The following is the procedure for public comment and participation. Individuals wishing to speak on agenda items must complete a signup card prior to the item being introduced. Those wishing to speak on quasi judicial public hearings must complete a signup card and sign the oath. Sign up and oath
cards are available on the table. Individuals wishing to speak on non-aggenda items may do so under petitions and requests from the public present. This opportunity is offered twice in the meeting and individuals may speak at either the first or second petitions but not both. No signup card
is required. Citizens shall not comment on any issue more than once during the meeting. All comments except petitions and requests must address the pending issue and citizens will be given three minutes to speak on agenda items. Next, citizens wishing to speak on the consent agenda must submit a signup card
identifying the items of interest. Each speaker shall be limited to three minutes to speak on the entire consent agenda. And finally, all signup cards and exhibits being submitted to city council shall be placed in the box on the table. The purpose of the city council meeting is to discuss city business and proper
decorum must be displayed by all in attendance. Public input and participation is encouraged. However, all persons in attendance shall comply with the rules for meeting procedures and shall refrain from any action that disrupts the orderly proceedings of the council meeting or hinders a council
from performing its duties. No person shall interfere with the rights of others to speak, hear, see, or attend the proceedings, make threats of violence, disrupt the proceedings with shouting, fail to confine remarks to the agenda item under consideration, nor continue to speak after the allotted
speaking time has expired, as these actions shall be considered disruptive and disorderly. The mayor shall caution any person who violates these provisions and disrupts the orderly proceedings of the council meetings, and they shall be directed to comply. Any person who fails to comply as cautioned shall be ruled
out of order shall forfeit the remainder of their speaking time on the agenda item under consideration and will be requested to return to their seat. Persons who fail to comply as directed shall be subject to removal from the council chambers by law enforcement or such other actions as may be reasonably
necessary to enforce these regulations. Notwithstanding, the mayor may order the immediate removal of any person from the chambers who possesses a threat to property or life safety. Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit or restrict a person's right created by the constitution, law, ordinance, or
regulation. >> Good evening everybody. Welcome to the city of Titusville City Council regular meeting scheduled February 10th, 2026 at 6:30. I'm going to call this meeting to order. Before we move on with our agenda, I
would like to uh acknowledge the honorable and former Vice Mayor Joe Robinson who passed away just the other day. And I would like um us to have a moment of silence, please. Whereas JoC Robinson, born July 18th,
1952, passed away February 8th, 2026, leaving a legacy defined by steadfast devotion to public service, nonprofit leadership, faith-based ministry, and the well-being of families and children throughout North Bard County. And
whereas Mr. Robinson first answered his nation's call in the United States Coast Guard, serving 24 years as a naval engineering officer before retiring with distinction, a foundation that shaped his lifelong dedication to leadership and civic duty.
And whereas following military service, he brought his leadership and compassion to the nonprofit sector as the executive director of North Bard Charities. And Mr. Robinson's tenure strengthened and expanded these vital services for individuals and families in need
throughout the community. And whereas under his guidance, the organization played an integral role in the historic community, revitalizing efforts, including the restoration and adaptive reuse of the historic Carter House, a century old landmark that now houses the
Boys and Girls Club facility, serving underprivileged youth, preserving local heritage while fostering opportunities for future generations. And whereas in 2020, Mr. Robinson was elected to the city council of Titusville, Florida, serving until 2024 when he was selected
by his peers to serve as vice mayor in 2022 where he is known for his collaborative approach and focus on practical service or ordinant governance that met community needs. And whereas behind beyond his civic and nonprofit leadership, Mr. Robinson offered
spiritual support and guidance through his role as an ordained Baptist minister, bringing comfort and hope to many and applied his academic background in business management to strengthen the organizations he served. And whereas his vision, compassion, and steady
leadership earned respect across sectors and deepened the impact of institutions that promote the health, stability, and opportunity of families across Titusville and the broader North Bard region. Now therefore, I, Andrew Connors, by the authority vested in me as mayor, do hereby proclaim our
profound appreciation and enduring respect for the life and the legacy of Joe C. Robinson and recognize his contributions for which forever shaped the character of our community. And now I'd like to invite Pastor Roger
Hackenberg from Hope Community Fellowship to give the invocation. Is Mr. Pastor Roger here? Is he outside? All right. In lie of Pastor Roger not being here, we'll just have another moment of silence, please. Thank you. Can you please stand for the pledge of
>> allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands one nation indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Thank you very much and I know I
appreciate you guys all being here. I know you guys are all passionate about this issue one way or another. But I would please ask that decorum be kept. Please no yelling or shouting while other people are talking because it is important for us to hear everybody and
everybody will have their right to speak but please don't infringe on other people's and their right to speak. Hopefully we can get through this before 10:30. I highly doubt it. Um, but our rules of council state at 10:30 a motion by council will need to be made to
extend such a meeting. It would be my ask of council and I'm just letting everybody know ahead of time that if that were to occur that we would extend till about midnight and then if we're still not concluded with city business, I would ask that we adjourn and then reconvene tomorrow at about 10:00 a.m.
That would be my ask just because I I believe we'll probably be done with with this item before, but there are other items that need to be talked about and I do not believe government making decisions at 2 a.m. is considered under the sunshine. uh because who in their right mind can come in at 2 am and and
speak on an item. So, with that being said, we're going to move through our agenda and let everybody have their opportunity to to talk, but if we do run late, just know that is what I'm thinking. >> City attorney, do we have a quorum? >> Yes, you do. >> Thank you very much. City manager.
>> Yes, sir. The first item on the agenda is the approval of minutes, and we have two sets of minutes to approve. >> Member Nelson. Move to approve the minutes of December 9th and January 29th of the regular city council meeting.
>> Second. >> I have a motion by member Nelson, a second by Vice Mayor Cole. City clerk, can you call the role, please? >> Yes, sir. Member Moscoso? >> Yes. >> Member Nelson? >> Yes. >> Mayor Connors? >> Yes. >> Vice Mayor Cole? >> Yes. >> Member Stokel? >> Yes.
>> Motion carries. Thank you very much. Mr. City Manager, sir. We have no special recognitions and presentations under boards and commissions. We have 6A board of adjustments and appeal and we have a semianual written report included in the agenda packet and no action is
requested. >> All right, I don't see any questions of this board. Now we're on to petitions and requests from the public non-aggenda items. So if the item's on the agenda, please don't bring it up at this time, but bring it up when that item is called. Ma'am. Hi,
I'm Connie Milton. I've lived here in this area for ever. Um, I go up and down Sison Road daily, every day. I mean, it needs improvement. It's used by the Titusville Police to get to the police department. It's used by KSC workers
coming from the space center to Highway 50. The Imperial Estates Elementary School uses that. Come down Wendy Lee, go up and down Sison Road daily. Um, Pine Tree Gardens, uh, the garbage up
and down Pineree Gardens, which is right there on Sison. I don't know if the city council can do something about that. Those folks have no other choice but to put garbage along Sison Road. They have no dumpsters inside of the area. They
It's could be called garbage gardens because they have a garbage cans right in front of each one of their houses, their con their town houses. they don't have access. There's 10 in each building. So, if there's any way that the city council can have garbage pickup
pick up there two or three times a week instead of just, you know, one time a week, there's been items out there now for over a week that I've been watching two giant piles since the first of the month and they haven't been picked up yet. So, I don't know if the city council can do something about that.
Also on Sison Road, the chain link area that is the city whalefield though that whole uh fenced area is just overgrown stuff growing on the fences. Some of the fences coming down. I know you fixed part of it, but but all along there it's
just atrocious looking. Um the turning lanes need to be expanded. you know, you approved or agreed to uh town houses or more condos going up there and they've got a lot of the in infrastructure in now. They haven't built the condos yet,
but they're going to be there. Um the traffic on that road is horrendous at certain times during the day. Now, the traffic study may very well say, "Oh, it's all fine." It's really not. So, it needs to be expanded like a turning lane put down the middle all the way up and
down Citizen. Do something about it. Um, and then the turning lane from Sison onto Highway 50 needs to be expanded. People are going off on the side of the road trying to make a couple of lanes to turn onto 50, but that needs to be addressed somehow. Thank you.
>> Well, thank you very much for your comments and just some information. Cison Road is a county-owned road, so it kind of limits our ability, but you know, I I think that's definitely something that needs to be discussed and I appreciate you bringing that up. In regards to the trash, we're well aware and we we ask for those things on a
regular basis, I think. So, uh the trash is city, but the roads county. So, and I think that project might have been in the county that you're referring to the condos. So, ma'am, do >> Dr. Kathleen work, I have a quick comment on your suggestion of perhaps
closing the meeting at midnight. I would like to recommend that the entire Royal Oak thing be heard and solved and decided upon before you stop. If you're worried about time, feel free to move it earlier, but it's going to be very detrimental to those of us who have
hired outside people to come and speak and be here. And it's not going to give as good a um opportunity to get the full story out and respect the citizens. So, I understand you're concerned about other items. you said fine, but keep in mind that this one should be completed
before you go home. >> I I appreciate it. I think we'll get through the first items before we get to Royal Oak. Hopefully, I mean, hopefully in the next half hour, we'll get to the uh that agenda item and we can hear it in its entirety, but I anticipate that
one lasting a little longer. Mr. Johnson. My name is Stan Johnson. I'm a registered professional engineer. And I bring that about because I'm doing some findings as a professional engineer uh that are
not pretty. They're ugly things that's going on in the city. and violations of laws and uh it's been going on for many years. So, uh I'm asking you guys to uh to not to ignore these these problems.
And as you know, it was just mentioned recently at a at a another meeting with the public is that someone is that my correspondence like when it went to Trump and the FBI was completely ignored. I don't think that you should
ignore these these uh emails. I really don't because there's crime that's going on in the city of Titusville in our departments. For example, false report by Brad Parish and the East Coast, East Central Florida Regional Planning
Council. False report. No discipline, admission of guilt. It's bad. It's really bad. We're talking about millions of dollars here. So, let's go into prayer. Lord, I pray I pray for some truth and justice in the city of Titusville. I
pray for them to be answering questions instead of ignoring the problems. I pray for uh um several things. For example, the um large culberts under I95 that are not
being used that is against FEMA law and against FDOT. I I I wish the city consider that these are supposed to be used as as as required in the storm water management plan. I also ask that the the city of
Tyusville council members recognize the TEC who also said do not spray people with piss and poop. And this has been going on since since sometime December 2020. Not continuously, but when we have a sewage spill in a pond that has a
fountain, this is not good. And it's it's it's against the public and it's against the health, safety, and welfare. So, I ask even the police department to cooperate with that. Not getting it.
So, uh I do have some some uh um exhibits in closing the prayer. Amen. Uh that um uh I know we're not as far as I I see that from reading it that they're allowed, but you you will tell them tell
me to leave when I just bring it up. So, this is an example that that I have to sit down. Okay, Mr. Johnson. >> So, I have over about 9 seconds left and I'm I'm I'm removing myself under duress. Thank you. >> No.
Is there anybody else from petitions and request non-aggenda items? >> I see none. City manager. >> Yes, sir. Moving on to consent. We have one housekeeping item. Uh 8D, the award of contract for a Bay View seminal
project has been pulled by staff. Uh we need to finalize a survey and also finalize some technical and logistics regarding the contract that will appear back on the February 24th uh agenda for council consideration.
>> Are there any council members wishing to pull items A through C on consent agenda? Seeing none, >> sir, I'll go ahead and read the uh titles for the record. 8A, resolution number 2-2026,
appointing members to the Taiso social services ad hoc committee. 8B change order number one to the work order of ACOM WR016 for additional engineering services and
8C trenchless rehabilitation and maintenance slip lining of sewer lines and manholes. >> Thank you very much, city clerk. >> Yes, sir. We have three cards. Lynn Golden and I believe she may be outside.
>> Okay. Officer, can you go get Lynn Golden? City clerk, can you call the next card while we wait? >> Um, we also have Susan Pender, which I believe is also outside. >> All right. >> And then we have Stan Johnston. >> Oh, Susan.
>> Susan, would you like to come? >> Thank you. My name is Susan Pender, appointed to the Tylersville Social Service Adoc Committee uh committee. I'm actually sitting in for Gina Buckles cuz she's outside
somewhere. So, she has um provided um some information that she wants me to read. So, the Titusville Social Service ad hoc committee gateway to nature and space. The intent of the committee to
allow those citizens that utilize or who in need of social human services to first express their experiences provide input on where services are lack lacking.
Three, find effective and efficient ways to build uh bridges and those gaps. um my personal utilization at the Heritage Moore um center. She uh
attended Zuma classes, volunteered at the turkey giveaways at Thanksgiving, assist the toy and food giveaways during the holidays, help people with facts and paperwork, attended community meetings and rallies, participated in repass,
presented grants and nonprofit workshops, conducted sat and act training sessions for interested students. Solicit input. Get the firsthand opinions of the citizens as to
where they are experienced gaps and disconnects in the services. Also get a clear understanding of the lack of participation in services and events offered. soliciting stu soliciting
citizens excuse me opinion direct interviews surveys focus group um archive data and others increase engagement increase attendance for the citizens understand how to generate
interest for nonprofit organizations in having satellite office located at the Heritmore social service uh center and report findings. Um the v the ver the number of potential
committee members direct background um new and long-term residents, citizens and service providers, younger and older citizens, females and male participants. Thank you.
>> Thank you very much, >> Lynn Golden. Concerned citizen group again. Good evening every counselor. Hear me. My name is Lynn Golden. I'm at 1100 Country Club Boulevard, Titansville,
Florida. And some of my concerned citizen members are here tonight. I wish that the council along with the city manager considered two items. HOCC CBG funding will be first. Not trying to
jump ahead of anyone tonight because everyone is here is important. But I'm not here to say who's qualified for the HOC committee. The original plan, according to Terry, seven members
that lived in the target area. Council Megan stated five members that would be considered in the target area and met the standards. Vice Mayor
stated everyone met the qualification and all 11 would be on the board. Megan read perhaps the rules of this committee hawk and she was outvoted.
