY 2020.

[6:38] That reduction is based on the elimination of a vacant position since the year 2020.

[6:45] It's an administrative position.

[6:47] And just for historical purposes, the Council did use to have we had three full-time administrative positions.

[6:54] But obviously as technology and communications have changed, you know, we've been able to,

[6:59] we have one full-time administrative position right now, and we have this vacant one,

[7:04] and things are working great with the one full-time administrative.

[7:08] So when the Office of Management budget came with us

[7:10] with the core budget proposal of $1.56 million.

[7:15] We took a look at it and they said, what can you do for a five percent

[7:19] reduction for next year?

[7:21] And we said, we'd be happy to eliminate the administrative position,

[7:25] which results in a 4.2 percent reduction of the budget.

[7:27] And they were very pleased with those efforts.

[7:31] So, the budget that you see and that the Executive Committee recommend it will be for $1.5 million.

[7:36] We anticipate that the council staff will continue to operate efficiently and effectively as we have.

[7:43] I also mentioned to the Executive Committee that we're doing a little bit of succession planning preparing for the retirement of the Assistant Executive Director.

[7:53] and DM wants to hear next year.

[7:56] So we have been actively recruiting for a planner position to prepare for that.

[8:02] And we extended an offer this week, so you should meet a new planner June next year.

[8:07] So we'll have eight full-time positions filled at that time,

[8:12] plus our operating position of the council attorney.

[8:15] So with that, I would ask for the full council to recommend the proposed reduced budget.

[8:22] All right, we'll take a motion.

[8:23] Second.

[8:25] Motion by Mayor Castilla.

[8:26] Second by Mayor Gomez.

[8:27] Any further discussion on this item?

[8:30] All those in favor, please signify by saying aye.

[8:32] Aye.

[8:33] Any opposed?

[8:34] Motion carries unanimously.

[8:36] Thank you very much.

[8:38] Ms. Blake Boy.

[8:40] Thank you.

[8:41] Item R2 is the annual evaluation of the Planning Council attorney.

[8:45] The Executive Committee had a discussion at its early remeading and recommended approval of the

[8:52] of the evaluation as presented to you by Chair DeGorgio and I would turn it back to the chair.

[8:58] Thank you, Ms. Blake Boy.

[8:59] Well, as I explained in the executive committee, I mean, this is my favorite job as chair,

[9:04] because we have such an amazing staff.

[9:06] And it really, the hard part about writing this letter is keeping it,

[9:11] I try to keep it for two pages because it could easily go with different adjectives,

[9:15] different spirulatives to make this ten pages.

[9:18] We have an amazing staff.

[9:19] So I'm going to start with Andy, I'm not going to read this whole letter, I hopefully you've

[9:24] all read it in the back up, like I said, I could speak forever about Andy, how great

[9:29] he is.

[9:30] And it's not just us that I think feel that way when you talk to other stakeholders in

[9:35] the county, tri-count area, they all recognize this staff is being one of the best staffs

[9:41] of any miscellaneous or county staff or anything else.

[9:45] So I really appreciate all that you both do and all that you do out there as staff member

[9:49] So with that, I'm just going to read a couple of highlights here.

[9:52] I'm going to just read the preamble only for the record for Andy.

[9:57] I won't do the same thing for Barb.

[10:00] So preamble, in accordance with the provisions outlined in the letter of understanding,

[10:04] dated August 31st, 1995, and reaffirmed through subsequent planning

[10:08] council actions.

[10:09] The planning council is required to conduct an annual performance evaluation of its legal

[10:12] council.

[10:13] As chair of the Brower County Planning Council, I am responsible for preparing and presenting

[10:18] disavaluation. This review reflects an assessment of Mr. Andrew Merotis's performance over

[10:23] the past year in its capacity as planning counsel. Hopefully that chance to review this,

[10:28] I've bullet pointed each one of these legal representation professional integrity highest

[10:32] level, contribute contribution to planning council meetings, just phenomenal, daily support and

[10:39] and interagency collaboration, institutional knowledge, and then I'm going to read the conclusion

[10:45] for the record.

[10:46] Is with great respect and appreciation that I recognize, Mr.

[10:49] Morodas is three decades of dedicated service to the Broward County Planning Council.

[10:54] His role continues to be vital to the organization's success and is clear, direct and

[11:00] principal legal guidance is truly irreplaceable.

[11:04] Looking ahead as anticipated, Mr. Morodas will continue to play a key role during the

[11:08] upcoming seven-year update to the Broward County land use plan.

[11:11] While Mr. Rhodes clearly qualifies for a merit-based compensation increase, he has once again graciously declined to request one, maintaining a longstanding tradition of service,

[11:22] rude and commitment rather than compensation.

[11:26] In light of his outstanding performance this past year, I strongly recommend that this evaluation be entered into the record and used as a reference for your future assessments.

[11:36] Andy, thank you again for doing all that you do for us.

[11:39] Thank you.

[11:43] I'll open the floor for comments.

[11:45] Brief comments.

[11:46] Yes, thank you.

[11:49] Thank you.

[11:50] Exceptional service to the county and to the people

[11:53] and of the county and to the staff,

[11:59] find staff just reliable and always on the money.

[12:05] And much appreciated all your service.

[12:08] Thank you very much, excellent.

[12:09] I think we all feel the same way here.

[12:12] OK.

[12:12] I don't know if I'm a motioner, Mayor.

[12:17] Oh, I know.

[12:19] But for the audience, you may not have...

[12:22] We do know this.

[12:23] We've actually been gushing earlier today.

[12:27] So please don't take some of our quiet now,

[12:29] as if we really don't care.

[12:32] We really do care.

[12:34] And he's absolutely phenomenal.

[12:36] And so from everything that was said earlier today,

[12:38] everything that people are thinking now, all positive,

[12:41] and thank you.

[12:42] Great.

[12:42] You did a motion to me.

[12:44] I thought that was.

[12:46] Yeah, you did.

[12:46] That's right.

[12:47] Move that quickly.

[12:48] Excellent.

[12:49] Any thanks again.

[12:51] Would you like to say anything?

[12:53] For sure.

[12:55] No.

[12:56] It's much appreciated the Conwards.

[12:59] And it's just a pleasure working with this staff, this director, and this staff, and

[13:03] this board on really exciting, important work.

[13:08] And everyone is so dedicated and I'm looking at people I've known for many

[13:12] years and it's really pleasing to be part of something as an attorney so so many times as an

[13:18] attorney you're involved in kind of a kind of legal combat and that gets trying after

[13:26] while and I've been blessed in that my career has been in representing governmental entities

[13:31] which I love and I particularly enjoy and I've loved working with the Brown Army planning

[13:38] Council Barber and I were talking, I always, I can keep track of my years with the planning

[13:44] Council, with the birth of my daughter. She's turning 30 this year and it's 30 years

[13:49] from me here. I'm blessed to and appreciate the privilege of serving you and it is a privilege.

[13:56] Thank you very much. Thanks, Andy.

[13:59] Okay. Moving on to the recommendation for, excuse me, the evaluation of Miss Blake Boyer

[14:06] executive director. I'll skip the preamble, but I'm going to read this first paragraph

[14:11] because I think it's important just to enter it in the director for a bit.

[14:15] It's titled Leadership in Strategic Oversight. Ms. Boye joined the planning council in 2000

[14:21] following her initial service with Brower County beginning in 1996 as completed her 13th

[14:26] years executive director. Her tenure continues to be marked by exceptional performance, steadfast

[14:31] professionalism, and an unwavering commitment to public service. She constantly demonstrates

[14:36] and ability to manage the planning council, multi-faceted work program

[14:40] while engaging constructively with council members and external stakeholders.

[14:45] Her approachability, accessibility, and deep institutional knowledge allow her to foster

[14:49] productive relationships with municipal staff, county agencies, and private sector partners alike.

[14:55] She manages complex high-pressure situations with discernment and commitment.

[15:00] All we strive to achieve outcomes that are practical, fair and forward-looking. Her integrity and leadership

[15:06] have been instrumental in maintaining the planning council's high level of credibility and respect

[15:11] throughout the county. Additionally, under Ms. Boyz leadership, the planning council and its staff

[15:16] received exceptionally high marks on recent customer satisfaction surveys. The comments

[15:21] accompanying these ratings repeat, highlighted the team's attentiveness, friendliness, and unwavering

[15:26] professionalism. These testimonies are reflected in Miss Boy's standards of excellence in

[15:31] the organizational culture she has cultivated, one committed to public service, responsiveness,

[15:37] and genuine care for stakeholders. I'm on a disc of jump right to conclusion.

[15:43] Miss Boy's

[15:44] consistent delivery of exceptional outcomes to strategic initiatives and operational improvements

[15:48] continues to merit the highest level of recognition. Although she is not requested a compensation

[15:53] adjustment and despite budgetary constraints remains eligible to receive any future performance-based

[15:58] increases authorized by the County Commission. In light of our outstanding contributions,

[16:04] particularly her leadership in the Broward Next Update, I strongly recommend that this evaluation

[16:09] be entered into the official record as a testament to her exemplary service. Her continued dedication

[16:14] and effectiveness reflect the highest ideals of public leadership. Ms. Blake Boyne.

[16:34] You know,

[16:34] It's always fun when you turn that color.

[16:37] I believe it, that's just my jacket.

[16:40] So I'll entertain a motion.

[16:40] I'm worried.

[16:42] Motion by Mayor Gomez, second by Mayor Castello,

[16:44] those in Fair Police City, if I would be saying aye.

[16:46] Any opposed?

[16:47] Oh, for the comments, other than we love you.

[16:52] We love you.

[16:54] We love you, thank you.

[16:55] Comment from Commissioner Fisher.

[16:59] I can't believe it's been 13 years, right,

[17:01] because I was privileged to be the chair

[17:03] this council when we did the transition from Henry Schnee's

[17:06] Act to you, Ms. Bob, and the people always so.

[17:10] And you've just been never missed a step,

[17:12] and you've just been absolutely fantastic for this council

[17:15] and for the county, now that I'm with the county,

[17:18] it just really shines.

[17:20] And it's an honor to have you be in this position

[17:23] and hope you continue that way for many years to come,

[17:27] but it's just a pleasure to work with you for all these years.

[17:30] Well stated, I think we all feel the same way.

[17:33] Ms. Blackboard floor jurors?

[17:36] Thank you very much and as Andy said, it's such a privilege to work for the Planning Council

[17:42] with the Planning Council. I said it earlier, we have the best staff, Dan, Don, who to

[17:48] Alicia, Kim and Leslie, they're the best. And we wouldn't be able to give you the materials

[17:54] that we have without all of them. They do so much of the groundwork for us to be able to provide

[17:59] the materials to you and you know get them to you in time so I just want to say thank you

[18:04] to them also but it is this is the best job and it's it's even when things are you know

[18:11] controversial or you know weird get through it and it's good so thank you it's a pillaged work here

[18:18] and Andy is the best attorney ever so thank you Andy so thank you off thank you both thanks council

[18:27] Item R4.

[18:31] Councillor for support.

[18:32] Mr. Chair, as part of the Attorney's report, I'll just acknowledge that provided you

[18:39] some materials with regard to sunshine and law of public records law.

[18:44] I changed it up to sunshine and public records law to try to come up with just a couple

[18:52] of pages that has all the important things to you.

