you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you Okay, Council. Any questions or changes to the agenda? Move to approve the agenda as presented. In fact. I have a motion by Council Member Christman and a second by Vice Mayor. All in favor sign by aye. Aye. Opposed? Thank you, Council. Passes unanimously and we will go to item 4a. Not that anybody is tired, but we're going to continue to talk about Milton. So Mr. Boudre-Schwar. Thank you, Mayor. So we had this little event last week that I thought it would be appropriate that we do a little debrief. So here's what we've got planned for you. We've got a little slide show that Mr. Frillick helped put together for us this weekend. Then I'm going to talk through, but then what I'd like to do is depart from doing all the talking. And I have several key department heads that I would like to invite up to give less than five minute debrief from their department's perspective relative to responding to and then recovering from this storm. So let me go ahead and just spend a couple minutes to talk about the impact from Milton, which has not even been a week yet, but it's very, very fresh in our minds. We've talked previously about how we prepare for storms and how we manage storms and how we recover. Before I'm not going to go through this, but I really want to emphasize how important it is to plan properly, to communicate well, to have great teamwork, and to execute. If you don't have these things, it falls apart. And communities make mistakes, and sometimes people get hurt. So I want to just pause for a second and say to you all that I think all four of those boxes were checked really well and the kudos goes to our team. They were prepared and they knew what to do instinctively and through practice and they did it really well. Will we perfect? Of course not, You're never perfect. There are always things that you learn, and we will document those things that we learned. So I'll be doing after-action report, and then we get better next time. So I wanted to just spend a second there to acknowledge that. Our emergency operations sensor. This is something that you all are familiar with. The public may not be familiar with, but our EOC is effectively our central command during hurricanes and other emergency situations that may happen in this community. The EOC is on the third floor of the station one and this is the place where we gather all of our leaders that are managing this storm. The EOC was partially activated last Monday afternoon and fully activated last Tuesday. And what that means is we need everyone who are making decisions in this room. And this is where all of the decisions were made. And this is where we did our debriefs multiple times a day as we went through this storm. The EOC was deactivated last Friday. Of course, work continued into the weekend, but that was the day that we deactivated the EOC. Just a little bit more about the storm. As you all know, we were really concerned about this storm. So last Sunday, actually, we began advising the public to evacuate. We called it a voluntary evacuation, because it's tough when there aren't shelters available to ask those who do not have someplace else to go to evacuate. Of course, we tell people and we'll say it again. We still have a month and a half of hurricane season, and there's stuff brewing in the Atlantic right now. And this is one of the things that we really, really try to emphasize, have an evacuation plan. Doesn't need to be out of state. It only needs to be a couple miles away. You just need to be on higher ground. We evacuate for water, not wind. Unless you live in a structure that is susceptible to wind, we're evacuating for water. So find a friend, make plans, because we still have a season ahead of us. The mandatory evacuation took place or went into effect on Tuesday. So those two days after we started telling people, we think you need to go. And of course, the community listened. We had exceptional compliance and that was evidenced by the fact that by Tuesday afternoon, I think chief's gonna maybe talk about this a little bit. There were no cars in a row. People, they cooperated. We did implement a driving curfew. That Tuesday afternoon at 4 p.m. And the reason why we did this was to keep people from getting hurt and to keep our first responders from being put in a position where they may get hurt. As you know, during E-N, and even during Helene, we had a lot of cars get stuck in high water situations. And implementing curfews are very, very difficult things to do, because you never, ever want to restrict people's ability to be able to move freely. But sometimes you need to do it not only for their good, but for the good of our first responders. So we think that that curfew was very limited and very effective in possibly saving lives. Let's see a little bit about Milton. Milton was extremely powerful. You know, we had talked about rapid intensification early on, but boy, I mean, that was rapid intensification, going from a tropical storm to a category five. And a day was pretty intense. This was the second most intense tropical cyclone ever in the Gulf of Mexico behind Rita in 2005. I don't remember what the wind speeds were, but gusts were near 190 miles per hour for Milton. Milton did make landfall up in the Sarasota, Bradenton area. Two weeks after Helene obviously devastated the West Coast and a big bend area. One of the really interesting things with this storm was the amount of tornado outbreaks. There were two tornadoes in particular that one stayed on the ground for, I believe it was 70 miles through the Everglades moving north and then one in Palm Beach County, stayed on the ground for 21 miles over an hour. I think it was a EF3, which is pretty powerful, 140, 150 mile per hour storm. I remember the exact number, but people were killed. 26 people perished in the storm, 23 in the US and three in Mexico. And a preliminary damage is estimated at $30 billion and probably will keep climbing. And of course, that's following Helene. We've got the outer bands, of course, and the east side of the storm. That's where you get that wind push. And that's what complicated our situation here with the surge. Fortunately, unlike Ian, when that storm arrived, I was during King tide conditions. So, tides were about a foot higher than they were for this past storm. This storm did approach during high tides. Again, making our roads impassable, but it could have been a lot worse. Let's see, of course, we experienced the storm surge. Our dunes, we didn't have dunes. Haleen flattened our dunes. So we knew that the Gulf of Mexico side of the community would probably breach first or much earlier than in past storms. And it did. And then of course, the high tide conditions and that heavy, heavy cat four winds that were coming on shore made it very, very tough. A lot of sand was deposited on our beach ends, Gulf Shore Boulevard, Gordon Drive, five feet of sand in some areas. Reminded me of January in Cleveland, following that snow plow, seeing that roadway. Let's see just a couple of photos during the storms. As you know, we have a lot of traffic cameras throughout the city, so we're able to be in a safe place and monitor what's happening on the ground. And these are some of the images. You know these locations, impassable areas, of course. Here's the parking lot, Police Department parking lot, 41. We didn't lose any vehicles. All of our vehicles, again, lessons learned for me and we evacuated our heavy equipment, our apparatus, our vehicles, to higher ground in anticipation of search waters. There's a few more photos of the breaching on the doon side. And of course we had recovery. This is a lot of milk park, parking lot, boat parking only. A couple more locations here. You can see the heavy sand. It's golf shore Boulevard. Up here. This one. We didn't lose a lot of vegetation. Again, a testament to our urban forestry practices, our tree trimming program. Really thins out and creates space for the winds to move through the branches. And Chad made, I talk about it here, but not too significant. There's some more of Laura Milk. We didn't lose, Laurak was pretty much sand. Last time during Ian, we lost the decking. We had to rebuild that. Not the same type of situation this time. Couple more photos. A little video here of louder milk. We did put the drone up in the sky to get some post storm footage and we do have some helicopter footage as well. I'm not sure if that's in its video. We'll find out. I'm seeing this for the first time too. So our beach gap bigger, except it's in the park. And of course all that sand will get pushed back onto the beach, the clean white fluffy sand. Excuse me, sand. We've given the instructions to the community how to deal with that. Let's see. Communication obviously was very important. A lot of anxiety during storms like this our community wants to hear from us. Even if it's a quick simple message about what's going on, we pushed out a lot of communications. We did a press conference, we did a video update on the mayor. I did a ton of interviews to try to keep the community involved. And we had a lot of phone calls that came in that we took. And we were reaching over 22,000 residents in Collier County, of course, we have residents not in the community that sign up for our communications, but just as important for people regardless of where they live to get our updates and warnings. Let's see, recovery still is continuing. We do have our beach ends are still closed, the pier is still closed, the louder milk is still closed. We've got a lot of sand that needs to be moved to drove around a little bit this weekend and saw a lot more progress has been made. But for the safety of our employees and the safety of the public, we're asking people to stay away from these areas, to stand as soft, your car will get stuck. I don't know if anyone's had to get towed yet, but it will happen. There's a swim advisory that's still in effect. We need folks to really use good judgment. You don't need to be in the water. And if you're coming to the beach, again lots of debris that may be submerged. So we're advising people to wear shoes and make sure that they don't injure themselves. With that, I'm going to pause and I'm going to invite a couple of our key departments starting first with Chief Pennington fire rescue to make some comments and to also amplify anything that I may have covered that he thinks is important to emphasize. Chief. I think we start pre-season with our prep, emergency management kind of falls under the fire rescue bureau so we conduct pre-season tabletop exercises to make sure everybody's all on the same page. And just like we try and get the same message out to the public is you need to plan, we plan, you need to understand at a certain point you need to hunker down, and then there's part of recovery. For us, it's basically the same plan. We're going to pre-plan what's going on. We have inter-almeetings. Make sure all of our staff is on board with each other and understand what our plan is if we're dealing with wind, we're dealing with water, how we're going to move forward. I think things that we learned, I mean, I've been in the fire service in the first hurricane I had to deal with was Andrew, then each one of these, there's something that you take from it and figure out how to deal with it. I'll tell you Ian was the first one I had to deal with storm surge, and you have to respect the storm surge. So many hurricanes I went through, we were threatened with storm surge and it didn't really happen. But when it happens, it comes in, it comes in fast, and this is one of the biggest killers is storm surge. So, you know, the public needs to understand when we're putting out information, what we're telling you is for your own personal safety. You have an obligation to take care of your own personal safety. It's very tough as a fire chief to sit up there and say, hey, we can't come and get you because on a normal day, on a normal blue sky day, something bad happens, we're coming to get you because on a normal day, on a normal blue sky day, something bad happens. We're coming to get you during a hurricane when there's water coming in, there's high winds. We can't get to you right away and you're going to have to be on your own for a while until we can get there. So we go through the same stages, prep, hunker down and then recovery. When it comes to recovery, keep points for us as we got to get out there early. As soon as we possibly can, when it's safe, so we can see or recognize what the damage is. Get out, start doing grid searches. Make sure if people are trapped that we're starting to do those rescues in a timely manner. We also keep track of calls that come into 911 that don't, can't be responded to during the height of the storm. And we keep track of those and we will get out there and check on those and do welfare checks to make sure, you know, everybody's okay. So, you know, the biggest thing I can emphasize is when we're holding, you know, our pre-storm, you know, hurricane, you know, learning sessions and things like that come out find out what's going on if you're not from the area If this is your first hurricane, you know, there's a lot of information out there. Heed the warnings Have a plan and execute that plan when the time comes so those are the thing the key points I would say you know from a fire rescue perspective that that's important Thank you chief. I'll just say you had stellar leadership and very impressive. So thank you very much. The community owes you and your department and all of the first responders and staff an enormous amount of gratitude. But it was my first time watching you and your leadership role and such an enormous storm. So thank you. Thank you. It's a team effort. It's myself, City Manager, please, Chief. We're kind of the nexus that the incident command, unified command up there. And we have a lot of meetings and a lot of things. A lot of stuff goes into making sure everything runs well. So it's a team effort. Thank you. Do you mind Vice Mayor? Has a question? Yeah, so before I start any questions, do we want to allow questions now where they're here? I think what might be best is let let. There are four other speakers that want them to give varying degrees of flavor from their perspective and they may answer some questions for you that you might have. So let's do that and then the director here to have a conversation and to answer questions that you might have. So let's go, thanks Chief. Let's go with Chief Dominguez next. Good morning. Good morning, sir Dominguez Chief of Police. I'll echo some of the things that have already been said and I think what's important to take away from where you all sit in the dice is understanding that how we operate is a team of teams. Everybody has their area of expertise or they if you will will, special teams, right? And so between the Fire Department Police Department utilities, every department really parks rec, everyone has their role. And this was another event where we worked in concert, like an orchestra, dealing with every issues that pop up and bringing resources whoever has it brings it to the table and tries to work it. So I can't stress too much the idea of teams of teams because that's how that works. And this way we can marshal all the resources to a problem because somebody has the answer is figuring out who has the better solution for that moment and working in concert. Second to that, the key is communication not only amongst ourselves, but the communication to the public and we used all our resources in regards to communications that reaching out to the local media, reaching out through the PSAs at the mayor and the city manager put out putting out things through social media whether it be the police departments, fire departments or the cities because part of this is also educating the public of what they can or cannot do with safety in mind. That's the key. And so next to that is getting people to realize the gravity of the storm. So we send a lot of our officers door to door in places that we know historically, flood quickly. The problem is the surge is fast. You know, it's not a very slow thing. All of a sudden you look out in your driveway and it looks okay. And then 20 minutes and a half hour later, you're stuck in your house and you can't get out. And we don't know how long that's going to be. So it's so important for people, as the City Manager said, to go to higher ground. Could be no more than just going up the Pine Ridge, if you have friends up that way, wherever you go. So going door to door and getting people out early was very a positive effect because during the last storm, we had a lot of people stuck and we had to go get them. In this case, we were able to move about 20 something people out to shelters out in the county, Golden Gate High School and those kind of places. One thing that we notice from those photographs up there is that the EOC and the police department are invulnerable spots, so we have to pre-stage our resources in order to be able to effectively get back out after the storm That's something that will all tackle years from now maybe two or three years from now But we'll have to identify how to how to improve that but in spite of that deficit of being you know located between the beach and the river Beautiful spot when it's dry We are able to maneuver around that because of pre-prior planning and knowing your environment and knowing how to pre-stage things. So that's important to take away. But another thing I want to make a point is, and some of you got to see it, is the amazing dedication of the police and fire and public service and all the employees of the city because most of us slept on air mattresses or wherever you could and and and to some degree I think that was good you know no one likes to spend the no no adult likes to spend the night on on the mat however I've got to say it's good in a way because it tests us, it tests our skills and capability and it brings our people closer together to what they're here for in that service. So I think as an organization, as a city government and as public servants, I think this was a good experience for all. Now you never want to go past three or four days because because it's like when relatives visit too long is too much. Just enough. So that was good. But the teamwork and dedication that it takes to get people to be safe is difficult, because folks don't like to be told what to do, and that's okay. Except for their best interests. And I wanted to say that the curfew was very effective. It was just enough to get people to have some common sense and not drive around in flood areas. I'll give you one quick antidote is myself and chief Montagno were out driving around and the surge was coming up and over the beach and central avenue. And a guy, this is after curfew, passes me, and the water's coming over. Now we got about four or five inches of water, and he's in an electric vehicle. I know. I'm not gonna pick on him, but all I'm gonna say is that we light him up, we pull him over and we say, hey, it's a curfew, you need to go home. Oh, I just want to see the beach. Yeah, but you have electric bugle and he, his remark was, yeah, I heard they blow up. And I know. So some of our jobs sometimes is just to help people to get out of their own way. It's okay. It's all right. Okay. It's okay have to be the know people. And that's OK, because we keep people safe. But you compare storm to storm during hellane. We had up to 60 vehicles, DAV stuck everywhere. We had zero this time. And it's because we were able to get in front of it. Once we get those cars off the road, then we can pre-stage our vehicles and then start patrolling neighborhoods because if people listen, the heavy had evacuated and we don't want homes that are empty to become victims of someone taking advantage of that. So that kind of goes hand in hand. So the two most important things when we have any challenge is patience and time. That's it. Thank you. Chief, I do want to thank you because I think you setting that tone for having the curfew earlier than we had thought we would do it. I think it was very beneficial. So thank you and your communications and reporting on the streets was fantastic. And thank you for going that and getting one-on-one on some of the people that were very stubborn and in very dangerous areas and getting them out. So thank you. Thank you. Mr. Renza. Good morning. Good morning mayor. Members of Council, Bob, the middle to public works. I'll just echo the same thing and you're probably going to hear this from the remaining of the directors. Like the chief says, this was a team of teams prior to the storm, during the storm, and after the storm. You know, I've been through a few of these and it seems like we're getting better and better, unfortunately. But it's, I feel we've come together as a team and being able to take the information from the EOC and pass it to the field and have responses back that those missions were accomplished was made our job a lot easier. So I'm gonna talk about recovery. You know, we did all our pre-planning, prior to the storm, and now we're in the recovery phase. As it was mentioned, we had a lot of storm surge. With the storm surge comes water over the streets and sand. When you have water over the streets and sand like that, we're going to cover utilities, specifically sanitary sewer pump stations. Gordon Drive, the end of south end to Gordon's Drive, Gulf Shore Boulevard, those coastal areas with the impacted areas. We had several varying depths of sand from one end to the other. Our primary mission was to open up the south end of Gordon's Drive. Anything south of the Port Royal Club had four and five feet of sand in the middle of it. We had just cleaned that out the previous weekend from the previous storm and had to do it all over again. So the sand that we handled one time, we handled it again. We are allowed to put that clean, fluffy sand back on the beach, which increases the speed of the process. We just have to pile it up, let it dry out. One thing I learned after this storm is you can't move let sand very effectively. You have to pile it up and let it drain to get the water out of it to be able to haul more sand to the beach. So we're adding a dare to before we can haul the beach. So we're adding a day or two before we can haul the sand. So you may hear residents make comments, you know, you're not getting the sand off my beach in fast enough, off the road fast enough. We're doing it as fast as we can, but we want to be efficient with the way we do that. Let's talk about sanitary sewer pump stations. We have 132 sanitary sewer pump stations. 48 were affected, either by a loss of FPNL or being submerged. We only lost one pump station control panel. If you remember in Ian, we lost, I believe, about 30 of them that were at completely submerged. So fortunately, the surge was less than Ian, and we didn't receive all that damage. I can say as of Friday, we had 20 pump stations that did not have FPNL power. We were the pump in those with pump trucks or supplying them alternative power with the fixed generators or portable generators. This morning we're down to two that don't have FPNL power. So the power is coming back. We have the stations in order to pump and the level in the pump stations is back to normal. That's the other thing we deal with. If those stations go underwater and the collection system goes underwater, all that water seeks its lowest level, which is the sanitary sewer pump station, sewer system. So that thing completely fills up. We have to get it pumped down that goes to the wastewater treatment plant before we can even begin our cleanup process. So it took several days to get that done but this morning we're back to normal operations. Both plants did very well. If you recall, we've replaced the electrical generator systems at both plants. They have a two week running capability based on the fuel load that they have. You've noticed the power going in and out. So we just stayed on generator power at the plants for the entire time. We're probably still on generator power this morning because any wink or loss of, you know, momentary loss of power throws everything into a tail spin so we are still on generator power at both plants. We had two minor water main breaks and of course one was at the end of Gordon's rife right where we're trying to take care of all this sand. So we've gotten both of those replaced, repaired. Talking about traffic a little bit, we identified 10 intersections where we did something different this time. We de-energized those control panels, those intersections. We removed the electrical components out of them, just in case we did get surge into those cabinets that they wouldn't be completely fried. After the surge went down, the crews went out, reestablished power to those intersections that could receive that had power. We reinstalled all the electrical components and we had everything up and running by 10 o'clock Thursday morning. So kudos for our guys for thinking and coming up with different alternatives instead of doing nothing. Talking about the storm water system. Yeah, it filled up with sand. That's going to be one of our long term missions is to clean out the sand of the storm water system. And the thing about it, you can't just do it once and you're done with it. With all the sand and debris on the road, if we have a rain, that material goes right back in it. Gordon Drive South. We can clean all the sand up, clear all the catch basins, but until the grass is reestablished in the soils, we're still going to get sand in the system. So as an Ian, you know, we're months after the fact trying to get those things cleared. So if the public sees anything, great covered or anything like that, please let us know and we'll do our best to get out there and clear those. I don't know if I mentioned but we had the south end to Guilfshore Boulevard reopen and passable by late Thursday afternoon after the storm. We still have a lot of sand to remove. That sand's going back to the beach. One thing that we did notice after these type storms with the water in the storm water system and it drains out, we notice we have sinkholes. We do have one big sinkhole on fourth street, fourth street, excuse me, fourth avenue south in the 200 block. There's about 200 feet of pipe that we're going to have to replace that's collapsed in the storm. We'll get some information out on that. We learn that over the weekend. Horticulture pickup. Right now, as far as solid waste goes, we're back to normal schedule, normal collection service. Any horticulture debris, we will pick up as part of the regular service. We did work very well with parks and facilities on horticulture clean up. As piles were developed, our solid waste guys working with parks did a good job on the first pass of cleaning and collecting horticulture. And that's going to continue. Friday we started seeing the C, started seeing the C and D debris come out to the right of way. That's the material that's removed from homes, construction debris, maybe furniture, appliances that were damaged by my flood water. We've been in contact with Collier County, as far as activating the Aspirant Contract. We've been meeting with them every day last week or several days last week. We're probably going to have another meeting with them this morning. We just don't know. We don't want to overreact and start Aspirant's work. They do have 15 trucks available for the county, but we want to see the level of material that comes out and we will probably be able to remove that material quicker than it would be to have aspirate come in. But anyway, we'll follow up and make a good decision on why we want to proceed. Other than that, I think I've covered everything. Thank you very much. Thank you, and thank you for your historic knowledge because I think that saves us a lot of heartache and thank you for the last minute text and you were like, we'll be on it tomorrow. So thank you. You're welcome. Mr. Middleton, can you mention the lakes real quick? We lowered the lakes. We removed all the boards out of Swan Lake and Devils Lake. As you saw, as the tide changes, if we don't put the boards back in, the lakes will fill back up. We did a good job of keeping the lake levels low. Fortunately, we didn't have all the rain. And we lower the lakes for precipitation, not surge. These lakes are not surge lakes. They have no effect on surge. It's strictly for precipitation. I did send an email out to everybody. We do have the backflow preventers for swan lake and devil's lake. We're meeting with the contractor this week to see about getting those installed. And Councilmember, you've seen the size of these backflow preventers. They're about a thousand pounds of piece, they're massive devices. The only way to install them is to put them on a barge and transport them by water, and then have divers install these things. So we hope to have the contractor here so he can determine where his float locations are gonna be and how he's gonna get it up there to install those. Hopefully we'll have that scheduled within the next two weeks. I just wanted to thank you for what you did on the lakes because what many people don't realize is in the middle of the storm, your guys go back in and they put those weird boards back in to prevent seawater coming in. And it's very manual, it can be dangerous. When it gets too dangerous, they don't do that. And it's completely understandable. But you know, you really knocked out of the park on these lakes this time. Thank you. Yeah. Thank you. Thanks, Bob. A couple of things I just want to expand upon. Since we're talking about public works and we're talking about stormwater, the show will go on tomorrow. We have a groundbreaking ceremony for the Beach Outfall project. This, as you know, events like this remind us how important it is. How important this project will be once it's completed. All of that flooding that we saw after the storm on golf shore Boulevard. This is what this project is for. So tomorrow, 10 a.m. 3rd Avenue North Beach End. We will move the sand out of the way. We're going to have this ceremony. A lot of work has already happened to prep for this project, but we're going to move forward and have this ceremony tomorrow. The other thing that I want to mention is regarding FPNL power. You all know that we've been closely engaged with FPNL for the last several days and a lot of progress has been made. FPL is doing an excellent job in the city as of ADM this morning. We're down to 400 customers without power, 2%. So significant progress was made yesterday, and getting a lot of large sections of the community lit up, countywide, about 1% is still without power, 1900 or so, including years truly. So we're hoping that the county areas and the city area by the middle of this week or so, some of these tougher situations will be back online. But we do want to thank the community for their patience and understanding that we, the city, don't light up your power, it's FPNL, but we have taken advantage of the relationships that we do have with the FPNL to encourage their assistance here in the city, and I think they've done an excellent job with that. So I just wanted to point out those two quick things mayor before I invite up Mr. Merritt to give a report on our parks and facilities. Since you mentioned that, you know, I just want to give a special thank you to Charlotte Miller. Even 11 o'clock at night she was texting me on Saturday evening. And to my knowledge, we have everyone up. If we don't, please let us know because that was a big effort and a lot of good communication. So thank you. Good morning. Good morning. Chad Merritt, Parks Recreation Facilities Director. As you've heard, a lot goes into this prep. And for our guys, it's the typical, make sure everything's fueled. We make sure equipment's ready. We make sure generators are fueled up and working. We also try to make sure that we stage equipment in a manner that it can be used. One thing we did this time, different, was we staged some of our vans. So if we had to do any evacuations for some of the residents we were able to do so. The staff kind of break up into teams. We have pre-storm pitchers. We want to make sure that we capture what it looks like before. Unfortunately, we had Helene who visited previous and things were a little messier than normal. We contact our contractors, we have three contractors that we put on standby. They help us with the response. We also communicate any kind of storm updates. We've sent elevators up to the second floor. We secure buildings, a lot of them have to be secured manually. We've done a lot of other prep that we have on our checklist. So again, this is as fast as I can tell you of what we do, but we have a checklist. And this is ongoing when we even get a whiff of this storm is heading our way. We start that started on Saturday and Sunday prior to. Our tier one staff, they do stay as you heard chief, we sleep in air mattresses on the floor. We were in the planning offices. We sit, we monitor, we respond as needed. The priority after the storm is to clean the streets and keep the storm drains clean. So as you heard Bob, we try to work with him. We talk to him, I tell him over and over and over. If there's an area that you need us, let us know because we want to make sure that we get everything draining. We try to get the streets clean. We bring in the contractors that I talked about. We brought in three of them this time, APT, which is a personal touch. We brought in Davey Tree and TreeScape. They come in TreeScape and Davey Tree, their focus is cut to tree up, stack it. So they're not going to cut the tree up and remove it. We want them cutting, go to the next one. So a lot of the trees, you'll see they're still stacked in the right away. The other, a personal touch goes, and their goal is to remove any kind of debris and, and mediums that could potentially get into the rugways. And then we have staff that are also going around and clearing debris, palm fronds, et cetera. And then they stack. And then we have our debris truck that's going behind and picking up piles. It is a very almost all-encompassing effort from the city and Bob's got more debris trucks. So I don't know if I'll catch up with them but it is good to have those I think we were able to clear the streets I don't know if you've been out in the streets and you know I heard somebody say there's not much debris well you know we can credit that to the team Bob's team and our team as well as the contractors. We did lose 23 city trees, that is not private trees on private property. We did have a lot of private property trees that were in the right way that we had to kind of cut off the tops of them. We also, you know, we're looking at a lot of sand. You saw the videos that, for a lot of milk park, that was the good end. The north end is worse than the south end, which is what you saw in the video. It's probably, if, you know, I was here for Ian and I would say it's more sand than we had in Ian. So it's going to take us a little bit of time to get to that and we're going to start that process. Again, our priority was to try to clear the streets enough I felt that we were effective in doing so. We will also be teaming up with Bob and probably some other contractors to try to get the sand at the beach ends and the beach accesses so we can get them out on the beach. We deployed generators where we needed to do so. We also have recreation staff, the recreation staff, when they come in after the storm, they start prepping for being able to feed all of these employees that are responding. So they prep all of that and a river park and then we have other staff that are also helping with picking up debris. So when we say, a recreation coordinator that used to do in summer camp is in the park or in the streets or in the median's cleaning up debris, that's the type of effort that we try to put into these events. And then the whole time we're in communication with EOC and there's a without going a long time, we could probably I'll tell you and write a book about these things. But this is, it's so much more involved in these storms than what we can tell you in this short period of time. So we do appreciate all the support from the council and the mayor, and we appreciate everything. And we appreciate the patience that the community will have with us as we clean this up. Thank you. Mr. Mayor, your team was ready to go. They great, great prep work. And the personal touch and childcare and helping care for our employees Along with the community and that cleanup of trees was impressive. So Thank you Appreciate your Thanks, Jan and then last but not least I'd like for Steve Beckman to a given assessment of what kind of damage we observe. Good morning. Good morning Mayor Council Steve Beckman, Director of Building Services. So as was mentioned already earlier, one of the key parts is preparation for an event like this. On Sunday, October 6th, we made the decision that we were going to cancel all the inspections for Monday and Tuesday, and then we set our sights on getting the team to go around to all the active construction sites and make sure that they're in compliance with Chapter 16291, Section P is the ordinance that gives direction on how to address the sites. We posted the notice on the website, and then we also sent on email blast to all the contractors that this named storm was potentially you know could impact our city. The construction ordinance section I referred to it spells out a few things like materials on site, contents, weather stored, dumpsters, roofing materials, port of parties, things like that. Obviously, loose debris and materials in a construction site when we have a stormy event, wind or flood can pose a risk to neighboring structures. So it's important that we get out there and get everybody prepping. And the prep that the community did was was very good. I mean, I think a lot was just cleaned up after Helene. So, you know, there wasn't a lot that was put back on the sites, but what was out we were able to get in order and the contractors and owners did very well. So all the, as I said, all the inspections were canceled until further notice. All of our inspectors psyched compliance. Guys, for two days, patrolled all these sites and made sure we had those set. We got our crisis track teams and zones checked and devices all charged ready to go and started to consider what would our post storm guidance look like. So speaking of post storm, the response. So all the department staff that could make it in safely on Thursday was asked to do so. We put the teams of two, one driver and then one person, you know, make the assessments and record information. The city was divided into zones and the teams assigned each their own zones. All the affected areas, both residential and commercial, were assessed with a windshield assessment. The preliminary assessment is the first step. The main goal of this is to really just see how much the storm has impacted us, what level of damage and that's used to determine whether or not we reached a threshold for getting assistance and aid in becoming a disaster. So, but it gives us a quick glance at how things look, but it's not the most accurate. So, but the first step is to go through, see what we see and record it. And then after that, a secondary assessment is preferred to do, which we did. On Thursday, we pretty much got through all of the areas with the initial windshield assessment. We had a couple areas to do Friday morning. Two teams worked on those while five teams went back out to the areas we were at before to see if we can gather more information also to provide some outreach and communication with the community. So staff were given two documents, one list of contact numbers, emergency numbers, assistance numbers, and then a FEMA flyer for information to hand out and just provide answers to any questions that they may have. On Sunday, we had three teams that were out as well. And during this time, we were out besides doing what I just mentioned. We also informed and kept people aware of that pressure washing and cleaning of silt mud trying to keep it out of the storm system was very important not to do the pressure washing now to not add that into a system that we're trying to clean up. So since then we've pretty much done establishing our permitting guidance that we're working on getting on the website today. We've seen, for the most part, similar number of properties as with Hilling. I think there was a little bit more as far as the amount of water that we had in some structures versus others. Again, it's still kind of a hard thing to determine without getting into structures. We did get into some where we saw 18, 12, 16 inch water lines on the outside and could have been two or three inches inside. Could have been six. Whether it's one to six inches or 12 inches, water's extremely damaging. So, you know, we are gonna see a lot of the construction debris, flooring, trim, you know we are going to see a lot of the construction debris flooring trim you know some drywall things like that coming out. Mostly on the minor side we I don't have the exact numbers we're still compiling those as like I said we had teams out Saturday and Sunday some of them that we assessed as minor got changed to major and vice versa once we saw some more of the insides so but we but we will have that information together shortly. And we are focused right now on still communicating some important information out to permit holders that have permits, what to do if you have damage, what revisions are required and why. And we're hoping that our inspections are going to resume starting again tomorrow. That's what I have. Thank you. Thank you for making sure those instructions are safe. And you do not have to do them on your own. And but as Tommy Tucker would say, and you would say, we got this and you did. So thank you. Well, again, as everyone said, it's been a tremendous team effort. The troops all came in rallied and worked hard and we're out there giving it all to have. Thank you. Thank you. Great. Thanks Steve. Mary Councilor we're happy to answer any questions that you might have. Really this is really just meant to be kind of a high level, a timely update. Still have a lot of work ahead of us and we're requesting that folks moving around in the community be careful. Watch for our employees and our contractors who are going to be out in the streets trying to get this community back into tiptop shape here very soon. So with that any questions you might have we're ready to stand ready to answer any any of them. I want to thank you Mr. Boudre-Schwar two major hurricanes and everything in between excellent work thank you so much for managing your teams. It's a lot. I don't really understand the orchestration that happens, but you have great, great teams. I'd be remiss in not recognizing Monique for her communications and Mrs. Rambosk and Mr. McConnell for being available and Mr. Young and and modico. So there are many people behind the scenes and I just really thank everyone for caring about this community. I'll take, I have councilwoman Petrinov. Just a couple of quick questions and comments and I wanted to thank you for running such a smooth ship during this hurricane, back to back hurricanes actually. One is on the FPNL side, there was quite a few linemen all over the place, a parked, and it was kind of confusing to residents. It would be helpful, I think, to make another email saying that it takes multiple steps to get it powered. Because the alignment on the streets were leaving the impression that very soon they would be powered. And once they were talked to, it was often 24 hours or up to 48 hours before people got power. So I think that would be very helpful. They came from all over. We actually had five on our street from California and from Indiana. And all of a sudden, we got an inundation or I got an inundation of calls saying, they're on the street. How many more minutes until we get it? And I can sympathize because we were out of power as well. So that would be like an ad. I would, the other would be a communication to the residents on who they should call or what telephone number that they should call. If they have in front of their home a clogged storm drain, how do they notify the city or do they notify the city at all? You did provide that? Okay. All right. I guess I missed that memo. The second is having a policy for the community at large for where to park cars because that did surface where in the buildings, hey, where can I park my car used to park in the parking garage? And I'd like to shout out for the HOA presidents of their condo complexes. Many of them did put a policy in place to say, if you're at the beach, you need to find a place to be a car. And I think that really worked. But it wasn't 100% compliant and I did receive a lot of calls. Where am I going to park my car? I'm afraid it's going to get flooded. Another piece is plantings and there were quite a few questions that started occurring yesterday and you probably saw a lot of browning of our bushes and our trees. And they were residents at large wondering what can they do about this? Can they save it? Can they squirt it down with water to get rid of the salt water or is it just wind damage? And what did cause some of this, the death of a lot of these plants, or is it just a short term thing, or should they be looking at ripping everything out? Let's see, on some of the, some of the swales, et cetera, that, you know, we're talking about on Gordon Drive, they have to repat plant the grass. I'm wondering, you know, if we should look at planting a different material, if it all possible, to like a sea grass, something that is where we know we're going to get saltwater on a regular basis, so that we are not constantly replanting. I know we're on the south end of Gordon Drive, and it looks like our little private street is going to have $50,000 worth of damage all because we don't think