Then the mayor Connor appointed a chairperson. not knowing your procedures when appointing people. I'm sure you have that authority. I got a few calls saying I thought we would have a meeting with Terry. She
would go over the rules, the reason why this hawk came about, this program, and the people completed the application. I'm pretty sure that Terry was surprised when this took place last Tuesday night.
When established a committee, the people choose who they want to be over them. Since this has been done, I would pray that on this committee will have things for the target area and bring about a
change, not another added addition to their resume. Thank you. Thank you, city clerk. >> The last card is Dan Johnston. Uh, my name is Stan Johnson. I'm a professional engineer. I'd like your
attention. I'm serious. I want your attention on this. This has to do with what? This has to do with forlog virus. This has to do with four log virus. This has to do with four log virus. That's when we get boiled water alerts
in the city of Tyersville. We get boiled water alerts too late. One of our businesses here lost over 37 over $35,000 because of this board water alert. Close down the business. That's what this is about. I want you
guys to do something about it. It's been how many years? 15 years. It's a long time. I think y'all should discuss it and understand what's going what the heck's going on here. For log virus, I do not know and I have asked the question of to FTP. I've asked the
question the city of Titusville. Who else in the city in in in Bvard County or in Orange County or in any place in the city of that is comparable to the city of Titusville has four log virus problems. I know of none.
It's time for you to take it, get rid of it. I know that uh Mr. uh uh Kevin Cook has been working on it, but this is a serious issue and and people have lost money for virus and it has to do with
colon colon counts of of our drinking water. So we get what we do is we get we get boiled water alerts in the newspaper or word of mouth or something like that and who knows what's going on. So So in
other words, people are drinking the water regardless of the of the boiled water alert. We spend over 50 50% of our our uh our budget is spent on healthy health, safety and welfare.
you should take care of this. This is a big issue and the city has been negligent for how many years? 15 years, 20 years. I'm not sure what. I didn't find out about it until I don't know, maybe 15 years ago. I'm shocked. I'm shocked. And I want you to guys to do something about it. This looks like a
step toward it, toward solving it. And if you have any questions, ask Kevin Cook. He knows what's going on. Thank you, Kevin. >> Okay, that's it. Thank you. >> Any questions? Thank you, city clerk. Is that all the
cards? >> All right. Thank you. >> Please refrain from the round of applause so we can continue with the business. Can I have a motion? Member Stokel. >> Yes. Just to clarify with u item A. I don't think that there was any I don't
think Megan made a motion without voted. What happened was we had originally had rules in place that were for five to seven. Once we saw a lot of qualified applicants, we decided, is there a way that we can have all of them be on the board? So, I think that's what this resolution is in reference to is to
allow us now to have all 11 because we saw those applicants. So, I just wanted to clarify that. >> Thank you, Member Stokl. Member Nelson, >> I would move to approve consent agenda items A through C. >> Second. >> I have a motion by member Nelson, second
by Vice Mayor Cole. Is there any further discussion? City clerk. Member Nelson, >> yes. >> Mayor Connors, >> yes. >> Vice Mayor Cole, >> yes. >> Member Stokel, >> yes. >> Member Muscoso, >> yes. >> Motion carries. Thank you very much, city manager. >> Yes, sir. Moving on to item nine,
ordinances, second reading, and it's uh item A is ordinance number 3-2026, the annual update of the 5-year capital improvement schedule relating to the capital improvement element of the comprehensive plan. And this is to
conduct the public hearing and final reading of this ordinance. And Brad Paris will read the ordinance for the record. An ordinance of the city of Titusville, Florida, updating the 5-year capital improvement schedule of the comprehensive plan of the city of Titusville for the 2026 to 2030 horizon
relating to the capital improvement element and providing for an effective date. >> I thought you were going to read the whole thing, Mr. Parish. I'm just kidding. No, >> I won't do that to you. >> All right. >> The staff report is on page 887. We're
supposed to provide a level of service analysis to you every year. We do this with the update to the capital improvements element, which is by stat statute required to be done. It is a schedule that's inside the city's comprehensive plan. It's a 5-year schedule of improvements that help us
maintain and improve our level of service standards for concurrency related facilities. And those are uh those kind of those facil facilities are transportation, the capacity for portable water,
sanitary sewer, solid waste, storm water, parks, and schools. So you'll see on that schedule there are some items that are pulled from our capital improvements program which is part of your original your annual update to your budget but they also include projects
from other agencies such as FDOT and the county because they help us maintain a level of service for parks and for other transportation facilities such as state roads. We went through and determined that the um our findings that that are that the
capital improvements schedule that was provided to you on your dies there there's some tweaks to it since the agenda was published. So what you have in your dies is the final version. We believe that it is consistent with the comprehensive plan. So projects and timing of the proposed
projects in the 2026 to 2030 CIE or capital improvements element will maintain the adopted level of service standards in our comprehensive plan. Therefore, the proposed CIE is consistent with the adopted comprehensive plan. We recommend approval of it. >> Thank you, Mr. Parish. City clerk,
>> we have one card. It's Dan Johnston. My name is Stan Johnson. I'm a professional engineer. My findings is the city of Titusville is committing fraud, false reports, sustainability is not true. Obviously, I'm against this capital improvement project because you're not
you're not obeying the law. For example, for example, I95 has numerous culverts on it. I've mentioned it before. I've mentioned it many times. And the city of Tyville is supposed to have drainage maintenance. What you have is positive outfalls over
there. Legal positive outfalls. Let me say it again. There's unmaintained legal positive outfalls that you're not taking about. Nothing in this capital improvement project has anything to do with it. In fact is you're supposed to do it internally and you're not obeying the storm water
master plan. This has to do with a lot of projects including Royal Oak. But anyhow uh this is uh the sustainability report was done in 2019. It was fraudulent and it excluded information about drainage in the city
of Titusville. Brad Parish admitted his guilt and so did and and Eastern East Coast Central Florida Regional Planning Council is also guilty of this. So what they do is they admitted admitted this information.
It's a false reports. It's fraud. So what you what you've got is a is a is a capital improvement project that is based upon what? Dishonesty and fraud. I don't like what you're doing. I don't like what you're doing. That's why I
write to to uh President Trump and also our our governor and also the FBI because you guys are crooked. >> Please stay on the capital improvement plan. >> That's what I'm talking about. In other words, your capital improvement project is is fraud and it's it's it's millions of dollars that you're not doing and
you're you're disobeying the law. You're disobeying your storm water management plan. You're disobeying all things. For example, guess what? The city of Tyville has put dams in the city of Tyville. These dams, none of them were were surveyed to show what they they flood. That's a against the law. My goodness.
What in the world? You put dams up, you don't tell what what they flood. You don't care. That's a that's illegal taking of property. The city of Titusville is in trouble. And I I'm I I'm asking I've prayed for you guys to think about it and answer questions.
You're not going to answer questions because you just want to want to let it ride. Pat yourself on the back. It's not right thing to do. You need to take action and obey the law. Any questions? I would think you would have some
questions. Okay. No applause. >> Thank you, Mr. Johnson. >> Thank you. >> So, city clerk, that concludes the cards. Correct? >> All right. MSO. >> Yes, thank you. Um Brad, on page um 8.90
um it it talks about the um level of service for um area 2, three and four and Coco. It says the resources there are sufficient system capacity for future water demands through the year 2035. Um it says these may include uh
constructing additional wells permitted as part of the city's approved consumptive use permit. So, I noticed that we do have the availability, but it it sounds like we need to be possibly looking into building new wells. And so, when I look at the capital improvement
schedule, where is that located? Because I see we have wellfill improvements. Does that include constructing new wells? And we also have water system expansion. So, where would that fall? >> Well, 2035 is outside the 5-year year.
So, this is that what you're referring to is a reference to a um the water supply facilities plan that was completed in 2023 as required by state statute for us to be consistent with the water management district's master plan. It that plan or I'm sorry, that report
that was completed basically is a monitoring tool. So, as far as specifics as long-term plans beyond that 5year horizon of what we should be doing, I'd have to defer to the public works to answer that question for you, but it is something we will have to look into. So the plan itself or the report that was
done back then was basically telling the the city that we need to monitor this and we need to be planned for it probably longer term. But as far as this CIE it only includes the 5-year >> because here it mentions Antigua Bay which I think is Tranquility and Verona
Willow Creek. Um those are like the bigger projects. Um, but how like I think it's just important if if we know that we are we have the ability to get more water, we just need to look into wells to start planning and to know that. And so, um, that's just where I
was curious, um, about kind of what the cost is, what we're doing, where we're looking at that area. I had had the opportunity with Mr. my jack to go tour up in Valuchia County and it's beautiful up there and it was really neat to see um how that all works but it just got me
thinking about the different wells and then reading this um we yeah obviously we have the cup but we we need to make sure we have the wells to be able to get those resources >> just to further answer we could look the water plan does have a 10-year planning
horizon in the study itself it's not in your agenda that's something we would have to get back and look at >> okay and I have one more question if that's okay. Um it says also that um and I did speak briefly to to I think the city manager. It's it has $20,000 for um
storm water. Um could you just explain what that means because we have all the just so everyone knows we have different um the the capital improvement plan and we have you know what we're going to be spending the money on. Um so you know portable water, sanitary sewer and then
storm water. It it says 20,000. And I know that we are allotting more and so could you just speak to that what that 20,000 means and what we're actually going to be spending on storm water this year for the next 5 years for this for the next 5 years. I'd have to look at to see what I don't have that information in front of me.
>> So we don't know what projects we have. Do we know what projects we have for storm water improvement for the next 5 years? Because I don't see them listed. >> So this the list of projects that are inside the CIE are only related to those that affect us level of service. There may be additional projects that are
inside the capital improvements program that aren't level of service related that are inside our budget that I would have to look into. Okay. >> So that I don't have that here in front of me for the CIE. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Any further questions from council?
Brad, I just had one question and it's more of a technical one. So I know we get money from the state to do some of these road projects and things like that. So when you say fiscal year 26, are we talking state fiscal year or our fiscal year? >> I believe their fiscal year is the same
as ours. >> It starts in July. >> We're on a different scale. >> Yeah, >> we're on from one October to 30 September. And that's what we're referencing. >> Yeah, we look at their fiveyear work plan >> because Yeah, there could be overlap, but depending on what year it's being calculated. I was looking at some of
these road projects and I was like, >> I think that was already done. Maybe it was, maybe it wasn't. So I just wanted to ask that question. All right. All right. Any further questions from council? Seeing none, city clerk or sorry, can I have a motion? >> Move to approve ordinance number 3,
2026, the updated 5-year capital improvement schedule. >> Second. >> I have a motion by member Nelson, second by Vice Mayor Cole. City clerk. >> Mayor Connor. >> Yes. >> Vice Mayor Cole. >> Yes. >> Member Stokel. >> Yes. >> Member Muscoso. >> Yes. >> Member Nelson.
>> Yes. >> Motion carries. Thank you very much. City manager. >> Yes, sir. We're moving on to 9B, the comprehensive plan amendment, CPA number 2-2025, Gemini Lakes, also known as Royal Oak.
And the action is to for council to take action on the transmitt of the comprehensive plan amendment application number 2-2025 to the state of Florida's land planning agency for review. And Brad Parish is here to present that item.