[18:54] The planning counts are not worried about how to schedule a meeting and all those things stay

[18:58] up to take care of that.

[19:00] So, try to get the highlights, it's type of document that I would recommend you pull out

[19:04] once a year or every six months just to take a look at, to remind yourself, the things to

[19:08] look out for.

[19:11] So, certainly available to answer any questions if something comes up before a meeting, if you

[19:18] have any questions.

[19:20] Secondly, some legislative updates,

[19:27] the Florida legislature passed SB 1730.

[19:31] This is the affordable housing bill, the third iteration of the live local.

[19:39] As you recall, at the previous meeting, we talked about SB 943, which was a competing bill,

[19:46] which was much more sweeping in its application.

[19:50] This is more targeted and as a result of the legislative process,

[19:56] some refisions were made to encourage affordable housing.

[20:00] As I say, the legislature, just like every city in county, is working its way through a really critical

[20:05] problem for the state.

[20:08] And some of the main things it did is just briefly, they're listed in your memo, clearly defining the application.

[20:20] You know, there was some questions whether replied to plan, plan unit developments.

[20:24] That's not a question anymore, it does.

[20:27] The definitions were changed.

[20:30] Very strong on the administrative process, so they reinforce the fact that you prove these affordable

[20:37] housing projects that qualify through the administrative process, without a quasi-judicial hearing,

[20:45] limitations on the amount of commercial or in a mixed use project, and basically going back

[20:55] and just cementing the fact that with regard to restrictions on affordable housing on high

[21:06] and what was in a particular land development code as of July 1st, 2023,

[21:15] and a kind of mandatory

[21:17] parking requirement of 15% reduction, as well as some restrictions on moratorium to stop

[21:27] any affordable housing projects. So it's a further iteration, it is much less expansive,

[21:34] it's much more targeted I think than 943 so that hits the books hopefully again the hope

[21:43] is that it will start making a dent in the affordable housing issue.

[21:49] Another piece of legislation that passes SB 1080, this has a number of minor or not terribly

[21:59] consequential provisions with regard development permits, it has language which regard

[22:04] to the school board's ability to enact certain developer

[22:09] executions with regard to schools in addition to an impact

[22:15] fee or in lieu of an impact fee.

[22:19] I think it really just, in that regard, just codifies what

[22:22] already exists in the law and that it applies the rational

[22:25] nexus test, which I think was going to be applied by a court,

[22:28] whether the legislature said it or not.

[22:30] And then the final, definitely not least of the legislation is SB 180.

[22:45] This is a 48-page bill on hurricane preparedness that the legislature passed.

[22:51] And on page 47 of that bill, it contained a language that indicated that the county

[23:02] or city shall not adopt any comprehensive plan, amendment, or land development regulation,

[23:09] which was more restrictive than existed as August 1, 2024.

[23:16] And it is retroactive of a place to anything that was passed during that interim.

[23:20] So, it's a fairly wide ranging effect on the county and municipality's ability to adopt legislation

[23:36] that is more restrictive or burdensome.

[23:38] Those are the words of the legislature.

[23:41] Are we going to?

[23:44] Absolutely.

[23:45] Okay, sure.

[23:45] So just a segue, we presented that specific bill to the executive committee at their meeting as the steering committee for for Broward Knacks and the implications for that process and what we would share with the whole council and what the steering committee agreed is that we're going to take the summer.

[24:06] South's going to take the summer, June and July, to go through the draft language that we've

[24:12] been vetting with the executive, I'm sorry, with the steering committee, to bifurcate what's

[24:19] in some of these and what could be considered more burdensome or restrictive. So to ensure that we

[24:24] don't put the county in a position, that's going to be in conflict with the legislation. So we'll send out

[24:31] kind of a pause of the forward facing these public meetings, but staff will be working with the attorneys.

[24:38] And then also, if the language is more burdensome if we come up with that, that's already

[24:42] been considered with the committee, if we could perhaps transition to that to incentive

[24:47] base or other opportunities to keep those documents and ideas perhaps within the plan.

[24:56] So that's what we intend on doing June and July, and then we would pick back up late July

[25:03] August to for committee meeting to kind of present those findings and what the next step

[25:08] would be.

[25:09] And that's before we get to any public hearings with the Planning Council, so we wouldn't

[25:13] ensure that we're not putting, like I said, the Planning Council or County Commission in

[25:17] a position to be in conflict with legislation.

[25:20] And the last I looked at Mr. Chair, I'm not aware of the governor having signed it yet so obviously that's a caveat that we're putting, but I think Barbara's correct.

[25:33] This is, you know, it's it's fairly draconian in nature and it is retroactive although we're pretty we feel pretty good about what this board has recommended and what the county has done from August 1st

[25:45] that little retroactive period.

[25:47] We feel pretty confident about the legality of everything that has been done to the

[25:52] date.

[25:53] But we're going to continue with the work of Broward next amendment that's going forward,

[25:58] which is going to have to take a little time to absorb the application of this new law

[26:05] if it is signed by the government.

[26:07] We'll know shortly.

[26:09] Next one.

[26:09] Thank you, Mr. Rose.

[26:10] Anything else?

[26:12] Nothing further.

[26:13] questions comments for Ms. Rose?

[26:16] Mr. Chair.

[26:17] I've got Mayor Gomez, and I'll get comfortable.

[26:20] Thank you.

[26:22] On the last one, SB.

[26:24] 180.

[26:27] Well, I have my opinions on it being unclear and

[26:30] ambiguous of the Liburdons, so I'm especially

[26:32] going to go back to August of 2024.

[26:34] It's all of the issue.

[26:36] But as we're trying to plan for our next,

[26:41] do what we said we're going to do.

[26:42] But is there a way to say, because it's sunsets, right?

[26:45] Whereas, if right now, it's sunsets in August, 27, is that right?

[26:50] We're planning, we're probably not getting this fully done

[26:53] until sometime in 26, right?

[26:57] The ground next, we rise, that's correct.

[26:59] Yes, so we did talk about, and maybe you just

[27:03] dropped off the call when you're working in.

[27:04] We talked about, we're, we're, by-for-cating,

[27:07] we're not removing anything from the documents.

[27:10] Right, no, my thought is while we continue to go and said we could do incentive based and change some of it to make sure it goes through but also have an alternative of

[27:20] It's effective, it's say the incentives August 31, 2027

[27:25] It starts September 1, 2027 before whatever we want to do going forward. I don't know if it's proper. I don't know I'm just throwing it out as an idea and if it's something completely off based and I never said it

[27:38] It's not all face and believe me, we're going to be considering everything on that.

[27:43] We're going to get creative where it's appropriate and within about, no, you're not

[27:49] a face.

[27:49] Thank you.

[27:50] Because our hard work shouldn't be stopped at the tracks and then have to delay and bring

[27:54] it back and forward and just...

[27:56] No, that's a goal is to have everything ready, even if we're going to hold off on something.

[28:01] So we're going to be moving full theme ahead, which is have to account for a new factor.

[28:06] Thank you.

[28:06] Thank you, Mayor.

[28:08] Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[28:10] Andy, can we go back to SB 1730?

[28:13] While we had expressed our concerns about House Bill 943,

[28:17] and it was much more sweeping.

[28:19] If you were called at the last meeting,

[28:20] I had brought up my concerns about the administrative approval

[28:23] of houses of worship, being a fruitful, affordable housing.

[28:27] And I know that that was inserted into the Senate bill,

[28:31] kind of toward the end of the approval process.

[28:34] And if you're all my concerns or many of us have houses of worship that sit smack dab in our single family resident neighborhoods

[28:41] Could you clarify with that insertion was that also administrative approval? Will there be no public hearing?

[28:52] The language I think it's a little bit better from my understanding is that it

[28:57] It authorized local governments to approve affordable housing developments on parcels owned by a religious

[29:02] institution containing a public house of worship, so it certainly wouldn't apply to vacant land that doesn't appear and it seems to be more permissive

[29:13] with regard to

[29:15] affordable housing developments on

[29:17] parcels owned by a religious or organization. Correct, but that could be a house of worship that decides that

[29:25] they're

[29:26] They don't have enough parishioners and they decide to sell that property.

[29:31] I guess my concern, again, is going back to that administrative approval as it was in the

[29:36] House bill.

[29:38] Okay, so no public hearing.

[29:39] I think it's important for the media.

[29:40] No, no.

[29:41] If it's subject to this bill, it's administrative bill.

[29:46] Right.

[29:46] That's why I wanted to be clear for the municipalities to be aware of that, if that's

[29:50] under the law.

[29:50] Thank you, Andy.

[29:52] Thank you, Councillor Woodward.

[29:53] Any further comments or questions?

[29:54] Just regarding 1730, someone had, you know, the phrase, none of my...

[30:09] I'm concerned about this Senate bill 180 stuff. I think that when tools are taken out of the tool box, that's a very dangerous thing.

[30:23] And whatever, whatever good, and I'm sure that somewhere in the spectrum of the thinking

[30:31] there was some desire to properly serve a good purpose.

[30:39] I'm sure that had to be in place, but to restrict local governments and local planning

[30:52] of the evolution of land use planning over time, and I think that's a horrible mistake.

[31:03] Now, I don't want to say that in two sweeping away, but that's just taking the planning out of urban planning is not a good idea.

[31:15] And I think that it probably will end up doing more harm than to it, if there was a specific thing that they wanted to zero in on and during the executive session we talked about how this had to do with Hurricane Damage properties and the rebuilding.

[31:36] And they should have not been in much more narrow, as Mayor Gomez said, this is a very broadly

[31:45] stated set of rules.

[31:50] And I look forward to how this evolves and how it ends up getting interpreted and handled

[31:59] but it's healthy, on occasion, to get rid of old rules and to create some new ones.

[32:08] And getting rid of some old rules might create a burden as well.

[32:13] And bringing in some new ones, you could see it as a burden,

[32:18] but it might also create opportunity.

[32:21] So I'm very, I'm very concerned from what I've heard today about Senate Bill 180.

[32:32] Thank you, Mayor.

[32:33] Further comments, questions?

[32:35] I share concerns as we all do, and that's why staff is trying to

[32:39] we're so diligently to pivocate this and continue our

[32:44] requirements with power next in the seven year review.

[32:47] So with that, Ms. Blake Boy.

[32:50] Thank you.

[32:51] The executive director is report today.

[32:52] We are going to talk about the barred next so we don't need to cover that.

[32:55] The other item that is in your back up material is we do an annual survey regarding policy

[33:02] 2164 of the Galler policy.

[33:04] We'll call it.

[33:05] I just we survey all of the municipalities.

[33:08] And a couple of things I just want to note from the material that's in here.

[33:12] One, it's been shared with some of the Galler.

[33:14] And I sent him a copy when we released it to you last week.

[33:17] He was, you know, thanked us for it.

[33:20] So what I would say about policy 214 is the same thing

[33:24] I kind of said last year.

[33:25] We're seeing local governments using it,

[33:28] but there are no units on the ground yet.

[33:30] Permits have not been pulled yet.

[33:32] So the permitting part is where we know that they've used

[33:35] the policy if they're going to be either affordable units

[33:39] on the ground or they're buying out.

[33:41] That's when they have to make their payment.

[33:42] if they're paying the in-lua fee.