we planted salt tolerant plants and they were inundated. Let's see. The other item was on the emergency shelters that are to be used as a last resort. Just a clarification that it's the county that opens those and runs those, is that correct? And have we ever looked at having the city do it? Would it be, we would not want to do that because there were, yeah, we're in the evacuation zone. So we can't have shelters in an evacuation zone in the city. Well not completely in an evacuation zone. Well, not completely in an evacuation zone. We are. A and B was the entire city. A and B was the one, but B is usually not. There's usually not. And people were just wondering why do they have to travel so far out. But if we can't, we should just communicate that it's the county that does that. And the county has used Naples High in the past when it's not an evacuation zone. Oh, okay. So there was past precedence of a bean at the Naples High School. Yes. Until folks are going to get trapped there and then we don't do that. Yeah. Okay. All right. And then let's see. Other items were. Let's see. I wanted to shout out to Exfinity as well. They, I had a contact there that did a tremendous job for a person. It sounds like there is a list that Exfinity has of critical people to have up for critical, you know, wires to have up because this particular gentleman was a radiologist and deals with a lot of rural hospitals and he has to read those and he was out of power and within 10 minutes they had Xfinity had him up and running which was really shocking and you know it was really pleased at the response. And let's see I think that is it. Oh the lake on the lakeside. If we can just have something in writing on how we lower lakes or what our policy is for lowering lakes. I think that would be helpful. We can put a lot of guardrails around it to leave judgment. But I think that would be helpful once we get the backflow valves installed. It would be helpful as people watch the water rising from their condos and from their homes. So thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman Petra Nauf. Wait, I had one more question. And it came from the Miracle Mile community. Along the canyon of four seasons, on Gulf Shore Boulevard, on the northern side, there was, there is water and it's bubbling and from two days ago to yesterday, it looked like it rose six inches. I know because I drove through it. And I'm just wondering, did we, you know, what is the source of that water? And they have an underground parking area. What are their procedures for dewatering during one of these events? I would imagine it was inundated with water, not sure. But how do we pump it out of there safely and environmentally responsibly? That's a follow-up question. Yeah, these are all great questions, but we'll be here all day. If you wanted us to address them all, some of them are things that we're working on. Others are things that we've. I would like that and I would like that policy, just to understand it for the community. And why the water was sitting there and seemed to have been rising. Because it was a concern for people trying to go south out of there. Sure. Yeah, but you know, I'll just say that that entire area is where this outfall project is going in. A lot of outfall pipes that are clogged with sand. The water has nowhere to go. And that's going to be if you remember during Ian, we had to clean out these pipes over and over again until we got them clear. So the community should expect residual effects for days after this storm. This thing just passed through a couple days ago and we've made significant progress. But these sorts of things that you're going to see in the field, this is very normal as we clean up. So I want to make sure everyone understands that still a lot of work ahead of us, especially with the storm water system. And this looks a little worse than normal. Yeah. Yeah. Thank you. And also add that dewatering the new hotel because it was a lake itself Because they didn't have the pump running. And how that, we really need to look at how to do what it looks like. And here's the thing folks. Well we have heavy rain and surge moving in. Water is being pumped into our storm system. It has nowhere to go. It's going to fill up. It's going to purge this. And then it's going to recede and then the sites are going to get cleaned up. But during this storm, this is going to happen. Yeah. It just is. And by the way, Councilwoman Petronoff, if you have the Expinity contact, could you tell them I need some internet? Vice Mayor. Yeah, so I made a lot of notes and I don't need any response to this at this meeting, but when you look back on this video or the record of this, then please consider responses to this. So first is we focus on FPNL when it comes to power. However, for those locations that have TECICO gas, that gas is running generators. My ask is to reach out and let's get a little bit granular with TICO on their communication protocol. I have numerous individuals that had visits by Tico personnel replacing meters and other gas related equipment because they came in contact with saltwater and then they turned off the gas. Well that gas was running generators which was then running freezers and refrigerators and things like that. So we need to really understand how they communicate and let's make sure that that communication is in the best interest of our residents for the fire department. We know that fire station one is built and we cannot improve the elevation. However, what can we do to ensure that or improve the the probability of flooding? And then whatever it is that we did on fire station one when we built it. Let's make sure that in terms of resiliency, if we build another fire station, let's make it so it doesn't flood. So please get those notes internal and let's make it happen at the right time. For police observations related to your facility resiliency needs. Now's the time to get those notes. Also, because you're counted on a lot for response in areas that have saltwater flooding, what challenges on our equipment, our vehicles do we have. You mentioned EOC-XS. I remember I think it was E and I had to come down here in an airboat. So just we can't have everybody our top management people stranded at the emergency operations center. So let's make sure they can get out and do what they need to do. For the city manager, parking garage management, I visited the parking garages after the vehicles were all parked and it was a mess. Not your fault. We didn't invite them. Let's don't invite people to the garages. But I can tell you this I drove up in there. I could barely get out because they're parking in areas that are not meant to be parked. So how do we effectively communicate that? Below grade parking garages. We've got some of those. There was a little bit discussion on this. I saw below grade parking garages with floodgates installed. And then I saw some with no floodgates. So can we improve our code? What are the best practices on these parking garages? Bob Middleton in streets, you talked about those sand practices, you learned about stacking that sand and letting it dry. Please make sure we incorporate into our menu and library of communications to the public that this is going to happen, that it's going to add days to the process, but we have to allow sand to dry. We also have to, there's a process with stormwater drains and the impact on that. Street best practices. We have, we're finding that some streets always flood in certain areas. And Gulf Shore Boulevard, Bob mentioned that the Beach Outfall impact, and maybe the City Manager said this is going to improve those streets. Well, there's a lot of other streets that won't be improved by the Beach Outfall project. Please make notes of that. When we start talking about resiliency city manager, let's make sure that FDOT and our own city knows where the order of priority is if we intend to improve elevations of streets so that we can get people to where they need to be. It's a safety issue. Mr. Beckman, you talked about your communication to contractors, dumpsters are really like battering boats during floods. They float. I've seen it. Please just look at your communications. I'm sure it's in there. But the plugs in those dumpsters, do we get as granular as telling them to remove the plugs or retain the plugs? Cranes, we have numerous cranes around the community. What's the wind speed rating? And what's the protocol on communications on that, if anything? And then we all remember surfside on the other coast that building collapse. What do we do to address void spaces when we've had storm surge and flooding? Who is responsible? Or do we just carry on like we never had We have a lot of things to do with the public. We have a lot of things to do with the public. We have a lot of things to do with the public. We have a lot of things to do with the public. We have a lot of things to do with the public. We have a lot of things to do with the public. We have a lot of things to do with the public. Thank you Mayor. Just two things that I wanted to raise and I had some offline conversations late in the week with Bob and Chad on both of them. And Mr. Boussour, I'm sure you're very focused on what I'm about to raise as well. And this is looking ahead to the future. But we've had five hurricanes in 24 months, five storms in 24 months. And going back to the first one, Ian, two years ago, out of that came two major initiatives that we had to begin. One was the rebuilding of our beach ends and the other is beach reneurishment. And what we've seen now, just because of mother nature is with each storm progress on both becomes impacted by each succeeding storm in particular the last couple that have come. So recently starting with Debbie and then Haleen and now Milton. And in my view anyway, we were just about ready to go to contract on the Beach Rebuild projects. And I think we ought to take a step back and think rethink exactly what we want to do there because does it really make sense with what I said 40 or 42 beach ends to be investing as much money as we are in each of them in terms of for a beach furniture and other physical infrastructure that then just gets washed away time after time or damaged and need to be replaced. I don't know the answer to it, I'm just raising the question. Or does it make more sense to have more, shall we call them, old Florida natural beach ends that allows you to get to the beach, park and get to the beach or Parking get to the beach or walking get to the beach. And then have a handful like eighth Avenue South of park like beach ends that are more more involved greater investment and play a different kind of a special role. These are questions but I raise it because as I understand it we were about ready to go into contract with the plan that had been developed prior to these recent hurricanes. Does it still make sense? And then secondly on the beach reneurishment which is something that we're not in the lead in. The county is, you know, just again, we never got to the re-vegitation for me in. We never got to it. And the emergency berms that were built are, I think, largely gone, largely, if not entirely gone. So, again, at some point, in the future, to have a further conversation with appropriate people about where should we go with respect to future nourishment, building backup berms and dunes, and whatever else goes into that. So to me those are two big topics that we should take a look at in the near term and staff can get back to us with their thoughts and recommendations. Thank you. I had someone say stop beach reneurishment. I'm tired of it being in my lawn. So very good points. Thank you. I have council member Barton. Along the same line, actually, it was where my comments as well, then reference to the burns and beach reneurishment. Maybe we need to do some more in depth. Education on what can be done in reference to the berms and protecting our sand, because right now we're finding it in our streets after every storm. Specifically, someone had told me that Barefoot Beach is taking on a project where they are actually building from what I can understand of enormous burns and there's some type of structure underneath fabric or something to that effect and again, I know it was very very little other than that I was told it was being done. I'm curious as to whether they did the research necessary to make to know that that's a viable option if it is maybe it's something that we need to consider. And again, obviously this is not questions to be answered today but I would certainly think it it warrants in his further discussion and education to see if there's something that we can do from a standpoint of building. I don't I'm going to hesitate using word structure, but building something more solid there that's going to prevent us finding our beaches on our streets and hopefully ideally improve the cleanup and also provide safety to our residents and our residents' property. So I would, I would embrace that, that project from a standpoint of resiliency to see if we can delve into that and if there's something that does make sense from a standpoint of building something more significant from a berm standpoint. Thank you. I think Dr. Halcson would agree with you because she wanted to do something like that putting the concrete so that those plantings could. So we might have that opportunity now. Thank you. I have Council Member Peneman. Well, thank you, Council. I think you must have been channeling me at my last CAC meeting because I walked in and said exactly the same thing that we could, you know, be spent a million, two million dollars every year and the sand is laid on the beach and then it leaves. So the CACS is taking a look at that. So anything that you want to throw our way would be absolutely terrific. We're hopefully we're going to start looking at ways of holding that sand on the beach. Otherwise it's a fee. And I just want to thank everyone for your dedication to this city. And wonder city manager, if there's anything that you need. Do we have enough, for instance, high-profile vehicles so that we can get people around? I think it would be worth it for us to know what exactly if there are needs and what are they so that we can start working on that a little bit. And you know, I frankly counsel, I think at the end of the day, the end of the season, these people deserve a little bonus. So maybe we could talk about that at some point in time. But anyway, thank you all very, very much. We cleaned up very quickly and I was stunned to be perfectly honest with you. So, frankly, many thanks. Thank you. I think they could use a day off. Councilmember Kramer. Thank you. And real quick, Ray, to your point with the replanings, I remember just a few weeks ago, the TDC, I mean, it took two years for that money to come from the state and federal level to get it supposed to start like I think October. So the wheels just moved so slowly, that's a tough proposition. Chief to your point, chief demean, is that guy in the Tesla in the Salt Water Flood, that could be, I don't know if it is, but it could be a case of natural selection and survival of the fittest and full effect. I want to say something else impressive and a lot impressive. And I also think we take a lot for granted in the city of Naples. Everybody lives here, takes a lot for granted in the city of Naples. Everybody lives here takes a lot for granted. I was up in the, we have a, my in-laws have a place up near Asheville, not from Asheville for 50 years. And I was there, I left Monday before Helene hit there. And then after the fact, friends from East Tennessee, college roommates that married each other, my wife's and mine came and stayed with us. And I can tell you, what we see here, it doesn't happen there. Like I said, it's neighbors helping neighbors. It's every man for himself. I think we need to temper expectations a little bit on, it's really not our responsibility in the city to see where your car gets parked. Just for their record. Or what kind of plantings you have. Like you've planted, if you didn't plant salt, grass, it resists salt water, that's not on the city. And for those who are new people, guess what? It's amazing how quickly all the leads are going to fall. And some of the trees will live, the vast majority, and some of them won't. And that's what happens during storms. So it longer you live here the more that you're going to see that's how this works. And I don't know if you need to call council people and talk about your shrubs. Just saying. Before the storm hit and we had all those days of rain, it was amazing to see our crews out in that I mean downours, clean and drains. I was driving around like most of the council, seeing who we could help and trying to get some feedback. And just kudos to our people on the ground. I stopped and said thank you. I was just like, you guys, and it's just, and they're like, I'm an idiot. And I probably am, because I with just the level of effort. Talk about FPL of time and patience. If you've been around here, we were out without power for weeks in the past. Weeks. And people are fussy. When the lineman said it's going to be on quickly, that means less than when the line, when the line, when the line, when the line, when the line, when the line, when the line, when the line, when the line, when the line, when the line, when the line, when the line, when the line, when the line, when the line, when the line, when the line, when the line, Carolina, they were there on their way there and had to come back to get staged here. I mean, there's a lot involved and it's more than just me and mine. And I'm not fussing. I'm just trying to give the number one source of stress for humans is unmet expectations. If your wife said she's going to call and she doesn't, you're frustrated. Well if your expectations are that every your life's going to be undisturbed, it's going to be on your timeline during or after a storm, you're going to be disappointed. Or very fortunate and blessed, one of the two. I also have to say, and this is for me, first, along with Council, preparations for things like this does not happen in a vacuum. It's ongoing, it's year-round, it's constant. That's just one more item that's not on our list of down to 16 or whatever that is on the plates of all of our staff. And they performed immaculately in this. But it's not a one-off, it's constant. And there's time to tasks, and we need to keep an account, the time to tasks, because everything that was on their plate in the last week, and then, Haleem, before that, that got pushed back a week. Everything else got pushed back another week, minimally. And so, before we start adding to their plates, let's just bear in mind what's just been pushed back on to their plates. It's just piling up right now. So we need to be aware of that. Because businesses in the city are still going, the everyday, the day to day. I also want to say, and I'm coming from an education background. We have a group of high achievers on this staff and that work for this city. Monique, it's unbelievable. The amount of information you put out, bless you. And it's not a template. There's, you have to be curated and distilled and then put linear and logical. And then also there's a presentation part too, the editing part of it, the mechanics of it. How big is Monique's staff? One. One. And I can tell you in the Asheville area I think it's Monique's staff, one, one. And I can tell you in the Asheville area and all of that that happened, there's not a Monique. So we need to have Attitude, a Gratitude about that. And then, again, we don't just have high achievers, but we also have efficient high achievers. We get this deal where every kid wants more time for the test, for all the standardized testing. So they'll work at any angle they can, but they have whatever difficulty with testing. They have it, whatever I have anxiety, whatever they can do to extend their testing time to improve their results. Well, we don't just have high achievers, we have efficient high achievers. In real life during the storm, you don't get extended time. You don't get to call that shot. And our people did it in such an efficient manager. It's just amazing to me. They didn't have have paralysis by analysis. They didn't make perfection their enemy. They moved forward. It was amazing to me how efficient and quickly and everything getting pumped out simultaneously. And again, that has not happened in a vacuum. And I, for one, this is the best, a bunch of us lived here a long time. This is the best we've come through, something like this. And I know it's gonna take time to get all of it sanded out, and as it being pulled out, more is running in to our stormwater system, but our group that is not satisfied and believes in continuous improvement and excellence and just comes to working grinds every day. I'm just, it's not that way everywhere and so for all of us, we have an attitude of gratitude and we're grateful for all of you. Thanks and yes, a day off for whatever. Thanks. Thank you. I think it's very insightful when you can actually cram or see it from the inside. Really what a great operation, what commitment we have. helpful when you can actually cram or see it from the inside. Really what a great operation, what commitment we have. So great work. Thank you, team. And Mr. Buddha-Schwar, that concludes our update. And thank you. Very, very needed. So thank you all for being here. We'll go moving to item 4B, Mrs. Rambasque. Good morning, Mayor and members of Council, Patricia Rambas City Clerk. The City Council has two interviews this morning and I'd like to thank Jennifer Cassidy and Jerome Fonds for sitting with us during our hurricane update. So the first is the Collier County Contractors Licensing Board. It's a nine member board. The City Council recommends two city residents to that board. And with how to vacancy since Patrick White resigned on April 21st of 2023. And we do have an applicant, Jennifer Cassidy. And I'd like to invite Ms. Cassidy up to the desk over here. And just to remind you, there you go. Thank you, Mrs. Ranbauskin. Good morning. Thank you for applying for the Contractors Licensing Board. I'm what made you interested in this particular board? Experience. In dealing with contractors on a personal level. I husband and I moved to Florida about or moved to Naples a little over four years ago. And we've had experience with contractors in other states. And then we've had experience with a builder here and a contractor here in Florida, both very good experiences. But I would say our experience, we lived in California before moving here. It was not a good experience and so I know from dealing with a bad contractor and having to fire a contractor, it's very important to find someone good. Thank you and I interrupted you. Can you just state your name for the record? Jennifer Cassidy. Thank you. Council, any questions for Miss Cassidy? Oh, just thank you for applying. Your qualifications are absolutely excellent. And for having been here for such a short time to jump in and apply is lottable. Oh, no. Yeah, I, you know, I think having gone through the experience of hiring a contractor, then having to proceed to fire the contractor, take on the project ourselves to get it finished. To do any type of work to a home now is a big investment. It can be very time consuming and very stressful and the contractor is the most important part of it. So that's why I see the value when it comes back at some point in time and tell us what truth learned. Oh yeah. It's important to do the background, you know, to know who you're hiring, to check their references, to, you know, that's very important. And, you know, also understanding, you know, the process of when you take on a project, you know, the permit process, what's required, you know, understanding all of that, not expecting, you know, just a contractor to take care of all of that, making sure that you're there and on site and following the project and all of that. So, you know, there's a lot to do it when you take it on. I don't think people always understand it. So, all right. Thank you for applying. Vice mayor. Thank you. Was it last name Cassidy? Yes. I miss Cassidy. Thank you for your engagement and interest in serving in this capacity. Have you been able to, what has been, let me put it this way, what's been your level of engagement with the contractor licensing board thus far? I haven't had any engagement with the license. Have you been to any meetings? No. Have you watched them at all? I watched them after I'd applied Jessica had mentioned it. Do you have any thoughts about what you might improve or something that you could bring to the board that they need? I think just from my experience and knowing as a resident and not, you know, as just an individual and just the process of dealing with the contractor and knowing, I think it's the element of, you know, honesty, you know, that the contractor has and with communicating with the individuals, the residents, or whoever you are. I think that was important to me in knowing the level of detail that they're communicating to. It's important. Well, again, thank you for your interest. Thank you, Madam Mayor. Thank you. It's volunteers like yourself that make us a better place. So we really appreciate your application and your willingness to serve. I think. We'll make those a better place. So we really appreciate your application and your willingness to serve. We'll make those decisions on Wednesday. Okay, great. Thank you. And thank you for being with us this morning. Oh, it was very good to listen to. I appreciate it. I appreciate it. I appreciate the efforts to not have the sand in the streets. They did a great job though. Thank you. The council's next interview is with Jerome Fonds for the Board of Trustees of the police officers retirement trust fund. Mr. Fonds, term ends November 1st. He has served two consecutive two year terms and he is eligible to serve and be reappointed. Thank you, good morning, Mr. Fonds. Mr. Fonds is my neighbor, and I think I see him more here and on TV than I do in the neighborhood. So, and I'll just say how amazing that we actually got electric for the first time. We usually have three weeks and we were one of the first ones to get electric, which I was surprised by. I didn't know we lost it. We left town. And I just got our, um, century link, our fiber just went on just while I was sitting here. So, so I didn't think that was going to happen. So, so we got internet. So we're, we're golden. Good morning and thank you for being here and if you'll just state your name for the record please. Hi, my name is Jerome Fonds. Anything you want to share with us? No, it's been very interesting being on the pension board. I've learned a lot. There's some really good people on the board which helps a lot because I think in the past there have been some questionable decisions made and I think we've been working to sort of write the ship if you will. But I think we're in good position financially and long as the city can stay solvent and healthy I think we're I think the pensions will be fine. Great. Questions? Council member Cramer. It's been a privilege for the short time that I've served on the pension board to I will vouch for him. He doesn't have, I try not to talk at all. And Mr. Fonds does not pontificate, but what he says is meaningful and insightful and concise. And like you said, there's a bunch of smart people on that thing. Capable smart folks right now. So we're fortunate in that regard. So thank you for wanting to read out. Thank you. And I'd count some member Barton. Yeah. Just echo the sentiment that I appreciate you being there. As the chair of that all I'm there to do is make sure we stay between the lines and get from point A to point Z and allow this more people to handle this and I appreciate you coming back and making a voluntary again and volunteering your services and your time. So thank you. Again, it is voluntary and it benefits us and it benefits our employees. So thank you very much for serving and we look forward to reappointing. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Thank you, Mayor and Council and the appointments will be on Wednesday. Okay. Thank you Mayor and Council and the appointments will be on Wednesday. Okay thank you. Okay Council that takes us to item five public comment. Madam Clerk, if you would like to speak in public comment registration forms are in the back and can be filled out given to the clerk. Do I have any public comment? I don't have any for this item mayor but I was informed that you have somebody who wanted to speak for 30 minutes. Yes, she actually we have that presentation. Yes, that's under public comments. The mayor's pre-approved an extended presentation from quite Collier. Yes. I believe it's the organization and we have a PowerPoint cut up for this presentation. Thank you. Sorry, I didn't realize it was going to be under public comments. So then we will move forward with our presentation. David has it up. If you'll come to the podium, please. Brought my water because I was going to talk in a lot. Thank you, thank you for being here with us today and providing the PowerPoint. And if you'll just state your name for the record please. Yes, my name is Mary Tatogen. I founded Quiet Florida in March of 2021. Can't believe it's almost four years coming up. Good morning, Mayor, City Council, Mr. Boudre-Schweier and Mr. McConnell. Thank you for the time that you've given me today to speak. Quiet Florida is a community organization working to preserve peace and quiet in our neighborhoods due to the incessant noise of modified mufflers and frequent low-loud aircraft. I am a co-chair of Quiet American Skies and a program chair for quiet streets, and I'm on the Scientific Advisory Board for quiet communities, which is a national organization, national nonprofit organization. The goal here today is to educate and bring awareness regarding the negative health impacts from noise pollution. The problem of increased aviation over our neighborhoods is not just a Naples problem. It's nationwide, actually worldwide. Many communities are being subjected to harm and community organizations have popped up all over the U.S. pushing local airports, legislation, and the FAA to make changes. Bear with me here. So today we're speaking local air quality and noise pollution. Noise hurts. Noise can damage more than just your ears through daytime stress and nighttime sleep disturbances. Loud sounds can hurt your heart and blood vessels, disrupt your endocrine system, and make it difficult to think and learn. What is noise? Noise is unwanted and or harmful sound. It disrupts our daily activities, sleep, and it's underrated as we cannot see, spell, or taste it. The World Health Organization states noise must be recognized as a major threat to human well-being. Noise is the new second-hand smoke. We all remember when we were told secondhand smoke did not affect our health. Well, they were wrong. It does. And the new definition, which has been accepted by the International Commission on Biological Effects of Noise at its 14th Congress in Belgrade, Serbia in June 2023 is unwanted noises, unwanted and or harmful sound. Noise is a public health hazard according to the American Public Health Association. Noise has many characteristics which can affect humans negatively. The Noise Control Act of 1972 declared, it is the policy of the United States to promote an environment for all Americans free from noise that jeopardize their health or welfare. We are asking you to help us. It's more than just decibels. It's more than 65 DNL, which the FAA would have us believe is acceptable. There's an energy to it, a frequency, the pattern, duration, tonality, that all affects us very differently than just the 65 DNL. A brief history. Noise, William, excuse me. In 1968, William H. Stewart, the surgeon general, stated that noise is a health hazard. That's in 1968, and here we are at 2024 still talking about it. One of the important points that he brought up is noise from aircraft and other sources causes physiological changes including cardiovascular, glandular and respiratory effects, reflective of a generalized stress reaction. The policy statements are from these five different groups, American Academy of Nursing, American Public Health Association, American Academy of Pediatrics, World Health Organization and the EPA. All have made their noted position in papers and publications that noise has detrimental effects to humans. There are community outreach, which I belong to a lot of groups across the U.S. There's many, the federal aviation administration has been encouraged by many organizations across America to make changes to their increased flight press, increased flight schools, and the amount of aircraft over their communities. Again, the World Health Organization, the highlighted portion here, the average aircraft noise exposure above 45 decibels is associated with adverse health effects. The FAA would have us believe that 65 DNL is satisfactory and that DNL is based on an average and we are a seasonal community. So at times that decibel reading goes up to over 100. The U.S. governmental accountability office, as you'll see by the chart here, the U.S. governmental accountability office provided commentary on the FAA's use of day, night, average, sound level. In other words, D&L metric for assessing aircraft. The GNOs, GAO's criticism is that the DNL metric does not accurately reflect real world experiences of communities by aircraft noise. Here are some of their key points. The community concerns are that the D. Al-Metric has led to community dissatisfaction and legal challenges. The GAO recommended that the FAA use additional noise metrics and improve communication with communities to better address noise concerns. The D. N. Al-L metric combines various components of noise into a single value which can obscure the actual noise levels experience by communities. For example, 100 quiet flights can yield the same DNL as one loud aircraft. It's outdated and insufficient to be used as the only metric to measure noise. There's some residents' enables in Naples as well as myself that had noise meters placed on their properties. I live approximately seven to eight miles away from the airport. Flights go from anywhere from 1100 feet to 5,000 feet over my home. The highest levels were 85 to 90 decibels over my home, and that's repetitively. That can be up to 100 times a day. I know there's also folks in old Naples that had noise meters in their homes, and they have a lot more flights, many more flights than I endure, well over 100. The World Health Organization states 45 decibels causes adverse health effects, yet we're allowing flights over our homes at 100 decibels. Something else I'd like to bring up is we have banned gas-powered leaf blowers. We have a state statute for modified vehicles loud exhaust. And we also have a state statute for plainly audible. So your car stereo is not that loud. We have all these in place. And our police force enforces that. Yet we still have flights over 100 decibels, sometimes 6, 700, 800 feet above people's homes. It's really hard to realize that that's actually happening. This is the Schultz curve that we, oh, sorry, go back to that one. I think we missed a, might have missed, hang on, I think we're missing a slide in there. Anyways, I wanted to talk about altrifying particles. Altrifying particles are a type of airborne particular matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than 100 nanometers. These come from the fuel exhaust of jets. These tiny particles can be particularly hazardous because their small size allows them to penetrate into our lungs and into our bloodstream causing inflammation and disease, which then eventually affects cardiovascular, including heart attacks, heart failure strokes, and results in hospital admissions. Vulnerable groups. The most vulnerable groups in our community with disabilities, veterans, children, seniors, deserve our protection and should not be harmed. These groups are particularly sensitive to noise. Naples has a large population of seniors, and we know there's 6,000 school children that go to school within a five mile radius of our airport. Our veterans with PTSD suffer greatly. I've personally received calls from family members stating that their vet is suffering from the low frequent loud aircraft over their homes. What happens to the human body when you have a aircraft event over your house? It causes stress. It causes a cognitive and emotional response and a release of hormones, almost like a fighter flight syndrome. Increases cardiac output, blood pressure, blood lipids, blood sugar, viscosity, coagulation, which eventually leads to hypertension, coronary heart disease, heart failure, rhythmia stroke, and psychological disturbances. Physical manifestations of noise. You can all read the slide here. I don't have to read that out for you. But changes in immune system, anxiety, hypertension, myocardial infarctions. These things are happening to people repeatedly and daily. It's every day. And I know in season it's more and we are a seasonal community. So it's been nice the last four months, it's been much more quieter, but we still experience this. And this can happen to us every single day. Children and those with autism spectrum disorders are especially affected. Noise has been shown to elevate blood pressure and children disrupt learning and contribute to developmental problems. Economics. Naples Airport talks about how much money they bring in or that they're self-sufficient, but there's a cost to noise pollution. It's estimated in the U.S. that reducing environmental noise by five decibels could save $3.9 billion annually in healthcare costs just related to hypertension and coronary heart disease alone. Noise can interfere with concentration, communication, overall cognition leading to a decreased work efficiency. Noise pollution can decrease property values by 0.4% to 1.1% per decibel increase in noise levels. Quality of life. We all want a quality of life. We deserve a quality of life. We do not have a quality of life when you have 100 to 150 jets flying over your home frequently, low and loud daily. Quality of life, the degree to which a person or group is healthy, comfortable, and able to enjoy the activities of daily living. And as you see, what does peace and quiet enable you to do? Lower your blood pressure, calmeracing thoughts, reduce cortisol levels. Cortisol levels is what causes inflation in our bodies and causes disease processes. I was going to play a frequent lounge at over someone's home at a very low level, but they said that we don't have sound. So, oh, and I guess that's it. I had one more thing to state regarding children and our vulnerable groups. A Cornell University environmental psychologist and his European colleagues concluded that excessive noise such as jet aircraft flying over your home Impairs children's reading ability and long-term memory concluded in a Study of school children living new airports. This is the first long-term study That's been completed With children before and after the airports were open and closed. It nails down that it's almost certain that noise is causing the differences in children's ability to learn and read. 55 decibels. Children living or going to school near airports or flight masks exposed to 55 decibels or more have lower math and reading scores. We have 6,000 school children going to school just in the vicinity of Naples airport. But this problem encompasses all of Naples. It's even the estates. I get complaints from people on Everglades Boulevard, if you can believe it, because they're in the same flight path as I am. Flight path 523, which is used 85% of the time. And they can hear these planes coming in very low. So when they do come in, they lower their flaps, and it sounds like an air raid. It's like a whistling metallic noise. Over Christmas vacation, we smelled jet fuel in our front yard. This cannot be healthy. And as a registered nurse of 30 years and a resident of Naples for 40 years, I implore you. Now is the time. This is the time that we make some changes. Whether we reduce the flight schools or whether we move them to a mockery, to a place not around people. I wouldn't say to move them near other neighborhoods. That's not fair. That's not what we're asking. But and decrease or change the, excuse me, lost my thought there. The flight, the itinerant jets, I'm sorry, cancel the leases or have them fly into Fort Myers. Just something to help us out. Quality of life, which we all desire, does not include low-flying aircraft creating noise up to 100 decibels and crop dusting us with altrifying particles daily. So I'll conclude that in conclusion the evidence-based scientific research provided to you today demonstrates how our community is being harmed daily. From the continual flow of low-flying aircraft over our heads we implore you to act now for the sake of our community. Thank you. Thank you for your presentation and thank you for taking the initiative and being an advocate. We, I think this council was very successful at being able to keep home rule and having the banning of gas blowers and we worked with the community and achieving that. So I think all things can be done. So can you just hear the founder of Quiet Florida? Who's on your board? Who's on the board? Well, we're going through a transitionary period and we might be merging with quiet communities. Quiet communities is the national organization I was speaking of that's based in massacres, but it's nationwide. So I am on their scientific advisory board and I do run their quiet streets program and I'm a co-chair for quite American skies. That's another shout out. I'd like to stress for quiet Florida. We've formed the Southwest Noise Task Force with Naples City Police, Sheriff Department, Commissioner Saunders, and Transportation Management. We are the Southwest Florida Noise Task Force working to quiet the loud exhausts and modified mufflers. So that's a shout out. For us that's our first achievement and we're very proud of that. But yeah, quiet communities has doctors, scientists, lawyers on their board and it would be in our best interest to fold into their group as they have a lot more outreach. And have you given this presentation to the county? No. I went to the county approximately two years ago to speak with them about the airport. We were speaking to them about noise in general. So whether it's aircraft noise or modified muffler noise, went to speak to them, they really did not want to hear about the airport. They weren't interested. So we focused more on the working with Commissioner Bert Saunders. He's the one that really was able to get me on their agenda. And after 10 or 12 presentations, the commissioners granted us to move forward and form this task force, which I'm very proud of, and start working towards quieting their streets. So the state statute that you referenced, that's for mufflers and for correct. We have a modified muffler statute 316.293 And there's other ones for the modified mufflers There's also a plainly audible statute for your car radio. So if a police officer can hear your car radio from 25 feet away. He's able to give you a ticket. Anything to quiet the noise? Thank you for that information. Thanks for your time. I appreciate your interest. Thank you. It's 10.25 or in need of a break. So we'll take a 10 minute break and then we'll come back and continue with item 6A. you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you Thank you. Okay, we're back from our break and continuing on with item 6A, Mr. Wuterschwar. Thank you, Mayor. This next item is, I guess what I would consider a preparatory discussion for your joint meeting on November 7th with the NAA. Attached to your packet or included in your packet is a memo from me that includes a list of tentative items that we've previously discussed for this workshop. So what I thought we could do today is just quickly review these items. So we are all on the same page in terms of expectations for the discussion. And then any feedback that you'd like to provide in terms of additional items or perhaps items that are on the tentative agenda that you may not wish to discuss. Of course, since this is a joint meeting, we will collaborate with the NAA to determine who is preparing the backup item. Most of these items on the memo that's on the screen in front of you will be prepared by the NAA. So mayor if you wouldn't mind I can go through this list quickly and then I'll just turn it over to you all to have your conversation and happy to answer any questions that you might have and then go from there. Thank you. Okay so the first item this is a request from the NAA, NAA to provide an update on the FAA Reauthorization Act. Their aviation attorney, Peter Kirsch, would be here to provide that overview for you and answer any questions that you might have. The next item is I think intended to be a bit more robust. It's kind of a general overview on an update on noise initiatives, including where they are at with the Part 150 study, where they are at with the redesign for flight procedures. And they want to talk about their fly safe, fly quiet leader board. The next item is the airport exploratory relocation study. This is the item that we had originally talked about having discussion today and then ultimately you all decided let's leave it for the joint meeting. So that presentation will be made at that meeting. And the next item would be related to the utilization plan, just an overview of what it is, how it is used, just to make sure that we're all on the same page relative to what the utilization plan is. Next item, and this is kind of the first item where we would work in conjunction with the NAA to prepare the backup. So this is the lease agreement discussion and what we will probably simply include in your backup is a copy of the lease agreement with a little bit of commentary from our staff. But a discussion regarding the lease agreement between the city and the NA. The next item is regarding federal grants, except in federal grants. And this would be something that the NA would have to present what is the current situation and how that all works and how that affects their budget. And then the last item we've talked about this before is an expansion of our interlocal agreement with the NAA for police services. And this is something that Chief Dominguez and his team is actively looking at what a good model would look like that is a win-win situation not only for the NA but also for the police department. So that's what we have on the tentative list here. Of course, there wasn't meant to be all inclusive and it is not meant to, I guess, mandate what items you talk about. So I'll stop there and turn it over to you, Mayor, and happy to take direction from you. Okay, thank you. Just want to have a few points of clarification on those items. And then I do have public comment. I'd like to go to public comment and then we can have a discussion based on these items and public comment. So the reauthorization overview, was there any indication how long that presentation would be? I don't recall that. Yeah, there wasn't any indication, but I would suspect that it's probably less than 15 minutes of a presentation. Be pretty quick. Okay. And the update on the noise initiatives. And I'd like to have that update, but I'd like to also, you know, kind of prioritize where it is in the agenda. The exploratory study, are we doing, are they doing a presentation? Or? Yeah, I think it's really kind of up to you all because they've seen the presentation. You all have a copy of the presentation. I think one of the things, well, I think I know that one of the things that the NA is looking for is what is council's position on this issue and you know perhaps you have a conversation today and you take a position on this issue perhaps you don't but it really is up to you how much you want to get into this at the joint meeting itself but they're prepared to make a presentation and have their consultant give the presentation if that's something that you want on the 7th. Okay. And where it says acceptance of federal grants, we also have FDOT grants that they receive so it should be both. And then, as you and I, that they receive so it should be both. And then as you and I discussed really setting the tone, and I'd like to set it up with how we've gone into a relationship with the NAA and a partnership in working together to address not just noise but also frequency and how we're going to go about that. So I'd like that time in the beginning to set that up and set the tone. It also goes in sync with the vision and the comp plan and our codes. I think that's very important. I'll try and weave and tie that in together. Something that probably because of the presentation today, whether that our of is 60 or 65 and our code is outdated or not and not just for the airport in general. It's been an issue for outdoor dining and entertainment so that might be something we need to discuss further. Also that what I think is missing here are the lease agreements and why they have them. As you and I talked with Mr. Rosanski and Mr. Rupert. Yes, which lease agreements, the one with the city or other. We specifically talked about the JSX because on our last meeting with them, we've only met twice. And why they chose to do an agreement. I think that understanding how these lease agreements and what's the benefits. And not just the utilization plan, but also the master plan. Right. And I want to go into details, but if it's okay with you, Council, I'm going to go into public comment, and then we'll go into individual council members. Okay. All right. Our first public speaker is Mary Young. Good morning. Good morning. Good morning. Madam Mayor and City Council members. My name is Mary Young and I am speaking today on behalf of the membership of the Old Naples Association. As you all know from the many times we have spoken about the airport at these meetings, we at ONA feel that the ever increasing volume of jet and propeller airplane operations at our local airport poses a huge health and safety risk for an increasing percentage of our city residents and our visitors. What was originally designed as a city asset has become a regional hub meeting the needs of a growing county population while ignoring the protections of our comp plan that calls for our city government to and I quote ensure that the airport is operated in the best entrance of the city end quote at the meeting on November 7th ONA will present a comprehensive presentation that will detail with fact-based evidence the growing noise, health, and safety concerns that our residents have identified. I think you will be shocked when you see the data. Just as a teaser, if you look at jet volume only in the last 15 years, you will see a staggering 300% increase, a 7-8% compound annual growth. When these kind of growth rates are projected out, it doesn't take long before you have a dangerous gridlock, excruciating noise pain on the ground, and an increased unacceptable risk of aviation accidents. And this, of course, is only part of the noise, volume, and safety story. We will have more data to share with you on November 7th. After framing the problem, we will respectfully suggest several actions for Council to consider that may help regain local control of the airport and right-size operations which can produce meaningful, noise reduction and safety improvements. If we all work together, we are convinced we can return the asset to its original intended mission to support the needs of the city of Naples residents. Something must be done and the time to act is now. We are frustrated to observe recent actions by NAA that only make our volume and safety challenges worse, including the negotiation of a contract with the quasi-commercial carrier JSX without any review by Naples City Council. These actions by NAA are concerning, and we believe are not in the best interest of city residents. We are encouraged to see that City Council has taken the initiative to plan for a joint meeting with the NAA, and ask that you think about an agenda that spends less time on reporting on topics like the Part 150 study, and the FlySafe Fly Quiet Leader Board. These programs have little effect on volume. the Part 150 study and the fly-safe fly-quiet leaderboard, these programs have little effect on volume. And more time on figuring out how we get aligned with NAA on our philosophy and operation of the airport. As always, we appreciate your service and commitment in solving this serious problem that affects so many of our residents. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker is Eileen Lowry. Good morning. Good morning, everyone. My name is Eileen Lowry. I live on West Lake Drive and Old Naples. Many of us are affected by Drive and Old Naples. Many of us are affected by the noise at Naples Airport. Have heard others say, you should have known about the noise when you bought your house. I'd like to take this opportunity to refute that statement. I along with many of my neighbors have been coming to Old Naples for over 20 years. When we first moved to our neighborhood, very few jets flew overhead. As a matter of fact, according to the 1997 Part 150 study, flight paths didn't include the 270 departure path down Fifth Avenue that were under today, and it is heavily used today. Lots of other things have changed in the past 20 years. Fractional airlines were virtually unheard of back then, yet today, charters and fractional make up a substantial percentage of the jet flights. In 2010, the decision to extend runway 523 was passed by one city council vote, and jet operations almost doubled in the decade to follow. Then came COVID, and jet operations almost doubled in the decade to follow. Then came COVID and jet operations increased 60%. How could we have anticipated any of that? We also didn't know flights would be flying over our homes at altitudes below a thousand feet. I have an example of one here that flew at 600 feet over Canberra Park during the annual art show when thousands were present. We also didn't know we'd be subjected to noise that exceeded the city ordinance of 60 decibels. Old Naples isn't located anywhere near the airport's DNL 60 noise contour, which is the metric the FAA uses to define who is affected by noise. Yet, according to the airport's noise monitor that was at my house earlier this year, we're being subjected to noise levels as high as 84 decibels. One day I had 84 noise events between 65 and 84 decibels. We also didn't know back then that noise could be detrimental to our health as Mary Tadogen just presented. The most important message to take away is that noise is detrimental to our health whether you know it or not. There are 4,500 city residents under the flight path. That's 25% of the population that are affected by noise. We're not asking you to support moving the airport in the next 20 years. What we're asking you to do is take action to put us on a path to local control, to enforce the noise ordinance, to not extend the lease, to have the same concern and compassion for the resident's health that you demonstrated when gas powered leaf blowers were banned, when you prevented a pickable court from being built, when you discussed the level of noise a resident next to the Port Royal Club could endure before consequences. And when you learned about the health implications of fluoride in the city water, a group of residents has been speaking with aviation attorneys to understand what options are possible. There's a shared belief that the city is the proprietor and has the authority to take the actions I just laid out. We're asking you to put the residents health first as you have done on the other issues that have come before you. Now is the time for the city to act. Thank you. Thank you. Now is the time for the City to act. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker is Maria Mayor. Good morning, everybody. Maria Mayor, resident at Bayfront Place. Looking at the proposed topics today, I'm struck by the lack of discussion on immediate and near-term actions to address the airport's impact on our community. Specifically, this seems to be little focus on how to manage the current volume of our traffic, rather than just the future. I'd like to suggest the following and top questions and or topics for consideration at the joint meeting. What is different on the agenda from previous meetings, because we've been through this many times now? What new topics will be discussed that weren't addressed before? What concrete actions will be taken to make a meaningful difference? And, more importantly, what will you do to improve the quality of life for the residents who have been directly affected by the airport? As has been mentioned, over 25% of your constituents are negatively impacted by the noise and yet traffic generated by the airport. What steps are you taking to improve that situation for them? This is not just about distant plans for 10, 20 or 30 years from now. It's about addressing the challenges we are facing right now. The daily quality of life for residents has been affected by the volume of air traffic and this needs immediate attention. While long-term plans are important, what has been done during your tenure to make a difference? A real difference. One suggestion is to focus on reducing the volume of air traffic now. Reducing the current volume would directly decrease the noise and mitigate health concerns for residents. Increased volume makes increased noise. It's a fact. The airport is a municipal asset owned and operated by the city. Despite the name change, it remains a municipal airport, and you, as City Council, have the authority to make decisions that can impact its operation. One of the things you could discuss is what you can do to reduce the number of flights, i.e., it was mentioned about rejecting grants, changing prices, services, contracts. Yes, it's a difficult and contentious issue, but so many residents have suffered, so something must change. Perhaps you could consider limiting the operations of quasi-commercial airlines or relocating the flight school to another location to reduce the frequency of departures and landings over residential areas. These are actionable discussion points that could provide immediate relief to the community as well as long-term benefit. Additionally, which was mentioned by Eileen just speaking now, I'd like to address that common myth that's been brought up time and time again, the idea that residents knew what they were buying into when they chose to live here. It's simply not true for many of us who have lived here for years. When I bought my home in 2013, the frequency of flights and jets, especially during peak season, was nowhere near what it is today. I didn't have to stop speaking to people every 20 minutes because of the noise, nor did I have to pause my conversation while dining outdoors over and over again at local restaurants. The volume of traffic was simply not the same. I think Councillor Kramer will know this from his sister living at Bayfront. The noise level, which is over 80 decibels at Bayfront is intolerable when it's continuously happening and you have to stop conversation. And I'd also say that at my particular residence, it's over 80 decibels as they fly overhead. For this reason, I urge you to expand your discussions to include not only long-term and medium-term solutions, but also short-term actions that could provide relief to residents who are struggling today. Thank you. Thank you. That concludes our public comment. Now, council, I was on the council when we had the big change from a municipal airport to an international airport. And we're in these chambers till 11 o'clock at night. It was very controversial. There were thousands of signatures asking that we come up with solutions and not to increase the flights. Prior to that there was that started, I'll get the dates, but started way before that. Not adversaries, but partners of local control and supporting the airport, but also making sure that, as it does say within our code and comp plan, that it is a benefit to our community and the residents. So I really want us to set this tone and we can set this tone that it's not them against us. We really need to work together to find solutions and that's really where Mr. Boudichwar and I and Mr. Rosanski and the current chairman have tried to come in a place. We went to DC together to see our state, I mean our federal representatives and state representative and we're on a good start, but we have to work really hard together. And we're a new team as a council and I just ask that we make sure that we set that tone of finding solutions and not creating a them against us atmosphere. So with that, anyone want to start on the agenda and what they would like to see as Council Member Christmas? Well, I made an assumption that the topics listed here had been worked through based on the meetings that you, Mayor and Mr. Buddha Shorad, with Mr. Rupert and Mr. Rosansky, and I think they are good topics. I have two additions to suggest. One, the first really relates to the last bullet point, but goes beyond that. It's that I think we should have a discussion regarding how we might go forward. I think this is on the city side of carrying out an updated analysis and study of all city services that are rendered to the airport, not just police, and how they should be monetized in 2024 dollars and what that translates into in aggregate in terms of an alloo in loop payment from the airport to the city so that we have a full and updated consideration of that that looks at every facet of city government from the standpoint of not just police, not just fire but an emergency services but other services relating to utilities or other staff work that goes on with respect to the airport. report and I know this has been done commonly in other communities and it's it's there's I think Mr. Young in his department could do this and carry this out and there are templates available out there or models for doing it. The second thing I wanted to add is a discussion of R, and I emphasize R, O, U, R, meaning the airport and the city lobbying strategy. I think our approach, again, collectively, I'm not pointing fingers at either, that anyone, is needs to be reviewed and reconsidered in terms of how we're going about it. We have on the airport side, Mr. Kirsch, who is a Denver based attorney with a law firm, been very impressed with him. The city hired Mr. Barr, who was with a California, well he was California based, he's with a national law firm now, still a California based. But, you know, in the final analysis, anything that can be done to reduce noise has to pass through the FAA. We've had this discussion many, many times. It's not something we can unilaterally do here. And I worked for 15 years as head of two organizations that were large organizations that were part of a regulated industry. And we're, I dealt with Washington-based DC regulator. And I know from that experience and other experiences that I've had in my career that if you want to deal with the regulatory structure in Washington, you need to do so ideally and preferably through a Washington DC based government relations firm who are on the ground in Washington. And you need to also recognize that the really the only party that independent regulatory agencies listen to is Congress. And therefore, to be able to have a strategy that has the right firm working with you with the contacts, not just with the regulatory agency in question, but with, in this case, the Florida delegation. The Florida congressional delegation is the only realistic and practical and political path that I see toward achieving change over time. And so I've always been scratching my head about the lobbying government affairs strategy that we have, we again, the collective way. And I think we need to have a discussion on that. And there may be points of view that are counter to mine on this and I'm happy to listen but I think the only way we're going to make progress is to have a much more effective effort in that regard. So I think that's an important question to issue to have on the agenda because as I said the path toward achieving some of the ends that some of our public speakers just spoke to whether we like or not goes through Washington and it goes through the FAA. So council member christman thank you I absolutely agree with you because that was part of the conversation when we were in DC is having that lobbying effort and whether we would have our own or do it together. And personally, I respect Mr. Kersh, but we have not, he's a lobbyist and we haven't seen anything but more increased noise and traffic. So I agree with you. I was going to include that lobbying efforts in my opening comments, but I think it's definitely worthy and needs to be a separate agenda item. So thank you very much for that. Well, and again, Mira, I'll just say that Mr. Kursh, who I think has been impressed with him and his knowledge and his experience, but he's, he is associated with a law. He provides legal advice to the airport authority as well. He's experienced in airport matters, but he's based in Denver and just as Mr. Barr, who is our lobbyist, so to speak, is an attorney with a large national law firm and a litigator. I'm not sure we have the right people in the role that we need, which is to be able to have an influence on Congress and on the FAA. Okay, I have a council member, Kramer. Thank you for that, Ray. I've spent a lot of time on this and digging into from the original charter to what the state, the contract, such as it is, FAA rules, and unless I'm mistaken, and in all, with due, all to respect to my sister's kind neighbor, I would love to have a magic one and say, flights go let's go to mockery. We're not allowed to do that. Unless I'm reading it wrong. And there's a lot of stuff that the NAA can't do because of the FAA. It's akin to I-75 and it's not liking the traffic on I-75. I mean, it's a port of entry now for the United States. I mean, there's a lot that goes on that we have really, this body has little control over. I do like the notion that, yeah, I think the tone is great. Let's work together. Let's lower the frequency. Let's lower the, let's get them fly in higher, faster, and lower the noise levels. It's anyway we can mitigate that. But to raise point, I think that, I mean, we have to, this is going to have to happen at NDC. A large part of it is. And I wanted to do whatever I can to get that moving. I don't know that it's going to move fast and, honestly, I think if it couldn't move faster, what if it moved fast already? And I may be wrong on that. Can correct me if I am wrong. The only thing I see on the agenda, and I've said this before, with the county commissioners already, they won't even address relocation. And there is no relocation within the city, so the only other option would would be within the county and they're not even going to touch that issue. I think that is a waste of time on the agenda. The relocation study is available to the public. We've all seen it and they can present it again but it's irrelevant. It's a nonstarter based on what county commissioners have already decided. And I think we'd use that time much more efficiently by trying to figure out how we do, I mean, we want to lower the noise. And whatever productive time we can spend on that, I think it's much more valuable than messing with it. We can look at it again, but it's completely irrelevant because of the commissioners stance. They've already stated it, it's a nonstarter, and I think that should be taken off the agenda. Thanks. So thank you for your comments. I agree, I think that's exactly what Council Member Christmasman is saying is the only way we're ever going to make these changes is through the FAA period. And as far as the relocation study, I really thought that it was kind of an interesting decision for them to make about the relocation study. I'm glad they did it. But I also think that we shouldn't start something and not finish it because I think if we finished it, just like Pagefield did, you know, 20 years ahead, they knew they had to expand RSW. So I think it's just prudent for us to let have them finish it. But my biggest concern was a mockly airport. A mockly airport has been in the Chamber of Commerce and really strong members of this community for being a much bigger hub for many different types. I mean, it's gone through medical, international medical. It's, there've been all kinds of discussions. So I was disappointed that that didn't happen at the discussion for the Immokhli Airport. We did not direct them to do that as a council. They chose to do that. And it's just my opinion. I do think they need to finish it and then very curious why they didn't finish them, Mothley. So thank you for your comments. Councilmember Barton. Along the same line of thought here, it's unfortunate that we're having a, we have to deal with a federal agency to get anything accomplished on a local level, but there's the world we live in. But it's an order for us to be successful, that it's critical, that we have a unified front with us and the NAA, and that we all are pulling in the same direction, and we have the same goals in mind. And if those goals reduce this noise level by reducing the volume, and that's what our constituents and residents want. Wonderful, fantastic, let's do it. I'll get behind it 100%. But again, if we don't have everybody pulling the same direction, we will not be effective with the process, and we will not be achieving our goals. So it's critical that we as a governing body up here, not only we have a united front, but we have united front with our partner, which is the NAA. And that is for lack of better phrasing, attacking the feds, the federal governments that we have to deal with here in order to try to get some type of progress here locally and get these noise levels under control and the volume under control. Thank you. Council Member Petterman. I'm just unclear as to, and I agree with much of what's been said, I agree with you. We've probably got to go to Washington. But in the meantime, what I'd like to know is, as the proprietor, as the owner of the land, what is available to us if there's anything at all. So I would appreciate knowing that. Thank you. Any other comments? Yes? I have a little different take on this. I think that we on this agenda I would like for us to get alignment and a reminder that we had agreed a year ago that we would like to have more local control both the NA and City Council in order to reduce noise. And some of the actions that I would like to delve into a little bit would be to talk a little bit about the utilization of the master plan and what infrastructure they are building. They're spending and a budget of a lot of money for capital improvements. And for us, we have the right to approve this utilization plan and the master plan. And to make sure that we are not building infrastructure to encourage volume. Because volume is all the other stuff that we're talking about is nibbling around at the edges of noise. The real issue is volume and this is a city asset. It's city property. We own the property underneath that we have at least with the NAA. And we work for city residents and they are the ones that are really suffering on noise. So I think that we ought to first and foremost make sure that the millions of dollars that they have in their capital expense are going for the right things and not going to encourage volume. The second, I totally agree on the lobbying piece of it because I think we have not done a good job at lobbying and have not been and we should do this together. We should also join other seasonal airports that are experiencing this, Aspen, Colorado, being one of them, there are many of them. And they are going through the exact same thing that we are going through on noise. And there has to be a forum if we can go together very strong to help on this. And one other piece that is sort of the elephant, you know, one of the elephants in the room is this notion of grant taking. And I know we like grants because we perceive them as free money, but they come with strings. And if we do not take these grant money, the airport is forced to become competitive on its own and that is raising rates. Some of the, it's a good deal to fly in and out of the airport. And we, there are, there are pockets in, like the flight schools, like some of the fractional that are price sensitive. If you look at the price curve, we ought to be looking at them standing on their own, being a premier airport with premier pricing. And I know they're looking at parts of this, but it's free to park. They have a lot of freebies on this because it is highly subsidized. We could reduce volume just by being competitive and making them be competitive and standing on their own two legs like any business enterprise would. So I would like to see that. On the airport exploratory relocation study, I know that there's some folks at the NAA that have worked really hard on this, in particular, Commissioner Burns. But until we get a recipient, unfortunately, it was dead before it came out of the water, because they defined the relocation study in Collier County. They did not say, and they asked airport people how far would you go? And this goes back to some misalignment that we have with them and that they define their customer as anybody that's flying. And there's a lot of people from the county and from other areas. We define our customer as city residents. And so we immediately have a disconnect there. But in terms of the reload study, because it was not, we asked them and they said, 10 mile radius and it was Collier County and we did not include RSW and their big expansion. I don't think there's a point in doing this because it would require the county to rezone the property and they won't even meet with us. And really it's our airport. I think that I would like to see that off the agenda. But I would like to minimize the dog and pony shows. I think we've seen a lot of that. And we don't have time for that. I would like to eliminate the new quiet leader board that can be on an email. On, you know, we've seen it a million times. And it really goes back to their definition of noise is different than our definition and the, and that our residents definition. It's those that are breaking curfew. So, you know, I would like to see a little bit of an update on how are they making noise complaints easier to make, because I know that there were certain technologies that at a press of a button, it could register it. And so I would like to get rid of the pitches and do something about, talk about, on grant money, I think that we ought to, I'd like to have consensus that we don't take grant money because it extends everything up by 20 years. And if we do that, we're also sending a signal that everything is okay. And I think these are used for a lot of CIP projects that may build volume. The other P is, you know, I would like to renegotiate the lease agreement, but not have in it. You know, things about, you know, any extension of the lease agreement. And because when it's a powerful signal that we send to the FAA if we extend that lease that everything's fine. And extending the lease is, you know, for me as an absolute nonstarter, I think we can negotiate other elements in particular with services. We're providing them with services and how much we're getting for those. So those are the things that I would like to see changed on this. Less pitches and more talking, more talking about alignment and talking about how we can lobby more effectively, maybe with all of us and maybe it goes beyond the borders of Naples and Collier County into airports that are like us that are highly seasonal, where we blast people with noise and flights for four months of the year. Thank you. Thank you. Vice mayor. Thank you Madam Mayor. First, and I'll try to be quick here. This premise, I think one of the speakers, the public speakers, use the statement that you should have known you were purchasing or building a house near the airport. That argument doesn't apply. And let me tell you why it doesn't apply. Think about that same message to anyone in our community when we say you should have known that you are living near the Gulf of Mexico or Naval's Bay. You should have known that we have heavy rain in storm surges. So now you've got these two groups of people one who lives near the airport or in a flight path of the airport and the other that is suffering from climate change, heavy rain, increased hurricanes, flooded roads, flooded homes, destruction of personal property and more. The question brought forward is to what extent do we, the City Council, address the most important issues associated with the airport? So when it comes to flooding, storm surge, do we put valuable human resources and financial resources against those problems? Are we talking about millions and millions of dollars in a resiliency plan? going to address the negative impact of flooding yet not address another issue, which is the increasing volume and increasing noise associated with the airport. I think everybody here knows what common sense would tell you. As elected representatives, you address them both. You address the issues that you can address at the airport. And you also address the issues associated with being close to the Gulf of Mexico and Naples Bay and flooding issues. Now the question was the topics, I believe there's seven of them for this workshop. And whether or not we support anything else in addition to those topics. I think the topics are pretty good. I think we can roll into some of these topics, the details that we need to address. So the FAA reauthorization, I think that's clear. Update on noise initiatives. For that, it's listing the Part 150 study flight procedure design and the new fly say flight quiet leaderboard. I really don't think any of those are going to make a measurable difference. Flight 150 study, I don't know how many years we've been dealing with that already. I think that we have to come up with a practical plan to reduce noise using the tools that we use day in and day out. And that's our noise ordinances. So I'd like to make sure that when we start talking about that, if you're okay, in fact, I think on City Council, they say, I've heard it said, if you don't like the code, change the code. All right? Well, if you have a code, you need to use it. And so we need to start using the codes that we have if we can and address noise. But that doesn't mean it stops there. Next the Airport Exploratory Relocation Study. To my knowledge, we haven't had a presentation by the NAA to this City Council. We owe that to the people who have elected us. And even before that, maybe an outcome for today is to reach a consensus on a position statement indicating how we will handle this study except the study formally. Right? Let's get it on the record. Let's understand that the community here, this relocation study, we're not ready to hear it today. That would come at that meeting, right? Let's hear what they have to say about it. And personally, there's been a tremendous amount of money spent on that study. And even though this council and the county commissioners, as they are formed right now, have evidently taken a position on this relocation study, things change. What could change? You have a bad aircraft- related accident here in this community And now you start talking about change So be careful about being hard and fast on where you stand Because that can change Lisa agreements The overview of the airport utilization plan is Councilwoman Petronoff has just stated. Tens of millions of dollars being invested that effectively preempt the actions that this city council can take as it relates to the airport. The lease agreement, well we've got a lease agreement in place almost since the earth was believe that one of our first steps should be... One of our first steps should be asking our city attorney for advice and him in collaboration with Mr. Barr, advise the City Council as to the role the City of Naples has in its relation to the Naples Municipal Airport. Specifically, are we at landlord? Are we a proprietor or does any other legal status apply? And along with that role, what comes in terms of authority? We need to be clear on that before we get too deep into anything else. You have to know who you are and what role you play. Federal grants, much has been said already. I don't want to go over it all. But if it's within our authority, so that goes back to that question I just stated. If it's within our authority, my ask is that we reach a consensus or any other appropriate legislative action here on this dies. to reach consensus in directing the Naples Airport Authority to not execute any other federal grants or otherwise that comes with a hook, an obligation that is not supported by this city council. And finally, the interlocal agreement for police services. I'm anxious to have that discussion. I think that there is merit in that discussion. So that's all I have at this time. Thank you, Madam Mayor. Okay. So I think that the items that we have just to elaborate, you know, that reauthorization and overview and update should be a minimal presentation. The noise initiative, we all, we could put that at the end of that agenda. The airport exploratory relocation, I don't know if I had a consensus that we just needed to get a completion or not a completion, but it still have that presentation. And if no one's opposed to that, then we'll just, but it'll be short and sweet on that relocation study. I would hope so, Mayor, because the reality is, it's a 15 to 20 year deal. Right. I think, I don't see how it's possible for anything to be short and sweet at this point. Well, we can do it. And the fact is it's dead in the water right now. I don't see why it would spend another moment of time on it. We all can agree that it's not, there's no moving forward with it. Yes, I agree. However, we haven't had that presentation given for our city residents from this day is and I think it's important that we get it at least on the record and For whatever comments, but it should be another short and sweet because of time May I I'm sorry to interrupt but I want to go back to the noise item because this is important I Think our conversation and what's written here is giving short shrift to the noise discussion that we would have on the agenda and it is the heart of the matter. I'm reading here from the minutes of the airport monthly subcommittee meeting and it's not dated so I'm not sure, oh here it is February 6th, 2024. This is the airport monthly subcommittee meeting minutes, attendees, Jay Buddhist, who are Bill Owens, Beth Petronoff, Chris Rosanski, Rick Rupert and Jim Stokes, and one of the bullet points, noise. In June of 2023, the NAA submitted eight initiatives. They wanted the FAA to consider a proving order to reduce noise. It's been almost eight months, the FAA is still reviewing it. We know about that. The NA efforts have not ground to a hold on these and they've engaged outside consultants to design flight operating procedures to be used with these operations. My point is this, and I've seen other material from the NAA talking about the various noise initiatives. The part 150 study I assume I'm going to our bullet points. I assume that embraces these eight initiatives. I'm not sure, flight procedure design. I think there is a more comprehensive and substantive set of noise reduction initiatives that have been some of which came out of the NA, like the Part 150 study, some of which have been discussed and added to it since then. And we ought to, that ought to be a big part of our agenda on November 7th, because it gets the heart of the best ideas that are out there right now to try to take some actions to reduce noise. So I just wanted to make that point. It's not to my knowledge, I think it'll be a good update. Just quick. Where are we on those initiatives and the flight operations and procedures and noise initiatives. But we don't need to go into it started back in how many years ago and yeah and I'm just trying to limit the scope so I agree with you that narrowing it to that is very important. And with what we have what are we going to do with it? Okay. So then under the overview of the airport utilization plan, it would also be what the master plan is and we need to have the distinction of. And it's in our codes. Whether we approve or not approve or whether we accept or not accept the master plan and or the utilization plan. So that goes to us understanding our codes, the NAA understanding our codes. We need to have that, we don't have to go over each of them, but we should have a list of codes and complaint policies that are there for us to discuss because this is the partnership that we're trying to establish and working together. The lease agreement between the City of Naples and the NAA, I think that goes back to who I think Vice Mayor saying, you know, who's a proprietor and what terms, you know, who owns the leases, who owns the equipment, who I think that's very important for us understanding who that as a landlord. Federal grants and FDOT grants, I don't know if those who are on MPO understand that those grants come from the MPO and the FDOT, the NAA has received a lot of grant money from the FDOT. So, and that's part of it's in our comprehensive plan. The interlocal agreement with police services, I think if no one's opposed, I think Councilman Christman has excellent recommendation of all the services that we provide to the airport and grants which are on here. Did I? Oh, and the lobbying plan. What is our lobbying plan? So with that, if I've missed anything, please let me know. Councilwoman Pregnant. This is really, we've been asking these questions, but among ourselves, and I think we might have, our attorney in the room who has already interfaced with bar to get a couple of these questions. The terms of are we a proprietor or not and what are the? What are the rights that we have the second thing it would be is? On on our Let me think about this Well, I'll answer the first question first Thank you, Council Member. So I have been discussing with Andrew Barr. Obviously this is a very specialized type of law that requires expertise. Now the proprietor question I will put to the side if I may. I'll be ready to answer that at the November 7th meeting. I just don't want to misspeak, especially hearing some of the public comment I heard today. I think maybe I asked a question wrong, but I want to confirm that answer before acknowledging it in public. However, the city is the owner of the land in which the airport sits. Not the owner of the airport. So we own the land, where the landlord, we've leased it to the airport authority. Going on 60 plus years, bear the tenant, we are the landlord. So that does come along with a different set of laws and rules, pursuant to Florida statute and case law, similar to when you rent your home to attend it, right? There's some landlord and tenant laws there that could be a benefit to the city. But I think those were the first two questions that you asked council member. The second question that I have relate to our code of ordinances and what control council has versus just receiving the plan. And that is, you know, we've got in our court of ordinance, this 58682B, that are we, do we approve the master plan? Or did we approve the master plan many years ago and it's static and things can be amended to it by the airport at their will that is then presented to us. Or do we present or do we approve the master plan? So do you approve the master plan? Yes, you had to have approved it at some point. I don't know when that point was, I don't know when it was presented to you, but there's the master plan and then there's the utilization plan, right? Which the complaint says the utilization plan is updated periodically, which makes me think that it's an ever-changing document that again is approved by City Council. The complaint says master plan has approved by City Council, but the complaint changes happen all the time. So I'd have to work with the City Clerk to see when the last time that master plan was brought before City Council, along with the utilization plan. I think that would be very helpful because, you know, for us as a body to have control, or to help reduce alleviate noise, we need to know where our power is, and part of our power is what, you know, what do we have the authority to approve or not approve. And we've got master plan, we have a utilization plan. Within the master plan, the most recent issue was the JSX issue that was irritatingly presented a couple days after we went on our two-month break for the summer. And that has a lot of – that has a lot of time pack there for our residents and what it could mean. And they're – you know, JSX, when I go online, they're already advertising Naples. They're – you can – I think you can already book think in December for white planes and I forget what the other airport is. But this is a sea change on volume. I think that our residents who have aircraft, like a John Allen, but we've already heard a lot of complaints about them sitting on the tarmac for hours during certain times of the year, where they actually have to refuel because there's so much volume going through there. And this JSX thing that was, you know, we did not approve is going to make it worse. So I think before the meeting, I think we really need to understand what we approve and what we don't approve as a body. Right, so that's, I think that's where I was going with the staff clarifying those questions. And it can be clarified in the code. It can be clarified in the code, it can be clarified in our comp plan and policies under the airport and the clerk if Mrs. Rambas could get the minutes so that we have an understanding of what happened when we went from a municipal international airport and then clarifying whether it's approval or not approval. And we can get those two minutes of the last time that we approved a master plan and the utilization plan and get a timeline for that. And even the rhythm of, you know, when does it come forward to us next? Can we request that it comes forward to us? Is there a, you know, I didn't see in the codes word says, every ex years, you know, but it would be very helpful so that we all know what leverage we have. And okay, I wanna wrap this up leverage we have. Yeah. Okay. I want to wrap this up. So just quick comment. I want to piggyback on that. Yeah. So just quick. Yeah. Quick. Pick it back on that. Something for the next meeting. And I asked previous counsel about this. Because Ray actually got me focused on that is. I've been led to believe that we cannot renegotiate the contract without extending it. I'm all for renegotiating if we can, but then the FAA will not allow that is what I was told. Now, whether that's the case or not, if you could look into that, that'd be great where our leverage is in renegotiating the contract and if we must extend the lease in order to renegotiate it. If we don't have to, that's awesome. And I have the same question. Like can we say no, you can't bring JSX here. Is that even in our purview, right? Yeah. Because if it's not, then we're talking about it. We've got none of it. To my understanding with the meeting with Mr. Ruterswar and Rupert and Rosanski, and that's why I think the agreements are very important to discuss, is they were coming regardless. But the agreement and I'll let them clarify this was to assure that they didn't break the nighttime curfew. But in my opinion, that's the least of matters. When you provide hangar space, front desk space, full service accommodations, it's a different take to your point, Council Member Petranoff. Yes. Vice Mayor? Yes. Thank you. So for our city attorney, perhaps our city manager and our city clerk, those are the entities that report to city council. So what we're