So before you tonight is a public hearing to consider transmitting a comprehensive plan, a large-scale comprehensive plan to the state for review. This amendment is required to be transmitted to the state if we are going to adopt this amendment. This is a first
step. The must do if it is going to be adopted. So this is not an adoption hearing. This is just a hearing to consider whether to transit it to the state for their review. And what the state is going to do is review an amendment that basically determine whether it's going to have an impact on
a state resource. So various state agencies will review this and provide comments to us. We'll have it's will go through what's called an expedited review. Uh this is required for any comprehensive plan amendment that for a a map amendment that is 50 acres or more
and that is this case is about 149 acres. The state will uh in addition to Florida Commerce uh they which is the land state land planning agency they will um send this amendment or we have to send this amendment to the various agencies
including uh the water management district um FD and various other agencies and they have about 30 days to provide their responses to us. If there are no objections then it's simply u for us to consider and adopt. If they uh
believe that there are some objections or some concerns or impacts to state resources, they will note that into a report to us. Uh they may have comments, they may be general, that may only be just recommendations that don't have any effect. But if there are objections, substantial objections, then we will
have to address those or the applicant will have to address those before uh we can send adopt this and send this back to the state. What you have in your agenda on page 913 is the beginning of the staff report. The application that was submitted to us
was a request to amend the comprehensive plan future land use map by amending the recreation and conservation future land use designations to the low density residential land use category on this property. The rollout golf course is about 149
acres. It has two land use categories on there. If you're not familiar with the recreation land use, it is a just that mean it's primarily just for recreational uses. Uh conservation is is what it's entitled to mostly for holding category or protection category for conservation areas. When you overlay
these categories onto the property, it does not generally overlap um you know eye for eye on everything that you see on that property. There are flood planes on the property. There are no wetlands identified that are jurisdictional. There are ponds that are stormwater related on the property and there are
some um grass areas and some trees on the property as well. The change of this amendment is sent to the state no objection and you and no concerns you and then it comes before you for further public hearings to adopt. If it is adopted then the new land use category will be the lowdensity
residential which will entitle the property to five residential units per acre. The applicant also is requesting to reszone the property from the general use and open space recreation zoning districts to a tailor made zoning district called plan development. So
currently there are two zoning districts on the property. General use is the most primarily an agricultural zoning district that is underneath the recreational land use. The open space and recreation zoning district is as as it states open space and recreation and that is located underneath the
conservation land use. If both of these are removed with the at the adoption hearings, then they'll be replaced as proposed, if you concur with what's been presented, with the planned development zoning district, which will have attached to it a master plan that will govern the property for future
development. Just so you know, the master plan that is attached to this PD resoning is just that. It is not a site plan. It is a it's not a detailed engineered site plan that proves the consistency with our site plan requirements. It is a master plan that
is uh to demonstrate to you compliance with the PD requirements of the code. Um the recommendations which I'll I'll iterate later on after my presentation is to transmit the amendment to the state land planning agency which in this case is Florida Commerce as proposed to replace the recreation conservation land
use designations with the lowdensity residential future land use designation. So this is not a consideration of the resoning. The action tonight again is just about the comprehensive plan amendment. The second option we're we're suggesting in our staff report is to not transmit at this time and direct the
staff to initiate a small area study to guide the redevelopment of the area. This was something that was suggested to us by um a planner who provided a letter to us in reference, you know, referring to certain policies in our comprehensive plan. planners determined that to be a
legitimate option and we uh put that in our recommendation as an option for city council. I do want to read what the policy says in our future land use element related to that. Future land use element policy 1.1.2 specifically states the city shall
prioritize specific areas of the city to conduct studies andor plan to provide the data and analysis for the development of the character dis district goals, objectives and policies. It's very broad. That basically means is that you can do a study to determine what land use category you'd like to see on a particular piece of property. And
this is a good case for that. There could be other there have been other examples around the city where there are some cases where there's large pieces of property. You're trying to determine what the holding category should be on that property. And so you've determined want to do a study to see what could be the capacity, what could be an impact to
our concurrency related facilities and other questions you may have to determine what is an appropriate land use category to put on this property. In 2017 or 2016, there was an attempt similar attempt to do a redevelopment on a golf course. The city the city council
at that time did ask us to do a moratorium which was adopted in order to allow us to do a study. So there was a similar study done back then and the study included um just what the existing titlements are on the property and this looked at both the Royal Oak golf course
and the Lita golf course. Those are the only two remaining golf courses in the city. So we looked at that. We looked at other uh examples of redevelopments around the region. We also provided in that report a um some suggestions of
moving forward next and some of them were to go forward with public uh participation. In other words, allowing the staff to work with the community to find out what their concerns are and what they would be what they accept and what input they can provide to us that we can give back to city council. At
that time, the direction we received from city council was to go forward with an ordinance and we drafted an ordinance that was very in-depth that provided parameters in the event that someone wanted to redevelop a golf course. That ordinance included several things such
as a master plan requirement. If anything was going to be triggered for new development on there and any piece was going to be divided, the whole thing would have to be put into that master plan. That ordinance also listed the approved uses. It emphasized conservation subdivision design as a tool. Um, there was a 75 foot buffer
requirement. It could go down to 50 feet. There was a trail. There was even a allowance for commercial uses inside certain areas of the golf course redevelopment area. There was a maximum height of 35 ft and 50 ft max uh that could go any further than that that prohibited anything going more than
that. So, that ordinance was a result of a study. that orders did not get adopted at that time. So, if you decide to go forward with the second option, we're recommending inside our staff report, we could do something similar or we could do something similar to other studies that have been conducted by the city
that are more in depth and that study could determine come back to you with recommendations that you would want to do with further action whether that be maybe another ordinance or whatever or maybe uh spec specifically identifying a particular land use on a particular property.
So that is my explanation of the second option in our recommendation. Um the staff report we reviewed this application for the land use consistency with the land use. We did not provide information on our staff report for
consistency with the zoning. So because again this is just a hearing just to transmit the application to the state for review. The application or the alken is asking for this land use category ultimately to have the PD reszoned on a PD put onto
this property the P the plan development zoning on this property with the master plan to allow up to 511 residential units. This was initial requested to go to 547, but since this um was brought to to um
I'm sorry, let me state here. The applicant provided a revised concept plan on January 15th of this year with changes addressing comments received from the public that they uh community meeting they held earlier that that month. The revised plan retains the layout the previous plan but reduces the number of town homes units and adds a
large central lake next to the central park and clubhouse. With this latest concept plan, which I'll identify in your packet, the total number of proposed residential units has been reduced from 547 to 511. Our findings have not changed in our staff report. This was brought to the planning and
zoning commission on January 21st. The commission recommended to not approve the transmitt of the amendment and instead to direct staff to conduct a small area study to guide redevelopment of the area. Just one moment. So, we did go through in our staff report, which I won't go in detail here,
but I'll just point out that we reviewed it consistent with the criteria for a land use amendment, and we provided our analysis The following is an analysis of the consistency of the request with the city's comprehensive plan. The request
for comprehensive plan amendment resoning is consistent with the comprehensive plan and more specifically with the following objectives and policies of the comprehensive plan. So we started on page six and seven. You'll see where we've identified provided some analysis on policies that we thought were most relevant to this request.
I'm sorry, page six of the report. Excuse me. So again, on page 924, you'll see on our on the staff report 924 of your packet, which is the last page of the staff report. Again, we're recommending that this be transmitted to state for for them the state to review it.
or to not transmit and do a study if that is the option of council. I will point out to some maps and some other exhibits in the agenda. On page 925 of your packet, you'll see
the map of the property and aerial On page 926, you'll see the f the future land use what it looks like on currently on the left side of the screen and what it will be what it will look like on the right side of the screen. You can see that the lowdensity residential land use category is consistent with the adjacent
land use categories. Uh the surrounding neighborhoods also have the lowdensity residential land use category. The applicant did initially request a highdensity residential land use category. We did work with them to see if that was really appropriate. We
thought there were some issues with that. Maybe in some areas it might be appropriate because there is highdensity residential near this property but not the entire golf course. And so the applicant decided to go amend their application and request a low density residential because the five units per
acre is above what they're actually asking for which is about 3.7 units per acre. So again, if this land use amendment is transmitted and we get the response back and you go forward with the adoption, you adopt and you adopt the land use amendment, then the resoning would
restrict it even further because of the master plan. I'm just going to point out some exhibits in the on the agenda. The master plan is on page 951. You'll see three different master plans. That is because there was one that was originally given to us. Then it was
revised and we asked them to provide where the changes happened in a bubble form. But on page 951 is the final version according to the applicant. We reviewed it and includes the 511 residential units. We did not see any issue with that or any or any need to
warn us for to change our staff report. So you'll see on page 951 the master plan where it has several entrances into the property has single family lots and several uh town home lots. So all of this if this is approved would the
master plan would guide development and they would have to go through the platting process to subdivide this entire property whether that might be in one plat or sub or several phases. There are recreational components throughout this master plan identified here. I know the applicant has a presentation they can they will describe
uh many of the amenities of those open space areas. In addition to this in your agenda you will see a landscape plan which is on page 1079 of your packet and that is basically uh a
plan that identifies where existing trees are, which trees would be removed to allow for the development, which trees would be preserved. The school district did provide a concurrency report and they did not find an impact to school facilities. There is
an environmental report on page 1116 of your packet. The applicant even provided a pesticide analysis report which is on page 1151, a traffic study which is very thorough on page um
1170 of your packet. I think one thing to consider when it comes to traffic is one concern that we had was that the subdivisions shouldn't all dump out onto the collector road uh because of the number of units. We believe that this should be dispersed
with additional entry points and exit points. That way you disperse traffic more appropriately throughout. The last agend uh exhibit is the uh preliminary storm water report that the applicant provided which is on page 1313 of your packet.
And we do have uh Quento Foso who's our city engineer u to provide any um answers to questions you may have about the storm water preliminary stormwater report that was provided to us. Again, the applicant is also here to answer any questions about it. With that, I'll try
and answer any questions you have. Um I know that was a lot and um I know the applicant's going to want to present something as well. >> Thank you, Mr. Parish. Um, now we'll have the applicant come up. Um, after the applicant speaks, I would like for
to hear from the public because I'm sure council will have plenty of questions, but I want to make sure that the public has an opportunity to to speak and I'm sure we'll think of questions to ask as the public speaks as well. So, floor is yours. >> Thank you. We have a PowerPoint.
>> Good evening, mayor, members of city council. My name is Cam Roseno with the law firm of Lacy Rosenko. I'm here on behalf of the owner of the property and of the applicant. We are here to uh present the comprehensive plan amendment and also to discuss the master plat
because you are allowed to rely upon that in making your decisions here under your code of ordinances. With us we have many of our consultants. Um Josh Long will do most of the presentation tonight. Josh is an AICP
certified planner with over 25 years of experience. Bruce Moya is an MVV is with MBV engineer with over 40 years experience. And uh James Taylor, a traffic engineer with over 25 years of experience. They are all here tonight. Mr. Paris talked
about what they have provided. It's all in your packet. I know there's been quite a bit of information about storm water uh and questions about it. Mr. Moya did do a 240 page study that's in your packet and he can answer any questions you may have. Again, this is
really a comprehensive plan amendment and what is appropriate for this area. And with that, um, Mr. Long will take you through the PowerPoint. I'll come back up with just a few points and then if you have questions of any of our consultants, I did provide at PMZ all of
the resumeumés, so they should be in your packet as well. And I will provide the PowerPoint to the clerk. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Good evening. Uh for the record, Josh Long, 105 Northeast First Street, Delray Beach, and with Culture. Um so, as Kim
mentioned, I'm going to go through a a detailed presentation of our project, and I know there'll be questions after. Um so Brad um summarized the applications we submitted and just to be very clear um the only application on the agenda tonight is the comprehensive
plan map amendment. Um so a little bit of history about Gemini Lakes. Um so as everybody knows uh the golf course closed um about 12 to 13 years ago. Um then Reed Property Group um purchased
that and they filed an application directly to the or a pre-application directly to the city for about a thousand units. Uh that was not received very well at all and they decided they needed to find a Florida based developer that understood development in Florida. Um they did the research and then they
entered into a a purchase contract with Culture in October of 23 and that's where I step in. So um I began working on this project in November of 23. I immediately reached out to some of the uh opposition um leaders um sat down in
their house and you discussed what we were going to do which was essentially start over and and do a proper plan. And the first thing that we did um was a a neighborhood outreach meeting. Um we sent over a thousand postcards to everybody. Um, we had a information type
gathering meeting where we had all of our consultants in one room, um, and allowed people to come in and just speak to us and and tell us what their concerns were, what their issues were, if the property was developed, what they would want to see, and we took all that information in. That meeting occurred on
January 11th. Um, we we spent a couple months evaluating that, evaluating some other very key important planning documents, which I'm going to address in a little bit. Um and then we had a more presentation theater style presentation at the Grove Church on April 29th. Um as
you can see the the number of attendees are there. The the numbers are higher than what are there. This is who actually signed the sheet. There were people who didn't want to give their name and that was fine, but um these are people who signed the sheet. Um and so we had that presentation at um the Grove Church um well over two hours where we
had each of our consultants go into great detail um to address the concerns that we had um and all of our consultants have drafted comprehensive analysis and reports and studies which have been part of the record and were submitted to the the city um in April
3rd of last year. Um and then finally before we came um started our public hearings, we had another neighborhood outreach meeting um on January 8th where we had about 80 attendees and that's where we went over our most recent concept plan with everybody. So the
request that we have today is a large scale Brad went over all of this so I'll go really quickly through this for 147 acres. Um but real quickly just the neighborhood data. Um so as you see on the screen there the area in red is the
Gemini Lakes um project 147 acres 511 units which is of 3.47 units per acre. We do have 26.69 um acres of lake. That's the surface area of the lake. Um and then we have multiple parks which I'll get into detail later. So the area in yellow is
what we're calling the Royal Oak neighborhood. Um and this is 264 acres. They've got about 1153 units at a 4.3 density unit in an acre with 11.39 uh lake acres of lake. Um they do not have any parks. Um and this consists of
uh 14 historic um subdivision plats and and 32 town home condo buildings um all in that yellow area. So that's essentially what we're calling the the neighborhood area. Um so these are the existing land use. Um Brad broke down and described those before. Um so this
is what our request is for a um lowdensity residential across the entire um 147 acres. Um and this would be a comparison of the before and after. So in Brad's staff report and Brad mentioned this before but staff does
have a positive findings for our application and recommending approval. We agree with those findings particularly the very important urban sprawl analysis which is one of the most important when you get into a large scale future land use map amendment. Um we city staff did not find that the application would encourage uh any
sprawl. Um and then we go through the other uh key elements of the comp plan. Once again, these were all positive findings from staff. Um we do agree with those positive findings as well. And then we're getting back to the um the neighborhood uh meetings. And before
uh we get into the detail of those neighborhood meetings, I do want for the record to present to the clerk that we do have um support from over 250 title residents here in this binder for you. Okay. So now I'm going to jump back in time to January 11th. So, this was the
neighborhood outreach meeting that we had. This is when we're um had all of our consultants sit around and this is when a lot of the residents were still talking to us. Um and so they they were they gave us all of their opinions, good, bad, ugly. They filled out these cards. They they spoke to everybody in