[33:45] So no money's have been collected as of today,

[33:48] but it's close to $20 million that's committed to.

[33:52] And that numbers actually lower than last year,

[33:55] because what some cities have seen

[33:57] is that a developer, once you use the policy,

[34:01] they committed to the in-lua back by out,

[34:03] but now they're going to build the actual units.

[34:05] So we're seeing a transition that way.

[34:07] So the same number of units,

[34:08] but just a few more units,

[34:10] but a lesser amount of money

[34:12] because of that transition and that just came to fruition when we were at a meeting that's on our

[34:17] gallery was having one of the developers commented on that difference. So that's just for your

[34:22] information. And then with that, I will share for the public hearing agenda today items PH1,

[34:30] 2, 3a, 3b, and 4.

[34:33] Items 1, 3a, 3b, and 4 have staff recommendations,

[34:38] generally, of an approval,

[34:43] sorry.

[34:43] Item 2 is not, planning council staff is not supporting it.

[34:47] So I know that that item needs to be pulled

[34:49] from the agenda for the staff to overview

[34:53] and for the applicants to share their information with you, too.

[34:57] So on items 1, 3a, 3b, and 4, there's no one signing to speak other than the Agents

[35:04] Applicants or Local Governments.

[35:07] Chair.

[35:08] Mayor Castillo.

[35:09] I'd like to move items 1, 3, and 4 on the agenda.

[35:12] 2, 3, and 3b and 4 on the agenda.

[35:14] We have a motion from Mayor Castillo, second from Mayor Harden, further discussion on these

[35:18] items.

[35:19] All those in favor, please signify by saying I'm sorry.

[35:22] I'm sorry, Mr. Chair.

[35:23] Can I just get a, I just get a clarification?

[35:26] Yes.

[35:26] Are we moving

[35:28] 3A

[35:29] 3A and 3B correct?

[35:36] Did you hear me that was 3A and 3B?

[35:38] Yes.

[35:39] May I?

[35:39] Was that Alan?

[35:40] Is that Dr. Zeman?

[35:41] No, it's I apologize.

[35:42] Mike Ryan.

[35:45] I'd like to have a discussion on 3A and 3B.

[35:50] So would I chair?

[35:51] Okay.

[35:52] I'll move on.

[35:53] I'll move on.

[35:54] I'll move on.

[35:55] I'll move on.

[36:00] I'll move on.

[36:00] the age four second by Mayor Harden, all those in fair

[36:03] please should have obviously saying aye.

[36:06] Aye.

[36:07] Any opposed?

[36:08] Motion passing unanimously.

[36:19] Turn your DMPOs have an award ceremony so could we take

[36:24] the 3A and 3B now?

[36:27] Is that without a second?

[36:28] Is that okay for the commissioner?

[36:31] We look at 3A and 3B and take it out of order?

[36:33] Let's do it.

[36:34] Thank you.

[36:35] Without objection?

[36:36] That's excellent.

[36:36] Thank you.

[36:37] like boy, item 3A.

[36:40] Sure, thank you.

[36:43] So the reason that I just want to start with,

[36:45] the reason these items are partnered together

[36:47] because while they are separate applications,

[36:50] one is for 3A is for land use plan change

[36:53] and 3B is for a natural resource map series removal.

[36:58] So they are the same similar sites.

[37:01] The map that you see before you,

[37:03] the area in red is the land use amendment site

[37:07] And that is proposed to change from recreation, open space, to transportation use.

[37:13] This is that Pompano Air Park in the city of Pompano Beach.

[37:17] And it is planned right now for right now that the uses are aviation uses.

[37:24] And this is undisturbed, some undisturbed lands part to the runway idea.

[37:29] So the recreation, open space use needs to be changed to transportation to be able.

[37:35] Thank you.

[37:36] This is not the better.

[37:37] To be able to be changed, we have to go to the next map, please.

[37:42] To the transportation use.

[37:43] Right now, the airport uses the aviation uses can't be expanded without this land use

[37:47] change.

[37:49] It's approximately 48 acres, and it is generally surrounded by commerce to the west and to the north

[37:59] and then some single family across Copens Road, also to the north.

[38:03] And then also it's a particular note, the golf course use in the green part of the smack,

[38:11] which I show the area, sorry, nothing control.

[38:16] So here you can see the adjacent golf course use for the the land use plan change to to occur.

[38:24] The underlying yellow pieces on this map are the course parts of the corresponding natural resource map series amendment.

[38:31] So for the land use change, land use change can happen, but for the site to be developed, the natural resource map series piece will also have to be considered and taken care of as well.

[38:48] The city has been working diligently.

[38:51] There is a deed restriction on this property for aviation uses.

[38:55] So it's very important to note that it's under control, generally, of the federal aviation

[39:00] administration.

[39:01] There is correspondence from the FAA in your materials, noting that it does not support other

[39:09] uses than aviation uses within its boundaries.

[39:13] This is also a secure area, I think, also very important to note.

[39:18] So as I mentioned, Plane Council staff does recommend approval of the land use change.

[39:23] And the further piece of this is that it does not authorize the development until such time that the natural resource not series is also amended or otherwise changed to accommodate the development.

[39:36] The City of Pompano Beach staff is here today, and they have Barrington Irving, sorry, the bits, so they have a brief presentation and overview, as well as a video of the bits, which is an aviation education society, so if you, if it's okay with the chair.

[40:00] Absolutely. Miss Dolan, good morning.

[40:11] Parenting, good to see you.

[40:20] You can give her the remote.

[40:35] Good morning. Jean Dolan development services.

[40:37] I'm a principal who I honor with the city.

[40:39] Good to see those familiar faces up there.

[40:42] So yeah, this is our, we're going to do one presentation for both items

[40:45] because they're really co-mingled.

[40:47] They really can't be separated and have any meaning.

[40:50] So these are our air park.

[40:52] Both land use change and the ESL map amendment request.

[40:56] So this again shows the highlighted area in blue that we're changing from transportation to from open space recreation.

[41:04] It was never part of the golf course, so there's really no reason to have an open space recreation land use on top of that parcel.

[41:11] Completing that corner makes all of the airpark restricted area transportation land use regardless of whether it's an ESL or not.

[41:21] So, this is the ESL map and the areas that we're requesting to be removed from the ESL map.

[41:27] So, 91.95, co-relate to the area of the land use change, and 93.92 and actually the lower five acres of 95 already have the transportation land use.

[41:39] So, we are required under the deed restrictions and under the FAA regulations to be in compliance with our airport master plan.

[41:46] The two parts of this master plan and there's many other pages, believe me, but these are the two we're going to talk about.

[41:52] The one that has the argile like pattern shows what the permitted uses are within those areas.

[41:58] So you can see that the entire area that we're changing the land use under is targeted for that dark blue and that argile, which is aviation and aviation support uses.

[42:07] And then the entire area of all those ESLs is also within that area, except for area 92, which is, which what we call area 4, is within the golf course.

[42:20] Now that half of the golf course in light blue is still under the FAA aviation restrictions.

[42:25] Sometime in the future we may end up having to put FAA or aviation uses there.

[42:30] It's not in this current land use, that light blue says it's going to stay as recreation for now.

[42:35] But again, those restrictions have not been listed lifted from that area.

[42:40] That area, all we're going to do in the short term is a runway visibility zone, which

[42:44] does require some clearing of vegetation in that area.

[42:47] But we still want that entire parcel taken off the ESL map.

[42:51] If you look at the other map that's kind of the opposite, the colored area on that map shows

[42:56] what has been relieved from the restrictions for aviation use.

[43:01] So everything in color on the right side diagram has been removed.

[43:06] So when the airport was dated in 1947, under the surplus property act, that whole

[43:12] thousand acres was under an aviation restriction.

[43:16] We've now had 400 of that thousand acres released.

[43:19] So we have a lot of community support of uses that really benefit the city because of this

[43:25] airport.

[43:26] And we are greatly appreciative of having the opportunity to have this airport and to have

[43:31] all these properties that have been released from these restrictions. And just to quickly go around

[43:35] the horn clockwise, that's the city center mall that red is half a half of our golf course,

[43:41] that yellow and between is our reclaimed water plant that serves the entire county by taking

[43:46] some of the affluent from the Copeland's Road Waste Water Treatment Plant, keep it from going out

[43:51] the ocean outfall, which is now going to be completely ended by the end of September of this year,

[43:56] January of this year, December of this year, the end of this year, no more ocean outfall.

[44:05] So we are actually expanding that plant and looking for another location for additional

[44:09] storage tanks so that we can take more of the city's affluent or the county's affluent

[44:14] to make sure that that ocean outfall doesn't cause a lot of disruption in terms of how

[44:19] we're going to get rid of all this wastewater.

[44:20] Going south, that's our community park, our aquatic center, our MLU community center, our aquatic facility.

[44:33] It's a tremendous city asset and we're so appreciative to have it.

[44:37] Those, the purple and chartreuses, the Pompital High, which is also our Hurricane Shelter and Pompital Middle.

[44:44] As you move over toward the other west side,

[44:48] that's our award-winning youth sports park,

[44:50] which we were able to build just recently,

[44:53] because we got that landeated to us by the Elx Club.

[44:56] And then the lighter green is our public works complex

[44:59] for our water.

[45:00] Human Plan is where all our public work facilities are. So you can see that the 60% of this airport is left.

[45:07] We really need to respect that and build it out in accordance with the deed restrictions and be happy for what we have gotten as a result of this airport dedication.

[45:19] So as you probably know, airports are very attractive to wildlife, because whether they're in urban areas or rural areas,

[45:27] They're wide expanses of open space.

[45:31] We have to keep them clear for their not obstructions

[45:33] to aviation traffic.

[45:35] So wildlife is a hazard to all airports,

[45:38] and the FAA has an advisory circular,

[45:41] that all airports follow on a regular basis.

[45:43] They do a wildlife hazard assessment

[45:45] to make sure they're operating their airport in a way

[45:48] that doesn't attract wildlife either

[45:50] on the restricted area or at the vicinity

[45:52] of the restricted area in the flight pass.

[45:54] The last one we did it was in 2017, and it does recommend us taking these ESL's designations off these areas and gradually phasing out any wildlife attractions that are happening within those but it areas.

[46:10] Our natural resources assessment, we just did as a precursor to this activity and the natural resources assessment clearly shows that one of the criteria of the county to be at LAPC in the first place is the probability

[46:24] of maintaining that facility. Given that this is an airport and it's

[46:28] indeed restrictive for aviation use that probability is extremely low. We're

[46:32] not allowed to have as wildlife hazards on the airport so it's something

[46:37] that needs to be phased out. So we did take the county staff and they're

[46:42] naturalists and they're plant experts out and to do a site visit they

[46:48] found some things in our ESL areas that they want to preserve. So what we're

[46:53] suggesting as they come in, they do seed retrievals and make plant cuttings or anything

[46:58] they want to preserve, and they plant these in the two existing sand pine scrub habitats

[47:04] and pomp and all which these total 58 acres.

[47:08] So these two habitats were purchased with a 1989 county bond issue, so they've been maintained

[47:14] and preserved for the last 35 years for wildlife habitat for sand pine scrub and anything

[47:20] that we have in our un-maintained areas on our airpark that they would like to transplant

[47:26] into these preserves.

[47:28] We will definitely take time to allow that to happen before any activities happening within

[47:33] those areas that we're changing the land use and the ESL designations on.