trying to find, what I've heard, is clarity in terms of our role, our responsibilities, and our authority. And specifically the lease, the volume of flights, we've heard that 300 percent increase over 15 years. Well how high is high in terms of flight volume? Can we just keep packing it in here and increasing these flights? And there's no end in sight? Or can we influence even a decline in volume? And then finally, it was mentioned, but I want to make sure that we get an answer to this. If we wanted the name of the airport to go back to Naples Municipal Airport, as I believe it is in the lease and perhaps in some charter documents. Do we have that authority and what does that come with? What does that mean to the community, if anything? Thank you, Madam Mayor. Thank you. So basically the name and whether the name comes, if the name is international or if it's regional or whatever they have maybe renamed it, what that means. And I'll just add that Mrs. Ramboz could get us the past opinions of attorneys and managers on those leases and flights because I know there are past minutes and that. If we can get that and we can do our homework prior to, we'll have knowledge that'll be needed for this joint meeting. With that, Mr. Bitterschwar, or Mr. McConnell, do you have any questions? I don't. If you wouldn't mind, if I could just read back to you all the items that I think I've heard some consensus on, Mayor, you and I can work on the order of these items. I know that's other a couple of things that you rather have towards the end and get some of the more media items up front. So I have the real reauthorization, again, this is in no particular order. The relocation, utilization and master plans, the lease agreement, federal and state grants, FDOT included, in our local agreement for police services, discussion regarding cost recovery of all city services provided to the airport review of agreements with airport customers. That would be that JSX as an example, review of lobbying strategy, and then update on noise initiatives including Part 150 and flight procedure design. I struck out the fly safe flight quiet leader board based on some commentary. If that's accurate, I'll work with the mayor and the rest of the parties over at the airport to get a agenda put together. I think it was, are you want to clarify that? Okay. Did you, you went pretty fast there. Did you include the updated analysis of payments and of services right here? Yes. You included that? Yes. Okay. Just want that. Yes. Okay. Just to make sure. Mayor. I still feel it's really important for us to know whether or not we are the proprietor, the owner, and what does that mean to us legally of this airport? Yeah. On that point, I'm 90% sure memory tends to fail you some more and more often, but I'm 90% sure that we had a memorandum delivered to us, probably prepared by Mr. Barr in the last year or two. This is pre-April this year, we went through of you to the council. But Mr. Barr, I believe, provided a memorandum on that issue. So I say that because it may be easy just to find that resurrected and set it around. On the proprietors. Prior to the purchase ownership issue. And we heard that question and I didn't have it down as an agenda item, but I do have it down the notes. We can finally add also the mayor pointed out minutes. We have some historical memorandums. We'll find those as well as the minutes related to the name chains from municipal to international. We'll pull that information as preparatory reading for you all, prior to the meeting. I would like also that, you know, given the proprietor piece of it, there was a different conclusion drawn, I believe, with table that was issued. And, you know, I'd like to surface that as well because we have this was before all of us because it was a different conclusion. So I guess you are a city attorney. I would automate, I would defer to you whether we are the proprietor or not, and you know, specifically what additional rights and obligations do we have being a proprietor or not a proprietor? Thank you. So I want to wrap it up. Mr. Butterswar, the only thing I see missing is just following our laws and having that in one place so they can do their homework on codes and the contemplative policy related to the airport. You really? Yes sir. And I think you were meaning to say this and I believe follow our codes and ordinances included in that is our noise ordinances. Right? And then finally Madam Mayor I'll just say this, that I think $400,000 was spent on that exploratory relocation study, and if all it took was maybe an hour long conversation with Collier County commissioners to understand it's not even possible, that we need to hear from the Naples Airport Authority that it's not possible, that they've come to the conclusion it's not possible. And if it was not possible based on the study or on the responses from county commissioners, that's important. Thank you. Yes, because that will also benefit us in our inter-governmental conversation with the county. So with that, I'm going to conclude item 6A. Thank you. And we'll, we have a time certain of 1230. We might hopefully get through this next 6B, but if not, we'll have to go to our time certain and then continue this after that. So Mr. Mayor Schwer. Yes, Mayor. And we have a little wiggle room with our time certain. It's for labor negotiation, so we don't have attorneys waiting. So if you need to go out on their 15 minutes or so to get through this item, I just want to let you know. Perfect. So Mr. McComb. Yes, thank you Mayor. So just to circle back and try to keep the conversation somewhat directed. We had a pretty lengthy conversation on board and committees and I want to say it was in the September workshop. I provided ordinances for every board with some suggested changes. And at the end of that meeting there was some clear direction that I got from council. One of them being working with the planning staff on potentially an application process and the 44 day if I'm just trying to trigger you all's memory on the deadline that came up with someone is owning petitions. The reason I mentioned that is because that's an administrative aspect that I am working through that I can always follow up with you all on, but I just want you to know that that's kind of happening because that doesn't, that may not require a code change to accomplish, right? That's really just developing an application that is fair for staff and is fair for the applicant so that everyone's fully aware of what's going to be required to move projects forward. But one of the other suggestions that I received at that workshop was providing some options on what how zoning petitions currently travel through the city, the various boards and through the administrative review. So Miss Marn was so kind to prepare some flow charts on what the current process is. These are identified in the backup materials as the current process and then there's a few options here that we've put together that will move some things around, alleviate some board reviews, but it's really up for discussion on what the council wants to see. I do think it's important to understand what things do now so that you can understand if that's being efficient or not. I would say based on the application, you know, someone could have to go through four boards. You know, you're going through staff, then you're going through DRB, planning board, city council, and then DRB again. That may be exactly what you all want. And then in that case, no changes will need to take place. But not to throw too much too soon. I do think there's one thing that I just want to highlight from my point of view before I turn it over to questions and Ms. Martin if she has anything to add. Is I included the board of appeals at the very end? The reason I want to highlight that real quick is because it doesn't really change a lot of the processes. I just think from a legal standpoint, the real deal is that the real deal is that the real deal is board first planning advisory board first prior to city council. Even if it's not planning related. I just found that a little odd because you as the city council are the board of appeals. For example, if someone appeals a design review board decision, that goes straight to you. That doesn't go to the planning advisory board first. So there's actually not to get specific, but there's some administrative appeals that are coming in the future to city council meetings. And that's one suggestion I would make is to just have it go straight to city council. If anyone wants to appeal an administrative decision, I think you are the board of appeals, and it's just more appropriate to go straight to you. So I didn't want to end with that because I think that's one of the easier changes and that's more of a recommendation from me. But besides that, I'm open to questions. I know it's Martin here as well. I know the flow charts. We tried our best. It could get a little confusing at times. So feel free to ask and we'll happy to answer. Yeah. Thank you. If we could, I would like for Ms. Martin to go over this process and how we're structured now. Eric Martin, Planning Director. So what you have, the first document in there is the current process. So it's four pages. There's four different versions and that's depending on what type of petition you have. But I think the one that we're most discussing the most is the first page, which is for a brand new, from concept to CEO, a brand new project, brand new development project. So the way it works currently is you have preliminary design review. It would be your first step, everything. so you have caveats all over here and asterisk, every submittal is preceded by a pre-application meeting. So anytime an applicant applies for anything, they have a pre-application meeting with staff first. So wait. Can we put that flow chart? Because I'm not sure. I think we're on page. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you. I think we're on page. Yeah. Hi, guys. Hi, guys. I want you to drive. I'm scared. So that is the first. So one little caveat as well. These two things here, preliminary DRB and site plan can be submitted concurrently or at the same time. You don't have to have, you don't have to secure your preliminary DRB approval before you can submit for site plan. Those two things can be running concurrently only because design review is an entirely separate review than the site plan. The site plan is a technical review at the administrative level. Design review is purely a conceptual review by the design review board of the design of the building, not code compliance. So you'd start with preliminary DRB and or site plan. Site plan, as you know in the code that we are enforcing today, only site plans in a plan development go on to City Council so that site plan as you see here is, this is applicable, I included up here at the top under the header. It's a very similar threshold for what requires design review and what requires site plan. So it's new buildings, new principal buildings, or structures, addition to an existing structure that is greater than a thousand square feet, or landscaping lighting, paving, and restriping projects exceeding 10,000 square feet. So if you do a complete overhaul to the grounds of your project, you would that would trip the site plan threshold. So for the projects such as that. So the site plan is submitted to staff, we distribute it to all the different departments in the city. That's the only step, if you will, in this process that doesn't have a timeline, so direct timeline, because that depends on how many rounds it takes for staff to find that sufficient. So they submit it to staff, we distribute, we gather comments back from every department. If those comments require revisions, the applicant provides the revisions necessary and that can go back and forth multiple rounds until staff finds that the petitioner has revised the plans to a point where we can find it sufficient. Once that site plan is sufficient, you cannot move on to any of these other processes until that site plan is found sufficient at the administrative level. We won't process your conditional use, variance if necessary, any of those until that site plan is found sufficient at the administrative level. We won't process your conditional use, variance if necessary, any of those until that site plan is found sufficient. And the idea there was that, you know, City Council wanted to know that this project is feasible before reviewed by Council. So you obtain your administrative sufficiency. Then if the project does not require any other entitlements by City Council so if it is code compliant, if it's a permitted use it meets all the dimensional standards, all the development standards in our code. It would go on to final design review so the DRB would then look at the changes that have been made to that project through that site plan process and once final design review is obtained, then they could apply for their building permit. Now for a project, if we go to the right, for a project that does require some sort of entitlement from City Council, you know, requires a conditional use, requires a variance, a parking allocation, or is in a plan development, then that would go on to PAB or Crab. There are a couple really just parking entitlements in the downtown or a waiver. I don't think we've ever processed one of a waiver. There are certain things allowed waivers in the D downtown. Or so those would go to Crab. Everything else would go to PAB. Once PAB hears the item, then it goes on to City Council with their recommendation for approval or denial. Once City Council or should City Council approve the project, then approve those entitlements, then it would go on to final design review. Once they obtain final design review, they could apply for their building permit. So that's the current process that you have for a brand new development. Now if you go onto the subsequent pages, you have different levels of smaller projects or small revisions or something like that. But I think what we're talking about today is really that first. Okay, so can you just describe and I have you by smear and then kind of an What is the rounds of revisions You said it's based on technical what what are those technical items or criteria that this preliminary or this site plan approval falls under. So say they submit their project. I'm going to pick on Eddie because I just saw him made eye contact. So say they submit their project and Eddie is reviewing it for storm water, the storm water plan, and they're not meeting. He's going to review against our storm water ordinance, the regulations that we have in the code. So if he's reviewing that plan and they're not providing the information that he needs or they're citing something incorrectly, he will, we call it a RAI request for additional information, he will send comments back to the planning department, we facilitate this project or process, he'll send comments back to us very detailed, comments saying, you know, these are the things that I have found deficient in this plan. Or say they submit something. And Steve Beckman looks at it and they're citing the wrong FEMA elevation. He'll give that back. Planning, you know, say they have an incorrect setback or something incorrect. We'll send that back. So it's each department reviewing for their own set of guidelines and regulations. Heather might see street trees that aren't correct or something. And then not to be redundant, but there are times when the staff report will say not at this time. So that's where the area gets gray for me because sometimes then they'll get their building permit and that's when it goes into a different set of review. So no, what you'll see sometimes is you'll see a comment. I'll use fires an example. So they're going to look and make sure that there is appropriate turning radius as they can get their equipment in there. What they're not looking for at this point is the location of all of your smoke detectors. That's something that they're going to, that's a detail that they're going to look at further a building permit. So this is, it's not preliminary in the sense that it's a real conceptual. We get pretty detailed drawings, but it's not that building permit level. It's not construction level drawings. It's, you know, I'm not looking to make sure that every, you know, tree that you've identified is the right caliper at this point. I'm making sure you're having your landscape buffers. So it's a little less than a construction level review. So you will see that comment from certain reviewers that the plan is sufficient at this stage, but that they're going to look at it again at building permit. So a building, once a building permit is issued, there wouldn't be any changes. Well, we'd have all those details. And then where is that criteria that you base it on prior to the construction or building permit? So we're always, it's different for every department. Like for me, I'm looking at the land development code. At ease looking at his stormwater ordinances, the stormwater regulations, fires looking at the life safety codes. So it's each department. You know Heather has her list of approved trees. It's every department in their own discipline. Steve's looking at the Florida building code and the FEMA regulations. So every department's looking at their individual discipline? So I'm going to use this as an example and I used it before. It's the rooms to go. Now it didn't come before council. It went through DRB period beginning and end. If council would have wanted to have had a buffer that was I don't know what the standards are. Do we have standards for buffers? We do. Yeah, for commercial properties. Okay. And that's in the code. Yep. Okay. So, I mean, DRB could make that as an offering, but the petitioner wouldn't have to do it unless it was something that council actually asked them to do. Is that correct? So site plan, yes, that is us stating that you meet the requirements of the code. So that project met the buffering requirements of the code. When a project comes to council, you have the ability to ask for more because they're asking you for something. They're asking you for approval of a specific use through a conditional use or approval of a variance for something that they wouldn't otherwise be allowed to do. At the staff level, we don't have that, I'll say barter, but we don't have that give and take because for us it's a technical check. It's the code says you have a 10 foot buffer, your plan show a 10 foot buffer. Check. Okay, I want to elaborate but I don't want to hog this conversation by Samar. Yeah, thank you. Thank you, Erica. Just a couple of quick questions. First of all on this on this planning department project flow chart that we see on the screen right now. When was that last updated? Prior to the dissolving of the pack, clearly by the note at the bottom. And the date, the year, not the date, the year maybe. This year, but earlier this year. Okay. So that may answer my question because I wanted to go back and make sure that I understand what one project that kind of sticks out in my mind, I want to make sure how it happened and which flow happened. It's the, it's at Third Street South in Broad Avenue. The old Naples building, which was the first city hall for Naples as well as the first Collier County courthouse. There was a matter involving parking allocation. Did that follow this current path? No. What path did it follow? That has been a over a decade long project. Yeah. I've only been involved at the back end, but that followed a fludra proceeding, so that was a litigation. So it wasn't not within this. Yeah, but before. It was not an development. So this process that you see on your screen is if you starting from a blank slate and you want to, you know, from concept to CEO. So you come in with a brand new development on a vacant piece of land. Okay. So that doesn't apply. There's also a different process for something like that then. For something like that then. For something like the old Naples building. Yeah. There is, that is a unique circumstance though, just because of the litigation. Correct. Which we currently are in, so I would prefer we stop. Still in it? Yeah, stop talking about that. But there's a different process. There is. And it's, but it has a flow. Yes, if that was just a standard renovation, that would be a different process. This right here is just a brand new development. Thank you. Is that non-conforming? If we're talking about that, I said, I'm not talking about that project. I'm just saying, but the other process would be if it's non-conforming. Right. There is if you have a non-conforming building. Yeah. Are you complete? Yeah. Yo, yes. OK. Councilmember Petteman. So in my mind, there's sort of two different processes here going on. One of which is quasi-judicial. Then there are projects that come through that are strictly legislative. That are code compliant. That are code compliant. DRB is quasi-judicial. So the only element of a code compliant process project is design review. But you are correct. Okay. And we have certain to that by this flow chart that if it is legislative, if you're going to select only go to DRB. And over here on the right is quasi-judicial. That goes to council or PAV and council. That goes to council. Or PAB and council. That's very helpful. Can I make a distinction for you? Yes. Yes. So legislative and quasi-judicial, I just want to clarify, is the type of hearing that you're having. Correct. Right, so if we're doing a code change. Yes. Right, so if we're changing the code of ordinances and that's being brought before you. For example, the floor I'd want that's coming on November 6th. That's legislative because it's citywide. Quasad judicial is site specific. So if someone is coming forward to develop a specific site. So while you may be right, 80% of the time with the distinction you're making, I don't think that's the appropriate distinction for this flow chart because the reality is, all of these applications technically, if they came to a hearing, would be quasi-judicial because they're all site-specific. The distinction here is some make it before you and some don't. Right, so some go straight to DRB because although they are site specific applications, they are compliant with the code. So they don't require any variances or conditional uses. They're doing exactly what the code allows them to do. They're building within the setbacks, within the buffers, et cetera. If someone is asking for something that is not permitted by code but rather a conditional use or they want a 10 foot set back but they want 8 back comes before you. So that's what this chart does. I hope that made sense but I wanted to make that distinction. It's not a legislative process and a quasi-judicial process. Technically, all of these applications are site-specific, so they're all quasi-judicial if you think about it. Right. None of these are legislative. Okay. I'll accept that. Okay. So in my people mind, I might delineate them differently, but in truth, they're all quasi-judicial. Okay. That's very helpful. I really appreciate that. Mary May I ask a question, Erica? Yes, please. Erica, is it rare? I mean, I mean, I'm assuming it happens, but how often does it happen where we get a project that's submitted? It goes to preliminary DRB and then we're reviewing it against all of our codes that it doesn't make it to final DRB, the project dies. Does that happen? Because I know from a public's perspective, when things are reviewed at preliminary DRB, there's this assumption that it's going to be built the way it looks. But we haven't finished at the staff level the review. That's happening on a parallel path and we may find out that this can't be built. And then the project goes away or gets modified. Can you talk a little bit about how that works? I'd say it's more that it gets modified. So anything that would put a project dead in the water, if you will, would have been identified in the pre-application meeting. If someone has a pre-application meeting with us and they say we want to build a six flags at the corner of 41 and 10th, we're going to tell them right away that's not provided in our code. there's nothing that would allow for that. So that wouldn't be submitted. And we have those meetings, we have people come in and request all sorts of stuff, not that outlandish, but stuff like that. Usually that doesn't make it past a pre-application meeting, but I think the distinction in J's trying to make is the site plan process is. Some of these projects spend over a year in site plan because the goal staff goal is to revise through the revisions, get that project to where it is code compliant and it comes to you. So it's not a mechanism where someone comes in and says I want to do this and we just say outright no. What we do is the RAI, we issue a letter that says, these are the deficiencies in what you're requesting. The goal is then that they address those changes. They make those changes, they address those deficiencies. So that by the end, they've made all the necessary changes so that the project can be compliant with our code and either come before City Council or go to DRB if it's code complaint. How many rounds of R.A.I.s can you have a NISER time frame for that? Well, there's a time frame for the review. So we can't take six months to get those R.A.I.s back. We have to review the projects and get those comments back with a certain amount of time. But we are not, I mean, we've had projects that, you know, we say that this is deficient and they don't address it. They just keep submitting insufficient plans. You know, we will keep reminding you that those plans are insufficient. If you don't address the comments. We're not going to say that a site plan is sufficient just because they're on the fourth round if they haven't addressed our comments and it still doesn't comply with our code. Is there just a little more elaborate? So we're on a time clock when the ball's in our court to give feedback. And when we do, whether it's as an RAI, they don't have a time clock. They don't. And sometimes they'll sit for a really long time. And then get it back to us. And now it's rush, rush, rush. We need it back from you now. So there's this thing that happens back and forth. That's a little bit out of balance sometimes. And sometimes our comments require major changes to the project. So it takes them a while to, you know, re-imagine or redesign that project. So yes, there's not a timeline on the whole process. There's individual timelines for each round. So the R.A.I. could take, as you said, two years, but then once they have what's it called an administrative site plan approval? It's not an approval. We just call it a letter of sufficiency. We have found it sufficient. But what you will see sometimes is through that site plan process, we may identify, you know, you're going to need councils approval of a conditional use for what you're going to need council's approval of a conditional use for what you're asking. And so sometimes you'll see our sufficiency letter says that subject to them obtaining council approval of a conditional use, we find this sufficient so that if they don't take that step and they don't obtain the approval that is necessary from city council, they don't get to say, oh, I'm sufficient. You know, it's a conditional. And that's when the code of 44 days kicks in? So yeah, that's the submittal for a public hearing. The site plan isn't a public hearing. That's just an administrative process. So that's, you know, from the time when we issue that sufficiency letter whenever they sometimes they don't submit for their conditional use or their council item right away. Sometimes they, you know, it says on their timeline but once they do finally submit for that variance, conditional use, you know, parking allocation, whatever it may be, that's the deadline that's in the code. And how do we keep track of that? Do we have a spreadsheet or a list so that we know where they are in the process and where they've left off at any point? My take in my office keeps track of all the petitions. Okay. You, so go back up to preliminary DRB. So that's where this council chose not to approve a project that had been going through the process of DRB, PAB came to us and 7 to 0. We denied it because it was a conditional use of transient logic. And that's one discussion if I recall correctly that council said they wanted to change so this would never happen again. So what are you as what are you recommending? Well, I've provided some options. To be honest, I can't remember which is which, but let me see if this one. There is an option that would kind of reorder those reviews. So did it come up on the screen? Mm-hmm. Okay. So you would have site plan first, so through staff first, and then it would go on if it was one of the items that needed council approval. It would go on to PAB or Crab whatever is required then to City Council and then to DRB review at the end So it would have only one round of design review. This is this was taken from the last discussion we had this was the the process that was outlined through Council's discussion So I just took notes and put this together. But that's only for projects that require entitlements. Correct. Mayor May I ask one question? Yes, please. Does everything come get applied for in the way of a site plan? So, if I'm asking, if I'm an applicant asking for a conditional use permit, my starting place is a site plan to you all. So, yes and no. If it's a brand new development, then yes, it goes, if it trips that threshold at the top. So if it's a new building or structure, addition to an existing over a thousand square feet or a major landscaping, Paving Restriping Project, then yes, we do have in that first document there was a page in there for the very rare circumstance where it's just a conditional use, but it's not a new building, say there's an existing building, and they want to put a dance school in it. Now school requires a conditional use. We had one, there was a barrel in Flask, I believe, where it was an existing building. They just wanted to have a liquor store and offer samples. Now that's not a new building, so that didn't go through site plan that just went to PAAB and council for the conditional use so there are some circumstances where if they're not building anything or they're not making any You know changes to the outside of the building they wouldn't trip design review threshold and they wouldn't trip site plan threshold It would just be Vice mayor. Thank you, Erica. So using that description, that language at the very top of the page under proposed revised flow chart option one, inside of that, I don't see anything that talks about parking, right? So if there's a project that comes forward that has parking allocation as part of it, it... It would follow the track on the right and go to Crab if it's in the D downtown, which is where our parking allocations are provided. It would go to Crab and then, or in the Fifth Abble, really, I'm sorry. It would go to Crab and then on in the fifth level really I'm sorry it would go to crab and then on to City Council. But it does go through the site plan process. Yes because that would be a new building asking for the allocation of parking. Well then wouldn't we include the parking in that heading that descriptive heading that they're just under the proposed revised project. Is this for a brand new building or a use that requires more parking? Because if it's not for a new building that it wouldn't follow this process at all, if it's just they're changing out of use to a use that requires more parking than they can provide and they just need an allocation, then it would go back to the one I just described where it would just be crab and city council no drb no site plan So note is so it's an existing project They're parking Wouldn't be subject to revision I suppose right if they weren't Building a new building or making and adding onto the building it was just a changing of a use to a new use that needed more parking. Then they can just go through the allocation of parking. Okay. I don't know how that would work in D downtown or Fifth Avenue relay. I don't know that that would ever occur. Because D downtown is 3,000 for all uses unless it was residential going to commercial. So yeah, there you go. Sorry to work. No, that's okay so the answer is that nothing parking related using that heading. If it's independent no because that assumes that it's parking related to a new building. Yeah so it would it would follow that process. Okay thank you. Councilmember Christman? Christmas. So I spent some time like I'm sure we all did looking at these flow charts and having some offline conversations including with Miss Martin and Miss Galat and some other folks in the community about them. And I think we've had discussions about our current process and that it's imperfect in certain ways and how do we make it better. And then it's always start thinking of alternatives and sometimes the problems become even greater. I have just three or four quick comments on the alternatives, option one and option two. The first of all option one that seems to me is in slightly different form, sort of a resuscitation of the site plan review ordinance that we passed and agreed was then in conflict with Senate Bill 250. And therefore, option one, it seems to me, runs into that barrier right away. Because what it does is, is Ms. Martin? Yes, sorry. On that. Oh, I was going to say, I see exactly where you're coming from. And we did have, I didn't have a chance to go through all of the different options, but I think option two might address that a little better. Yes now option two and three or two A and B First of all and you've heard me say this before all of you I am resistant to eliminating preliminary design review board role because I think it's extremely valuable. We've had Mr. Ruby testify before us on several occasions is view that the DRB preliminary review is the most valuable and and adds tremendous value to making projects better and and in fact, I Again, I've said this before us uses our opportunity to say it again If we're going to do anything I would argue that we should have had an experienced urban design professional to our planning staff that would be assigned to staffing the DRB and would give us a person on our planning staff with that expertise, which we don't have now, who could add value to that entire DRB process. Mr. Ruby also said that the final DRB approval on projects really is more of a check the box kind of a process rather than the real value is at the front end. That's point one. Point two is on the PAB, I would argue that, whatever else we do, we should help reduce the petition review workload on the PAB, which they have told us, it can be cumbersome and limit their purview to just those matters that are required by state statute, which are rezoning text amendments and PDs. I believe, or those are the three. And anything else that would re that now is going to PAB for approval on petitions, not go to them, the Gooms directly to council. And then the third thing I'd say is on, again, doing these option, option two, where you have this conceptual site plan box at the top. Again, I would argue that DRB should come first, preliminary, but to me, where the devil's in the details is if we are going to have some kind of a review and approval of site plans here at Council, call it site plan approval light. We still have to have specific criteria and standards around which we make that decision. If we're just looking at something and sort of, saying, in effect, looks okay to me, or a wink and a nod, that can get us, both us and the petitioner in all kinds of difficulty down the road. And it's just problematic. You know, if we're sitting here as a council at any point in the process, earlier in the process or later in the process, we have to be making decisions based on specific standards and criteria that relate to our comp plan and our development code. And so how you separate out a conceptual approval from a final approval is something, it may well be possible, but I haven't figured that out of my own mind yet. So those are some comments on revisions to propose revisions to this. So then if that's the case, what standards and criteriaR-B using that council wouldn't use. They're using the D-R-B handbook. Oh, is the D-R-B handbook different than what the codes say? The D? The criteria that the D-R-B is using are in now chapter two. There's actual 14. There are 14 criteria and I think it's 2-479 that they use but they are design based. They're not based on the comp land. They're not based on the land development code. They're design based only. So they are the designer view board is using much different criteria than council. When you make your decisions, you're using criteria specific to whatever petition is in front of you. So conditional use criteria, variance criteria, site plan criteria. They're very, very different from the design review criteria that the DRB is looking at the code. I'm looking at the code. What criteria are you looking at when you're looking at site plan? I'm looking at I don't have a set of criteria. I'm looking at the code. I'm looking for a sufficiency with the land development code. So chapter is 44 and above. And where does the comp plan fall into that? I mean, we're looking at the comp plan as well. But I'm not looking at the design review guidelines. I'm looking for site plan, I'm looking for code sufficiency. And make sure their density is correct and all those. And what's the benefit of the comp plan when you're doing your review? The benefit of the comp plan, we look at the comp plan, the comp plan sets your overarching. The comp plan drives your land development regulations. So the regulations that you put in your land development code, all your development standards are all driven by the comp plan and consistency with the comp plan. So all of those policies are the criteria? Those are not criteria. No, you're The development standards that you adopt in your land development code are consistent with your comp plan So for me to find something entirely consistent with your land development code There's there you couldn't say it's inconsistent with the comp plan. All of your development standards are written to be consistent with your comp plan. That's your enforcement mechanism. Your code is how you enforce your comp plan. The comp plan are broad, suggestive statements. Your land development code puts those into dimensional standards and criteria. And I have to move on to other council members but I'd like to know the different sections and areas for which site plans are mentioned in the code. So like I said I'm not looking at just site plan in the code. I'm looking at fence regulations, landscaping regulations, density standards, everything applicable to that property is how we determine if something is sufficient. So if it's in the D downtown, you have your parking in chapter 50, your fence regulations in 56, your mechanical in 56, all your different, just like when we review a building permit, you know. And that's what each department, so that's what I'm looking at. And then, you know, Eddie's looking at chapter 16, the stormwater regulations. He's not looking at our fence regulations. He's looking at his building departments looking at the building code and the FEMA regulations, fires looking at their standards and the fire prevention code. Each discipline has their own set of regulations. Okay. And then, how do you know how many areas within, I mean there's site plan administrative, it's in chapter two and then there's another section for site plan. Do you know how many site plan sections are in the code? Well, there's one. It's 46-33 is the section that is the site plan provides for site plan. It's submittal requirements. It's the methods of approval of the regulations. And then there's the administrative approvals in is that in chapter two? No, so the approval process for site plans is in 4633. And that's the only place. That lays out, yes, that's the process for a site plan is 4633. But the different type of site plan of approvals is there. Same. Yeah. I mean, it's only one type. The only distinguishing factor is there's one sentence in there that says that council has the review authority of a site plan within a PD. All site plans are the same. They all start the same way. They all go through the same administrative process. There's only one distinguishing factor is that those that are in a plan development then go on to city council. Or if you do you review determine that there's a conditional use required or a variance required? Right. Yeah, and that's addressed. It says, you know, that site plan must be secured before you go on to council entitlements. Not in those words. Council member Karemmer. Yep. Thanks. To raise point, I think, in my mind that what ameliorates this and for us is they're only common to us if they need something. If they need a variance or conditionally used or less to vacate something. So it'd be pretty rare or relatively rare compared to the folks that just follow the rules and do it with that asking for something. And those that are just in option one, I'm comparing option one and option two, option one gets their quick if they're compliant. I just roll with what you got, go to DRB, and get home. I really like that. If my colleagues option two slightly more complicated, not much, but my question is, in terms of if we went option two and we had to rename the float chart, and this is just in knowing how we have to change documents and what they say for calling things new names, would that be cumbersome on y'all to have to make that switch? I think it would be helpful honestly. Oh really? That's something I don't even know if council brought that up. That might just be something that I'm putting out there because I think there has been a lot of confusion amongst petitioners, boards council, the site plan process and then an actual site plan in a set of plans are two very different things but they're called the same thing so you know and I want to kind of distinguish that the process is not just reviewing that one drawing that is a site plan. The site plan process is reviewing the full collection of architecturals landscaping civils the whole set so to change it from the site plan process, I think I offered some different names. I think it's great. Not tied any of those. I just thought it might clarify for everyone. And that's why I'm bringing it up because so that the juice is worth the squeeze in that case. Yeah, I don't know that it's necessary, but it would be very helpful. And so then if we went with Option 1, which is bringing me to this, would we want to change that top box a different name no matter what if we do nothing that's my question if we wanted option one can we change yeah okay let's agree that I'm for that thanks and what would you change that I think I I've offered general general development plan general development plan yeah General development plan. There's conceptual site plan too, right? Yeah. I think that's a little, yeah, I don't want to say concept, I don't know. I thought conceptual might be a little bit of a. Then general development plan, set a site plan on option one would be fantastic. I'll strike that out. And then. Sorry. Thanks David. The general development plan on option one, that would be a name change instead of site plan at the top is what I'm saying to help staff. And then I mean I like that. We only see it, we have to see if they needed something from us and then otherwise D.R.B. Can staff and D.R.B. can roll with it if they're doing everything that they're supposed to be doing. And some of that, the analysis on us to trust people do the job that they're supposed to be doing. And I am ready to do that. Thanks. Mayor, can I just clarify something? Yeah, I think you. Yes. I believe the only thing option one does differently is remove preliminary DRB. Yep. Yes. Yes. So like, planning board still sees everything that they currently see. I just want to make that distinction. I know these tables can be a little confusing but the only thing that would change is preliminary DRB. And that you're talking option one. Correct. Option two is significantly different in that it limits the planning board to what their duties are as a local planning agency pursuant to statute and removes all of these CUPs and variances that legally could come straight to you as a city council if you'd prefer that. And it only has one DRB as well. Okay. Councillor Martin. Obviously we're attempting to make this more efficient and effective and I feel like we've lost sight of what the catalyst was for this conversation and that was the right after we became the new elected officials part of the equation. I got thrown in the dependent and we had the transient lodging thing down on fifth and they had gone through everything and checked all the boxes and it was a thumbs up but the business model for that particular business didn't fit for what they were trying to do and they were trying to put a ground Square pegging around hole and we as the elected officials up here on City Council at the very end of the process said We realized you did everything right, but this isn't gonna work on Fifth Avenue And it was definitely the right decision. There's no doubt about that But that's really what kind of created a catalyst for us to try to say, is there a way we can do this differently? And change this process so that something like that doesn't happen, where that particular petitioner spends millions of dollars to get to the goal line and then for us to say, no, that's just not going to work as a business model stock. Again, I don't know that I have a solution from a standpoint of the flow chart here. But, and I know that my colleague, right here, Chris Bennett also mentioned you, we need to figure out, you know, if we don't want to put ourselves in a position where we're creating more problems than providing