great detail. Um and this is the information that kicked off our planning um initiative, right? We we started from here and tried to come up with a plan that could was economically viable, would work, would make all the improvements and provide as much to the neighborhood um as we could in in form
of public benefits. And so, as you can see, each of these was broken down into um the most common responses and then we had everything, right? And so on this sheet, this is everything
that we received in order, right? So everything in red are the things that we could address. Um unfortunately the number two the number one and two comments were just absolutely no reasonzoning and just you know build the 79 homes that is entitled to and
obviously we couldn't address that because there would be no development with it. So, we did focus on all those other areas in red and the rest of my presentation is going to highlight how we have addressed those or provided information or facts or studies or figures that address those concerns as
well as we've moved along the last two years. So, now we're getting into the conceptual master plan itself. Um, as I mentioned before, it's 147 acres, 3.47 units an acre. A couple key issues here is that we have identified six vehicular
access points and eight pedestrian path access points. And this is really important because interconnectivity is a key vital element of providing a proper plan in inviting the adjacent neighborhood in to Royal Oak. We don't want this to be a gated community. We don't want this to be separate. We want
this to be part of the existing neighborhood. So finding these access points has been very important and a key element of our our long-term plan. Um, some of the many public benefits that we have are the clubhouse, which is going to be a semi-private clubhouse. In fact, this was the number one item that came
out of that initial meeting we had on January 11th. That was a surprise to me. Um, it was that the the majority of the the residents did not miss golf or playing golf. They missed the clubhouse. That's where they had the memories. That's where their children grew up and went swimming. That's where they met
their friends and played bingo and all all these incredible memories. So, we completely revised our plan and we added a semi-private clubhouse into our plan. And how we would work this out through the um ordinance for the the PD would be we would allow anybody that was in one
of those 14 platted subdivisions, right? Everybody's deed has what where they live. And so, we would know if you're in one of those 14 platted subdivisions or one of those 32 town homes or condos, you would be able to um join at your own leisure. It wouldn't be a requirement. Our development would require membership to make make sure that we had continuous
income coming in, but other people could join at their own will. And so this would be a public benefit that people in the neighborhood could use. Um also the extensive public park system that we've created, I'm going to go into detail on that. That's probably the biggest um public benefit that we're offering. Um
it includes a central park um couple do two dog parks, two tots, and uh several Paso parks. Um, so these parks would operate through a dedicated public access easement. So we would go ahead and grant access to the adjacent neighborhoods through our green trail
system through these parks so people in the adjacent neighborhood could have free will to walk all throughout this golf course to you know utilize the uh trees that we preserved, walk along the green path um and all of that which right now today I was this private property and they're not technically
allowed to go on those golf court um paths. um we know they do, but that's this would allow that and and make it completely legal that people could have access and interconnect the neighborhoods. So all these things would be addressed through the PD, which is not this
application, but I'm letting you know that this is how the safeguards would be memorialized through the PD through conditions of approval that would require we do these things or we don't get our uh development permits. That's how these the PD um development order would work. So now another key element
that I want to address is you know over half of the property is dedicated to open space and public benefits. Um you know we have collectively and I'm going to go in detail on these parks here in a second. We have collectively over 25 acres of passive playground tot dog
parks and other um fitness parks. And then we have 40 acres of lake. 27 of that is surface water. But what's also important is that 13 acres is the the lake slopes in the latoral zone. So collectively 40 acres is all dedicated
to our lakes within our project. And then we have 9 acres of a completely dedicated separate 20ft landscape buffer that separates um our proposed lots and the existing lots. It's a 20ft landscape buffer that would be installed. So there's 9 acres cruelty of that and then
the 2 and 12 acres of club F. So that's, you know, 76 and a half acres of the project. Over half the percent is uh open space or public benefits. So now I'm going to go into a little detail of the plan and I'm separating this in north and south because that's
the easiest way to do this. The project is very long. Um, so this is um a picture of the north portion and as you can see we identified a key over to the left and the different colors represent where the different types of public benefits um are located. So I'm going to
go through and and walk you through and show you those different areas. So the first is the central park in Central Lake which is located right there. This is the heart of the community. This is center to you remember the red circle I showed and the yellow circle I showed. This is right in the middle of
everything and this is the proper place where you should have a large central park and a large central lake. This is an area that would be along Country Club Drive. It'd be open to everybody. Um the park is is open on purpose so it could be programmed. You could have Fourth of July celebrations or a food truck night
or or go fly a kite with your children. And then the lake would have passive benches around it so you could enjoy the you know large and just a relaxing atmosphere there. So next we have the clubhouse. I did describe the clubhouse two and a half acres um would be
semi-private would be um allowed for people within those um subdivisions to to join if they would like to. And then the dog park and that's where the dog park would be be located. So the little pictures that you see over to the left that's a culture project that was
just built. It was done through a PD that was a condition of approval. So I'm just giving you examples of how when you certain elements are proposed, those can be implemented through the PD process. And so that the dog park pictures that you see there is a recently completed project from Culture. And then we've
also identified an area where a tot lot would be. Once again, that's another picture from a recently completed culture project, a top lot in that area. And then this would be the large playground for the entire community where you'd have more traditional um playgrounds and swings and a larger area
for the children to play in. And scattered throughout um the community and and connected through the green trail system are our exercise parks. And so these are the exercise equipment pieces that would be outside. Sometimes they're um more passive and not as
aggressive. Some would be more bench press and and be able to get really into a good workout. Um and these pictures on the left once again another recently completed culture project that was done through a PD where we installed these in in development. So those would be in the yellow areas where you see right there.
Um and then uh another great feature is we have so many lakes that I mentioned that we have included all these passive parks. Those two benches at the bottom, that's my community that I live in. And that's, you know, a perfect example of having, you know, benches over a large
lake um in a community and and what that adds to the ambun of the area. So then we go into the south part. I'll go a little bit quicker. I'm just going to show you the locations. I won't show you all the pictures again. Um but once again, here's where the dog park would be located. That's the tot. Those are
the exercise areas. And those are the new passive areas. Um and then scattered throughout we have the neighborhood connection points which are shown right there in red. And what we've identified is we've identified locations where interconnect
interconnection makes sense. Um there's either a large or vacant lot or a space between them. We would design and plan for that connection in the future. We understand that we would have to get easements and and and build the connection points. Um, and that would be up to the adjacent neighborhood if they
want to connect to our project, but we would build that they would want to. So, if they don't want to immediately, but maybe in five years they change their mind, the connection point and our willingness to provide the interconnection would be there. So, we're thinking planning long term. So,
once again, here is the south project, south part of the project where we have identified more inter um connection pedestrian access points and then we get to the tree preservation. So, I wanted to to go into this because I there have been a lot of comments and misinformation going around
that we're just going to, you know, clearcut the area and and remove all the trees. And I just want to let everybody know. So, we we did submit a landscape plan um back in April 3rd. Um and this this information has been available um to everybody in the neighborhood. And in
fact, I I emailed uh the opposition leaders the day I submitted on April 3rd um all of these documents. So, they've had these documents well over 10 months. And in our landscape plan, we identified the trees that would be preserved and the trees that would be removed. Um, and
just to kind of give everybody kind of a quick summary just for the oak trees. So, on the plan that we submitted, we would we're removing 219 oak trees. However, we're preserving 238 oak trees
and planting 538 new oak trees. So this has been on the landscape plan from day one and that's what we have proposed. And another important um thing to mention about the landscape plan is that the the existing canopy of the entire
area right now is about 2 million square feet of of canopy. We're preserving about 750,000 square feet of that existing canopy. And then we when our with all the new trees that we're we're building in the canopy of those the
proposed new tree canopy would be 3.7 million square square feet. So as you can see the the future of this project would be an addition of 1.7 million square feet of canopy area which makes sense because large areas of the golf course had to be open so people could
drive their golf ball through the fairway. So we're adding all these green trails and all these additional trees. So at the end when the project is developed and the new trees are planted, the long-term tree canopy is is a a massive increase than what is there today. And so I also wanted to identify
the the detail of the planning that went into this plan. So as you can see these areas and I and I have the plan to the left. So we identified the key areas where we could add public parks, right? So the the large kind of backwards L is
where we have a dog park, a passive park, and a tot lot. And that's a large well-maintained um established um group of trees. We also have identified, you know, the main playground and two of the very large passive parks all around existing clumps of trees that was all
interconnected and and planned accordingly. And then we identified other specimens where we um moved a lot over or didn't put a lot or or curved a lot out so we could actually include other species trees um in as part of our plan. So so this was all carefully
thought out and and planned to make sure that we could preserve as many trees as possible and I just wanted everybody to know the detail that went into the plan. Once again these have been available since April 3rd um these kind these documents. So another important item is the privacy landscape buffer. Um the
bright green that you see surrounding the entire project. This is a completely separate landscape buffer that is not within the individual lots. This is between the the property line of the new house or new new lot that we would build
and the existing property line of what's currently adjacent to the golf course would be a 20ft landscape buffer maintained by the master property owner association. So, there's a cross-section that kind of on the on your right, I guess, would be a cross-section of the 20 ft and how the houses and the lot
lines would be situated. And then uh next to it is a um a picture of the the hedge and the and the trees that would look at installation. Obviously, these trees would grow and and and grow up. So they would the the buffer would be there, but this is uh an additional, you
know, a public benefit that we're providing above and beyond to make sure that any of those people that had a house on the golf course would have this um landscape buffer that would be behind their house before they ever saw any other new residential house.
So then we get into the small area study. Um as Brad mentioned, on January 21st, the PZY board recommended um to do a small area study. Um Brad also mentioned that um staff analyzed um golf
course conversions um back in uh 2016 and it's our opinion that the staff report that was concluded and the draft ordinance that was completed um essentially was a small area study for golf course conversions. And this is one of the documents that we, as I
mentioned, when I opened, um, besides the actual going out and speaking with individuals and and finding out what the individuals wanted, we also contacted the city, we got all the historic documents we could could find. And this is one of the documents that the city provided us because it was relevant to
golf courses and golf course conversions. So, we used this document in our drafting of the of the plan that we came up with. And we used several of these elements as our guiding principle. Right? So here's just a picture of the draft ordinance, the golf course overlay
ordinance. Um, and when you get into the intensive, I won't read all of this, but each these are different elements of the golf course overlay that we implemented into our plan, you know, to maintain um enhance the quality of life in the
community by developing compatible height density standards, controls, and mixeduse principles. Um you know once again the um allowable uses keeping it to single family detached and town homes. Um a new development shall be compatible with the surrounding existing
development density massing development patterns which we've established with our plan. Um that goes into how you can modify storm water as long as you provide the um the civil reports and the and the city agrees with that. It has a requirement for additional buffers to um
be planted between um the houses and the proposed houses. Um it asks for treelined trails which we have provided. Um it it describes the maximum height shall not be over 35 ft which we have already um agreed that none of our um
town homes or our single family structures would be over two stories. Um so that we've agreed to. Um it established common open space shall be preserved for its intended purpose. Once again, we discussed the um public easements that we would provide um and it talks about the location criteria
where open space park and recreational requirements should be spread throughout the development and connected with multiple pathways. That's that's the heart of our community. That's exactly what we did over and over to interconnect the adjacent neighborhood into our plan because we believe that
interconnectivity is not only going to help our project, it's going to help the adjacent neighborhoods as well because now they have access to these amenities. Um and then also I wanted to mention another very important um part of the comprehensive plan which is very
important to this particular property and this particular use of this property. Um, in your policy 1.774, um, the city shall define infill development if the property meets one or more of the following characteristics. Um, you list, I think, seven or eight.
And then under number four, it states contains an original structure or use that is no longer viable or which is not economically feasible to renovate. And that's exactly what is happening here. The golf course closed. Um the entire
golf course market changed over the last couple decades. Um and we have a use um in the middle of the city. It's it's a perfect um example of infill development and your comp plan directs the commission to treat infill development and try to renovate those properties. Uh
in policy 1.79, it even says the city shall provide standards and administrative process to facilitate infill development. The land development regulations shall be amended to provide flexibility in site development and that's through the plan development application which was what we have
submitted. Um so also as K mentioned um we have uh you know submitted our you know comprehensive elaborate reports. Um our our consultants are here if you have any questions. You know the traffic impact analysis came back with the positive findings. That's 143page
document that's been available since April 3rd. uh storm water report uh I'm sorry the environmental report came back and went through all the regulations um and the procedures and once again our environmental expert went over this um at the uh April 29th meeting and how
everything would be treated because we know contamination issues were a big issue and all the regulatory agencies that would have a handle and we described how um soils are treated and processed and tested and regulated and permitted. We went through all of that. That was in there. And then also the
storm water plan. Um you know, we submitted a 220 page storm water report with the 26-page civil report that has been available since April um 3rd. Um at the January 8th meeting, we had a real estate appraiser come in and do a property value comparison where they
evaluated um other recent golf course conversions to show that the property values do not go down. they actually go up when a golf course builds and the adjacent property values in the area. The the trend is for those to actually go up. Um we provided um information on
the homes and the types of homes that we're providing. This has been provided. There were issues that we were building mobile home parks or 800 foot homes or shotgun homes or small little shacks or all this stuff. So we gave examples of of recent projects that we're working
on. provided the website. You go to this is a project we're building right now in Verono. These are the approximate sizes of the homes that we're going to be bringing to this project between 1450 and 3200 ft² or 3,400 square f feet. So once again, these are all things that we provided just to provide the
reassurances and and this is a lot of stuff that is going to be in the plan development, but it's important because of the importance of this project and to let everybody know, you know, the intent of this project and that the plan development and the conditions of approval is what holds our feet to the fire and all these things that I just
talked about, right? And so that's the important thing. And so with that, going back to this comment card that you saw at the beginning, we do believe that we have addressed or discussed the majority of all these unsatisfactory. And then in closing, this is why we're
coming here, right? And people are like, why are you doing this? Right? They're like, you're going to flip and burn and do all this other. No, we are here because we see a huge opportunity with the space program, right? These companies up here, we know that they're just starting. They're about a third of where they want to go, right? and these
executives and these engineers and these scientists and these administrators, these are coming down here and from what we've heard from speaking from almost everybody in the city is that a lot of these people can't find the kind of housing that they want. They can't find the quality of life that they're accustomed to where they're coming from. Most of these people are already very
successful in their own right. You know, whether there's Washington or California, New York, wherever they're coming from, and they have a certain standard of life. They want a certain kind of development that provides certain public benefits. So, we are very bullish on the city of Tisville and we want to be here long term. We want to build this project for these people to
help bring these um kind of influential people into the community and have a full, you know, resurgence of the the space program. Take two. Right. We know this this project, the Royal Oak Golf Course, was built during the original boom of the space program. It's time to
come back and let this area um prosper from the new resurgence of the space program. And with that, I'm gonna let Kim close with two final slides. Thank you for your time. I know I talked a lot. >> Thank you.