[47:38] So this is probably the most important piece of your whole backup.

[47:42] This is the letter we had the FAA right for us to really lay out their requirement so that

[47:48] can be no discussion about whether this is optional in terms of having wildlife habitat

[47:53] on the airport.

[47:55] The key points in this letter is the FAA strongly opposes any encompasses on airport

[48:00] property for ecological and conservation purposes.

[48:06] The land use cannot promote attracting wildlife because it's considered a hazard to air navigation.

[48:14] The deed restrictions in the 1947 transfer of the city requires under the surplus property act that this property

[48:21] used be used for aviation and aviation support purposes only.

[48:26] And all these years we've been accepting federal grants to do aviation development on our airport.

[48:32] Those grants come with grant assurances that if we continue with these environmental restrictions on the use of that land that is found in conflict with those grant assurances.

[48:43] So that's another reason we're not allowed to keep these environmental designations on our airport.

[48:50] So we are requesting a recommendation of approval from you today so that we can be in compliance with all the deed restrictions,

[48:57] the grant assurances, and the requirement to be responsible in terms of not attracting wildlife and heightened visibility hazards to the aviation operations.

[49:05] And most importantly, to keep out of the next step of this if we aren't able to move forward,

[49:12] which the FAA comes in and does what we call a memorandum of understanding process,

[49:17] which we have gone through twice and we would like to avoid going through again.

[49:20] The ultimate threat on that process is that they will rescind the airport back to federal control.

[49:27] And we will no longer have a say in how the airport is run or managed.

[49:32] That's very important to us because right now,

[49:34] We have a tenant in bits that we would really like to expand on our airport.

[49:40] Barrington Urban's Technical Training School is currently located in one of our hangers

[49:46] and personal why one of our newest developments.

[49:49] They are doing their first cohort and I think I'll just play this little video and we'll

[49:56] do this questions and then Barrington will talk a little bit more.

[49:58] Everybody is Dr. Laura, your teacher.

[50:02] You don't really hear about aviation.

[50:05] My name is Stephanie Williams

[50:06] and I'm a student at Bits Pump Enough.

[50:09] I've been in a program for eight weeks now

[50:11] and graduation is about eight weeks.

[50:13] It has been great.

[50:15] This is new to me.

[50:17] I've been in a medical field for almost 13 years

[50:20] and you know, I was already thinking

[50:22] that I need something different.

[50:23] I'm not an office girl.

[50:25] I like to be out.

[50:26] I like to work with my hands.

[50:27] they give the opportunity to do something

[50:29] while like this.

[50:31] Aviation has a broad horizon of so many different things

[50:35] that you can think of.

[50:37] My name is Shai Reed, and I'm a student at Bits.

[50:39] It's been really cool.

[50:41] The flexibility and the hands-on aspect

[50:43] of the program really is what I'm getting into this.

[50:45] It's really nice to experience the fundamentals

[50:48] of the aviation business.

[50:50] One of the things I'm interested in is avionics,

[50:52] and that's dealing with more electrical systems

[50:53] on the plane, so that's going to be really

[50:55] home and being able to work on the electrical systems and panels is really cool.

[51:00] Throughout the program I've used a lot of these tools physically and it's helped me

[51:04] really learn it and not just look at it and visualize it, it's helped me really use it so I can

[51:09] use it in the aviation industry. The teachers are phenomenal. They are really dedicated and determined

[51:16] to CS68. But since it's so interactive and my soul tight knit we're able to get through a

[51:21] much of stuff, and quickly but still able to learn everything, would be perfectly.

[51:25] Seeing that dedication really drives me to want to do push myself.

[51:30] They're with us, they're patient with us.

[51:32] You can do anything you said your mind, so the sky is a limit.

[51:39] So I'd like to have Berington come up and just talk to you for a little bit about his program.

[51:44] What this whole ESL map amendment and land use plan amendment allows us to do is to put

[51:54] You utilize these new areas for development on the airport and we really want to support things like

[52:00] Barrington Irvings program, which does support not just aviation on the airport, but also the community as a whole.

[52:14] Good morning, Chairman.

[52:15] Council members.

[52:16] Thank you all so much for considering this request.

[52:20] My name is Captain Barrington Irving.

[52:22] It's actually great to be back in the space several years ago.

[52:27] You all honored me after I did a historic flight around the world and I'm I'm grateful to be here to share with you the video that you just saw

[52:37] We decided to expand our workforce development

[52:41] Training into Broward because we're based in Miami

[52:45] But we've trained several candidates from Pomponode or Fort Lauderdale and so forth. They've been coming down to Miami to be trained

[52:53] And I said, you know what, it makes sense at this point in time to expand the work directly

[52:59] within this county.

[53:01] And I'm very grateful to the City of Pompano for giving us an opportunity to establish

[53:08] our training program, where basically what we do is we focus on the technical needs within

[53:14] aviation.

[53:15] Of course, I don't have to belabor some of the challenges we're facing in industry as it pertains

[53:22] safety and technicians and so forth. And I know aviation is a strong economic driver within

[53:28] the county as well. What we do is we try to focus on those within a community, we kind

[53:34] of call them the silent middle. So these are individuals who they might be in school, but don't

[53:39] know how to access industry. You might have individuals who simply exist in a community, they're

[53:52] and they're looking for something different.

[53:56] So we've had tremendous success in doing this.

[53:58] Our first core hoarding Miami, we had 17 students,

[54:01] 15 graduating, got employed by industry,

[54:03] second core hoard was 21, 20 of them graduated.

[54:07] And they're all employed right now.

[54:08] We have a core hoarding Miami of 24.

[54:12] And here in Pompano, we have 12 candidates

[54:15] who they've already achieved over 160 micro credentials.

[54:19] You saw some of them featured in the film, and we're very proud of them.

[54:24] Some of them already getting offers to be employed within the industry.

[54:28] Our whole goal in Target is to train up skill and empower these individuals.

[54:34] To be able to take advantage of these opportunities.

[54:37] Oftentimes, we hear people talking about career opportunities in various fields,

[54:43] but the real challenge is how do you practically get there?

[54:47] You know, the cost of tools, the cost of equipment, yes, we need more technical people, but how do we practically

[54:55] get them there?

[54:56] So this is a program where the training is provided for free to the candidates.

[55:02] And I say it again, it's provided for free to the candidates.

[55:06] And very grateful to the City of Pompano, given us opportunity.

[55:09] Of course, we want to expand the work here.

[55:12] And in order to expand the work, you need to have facilities.

[55:14] you need to have space, you need to have the ability to pull in the employers who will say,

[55:21] hey, I want to establish a maintenance repair facility at the airport and create this dynamic

[55:27] ecosystem that the candidates can be involved in. What we're finding is a lot of these employers are

[55:34] saying to us, hey, we don't have the internal capacity to train, but if you can train specifically

[55:40] to the competency and the proficiency.

[55:44] Yes, certifications are important.

[55:47] But what employers want is, hey, regardless

[55:50] of what the FAA wants and others want,

[55:53] as a company, this is what we specifically need.

[55:56] So if we're overhauling landing gear,

[55:59] if we're overhauling engines or cleaning parts,

[56:03] these are the competencies and proficiencies

[56:05] that we need and that's what we're trying to.

[56:07] I'm very excited about this.

[56:10] I mean, we've been training these students for the past nine weeks now, and just a success

[56:15] that they're having, and we want to create more opportunities, but we need the space

[56:19] to do it.

[56:20] And we know we want to do it in Pompano and expand the work, the Northern region of this

[56:26] county.

[56:28] When you look at airports like Pompano and Fort Laudadale, Executive for Laudadale in

[56:32] National here we have industry saying we need people we need people but guess what right next door the people are there

[56:40] So they just need to be trained upskilled and powered and I'm glad to be a part of it and I appreciate

[56:47] The head start the city of Pomp and know has given me excellent

[56:51] Thank you, Barenton. Thank you

[56:54] Okay, Ms. Blake Boy is one comment. I just want to make a couple of comments one on the land use change

[57:01] I just want to know, it's from recreation open space to transportation.

[57:05] The site has never been used for recreation in open space.

[57:07] It is not on the city's tables.

[57:09] I think that's just an important nuance.

[57:11] It's not removing anything from their, from their parks, acreage,

[57:15] so to speak, and it is in a secured area.

[57:17] So I just wanted to highlight that.

[57:20] And then since the city staff, since their presentation was on both applications,

[57:25] I just wanted to add to my overview or staff's overview about every

[57:30] about item B and about the recommendation and how it's formatted.

[57:37] And I think it's important to know that this land is publicly owned, it is subject to

[57:44] this, the student restriction with the FAA and a really different sheets that's from other

[57:49] natural resource map series amendments that we've seen or are going to see later on this meeting.

[57:54] So, I just wanted to point that out that this is a very narrow recommendation of not

[57:59] objecting to this amendment due to these other factors.

[58:05] So, I just wanted to call that to the forefront before you go to your discussion.

[58:09] Excellent.

[58:09] Thank you very much.

[58:11] Mayor Ryan, I see your hand is up.

[58:13] You have the floor.

[58:15] Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[58:16] I have a series of predicate questions to make sure I understand this.

[58:20] Did I understand that some portions of the property we're discussing were purchased with county bonds for park system?

[58:32] They were not.

[58:34] No, that was not part of this property.

[58:37] All right.

[58:38] With respect to the FAA and the statement that they strongly object,

[58:46] When was the first time the FAA strongly objected to having this area maintained as an environmentally-protected area?

[58:58] Mr. Dolan.

[59:05] Well, their first objection, I think, our first memorandum of understanding process was in 1992.

[59:11] However, they let this stand because we have so much property available on the south end of the airport.

[59:17] now that's fully built out. So we have no more land to lease. So when somebody calls us and says we want to locate on your airport and we say, oh sorry, we don't have any land available. That is when the FAA intervenes and says you need to make this land available.

[59:36] So I just want to make sure I understand thank you for that answer. It was my understanding that the FAA strongly objective because of the potential guy that picture is awful.

[59:46] Because of the potential for interaction of wildlife and aircraft, correct?

[59:54] No, they object for that reason as well, but it's because this deed restricted to aviation uses, and we can't put aviation uses.

[1:00:00] Is there if there's trees there?

[1:00:03] Yeah, but the trees have been there for a long time and they didn't object previously. The current

[1:00:08] objection is centered around, I guess, the desire to develop or provide more aviation support

[1:00:16] in terms of industry, and there's just the first time that they're upending the additional objection

[1:00:22] to the potential interference of wildlife with aviation.

[1:00:27] No, that's a universal standard for all airports everywhere that wildlife is hazard to

[1:00:32] aeronavigation.

[1:00:34] The reason that we're doing this now is because we don't have any more lands to develop

[1:00:37] our aviation uses so we have to clear these for aviation use.

[1:00:42] I apologize.

[1:00:42] It's probably how I ask the question.

[1:00:45] I'm trying to understand, I get the general idea we see it at all airports about interference,

[1:00:51] But I'm trying to find out when did the FAA first specifically take exception to having open space that attracts wildlife at this particular location?

[1:01:04] Yeah, the first time we probably got that in writing was in the 1992 member and I'm a Bunderstanding

[1:01:09] But they let that go, and so they've let that go for the past 33 years

[1:01:14] Yes, if I understand correctly right cuz we had other aviation land available for development and now

[1:01:20] we don't, so now is the time we have to correct that.