solutions by putting City Council earlier in the process. Unless we can do so by putting City Council earlier in the process on a very confined avenue for saying yes or no. In other words, we're not going to be looking at all of these other things that are already being looked at anyway. But if we can say, hey, it's a business model specifically for that particular location in the city. I mean, I don't know if that's something we can do or not or we can create that from a legal perspective. but we need to stay focused and try to remember what we're trying to accomplish here. And that is to make this more efficient and effective and also eliminate the situation where a petitioner goes all the way through the process and we kick him out of Alton and say no, it's not. You go after they just spent a ton of money and a ton of time and energy. So the conceptual review would just be of the entitlement. Maybe. That's what I'm saying. Again, I don't want to... The process we've got is pretty dang solid. But that's a perfect example of where it didn't work. And if we can figure out a solution to prevent that from happening, that would be awesome. Yeah. But I'm with Council... Thank you. Awesome. Yeah, but I'm with Council, thank you. But I'm with Council Member Christman, you can't give entitlements at a conceptual review when you don't have details. Right. That's, I mean, that doesn't work. Well, I don't, you made you right. And maybe it just, maybe it just doesn't work having City Council earlier in the process. Maybe the, the ultimate decision here that doesn't work in that scenario. In that specific scenario I think those folks knew dang good and well what they were going to build and what they wanted to put there was let's call it what it was an Airbnb but they were going to call it transient lodging because it fit in our comprehensive plan for the Fifth Avenue area and that wasn't a hotel. It was something entirely different that they were trying to call a hotel. So this came out of too when we had the Mayor's focus group with the development community. This was an idea that actually came from the development community of before we go down this whole path if there is something specific that we need from Council. Like they don't need the Council's approval of the site land but they know they need approval of a variance or a conditional use just the opportunity to you know put, put it in front of those. Yeah, and get that feedback right away. Okay, I think it's also important, Bern, that this is an option. I think if they don't want to come before us and just roll with it and go down the road. I think under Senate Bill 250 it has to be an optional. That's right. That's what makes it work with SB 250, is this is not required. Well we can't do that. It's kind of like having a code and it being confusing. Now you get to pick whether you want to or whether you don't want to. Notice given an option for a big picture if you need a variance or what condition we use, the option is you can come before council and present the big game plan like Burns talking about so you don't get to the end and get squashed. But we're missing the big piece. There are petitioners are bringing fully baked, sorry, I wish I had a better word, but I'm following you, Erica, projects having DRB see something as a preliminary, fully baked, when we're the ones that are elected in their volunteers? I go with Chris men saying we should have somebody on staff that is looking at the standards for architecture and whether it meets the standards for architecture. Just like we used to have an engineer who looked at the traffic patterns. To have a volunteer board that we haven't been able to fully have volunteers committed to it, had to change the rules because an ad county people, because we didn't have enough city volunteers is my boggling to me. Okay, just to be clear, I'm not talking about architecture. That's a whole different interlada. I'm talking about big picture uses that would require a variance or conditional use or a survey cake something very specific. If it doesn't require anything, that's not our purview. The process is fine. But why, that's not our purview. But it is fine. But why wouldn't it be our purview? That's what I'm still trying to figure out. And I'm still very confused in there. If they want additional use or variance, it is our purview need to come in front of us for approval. And that's very specific. Please correct us. We're just like pointing you as I know. The people have corrected me if I misspoke here. That specific example, again, that kind of was the catalyst to this, they actually had everything that they wanted to do. And they're business plan meant all the criteria for our codes and our ordinances. So they were able to say, gosh, we're going to put a transient lodging down here. But it really wasn't transient lodging down here, but it really wasn't transient lodging. And ultimately, this group up here said, no, no, no, no, no, that's not transient lodging. That's an Airbnb you're trying to put on Fifth Avenue. And you don't have any staff there. You don't have anybody cleaning it there. You don't have anybody security there. So we were like, no, that's not going to work. But they actually had met all the criteria. Dimensionally yes. So the issue with that particular one is that got all the way to us and we also said no because we think you're what you're trying to do here Some of the entire is different But so did all of eighth street if you start all of that on eighth street and what you used to I'm sorry for those but Bakers Baker building. Yeah, all of that is the same thing But that they work God Most of that didn the same thing. But that they weren't. Go ahead. Most of that didn't require a specific approval. Only the ones that include transient lodging required approval from council. One of, you know, the buildings that required conditional use approval for the transient lodging did come to City Council. But if there's a lot of the development on 8th, that is by rate, but is by code. So they wouldn't- But it's by the pretense of it's a hotel, but it's the same concept that they were trying to put on Fifth Avenue. It was a new transient lodging, yes. It was, and they were upfront about that. I mean, history history, they came to City Council and said this is what we're doing. There is no lobby, there is no central laundry. Well, they did it to DRB first. They did it and then- But not at that level. They didn't come to DRB and say this is our business model. They came to DRB and said this is what our roof color will be and our honours look like. I watched it. I watched it happen. And Matt Craig said, this is a new design concept with no concierge. Right. But the DRB, the criteria that the DRB is looking at is the design of the building. The DRB is not saying we don't like the concept of this building. We don't like your operational plan. They're looking within their very narrow criteria of the design of the building. It's misleading though. If I were Matt Craig, I would have said the building. It's a misleading though. If I were Matt Craig, I would have said, okay, that's what they want. And that's what they got. Because then as it went through the process, it was known as transient lodging, but no one really knew the details except for that DRB meeting that it really didn't have your traditional concierge. Where the question is not asked when it came up in front of City Council. That was just the best. We did ask for an operational plan. And that came up in front of the City Council and the City Council at the time said, we're okay. We're okay with that. We're okay with that. So, well, this City Council said no, that City Council said, yeah. But the same concept though, the transient lodging being improved there, the process could have been a little bit earlier in the system and the conceptual flow chart. So that the petitioner would know earlier on whether that disk, whatever the city council was sitting here at that point in time is going to say yes, we forgot to a great idea or we're not so sure about that. You may want to go back to the drawing board before you spend all this money. And again, that's the point of this conversation was not to reinvent the wheel here, but to try to make it granted a little more efficient, but also eliminate what happened specifically a few months back when that particular petitioner had to go back to the drawing board. So again, I don't have an answer, by the way. No, this is discussion. That's good. I wanted to try to get us going in on what the issue was, they sort of created and was a catalyst for this discussion. Got it. That's my whole point. But I want to be very clear before DRB, there wasn't a DRB. Yeah, okay. There was a city council. And I've actually talked to a couple of GCs and developers who really like the DRB being up there in the beginning of the process. So I'm not saying that that's a bad idea either. They actually are saying, we don't think that's a step that we shouldn't have to take up here. We'd rather do it down here. They actually enjoy and benefit from the input from the DRB being early in the process. And then also at the end of the process. I don't know if these flow charts are, it's not a half pick wholesale auction one, two, but we can mix and match elements of all of these to create. Yeah, and I'm not opposed to the mayor's suggestion of having somebody on staff do some of the stuff. I don't, my issue is just that it's like interviewing for a job. I only want to talk to who can fire me. I don't need to talk to all the other people. I want to know what the person who can kill this project, so it's the council. If we're going to get, let's end it early as an option. They don't, again, they don't have to do it. I think that's huge to, and it's way higher, we can plan this, be 250. And beyond all this, the development community would like it to get before us if we're going to squash you. If they need something from us and we're going to say no. I mean, they've asked for it and it's within our purview to do it. I just think it's- I think so. What the- That process we need to hone in on exactly what that early city council decision is going to be. Is it operational? The business plan, the business model for that area of town? Is that the only thing we're going to look at? Great. Maybe that is the only thing we look at. I don't know. We need to know exactly what we're looking at to avoid what Councillor Chris was talking about, getting in trouble by saying, hey, that looks awesome. And then all of a sudden, it doesn't look awesome when it's all said and done. But if we're going to look at specifically, again, I don't know if this is it, but specifically the operational plan or the business model, then let's look at that and we spend half an hour discussing that. And if we think that's a viable operational or operation that's going to go in that part of town, great. You know, why don't we put a weed shop on Fifth Avenue? I don't think we want to drive through liquor store on Fifth Avenue. I'm sure our codes probably prevent all of both of those things. But nonetheless, one of my point is we can, as a city council, look at that real quick and say, I've seen that having major problems. And if we do have some problems, we can tell them, hey, these are the problems that we see with this particular type of operation or this type of business going in this particular part of town. Again, I don't know if that's specifically what we need to do but I dream. But we have to, with knowing that, they're only coming before us if they need a variance conditional use or a survey case. See, again, I don't understand that philosophy. If it meets the code, why wouldn't it come to council because council can make request and the petitioner would honor it where if they go to drb they can say we want you to paint the building we want you to do this and they don't have to do what drb wants. So there's really no conditions that say they now if council says do it, they have to listen to council. We can't compel them to paint their building different, I don't believe if it's within the code can we? Mayor May. Yes sir, Mr. McConnell. Yeah just to try to great comment, great discussion, I appreciate everyone's insight here. Just to try to. No wait down. I appreciate everyone's insight here just to try to know it down if I may and so your point mayor if it's permitted as a right then it should not come before the city council well that's what this is the business plan that we're operating no it just generally speaking the way you control that is to amend your codes to make you feel more comfortable with what is permitted So that if it is permitted it's moving through the process Right the only thing coming to city council is entitlements that are not permitted by right Everyone when they buy a piece of property has the right to do a BC with it period Which is just a building permit through this city process? But if I could ask and I don't know if this is but can on that point yes If DRB says we want you to put a bigger buffer They don't have to do it because it's not presuming to code But if they want approval for I mean you can't Can't move on without drB approvals if the DRB can't act towards. Well, no, I think the appropriate, the strongest power you all have as a body is your zoning power. If you don't like a 10 foot buffer, then change it to 20 feet. We don't know. Well, that's just nice, but. No, I'm just saying that's the appropriate way to address the concerns that you're raising in my opinion. However, I do want to ask. There are other two. Wait, let him finish this. No, that's fine. No, that's fine. Please. There are other pieces though that might be missing in there. And that is really, I think what we're struggling with is the disconnect between our our comp plan and our codes. And, you know, like for example, in our comp plan, it says, you know, no big box retailers, just incentives. That's in the vision work plan that is adopted. It is, however, if you read that, that is relating the old comp plan to the old vision. So that is neither the current comp plan nor the current vision. So that is neither the current or the current vision. So that's the problem with that one. That vision work plan needs to be redone now that we have soon hopefully the we we transmitted to the state the update of the comp plan. So once we get that now that we have the new vision that vision work plan will be redone to relate the new comp plan to the new vision. Because that is relating policies of the comp plan to the new vision because that is relating policies of the comp plan to a vision that is no longer in effect. Okay, but this was done months ago and we were okay, you know, we were okay with restoration hardware and whole food there being a big box and everything was intact. It was not, you know, that was what we were going under. And so a vision was adopted years ago, the new vision. So that vision work plan is still relating to the previous vision. That's the, there's a small issue with the vision work plan. That vision work plan that's in our comp plan right now is the old one. So we ignored that when we decided administratively that Whole Foods was appropriate and that Restoration Hardware was appropriate for that area. When we are looking at a site plan, none of those plans had Whole Foods on them. That's stuff that you know because the word is out on the street. But nobody submits to us very rarely. We'll get like Chick-fil-A says we're Chick-fil-A. But when someone submits a building, it's a grocery store could be wins or it could be publics. They're just showing us the floor plan of the building. Big box. We don't know who the final tenant is. We don't know that. It's on the street, but it's not in the formally submitted documents that come to staff. Okay. If I, I don't know if you're, I just wanted to circle us back to kind of keep us directed on the issue. And again, if we could just refrain from speaking about specific projects, because we're at a workshop and this is legislative, please. I'm just trying to deconstruct these and where we are, there is a fear of letting go almost. And I think it might be because our codes are really not in sync with our vision statement. We've got a, you know, preserving green space all over the place and I just finished an analysis on the Miracle Mile where we've tripled the building sites. You know, really it's sometimes part of it is as much as an increase of 480%. I think the problem is the complex plan says that, but then if you look at the lot coverage requirements and the way lot coverage is measured in your code, which is your enforcement document, those projects are all compliant with what your code says. So the premise there is that when those codes were adopted, the assumption was that that is an adequate amount of green space. And that's where it's tricky. When Matthew says the comp plan is great and the comp plan is a guiding document, but unless your codes enforce those things, preserving green space, the comp plan doesn't say preserving 62% on every property of green space. That's what your code does. So if your code doesn't say it, that's... I think we might be saying the same thing in that we do not have really an alignment with what our comprehensive plan is, which it all has to meet the comprehensive plan. And the way that it is mechanically built through our codes. Right. Because there you know there there is a loss of green space and we say just the opposite in our comp plan on a lot of these projects and you know it's just it's all but disappeared and many many of our projects. And so what we need the most important step that we can do is update the comp plan to be to say what we want that to say. And then once the comp plan is updated and we're all satisfied that that's, you know, reflects the community's vision, then you update your codes and that's another process that we could change that code tomorrow though to require more green space. No, we could hit with 250. I think. So if I could just take a minute to circle this back real quick. That's really the frustration of a resiliency council is the you know you read one thing and it doesn't match with the other. And it's you know it becomes a conundrum and bangs right up against SB50. Understood. Well, can I ask a few questions? Yes, I just want to make this comment though, because then I have Vice Mayor and then we'll go to the questions. But I'm sorry under resiliency, having more green space, is not 250. Vice Mayor and then yes Mr. McConnell. Yes, so I'll be quick about this. So for me I had to ask myself why am I here, why are we here on this topic today and I believe Councilman Barton said it very well. I think it relates to that project that was down on Fifth Avenue and all the time and effort that they spent to get here, right? And then it wasn't really an alignment with City Council. So real quickly, option one proposes that we eliminate preliminary DRB review, right? Am I right about that? Yeah. So having experience on DRB, Chairman Ruby, is messaging us that preliminary DRB has the most value. Consider if you want to disregard that guidance. And if so, why? Next, have we identified unintended consequences with each of these options? I believe Councilman Christman alluded to this and rightfully so. But what are the unintended consequences for each item? The conceptual Site Plan option reviewed by Council. What does review mean? Does it mean that we approve it? Does it require a consensus or a denial? Does the petitioner have to come back if the Conceptual Plan is rejected? How many times do they come back? Architecture was discussed. And I'm the world's worst believe me. You don't want me to prove an architecture or colors or anything like that. But is architecture involved in that city council reviewed? Hight is part of architecture. Below grade parking is a concept. Parking is discussed. Is parking discussed as part of a conceptual site plan? I think I see it in the description. And is that guidance that we're giving on parking? Remember that project downtown had a parking issue, right? Remember in the back? So is that a consensus? Is it guidance? What in how, I do support the idea of adding a subject matter expert in urban planning, but we need to understand what or how does adding such a person, a person aligned with our code. But how does that bring value to our residents? I think it does, but I'd like to hear it discussed and identified. And what value does such a person bring in value to the development community in terms of time and expense? So there's a lot of details of that conceptual site plan reviewed by City Council. I don't know if we wanna get in the weeds on what, what are we really saying when we say review? What does that message look like and sound like? And what does it, what does the outcome of that review impose upon the petitioner? And how many times can we do it? That's it. the outcome of that review impose upon the petitioner. And how many times can we do it? That's it. Anyway, thank you. Thank you, Mr. McConnell. Thank you, Mayor. So just to circle back on what I heard, I think we have a consensus that, unless I'm wrong, that we like preliminary DRB as a board, is that? I would wrong, that we like preliminary DRB as a board, is that? Pretty accurate. I like preliminary DRB, but the problem is, the reason we got a height issue was preliminary DRB allowed embellishments. They liked those things on top, and then all of a sudden we went over our height because they don't look at code. And then it comes to us. And we didn't know for years we were allowing embellishments that were going against our coat. It's a problem. If they're not going against the coat, yes, sir. Yes, sir. Well, we can change that. I mean, we can change the criteria on what the DRB looks like. I was just trying to focus back on the process here, because there are certain suggestions that I'm about to make. I don't like the conceptual idea period. I think it creates too much hurdles. I know it was suggested during the meeting greets with the development community, but to sit here and develop a whole new set of criteria and things just for it to come before you conceptually, before you make a decision. I'm just thinking this through legally. What if you say you're okay with it and then you decide not to approve it at the end? It just creates too many avenues for appeal and things to even entertain. So if I could just limit that discussion now, I highly advise against doing a conceptual general development plan. But what I do advise doing, along with removing PAV from the administrative appeal process of administrative decisions because legally it just makes no sense for them to review that, is limit planning board somewhat on what they're reviewing conditional use and variance-wise. Have that go-to design review, have it go-through site plan, have it come straight to city council, and then let them move on. You are the only board that can give entitlements when it comes to variances and conditional uses. And a year from now, we may have a discussion on, hey, we wanna hearing examiner for variances or we want a board of adjustment for variances which we can very well have at that time. I just think part of the issue that we were dealing with too, or at least I was hearing from staff is they are preparing for a hearing every single week. Every time an agenda is finalized they are preparing for another one. And that's because it goes to DRB planning board and then city council. Take one of those away because there's no legal requirement for the planning and zoning board to review all of these things that you all review. So that's I'll end it there then to me it makes more sense with the Track record of trying to fill positions of drb That we have a combined board that looks at that drb and PAB per what their purviews are and is to you Vice mayor that's right. Do we want to lose Chairman Ruby? But what's going to happen if we lose Chairman Ruby? Because who makes that board right now is Chairman Ruby when it comes to architectural design. And then the landscapers also give their benefits. But to me, if we want to make it simpler, it doesn't make a bit of sense why we don't combine that design review and that PAB process. It makes it less cumbersome and then it goes to council. But again, when it comes to entitlements, they're already have it when they go to PRP. So what's the difference? But they do. They don't. They have. They legally do not. 100% do not. But they do. But they don't. I mean mayor, respectfully. I'm sorry. They do not have entitlements when they leave the R.A. I understand that entitlements, but they have the plans. They have. The reason that the, the, the, the harbourn that council has with getting the fully baked projects is not a product of preliminary DRB. It's a product of site plan. Preliminary DRB, those plans are nothing more than conceptual architectural drawings. The reason they're when the projects come to you, you're seeing full stormwater, full civil sets, full everything is because they've been through the site plan process, which is a very detailed staff level analysis. So preliminary DRB was in place way before the site plan process. That's always been a pretty conceptual level. The thing that has changed was the addition of the site plan process moving from the end of the project to the beginning. Now site plan is the first step and the reason you're getting projects that are almost construction ready is because they've been through multiple rounds of site plan where we've requested, you know, then combining those two to me sounds like it's going to have it better off in that process and make it smoother. I combining site plan and DRB. Well, I don't understand why site, if site plan isn't complete, then why have they been submitting complete documents? Site plan isn't complete, if site plan isn't completed, it doesn't go anywhere. So when it goes to DRB, it has a complete site plan and not necessarily because the DRB like I said isn't looking at the stormwater plans they're not looking at the civil drawings the fire truck turnarounds the DRB is really just at preliminary especially just looking at the architectural plans the elevations I mean they're not even really required to submit landscape of preliminary they're just supposed to be looking at a very conceptual architectural design. So I won't use this name, Mr. McConnell. But we just had a project go through DRB and they did not look at those designs. And they only had one ingress and out. Egress. Thank you. And it went through DRB and landscape wasn't talked about, signage wasn't talked about, and nor was the traffic pattern. Well, DRB doesn't talk about the traffic pattern. That's probably the reason they didn't have those details is because if it was preliminary DRB, they're not looking at that. And it probably hasn't been through site plan yet. So they probably don't have all of those details figured out. But preliminary DRB is truly just supposed to be, we're looking at this Spanish style building. Do we think it's good? I mean, we have buildings come in that are, you know, that doesn't happen in South Florida redesign. It's that level. It's not meant to be traffic generation and stuff like that. The DRB doesn't. But it's time and it's expense for them to go through that preliminary then. What they're doing is because they're already in the site plan process and they have those for lack of a better word, fully baked plans. They're just for economies of scale. They're using it as a DRB submittal as well. But some of them are at that point and some aren't. That's why you see that level of detail sometimes. Okay, I'm gonna go back to Mr. McConnell because you asked us for those, actually, Ms. Martin said we could create something that's going to be easier. I hear you. I believe this conceptual general with development where we're making up criteria. I don't understand why we just don't have make up to a site plan and it goes to DRB and it goes to PAB at the same time and then it goes to council. To me that's an efficient way. I don't suggest combining the DRB and PAB to very, very different functions to extremely different powers and duties. Once pursuant to statute, the other one you could do away with tomorrow and still be legally compliant. And DRB is that? DRB is that. Planning board, you, you. You don't necessarily need a planning board either. I've had city council sit as the planning, as a local planning agency as well. You already sit as the CRA. I don't suggest doing that either. I think there's a lot of work that the planning board does for you. Their advisory for a reason. I've heard comp plan come up at every meeting since I started in June. You have a board whose main focus is comprehensive plan who is getting tied down with all of these land use petitions that they are not required to review. But for your code saying that they are supposed to. But pardon me, they already reviewed it and it hasn't come to us. So that's a process issue somewhere along our processes that it didn't make our agendas. Because they've already reviewed it. We haven't seen it. Sorry, I can't speak on. I didn't know they reviewed the comprehensive plan I know that we're doing it now and we're about to hire you guys just review to scope of service as well Mayor can I on the D or B so I Am It's pretty obvious from my comments. I'm a strong advocate of having as strong a DRB as we can. I think urban design is extraordinarily important to the future of Naples. And we want to have both at the staff level and at the advisory board level as a group of people that pay attention to that. At the risk of over complicating this, I will offer another model and this comes out of a conversation I had with Mr. Bouderswar drawing on his Palm Beach experience. And if I'm correct me if I'm saying this wrong Mr. Bushor, but I believe in Palm Beach, which has a, one of the strongest traditions around historic and urban design of any community in Florida, they have their DRB, whatever they call it, at the end of the process, not at the beginning. And after council has approved the entitlements of a project, it goes to their DRB. But, and here's a big but, that DRB, which by the way, again, the Courtney and Mr. Boudre-Swar is not necessarily filled with professional architects, it's volunteers from the community who just happen to have a deep interest in this topic of urban design. The building permit for the project is not issued, not with standing Council's approval until the DRB meets and is satisfied with the design of the project. So that design review board has enormous power and authority to, and apparently utilizes it to do everything they can to make sure the project is designed in an appropriate way. It does come at the end of the process. But as I sort of tried to do some research on how different things get done in different places. I thought that was worth mentioning. Am I describing it accurate, ladies and gentlemen? You are for commercial and multi-family. One of the things that Palm Beach has, their boards called RCOM, the Architectural Review Commission. They actually also review single-family homes. But single-family homes, that starts at the beginning of the process. But we're focused here on commercial multi family. And it does happen at the end. And sometimes I've seen projects go back and forth with RCOM over four, five meetings. And sometimes the project dies because that's how powerful this board is and how committed Palm Beach is to its architecture, sense of place, compatibility, all these sorts of things. So, but that's after the entitlements are given. And one of the things that I've seen happen in the past, and if we want to look at a model like that here, I mean, this would be an obvious thing that we'd have to write into the code, is if something happens in the architectural review process that affects an entitlement that you've provided, it's got to go back to you. So as long as whatever the final project is, is compliant with the entitlements that you gave, it goes to building permit. But sometimes, something, you know, our commas so adamant about something, it actually requires coming back to Council on, Council usually says, yes, we think it's good for the community to do this. And what if they don't need any entitlements in which to process? It just goes to them. Yeah, it goes through the staff level review and then it goes to the architectural review commission. Very similar process. And we have meetings. Whatever, then come back to Councillor Noe because it can go straight through, right? Yeah. Okay. And I'll just say, I don't know where we're going to go with this. We need to wrap this up way past our time, but we have had a legal battle over this process It more than once We have had our codes interpreted more than once and had and spent a lot of time on height interpretations. I'm only trying to make sure that this process is efficient and we're not creating an area where there's ambiguity within the codes and we're correcting the habits or the mistakes of the past. And you can do where we've come with with letting a design review board even do resolutions. They're development orders. Mr. McConnell? Is that a question? Yes, Mr. McConnell? Is that a question? Yes, sir. It's a hard question with the RB. I'll be honest with you on whether or not those are development orders. I don't think they are, personally. I know that you've probably gotten legal opinions from different city attorneys. I don't think that entitles them for something that they need from you to do what they're asking like conditional use wise. It just says it's part of the process they get to move on to the next step, which is you all. I think the development order is you granting the conditional use or the variance. That is what's appealable to Circuit Court. Anything DRB does is appealable to you all. It does not go to Circuit Court from what I read in the code. So. Well, we resolved a lawsuit that had to do with underground parking. And they thought it was an entitlement and right away. So I'm not getting into that. Okay, that's fine. But I only think I'm not saying we don't need DRB, but the process has to be simple. It needs to be more efficient and we need to prevent what has happened because of these loop holes somehow that have been found within our process. That's my only concern. And there's history and documentation to support that. And my only point in what I just said is that we can put, assuming we believe that the DRB function is important, there's a way to keep it at the beginning, or we can put it at the end. But either way, if it's done in the right way, in either case, I can support it. But my position is that one way or the other, the urban design function has to be, should be an important continuing part of the process. The other question that you had, Mr. McConnell is about the PAB. I agree they should be doing the comp plan and levels of service and concurrency. So if it's we should be looking at what their duties and responsibilities are, not just how this process works. And we talked about that this summer. So I kind of feel like we really need to bring the duties and responsibilities along with this structure. The problem with PAB is it's not in their duties and responsibilities. It's in the code specific to conditional use permits and site plans. All right, so if I pulled the powers and duties of the PAB right now, you wouldn't see site plan review, conditional use permit review, you would see it in the specific section related to what's being applied for. Does that make sense? Not really. Okay, so last workshop, I provided you the powers and duties of all of your boards. Yes. PAB reviewing conditional use permits if my memory serves me correctly is not it listed in those powers and duties. It's listed under the conditional use division of 46 where it says list out the level right in the review process and it includes PAB. Administrative appeals if you look at their powers and duties that does not say PAB reviews all administrative appeals prior to City Council. It states that PAB is required in the administrative appeal process laid out in your code separate it apart from their powers and duties. So your point, Mr. McConnell, if I understand it is that if we wish to reduce PAB's approval authority to just the three items required by the state. We would need to go back and amend our code to remove PAB from certain sections of the code in those areas other than those required by the state. Correct. And then align the language and then make sure that the language and the duties and responsibilities are updated to reflect what we want going forward. Correct. Correct. So that's in their policies and procedures. In their policies. Which is different. Yeah. That's their resolution right on how they. But that's where we had the DRB problem. That the DRB handbook had conflicts with the DRB code. But my point is all that would need to be aligned. And it will be a chore to do that, but it's not brain surgery. It's kind of what we worked on all summer long. Which is why I try to preface this with how do you want to shift the process because by making one simple tweak gives me the green light to do what I need to code wise. And that's why I suggested earlier that one seems to me one action we could take or consensus we could reach that has not really, you know, how the flow chart ends up, it doesn't even affect that, would be to agree to streamline PAB's duties, as has been discussed today, and if we gave that direction, which by the way, PAB seems to want itself, you know, it would be an action we could take and it would give Mr. McConnell the direction that he needs to begin to make those changes and bring it back to us for whatever approval would be required by us. Okay, I did. While we're amending site plan, can we change the name? I'm amending that section anyway. I'm fine with that. Well, I don't know if I'm convinced that site plan being done simultaneously with DRB makes any sense, why we just don't do site plan. Finish and get that complete before it moves forward in the process. That's not, that's just not. I mean, there's a way it was before it was changed. Which I'm learning there's the Naples way which is a lot different than other ways, which is fine. It's a great process. Final site plan, I mean, you could pick any city you want in the entire state and I highly doubt that final site plan is submitted prior to entitlements being issued. It's backwards. You're not going to spend the time getting that specific on a site plan for final building permit, prior to even being told whether or not you can build what you're asking for. So no matter what, site plan before you is always going to be somewhat conceptual because at the very end, guess what? They dig up the road and they realize, oh, there's a pipe there that I didn't survey. Things get shifted here or there. But to the city manager's point, there could be a trigger that if it shifts this much or it changes something that you already approved the entitled to to come back to you. But no matter what process we make, I don't think you'll ever see the detailed leverage of site plan that they get prior to building permit after entitlements. Plus, it'd be hard to understand because we're not. I mean, at least I'm not. I'm not a building inspector. So with that being said, what is the latitude that the building department has? Or percentages in making that change. I think that's a conversation for a different day. To council member Christmas Point, because I think we're right there, if I can get a consensus, he offered something about PAB. I saw a lot of head shake, but I just want to get a- Let's get a consensus. I mean, on this. Councilman Penelman. All right, so we're in the focusing. We're specifically on option. At this point, you can throw away all three options. Well, we actually though. I think we're creating something that was not proposed as what I'm getting at. Are we adopting Palm Beach's? The model that was suggested as that? What's before you as one simple question, if I may, which is? We had about four of us that like site plan number one. So I don't know why we're throwing that out because the process is the problem. Okay, so. I know you have your problem. Okay, so- I know you have your agenda. No, it's not. It's your agenda. We work this summer on making sure these processes were beneficial. So, I mean, if there's a consensus to keep option one and eliminate the PAV from doing their, the be specific for me, Mr. McConnell, zoning. Limit their functions to that as the local planning agency. Which, which if you want to go a step further, which I think is what's being proposed is they would also review site plans and a PD and Rezones and comprehensive plans which site plans and a PD are not necessarily pursuing to Statue but Those could maintain it's really the CUPs the variances the administrative appeals those things that would be removed from planning And if I'm right, Mayor, if we look at number one, those early questions would come to us first. We're seeing that the same way. That's what I think. Okay. It depends on how it's interpreted. Am I correct in that? It would come to us if they needed something. So I think it depends on how it's interpreted. Am I correct in that? It would come best if they needed something. One, it would go through the administrative site plan and then go directly to PAV and or Crab and then to City Council. Depending on what it is. So if it's a hybrid of number one and the conversation we've had is that it would go administrative site plan first or general development site plan or general development plan then if it needed a conditional use or a variance or anything like that it would go directly to council. Yeah. Then to DRB for just a DRB review, not computer. Can we get option one on the screen? Yep. Please. But perhaps removing PAB, because I think that was the question that- That's what Eric had. Yeah. She alluded to. Yep. So it would be site plan administrative then only on to PAB if it involved a rezone to plan development, a text amendment which it wouldn't, a comp plan amendment or was a site plan in a plan development. Those are the only petitions that would require a PAB. If it did not require a PAB but it required some other entitlement, conditionally use variance, nonconformity, parking allocation, something like that. It would go directly from site plan to city council. Then one city council approval was obtained. It would go on to design review board. And then once that approval was obtained, it would go on to building her. It just goes to DRB review. Site plan to DRB to building her. I think option one as it stands works. With the changes to the DAB, that's going. Yes. Yes. Yes. With only one DRB review. Yes. Well, real quick, on the one DRB, it may be more than one. I mean, remember, they can continue it. If they're not satisfied, they can take three DRBs. Yeah, we wouldn't specify the preliminary or final. It would just be design review and if they request changes They can and the same thing would apply to when it gets to the council stage. You may continue it It doesn't mean that you have to make a decision at that meeting. You've got to be satisfied Just not for nothing. I'm not A little closer to anybody on the RB. How are they gonna feel about that? We're going to get everybody saying, hey, I'm out. I'm like, are they OK with it? If they require no entitlement, it's only going to go into DRB, right? Yep. And they're, I mean, yes. OK. And can I make one friendly? I don't know what we've eliminated. We have an eliminated DRB. And the only thing that's eliminated on option one is preliminary DRB. Yeah. So that's the elimination. I don't see any point in preliminary DRB. Let's do within the entitlements first. And then I like option one. I think it's very well. Penementations from every Christmas. I like option one I think I'm sorry kind of meditation from happy christmas yeah christmas oh I think we actually have stumbled on a good process here. And I continue to have some worry about unintentionally emasculating DRB. I don't think that's nobody's intention. But I think some of the ways in which we need to Make sure the RB is properly Supported our internal administrative decisions around staff and other things and and can be addressed down the road So to move this forward, I think this process process that would just describe, including renaming the site plan, general development plan, would be a step forward process wise. And so I'm good with it. I don't understand the difference, but somebody can clarify it. Council member, premier. I don't have anything that, but somebody can clarify it. Council Member Famer. I don't have anything that I'm good with. Yes. I'm just trying to build a consensus here. How do I know? Patronon. Yes, with hiring a person that has planning on the board that has an architectural experience. Pervert is on it. board that has an architectural experience. I've got one, two, three, four, five that say yes to that. And this is the third meeting that we brought this up. Okay. Vice Mayor? Yes. Okay. And can you just tell me what this general development plan will be? Just a different name. This is microphone. Thank you. When you think of a site plan, you think of a piece of paper that shows you everything on the site. The problem is we have a site plan review process, which includes much more than just a single piece of paper. So I think where Erica's coming from is, we're not going to change the name of a site plan, because the site plan is the site plan. But we're going to change the name of the site plan review process to a general development process. To avoid the confusion when you think of site plan, I'm thinking, OK, show me your site plan. But it actually encompasses a lot more. Architecture of plans and landscape and all that. It's like YouTube and YouTube TV. It's all right. That was easy. No. We are. Oh, yes. Yes. Do you need to review what you