>> Thank you again. Uh Kim Rena here on behalf of the applicant and the owner. Uh again, we are asking that you adopt the recommendation of the uh planner uh Mr. repairs uh and uh to transmit this
to uh the state for review. I do want to again comment um on your code section 34-22 that does allow for any proposed amendment to the future land use map to provide a concept plan. And Mr. Paris
spent quite a bit of time talking about how this would be limited at the PD by the 511 units and that if you do look at that master plan, it is presumed that in adopting this future land use that you relied upon that and that's why we've gone through all of this with all the
traffic studies, all the storm water plans, all the expert opinions to move forward with the plan development. Also, I do want you to consider the p uh private private property rights involved with this property. This was purchased
outright without the entitlements with just as it was. And now, Culture has come in here to do a plan to make this a very good development with many amenities for both the public and for the residents
that will buy in there. Um, this is from Florida statutes. This was codified in your comp plan, your private property rights element back in 2023. It does have most of that, but what it also doesn't have in the state statute
that's in your property rights element is the right of the property owner to use, maintain, develop, and improve his or her property for personal use or the use of other persons subject to state law and local ordinances. the right of private property owners to privacy and to exclude others from their property to
protect the owner's possessions and property. I'd ask that you consider that when you're reviewing this that this is private property. It's not a public park. It was never intended to be a public park. And with that, we have our experts here
to answer questions if I can answer any questions for you or if you have any one of those that we've listed. Vice Vice Mayor Cole, I'm going to ask that we wait until after the public has an opportunity to speak and then I'm sure there'll be plenty of questions from council. Thank you. >> Thank you, >> city clerk.
>> We have a David Basser that's here for questions only. >> Oh, so >> uh we have Bruce Moy for questions only. James Taylor for questions only. Then we have Kyle.
Looks like uh Bradfield. >> Sorry, you caught me off guard. Wasn't didn't think I'd be going first. Uh my name is Kyle Bradfield. I own the Geico local office here in Titusville on US1. Um, locally owned, locally operated. So,
I don't have corporate funds to back me to support my marketing, to support my business. I opened in 2021 and as a local business owner that employs people, tries to do things in the
community, I need responsible development like this. When I talk to other business owners, the small business owners here in town, the word I hear most is need. I go to meetings all over the place. We're
talking about the expansion of space and the port and the support businesses that are coming in. I don't see the benefits of that. They're driving straight out of town getting on 95 and going home. They're not spending their money locally the way the businesses need. So, as I
talk to other business owners at chamber meetings and board meetings and all of these kinds of things, as a business owner, we don't have a lot of time to come to these type of meetings and speak. I ask more people to come because it needs to be heard. But
when that when they all say to me, "We need this and more things like it. We need more people to help support local business. We need more customers, more money spent locally instead of having to market and try to
find business elsewhere. More than half of my business comes outside of Titusville. That's a that's a big number. There's not enough support in the local area to sustain my business. I would have been out of business long ago. I have to
spend m money to market to Orlando, to Ovidito, to Palm Bay, to all these other areas trying to find business to sustain. So that's why I'm in support of this. I am from South Florida originally. I know Coulter's projects. I
know the type of developments that they put together. They're pretty high quality. So this, in my opinion, is responsible development that we need. Thank you. >> Thank you, sir. City clerk
>> Rosemary Goodrich. >> Good evening, mayor and city council members. My name is Rose Goodrich. I'm with Title Solutions of Florida here in Titusville. It's a local title company uh serving Bvard County and all Florida. As a matter of fact, um I'm here tonight
not to sell services, but to share how local title infrastructure supports projects like Gemini Lakes as they move from approval to into execution. Gemini Lakes represents a thoughtful redevelopment project for Titusville, one that brings new housing
options, infrastructure improvements, and long-term economic benefit to the community. Projects of this scale don't end at approval. The execution phase of how homes are transferred to buyers plays an important role in how smoothly
that growth actually happens. Our role as a local title company is to support that execution phase by helping ensure real estate closings are handled efficiently, compliantly, and with an understanding of local processes. Because we work closely closely with
local municipalities, county recording offices, and lenders, we're able to help reduce delays and confusion during the closing processes for future homeowners. We hear a lot of people, I hear it almost every single day, people are looking for things and reasons to move
to Titusville. They want Chick-fil-Ass. They want all those things. I always say, "Well, be careful what you ask for. You could end up getting it." um but they want to move into this area and they want to support the area but they're not spending their money here now. They're going out of
town and if they live here they should be supporting this area. Um a smooth closing experience closing experience builds buyer confidence reflects positively on both the development and the city. Our goal is simple. To support
reasonable growth and help ensure projects like Gemini Lakes transition from approval to occupancy in a way that benefits buyers, the city, and the broader community. Thank you for your time and your continued work in guiding thoughtful
development in Titusville. >> Thank you, city clerk. >> Uh Vance, >> I can't make out the last name. The first name looks like Vance. Is there a Vance here? There's a letter that starts with at the end.
>> I can't make it out at all. They're on Yeah. >> Is there a Vance? Are you >> I can I can come back if you'd like. >> Okay. >> Cody Spar. Hey, how y'all doing tonight? So, good evening, mayor and council. The
turnout tonight speaks volumes of how much uh the community cares, as you can see, obviously behind us and out in the uh lower story down there. So, I want to point out something that often gets missed. Many who support this project are business owners and working
families. They're deeply involved in the community. They don't always have the time to attend every meeting or speak publicly. I mean, frankly, the extreme scare tactics, as you can see around here, from the opposition have discouraged many
supporters from coming forward. So, it doesn't mean uh support isn't there. It just means uh people are busy running businesses. >> Sorry, not a good public speaker. So, that doesn't mean the support isn't
there. It just means they're busy. Uh, like I said, running their businesses, raising kids, and contributing to the city in many real ways. So, the fact that people made time to show up tonight and support matters. Um, I understand why change feels
uncomfortable as human. None of us want to lose the character of the place we love and neither do I. But the reality is growth is coming whether we like it or not. over the last ne or over the next several years, thousands of new workers and families are moving here
because of SpaceX and the broader space industry. And that's already happening. Um, when cities don't plan for growth, the outcome is predictable. Rents go up, house prices spike, locals get priced out, traffic gets worse, infrastructure
falls behind. Um, Gemini Lakes is about planning responsibly, fixing long-standing infrastructure and also making sure growth um strengthens our community instead of overwhelming it. Um, this decision is
about planning for the future rather than reacting later when the consequences are far worse. So, I urge you to look past the noise, support Gemini Lakes for the long-term future of Titusville. Thank you. That's it.
>> Thank you, city clerk. >> Scott Hudson. >> Yes, ma'am. Council, >> you got lucky. You just walked right in and get called right up. >> Well, I was I couldn't get in here till everybody else left. So, uh, good evening, council and, uh,
fellow Tit Titus Villians. Um, my name is Scott Hudson. Um, you probably seen my vans around RBair. Uh, we've been trying to grow in this market for a long time. I came from uh Orlando, built our forever home over on Fox Lake.
Um my employees and my family and all kinds of people have moved with me over here to try to support and grow this place. Um, and a lot of them been impacted most importantly uh about the last flooding and all that kind of stuff which uh to me has been we we went out our whole
crew went out and tried to save people and help people and pull people and stuff and that's the biggest concern I have with this uh growth like Cody and Kyle both have said from the GEICO uh administration or whatever you want to call them. Uh growth is coming no matter what it is
with this space stuff coming along. Uh I moved over here to get away from the big hustle and bustle of Orlando. So I understand the traffic and this that and the other, but it's going to grow and that's what it is. Uh, I'd rather see this this type of development, the Gemini project, you know, that comes in
and actually privately funds some of the drainage issues that we have rather than public money coming to it or tax money to assist with the with um all that drainage issues we're having and infrastructure. Uh, I think that we have a stagnant golf course. It's not doing
anything. there's property there that somebody could gobble up real quick and turn into some housing or some things that we don't want. Um I think that there's people that live in there that have been a little uh they've been happy to have that as a backyard for a while.
Um and I understand that. I mean I hate it when people move in next to me this that and the other. But most importantly again drainage. And secondly important is I'm just watching since I moved here um you know it's been it's 2015 I think I came here uh restaurants and small
business owners and everything just deprived and and falling apart because we don't have the support. So I think it's really important that this Gemini project you know I think it's it supports the community. We are going to grow no matter what progress comes.
You've watched it hundred years some thousands of years. Um, so I just think that this is a great opportunity that we can actually control instead of somebody coming outside of the community and turn it into whatever they want. We have a good solid foundation for this to come
forward and make positive changes and and great influence for this for this city, for business owners, for the people around here. We don't like to see big chains who don't have Chick-fil-As and stuff. They may be coming this that and the other. However, I believe that you know the small business Lloyd have
mercy's unfortunately we've lost Shilas which hopefully turns into something. We have you know another group if you vine and olive and all these other people out there that are small business those are the ones we need to be supporting for all these people coming to space. >> Thank you sir again. Thank you.
>> Okay. Um the last name is spelled V I Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z A R R O N A. >> Okay. >> All right. And please keep the chatter down while somebody else is speaking, please. >> Hi, Mr. Mayor and members. Thank you for your time. Um, I'm just here to support
the project myself. Um, I'm I'm new to Titusville. I lived here for three years and what I've seen, you know, from 2022 till now, I've seen kind of a decline in the area. Um, I think this housing would
be good for the area. I mean, looking at the plans, the way they laid them out, it looks like an eyes sore over there. So, it would definitely revitalize the area. Um, also, it would help homeowners like myself. Our property values would go up all around and the surrounding
areas and and it would generate revenue and taxes and and just help our city. So, as a as a new member of Titusville, I just like to uh say that. Uh the other thing is I spoke with the developer. He's a friend of mine. It it helps with
drainage >> order. >> It helps with drainage, new roads, um access roads, jobs, tax. I mentioned those things on my own. These were the things that I talked to him about and and growth again
for our neighborhood. Um I think it would be a good thing and as a homeowner here in Titusville, I definitely recommend it. Um that thanks for your time. >> Thank you sir. City clerk. >> Um Kathleen O.
>> Um Dr. Kathleen O Titusville resident and Royal Oak neighbor. It's been three years since we began working to protect the Royal Oak property and I've really been honored to represent this community. I understand that a decision of this importance can feel overwhelming, but the choice before you
is straightforward. On one side are the citizens who care deeply about storm water protection, wildlife, historic oak trees, the lagoon, and the neighborhoods they call home. The other side is a development team with substantial financial resources to advance its
position. There's a clear difference between protecting the community where you live and maximizing a financial return. You were elected to serve the people, not the outside developers. And there's much at stake in this proposal. You're being asked to consider one of
the largest land use changes in this area, one that would place a new development inside an established community. There may be a temptation to try to seek middle ground perhaps by advancing additional studies while also
recommending transmitt. But when substantial questions remain unresolved, moving forward with the transmitt is a dangerous choice. It wrongly single signals that the proposal is acceptable as it stands. A transmitter should
proceed only if you're comfortable with the full development intensity allowed under this designation, including the worst case scenario. And these plans are not binding no matter what they tell you. As presented, the proposal leaves
key infrastructure questions unanswered. There is no independent fiscal analysis. Ownership and long-term storm water governance affecting existing residents remains unclear and the like-tolike requirements have not been resolved.
From transmitt to adoption, there is a limited statuary window. At the same time, unresolved land ownership issues are likely to be addressed through the courts. If these matters are not resolved within that time frame, the
city could find itself making a final legislative decision under time pressure rather than clarity. It is never a bad time to slow down and take the time to listen to your citizens and get this right. A transmitt vote is procedure,
but its consequences are not. A transmitt is a big deal in spite of what the development team says. It removes options from the city. If it wasn't so important, why are the developers working so hard to make that happen?
Tonight's question is whether the record before you is complete enough to justify advancing one of the most significant land use changes this community has ever faced. If you are not absolutely sure this is the right decision, the
responsible course is clear. pause, complete the necessary studies, and protect the integrity of this decision before it moves forward. >> Thank you, Dr. >> Please keep the applause down or we're going to be here pretty late. I get it. You guys all support what is being said,
but it is disruptive. City clerk, >> Elizabeth Parker, >> you know, are you Elizabeth Parker? I represent m >> Mr. Mr. Are you She called Elizabeth Parker. >> Huh? >> She called Elizabeth Parker.
>> Who? >> The city clerk. >> Oh, >> are you Elizabeth Parker? >> No, I'm I'm No, my name isn't Elizabeth. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> We'll get to you. I promise. Thank you. >> I'm assuming you're Elizabeth Parker.
>> Okay, >> I get it. Um, if I might have just 30 seconds before I speak because I have an issue that's outside of my speech, but it's uh administrative in nature. >> Is it about this item? >> It is about the fact that we shouldn't
be hearing this item because the toll gates have not been met. >> Okay. Well, that's >> and I just I'd like to have that on the record outside of what I'd like to say with regard to the item. >> Okay. >> Which is um there was supposed to be a 7-day notice. There wasn't. There was supposed to be a 10-day notice. There
was an And the developer should have held a community meeting, not as a sales pitch or to gather community input, but to educate the community with regard to what the future land use map change is that's being proposed and how it affects
the current future land use map. Because of these things, this meeting and the planning and zoning meeting should have never taken place because the toll gates have not been met. However, we're here. So, I would like to speak. All right. Um,
uh, good evening, mayor and council. My name is Elizabeth Parker of the Vontraino Circle on Morlo Golf Course. Uh, I want to be very clear about what what the decision is that is actually before you tonight because the future land use map changes um are being described as modest or flexible or
reversible and this is not true. A vote to change the future land use map to lowdensity residential is not procedural, not temporary, and not harmless. Even if the zoning never changes, a vote to change this map to low density
under chapter 163 is where development entitlement is granted. Zoning is subordinate. Once the city declares this land residential on the future land use map, the city has formally stated that the residential use is appropriate on that site and every future land use
decision must be defended against that declaration. This is not opinion. This is how Florida comprehensive planning works in the law. Um, excuse me. And this is going to not scroll for me.