[1:01:23] Well, there are two different distinct issues here.

[1:01:25] One, there's a development issue.

[1:01:26] Let's leave that aside for a second.

[1:01:28] I want to focus in on what has been raised

[1:01:31] as a safety issue to aviation,

[1:01:33] and that is the potential interaction

[1:01:36] and interference of wildlife with aviation.

[1:01:40] So I want to focus on that specifically.

[1:01:43] Can we agree that if the FAA had concerns about that in 1992,

[1:01:48] Over the last 33 years, they have not raised any substantial objection and request that that be changed.

[1:01:58] We have relocated some go for tortoises over the years.

[1:02:02] But as long as we had aviation use to land to use, we didn't get what they call a part 16 complaint,

[1:02:08] which is what triggers us having to remove these trees.

[1:02:11] So that's why we haven't done it today.

[1:02:13] But the objection for the wildlife has always been a possible hazard, as was laid out in our recent 2017 hazard assessment.

[1:02:22] I can't tell what's possible.

[1:02:24] I want to be immediately specific and I apologize.

[1:02:26] I need to understand and let's break it down.

[1:02:33] Did the FAA complain about go for turtles and the potential interference with aviation?

[1:02:43] I'm sorry.

[1:02:44] a mayor harden wants to chime in here and we'll allow them to.

[1:02:47] Yeah, I'm just going to try and try and address these kind of things on the standard operation

[1:02:52] of an air park or an air port.

[1:02:54] When there is a wildlife issue like that, it's incumbent upon the operator of the airport

[1:03:01] to take care of those problems.

[1:03:03] That's what the city of Pomp.

[1:03:04] So you're popping up each and runs this air park.

[1:03:06] We've got our own air park managers, so yeah, when you know that there's a known issue

[1:03:11] with wildlife, you need to deal with that particular issue at that time.

[1:03:16] The FAA overall discourages wildlife on air park properties because of the inherent danger

[1:03:23] between air traffic and wildlife, be it go for tortoises, birds, coyotes, you name it

[1:03:31] alligators.

[1:03:32] When you mix wildlife with aircraft, it's not a good idea, so eventually if something were

[1:03:38] happen, an impact at the air park, that's when the FAA would probably walk in and say,

[1:03:44] okay, that's it, rip all those trees out. But really what's forcing this issue now for

[1:03:50] us is the fact that we are running out of aviation, developable land outside of these areas

[1:03:58] that have this landscape on them. So eventually, if someone comes to Pompano Beach and says,

[1:04:05] as Mr. Olon pointed out, someone comes to pump on a beach and says,

[1:04:09] I would like to develop some type of aviation use on your airpark,

[1:04:13] as Mr. Irving has, and we tell them what we don't have anything

[1:04:17] that you can develop because we've got these trees all over this.

[1:04:21] They can then complain to the FAA, and the FAA will then say either you let them

[1:04:25] develop there, or we will take control of the airpark from you,

[1:04:29] and then we will let them develop there.

[1:04:31] So that's kind of the overview there.

[1:04:33] But I didn't want to address the wildlife issue. I'm not trying to step on Miss Dolan. She's quite capable of doing this

[1:04:40] But I just thought I just saw maybe there was a little disconnect there. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very hard. Go ahead.

[1:04:45] Hey Ryan.

[1:04:47] Thank you to my learned friend from Papua for assisting me. He doesn't address the question I have.

[1:04:53] I'm trying to understand the predicate. I appreciate the overview. I just want to clarify has the FAA to this point.

[1:05:03] prior to the request for the development.

[1:05:07] Issue to specific complaint and we were talking about go-for-tources since that was raised about go-for-tortices.

[1:05:15] I think that's just probably no.

[1:05:16] I just want to make sure I understand.

[1:05:18] I'm not aware of that.

[1:05:20] Okay, all right, that's fair.

[1:05:21] Thank you.

[1:05:23] And to this point has the FAA requested the city pop and how to do something with the lands we're talking about.

[1:05:33] any other lands because of interference with wildlife. Since 1947, have they requested any

[1:05:40] of the land to be developed for aviation because of fears or complaints of interference

[1:05:46] of wildlife with the airplanes. It's a specific complaint.

[1:05:52] No. That's very important.

[1:05:55] It just helps me understand where we are and Mayer Harden's summary helps to clarify so everyone

[1:06:01] Can't understand the risk.

[1:06:04] There was a statement regarding one impact if we don't approve this and it isn't allowed.

[1:06:14] Was that the FAA if I understood correctly, could take over the airport that I understand that correctly?

[1:06:19] That's correct.

[1:06:21] Okay. Help me to understand where that is in the backup. I reviewed the FAA correspondence

[1:06:28] and the emails from April and May. I didn't see that specifically, but I admit I may

[1:06:34] even oversight on my part. Mr. Warren. Yeah. No, they did not include that in their letter.

[1:06:40] That is in the deed. It is part of the deed. Okay. And they certainly have not

[1:06:46] besides that since 1947, but the point being now

[1:06:49] that this has been raised, I get it,

[1:06:51] I take the position from City of Pompino,

[1:06:53] is that if it's not approved, this is maybe speculative

[1:06:58] or at least a potential that the FAA could take it over.

[1:07:02] I think there is precedent that they have done

[1:07:04] exactly that, that they have come to do that.

[1:07:06] I just want to understand the Pompino,

[1:07:07] I'm not saying they haven't done it in the past.

[1:07:09] I just want to be clarify,

[1:07:11] because there's going to be some public interest in this.

[1:07:14] So some of my questions are trying

[1:07:15] make sure I understand what's happened here, and I'll give it a second.

[1:07:21] Do you have answers to that question?

[1:07:23] We still have control of the airport.

[1:07:25] It has not been rescinded to the AA.

[1:07:28] Okay.

[1:07:29] And at least to this point, there's not been a specific correspondence threatening to do such

[1:07:34] if we don't approve this.

[1:07:37] Correct.

[1:07:39] Okay.

[1:07:39] Now, I read the back of it, let me sure I understand this as well.

[1:07:43] were there are two Broward County departments who objected to this item.

[1:07:50] This is Blake Boyd.

[1:07:52] Yes, that provided comments about us.

[1:07:56] All right.

[1:07:56] We've received an objection from Dr. Rado, the Chief Resilience Officer with the Broward

[1:08:03] Resilient Varmel Department.

[1:08:05] What has been done to address the objections of the Resilience folks?

[1:08:11] It's not entirely.

[1:08:13] It's not interesting.

[1:08:14] Wow.

[1:08:14] It's more about water tables and other relationships.

[1:08:18] Let me answer that question.

[1:08:21] Ms. Boy answer that question.

[1:08:22] I didn't.

[1:08:22] First of all, I did not see that as an objection, but Ms.

[1:08:25] Ms. Boy please respond to that.

[1:08:26] Right.

[1:08:27] Well, let me.

[1:08:29] Let me stay.

[1:08:30] I'm going to say we're clear.

[1:08:31] Mike, Mike, hold on one second.

[1:08:32] Ms. Boy, just respond to that.

[1:08:34] So you have it in front of you to also.

[1:08:37] I do.

[1:08:37] I want to just stay for the rocket.

[1:08:38] Let me do this.

[1:08:39] chair. Thank you for your patience with me. The county also strongly discourages those amendments

[1:08:45] which would place additional residential non-residential development at risk of flooding

[1:08:49] and sea level. I want to make sure that all of that has been taken into consideration.

[1:08:54] And what can we talk about specifically what has been done to address the concerns of the

[1:09:09] that that comment was related more to a flooding potential but it was not it's not in the

[1:09:14] priority planning area for sea level rise. And I would I would also note that no one from

[1:09:19] County staff has come to to the meeting today that their comments stand. I didn't read her

[1:09:25] that specific comment and I also talked to the resilient environment department about that specific

[1:09:31] comment that it's it's not a recommendation for for denial for that. So. Okay. And that's helpful.

[1:09:42] Okay. That's helpful. All right. Just to shortcut this so we can get to the other comments.

[1:09:46] That's helpful. And it may simply be that what what I'll be requesting is just something from the resilience notes that they're not objecting.

[1:09:52] But there was simply raising the issue, maybe as a specular of our future issue, is that, is that a fair interpretation that might be just standard language?

[1:10:01] I think that that was standard language.

[1:10:03] I think the county staff is in a position to evaluate the policies and they're as the environmental staff.

[1:10:11] That's why they discourage them, but they're not objecting to it in terms of that.

[1:10:17] I don't know that we'll, I don't believe we'll get any additional comments from the staff regarding that.

[1:10:26] All right.

[1:10:26] Then the second was from Mr. West, from the Broward County Parks and Recs, that objects to the removal of the environmental ESL designation.

[1:10:35] I take it.

[1:10:36] There's been a number of mitigation steps offered to address those concerns.

[1:10:42] Is that correct?

[1:10:43] Yes, that's correct.

[1:10:44] All right. Can you just simply outline for us once again so we can understand all of

[1:10:50] the mitigation efforts that are being taken to address what the Broward County has

[1:10:56] raised related to the ESL and the Florida natural areas?

[1:11:00] So the Broward County we have offered that they can come in and take cuttings and seed collections

[1:11:05] for any plants that they'd like to re-establish and their two preserves in Pompano.

[1:11:11] And with respect to wildlife?

[1:11:14] The what?

[1:11:15] Do you go ahead?

[1:11:16] Yeah.

[1:11:16] The only wildlife that will be relocated are the go for tortoises.

[1:11:21] The burrowing owls are in a totally different location and they're fine to stay where they are.

[1:11:29] The trees will be mitigated based on pump on beaches, tree mitigation requirements along the ab order of the airport where we have a walking path that goes all the way around the airport.

[1:11:39] We've already done this three negation along fifth, which is beautiful, especially this time

[1:11:44] year, without the trees or blooming, so if you want to drive up and out fifth, you'll

[1:11:48] can see how lovely it is, and we will consider that, continue that effort along Copen's

[1:11:52] Anthem.

[1:11:55] But my last question just because of concerns about the FAA, meddling in local designations,

[1:12:02] had there been any concerns about the open space that represents the golf course around

[1:12:07] airport, and it's, since they feel that open spaces and trees attract wildlife. I can tell

[1:12:18] you having played golf there, they should be more concerned perhaps about my golf balls. Since

[1:12:24] the safest area on the course, it's either the green or the fairway. But leaving that aside

[1:12:29] has the FAA raised any concerns about the significant open space right around the airport for

[1:12:36] attraction of wildlife as it relates to the golf course?

[1:12:39] Yes, actually, in our wildlife assessment, the most scary facility on our airport is the

[1:12:48] pond on the golf course where did the end of that runway?

[1:12:51] So that was brought up as a possible fucking bird attraction.

[1:12:55] So some netting was placed over that to distract any, you know, keeping any bird attractions

[1:13:01] from that area.

[1:13:01] so that when they do a wildlife assessment,

[1:13:04] it goes out five miles around the airport.

[1:13:08] So even the dump that has the flocking birds

[1:13:11] is part of that assessment.

[1:13:12] So it's not restricted to airport property.

[1:13:15] No, that's very innocent.