heard, Mr. McConaughey? I'm. No, I think we are good. Okay. And remind, remember, everything's going to come back before you in the form of an ordinance. So we're going to have plenty of more discussion on this. It is. We're making some progress. Thank you. Thank you. That concludes item 6B and Mr. McConnell. We're going, or Mr. Voderswar, we're going into executive session. Yes, Mayor, we had an executive session scheduled for 1230. It is 140. The executive session is to discuss the city's labor relations and compensation strategies to both the collective bargaining and pending certification elections. This executive session is pursuant to section 447, 605-1 Florida State Statutes, and the following bargaining units that we will have discussions about include the Florida Public Employees Council, number 79 of the American Federation of State and County Municipal Employees Local Union, number 2017, also the Collier County Lodge, number 38 of the Fraternal Order of Police, and lastly professional firefighters of Naples, International Association of Firefighters, IEFF Local Union 2174,ing this to last less than an hour. So hoping we could be back in the room by 2.30. Okay, with that we're an executive session up. you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you All right. Okay, we're back from our executive session and moving on to item 6c. Mr. Moonshore? Thank you, Mayor. I'm going to quickly turn this over to Mr. Middleton to give us a little bit of background. And we have a presentation. It's the next item is at discussion regarding bicycle and micro mobility. Thank you. Good afternoon, Mayor, members of Council, Bob Middleton, public works director. As the city manager said, we've got a presentation for you to discuss for discussion and direction on regarding the bicycle and micro mobility regulations within the city. With us today, making the presentation will be our city engineer Dan Orrstein. And we also have our assistant city engineer, Allison Bickett, who can provide answer to any questions you may have. So with that, I'll turn it over to Dan. Good afternoon. Good afternoon, thanks very much for the record Dan Arnstein to the engineer. So here to give you a presentation on bicycle and micromanability regulations. So speaking in terms of the state law, where are bicycles allowed? They're allowed anywhere a driver or pedestrian may go, so long as they operate like a driver or pedestrian were appropriate. So if a bicyclist is on the road, they have to operate like a vehicle. If they're on the sidewalk, they have to operate like a pedestrian. And that's the quote from the state law. Not gonna read through it, but that's where it is for your reference. Where are e-bikes allowed? So anywhere a bicycle is allowed according to the state law. What about scooters? Scooters can go wherever bicycles can go according to the Florida statutes. And finally, what can cities do? Cities can restrict the use of streets, regulate the operation of bicycles, and control or regulate the operation of vehicles. And cities can get granular in terms of those specific different kinds of vehicles and micromobility listed there, mopeds, motorized scooters, electric bicycles, etc. So, can cities ban bicyclists on sidewalks? Yes, Jacksonville has banned them on sidewalks downtown Orlando as well. Tampa also, they can't to bike on sidewalks downtown or land do as well. Tampa also, not the can't to bike on sidewalks within business districts who were signs otherwise prohibited. Venice, Florida, not, they list several specific main avenues downtown where they can't bike. And then Miami, not along Southwest A Street across the whole span of town. So, what about Naples? So I'll read this. along southwest A Street across the whole span of town. So, what about Naples? So I'll read this. This is what our code says about where you can bike. So section 36-2, no person shall ride a bicycle, skateboard, roller skate, or inline skate upon a public or private sidewalk within a business district or shopping center. And then B, when signs are erected on any public street or sidewalk other than in a business district or shopping center, which prohibit the writing of bicycles they're on by any person. No person shall disobey such signs. Yeah. If you all such signs. Yeah. If y'all got that. I thought it was funny. So going forward, the question is what vehicles and devices to regulate and where should those regulations apply? And with that, we'll welcome your discussion. Thank you. I've got a real quick one. Martin? Go off here. No person should run a bicycle, skateboard, roller skate, or inline skate, upon a public or private sidewalk within a business district or shopping center. That's here in Naples. What would the sidewalk go on the bridge across Gordon River be considered? Is that a business? Is that I mean there's nothing there there's a bridge. So that's another difficult question with the code because it's difficult to directly apply. Business district is not defined strictly in this in this sense in the code. There's only one is a zone that's defined as a business district and that would be I think the business park where it's just an office park basically. So it depends, it's not directly enforceable. Yeah. Okay, so. So real quick on this point, because we talked about this, actually I think with the planning staff as well, that this is an opportunity for us to get some clarification for enforcement purposes. Otherwise, it's difficult. Yeah, I mean, I think a starting point, and it made me to go further, and this is one of the earlier ones said act as a bicycle. And if our code specifically for bicycles can't be on sidewalk for a business district, then obviously that applies to e-bikes. But then we get into another issue of, okay, an e-bike is not a motorized scooter. And it's also not a segue. So, my knee jerk is anything that's motorized needs to not be on our sidewalks. That's kind of where my head is. We've got families and women with strollers and everything else walking down the sidewalks. That's that's kind of where on my head is. You know, we've got we've got families and women with strollers and everything else walking down the sidewalks. If you got a motor on your on your vessel there, you need to go go deal with cars in the in the roadway and if you don't feel safe doing that then don't ride them. That's a good consensus starter. May I? Yes, you may please. Always. One point of good point. So micrommably device, pursuant to statue. And this is a recent law change. When I say recent, I believe it was 28-tea, and if I'm not mistaken, includes electric bicycles. There's a definition there, I think. To your point, you see the one wheel. I mean, they're all sorts of different elements now, but as long as we classify them and they meet this definition, which that was the intent of Tallahassee, I think by creating a section for micromobility devices, we can get to that point of regulating them everywhere. Can I ask a question, Mr. Borgon? Yes. Would you include expanding the prohibition on regular bicycles on all sidewalks? I actually did put a little time to thoughts of this. My concern all of a sudden becomes we've got an elderly population here that might be riding around on a three wheel bicycle, no motorized. And if we're now saying we're not allowing bicycles at all on sidewalks, does that include the little lady driving around on the three-wheel with the basket on the back? We can't put her in the street. So again, I don't know what the answer is. I don't know what the solution is, but please, input is greatly perturbed. Well, my thoughts are we really need to look at our master bike pedestrian and bicycle plan. We've looked at it for complete streets, but we haven't looked at it for the safe path from point A to point B. Like how does someone get from Port Royal to Third Street to Fifth to hall, to wins on a safe path. It's a little fragmented, but that's I'd like to work on that safe paths because my biggest concern is we don't have or we don't enforce or they don't follow the truck path. So the truck routes, they're going down second. And those are big trucks. And then you have these hotels now that are giving away bikes. And you have these vacationers that are just, to side by side and it's too late and you've got the construction trucks coming down and you've got, you know, locals going and visitors to me, it's a safety issue that we need to really address and try and be, I think, much deeper thought in how we're going to regulate some of these things that are coming that are missing for us. Miss Pickett? Alison Pickett for the record. Just to kind of back up just a second because to answer, there was a question about the Gordon River. We're talking about US 41 there. So we're following state, you know, road regulations. Also, we do have to consider the regulations that are followed within the state, which we apply. I also want to also relay that there's also different classifications per the state statutes of different bicycle levels. There's like a class one, class two, class three. And so those per the statutes, those are based on the speeds that those bicycles, those electric bicycles and vehicles can go. And then there's also electric personal assistant mobility devices that to respond to that criteria that's identified within the statutes as well. So I just want to state that there are some differentiation between those types of vehicles and what we're talking about. So there's some understanding as far as the different types. And I have the criteria, if you'd like, for me to read that from the statutes. Well, that would help. So the Class 1 electric bicycle means that's electric bicycle equipped with a motor that provides assistance only when the rider is pedaling. And that ceases to provide assistance when the electric bicycle reaches his speed of 20 miles per hour. Then you go to the class 2, which that provides it is equipped and exclusively propels the electric motor that ceases to provide assistance when the electric bicycle reaches this speed of 20 miles per hour. And then you have the class three electric bicycle, which it provides assistance only when the rider is pedaling, and that's used to provide assistance when the electric bicycle reaches the speed of 28 miles per hour. You said 28. Yes, 28. And then the electric personal assistance mobility device is any self-balancing two tandem wheel device designed to transport only one person with an electric propulsion system with average power of 750 watts, one horsepower, the maximum speed of which on a paved level surface when powered solely by such a propulsion system while being ridden by an operator who weighs 170 pounds is less than a 20 miles per hour. Electropersonal assistant mobility devices are not vehicles as defined in this section. So that's going to be hard to enforce. Yes. So that's been I think that's been part of the problem is enforcement. And in this there was some discussion that went before Cari County. There was, and there may be from the MPO discussion on this before, and they were looking to regulate, I think, as part of the regulatory information that I recall, was they were looking to even look at the direction of the bicyclist on the road and requiring only that they go in the direction of travel with vehicles. And I think of course that would be something that would be hard to restrict. And then they were also looking at some of the classification information as far as what was gonna be applied within as far as the e-bikes. And as I understand it from Commissioner Coal, the county has no statute at this particular point in time because he's writing the language for the county So the county has not addressed this situation as I understand it. They took forward and I don't know if I printed that but I know that they took forward a They proposed some language that went before and it was presented before the MPO Previously and it had that information where I think that it was drafted, and it was presented before the MPO previously and it had that information where I think it was drafted but it was never approved from the records that I have. And I haven't heard anything beyond that. I did read that Sanibel passed an ordinance that class one or regular bicycles were allowed on sidewalks. Anything higher than class one had to be on the road. So class two and class three, I guess that would imply. I guess as a mobility assisted devices would fall under the class one because it's the slower speed at less than 20 miles an hour. Again, I read they passed it. I didn't actually delve into the minutia of the language with which they passed it. I didn't actually delve into the minutiae of the language with which they passed, but I did, the article I read specifically said it was the peddling one that only went up to 20 miles an hour. They allowed that on the sidewalk. The others they did not. So again, I don't know. Maybe we gander at that and see if it makes sense for Naples or not. I think the other issue we're dealing with here too, from a standpoint of mobility assisted devices, we're talking about if I'm not mistaken, I think they're kind of gearing that language and that definition towards like a segue type thing, but that also doesn't take into consideration. We see the elderly population here, a lot of them, have these rural low-speed scooters just to get from point A to point B. Certainly again, we're not putting those on the street. So we're going to have to be very specific with the language here and the definition of these vehicles. And I don't know if that low-speed scooter that an elderly person might use would fall under the mobility assisted device language and definition or not. Does it, Alan? Miss Pickett? Yes. Does it, I'll miss pick it? Yes, and there was actually an article from back and we've been looking at from way back in like 2018 as far as regulations of those as being a personal assisted device and that's where it's kind of gotten into the criteria as far as the saguies because over the years, the saguies have been brought up and I ended up finding and digging out one of an article that was brought up from the Naples Daily News from September 15th of 2008. So it's right on Segways can use Naples sidewalks but bicycles can't. And I certainly wouldn't consider that real low speed device that an elderly person might use as the same one as a segue, but I had the sneaky suspicion they're both falling under that last definition of mobility assisted device less than 20 miles an hour. Is this segue fall under? I think it falls under the, well it's the assisted, I actually I think I saw that in code, but I, or in the statutes. I think that over the years, I think we've identified as the electric personal assistant mobility device. But I think that there's actually some criteria that I saw in the statute. Like if you go back to, I think it actually, there was some language that I found just looking out this morning. I'm sorry, I don it actually, there was some language that I found just looking out this morning. I'm sorry, I don't have that in front of me, but. So let's talk about why we want to regulate it. I'll go, I'll just say from my point of view. When I go visit my kids in Orlando, these scooters that are on the screen are left in front of homes, businesses. Just recently, the farmers market, there were like three of them. I don't know where they came from. So these franchises that can pop up anywhere I'd like to talk to legally. Can you limit those? Can they be allowed period? Because once you let one, then they all have the right. And the second thing is the segue tours. Love to show our city off but I will tell you it's extremely dangerous during season when the roads are crowded and there are, I have video after video, 18, 12. There are little pack moving down the road. And the guy who's in charge basically stops traffic. He becomes the, you know, official of managing traffic. And we'll stop and everybody will go. And they're all kinds of devices. They're segues, these scooters, they're the three way, three seats and trikes. Thank you. So that's my other area of concern. Just from a pure safety point of view, and them popping up wherever and however they want. Besides the fact that I'd love to know and then popping up wherever and however they want. Besides the fact that I'd love to know whether those, I know the wheelchair you're talking about that they can go on the street. Correct. Correct. Okay. And then I think, and perhaps, and I'm not trying to jump ahead and maybe Dan had some discussion on that, but I was thinking like franchise. I mean, we could look at incorporating some language on our code for regulating those franchises if you look at some of the other municipalities such as like Key West they they have and I know that's not always the best comparison But they have regular they have pretty actually in their in their codes They have information on regulations for their franchises how many they can have how many people they they have leading even the tours the registration criteria so that may be something that we might want to consider applying within our code. Council member Kramer and do they have like they have maps and specific roots they can take is that correct if I remember right in Key West? I Believe so I think that's the case and I just I just pulled their their code of ordinances and they have a their section is actually pretty fairly strong on the restrictions for their their tour companies and all franchise Restoration when we talk about bikes on sidewalks burnt as a I wrote a lot around here and near death experience to not do it so much anymore. But there are times when there's no bike lane and you're in the road, but they've got like lawn trucks or construction. And the only, like you got to get on the sidewalk or you, there'll be bad. And that's bad. You got to stop if somebody's coming or whatever. But anyway, I don't know the answer to this, but I think it should be set up front. Cars, pedestrians, and whatever kind of bicycle. They are not compatible. They are not friends. They do not play nice together. Somebody has to have the priority. It's wishful thinking to think that they're all going to work harmoniously together. Somebody, something has to give somewhere. Just if you don't, you never had a driver kid to school, and then somebody hit the crosswalk button, and that backs up three cycles of traffic behind you. And now you're five minutes late. That's just a reality ever. And so I think part of the question has to be, where do we prioritize what? And I don't know the old answers. That's for smart people like Allison. But I just think it has to be said, because I hear a lot from the community. Many really good, wonderful people that think that somehow it all gets, they'll all get along together. And that's just not the case. And I will also end with this. I know a businessman up in Sarasota area who excitedly told me how they just got a lease on Davis near the Kleenex box. And how fired up he was to open up his golf cart rental and scooter rental shop. And I knew exactly which direction they're coming. They are not going that way on Davis. Like they aren't going east. I can promise you that. Thanks. What is the law for golf carts on coming east over the bridge? Well, the speed limit is that such that they can actually drive, I think it's within 35 miles per hour. That they, and it's actually posted at that speed through that area, even though it doesn't look like it. It looks like it's a higher speed through there, but it's actually, they can drive the golf carts through that area. There was something that I think we had visited before when the golf cart, there was an item that came before the City Council a while back to create a cart path by the Naples resort there, the one by sandpiper. Naples that may resort, yes. I want to go, I want to get some legal advice, but Mr. Ornstein, do you have some words of wisdom you'd like to share or complete in this conversation? Oh, well, certainly. One of your concerns is that folks are going to park their scooters all over the place. In this photo, this vendor is able to have assigned scooter parking in the right of way because they have a franchise permit or a franchise agreement with the city. So without a franchise agreement, there's no inherent right to stage anything in the right of way. And a number of cities also, such as Orlando and St. Petersburg, do have whole sections of the code designated for micrommability regulations to regulate who can operate just saying nobody can have this service or You know unless they're authorized and where parking is allowed or not loud where riding is allowed or not loud And you can specify different kinds of these vehicles that for the state statute is where they're allowed and then In terms of what's a business district, it would, you know, because you kind of want bicyclists on the sidewalk on US 41, right? There's commercial lining US 41. So if you can't just say all commercial areas, we have to be a little more granular. So, yep. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. McConnell. Thank you, Mayor. No, I do agree with staff. I do think it's now is the time. In other cities, we were a little too late and there were operating, and it became a problem to make them not operate anymore because they were already doing it prior to having regulations. So I do think it's important to develop something. Not gonna say it needs to happen tomorrow, but if the idea is you don't want what's on the screen before you, and that's a pretty simple ordinance, right? Because you can just say in order to do this, you need to franchise agreement, it'll come before you. And essentially, you can deny it or approve it like we did with right-of-way permits. But this is ironically, I believe, same-peat. And what they did was they did a trial period where they solicited a company to do this for a short period of time to see how it worked. Their roadways are completely different than here. They have a lot wider roads and cars and electric bicycles actually work well together there. But yeah, we can do, I do think if you're going to do something, you should probably go the route of franchise, developing a code section for micromobility devices. And then just remember wherever you allow bicycles, you're allowing electric bicycles, unless you prohibit specifically electric bicycles. Can we specifically prohibit specific classes of the electric bicycles. In other words, could we say class one, two, and three can't be on a sidewalk, because they all go more than 20 miles an hour. I don't care if you can pedal them or not pedal them. It's all, they're all over 20. You need to be somewhere other than a sidewalk. The third or fourth classification of the mobility assisted devices, we allow those on. But can we be that specific about the types of bicycles that we allow? I think you can. And just one thing to think about, especially in APLs, is you're going to carve out some kind of ADA exemption here for people using things that need to. Right? But yes, can you pick and choose? Yes. Just keep in mind, though, wherever if you don't specifically prohibit electric bicycles, they are going to be allowed wherever you currently allow bicycles. And how would have been forced something like that? Oh, yeah. Because it'll be on the code and the officers will know. And you put signs. And code enforcement will know? You put signs too. I mean, similar to stop signs or no skateboarding or yeah And we have to be very careful with our signage. It has to be signed, but you know, we don't want That's what makes us special is that we don't have a clutter of signs, so we need to be very thoughtful in that I had Penement and then Kristen and There seem to be a plethora of ordinances out there. That's for sure. I happened to land on Treasure Island and don't ask me why necessarily. But they're kind of interesting based on the conversation that we've had already. They prefer them in bike lanes, but they have to be to the right of all of the bicycles. So in other words, they're not shoving, putting pressure on a bicyclist to go faster. So you have to be over to the right of them. So there is, you know, there's just a plethora of ordinances out there. It's just a matter of where we really want to go with this. There's, you know, as I say, they're awful lot out there. What do you have any one particular? I've already shared what my concern. This one happens to be. No, any particular concern that you might have or support. For what we've talked about, like the franchise, certainly not on sidewalks. That's for sure. That'ss, that's for sure. That's my biggest concern, sidewalks. In business districts versus neighborhoods. Anywhere. No bicycles on none of these on sidewalk. Electric. Electric. Okay. Yes? Can we get that consensus? Mayor. Yeah. I'll let you go. Yeah. That's what scooters. I like the razor I saw out here going to the left in the water. No, that was somebody else who just left. Yeah, that's a different person. Okay. So yes, if we can knock down one, electric bikes. Class one, two, and three. Class one, two, and three. That's good. On business district sidewalks. Yes? I would say on any sidewalks. Electric. Yes, yes, yes. Okay. One, two, and three on any sidewalk. Okay, you're saying it's okay to be honest. Yes, thank you. Okay. One, two, and three on the east sidewalk. Okay. You're saying it's okay to be honest? No. Right. On no side of. Yeah, I agree. And what about scooters? Are they clear that? I don't think they want to be. Is a scooter considered the same as an electric bike? No. That's right. Okay. That's from time. I didn't think they were. That's not included in this. At least not yet. Okay. All right. Just asking. I'm just asking. Are you okay with getting a consensus on this one thing? Yeah, but I want to go further. Okay. And actually a question. Yes. Yes. Okay. So we're on this there. Go ahead and add to it. Well, so, so, um, a clarifying question, will we just reach consensus on it? If we're saying no electric bikes on, on sidewalks anywhere, you just said Mr. McConnell, I heard you right, that anything, that if we, if we say that about electric bikes, we're saying it about bicycles also. Correct? Other way around. Other way around. So it does not include bicycles. Correct. So electric bicycles are allowed wherever bicycles are allowed. Okay. So here's my view then, is that, I mean, I agree with your two reasons for being concerned, which really related to electric bikes. But I think that I believe that there's an issue we have a naples in business districts and residential districts with bicycles on the sidewalks. Yeah. And I mean, I encounter them all the time, just walking, I'm talking about residential neighborhoods. And it's people who are, and again, it's like so many things in Naples tends to ebb and flow with the seasons. But in season when we have more visitors, there's just people who do it. And they're people who obviously don't ride bicycles a lot and there's gambling down a sidewalk and that's off with the sidewalks therefore. So I think you know I'm very sensitive to you know the law of unintended consequences when we're talking about all this but I would like us to consider anyway whether we can have a broader ban on sidewalks of bicycles as well as electric bikes as well as scooters. Yeah. I don't know. Where will I ride? I'm the same. I'm not serious. Because like I do. Do you ride on the bike? I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. When I go down third street, I mean I wouldn't take that. There's not a bicycle lane. No. But. And our current code prohibits the bicycles in the business district. So we do already have some restriction reference to that. I mean, roughest that. If we add class one, two, and three, right away we're saying no bicycles, including regular bicycles, plus one, two, and three in any business district on a sidewalk. So right away, regular bicycles are moved off the sidewalk in the business district. But without a change to that, they're still going to be permitted in residential. And that's where we need to have a further conversation, particularly allowed in residential, but keep the code as it is from a standpoint of not allowing it in business. And it gets really difficult because all the hotels are giving bikes away. Yeah. And then that's where I'm seeing these people that have, they're clueless, that second is a truck route and a D most in your street. And they've just got their little basket and here we go in sight touring. So, Mayor, this also interestingly enough, they all have to be licensed. and they've just got their little basket near we go inside touring so may or this also interestingly enough they all have to be licensed and you have to be 16 years or older in order to license so unfortunately the city has to go through the licensing procedure if we decide to go that way I actually think it's the opposite they have to 16, but you cannot require a driver's license. Okay. But the... Cheshire Arley may have done something a little bit more strict, but if I'm not mistaken, the statute specifically says you cannot require a driver's license for this. Okay. Okay. a driver's license for this. Okay, this does. This is stricter. 16 parents can't, you know, even provide a bike for them. So they almost pull the parents in on that. Vice mayor, sorry. No. That's okay. Then there's ensuring the darn things. Okay. So just a few quick thoughts here. First of all, I would support anyone that will yield equipment that on that rental process it requires disclosure notices at all retail, hotel or online locations because that will be some of the deal to where they drop them off. the city of Napol's policies and ordinances related to that. In 36-2 item B, my ask is that the wording changes and as amended only by the city of Napol's policies and ordinances related to that. In 36-2 item B, my ask is that the wording changes and is amended. Only bicycles are mentioned in that. On the Key West code or ordinances that apply to these devices, consider duplicating the tour portion. So let's get our tours in line and let's look to that QS code for some language that's already been developed. I would caution against adopting ordinances which don't mesh well with how FDOT or Carrier County regulates the same. Now if those two entities don't have a solid code prepared, we should not wait to develop our own. Simply be aware of how our ordinance matches up with our neighbors. I don't support going down the path which risk having these devices or the EV devices or micro mobility franchises using these pieces of equipment on our sidewalks or VIs, right? I mean, there's sidewalks and then there's think about that. What I've witnessed in other cities is something that we don't want to bring here. Truth, truly. I don't support attempting to measure speed limits on any wheeled device other than a motor vehicle. Read into that. A car or or pickup. Not sure where golf carts are there some golf carts that are street legal and some that are not. But that's some of the minutiae that our attorney is probably going to be good at. I would I would hope to have the city consider using a specific identifiable stripe on the curbing to designate where the use of these devices are prohibited. It identifies where business districts begin and end and any other prohibited areas. Think about how we use markings to prohibit things like parking. So consider, yeah, we can use a bunch of signs, but we can also use if our police officers or our code enforcement has to enforce something and talk to an individual, they should be able to point and say, this is those areas that you shouldn't be using that, or you're not allowed to use it. So, and then the class one, two, and three, I by support that. Thank you. Just for clarification, the rental disclosures, are you talking about rental regular bicycles? Or you're talking about any franchise? Look, whatever, if I'm a visitor here and I'm not sure about your ordinances and I'm renting a bike or an e-bike of these scooters, right? I need to understand the rules in one of the easiest ways I think that we could do it is I think one of the easiest ways we can do it is by giving them the information up front at the earliest opportunity So for for those businesses that register the triggering point would be a business classification where we know they're going to be renting this equipment and the notice needs to go to their renting customers. Okay. As far as where they could ride and where they can. Okay. Well, let's, oh, and golf carts. You can't, are there, are we allowed to have golf carts on the street that aren't street legal? I think the speed limit was 35 miles an hour and above where they can't go. So above 35? I think it's under 35 and under hour and above where they can't go so above 35 I think it's under under 35 and under 35 and 20 so it's 35 and I know they can ride on the street Right can they cross over a street that's that's higher than 35 they they can cross Like they can cross good, but I think we'll be we're dealing with some of these franchises like the nickel rod and slider They were able to as far as looking at the regulations they were able to cross the streets We we allow them and I think that's per the the statutes of our recall correctly that they can cross it They just can't drive along it so So So back to the electric scooters. I have a question about people who work in the state statute. If they have an electric bike, but they're not using it as an electric bike, they're using it as a bicycle. Is that something that can happen? Because I see workers on electric bikes. Right. Yeah. I think it's a good comment as far as I think that's one of the challenges. When you look at these electric vehicles, there's a lot of the workers utilizing, coming in to their jobs. So that was one of the challenges I believe that Carter County was faced with that they didn't want to have a negative impact on these workers that are trying to get in and have an alternative mode to get to their jobs. As far as the speeds, and if they can only be, it gets into the criteria as if they're assisted in that class one criteria. Once they get to that 20 miles per hour in the class one Then that's where it gets us it becomes assisted As distance when the writer receives is the proof to provide assistance when the electric bicycle reaches a speed of 20 miles per hour And I think that's where you get into The differential Yeah, so mayor is it is what we're talking about with that. Would that be prohibitive for workers to get into the city to work? Well that's what I'm trying to figure out. So it so we're most okay so backup most of a lot of these these companies or the I'm sorry the workers that are coming in they're usually coming out of Say at the county coming in through the city on most in most cases like if they're coming in off of 41 They're coming in off the state roads. They're crossing in the only challenges I think that there are some of these workers that probably utilize like Baker Park if we're looking to regulate Like Baker Park because that is across through but most of these's going to be your challenges once they get into the city limits. I mean you have to think of some of those businesses, the hotels that are say Angosha Boulevard, what we want to restrict once you get to that point. Fifth Avenue for instance they can bring they can come in and they're basically on a state road coming all the way up to four corners and so they would fall under the state regulations. I was speaking with the developer and he was concerned about the path and not having a path for bicycle safety and trying to get them downtown. So you know, we have to really think about that. What's the safest routes that we can recommend for these sure will be last. But so let me just so we can kind of frame this. personal. Can we have a law that one for recreational versus. Yeah, I don't know. Commuter. That's going to be an enforcement nightmare. Yeah. Okay. That's where you get into. I mean, but the way we can do it. I'm not sure if we can do it. I'm not sure if we can do it. I'm not sure if we can do it. I'm not sure if we can do it. I'm not sure if we can do it. I'm not sure if we can do it. I'm not sure if we can do it. I'm not sure if we can do it. I'm not sure if we can do it. We wouldn't hopefully have as much congestion and safety issues. Okay. But I guess the question then becomes where would you allow the locals to use it? Because once you develop something like this to the vice mayor's point as well, if a hotel is doing it, if a bike shop is doing it, they're adding this form of business to their BTR. This is part of their business operations, same with hotels. And we could provide them a disclosure, but there's also going to be code language in here that says if you violate this, you're going to go to code enforcement and it's going to be a $250 fine. And really, the responsibility is on the hotel owner or the business owner to ensure their patrons are operating in compliance with code. So there's a bunch of different ways that we can go with code. So there's a bunch of different ways that we can go with this. But it's also, you know, creating a law, but making sure you have safe paths are, I think, going to hand in hand. That's the most important thing is where are you going to allow them? And then, of course, those disclosures to those people that might rent. Well can I get a consensus about franchises allowing the rental of these scooters and motorized bicycles? Well I'm a no but if we want to go that way I think they've got to look to see whether or not the people are insured. Okay so no.. So I'm yes or no. Barton. So this is the question of relying hotels to allow the rental of motorized vehicles. We're other franchise. And last far I was about to go with this. So now does that mean that we're not allowing a specific smithereciscumeter franchise? Yes, does that mean we're not allowing a specific Schumannter franchise? Yes. Does that mean we're not allowing a specific Schuter franchise to pop up and go, hey, I'm going to rent these things from the corner here? Because I think my mind, those are two different things. Allowing a hotel to do it versus allowing just a Schuter rental company to do it. I don't like this one. I don't like the Scooter rental company. I think I'm probably okay with a hotel maybe permitting that or us permitting a hotel to do that. But if they're just doing bicycles, can't we just buy? Just bicycle like I'm okay with. Yeah. Data. I'm just trying to. Data can say yes to. I really just regular bicycle is flying me. So the job can direct them to this. To write. The business assistant. I'm not a fan of allowing the scuder rental process. And if we're just talking about allowing hotels to rent regular bicycles, not otherwise bicycles. I'm okay with that, yes. Okay. Do we have scuder rentals and electric bike rentals? So, Naples now? Probably. There are some that operate. They do not have franchise agreements. And are they private businesses to your knowledge? I think that's through the Naples Transportation and Tours. I was looking at their website before this meeting. They have a rental facility somewhere. I think that's a tent city if I'm not mistaken. And do we know, are there hotels at all? No, there are. There are some that operate. They do not have branch-hize agreements. And are they private businesses to your knowledge? Yes. I think that's a tent city if I'm not mistaken. It's a tent city. And do we know, are there hotels that offer them now to our knowledge? I don't think. We don't know them. I don't think that there are. I think we've had some that have been proposed. We have quite a few different micro mobility and requests that have come before us over the years. And I know that we've had scooter rentals. It's mainly been scooter rentals that I think have been presented to ask if there was any interest in that or if we would allow it. And if- Well, I think the only way we can, assuming this is going to grow in popularity, the only way to control is to have some level of control is to have a franchise agreement requirement and that would be for anyone in my opinion. I'll just, I agree with you, however, I'm not franchise agreements are do you remember taxi cabs? And do you remember the horses? Remember we let that franchise. We do have a code that we do have the code for in your R correct we do have the horse strong carers. That's already in our code in section 40 I believe. And we have actually we can have pedicabs up to two pedicabs within the city and for strong characters. Carriages. Yes. It's where they, um, that's where they, uh, we have that in our code. Yes. Everybody okay with that? Well, there's, there's actually a, well, it's funny that we discussed that now. I'd like to get, if, like to get the temperature in the room because we have recently had some of what we've had over the years in multiple. Entrepreneurs reach out to us and interest in trying to start a petty cab business throughout this in the city. In the years, I've relayed that I don't think that there's been supported interest. They can bring it forward. It would be something that I think we've discussed it could go, it would be presented to you, but it is within the code. So they've gone off of the code section. But it counts. Oh, okay. I don't think that's a look we're interested in. Question. I think that's a look we're interested in. Question? Well, let me get a consensus on that. I've got one, two, three, four. So this is on the skew. Petty cabs. We were on the skewers. I know, I know, but we just found out. Well, these petty cabs with bars on them, you know, the bars. Well, that's a gentleman. No, no, no, that's that's that's different that's that's they that's when we had You didn't get into detail there so yeah, no those are So so actually have this so panic It states in here we have a limit in section 40-1 on the number of patty cubs and horse strong carriages Franchises patty cubs and connection to the issues of any franchises for catty patty cubs in the city such franchises Maybe issued under such terms and conditions as will ensure safe and efficient use of the rights away in the city, but shall not permit more than two petty cabs to operate within the city at any one time. I actually don't see a definition that I've printed out, so I apologize. Can they play music? I think that would be... See, that's what I'm talking about. I don't support it. I don't support it. Yes. To the petty cabs. No to the petty cabs. All right. I have a consensus. But, Karimah. I know. Okay. I'm sorry. It's a petty cabs because she got me distracted. So we have a consensus to get the petty cabs off the books. Off the code. Mr. Montgomery. Glad to unpack there. That was it. No, I just because there was comments on the franchise. I'm going I'm finishing the franchise now. So I've got one, two, three, four on the franchise. Before we get a consensus, I just want to explain something. Okay. The reason you're entering into a franchise is because someone's asking to potentially stage something on your property. You're not just making them enter into a franchise to simply use your road. I want to make that distinction. If these businesses are operating out of their brick and mortar and simply just renting things for people to use on the right of way. I don't think that's really a franchise agreement. I think a franchise agreement is someone's bringing scooters into your city and staging them on the right of way for people to rent and drive around. So I do want to make that distinction because I think it's different. Yeah, and I want to just having done it. I think the franchise part comes in. Like you go to San Antonio, there's, it's all in the way on those things there by the way. But there's spots where you put your lime in your bird and it's, and it tells you this is where they go. That's where the franchise would come in because you have to have a place to put them We got to be careful about how regulating businesses with what they can and can't do where and we need to be a city code issue does it not where we find where it's up where we can safely do this make corridors for them and then codify that am I? That is the most logical efficient approach is to limit where they can operate and then the business will have to fall in line. While also developing and overarching in order for you to park these and come into our city you need a franchise agreement which we may or may not approve which limits someone from popping up tomorrow on 5th Avenue. So I'm on the franchise where they can have right away and rights to the right away. OK, which is yeah, and I've got one, two, three, four. Still. OK, I have four so far. And yeah, so this is the franchise question on the right away on the right way. So we're going to see what we would see if we approve this is in the right way in certain areas. We're going to see these e-bikes or whatever else we approve with these franchises. And where we see them, where they're being powered up or parked, where people can go up and use their phone to transact, you'll make the transaction. That's where they pick it up. That's where they pick it up. That's where they drop it off. What we don't see is what the city looks like when they're not on those devices after they've been rented. So they're typically on the sidewalks in front of business. That's a weird timeout. It's a problem. And so that's where what that's the look and feel. I don't believe our residents will appreciate that. That's something more for the tourists, right? Our residents have their own devices. What are they gonna do? Walk downtown and go rent this device and then park it and walk home. I just don't think this is what we need. Okay, we're one, two, three, four, five, six. Yeah. Okay. We agree with Terry. We agree with Terry. Got it. We agree with Terry. Okay, so now you got that one, Mr. McConnell, on franchises on the right away. Now we have to talk about how these people operate if they operate out of their own