Uh the vote exposes the city to three concrete and unavoidable risks. First, permanent loss of legal leverage. Once the land use is designated residential, the city has said yes to residential use. From that point forward, denying or limiting future reszoning becomes
legally harder and riskier for the city. The burden shifts from the applicant to the city city, excuse me. Uh this is not reversible. No intention there. uh without another comp plan amendment reversing the property rights which would never happen and has never
happened under chapter 1 16 or statute 1633 31941A all development orders must be consistent with the comprehensive plan once residential entitlement is embedded in the flume future resoning becomes consistency exercise not policy decision
second storm water and uh flooding liability this site is not vacant land awaiting intensity staff's own report confirms that it says the property functions as a storm water retention infrastructure. It serves off-site properties in the surrounding basin and portions of the waterways are
publicly deed. Uh the property is public property. So contrary to the developer statement, this isn't public property. Some of it is. Um a low density residential flume characterizes the utility and storm water land is private developable land. It weakens the city's
ability to require storm water primacy in per perpetuity and creates future arguments that storm water is merely an accessory use to residential development. If flooding or drainage occurs uh later, uh it's not speculative. Finally, >> thank you very much.
>> Um increase mitigation exposure to Bert Harris Act when you reszone this. >> Appreciate it. City clerk >> Tina Adamson >> Kanan Alex. >> Good evening, Mayor and council members. My name is Tina Adamson and I live in
Royal Oak neighborhood. Tonight's decision is not about marketing language. It's about what the law will allow tomorrow. You've heard this proposal described as low density and like to like. Those
phrases may sound reassuring, but they don't determine what gets built. What matters is what the future land use designation legally permits. Not what's promised, not what's
preferred, but what's permitted. Like to like is not a marketing phrase. It is a planning concept and when examined honestly, this proposal does not meet it. Royal Oak consists
primarily of detached homes on larger lots with generous setbacks, limited height, predominantly twocar garages. People walk their dogs past wide lawns
and oak trees every morning. And that is the scale and rhythm of our neighborhood. The development authorized by this change would allow fundamentally different housing forms, smaller lots,
six plex attached units, singlecar garages, more units overall, and multi-story buildings. Calling that like to like obscures material differences in scale, form, and impact.
And those differences matter because once they are authorized, they become legal rights, not conceptual illustrations. Compatibility in land use isn't decide isn't defined by slogans.
It is defined by maximum density, intensity, and development pattern legally allowed under the designation that you approve. The proposed change would authorize development that breaks from the existing pattern.
Even if those outcomes aren't shown tonight, they become legally permissible the moment the designation is changed. You may be told that zoning or plan development review will ensure compatibility later, but those processes
don't revisit whether this level of intensity should have been allowed in the first place. They operate entirely within the envelope that you approve tonight. If the city grants a more intense designation while relying on verbal
asurances that it will stay low density, it creates a dangerous mismatch between the city's findings and legal reality. >> Thank you very much. >> May I have 15 seconds? >> I cannot grant that to you. I apologize. But I do also do want to apologize. I
heard her name say your name was Keenan and it's Miss Tina. I'm sorry. >> It's okay. >> Yeah. Sorry. Thank you. City clerk >> William Bot. >> We could not hear the name being called >> William Bot. William Ballot 2756 Demerit. Good
evening folks. Guess I better get my glasses here. As a concerned citizen living in the Royal Oak area, I'm asking for your commitment to uphold the city's current comprehensive plan
and by doing so maintain current land use of the former Royal Oak Golf Course. Please consider the thoughtful unanimous decision made by the city's planning and zoning commission on January 21st
to not go forward with the developers pro proposal without more extensive investigation into the impact such a radical demographic change would have on our community.
the developers pie in the sky promises to improve our lives by crowding an additional 1,300 or more people into our tight-knit community are about as convincing as attempting to sell a Timex watch for the price of a
Rolex. Sorry, folks. Clearly an inevitable increase in crime, traffic congestion, car accidents, noise, pollution,
storm water management problems, and loss of privacy will not increase the quality of life for current residents living in the area. Approving this proposed project could
lead to many of the unintended consequences that inevitably follow in the wake of overdevelopment. The increased possibility for catastrophic flooding of our homes is one issue of major concern.
Your decision to maintain current land use, please, will help to protect and conserve our natural environment. and prevent compromising the city's already fragile infrastructure. Your decision to maintain current land
use will firmly place you on the moral high ground by prioritizing people over profit. >> Please don't interrupt. With all due respect, kicking the can down the road for the
state to decide on an issue which is clearly a local one would reflect poorly on city officials who are elected to represent the best interests of us, your constituents. We put our faith in your integrity and
commitment to ensure our safety, economic security, and well-being. Please do the right thing. by voting to maintain current land use or at the very least honor and abide by the unanimous decision made by the city's planning and
zoning commission. >> Thank you. >> Appreciate it. City clerk >> Seth A. Seth Adams. >> Hello, my name is Seth Adams and I live in Royal Oak neighborhood. A lot of people have come up tonight and
have had they have addressed the legal resist the legal risk of this proposal. I want to focus on what those risks mean in a realworld terms for our community. When considering a future land use change, this council must evaluate more
than just the concept shown tonight. You must evaluate the worst case development scenario that this new designation designation legally allows. You are not approving what is promised. You are approving what is permitted.
That entitlement runs with the land. It is not tied to this developer. This this specific sketch or the the verbal asurances offered tonight. Once this zoning is changed, it's permanent. Currently, this property functions as a vital open space and storm water system.
It has no vertical massing. It is surrounded by a neighborhood defined by single family homes on large lots with mature tree with mature tree canopy. The requested change obliterates this framework. This new designation would legally allow sixlex town homes and
multifamily buildings. Rear setbacks shrinking to to 10 feet. Building heights soaring to 50 feet. The concept might show trees, but the the entitlement allows the site to be fully cleared. Roads, driveways, concrete will
replace previous land with imperous services, impervious surfaces across the entire site. And this this is important here. In a town that relies on this specific acreage for drainage, you are trading a sponge for a funnel. The
drainage doesn't just disappear. We have to protect the lagoon. Approving this change is effect and then also too according to what we're addressing the developer approving this change is effectively handing over a blank check. Once it's signed the city
loses control over how it's spent. Courts do not evaluate land use decisions based on what a developer promised in a in a slideshow. They evaluate them based on what you authorized in this code. If the worst case uh is built out permitted by this
designation is incompatible to Royal Oak and it clearly is, the only responsible action is denial. And you have to think about it also too in light of recent torrential rains that we've just had and we have to look at the problems the hair are having in
Edgewater and Port Orange and Orlando. These are all flooding issues because of squeezing in overdevelopment and these cluster houses in places to where the the drainage can't handle what's going on. The drainage of Titusville runs
through this system of lakes in Royal Oak and the water has to go somewhere. We have to protect the we have to protect the lagoon. This is a lot of water. >> Thank you. >> So, thank you. >> Thank you, city clerk. >> Kathleen Flynn. >> Can I hear the next name?
Kathleen Flynn. >> Good evening. I'm Kathleen Flynn. I own and occupy my home at 2805 Player Court, which abuts the golf course property at what was the eighth fairway.
The five ranchstyle homes on Player Court that abut the golf course property. Well, according to the Culter concept plan, have 13 twostory shotgun style houses with singlecar garages behind us
with a concrete with a with raised elevation. This leaves our street and homes in a moat around a concrete jungle. That's why storm water and potential flooding are of paramount concern to me and my neighbors.
So, I want to speak about storm water, not as a future engineering project, but as a system that already protects this community. That protection will be permanently lost if this amendment is approved. For decades, the former Royal Oak Golf Course has acted as a
stormwater buffer for surrounding neighborhoods. A 1943 aerial photographs >> shows this area as a lake or open basin >> documenting its long history of holding water. Today it still absorbs rainfall,
slows runoff. >> Please have a seat. >> This is her poster. >> Please have a seat. >> We have We addressed the rules at the beginning. Please have a seat. >> And spreads and spreads water across open ground instead of sending it quickly into streets and yards. This is
not theoretical. It is happening right now and it benefits homes beyond the property line. If this land is developed, that natural protection is fundamentally changed. Roofs, roads, and compacted soil do not absorb water. They
shed it. Even well-designed storm water systems move water differently. They are built to protect the new development itself, not the surrounding neighborhoods that currently benefit from this open land. Once this land is built out, existing
residents lose a storm water buffer they rely on and receive nothing in return. No new system will serve them. No new district will represent them. And no later review will bring back what has
been lost. Because this application seeks a future land use amendment, that loss is permanent. Once the designation changes, the city cannot require this land to remain open space that absorbs water. Roads, driveways, parking lots, and buildings can replace ground that
now holds and slows storm water. This amendment removes a shared safeguard and shifts risks onto residents who have no control over it. Denial preserves a protection that already works and one that cannot be recreated. once it is gone. Thank you.
>> Thank you very much. City clerk >> Jill Sterling. Good evening, Mayor Connors and city council. I'm Jill Sterling and I live on Nelson Place. I want to focus on the critical issue of city-owned storm water easements on the Royal Oak Golf Course
that are not part of the Tulonowned parcels. The city has legal authority over this property and has long-standing storm water obligations to existing neighborhoods, including historical operations and maintenance of the storm water system. The original developers of
Royal Oak Golf and Country Club, Royal Oak Development Company, deeded six storm water easements to the city of Titusville, and the city accepted them in fe simple permanently for the benefit of the platted Royal Oak properties. Because there appears to be controversy
around the deed, the developer's failure to accept the deed as legal and binding, I secured a certified copy from the Bard County Clerk of Courts, and have provided um a a copy for the record. The developer's attorney can make any untrue
statements about the deed in this forum without consequence. But we know the deed to be true and correct despite anyone's claim of ambiguity. If this deed is unclear or vague, then all deeds in the county are unclear and vague. These easements are recorded in
the official records of Bvard County, book 659, pages 536 through 538. The easements are permanent, public, and non-discretionary. In addition, every Royal Oak plat includes a formal dedication that streets, canals, and drainage easements
are dedicated to the perpetual use of the public. The plat depict the storm water infrastructure that serves surrounding neighborhoods. These are not conceptual features. They are legally binding components of the subdivision and I've provided an example for the record. Further, the city prepared doc a
city prepared document titled Royal Oak easements and storm study also obtained through a records request depicts multiple storm water easements on the golf course along with the interconnected storm pipes and conveyance systems that rely on those easements to function. I included a copy
for the record. Including or altering these city-owned easements as part of a private development raises a serious legal concern. Arbitrarily handing over or impairing public easements dedicated to the Royal Oak community, constitutes inverse condemnation, which in Florida
occurs when government action effectively takes or damages private property rights without formal eminent domain proceedings or just compensation. If these easements are interrupted during development through filling, regrading, compaction, altered ponds, or
disconnected conveyance, or if they are insufficient afterward, existing homeowners face a foreseeable risk of flooding potentially worse than what was experienced in last October's flooding event. For these reasons, the city should finish its current storm water
study and agree with the planning and zoning commission recommendation for a small area study and not send this land use change transmitt to the state. Thank you for your service to the city. >> Thank you. >> Michael Lutter. >> I'm sorry, city clerk. I didn't hear
you. >> U Michael Lutter. Order. You can you have the floor, sir. >> Michael Lutter, 3025 Royal Oak Drive. Uh, Coulter and MBB have claimed their preliminary storm water assessment and modeling can assure the city of
Titusville that storm water, pipe, and conveyance problems will be solved by the proposed development and the city seems to be to want to rely on that. However, only a preliminary storm water report was prepared and the acreage supported 300 acres which includes the
149 acre buildout golf course area is a huge point of contention with the community. See the high water photos from our 100redyear storm. The Royal Oak community has used the golf course property as a prescriptive easement for 61 years. Property beyond what the city
fee simple deed identifies that the city owns. Our 100red-year flood experience was a result of all 141 149 acres of percolating sands combined with topological topographical design and storm water infrastructure. And we still
look like this. We have zero confidence that culter covering over percolating sands with compactable fill changing the topography and covering a huge percentage of it in roads, sidewalks, driveways and dwelling slabs, leaving just 26 acres to collect storm water
will keep our community and even their proposed one from flooding. We believe the claim to predict the effectiveness of their drainage plan cannot be relied upon. A local planning agency in Martin County recently denied support for 1,50 new
homes on over 600 acres after Coulter Land Management sought changes to the growth management plan in that county. Expansion of public services such as portable water, sewer, education, and public safety are reported as part of their rationale for denial.
Submitting a requested land use change to the state prior to knowing whether this land use can be supported is not a wise course of action for the city. The citizens want to know, is there an agreement between the city and culter that identifies which party retains liability for neighborhood flooding into
the future? Is there agreement between the city and culter that identifies and lists by storm water pipe number and location which storm water pipes or other conveyances will be kept by the city for ongoing maintenance and which will have engineering and maintenance responsibility transfers in perpetuity
to the HOA and CDD. And please note, Royal Oak residents will shall not agree to pay or be subject to pay any HOA or CDD fees. I'll add in my own words, this proposal is going to put an access road uh directly behind my house uh right
behind my uh my backyard. Um you know, as the Bill of Rights stated there, we have we have our own rights. Um, you know, this is conservation land as I bought it and uh changing it to a road uh certainly will reduce my uh enjoyment
of my property and uh damage my rights. Thank you. >> Thank you, city clerk. >> Rose Roach. >> Who? >> Rose Roach. >> Is Rose downstairs? Oh, over there. Good evening, mayor and council members.