[1:13:16] But other than the pond, which probably

[1:13:18] has attracted a lot of golf balls as well,

[1:13:21] they're then the pond.

[1:13:23] They raised any of the Jeffs.

[1:13:24] Do you know anything concerns that the FAA could take this

[1:13:27] press in our bus saying, hey, we're concerned about enough.

[1:13:30] We don't want you to take over.

[1:13:31] that they would somehow interfere with the operation or the golf course any further.

[1:13:35] Half of that golf course is still deed restriction restricted to aviation use.

[1:13:40] So at any time the FAA could come in and require us to develop that in aviation uses.

[1:13:46] Okay.

[1:13:46] Thank you.

[1:13:47] That's all the questions I have.

[1:13:48] Thank you, Mayor.

[1:13:50] Mayor Levy.

[1:13:51] Yeah, just I can appreciate the application and its forward-looking step into its intent with regards to the airport and the airport.

[1:14:00] and what's been described through the application.

[1:14:02] So I'm moved to approve item 3A and B.

[1:14:07] Do we, um, Ms. Blake Boyd, do we need it since we broke these out?

[1:14:10] Can we make one motion for 3A and 3B or do you want two separate motions?

[1:14:15] Okay.

[1:14:15] We have a motion to approve 3A and a 3B from Mayor Levy.

[1:14:19] We have a second from Mayor Gomez.

[1:14:20] Mayor Gomez is her hand up for more discussion.

[1:14:23] No, that was just for the second.

[1:14:26] Any further discussion on these items?

[1:14:31] I think the doctor's even has his hand on him and I see it. There you go. Now they put you

[1:14:35] Don't watch not electronically. I wouldn't know.

[1:14:40] Well, I was going to say that I'm very proud that someone mistaken me for Mayor Ryan, but

[1:14:45] I'm not even going to go there now since I heard about his golf king.

[1:14:49] Three A is the application for dingy beach am I right?

[1:14:52] No, no, no, two. No, three A and three B are both the Pompano airpark.

[1:14:58] Three A is the land use change and three

[1:15:00] MPB is the natural resource map series change for Pompano Beach.

[1:15:04] And for the record, the motion would be to recommend approval of both the land use plan, amendment, and the

[1:15:11] map change.

[1:15:11] Thank you, Andy.

[1:15:13] Terrific.

[1:15:14] Then I'd like to second that motion.

[1:15:15] If no one has yet.

[1:15:17] It's hard to be second.

[1:15:18] So is there further discussion on this item? All those in favor please signify by saying aye.

[1:15:23] Aye.

[1:15:24] Aye.

[1:15:24] Any opposed?

[1:15:27] Motion passes unanimously.

[1:15:29] Thank you very much.

[1:15:30] Thank you.

[1:15:31] Thank you. Thank you all for taking that out of order. I appreciate that. But Mayor couldn't. Our commission can you stay for.

[1:15:39] Thank you. Item two, also a natural resource map series item. This is for site 97.

[1:15:46] Locating the city of dingu beach. You have the map there.

[1:15:49] Friend of you, the yellow area is the proposed removal from the environmentally sensitive lands map.

[1:15:56] The proposed application is to remove three-and-a-half acres within the city of D&D Beach.

[1:16:01] The city of D&D Beach has provided correspondence that they do not object to the proposed amendment.

[1:16:05] That's attachment to in your materials. You can see that the three-and-a-half acres

[1:16:10] is part of a larger 21 acre ESL and then also part of a larger 160 acre area wetland

[1:16:19] and Biberd County that surrounds it to the east and to the south.

[1:16:27] The county review agencies are been planning resilient environment and environmental

[1:16:32] permitting, do not support the proposed amendment and refine the site as hydrologically

[1:16:37] and tidally connected to the surrounding wetlands and the Dania Cutoff Canal.

[1:16:43] It is in with it, it is within a priority planning area where flooding and stormwater

[1:16:47] management are a concern. It provides nursery, reading, forging, and refuge within its mature,

[1:16:53] red, and black mengrove habitat. Those comments and their agency responses are all included

[1:16:59] in your backup in the attachment 3, 4, 5, 10, and 11. The applicant has also submitted responses

[1:17:06] to the review agency comments and that's included in several attachments in your backup and has

[1:17:14] indicated that the eastern most, so it's divided by the red line here, here it is isolated.

[1:17:21] This piece will be a conservation easement, so that's part of their application, and then

[1:17:28] in addition they will be purchasing credits through the Everglades mitigation bank 1.24 acres

[1:17:35] of credits.

[1:17:35] Planning Council staff is not supporting the proposed amendment to remove the three and

[1:17:44] half acres of the 21 acre environmentally sensitive land, Site-97.

[1:17:50] I would add to that recommendation that there was going to be likely an extensive discussion

[1:17:55] this morning, and staff would just say that the eastern most the conservation easement piece,

[1:18:03] Any, we would ask for you to consider that peace remaining on the environment and the sensitive

[1:18:09] landscape if you are inclined to recommend the removal of the western piece from the map.

[1:18:18] And I think that does a couple of things.

[1:18:20] It shows the continuity of the area.

[1:18:23] Once we remove that, it shows it as two separate areas.

[1:18:27] Can we go to the map where we just show that, so, the map that shows the ownership

[1:18:33] Thank you. So what I just, this map is interesting just to show a couple of things.

[1:18:38] Here's the northern part of the property. The red area on the west.

[1:18:43] That's a private, privately committed to easement and conservation,

[1:18:48] a mangrove area as are the bright green and the turquoise area.

[1:18:52] Privately held but committed to saving,

[1:18:54] rebanding as conservation easements.

[1:18:56] Everything in purple is owned by Broward County.

[1:18:59] So that's just to the south of that to the immediate north and south of this site.

[1:19:05] So it is surrounded that site has been functioning as a conservation easement and conservation

[1:19:11] area.

[1:19:12] So I just wanted to show you that map of the ownership.

[1:19:16] The applicant at Stacker has a brief presentation to make and he's coming forward if that's

[1:19:25] okay.

[1:19:25] Absolutely.

[1:19:26] Mr. Stacker.

[1:19:27] And Mr. Schippell, are you going to be participating at the same time?

[1:19:31] I'll defer it in.

[1:19:32] Okay. Sorry.

[1:19:33] Sorry. Tyler Schippell and Ed Sacker.

[1:19:36] Mr. Schippell.

[1:19:37] Thank you.

[1:19:38] Good morning.

[1:19:39] Good morning.

[1:19:40] Mr. Chairman, Vice Chair, mayors, members.

[1:19:45] Glad to be here.

[1:19:46] Thank you very much.

[1:19:48] Andy cautioned me that it's dangerous to hand the dinosaur.

[1:19:55] I don't even know what to call it, but so there's an example, but I'm going to try to

[1:20:03] get into a little bit of this in detail and then I'm going to defer to Tyler Schappelle

[1:20:08] with the Chappelle group who has been involved in this for a couple of years now in the

[1:20:22] of 1450 LLC is here, also Tyler and Gabe Dittina from the Chappelle group, and Shoranda

[1:20:35] Placid from Rubin Turnbull is here as well.

[1:20:39] We're happy to answer any questions that you may like, but as Barbara said, this is a five-acre

[1:20:48] site. This isn't the slide that's in your back, back up materials. It's the whole five

[1:20:58] acres is colored there and you can see that the eastern two thirds, three and a half

[1:21:05] acres approximately is included within the overall 21 acre site 97 ESL.

[1:21:15] That, let's see, there we go.

[1:21:19] I want to go back to 1989, and this is when the maps were first pulled together, the environmental

[1:21:27] coalition of Broward County surveyed the county and identified hundreds of parcels, and

[1:21:34] they were went through an extensive public hearing process and designated many properties

[1:21:40] as environmentally sensitive lands, local areas of particular concern, and in our

[1:21:47] days, and what has occurred in this area since 1989?

[1:21:56] Virtually nothing except that the county eight years after the adoption of the map,

[1:22:07] The county acquired the property immediately to the north that part of the ESL.

[1:22:16] I mean, part of the local area of particular concern, they acquired the property on the east and the property on the south.

[1:22:26] So, this five acres is surrounded on three sides by Broward County and development along

[1:22:34] northeast 7th Avenue in Dania Beach to the West.

[1:22:42] Why wasn't this partial purchased?

[1:22:45] Retortical question.

[1:22:46] I don't know the answer.

[1:22:48] I will tell you that the property on the east and the south was part of a $120 million acquisition

[1:22:56] from the SWORDLOW companies at the time and it obviously included land all the way down to the

[1:23:07] Dainy Cut-Off Canal. I think that was for purposes of the expansion of the Southern

[1:23:13] Runway at the time.

[1:23:18] If you could focus in on this parcel, I think in your backup materials,

[1:23:24] you can see that there is a man-made pond. It was dug for fill, and I went all the way back

[1:23:35] for to the areas on the property of Fraser's website. They only go back to 98, and it looks like

[1:23:42] that was dug back then. So it was a disturbed piece. Is that a reason why it may have not been purchased?

[1:23:50] I'm not sure. I just don't know.

[1:23:55] I want to go to back to this slide because this is the

[1:24:09] identifying parcel as provided to us from the county before we submitted our application.

[1:24:16] This is showing 2.39s with some of our property on the east and some of our property on the west.

[1:24:26] And that actual graphic was submitted with our application.

[1:24:32] After your staff turned it over to the county staff, the county staff came back and said,

[1:24:39] Now that's not it, it's this, and this is difficult to read, but I will tell you that the

[1:24:49] yellow portion, in this graphic, site 97, stops at a blue line about two-thirds of the

[1:25:04] eastern portion, but not some of the southern.

[1:25:10] So the reason I'm pointing this out is that when you are a property owner who does due diligence

[1:25:20] And they acquired this parcel in 2019 from Nova-South Eastern University.

[1:25:30] The land use is commerce from the Broward County and employment sitter in Dane Yubic.

[1:25:38] The zoning is general industrial in Dane Yubic and they bought the piece and they've been

[1:25:45] working with consultants, since that time, trying to get approvals, as you all know, a

[1:25:54] plaque is a prerequisite to the issuance of a building permit, and this property was

[1:26:01] unplatted and is going through that plot process as well.

[1:26:07] I got the development review report from the county.

[1:26:13] It's dated March 31st of this year.

[1:26:15] And I don't have it on the slide, but I just want

[1:26:18] to read to you the short recommendation of the county

[1:26:24] urban planning division is denial of the plan.

[1:26:29] Until the site is removed from the ESL map,

[1:26:33] the state of Florida chapter 163 amendment process and all licenses and permits are obtained.

[1:26:43] Quince, eventually, that's what we applied for last year.

[1:26:46] Was an amendment to the map asking you all to remove that 3.5 acre portion of the 21 acre

[1:26:54] for LAPC. So we could move forward in the environmental permitting process without people

[1:27:03] dandling this LAPC label over our heads because it is precluding our ability to develop

[1:27:12] this site. And I told a couple of you all when I talked briefly that if I had 30 seconds

[1:27:19] to make my presentation, I would point to the city of Dania Beach's letter and ask you all

[1:27:26] to consider deferring to their position, and their position is that they have no objection

[1:27:32] as Barbara pointed out to this amendment, as long as the applicant proceeds through the environmental

[1:27:39] permitting process and obtains the necessary permits. We're asking you to balance the

[1:27:47] The benefit of preserving a small amount of degraded mangroves versus the benefit of economic

[1:27:58] development in close proximity to the port and the airport and in that corridor where

[1:28:04] there are not a significant amount of lands remaining to be developed.