businesses. And I know there's four of them. I think one at Bayfront, there's one at Ten City, and there's one at the trolley facility. But that's just- Okay, I thought the trolley location was the same as the ten city. But I can, no, maybe they don't. I know it's under the same business tax receipt. I don't have the tax receipt information, but I know they have a tax receipt. Do they have a right away permit? No. Because they are on, well, and they don't have a franchise agreement and they don't have a right way permit. I think simply, I've received an application for one other than I guess my only understanding is because they're operating and they're set up on private property. And then they're just utilizing them. And they start and stop the same place. Okay. So let's deal with that one in a moment because that's kind only way to limit that is to regulate where you're going to allow them. You're not going to tell a business, you can't operate at all, but you're going to say even though you're renting these, please don't allow, you know, they're prohibited on our sidewalks from point A to point B or, etc. It would be helpful to further refine the definition of business district to something like the third F south and the fifth F south over, or third street south and fifth have south over lay districts because that's that's that's we'll define in the question. And we'd have to ask Venetian Village because I've had complaints from Venetian Village that they've been run off the sidewalks over there but that's private property right. If it's private property then it's a private dispute. Okay. Thank you for that. I'm going to come back to you for other questions like the tours and where they can go if they already have a business that's happening and can we limit the number of bikes or tours you know just 20 people taking up the whole street is very dangerous but I'm going to we have one public speaker. Thank you, don't go too far, please, Miss Bickett. Maria Mayor. From someone who rides a scooter, let's hear your opinion, ma'am. The politics for coming up again, but yes, I do. I don't have a car at bay from, at Naples. I've never had one. My husband doesn't have one. So we keep two cars off the road. But we do have six bikes between us, and I have a Segway scooter, which is made me very lazy, I have to say. And because I love the Segway scooter. But I think this is a great opportunity that you're talking about it now. And I think it's such a big topic that you've probably going to have to come back to it again because it is so big. How there isn't been major accidents I don't know. I run, walk, bike, scooter every single day. I go shopping on my bikes and so on and so forth. So I go all the way up to publics. I go all the way to dentist appointments up to four or five miles away. So in the morning when I'm running though, it's predominantly people going to work because I run between six and seven a.m. So all the people are coming in to Naples, I might run over the bridge and people are coming in to go to work. One thing I'd say is, one, they don't have lights on, they don't have bells. I think a bell should be mandatory. Even on my triathlon bike, which is the fanciest triathlon bike you'll ever see, I have a bell, which makes all the other triathletes laugh. But in New York City, it was the law to have a bicycle bell, so I have one. And I use it to let people know, or I say, passing on the left, passing on the right. because I can drive, but there are issues and problems even with some of the things that you've said here today. Some traffic lights, for instance, do not change when you approach them on a bike, because it doesn't pick up the car. So I can sit there and think, oh, is this one of those? I don't know. I can sit there for five minutes. Then I have to get off the bike, go onto the sidewalk, press the button, that means I'm on the sidewalk. So that is another issue for people on bicycles or scooters. The other thing is the scooters are fast. My scooter can go really, really fast. I tend to ride it around 15 miles an hour because that's how fast I will go on my bicycle. But I can do 18 miles an hour on that. Somebody coming up behind you at that speed, that is clearly dangerous, especially if you haven't got a light on. I do think dismount signs would be useful. When I go under the underpass from Tin City, it is so dangerous when people come past them. No idea why it doesn't say dismount when you're coming under that bridge. And I think dismounting signs, when you're going from Tin City over the bridge towards the Bayfront Resort and the other one, it's virtually impossible to pass people. And then people are coming up the road the wrong way because they're trying to get pass people. So you can have bicycles, electric bicycles, scooters, walkers, runners all in that same space. I'm just, I'm now have a place at Concord over at Oyster Bay, so I'm wondering just how bad that's going to be in season. I would imagine it's, there's an accident waiting to happen. And, what's it going to say? Extreme sports, which is at bay front, does have a lot of them going out. I think if the show and how to ride them properly, and they are mandated to a particular area would make a big difference for 20 scooters or bikes All coming at you even for me and I'm on mine. I'm like, whoa, where do I go? I have no idea But in relation to the e-bikes just a lot of things before I go is a lot of people now depend on them as their exercise A lot of older people. I mean all over the world So restricting the use of where they can go would be very bad. I go on the A41 on my bike and on my scooter but I would not go to goodlet for instance, not in a million years. I never go to goodlet, I go on the sidewalk there but I do treat pedestrians that they have got the right way. I always stop for the pedestrians. The sidewalk is for them and I'm very privileged to be able to use it. If you have any questions and yes, that is my segue outside. Thank you. There's also somebody outside writing around now. So we have two. Thank you. It's always good to hear from someone who's a local and has the experience. So all very good points that we need to consider. Can we go to the last two, Mr. McConnell, and that was tours? When we allowed the water taxi, they gave us a business plan of where they were going to go, where they were going to have a drop off and pick up. Is that something, these tours now that are happening? Do they have business plans? I think that would be required. It would be like any of your other franchise agreements, the trolley, even like slider and work like the franchise or licensing agreements that we worked with them, where they had the specific stops identified if we do a tour is what I would anticipate. Now, I want to make sure that we're on the same page legally. Is that a franchise then who does these tours? The reason the trolley operates that way is because at some point they are staging on our right of way. They are utilizing our right of way for their business venture. This business, this bike shop down the road that so happens to have five motorized scooters that they're going to run out to a family or do a segue tour. I don't know if you really classify that as a franchise. But there's probably a way to do it when they get their BTR at the beginning of the year to line something up. I know we had that BTR discussion, so I won't go down that road. But again, the way to not have 20 people in a row going to see the first city hall together and blocking traffic is to prohibit it in your code. And if it happens, then you cite them, and you handle it like you do any citation. If you go to, like if you look at the tours that we were discussing before as far as the Naples Transportation Tours, I went on their website and looked at what they do for their tours and they actually have like a route of where they take the tour. So I think that that would be something that I think we would want to include and have them submit if we're going to go this way. Well, that's my problem is it's on residential busy streets and they're stopping traffic. It's not on back street. Well, I don't even know what back streets you would use. I thought so. I was going to suggest is there a way that maybe open line of communication with them obviously and they maybe have them assist us with determining what is what they consider to be a crucial part of their tour and maybe areas that aren't so crucial we can say hey instead of doing that go this way so we can get help them come to a safe route. Yeah yeah and it worked with us you know but all again I say that's over in the area and I'll try to pull the same direction. It's a lot easier to do that. And then in addition to that, though, can we, Mr. McConnell, would we be able to limit the number of people they can take on any given tour? So maximum of ten or whatever the number might be, would we be able to regulate them in that fashion? I do have a question. What these tours do they come forward for any type of approval? We have not historically for the tours. But in that response, like I was looking at like the information from Q West, they have, they shall take no more than 15 clients per tour guide. So they do have criteria that restricts the total. So that could be controlled, I think, So they do have criteria that restricts the total. So that could be controlled, I think, from what I read, according to the way that they're ordinances set up. I want to- It may be doable, not that I don't trust Key West, but I'd have to look into it a little bit. Trust Key West. Well, I think that we have some things on the table that need to be discussed and brought back in some form of potential franchises, resolutions. And I think that you do have to think about the signage. How many people are actually doing, is it a recreational or is it a tour of two different types of businesses, I think? So why don't you let me work with staff in the city manager and not going to promise to bring back an ordinance but why don't we try to circle back based on this discussion and come up with some ideas. Good and the sooner we get these ordinance the less problems we'll have with people coming in. And if you do allow franchises, can you regulate the number of franchises? Because that's concerning to me. Free enterprise and once you start it, you know. So if you do the answer is yes, you can limit the number. Okay. Is there other questions that we want to give so they can ponder it to bring back a vice mayor? Yeah, I like the idea of must or required to have an operable, bail or horn on these wheel devices. That's already state law for bicycles just for the record. The state of Florida you have to have an audible divisor of bell on your bicycle. Let's incorporate that then. I support that. Ooh, I'm in trouble. You 7-11 salesman? No, no, no, no. OK. Staff, is there something else you that we haven't talked about that we need to think about? Oh, Oh thank you I think that's everything I had. Okay anybody else? Great. Great. Thank you thank you for finally getting this to us so that we can have some further discussions on our streets and safety. Thank you. Okay. That is easy. Takes us to item 60. Are you leaving me, Mr. Middleton? Oh, got it. There you go. I'm not sure if you're going to be in the next meeting. Mr. Booter Schwar you want to I'll let Mr. Middleton introduce his item and just a reminder we're going to have to step out here in about 10 minutes. Good afternoon. Bob Middleton Public Works Director. Our discussion today is going to be tailored around our storm water ordinance. It's been a long time coming. What we wanted to do is take a high level look at our current storm water ordinance. See how it's applied with us today is Eddie Bliss, who is our storm water engineer that's intimately knowledgeable about our stormwater codes and see applies us to all the projects he reviews. Also Dan Orrstein can chime in with any information that he may have. We do have an ask on this and you may have seen in the information that we've provided. We do want to discuss the inspection requirement that's currently in the code. Staff is making a recommendation that we reconsider that and Eddie will go into the details of what we currently require as far as those inspections. And what staff is recommending is that we revise that to put that responsibility on the property owner. There are some catches that we would like to add into that if City Council desires to change the code or the handbook that's worth located to require inspections at the time of a building permit. So if somebody comes in for a building permit then they are subject to that inspection. And there's some nuances in information in the code. If they do not have a storm water system, then they'll be required to install one per the code based on the 2021 current storm water code regulations. Did I cover everything that I wanted to cover? Unless you want to go for the history of it. Did you want to? Yes, let's do that. Dan, can you, Dan, or Eddie, can you take us to the next one? In 1992, storm water management utility was established for the city. Following up in 2007, or an ordinance was prepared and passed by City Council that would provide pretreatment, protect low areas, contemplate, compliment stormwater systems, a compliant stormwater system, excuse me, and the first city implored it to have a single family requirement for a professionally designed stormwater system. Then we get to the 2021 ordinance. Next please. The 2021 ordinance goals was to incentivize design to maximum pervious green space, have oversized stormwater management systems and use the best management practices at the time. Compliant and support a complement and support the city storm water management system to respond to more frequent and intense storm events and climate change impacts. Next slide, please. What we were trying to deter or limit or reduce or eliminate during the 2021 code change is what you see on the pictures right here. I just had this put in there because we're all about public outreach. And from what I recall when this put in there because we're all about public outreach. And from what I recall when this code was passed, there was a lot of public outreach. This chamber was full on several occasions while this was being done. Thankfully or not, I was not involved in that. But some of the people that we did reach out to was the Collier Building Industry, our local architects, engineers, and POA presidents. The Conservancy of Southwest Florida, Naples Area Board of Realtors, and the Naples Historical Society. And all the public input that I recall helped craft what we currently have as far as an ordinance. I think starting next slide is where I'm going to turn it over to Eddie because this is how the code was changed based on the 2021 code. So let's go back in time a little bit to 2007, that ordinance. That ordinance really focused on the new single family homes. It didn't really regulate the adulterations, the site work permits. That was just single family homes. So any home built or COD in 2007 going forward has a stone water management system. Anything prior to 2007 does not. It was not made to. So that 2007 ordinance required a half inch of water quality volume over a lot area minus the roof. So a lot area minus roof, you take that time to half inch, that was the required value at the time. So the big change, so I'll go so that some of these changes for the 2021 ordinance was it not only included a single family homes, it reached out and touched the adulteration permits, the sight work permits, if you want to add a concrete pad on your outside of your house, that's greater than 250 square feet that would trigger compliance. So this new ordinance really captured a whole lot more for the water quality component, including commercial sites. So let's me look at this real quick here. So we always talk about maximizing green space. So as an incentive for this new ordinance, if you had 40% or greater impervious, you would have less water quality requirements. If you have greater than 40% impervious, you would have greater water quality requirements. So that's part of some of the differences. We're trying to, we want to encourage green space so we kind of give them more of the discount if you want to call it a discount. Incident. Incident has been really successful, but we try. Yeah, we try to get roof drains to connect to these systems or at least maybe not connect, but at least be directed toward those systems. We don't want your roof drains to go to your neighbor's property. We want it to be captured by your property. I think next slide. We're really trying to get into soils. It's been hard to get these swills into compliance. If you have a property in the middle of a new property that we're getting hammered for this swill and then the two outside properties don't have a swill, it's just really tough. So we're gonna continue to kind of fight that process and it's been hard. Because if a property doesn't have an ongoing permit, we don't have any teeth to make them comply. I don't, maybe we should, but we haven't, we haven't done that part of it. Maybe that's maybe something we should do. If we just identify an adequate soil that's a co-compliance issue, or maybe it's that you can do some work that's a co-compliance issue or maybe it said you can do some work itself. Is that a go into the homework? Let's see. So we go into the, I guess the credit policy, credit policies, I think there's maybe 20, those are more of these towers that we have credits. So they apply for this credit, so they get a discount. The old code had a 30% deduction in their utility bill. The new code is 25%. And those credit required inspections. Those inspections need to be every three years and those need to be sign and see it license for to professional every three years and if they don't supply that credit then their discount goes away. I kind of make it up to them to follow their when that needs to happen. So as soon as they don't get their discount that's a really good reminder to you know to get that certification process. And then just for clarification, the condos, correct? The condos, yes, yes, yes. Let's go to the next slide. Let's go again. So I've started here, I think a couple months before the new ordinance came into place. So I was fully, this whole transition process, I was right in the middle of it. So there was a point in this discussion. So when you have it as an existing system in place, this new ordinance did not require you to come up to compliance. You're just required to maintain status quo. Maintain your system as it was at the time of CO. That's what you're supposed to do. Now if you've come in and you have an existing system and you want to modify it, so you had a swelled system, you want to put an underground system in. Well that change will trigger compliance for the new code. But we're not going to go after the older system, some just arbitrarily make you come into compliance. You have to do something to trigger that compliance. So any permit that was applied for after that was July, what is it? June 7th? July 7th? Anything after July 7th when you issued that permit or when you apply for that permit, that's when you triggered that new ordinance. If you started your project in 2020, you're under the old, even though it carried over the 2021 start date. If you're a permit expires, and under the old, and you come in for the new, that permit date is the new date, and you have to comply with code. There was a few of those that didn't appreciate that part of it. So repairs, if you're just going to repair your old system, just if your berms and adequate are you got whatever, that's not going to make you come up to current code. You're allowed to repair your existing system without any compliance issues or current code compliance issues. And then next slide. Inspections, as of right now, with the ordinance states, is every storm under the intervention system, again, from 2007 to whenever, every five years needs to be reinspected. Now, this is where we're having some issues. And we've kind of stopped those inspections based on council's direction was it back and was it January of 22? Is when that was that happened and is it will be around January 22 when inspections were halted. That means we weren't issuing letters to homeowners because I guess when this thing is first started in July of 7th to 20th when we start issuing letters to homeowners because I guess when this thing first started July of seventh to twenty when we start issuing letters to homeowners requiring inspections and you guys know that that created some some correspondence between council and residents and in that six month period we kind of just stopped until we got a better handle on and it was basically based on the cost the cost of these inspections were far greater than we anticipated, and that's why we kind of halted these inspections. Again, the spectrum must be performed by a life of professional per their ordinance. Do I think I already covered that apart? We can go ahead and next one. So I just wanted to state that there's three different kinds of inspections in the ordinance. So there's a routine inspection, a credit inspection, a verified problem inspection. So the routine inspection must be done every five years. Or if that's not completed, then the customer gets a search charge. Then if they want to claim a credit, that has to be done every three years or also don't get a credit. And a verified problem inspection is what we do every day. If there's a nation out there, then we go look at it. I'm sorry, every day is a verified. So yeah, so if we get a complaint from a homeowner that says, my neighbor's discharged me on my property we'll do it make a site visit and we'll do it for the verified issue like the burn is inadequate there's a erosion that's a verified complaint and we'll issue them a letter and I've only had to do that I think two or three of those not not a lot most of those are just the phone call and we'll fix it. Those identified. So that's that verified problem. We've got there's a natural issue with the system that we find. So they report to you? Yes. Not to co-compliance. Co-compliance may call me and say we've got a problem. Yeah. And there's a search arch that we can apply if there's no follow-through. Which has not, we have not applied a search arch that we can apply if there's no follow-through. Which hasn't, we have not applied that search arch to anyone. Right. Okay. Again, we're already talking about, I think. I think we are to cover this slide. I'll also read this slide out. Going forward, change of routine inspections provisions such that the homeowner are responsible for performing the routine inspections, but correspondence and verification by the city is not necessarily an ongoing basis. Proof of inspections or a new inspection will be required for any building permit reviewed by the Public Works Department. I'm kind of doing that now. Just if there's a significant construction project, and I call significance 100,000, it's just an arbitrary number. If you have a project of that much, and you have an existing system that has not been inspected, I'll put a condition on that permit that requires that inspection. And I think that's fair. Because I think these inspections, these systems need to be checked or at least identified to make sure they're still functioning. Otherwise, the city is not getting the benefit that they're wanting to achieve. So I think the inspectors are necessary. It's just getting those done in an effective manner has been harder than what we thought. And I think that's it. I think that's it. Thank you. Again, this is high level, and I'm sure you may have questions, because last time we've talked was I think it was July or January 22. So it's been a while. Right. And we thought we were making a good decision about if you're going to make somebody do something, you need to make sure that it works. But if we have these tools that you mentioned, then, you know, and you think these are solutions to not having people go out and pay for engineering to make sure it's working. And if people are going, I mean, I know my building next door floods all the time and I have to call Mr. Middleton and say, there's a problem, he has to call them and say, you have a maintenance. You need to maintain that. Is that on the books that they must maintain their storm system so that- That's part of the ordinance. That they're- Right. They must maintain their system. Perfect. Okay, I have Vice Mayor Chris Manon and then Petronov. Thank you for that. It's time and for some on council, I know you're new, but you perhaps heard about this when you were preparing to run for office or otherwise. So a couple of things just my thoughts and lay it out there and then others can comment or whatever. For our city, I support revising the ordinance to allow homeowners or their designees to make this inspection. My ask is that the city develop a how to inspect YouTube video and make sure that video is accessible through appropriate locations on our website. I also believe that we should develop the practice where the homeowner or their designate can submit the inspection completion by video submittal. Triggering events for stormwater inspections. I believe you already have those, but those should be developed and keyed into the system so that when whether it's a new build or an ad, alt, right, whatever those triggering events are, please make sure that we have a notification system that includes email and USPS mail with the directions on whatever we're going to end up doing on this inspection procedure, whether it's the videos or not. And then of course that verified problem inspection probably needs to be communicated as well. That routine inspection and the credit inspection, please make sure those are automated, not manual. We don't want, you know what I'm saying? Make sure they're popping up in the system so that we can manage the whole system, the whole program effectively. So that's all I have. Thank you. Just to that, I'd like to keep it simple. If you have the support of the YouTube, that's, you know, we can talk about it. But I think that David would love to do a PS, public service announcement on making sure that your stormwater is clean. And if it's, I mean, that it's functioning and if not, then it's your responsibility. But, you know, yeah, not only mention that we have a large community. We have very few individuals. I believe if we can effectively communicate how to inspect these various storm water systems. And I've been to, you know, over in the lower harbor, Mr. Holbert. Holbert, Holbert, and others. And so I've had an opportunity to understand what this involves. And I think this is something that if we're going to have residents complete this forest for the city, I think that we should give them a visual. Let's give them something they can look at. Thanks. And as far as finance, it seems to be working for you if they're not getting their credit, they'll let you know. But maybe there is something that you could have with finance that I don't know some. I think we'd have the work of finance, the finance of the networks for both of us. Poor Ms. Douglas and I think I just gave her a task but maybe it's something easy like that right? I think I addressed what you said. I've got a quick question about Councilor Hutchinson's comments. Just, and it's real quick. I mean, maybe I just missed something. Inspection must be performed by a floor license professional. So, we were talking about doing inspections on our own. You would have to change your address. Okay, so that's what you were asking. You would like to change it. I'm on the same page. Thank you. Wait. You chair. Madam Mayor. Yes. Part of my ask was to revise the ordinance to allow homeowners or their designees to complete this task. Okay. Thank you. That's what I thought I heard. I'm not. Okay. Chris Smith. Thank you, Mr. Bliss. And I support as well reinstating the inspection requirement, but shifting it to the homeowner with certain, shall we say, action forcing requirements associated with it. I want to understand better, we'll say here and make sure at least I have it straight and we all have it straight. This would apply under your proposal. This would apply to single family, multi-family, and commercial properties that are seeking any kind of a alteration or modifications such that they would have to apply for a building permit. I would, for us, in the inspection goes. I think single family only. Single family. Any multi-family or commercial is, I think it's a different animal. Their systems are much larger. It can be much more complex. Okay, so what we're talking about here is, in the modification, the ordinance now only applies to single family. Or the inspection policy. As far as the inspection policy goes. As far as inspection. Yes. So we're talking about modifying the inspection requirement such that if we're single family when any kind of a modification to the property is required or applied for by the by the property owners such as a building permit is required that would trigger an inspection. It would require a proof inspection. If it's outside that five-year window, yes. Okay, and these would be for all single family properties that were built after 2007. Now, would it make sense to, in addition to that, require also a proof of inspection on any property that is being any single family property that is being sold. In other words, at closing. I don't think that should be part of your title commitments. It's just when they come in for a permit, that will be looked at. Any time a permit comes in, I look at when it was constructed, if there has been an inspection done in five years, and the type of permit that would, I guess, get my attention. But how many single-family properties come in for permits? Weekly. Yeah. I would say close to 20. 20 single family applications are coming in. They're about per week. Per week. So that means a few. Some of those have been, you know, they may come in four times for review. If they don't pass, they come back in for review again. So some of those I'm reviewing are been in the system for months maybe. Well, in the course of a year, how many- I have to pull your report. It's- You see what I'm getting at. What I'm wondering is how frequently this is going to, you know, to what degree is it going to over a multi year period capture? I think the meaningful number of the property. I think the original proposal was to send out letters to homeowners of this compliance, like 25 letters a month forever. And that would give them a notice of the inspection requirements. Then they had a number of members very well. And that we had, I think Tom Mayer was here at the time. And that's all he did. For that three or four month period, that was his full time job was issuing letters corresponding with home uttering questions. Yeah. I don't know. I'm quite familiar with. I don't do that. I'm quite familiar with. There were issues around staff burden on staff. There were issues around the cost of the inspection, much higher than was expected. And so it was burdened some both internally and externally. But what I'm driving at and wondering about is, excuse me, what we want to be able to do is have some kind of a reasonable action forcing mechanism that causes homeowners to periodically carry out these inspections using their own resources or contractors. who are contractors and you're suggesting that for all single family homes, build after 2007, who come in for a building permit. And where this inspection has not been carried out in the previous five years, then it would have to be then carried out in the previous five years that it would have to be then carried out? I'm on a court. I've been playing a significant improvement or if it begins in for a $5,000 or whatever. That don't think that's a fair ask. But if it's a significant improvement or project, then I think it's a very nice. So that would have to be defined. Right. Right. Right, right. Yeah. And I don't know the answer to this. I'm just raising it as a question. Why wouldn't in addition to that, why wouldn't we want to institute for those houses that are captured? Those properties that are captured by this ordinance, meaning post 2007. If and when they were sold, that would not also trigger the requirement for an updated inspection. I don't know how that would come to the city staff. Mr. McConnell, you and I talked about this the other day. And you have you given any additional thought? I did, thank you for the question. I just don't know how I put thought into it. I don't think there's anything wrong with the requirement. I'm just trying to think realistically how this would play out. It almost be requiring homeowners in a private sale of their home to put the city on notice of that sale. And I don't know how that would. Or if there's a change in a water bill or something. It would play out. Well, I mean, that's a good point. They have to put us on notice anyways, because they're putting a new name under, but that could be a that could be a tenant, right? It's not always the sale of a home. I just I think I probably need to think with staff on how to do this and have it work without us being required to be contacted every time someone decides to sell their home. Because that's really the only way, right, for us to know, unless we monitor property or appraiser, which we don't. I'm assuming. Yeah. I mean, as a practical matter, if we put this requirements, such as being proposed and I think staff is on a very good job in thinking this through and put forward a good proposed program here. But some people will voluntarily follow these recommended procedures and make sure it's inspected every five years. Some people won't. the only way under this proposal that the city will, that we will know that something eventually will happen is if there is a building permit applied for of a certain, certain significance, that would require the homeowner in order to get the permit to either prove that they've carried out the inspection or then carried out at that time. We put that condition on that permit so they can't close that permit out until this task has been completed. Exactly. So it's really easy way for us to have a little bit of authority. Yeah, and I think it's a great idea. The only thing I'm questioning is how many properties would, over the course of time, actually be receiving a permit at this significant level. You're not going to get a level near what you need. Not near what you need. That's my point. And that's why I went to the idea of closing of sale as another trigger for trying to create an action-forcing mechanism. And if not that, is there something else that we can do? And that's just really in the spirit of, let's think about that. If the goal is to get all the properties inspected in a certain amount of time, there's a certain you're trying to get so many in a month. But if the goal is just to just be proactive and just getting what you can, when you can, I think it'll work. But it's going to take a lot of effort to get all of them in a time frame of that five years. That was a goal. It's getting all these inspects in that five year window then after five years, you just restart. That's a full-time staff member's job. It's not as easy as we thought when we put this together. It's difficult. But if it's just to capture the ones that you can, we can. I think that's- I think there's no doubt that what you're proposing makes sense on this questioning is to how far it goes. It will take us and whether there's anything else in addition to that that we want to consider. I'm done. addition to that that we want to consider. I'm done. Just a quick thing on the inspections. I think Terry and I visited the same gentleman over in Royal Harbor when we were campaigning back in 2022. And he showed us a matrix of I think it was six or eight vendors he had to go and inspect and The range was like $1,500 difference and none of them ever You know offered to go in and actually look if it was clear. It was more like looking at a great from afar, completely useless. And they didn't know how to do it. And they, you know, it, well, leads me to believe they didn't know how to do it, because they just went out and just surfaced looked at the thing. So if we are going to require these, whether it's the onuses on the homeowner or on us, we'd better have down what exactly they're looking for. Or another way, and I don't know, this was suggested by the homeowner, is put it completely on the homeowner. If they're going to be insented civilly to make sure their storm system is working because if it doesn't, it's going to flood their neighbor. If it doesn't work. It just like, you know, you would do for any other thing that you had in your home. You know, the owner says on the homeowner, and you know, this is know we don't we don't walk around in it and they you know they're incentive to do it just because of what could happen if it does get clogged and wanted to see what your thoughts were around what would be the downside of not getting involved in that ongoing inspection process. Oh, I'm just not doing it. Yeah. Well, putting it on the homeowner and, you know, saying, you know, this is what happens when you don't do it, you know, with the new storm system as they put it in. And, you know, our recommendation is you inspected every five years and then they can inspected or not just like they would any other mechanical in their home. I've talked to several homeowners that didn't even know they had a so-called manager system. So that's half of them. Don't even know they have it. They don't even know what it does. And just for me, it's a tracking thing. How do you track who needs it, who has it, and who's next. And those are going to be issued letters. There's got to be a, to get the stunters, there's got to be some type of tracking. There's going to have to be letters mailed. And I... To get what done. To notify the homeowners that inspection is needed. There's going to be letters mailed. And I- To get what done? To notify the homeowners that inspection is needed. Okay, but I'm suggesting that we don't do that at all. So that doesn't get done? We roll it out and we- Well, I'm not sure if I'm just going to explore that for a moment. What's the downside to saying, okay, we know we've built it right. We know that it's working. It's, you know, you've inspected it and signed off on it. And then we give it to the homeowner and tell him that they have to, you know, they should be maintained, just like they maintain all the other mechanicals in their homes and the onus is on them. Is it on what we're trying to get to? Well, the other side of it that we're just talking about is, you know, is requiring them to do inspections and tracking if it doesn't. I'm saying that we stay out of it. And we leave it up to the homeowner to maintain their home and the mechanicals in it just let you know, and this is just one of many of the mechanicals. The downside is over time, perhaps the system won't work as well as it should for the intended purpose if there's no regulatory mechanism. And how would they exactly know whether or not their system is not working through the inspection? It may be working, but it may not be as effective as it once was over time. And how would they know that? Because the way that this gentleman was inspected was it was a visual inspection looking at the great and it did absolutely nothing. You look for clogs and other kind of foreign matter that's blocking the drains and so you're saying you would go in there that this inspection they would go in there and snake it and they would have a camera and they would look at it which is what didn't happen in six suppliers that went out to this guys house right well yeah I the inspection talking about are pretty typical. OK. I haven't seen any inspections where they actually scoped these underground systems. It's a visual inspection. They check for debris. They check for a lot of times the berms over time, the berms kind of go flat. And berms are important as far as keeping your water near property. So a lot of times these berms need to be reestablished or reconstructed. I haven't released any of the undergrain systems. Failure yet? It's more the earth berms that flatten over time or the soils fill in over time just like our city soils. Your private property soils fill in over time. So we're checking for the, you know, the, the hump that's around the, you know, the house. And then inside of the grate, if we're not snaking, we're not looking anywhere inside of that perforated. Well, I'm sure they did a visual inspection inside the grate if there's like a full of debris. There's been a few were, I've seen the reports and they say it's good But I look into it and they're great and it's full of debris. I know this is not good And I want it to be inspecting. I want the debris removed I want them you know they can vacuum that out like we were vacuuming all of our inlets in town They can vacuum out their their little systems So if if it's full of debris and I see that in their inspection. I won't accept it until it's remediated. Okay. So I've done a couple of those like that. So, but yeah, none of these have a plumber come out and actually do a videography of their system. They don't do that. Yeah. Otherwise they're costs. This guy didn't even, I mean, then none of these suppliers even pulled the grate. They just visually looked and I don't know, it was completely not productive. Sign and see how by license for the profession. Okay. That's what it requires. And if they don't get this inspection, you're saying that they would have them, perhaps flooding issues or water would get- I'll take it. Again, the cities after a certain benefit, we're trying to select water on their property flooding issues or water we get. I'll take it. Again, the cities after a certain benefit. We're trying to select water on their property, so it reduces the impact to the city system. So if they're not maintaining it like they should, it impacts the city system or it could affect the adjacent properties. So we want them to maintain as it's designed, and it functions as it designs, we get the full benefit from them as a water quality and to help reduce the impact to the city system. Okay. Thank you. And the verification is, I mean if their neighbor starts flooding, somebody is wanting to rat on somebody. Then they will. And they said I didn't tell them I didn't call you right. Yeah, that's what I get that a lot I didn't call you okay, okay. I have pen and then Kramer and then we'll Give you what you have come and asked for see Community this isn't easy. So the state, the state pillow, to come up with a bunch of things, or anything for our, is it possible? Let's be practical. Is it possible that we might as well just proceed with our Swale Program and any other stormwater attenuation programs that we can. And have these send out notices, this is your annual inspection time. And just consider those to be a bonus, but in the meantime, have backup that we're ensuring that the stormwater system is, our stormwater systems are in good shape, the city's just going to have to eventually take over that responsibility fully. Digital staff with our current staff to capture all properties that have been in that five year window is not plausible. Even with the full time staff you're not going to get it because- Certified public and Plumber was put, I was thinking about, but then you've got to send out the notices. You've got to have staff to follow up. It's a 30-day follow-up, 60-day follow-up, 90-day follow-up. Yep. You know, a lot of residents live in their house that you're dealing with the property management or are there does any? So it's. So that's my question. Is it entirely possible that we look at the fact that those systems were installed as a bonus and just continue with our own stormwater programs, swales, whatever, and just assume that those are just a bonus and we're going to continue to protect the city to the best of our ability. Is our back to the wall? I would like to, I'm capturing some, but I would like to capture more. So maybe a permit that has, on these permits, they give you how much is a project going to cost? There's a fee of the project cost on these applications. And they'll put 100,000, 200,000. Again, for me, it's a $100,000 threshold is when I require these. So maybe that to get a bigger net, maybe I lower that to say a $50,000 project requires an inspection. That would, if that was in the ordinance, that I got something, that's for me. Otherwise, I get questions, why am I doing this inspection? I just don't mind. It's a condition of the permit. But if I have something in the ordinance as a project, if you had an existing system and it's not, has an inspection of five years and you're pulling a permit, that requires an inspection of your existing system. Maybe you don't put any fee at all. Just if you have an existing system, you apply for a permit and an inspection of the existing system is required. And again, that's a homeowner. Could be a homeowner inspection or their destiny. And we do have a definition of remodeling or redevelopment in the ordinance today. So we have that to work from as well. That's under page three under the ordinance. Three. Right, that's page three of the ordinance at the bottom. And then continue on page four. But for what it's worth, I think the ordinance has accomplished its mission. I think you guys spent a year developing this. I think you guys did a great job putting it together for what it's done. I think it's done this job. Well, it's no secret that, you know, I think there's a whole different world out there that we're all going to be facing. This is our new, this is the new paradigm right now, weather-wise. So, you know, these systems are a huge bonus, but they should not deter us from proceeding with any kind of storm water attenuation that the city needs to do. Just to assume that there are a bonus and move on. And I