My name is Rose Roach and I've been involved in the efforts to keep Royal Oak as the historic landmark that it has been for years and I've been involved for years. uh you've heard asurances tonight about experience from experienced team careful engineering a
robust approval process but I want to speak speak briefly about why those asurances by themselves are not enough in Edgewater Florida development was approved with every procedural safeguard in place professional engineers prepared
the plans the planning and zoning committee approved them the city council approved them St. John's River Water Management District approved them. Every required step of the regulatory process was followed and still the outcome was catastrophic.
Homes that were not even located in flood zones experienced severe flooding. Families lost their homes. Entire neighborhoods were damaged. The impacts were so severe that public funds were ultimately used to address widespread flooding and resident displacement.
That failure did not occur because corners were cut or because expertise was absent. It occurred because a natural system like Royal Oak that had quietly managed storm water for decades was removed and replaced with engineered solutions that behave very differently
under real world conditions. Edgewater teaches a critical lesson. Process does not eliminate risk. Expertise does not cancel uncertainty and regulatory approval does not guarantee protection for existing
residents when natural systems are lost. The lessons matter here. The former Royal Oak Golf Course is not vacant land. Its functioning landscape that currently absorbs water, moderates runoff, and protects surrounding homes. Once that system is altered, the city is
making an irreversible decision, one whose consequences will be felt long after approvals are granted. The question before you is not whether this team is qualified or whether this process appears thorough. The question is whether the city should knowingly
remove a working system and assume risk when the consequences fall on the people who didn't choose them. Edgewater shows us what happens when overdevelopment replaces functioning storm water systems. Please don't make that mistake here. Thank you for your time.
>> Thank you, city clerk, >> Earl Johnson. >> Good evening, council. Uh, my name is Earl Johnson. I'm a longtime Royal Oak resident and I'm here to address the proposed Gemini Lakes Community Development or CDD uh and governance
concerns. Um a CDD is a developer initiated quai governmental entity created with local approval that has authority to issue debt, enter contracts, own, operate, and maintain infrastructure within its boundaries somewhat independent of the city with
little oversight. Amenity and infrastructure costs are financed through municipal bonds issued by the CDD under developer control during buildout with repayment obligations transferred to the residents up to 30 years. In addition to standard HOA fees,
residents assume responsibility for infrastructure maintenance costs traditionally borne by the city. These obligations are recurring and permanent. Well, these are the CDD basics. Um, but specifically what we have here is a
concern with the Gemini Lakes CDD proposal and that it is surrounded by an entirely embedded within an existing nonCDD neighborhood. This is not a typical setting for a CDD. This introduces fragmented governments
within an otherwise unified service area and creates an overlapping and potential conflicting authority for the management of storm water. Of particular concern, of course, is the storm water infrastructure. The proposed CDD would
own and control storm water facilities that serve the surrounding neighborhood, that is properties outside of the CDD. decisions regarding the maintenance, modification or capital improvements would then be subject to the discretion of separate private district boards
rather than the current uh municipal control as we currently have. Uh the record does not demonstrate how storm water infrastructure serving non CDD properties would be governed, maintained, enforced or enforced once it
transferred to a private district. There are unresolved questions regarding ownership and control of existing storm water infrastructure within and adjacent to the proposed CDD boundaries. The record indicates that certain storm water ponds impacted by this proposal
are co-owned and cons and consent for alteration of these ponds has not been obtained. Additionally, available records indicate that portions of the storm water conveyance system may be owned by the city in fe simple rather than easement. As you've heard before,
uh the owner this ownership has not been legally resolved either. This this CDD proposal is not for green field development out on the edge of the city. Rather, it is embedded within an established neighborhood that has long relied on city-owned infrastructure and
unified municipal planning. Transferring core ownership and stormwater responsibilities to a private district raises significant legal and government's con government government's concern. A community development district in this location is not
appropriate. At this stage, the council's responsibility is to determine whether evidence supports the proposed governmental structure and its long-term implications. >> Thank you, Mr. Johnson. >> Based on the record, the standard has not been met. >> Mr. So for this reason the same amount of time. Thank you.
>> City clerk >> Heather Piper. >> Hello. Good evening. My name is Heather Piper and I'm a resident of the Royal Oak community since 2017. I want to speak plainly about the tax revenue claims being used to promote this proposal. The developer is advertising
that full B, excuse me, full buildout, this project would generate roughly $1.4 million a year for the city's general fund. If this number is going to be used to justify a permanent land use decision, then it must be backed by transparent, independently verified
data. Dr. Aor, who spoke earlier this evening, requested the assumptions and calculations behind these projections. The developer ignored the request and did not provide the data. That should be unacceptable to this council. Relying on financial projections without the
underlying math is not due diligence. It is taking a developer's word at face value on a matter that will shape the city for decades. The question is not whether residential development brings in revenue. We know it does. The real question, the only question that matters
is whether these projections are accurate and complete and whether they show the net fiscal impact to the city under Florida law. The Florida League The Florida League of Cities has already documented a long-term structural problem. Homestead exemptions steadily
erode taxable value while the cost of providing essential services like police, fire, roads, storm water, and staffing rises year after year. Across Florida, cities have learned the hard way that residential development often does not pay for the for itself over
time. Yet, the projections being promoted here rely on unverified assumption. They assume full buildout. They treat condos and attach homes as if they perform the same as single val single family homes. They highlight gross revenue while ignoring the cost of
serving new residents and maintaining new infrastructure. For this decision, only one number matters, the net inial impact of the city's general fund after costs. To date, that number has not been provided.
Without independent verification, these fiscal claims are not evidence. They are sales materials. A public records request confirms a city has not conducted its own fiscal analysis. And even after being notified that their projections included only potential revenue and no
cost, the developer continued to circulate incomplete and misleading information. This is exactly why an independent fiscal impact assessment is not optional. It is essential. It would clearly state its assumptions, apply Florida's homestead rules, and evaluate
long-term costs and revenues, not just optimistic early estimates. You're being asked to make a permanent land use decision. Permanent decisions require independent verification, not unexamined projections. Until a full independent fiscal analysis is completed and made
public, these tax benefits claims should not be treated as facts. Thank you so much for hearing what I'm saying. >> Thank you. Click. >> Vicky Conklin. >> My name is Vicky Conklin. You've heard a great deal tonight. The issues before
you come down to four things: responsibility, risk, permanence, and legacy. This decision is not about whether development should ever occur. It's about whether this future land use change can be responsibly approved based on the record before you and what legacy
that decision leaves for the city and each of you as council members. You've heard that a future land use amendment permanently authorizes development intensity and cannot be undone. You've heard that concepts, promises, and marketing materials are circulating, but they're not binding and they're not
aligned with the developer's formal application. The original plan shows 551, then 547, then 511, but that was submitted too late for the staff to review for this meeting. Unresolved questions remain. Moving forward without a clear, enforcable, and fully evaluated
plan creates legal and procedural risk. You've heard plan developments do not lock in protections. They're frequently amended and only after development rights have already been granted. You've heard the former Royal Off Oak Golf Course currently functions as a storm
water infrastructure has effectively served as a stormwater golf course for over 60 years and changing it land use would permanently protect that or remove that protection. You've heard that a proposed CDD would serve only the new development would not protect existing residents. And you've heard that
development rights run with the land, not the developer. Meaning that once granted, those rights may be exercised by future owners who wouldn't be bound by any other other asurances. Here's a critical factor. The land owner is already entitled to build 79 dwelling
units. The city has no obligation to change the future land use designation. Together, the conclusion is clear. Approving this amendment would permanently increase development potential, remove protections existing residents rely on, and expose the city to risks they would have limited ability
to manage. But it would leave a lasting legacy, one where a permanent land use decision was made without complete information, enforcable limits, or clear public benefit. The denial preserves the existing designation, maintaining current protections, keeping storm water
buffering in place, and preserves the city's ability to evaluate any future proposal with complete information. The record before you is not adequate to justify a permanent land use change affecting 150 acres surrounded by existing homes, and it does not meet the
criteria for infill. As the applicant stated, for these reasons, the responsible, legally sound, and legacy-minded course is to recommend denial of this future land use amendment. And given the applicant's claim of fiscal benefit, the council should require an independent fiscal
impact analysis before any future land use land use change of this magnitude is considered. Thank you for your service to the citizens of Titusville. >> Thank you, >> Dan Lewis. Who?
>> Who' you say? >> This is Dan Lewis and I'm a homeowner here in Royal Oak. And um you know, these guys were a really hard act to follow. I'm telling you what, they said everything I wanted to say. So, here's
something though they didn't tell you be that I'm the only one that actually knows because we sent out of almost 13,000 emails to registered voters in Titusville.
And when we did that, you know how many people wrote back and said, "This is a great idea. You're a complete jerk and they should move forward. Two.
I had two. That's nothing. Now, I got to tell you another thing. We had almost 6,000 people click on that information we sent
out. And two of them said they think coulter is a good idea. Now if you look around you might notice this whole thing is a little unpopular. I mean just a bit. Well how much red do you see? Look downstairs. It's down
there. These people don't want this thing. Plain and simple. And you know, here's something else that nobody even thought of. Right now, we're we're talking about I read this in
Coulter's material because I read their stuff. And in their material, it said we're going to get this 1.4 million a year and D. And again, it that's a gross figure. But there's even a more complicated thing here. Governor DeSantis wants to get rid of
property tax. How's that going to work? We're not going to have any money. We're going to have all the bills, but we're going to have no money to do anything. Gee, that's kind of an eyeopener, isn't it?
So, the bottom line is you got to take a look at this and say, who's got something to gain here? Well, sure, not the citizens. 6,000 of them told us nah, they don't want that. Two of them said it's a good idea. Here in this place,
Coulters managed to get the guy who sold him the property to endorse it. They got the air conditioning guy who's out there fixing air conditioners, and they got a couple other guys. I can't remember what they did, but look what we've got. We
could keep you talking here for the next five days. When people don't want something, don't do it. And if their experts are all wrong, and remember, experts are just an opinion, the culter is not going to be there to
pick up the pieces. That's all of us who actually live here. We're the ones that got to pick up the >> Thank you. >> City clerk, >> Daryl Forgy, >> could not hear. What was his name? >> Daryl.
>> Okay. Good evening. Max Forgi, uh 236 Southeast 45th Street, Cape Coral, Florida. Uh member in good standing of the American Institute of Certified
Planners, uh for 33 years. I have provided you with a an expert letter. I have worked on for the the past year with uh Ms. Conklin, her neighbors at uh
Royal Oak Neighbors LLC. I have also provided you with a copy of the letter which I sent uh to Mr. parish with the um permission and encouragement of Royal Oak neighbors back in September
and which he referred to and and I appreciate that that uh the best option in my opinion after studying this the in addition to what you've heard today
what you also heard uh from your planning and zoning commission Um on the 21st from all of the written uh evidence that we have uh you you have a recommendation
of denial by a five to zero vote and in my report I have a digest of all the factual data which you have received in testimony from these people. I'm going to ask for two minutes to uh an
additional two minutes so that I can read into the record those eight findings of fact that I recommend as you have not heard those before, but they are based upon the testimony that I have gathered. And if you'd like to hear more
from me, I welcome any questions that you may have. Two minutes. Yeah, >> somebody would have to make a motion. Members, >> I'll make that motion. >> I'll second. >> Thank you. >> Hold on. There's a motion and a second. All those in favor say I.
>> I. >> Any opposed? Motion carries. >> Recommended findings of fact and um I'm going to read only the the lead sentence. There's more comment on it.
Finding one. This application can be adopted only via a legislative process which city council is not obliged to adopt. Finding two, the comprehensive plan adopted by ordinance is an expression of
the community's long range vision for land use, infrastructure, and services. Finding three, the proposed future land use map change is inconsistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Titusville comprehensive plan,
specifically objective 1.1 and policies 12 and 114. Four, the application, if approved, would permit a substantial intensification on uh off the of the property. According
to the staff report, the application proposes an increase from the existing 42 total units to 745 units, uh, which is a 1,678% increase in the allowable number of
units. Although the proposed plan development would impose a cap on residential development at 547 units, which is a mere 1,22% increase. Finding number five. Titusville city
professional staff conducted a thorough analysis of the case and presented to the planning board a lengthy staff report that dispassionately weighed the factors which favored adoption and those which did not. The city planning board
in its capacity is the local planning agency almost done. Uh recommended denial by a unanimous vote which I encourage you to uh follow up on today. >> Thank you, sir. >> This three more. They're quick.
>> Sorry. Um prior to this, I believe they submitted an additional 11 citizens names that were willing to give up their time, I believe, for the attorney and one other person. Um, so I would >> just got to make sure we annotate that with the clerk because again just trying
to be fair and impartial here and make sure everybody has the same amount of time. >> So who's doing that? And did you already speak? >> No. >> Okay. >> I'll give up my time. >> All right. >> Thank you. >> Got that clear. >> Hold on one second. Let's make sure we got a procedurally correct >> and then I would just move to give him
up to five more minutes to state what he needs to second. >> There's a motion and a second. Um, all those in favor say I. >> I. >> All right. Motion carries. >> The staff did not recommend approval or
denial, but it did offer an option of not transmitting and to proceed to p uh to pursue further study under city supervision, which is what I strongly recommend. Uh,
finding number seven, the proposed amendment would result in adverse impacts on the neighborhood. You have heard testimony to that effect. And finding number eight, the city of Titusville is responsible for the
maintenance of the comprehensive plan and the city council is the only body that can amend it. Um, I think I I am not a resident of Titusville. These people are. Uh, I
observe that this is a large tract, a historic tract, an important tract. It merits your attention as the governing body. And I urge you to deny this
application and to uh take future action to do your own planning as the rightful planning body for the city of Titusville. Are there any questions? >> Thank you very much.