[1:28:10] And we're asking you to do this by removing the label and not compromising any environmental

[1:28:17] permanent requirement.

[1:28:19] And now it's probably a good segue to let Tyler come up briefly and I may come up at the

[1:28:24] end and do a quick summary and answer any questions.

[1:28:28] Thank you.

[1:28:29] Mr. Schuppell.

[1:28:31] Thank you, Tyler Schuppell.

[1:28:33] Just a brief history on the project as I mentioned.

[1:28:38] We've been working with the agencies for the last five years to come up with a balanced

[1:28:43] approach and compromise on how many mangroves are the areas that we could preserve versus

[1:28:48] what we could mitigate for and what we came up with was preserving the eastern portion

[1:28:55] of the property where you have the most higher quality mangroves as well as it was in the

[1:29:02] LAPC portion and then also the area on the western side which has already have been impacted

[1:29:10] by previous fill and excavation of lakes.

[1:29:15] That portion of the property is where we proposed

[1:29:17] the development to be.

[1:29:20] And then any additional impacts that we would have

[1:29:23] would be mitigated offsite at Everglades mitigation banks.

[1:29:27] So we preserved about 30% of the property.

[1:29:31] And then the rest of it is either uplands or mitigating

[1:29:34] for through EMB.

[1:29:37] Those agencies are currently processing those applications.

[1:29:42] We've had some delays due to the fact that the 404 program,

[1:29:47] which is the federal program for authorization,

[1:29:50] was delegated to the state under the first Trump administration with Governor

[1:29:54] Santis.

[1:29:55] It was then delegated back to the Army Corps during the Biden administration.

[1:30:00] And now, potentially going back to the state. So there was some delay in our authorizations, but those agencies at the state level, as well as the core level, are good with the amount of mitigation and the avoidance and minimization of the areas that we are proposing.

[1:30:17] And as well as we have been discussing with Breard County on those mitigation requirements as well.

[1:30:24] I would touch to on some of the backup regarding the severance or the connection of the

[1:30:30] wetlands on this site to other surrounding wetlands.

[1:30:35] There is an FPNL easement that runs to the south of this property.

[1:30:40] There is a dirt road that FPNL uses for maintenance of their power lines, which does

[1:30:45] We have several connection to the northern 40 acres I believe of main roads from the southern portion.

[1:30:54] And we are mitigating for secondary impacts off-site.

[1:30:58] We're not just mitigating for the wetlands that are on site.

[1:31:02] We're also mitigating for the main roads that are adjacent to the north and south.

[1:31:06] But as far as the connection part of it, there will still be connection.

[1:31:11] It does receive water during the extreme high tides.

[1:31:14] We have seen that, we've gone out there to see if the water comes over the road, but it is not a direct connection and you can see some of the pictures of the lake that's on site and it has a significant red hue.

[1:31:27] The reason for that is because it does not flush and it has high levels of bacteria and is not connected at all times.

[1:31:34] So with that I'll go back to and answer any questions. Thank you, Mr. Schuppill.

[1:31:40] Mr. Stich.

[1:31:41] Thank you all very much again.

[1:31:45] If you have questions, we welcome them at this point.

[1:31:50] But we encourage you to support the city of Danielle Beach's position,

[1:31:57] and obviously the applicant's position that will enable us to continue

[1:32:02] through the environmental permitting process without having to

[1:32:11] nation on the portion of the property.

[1:32:13] If there were two parcels, another five acre parcel

[1:32:16] with the same characteristics from a Habitat point

[1:32:20] of view, Tyler would tell you that they would be treated

[1:32:25] the same, and we're asking that you do that,

[1:32:28] and enable us to do it so that the county doesn't say denial

[1:32:32] of the plaque because it's designated as an LAPC.

[1:32:38] Thank you.

[1:32:38] Thank you, Mr. Stecker.

[1:32:39] It's a great point.

[1:32:40] Anything that before we open the floor for discussion.

[1:32:43] Thank you.

[1:32:44] Thank you.

[1:32:45] Dr. Zeeeman, you wanted to decide.

[1:32:46] I'm pulled.

[1:32:46] I'll start with you.

[1:32:51] Thanks so much, Chair.

[1:32:53] I appreciate all this background.

[1:32:55] Particularly Tyler should fell in his as usual.

[1:32:58] Very cogent summary of this.

[1:33:01] I'm curious though about a couple things.

[1:33:05] I understand the first sentence in our item.

[1:33:08] you know that the Howard Planning Council staff unable to support the proposed amendment.

[1:33:13] I understand that and I'm curious about the removal or excuse me the retention of 1.29 acre conservation easement.

[1:33:24] I'm curious how does this happen? Is this all part of today's item or are there other things that we need to do in addition to today?

[1:33:32] Mr. Schuppel.

[1:33:36] As far as the conservation easement area and the preservation of that area, that will be done

[1:33:41] after a permit issuance, we will be required to record a conservation easement with

[1:33:46] Barra County in the state.

[1:33:48] The we come in part of the public record, that area will be preserved in perpetuity.

[1:33:54] It would also be treated and maintained, we'll actually have to monitor that area for

[1:34:00] five years as a requirement of the permits.

[1:34:02] And then it would also have to be maintained removal

[1:34:05] of exotics, that kind of thing perpetually.

[1:34:09] So that's how that area is protected and codified

[1:34:13] or legally bound with the development.

[1:34:18] And then during construction, obviously, that area

[1:34:20] will be segregated off and protected during construction.

[1:34:25] Terrific.

[1:34:26] And to our staff, how does this need

[1:34:30] for establishing a conservation easement. Does it trigger a second public hearing?

[1:34:35] It does not. It's a separate process.

[1:34:39] Terrific. And maybe the Mr. Chipel again. How would you envision the

[1:34:44] vehicular access to this three and a half acres?

[1:34:49] The vehicular access is the way it's shown on

[1:34:52] the site plan is coming from the west side of the property into the loading area. I don't know.

[1:34:59] should be in the back up, but there is a the warehouse facility has entry coming in from the west side

[1:35:05] of the property.

[1:35:07] Just to, I'm sorry, Ed Stackard General quickly, the property owner has an access easement there

[1:35:13] on the south, so I often ignore these seven things.

[1:35:18] I appreciate that very much, Ed and Tyler, thank you for organizing this in a way that makes

[1:35:24] that strike forward, sometimes these issues can be difficult, trading off ESL for economic

[1:35:32] development, but I love the concurrence from the city of danger beach, and I love knowing

[1:35:38] as much as we do about this land, so thank you very much, Chair.

[1:35:42] Thank you, Dr. Doug, for doing this.

[1:35:43] Mayor Gomez.

[1:35:45] Good morning, I think so.

[1:35:48] I just have one question for the applicant.

[1:35:50] There was a request by the Planning Council Executive Director that if we were to move against their recommendation to not support this, but to keep it as the 1.9, 29, still remaining labeled as the, I'm always bad with acronyms, LPCA, LAPC, you know, me and half of us, how would that affect what you are doing?

[1:36:17] Well, that's a good question, Mayor.

[1:36:20] And I appreciate it.

[1:36:24] My concern is what I got from the Black report,

[1:36:30] that they're recommending denial

[1:36:32] since the portion of the property is designated

[1:36:34] in a local area of particular concern.

[1:36:38] Our, they may modify that as it is evolved.

[1:36:44] But there is nothing having dealt with conservation

[1:36:48] these investments over the years, there's nothing more protective than a conservation

[1:36:53] easement that would be placed on the property, voluntarily by the property owner, to restrict

[1:36:59] the use.

[1:37:04] And my preference would be to remove the entire, to recommend the removal of the

[1:37:10] tire in light of left hand and right hand difficulty with respect to what is the effect of an

[1:37:18] LAPC. Barbara may be able to vouch on that.

[1:37:22] Ms. Blake Boy.

[1:37:26] I was just talking to Andy about what planning counsel staff, you know, the request is.

[1:37:32] And from our perspective, it's really for the continuity of the map.

[1:37:36] We do have other conservation easements, but I don't want to speak at this meeting and then

[1:37:42] to interrupt their process, we have other conservation easements that are associated with

[1:37:46] ESL maps on the site, but to Mr. Stacker's point, maybe it's not the best idea, because

[1:37:54] I mean, it really could, we have seen later in the process, I have a plot recently where

[1:38:02] the environmental staff is like, oh, the size of change, this conservation easement, and we really

[1:38:08] had an extensive back and forth, so while I like the graphic depiction of it, the conservation

[1:38:16] easement is actually much better than the ESL or map requirements, because ESL map requirements,

[1:38:26] there's a lot of these sites, there's several sites that are abandoned or not maintained

[1:38:31] without if they don't have a conservation easement and they're not identified.

[1:38:35] So basically remove the idea so go back to the original of if we want to support the support it as the whole conservation

[1:38:41] Okay, the conservation isn't does the trick. So I apologize. I don't know if there was a motion on the table

[1:38:47] There's not okay. I'd like to make a motion to sorry but go against staff recommendation and support the

[1:38:54] removal of the L a

[1:38:56] L P a C

[1:38:58] L a P C

[1:39:02] On this

[1:39:03] We have a motion to approve the applicant application as submitted.

[1:39:09] Is there further discussion on this item?

[1:39:11] I have a question from Mr. Shappelle.

[1:39:13] Question from Mr. Shappelle, from Council Member Horland, and we have Mayor Castillo.

[1:39:17] Good morning, Mr. Shappelle.

[1:39:19] I raised a couple of concerns during my meeting with Mr. Stacker, and I'd just like to as a layman.

[1:39:24] I'd like to get your opinion on.

[1:39:27] I was concerned about the title flow disruption.

[1:39:28] and you explained about that FNL road there.

[1:39:32] Now, does that looking in the report?

[1:39:34] Does that only flood during high,

[1:39:37] King Tide or any high tide?

[1:39:40] Our experience being out there during King Tide.

[1:39:43] So I can only speak to King Tide.

[1:39:44] We weren't out there numerous days.

[1:39:45] So we don't know about that.

[1:39:46] So we don't know about that.

[1:39:46] During a King Tide, we knew it would be potentially

[1:39:49] going over the road.

[1:39:50] OK.

[1:39:50] And I did reference in my conversation with Mr. Stacker,

[1:39:54] Dr. Horado just released the two-year resiliency plan

[1:39:56] from Broward County.

[1:39:57] As we know in 2023 we did experience that one in 1,000 year rain event, where we did see some disruption at the port,

[1:40:06] some flooding there and at the airport.

[1:40:07] So that is my overall concern with removing this designation.

[1:40:13] Can you speak to that?

[1:40:14] Hydrologically?

[1:40:16] Sure.

[1:40:16] We have an engineer this working on the design for the drainage,

[1:40:21] and the way it's designed currently is we have a retaining wall around the property.

[1:40:25] As you can imagine, it's a significant elevation change from the development to, you know, what it is today.

[1:40:34] So, with that in mind, to get the elevation up to a point where we won't have a flooding event at this property,

[1:40:42] as far as storage in those adjacent wetlands.