agree with you, there's a lot of staff time that we could employ. That staff time could be spent, in my opinion, in a different direction, a better direction than those. So there are bonus and let's continue on with stormwater attenuation plans that the city has. I just don't see how we're going to solve this problem, frankly. Kramer? I just want to say that I don't think you said it is not a perfect solution to this and I wish that folks were like but I've got neighborhood you know my neighborhood from the 70s man and we We had to cut the swell and we ever circled drive with pavers. We had to make all that happen But I've got neighbors that damn then anything since the 70s and they're not gonna and their them, they have them, they have them, they have them, they have them, they have them, they have them, they have them, they have them, they have them, they have them, they have them, they have them, they have them, they have them, they have them, they have them, they have them, they have them, they have them, they have them, they have grace. So that's okay, that's not typical I don't think and I think you're right. Eventually you're going to apply for permits, because eventually it is going to affect you, and you're going to have to get your property right. But you're, I think your method is really, it's well thought out. It is going to be some time consuming process to it, you know, as people apply for permits. But I can't other than hiring a whole bunch of folks and creating this at apartment for it or something, I don't know another way to do it. So I'd like the mayor said I'd like to give you what you need and get this thing done today. Okay, I just want to confirm that we're looking at not doing the mandatory inspections that is within this ordinance. What's the other request that we look at? What was that sentence on there? So that proof of inspections or a new inspection will be required for any building permit reviewed by the Public Works Department. So that when there is a redevelopment or remodeling or a new house that's when we request the record of an actual inspection being done. Okay and that's the, that's a definition. Oh, right. So it's not, right. So it wouldn't be us going out and writing mandatory letters saying that they give us the inspection notice that they give us their inspection report. We could look at it at that at that juncture. Or if the council wants to eliminate the requirement entirely. There's the options. And hire a. No. Okay. I think we're we're wanting to remove the requirement for the inspection. Right. I think we're going to eliminate the requirement to have annual inspections or unless it will be triggered by a redevelopment. Building permit. Over a certain threshold. Well, I would like some latitude with that. I don't want to nail down to a certain price. Give us leeway or give us some the moring's part beach right you need some latitude yeah they're kind of their volume I got it yeah and that's what's good you're logical you're gonna make sure that we're keeping the water in and that's a take a few iterations what we I think we're gonna get it yeah and if we hold you to one thing then then you have to say no. I would like some wiggle room. Right. I think that's what we're giving you. Okay. So the next step would be to create, to staff to come back with a revised ordinance. Yes. And that would include you're giving more thought to what, how to define this threshold level. Right. And I'll say of my other comment for the next time. So we're not. Is it different? I don't want to get into the different, something different today. Next time, sounds good. I do think that there's any recommendations of changes that you see that you bring it forward to us. We're making policy, but you're also the one implementing and seeing. So that request will come at the next. Thank you. The next one. Thank you. Yes, Vice Mayor, and then I want to just. Yeah, just real quickly. So I don't know about you, but I believe one of the common complaints of our residents is flooding, stormwater flooding. So if we don't measure what must be done, I believe our residents will experience escalating stormwater issues. Right? The more systems that we allow to go with no verification that they're working? Is that really the direction we want to go? So if we pursue a policy which requires commercial enterprises to conduct stormwater inspections at an expense, what issues are going to flood this council by not requiring certain residents to ensure their storm water system works? I think that I understand what may be behind some of these decisions, but I don't think we're serving the best interests of our community by not sticking with our commitment on having storm water systems that work. In fact, we're going to then turn around and talk about spending millions and millions of dollars on resiliency. So, you know, I'll wrap up. No, in that though, they can bring back the recommendations that will give, I think we already have that latitude. Maybe I'm wrong legally, that we can, or if it needs to be added, that they must maintain their water, storm water up within their property. I think that's still going to be in the ordinance. So we should expect, if that's the goal, we should expect compliance, similar to what we have with Swills. And if you're satisfied with that, that's what you're going to get. Now, lastly, I say we need to maintain Swills, develop a plan, and execute it. And then include our HOAs. Help them, help, let's ask them to help us engage the HOAs on how to best ensure residential stormwater systems are operating the way they were intended. Maybe even look it in centers. But just thinking people are gonna do it, ain't gonna happen, we see that with swells. So I think swells and reviewing our swells and whether they're actually functioning as something that to look ahead. No, but that's something we're gonna continue to address street by street. You know, it's just every, it's almost like every street's a little bit different. The swells are a little bit different. So it's just, I wish they're easy. I wish it was easy for swells, but it's not. Okay, yes. And then we need to move on. And I understand that your vice-Memberer Hutch, you're right, if we don't have an ability to monitor it, is it going to get done? I 100% agree with you. One caveat that you carved out there was, there is a monitoring process. It's not put in our books over there. And that is when someone's system is failing and dumping all the water on their neighbors yard that neighbor's going to go excuse me somebody come over and fix this thing. So that's that verify that that is what's going to happen we're going to have gots out there fixing stuff when it breaks because you don't have a neighbor going this is broken. So I've been 100% agree with you but we need some way to verify. We don't have a department to do it. So we have to rely on our neighbors to say, this guy's flooding my yard. I would love to capture every home and at five-year window. I think that's the best way to do it. And I just don't know with the current staffing levels and what we have. I'm not following the ordinance right now because it's been suspended. And unless there's another method of doing this, I'm all yours. And just for everybody's sake, if we, once word gets out, we're not inspecting. What we require them to build, this gentleman made a statement to it, but over time, we should expect people just to say, say, they're not expecting it. Well, I may not even have to build it. Well that's a different story and that is if what we have required for them to do is not working, we need to know that also. It may not be because it was clogged or dirty, it may just be that it wasn't the proper storm water collector. Because I know every there are a couple of options you can put in. Yes, I agree. But that is something that we want to be on top of. And this was the one thing is we were doing mandatory inspections. It was too costly. We couldn't have accountability for it. We're going back to, if you see something say something and be respectful because stormwater is something we all need to be responsible for and making sure it's on our property and not others and the streets. Anything else that you need for this to come back? I just want to move in different parts. Inspection is that our standing now? In the permit process. As part of the permit process. Yes. Yes. Is swilling is part of this correct? That's right. This part is part of what? Is part of this whole discussion. This whole no. We're going to talk. Are we going to talk about that at some time? Absolutely. Okay. Anytime you want. Just not today. Okay. Yeah. I thought it was on the look ahead. So I will make sure it's on the look ahead. Okay, please do not today. I'm thinking 17th. Yeah. Oh, yeah, that's fine. You have what you need from us? I believe so. Yes. Thank you. Thank you for caring and thank you for changing that ordinance and we'll look forward for it coming back. Thank you. Certainly. Thank you. That concludes 60, going to 6E and be mindful. We, this next discussion, we want to listen closely, but I think is our staff that has been overloaded because of the hurricane. Let's let them talk and tell us how this process is working and be really thoughtful in time management. So Mr. McConaugher. I'm sure Eric is in the back. I can start. Yeah, I hope Ms.arns in the back. But generally speaking, the reason this is added was based off of request from me actually through Jay. I got a lot of questions, not just from the public, but in general related to what the differences with a PD and a site plan with NAPD. Not to talk about any specific projects, but there was one recently that the question came up quite frequently from the council on. I thought it was probably a good opportunity for a refresher because we have a couple more of these coming forward. And based on the way that your code is written, site plans with NAPD are the only site plan that you see as a body that are not administratively approved. So with that, we've added some specific code language. Again, this is one of those situations that I ran into where I was looking at a code and Munich code and was told that that is the one that we are not enforcing. So you'll see as part of what's included our prior versions, which is what staff has on file to be able to apply the appropriate code. Don't worry, that ordinance rescinding is coming soon, November 6th, for the look ahead. But with that, I will default to Miss Martin a little bit. I'm not a planner, but this is what I'll say legally. When it comes to PDs, the way the city treats PDs is essentially like its own zoning district. All right, so once you develop it, it has permitted uses, it has conditional uses. Sometimes it picks up or adopts certain uses of different zoning districts, like the D down down for example. And when someone comes in for a site plan within that PD, right, and they are building this site, pursuant to the permitted rights of this PD. The only reason it's coming before you is because the code requires it or also be administrative approval out the door ready to go Right, so it's similar to when someone builds a single family home in a residential district and you don't ever hear about it It's because they built a pursuant to code and there was no entitlements needed Therefore they got their building permit and they moved on Just because you are now applying for a site plan within a PD does not automatically you trigger reopening the PD Right that's not what happens reopening the PD Persuant to the city of Naples because Top of for a different discussion. We need to have a minor amendment and a substantial amendment process, just my point of view. Right now, even if you make the smallest tweak to a PDE, it's like starting from scratch. You're doing the whole rezone all over again, which seems extremely burdensome, in my opinion. I think if you're changing one parking space and doing something very minor, maybe that's not a good example because parking is important here. But we can all think of something that's very minor that shouldn't trigger the whole PD opening. Now what does open the PD? Well, let's say the developer or the applicant wants to add a use that wasn't part of the prior PD. You would be reopening it because you would be doing some kind of text amendment for lack of a better term, right? You'd be adding a use that wasn't currently there. Let's say the PD is this rectangle I'm making and you want to expand it to include another property. Again, that's triggering reopening the PD, right? Because now you're expanding it to something that wasn't previously approved. So those are the two distinctions I'll make. I think for some reason, and I know there may be different attorneys that have given you different opinions, just because you are seeing a site plan within a PD does not automatically trigger the PD being reopened. Reopened. If anything, I would assume the opposite. I would assume that when you see a site plan within a PD, they are not reopening the PD. Right? Unless you see it in the form of a rezone, because that's what the code requires. In order to amend the PD, you're starting from scratch and you're rezoning and restating it as if you did it for the first requires. In order to amend the PD, you're starting from scratch and you're rezoning and restating it as if you did it for the first time. So, again, just my legal point of view, but I know Ms. Moran's here and I'm sure you guys have questions because this topic has come up quite a bit. Good afternoon. Well, who has questions about site plans? I'll ask the roll-out. A real general one, which is what is the rationale for us as a city council approving a site plan if we're not reopening the PD because it's not a reason for reopening the PD. Wait, say that again. Yeah, I like the most recent one. What is the rationale for us as a city council to have to approve a site plan if they're not requesting any type of if they're not making a request that would cause the PD to be reopened? Why are we going through the process of approving that site plan if they're not asking for anything from us? Let's ask staff. Yes. I didn't draft that ordinance but I'm going to take a educated guess. Your opinion is extremely obvious. That's not your reason. The reason that there's that added level of review of site plans and plan developments is because unlike your standard zoning districts, plan developments are kind of the ability for a developer to create their own zoning district. So they develop, it's their own development standards. And so it's just, it's different from that collective, you know, adopted code that everyone else has. So, you know, you want to make sure that every change that happens within that plan development, within that unique zoning district, is acceptable to city council. I don't understand how, like I can't imagine how they would have their own building standards. Yeah, so that's essentially what a plan development is is you're creating your own zoning district just for that specific property. So you have the opportunity to establish your own, we call them development standards. So what I mean by that is height, limitations, setbacks, lot coverage, all of those dimensional standards that are provided in each zoning district, but it also includes uses, conditionally permitted uses, conditional uses, stuff like that. But isn't all that already spelled out in the PD? So that, yeah, that's what the plan is to make sure that the plan is done. So that's what the plan is. So that's what the plan is. So that's what the plan is. So that's what the plan is. So that's what the plan is. So that's what the plan is. So that's what the plan is. So that's what the plan is. So that's what the plan is. So that's what the plan is. So that's what the dimensional standards. If the way planned developments our code describes that if something is not specifically addressed in a planned development, it reverts back to the code. So if they don't give a specific height for fences in the planned development, the underlying code requirement would prevail. Yeah, so it's a Burns question. That seems to me that would check the boxes and if it is by right to do whatever, I don't see why. If they're not asking for something different, I don't know why we'd have to deal with it. Well, it's because the code says it has to come. Other than the code saying it, like, that's super rational. That's what I mean. But if you come in for a PD, it allows you to create something different. So you're really getting entitlements that not everyone... No, I'm talking about a PD that's already established. What we're talking about, not coming in for one. It's already done. It's already... Well, unfortunately, we haven't had PDs that have been totally built out. So you know exactly what's going to be there at the end. I'm just going to be involved. But there's still parameters for it. There are parameters, but in the section it says if there is change, if there is a change of 10% or more, a significant change in the increase in total floor area, it has to get approved by City Council. No, I get that. So there are coming. 58.807. But if there's not that change, then why would it come to us other than the ordinance? It would come initially to get the entitlements and then that's it. But they always change the PD. Because they often go on for years. And so they'll come in and say, you know what? These 2,000 square foot units don't work. I want to create less of that. I'm not saying that. I'm saying if they do it within the PDS, as it's designed already, it would still have to come to us just to build whatever's in what's in the pipeline does. Yes. Which doesn't make sense to me if it's within whatever already exists. It's open the PD unless, so what you're saying is 10% of... As to what they're saying. It's a total floor area. So say you have a plan development that provides for 10,000 square feet of total commercial area. If they submit a site plan for that joint, that is within that 10,000 square feet, that doesn't reopen the PD. If they're going from 9,000 to 8,000, that doesn't open up the PD. If they want to change that 10,000 to be 12,000, and then they've tripped that percentage, that opens up the PD. So that's the distinguishing that you are establishing those development standards, and as long as what you're doing is within those development standards, you're not required to amend or rezone your PD in order to do that. If someone's, let's say someone comes forward and the PD allows for 30 residential units and right now they've built 25. And when at the time they built 25, they said, well, you know what, we'll build these 5,000, they may be 3,000 or 4,000 square feet, but we'll let you know. When they come back, the PD is silent on square footage, but specific on units, and they're coming forward with 5 units, which is what's allowed in the PD, then they're not reopening the PD. Regardless of if they're changing the square foot of the unit itself, they're still building five units, which is what the PD allowed them to do. But by code, you're going to look at the site plan. You're going to look at the last couple of months. But it's not amending the PD itself. It's just the site plan within the PD. So that's kind of those two layers. Because keep in mind. So we're all thinking of, I know there are a couple of PDs we all I'm going to have to go to the next floor. I'm going to have to go to the next floor. I'm going to have to go to the next floor. I'm going to have to go to the next floor. I'm going to have to go to the next floor. I'm going to have to go to the next floor. I'm going to have to go to the next floor. I'm going to have to go to the next floor. wanted to make some sort of change. They had to re-state, re-zone and re-state that PD. I would never not be in this chair. But that's what it says. No, that says that the site plans come before you, but not we're not re-zoning and we're not opening the PD every time something is developed within those standards. Okay. I get to, we we're not really, just for rationality, why we as a city council have to approve. I think it was just an added layer of review and. And then the ordinance says so. Yeah, right. Okay. And it's not just you, it's planning board too. Okay. And I think it's because it's so different. When you're doing a PD, you have to make certain requirements that you cannot achieve what you want to achieve within the normal zoning codes and that this is demonstratably better. I think of it like gray oches or something. That's where a perfect PD is where you crunch the houses a little closer together in order to build an amenity building in a golf course and that whole thing becomes a PD. And so because it's so different and it's a unique, you know, it's a zoning category. You, you know, you want to, and it's unique. You, you want to take a look at the site plan. I do want to clarify, neither Matthew or I were proposing to change anything today. It was just more of a discussion. Yeah. Just going to have more of a discussion. Composing to change it so late. And isn't it five acres minimum? So there's not a whole lot left. Minimum for rezoning, and it's not just to PD, but the minimum for rezoning is your minimum parcel size is five acres. If you are not simply extending an existing zoning district. So if you have R312 next to R36 and you just want to extend the R312 over you can be less than five acres. However, land developments there is no existing. So you're to create a new PD is a minimum of five acres. Okay. Vice mayor? Yeah, real quickly. Thank you, Erica, for some of those explanations. So one of my experiences with a PD and whether or not a PD should have been reopened. I want to take you back to the PD where McDonald's is over by. Is it the old trail? Yeah, is it the old trail? Yeah. Oh yeah. In that PD, I believe there was a point in time where they relocated a building or built a structure that was depicted or put somewhere else than what we thought might be where it was supposed to be. If I have a PD and the square footage is, let's just take the Neapolitan Publix. So they've depicted that on the edge of the PD. And there's a storm water system underneath the ground. If they want to put buildings within the framework that doesn't open up the PD, but puts it somewhere else other than where it's depicted originally with that approval. Can they do that? That would go through site planning would come back to you. It would come back. It would come back to. It's not opened up. In a plan development. So when we say open up the PD, what we're talking about is rezoning. Is that a reason? I don't think we we clarify that. No, that's not a reason. That's not a reason. Then it's not opened up. It's not opened up. Then do we? If it's within the development center, it's if it's within the total square footage, the total lot coverage to all of those. Then it's not rezoning to PD to allow that, but the site plan in that PD would be reviewed by City Council. Can you provide an example of when we opened up a PD? Oh, the most recent would be Naples Square. So we opened up, quote unquote, the Naples Square PD to add in the Gulf Shore Playhouse. We rezoned and restated to a new Naples Square. We did the same by adding the wind parcel and the city parking garage. Each one of those, because what we amended was the boundaries of the plan development. We added land in which changed the legal description, changed the district boundaries, changed all of those things. Those were all we opened up the PD meaning wezoned and restated to a new plan development. A PS. Yeah, to add those in. And then subsequent to that, that last parcel that was just before us was not opening it up. Right. If we wanted to address that, we should have done it at that time. So that was, right, that was just an amendment to the site plan within the development standards of that PD. OK. Thank you. So when you said, when we open up the PD, when there is a reason, that is really, they are asking for something. It's opening up a negotiation. Correct? They're asking for something. And I would never give anything without for something. It's opening up a negotiation. Correct? They're asking for something and I would never give anything without getting something. That's just good business. And it's good business for the city. And it's, you know, so that would be where we would talk about maybe enhanced stormwater or something else. I don't know why. As part of the rezoning. Yes. Yes. And we didn't. When they reopen I think that's the most appropriate time. But I think when call it in negotiation but you don't have to do what they're asking you to do. And they have the option if they don't want to do what you're asking they have the option to withdraw. So. Okay I have one public speaker, Maria Mayor. I've already given my apologies to James for sticking in again, but it is very important that I do. I'm giving an afternoon lecture, so I'd be very much appreciate it, because it's such a big topic. The whole reason I ever came to speak at City city hall was caused of darned PDs. In 2018, I first came to the city because we didn't even know we had a PD at Bayfront, the residents that lived there. So I've been speaking here on numerous occasions. So I'm going to give you a real life experience of what can happen with your PDs and why it was important. So in 2018, I started coming here because we suddenly realised what had happened at Bayfront when a bar opened. A bar opened with 1500 square feet of dining. Just overnight literally people woke up in the morning and there was this 1500 square feet about door dining right underneath where all these people lived. They didn't know about it. That's not because there was no notification, just nobody ever knew what the notification actually meant. So I came here with Sharon Iski and Susan Harmon on a regular basis. They're no longer at Bayfront now, I'm the last woman standing. At that time, those at City really didn't know much about PDs. And in fact, I would even go so far as to say some of the planning department didn't know all the intricacies of PDs and how it impacted residents. Residents that Bayfront certainly didn't know about it. We didn't know about a written PD that was an actual document, we should have known, but you don't get that when you get your documents when you buy a property. Or it be noteworthy for applications and changes. We learned a lot fast and we learned that changes slow. The planning department administratively allowed the outdoor dining at that time and the PD wasn't open. When we spoke to the planning and I have to say that the planning department Erica rewrote our PD, which was absolutely marvellous because our PD was a disgrace and it took many, many hours for the planning department to rewrite that. But we were told that items were grandfathered in and they weren't, so we didn't know that. Once the PD is in place it totally dictates what can and does not occur on properties in the communities. We can't open a PD, even though we live there, the developer has to open the PD. It has enormous impact on a community and I'll give you an example. Bayfront has buildings one to six, one through six. We're still, sorry, one through five. We're still waiting for buildings five and seven to be built, they're the two buildings at the front. They were meant to be single-story buildings. They morphed over the 24 years from single-story to three stories, to four stories, to 65 feet, and in the middle of all of that, we ended up with an extra building, a long linear building, building eight that nobody ever knew about and wasn't in the plan. So what happens is, within that period of time, we still haven't got those buildings built. Those buildings that will be built will be built on the old codes and ordinances. So anything new that's come in, they're not going to be built to those. The good thing is when we rewrote the plan for Bayfront is we did start to put in some dates and things, one things can be done and I'll come back to that in a moment. Things that we're impacting us, we went from three bars to six. You mentioned about negotiating and what can you do. We didn negotiate. We did not realise that we did negotiate. We said, well, OK, he wanted to have 8, I will develop her. 8 or 9, boss. Can you even imagine? We said, we will stick with the 7 if you go to 65 feet. You can negotiate there and we did. That was a hard negotiation. Ray, you was part of our negotiation at that time. You came around when we were doing parking and analysis and counting, we literally went around and counted the parking spots. The incremental changes that happen over the years on PDs have a major impact. If they'd been able to come to you and ask for eight buildings to be built on that property at the very beginning, You just said no. What happens is over 15 applications were made to city. Over 15, we were here all the time. Erika was unundated with applications for Bayfront for the incremental changes. And sometimes, well, in fact, most of the times until 2018, we had no idea about them, owners didn't know about them. The density almost doubled at Bayfront. Imagine that, and we couldn't even get an answer on what the density should be, but we found out what it was, because Susan Harmon, one of our ladies, worked out the density and told the planning department what the density was, and then later on, the developer came back and asked for that density to be increased and we had a complete rezo. And that was because things had changed and morphed over the years and there were so many documents. So we now have density in the early double, we could end up with eight buildings, I think we'll end up with seven. But I was actually looking at some of the wording on this document that you're looking at today. And I have to say, by the way, going into this document, I spoke very briefly to Jay, 810 is wonderful. Oh, did I wish that I'd hear, under 58, 810 that we would have had that, because it would have saved us so many days and hours and whatever and getting round to things. But there's still a lot of ambiguity. I listened to the presentation and the site plan application that was here just over a week ago. And even when legal says, I assume, I'm not being rude, but please don't assume, because planning assumed with us sometimes. I say that, I don't say it lightly, but they did, because I don't believe that they'd had that much to do with the PDs. So we can't assume and we can't have ambiguity around the wording. So just to give you an idea, on 58807, okay, it says here, 58807, significant. What does significant mean? What will that mean to a new City Council because they'll come in on a PD change two, three, four years down the line and you might not be here to explain what you thought significant was or what Mr Booner or thought was significant or what the lawyer. So it needs to be drafted with better wording. Also, 58806 says substantially complied with, what's substantially complied with? Ambiguity, it drives, when people will be coming from Naples word, you're all the planned developments asking for changes, so you really have to work on the ambiguity. 58805, open space, adequate. What's adequate? I mean, you know, so I'm my ask, and I obviously that's your phrase, Councillor Hutchison, is my ask is that we can get rid of some of this ambiguity around the wording and make it much clearer. It's better for developers and it's better for the residents because you will have PD come in up to you all of the time. I'm so glad that this is on the agenda. And one final thing is, if you do give a one-year extension, could you please let the residents in that community know? Because if it's given administratively, we have no idea. We have been waiting now with that green fence in Round Bayfront for four years, maybe five, and it's still carrying on. We'd like to know if an extension is given, and I'm sure other PDs would. But thank you very much. Sorry I took so long. No, no, no. Thank you. It's very important and you are absolutely correct in what you stated. That's how you started coming to Council and it's always one issue and you and many others have worked very hard at having us and even our staff understanding this process. So thank you truly for sticking with coming in and assisting. It's slow, but let me let we get in there now. So thank you. Okay, thank you. Thank you. She just said something about the PD process and it went right out of my mind. Did anybody have any comments on this Council in the Christmas? Just one comment which may be a clarification. I'm not sure, but in terms of extensions. That's it. The I believe to my knowledge, we have not granted any extensions on this or any other project. I can take over the top of my head. What does happen, however, is under the state, I think it's known as the tolling provisions. The state of Florida and the governor are able to grant with absolute discretion. And they do extensions beyond what local governments have granted for projects based on natural disaster. Emergencies. Emergencies, primarily maybe there are other ways in which you can grant them. But that is how, whether it's the old Naples Hotel, or in this case Bayfront, or a number of other projects you can name in this city, and across Florida, which perhaps are granted two, three, four year requirements to begin development, can sit there and sit there for many years beyond that without moving forward with their development. So everybody knows the, any extensions really are not coming from this council or from this staff. Our staff administratively or even from council, they're coming because of these tolling provisions that are provided through the state of Florida. Correct, that is correct. We do not have the ability to deny. That's not something they ask us for. It's a notification to us. They are entitled to those extensions on the development orders and they compound. So COVID, you know, or COVID, they all each extend out. So there's nothing staff administratively grants or approves with respect to those extensions. Those are, they're right. And if it was a city manager approved extension at one point we don't really have a tracking on how that if if a city manager because he's allowed to do one extension one year extension according to the to the code. Are we looking, I also want to make one quick clarification. A lot of this, if you look at the section in the code now, that is a large portion of this is one of the ones that have been repealed, because of Senate Bill 250. So if you open Munich code and you look at the PD section, a lot of that is not applicable. Those are not regulations that we're enforcing. With specific respect to 58, 810, the time limitations, that ordinance has been repealed. So, don't look at this code. I was going to say, so you gave us the code that we don't have. We provided the code prior to this amendment, which has been repealed. So what you have is what we can enforce. Okay. What's in Munich codeode is not what we can. Okay. And the time limitations that Ms. Mayer referenced are in the code that we can't enforce. Right. Okay. I guess it's always the question of why we have we don't have a process on opening APD and the attorney started it off with that we should have minor and major processes for opening open the PD the only process we have Opens the PD we don't have a process to amend a PD Without opening the entire world sometimes we say open and restate. So that terminology, I think, is what needs to be. Yeah, any time we're making any change to a plan development, it's a complete rezone. We are rezoning from the prior PD to a new PD. What do you mean you can change? Which opens it up exactly, which means you can change anything. What we don't have is a more minor amendment to a PD process whereby you can come in and say we only want to address this section of the PD, but leave the rest of it alone. That's what we don't have. So it's to discretion. No, it's any change you want to make is a rezoning. So I think what Mr. McConnell was saying is that most jurisdictions have an amendment process. They have a process whereby you are not rezoning the planned development to create a new one entirely. You are simply amending the existing plan development. It doesn't open it up to everything. You know. But there are some things when the PD has remained the same since 2000. We'll just say 12. So like Naples Square has always been the Naples Square Plan Development. But if you look at the effective date of that plan development, it has changed. If you look at the title, it's rezoning from plan development to plan development. So you are rezoning from this plan development district to a new plan development district. Everything, you know, most of the things are the same except this one's a little different because we added something, something changed. So each one is a new plan development. Which should be re-numbered? Well the ordinance is a new number. The plan development is a new number. But you still refer to the originally approved PD? We'll give you, well, the plan developments don't have a number. The only number on the plan development is the ordinance. So it'd be 2022-14537, which would be the ordinance number that adopted that plan development. Yes, a cramer, no, Petra. So the question is, can we come up with some language so that we don't have to open a PD to make changes within it, small changes within it? That's the will of council, yes. And that's what I think where we should start is. Let's rescind, because even now when I look on the code and to Ms. Mayor's point, she's re-referencing a code section that's not being enforced. So I think the proper step is let's rescind this and we can always start from scratch on proposing something that clearly doesn't violate SB250, which I don't think it would if we're developing a process for minor ones, but we can clean up this section for thinking of timeline. I support that. I'll touch her off and then vice mayor. I'm trying to see, you know, other than making it quicker, why would we want to do that? Why would, you know, a piti is so unique. What is in it for the city? What's in it for the citizenry of Naples to have a minor amendment where we make enough, we made enough of them on the major reasons and it's you know It's a they get bigger and larger and you know they've they've these things have morphed over time like in the case of Bayfront Why would we want to do this? Why would we want to create a minor process? There's no reason. Miner process, if you're doing a minor one, generally speaking, you're not seeing it. If it meets ABC, it gets administratively approved in their Alpador with the PD. No one saying you have to do it or not, I'm just shocked that you don't have one. I mean, I think it's a little burdensome to have someone. If they want to change this little, little 500 square foot area, I have to come and risk the entire PD and reopen the entire thing. I just think it's a little much, but it's not, I mean, there's nothing requiring you to change it. We can leave it that way. We'll just also have time limits. And when you have a PD from when I understand another PD's in cities, it's laid out. You know what you're going to have in all those spots. You just don't go. I'm going to have commercial here. You know, because Naples Square was really multi-use and then we re-zoned it to just residential. I wouldn't say it's I would say I've seen PDs you have a hundred thousand square foot of commercial thirty five thousand must be a grouch ranger I mean we added the city parking garage parcel before we had the design of the city parking garage those are yeah you're not being we know what it was going to be but you're not going to get that exact plan at the time they're going to create zoning and That's what those buildings will fit into and you have me and think about it this way if you have a those time limitations Are in there saying once we approve your plan development you have X amount of time to establish that. I mean, you can't put a cap on it and say that we're going to approve this plan development and you have to be done in five years and nothing can change. Again, the parks for plan development. That's been an active PD since 1989. It's changed a million different ways, individual buildings within that plan development since 1989. You're proving your zoning district and then stuff happens within that plan development since 1989 you're created you're you're approving a zoning district and then stuff happens within that zoning district so those time limitations are not you know all development must cease at a certain point because these are just like any other zoning district buildings age out you know we we're all thinking of the new PDs that have been approved in the last five to ten years, but think of the plan developments like the estuary, like Bears Paw, you know, we have, you're creating a district and within that district those buildings live and. But they change, you know, they change all the time like take Park Shore for example, they're, you know, we've never seen something come forward to us on- You're about to? On the PD. Well, I mean, I've been on two and a half years. I mean, I would imagine it changes all the time with houses being ripped down. So the single family portion of Parkshore is not in the plan development. It's the island, it's the multi-family buildings. Okay, so it's all the condominiums that are there. And those large high-rise buildings haven't, they're just about to start turning over because they're hitting the end of that life cycle where they were all built in the 80s and they're starting to, you know, we had Ian damage. You know, one, you'll have one in front of you in the coming weeks because of Ian damage trip to the site plan threshold so okay just so what you know on this building that's coming forward it opens up all of Park Shores buildings so it doesn't open up the PD because it's just a change in the site plan okay they're just redoing the grounds of their individual building okay it trips the site plan. They're just redoing the grounds of their individual building. Okay. But it trips the site plan and because it's in a PD, you see it. Okay. So yeah. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Are you finished? I am. Vice Mayor. Yeah. My suggestion would be before we give the city attorney any instruction, as it relates to PDs, the agenda items said just discussion. I think the community would appreciate the opportunity to come in and comment if we're about to change how we handle PDs. So it'd be good. We've got NCH that's going to, it's a PD. We've got this area over here. Where, what was the development? I think the recommendation. Just a lot of stuff. The recommendation was to put in a place or an into the code, a protection mechanism that we don't have. It's ambiguity. Like, Maria Mayor was saying, what triggers action mechanism that we don't have is ambiguity. Like Maria Merrill was saying, what triggers opening a PD so that we're not? Yep, excellent. So in your mind, city attorney, is this an ordinance change, a first reading and a second reading type thing or how does the community engage? Thank you for the question. I am not requesting any direction right now. This was really just a refresher. The only thing I suggested was I've already gotten direction to rescind the parts of this code that are not being enforced. That's already in the works. Let that happen first so that we're operating off of an accurate code section, and then we can workshop it and have public engagement and do whatever we need. I'm good with that. Okay. I don't want to end the conversation, but it is 520, and it's a very important question and you had good. Okay. So that takes us to item 8, public comment. Hi, Heavenen. Thank you. We'll start with correspondence and communications. Councilman Gramer. I have none. Thank you. We'll start with correspondence and communications. Councilman Gramer. I have none. Thank you. Thank you. I'm pitching off. I have none. Vice mayor? Yeah, I'm looking forward, but right now I have none. I'll, council member Christmas. I have nothing tonight there. Barton? Very quickly. I have multiple people commend us on the amount of communication or they're receiving throughout the storm process. So again, kudos to our staff for that communications that we're going out from everyone. You've job well done. Thank you. And, Pettaman? Well, I'm not going to keep us any longer. As you know, we really do need to talk about resiliency and adaptation. That's for sure. It isn't going to go away. The one thing that kind of keeps me nagging at my back, let's go back to Monroe County, where the impacts that were avoided by adaptation was worth $4.5 billion. So, you know, it's a little, and the cost for adaptation was $1.5 billion. So, you do the math. The longer we wait, the more expensive it's going to get. So I don't know how you can ignore those ratios day after day or how we can. So I really think it's important folks. I just finally did my onboarding with Dr. Hardman about a week ago. That's an amazing document that she has. Let's get with it. Let's get that, drag that out, and decide what it is that we want to do, because every day it's going to cost us that much more money. I think, obviously, this last weather system that is our new paradigm. In many ways, it was a blessing for that reason. Because I don't think we're going to have mild storms anymore. So I think that really turned out to be a blessing in disguise to be perfectly honest with you. So I'm just saying, the sooner we get to it, the less it's going to cost. And the rewards are a terrific relative to the cost of benefit ratios. Thank you. Thank you. Vice-Marrer. Well, I have nothing. Okay. Mr. McConnell? Appreciate the insight in the direction today. I think it was good discussion. And that's pretty much it. Thank you. And thank you for taking one piece at a time and making sure that we get our codes and our planning in order and with that we are adjourned. you you you you you