[1:40:46] There's nothing in their calculations that would state that this mangrove area is holding water

[1:40:54] or is permitted to hold water for any of the adjacent properties.

[1:40:59] And again, this northern portion is not connected.

[1:41:05] So, you will have a situation where eventually that area,

[1:41:10] if it's a high, you know, king tide event,

[1:41:12] that elevation is usually about a foot above mean high water.

[1:41:16] So, if you had a rain event, it certainly would go over the road

[1:41:19] then flood to the south to Denecota.

[1:41:21] Okay, and I do...

[1:41:23] There is structures, there is structures, there is structures, there is structures, south of this property, that direct flow to the ding you cut off for the port as well.

[1:41:35] Thank you.

[1:41:35] And last question, I understand there will have to be a substantial amount of fill brought in to elevate that property.

[1:41:41] What about the impacts on the surrounding properties?

[1:41:43] Right, so we are mitigating for secondary impacts for the adjacent properties to the north and south,

[1:41:49] which are the county properties.

[1:41:51] But again, the reason we are doing a retaining wall

[1:41:54] is one for twofold.

[1:41:57] Two, you don't have to impact as much wetlands

[1:42:00] because you're going straight up and down

[1:42:01] whereas a normal development,

[1:42:03] you would just have like a sloping fill pad

[1:42:05] that would be sawed and or whatever,

[1:42:07] which would encroach even farther.

[1:42:09] So this enables us to go straight up

[1:42:12] and let lessen our impact as well as the engineers

[1:42:16] containing all the water that it would be associated

[1:42:18] it with the development in and on site so that they have to do that.

[1:42:24] Okay, thank you Mr. Spel.

[1:42:25] Yeah. Thank you, Councilmember.

[1:42:27] Mayor Castillo.

[1:42:30] Mayor.

[1:42:31] We need to wait for it.

[1:42:32] Yeah, I just wanted to do one follow up.

[1:42:34] Yes.

[1:42:34] I appreciate the questions of Commissioner Orland and just for the record.

[1:42:37] I had an extensive conversation with the whole team.

[1:42:40] So that's why I did not ask certain questions, but just letting you know that my motion

[1:42:46] wasn't uneducated.

[1:42:48] I've never, for once, suspected that.

[1:42:52] Thank you.

[1:42:53] I also had contact with the applicant,

[1:42:55] because I had many questions about this.

[1:42:59] And I have to tell you, I wasn't quite sure how I would go.

[1:43:03] Mr. Zachary, if you would come forward, please.

[1:43:08] Because I want to be real, real clear about this.

[1:43:11] So you're authorized to make voluntary commitments on behalf of your applicant?

[1:43:15] Well, I have the authorized manager here, okay, today.

[1:43:21] He may want to draw near because I want to make sure that I understand this.

[1:43:26] So if the motion, which I seconded, because I understand the situation, is past I need

[1:43:32] an absolute commitment that can be passed from this board to the County Commission, that

[1:43:37] all environmental requirements will be fully and completely adhered to and satisfied.

[1:43:45] Absolutely. I can say that on equivocally.

[1:43:51] Okay. I have to tell you that the-

[1:43:53] That was unambiguous, Mayor.

[1:43:56] I want to make sure that we're clear because there's a big step that we're asking people

[1:44:01] to take and based on that and the City of Dany is a commitment prepared to support it.

[1:44:12] Does it need an amendment to the motion without any more?

[1:44:15] No.

[1:44:15] It's on the record.

[1:44:17] Commissioner Novel.

[1:44:18] Thank you, Chair.

[1:44:21] I also had conversations with Mr. Stacker and his team.

[1:44:25] And thank you Commissioner Horlain for bringing that up and also to Mayor Castillo.

[1:44:37] But I also, in addition to what Mayor Castillo said, I also want to just make sure

[1:44:43] your plan to address flooding will be included in the final process like to the city to

[1:44:51] show them how you're going to address the flooding.

[1:44:53] we're going to adhere to all all stormwater and

[1:44:59] Inverse.

[1:45:00] Criminal permitting requirements and that includes that. Yes. Okay, and making sure there's no runoff into the neighboring properties.

[1:45:07] Right. Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner. I see you sit down. I'm too old to get up and down.

[1:45:14] Well, you stand in just in case we have one more question, so you don't have to get up and down again. Mayor Ryan.

[1:45:21] Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Mayor Castillo, for putting a fine point on this. It is rare

[1:45:32] that I would not follow staff's recommendations in something as sensitive as this and

[1:45:40] follow the reports and all the concerns that were raised. It is only because of the stated

[1:45:47] commitment to comply and to fully comply with all of the environmental permitting and to follow the mitigation efforts that have been represented, that even allows me to support this.

[1:46:02] And I appreciate the work of Michelle and Mr. Stacker in making those commitments. I hope it is not a vote I regret, but I think that they are committing to make sure all of those standards are met.

[1:46:16] And, again, I thank Mayor Pistue.

[1:46:21] Mayor Harden, thank you, Chair.

[1:46:25] This is really from his Blake Boyd.

[1:46:28] Do you know off the top of your head or just kind of have a feeling

[1:46:32] for how many other sites of this type exist out there?

[1:46:39] Because I actually, the reason for my question is I'm just kind of concerned.

[1:46:45] I spoke with Mr. Stacker about this and he knows my my history with environmental issues.

[1:46:51] I mean he was before it's once before and it didn't support it.

[1:46:56] With these environmentally sensitive lands, but we're almost kind of like we're dying by a thousand cuts here.

[1:47:03] So, Ms. Blake Boyd.

[1:47:06] Yes, so we had gone through areas a couple of years ago.

[1:47:08] There's a couple of dozen sites that are privately held that I think would be under similar circumstances.

[1:47:14] And what the full council hasn't been privy to, just the steering committee members have had a discussion.

[1:47:20] We've actually brought forward the kind of death by a thousand cuts concept of this

[1:47:38] an updated process that is similar to the wetlands map process.

[1:47:44] The map is still part of the county land use plan for planning purposes, but every piece

[1:47:50] that we're talking about today would fall holistically under the licensing and permitting process

[1:47:56] as it does with wetlands as opposed to having to come here for your consideration and recommendation

[1:48:02] to the county commission for removal because it is very complex.

[1:48:07] You have the county staff taking in the licenses prior to, now they're filing for a

[1:48:14] National Resource Math Amendment part of the process.

[1:48:18] That same staff that's taken in for the license and for the permit is now commenting on

[1:48:24] the National Resource Math Series removal or modification and perhaps they're objecting to it,

[1:48:30] but they're required to take in and have them comply with the licensing and permitting

[1:48:34] the process. So it's just a disconnected process. And it's really,

[1:48:40] since I've been with the Council on 2000, this is the second site.

[1:48:45] And Mr. Stafford was the applicant for the last site.

[1:48:48] Also, but I mean, we, we under, I think staff and county staff understand that it is a very complicated and disconnected,

[1:48:57] disjointed process to ultimately get to the place where you are, it's the licensing and

[1:49:03] permitting part that is assuring all of these things that you're talking about because being

[1:49:08] on the map is not assuring that that's why I was kind of saying this conservation easement

[1:49:12] is really better than just having a natural site that's not being maintained but is held by

[1:49:19] a private property owner. Yeah, that's good. That's good. I mean, it's serious. It's like we're

[1:49:26] anything away at a little by a little, where, I think everybody on the council is concerned

[1:49:31] about environmental plans, but it's, well, okay, so yeah, I think the county needs to figure

[1:49:36] out a different way to look at these parties.

[1:49:38] And because that's in the forward, we have the policies that we have today, so that's kind

[1:49:43] of where it's, well, we don't object to, wait, we do, we don't support it, right? Sorry,

[1:49:48] it was not, it was not a denial, but we're not supporting it because we understand the environmental

[1:49:54] sensitivity of these lands, but we also understand the disconnect of these processes, and we

[1:49:59] will be trying to cure that.

[1:50:02] Would you question the record, I want to say I feel strongly the way Mayor Ryan said what

[1:50:07] Mayor Castillo and this she said, we're all saying basically the same thing we are very concerned,

[1:50:12] but we have addresses or trying to address this through the steering committee to bring

[1:50:16] back for this full board when it's appropriate to address these concerns.

[1:50:21] Mr. Governor, retracted, okay. Any further discussion? We have a motion just like

[1:50:29] the whole. We have a role. Just because we're not sure who's online. If you're calling

[1:50:34] to me. I am calling you. You caught me right in time. Karen, can we please call the

[1:50:39] role? There's a motion to approve as a submitted item PH2. Motion in a second. Karen,

[1:50:47] Please call the roll.

[1:50:48] Ms. Jessica Abramson here.

[1:50:51] No, no, yes, that is.

[1:50:53] Yes, that's yes.

[1:50:55] Thank you.

[1:50:56] Welcome.

[1:50:57] Welcome.

[1:50:57] What are you doing here?

[1:50:59] Mayor Felicia Branson.

[1:51:04] Mayor Angela Castillo.

[1:51:07] Ms. Denise B. Fernandez.

[1:51:10] Commissioner Lamar P. Fisher.

[1:51:14] Mr. Adam Amgiller.

[1:51:16] Yes.

[1:51:18] Mayor Michelle J. Gomez.

[1:51:19] Yes.

[1:51:19] Ms. Ryan Greenberg?

[1:51:24] Mayor Rex Harden?

[1:51:25] Yes.

[1:51:26] Council member Denise Evelby-Horland?

[1:51:30] Mayor Josh Levy?

[1:51:33] Commissioner Lytisha Newbold?

[1:51:37] Yes.

[1:51:39] Mayor Jackie Rayleigh?

[1:51:42] Mr. David Rosena?

[1:51:49] Yes.

[1:51:49] The could be yes.

[1:51:53] Mayor Michael J. Ryan.

[1:51:56] Yes, without a bar.

[1:51:58] School board member, Alan Zeman.

[1:52:02] Yes.

[1:52:03] Mr. Thomas H. to George E. O. Jr.

[1:52:07] We have a quorum.

[1:52:08] Motion passes unanimously.

[1:52:10] I just want to say sorry.

[1:52:12] Mr. Rosenoff is not here.

[1:52:14] He was texting me.

[1:52:15] So I think that was just like an automated big dog.

[1:52:18] Thank you all very much for your consideration.

[1:52:22] Thank you.

[1:52:24] Okay.

[1:52:24] Ms. Blake Boy, anything else?

[1:52:26] I have nothing further.

[1:52:27] Mr. Chair, if I might.

[1:52:30] There's a young man sitting in the audience.

[1:52:33] His name is Ethan Greenberg.

[1:52:36] And he is a student at Florida State University.

[1:52:39] And he's going into the military.

[1:52:43] And he is the son of Ryan Greenberg.

[1:52:48] And she's very proud of him and so all of us, and so I want to thank him for all of us.

[1:52:55] Thank you, young man,

[1:52:59] for moving forward. Excellent. Great point. Anything else for the good of the order?

[1:53:05] Okay, we are adjourned. Thank you all for the record.

[1:53:10] We do have the meeting in June.

[1:53:14] June 26 is the next meeting.

[1:53:16] Unfortunately, it ends with a gatherer, I have a big question to share.

[1:53:20] I'm gonna give you an hour. I missed him.

Planning Council Meeting

Agenda

Transcript