>> Thank you. >> City clerk. Next card. Next, Kurt. >> James Mutter. >> James Mutter here. >> Christopher Childs, >> Christopher Childs. Um, as you know, I'm vice chairman of Planning Zoning
Commission. So, I just wanted to kind of give my perspective of why I voted the way I did. Um, for one, it was just kind of messy, especially with this a simple feed deed. Um, it seemed like the the applicant's lawyer was arguing that the
the word simple feed on the top doesn't mean what it means. And so, words don't have meaning. But, you know, the the US Constitution is made up of words. And I think it has meaning to me. It has meaning. I hope it has meaning to you. If the law is just words, so if we if we
don't have meaning to those words, then what do we have? We have I hope someone doesn't do that to me about in my house, you know, with my deed and just say, well, they're just words. It could be a laundry list. So, also storm water. Um, we didn't get the plan for uh their plan
at plan for planning and zoning meeting until that day until that morning. So, uh we didn't really have a lot of time to go through it. Um, but I I have gone through and I think there's there's some some questions you should probably ask them. High water table wasn't analyzed.
No backto-back storm modeling and like it assumes that there's just going to be one storm at a time. Um, and so another thing is uh if you're going to go I know they said that we had like a a small area study done in 2016, but as all of
you know there's been a lot of changes in Titusville over the last 10 years. Even the mayor hasn't been here since 2016. So, there's been a lot of changes since 2016. So, I think uh the I think you should do a small area study. I think that was our unanimous um
recommendation to you guys. And I just wanted to let you know uh what our thoughts were behind that. Thank you. >> Thank you, city clerk. >> Robert and Laura Headley. Good evening.
I'm Robert Hedley. I've lived in Royal Oak for 41 years. Uh seen a lot of changes. Some of them weren't good. What all these people are behind are real good people. And those people over there that want this thing developed, they're good folks, too. But they're trying to
make a buck. And if you analyze the one kind of houses we have there now versus what's going in there, you got pretty good size lots here and then you got next tours coming in postage stamps. Uh I'd say the average house is going to have to be
1,500 square feet. And if you look at their lake plans, their lakes have been altered what we got right now. So they're going to be probably filling in and when this thing goes into construction, it's going to be a mess. I have been in the construction business. I'm a licensed contractor, retired. I
worked at Kennedy Space Center in construction management for 41 years. And I know what I'm talking about. Storm water runoff there is going to accelerate tremendously because it's going to be concrete. Yeah. They got a lot of retention areas. They got a lot
of sidewalks. So they got a lot of rooftops, streets, and it's going to come flowing out of there quicker than we've ever seen. If you replace fairways with asphalt, that's what happens. So, it's just common sense. The other thing
is it's totally out of balance for what's there now. >> Completely out of balance. You got real nice homes. Mine's 3,000 square feet and across the backyards of our neighbors over here, they're going to be 1500
square feet. What's that really going to do as far as balance out there? If you're going to spend money, flush it down the toilet. Spend a little money and go recoup another golf course developer in there and let's get back to playing golf out there and having a good
time and make it worth our while. >> Thank you. See, >> Natasha Kelly. >> Good evening, uh, Mr. Mayor and council members. Thank you for your time. My name is Natasha Kelly. I'm speaking on behalf of my husband, Kurt Kelly, who is
also downstairs. We are new owners at Royal Oaks and we are very happy. We knew what we're buying in and I told my husband, I looked at the facts and I said, "This shouldn't go. This should stay the way it is." Uh developer is asking you to abandon
the city long-term vision, a vision that residents rely on for the stability of our homes and our environment. I'm asking you to uphold the unanimous recommendation from Planning and Zoning Commission and vote no.
Let's be clear about one very important fact. When the current owner purchased this property in 2022, it was already designated as a recreation and conservation. They bought this land with full knowledge of its
limitations. The city of Titusville is not a grandtor for private real estate gambles. It is not your job to bail out a developer who ignored the comprehensive plan in hopes of a windfall.
By keeping this land, recreational and conservation, you are not taking anything from them. You are simply enforcing the rules that were in the place the day they signed the deed. This land is a vital purpose as a
conservation and recreation land. It acts as a massive sponge for our storm water. But you heard all about that. I'm just going to quick I want to mention something else. I want to highlight a relevant example from Semino County. A very similar situation in Rolling Hills
golf course. Big difference was it was zoned as a plane development. So flexible zoning category. However, city voted to preserve it as a park for its residents. Actually, county bought it.
So, I ask you to vote no on this. It's I think the only right thing to do considering all the facts. I thank you for your time. >> Thank you, >> Megan McCormack. Good evening. Uh my name is Megan
McCormack. I live on Royal Oak. Um as we're all aware, uh Titusville's slogan is the gateway to nature and space. But does Titusville actually want to be a gateway to nature or is that just some slick false advertising? Um, I was really thrilled to hear that
Titusville created its first urban forest management plan and it recognizes the importance and the benefits of mature tree canopy. However, the development of this Royal Oak property will remove almost all of the mature trees there. Check their plan. It's a
lot more red than green. So, why is Titusville creating this forestry plan to save and increase tree canopy while simultaneously entertaining this proposal to cut down hundreds of mature trees? Titusville falls within the Great Florida Birding Trail, which brings
people from all over the state and country. 96% of terrestrial bird species raise their young partially or entirely on a diet of insects. Research just updated in November 2025 shows that over a thousand of those insect species
critical to bird survival are hosted on oak trees just like the beautiful mature trees that this proposal would destroy. Development of the Royal Oak property will also increase imperous surfaces, reducing water infiltration and significantly increasing runoff that
makes its way into the surrounding environment and the lagoon, which we already know is in trouble. In fact, as a biology professor, when my students do a lab that isolates human fecal bacteria from a natural water source, we use lagoon water because I know we'll get
unmistakable results. When the city is already working so hard not to take accountability for that, why would you consider approving things that only make the issue worse? Decades of research has repeatedly shown that human health and quality of life are directly
correlated to the health of the local environment. The residents here have made our wishes clear. We have voted for clean water and measures to fund lagoon improvements and acquisition of land for environmental protection. How can city council claim to represent citizens when
your decisions go against our voices and our votes? How can the city of Titusville call itself a gateway to nature when one by one you're making decisions to develop and degrade our natural spaces? With this Royal Oak property, you have the potential to do more than offer meaningless lip service.
I'm asking that you not transmit this proposal to the state. instead allow the land to be fully restored into an ecologically functional property that alleviates all of the other concerns my neighbors have brought before you tonight and supports Titusville slogan
as a gateway to nature. Thank you. >> Thank you, >> Connie Milton. Connie Milton. >> Good. I hear you. Hi, my name is Connie Milton. I moved into Royal Oak on South Casper Place in
61 years ago in 1964. My family moved from Alabama to here for the space program. We lived there. Then my parents, as time goes on, moved to uh Spanish Oaks, also on the golf course. Now they're on Nelson Place. My father's
93, my mother's 91. I'm the executive of the trust for that property on Nelson Place. There are eight homes that back up to the golf course right now on Nelson Place. This proposal has 18 homes
backing up to those eight homes. My parents one property has three lots backing up to their single lot. So this smoke and mirrors talking about 3.5 homes per acre is nothing but smoke and
mirrors. It's a large intensity development that they're proposing. Yeah, they have some some ponds out there. They have they're going to have a lot of streets and roads, but the the density is going to be two to three
times more than what the existing community in Royal Oak has today. Talk about property rights. This owner bought Ozoned conservation land use. O zoning allows
one home per five acres. Now that would be a nice development. Executive homes, one home on five acres. Why don't we look at RE? Titusville has an RE zoning. That would be two homes on
one acre. Now, that's a heck of a lot more than O zoning, but it would be closer to what Royal Oak has today in their existing homes. large homes. My parents home is 3,000 square feet. Um,
we need to find a win-win. We've talked about win-wins in the past. And hopefully, if you take the time, don't transmit this to Tallahassee who's going to now start dictating things to you and having an expectation of what
you're going to do if you submit it to them. Don't submit it. Keep it in house. Let's talk about this as a community. This is not the right thing and to do is to to approve this. Thank you.
>> Thank you. >> Thank you, city clerk. >> Joey Meyers. Joey Myers. Michael My Somebody check downstairs. If I can get this up high enough.
Michael My Titusville Environmental Commission. I've um I've been following this for quite some time and one of the things that I've I've noticed is that the land in and around Royal Oaks is around 30
feet above sea level. And if you look at the elevation map for that area, all of the the development around it is at 35 to 37 ft. These are these people's
homes behind me. The land that holds the golf course is at 30 ft and the ponds are at 25. So, we're talking about a relatively flat
piece of land over 150 acres. The trouble is that our development over the years, 40, 50, 60 years, our storm water development management
from 1960 is not the same as it is today. These homes were built in 1960. We would call that bad storm water development today. Most of these homes run their storm
water, their excess into this golf course. You're going to be building new homes in the golf course. Well, their plan to get rid of the agent orange and the arsenic is to cap and cover.
That means they're going to raise the elevation. We already have storm water running into this development that's not being considered by the developer. They consider the rainwater and their calculations are based what falls on
their property. Now you may recall a few years ago we had an issue with the Hilton wanting to put in a parcel that was two and a half three and a half acres and two and a half were wetlands and we let them build on it because it
was just two and a half acres. It wasn't five but it was directly connected to 15 acres of wetlands next door. We didn't look beyond the ends of the property line. That's the situation here.
We're not looking beyond this property to see how much flooding is coming in from the neighboring properties and it's not being calculated in their equations. What's going to end up happening is this neighborhood's going to flood and the
homes around it are going to flood just like we've seen in Edgewater and elsewhere because we're only looking at this parcel. Look beyond. Thank you. Brienne Robertson. >> Good evening, Mr. Mayor and honorable
council members. My name is Dr. Brienne Roberts and I'm the president of the Royal Oak Community Alliance. But before I proceed, please accept my sincere condolences with the passing of um past Vice Mayor Joe Robinson. I know many of you served with him on this council and
have walked alongside of him and many of his philanthropic activities. I'm here as a property owner of the Royal Oak community and a resident of Titusville with my family being here more than 50 years. I stand before you without hesitation, resolute in my
mission as one who continues to work for the good of the community to speak up for the welfare, not just for them, but for their descendants. Myself along with ROA, Royal Oak neighbors, and the residents of the Royal Oak community are here to speak up for the welfare of all
our descendants. And we don't need a white binder because we're all here. The out of county applicant may have deeper pocket, walk in circles of impressive networks, speak with eloquence, and bring decades of experience to the table. But make no
mistake, we have the confidence in our elected city officials and the positions they swore to uphold. Winston Churchill so finely stated, "Never give in. Never, never, never in nothing great or small, large or petty.
Never give in except to the convictions of honor and good sense. Never yield to force. Never yield to the apparent overwhelming might of the enemy. I applaud the members of the planning and zoning commission who on Wednesday, January the 21st, recommended not to
approve the transmitt and directed staff to conduct a small area study to guide redevelopment of this area. Coming to that recommendation was an honorous task and one we believe was done with careful thought, deliberation, and integrity. And we thank you for their unanimous
vote and a solid recommendation to dei deny the transmitt. My first line of questioning will be directed at the role and the weight that comes with the title of city manager. A memo from the city manager was issued last week to the members of the council acknowledging that the planning and zoning committee
recommended to deny the transmitt. And yet in this packet there's a recommendation to action to approve the transmitt of the comprehensive plan amendment. A recommendation made by an individual who's not even at that meeting. How's
his recommendation justified over the six highly qualified candidates or qualified members of the commission who were there in that meeting for hours listening to all the elements of such a complex petition. I would ask that the city manager disclose all communications
that occurred between himself and the applicant including any and all parties associated with the applicant both verbal and non-verbal recorded and non-recorded. Thank you. >> Thank you Brian. City clerk hold
>> and Marie Sedler. >> City clerk, hold on. How many more do we have? >> Okay. I'm sorry, but I'm getting like motions from council. I think people need a slight break, >> you know. So, I was going to >> Everybody's I think squirming up here.
Uh so, if it' be okay with you, >> that would be fine. >> Can we take a quick recess because I know everybody's So, we're going to just uh take a quick recess for 10 minutes, use the restroom, and we'll be back at 9:30. >> Yeah. Thank you, mayor and council members.
Thank you. My name is Amarie Sidler and I'm the president of the Association of Fairways at Royal Oak. I'm speaking tonight on behalf of the association's board of directors and our residents to formally enter our objection to this transmitt into public record. Our
community is bordered by two ponds that we share with the former Royal Oak Golf Course. Pond A on the east side of our property along Barnett Avenue. Pond H on the west side of our property along Knox McCrae. We are not here to discuss
theoretical concerns. We are here to document an ongoing infrastructure failure. According to the city's own storm water mapping, Pond H functions as the outfall for this regional drainage system, while Pond A along Bara Avenue
is part of the same hydraulically connected system. I'm here this evening to document the ongoing and measurable loss of association land along the west side of H Pond adjacent to Knox McCrae Drive.
Over time, approximately 25 to 30 ft of our common property has been lost due to continued erosion and the gradual expansion of the pond. Land that was once stable is now underwater. Soil that once supported infrastructure continues
to shift towards the water and air conditioning units that were originally installed on level ground are now visibly tilting as a result. This is not cosmetic. It's an active land loss and an increasing risk to our property.
We are also aware that the proposed development includes plans to utilize a portion of shared pond a area for a roadway connection to Bara Avenue. Because these ponds function as part of the same connected drainage system, any
alteration in this area raises serious concern about additional impacts to an already unstable shoreline. The association does not consent to the alteration or modification of this sharepod area given the documented land
loss in activity or excuse me an active instability of this drainage system. The association respectfully requests that the council send it back for further study pursuant to staff recommendation. These are existing measurable conditions
that cannot be deferred without exposing our community to continued harm. Where documented risk to property and public safety exists, transmitt must not proceed. I thank you for your time and your consideration. Thank you.
>> Thank you. Stay clear, >> Joey Meyers. And I do believe I owe you an apology. Sorry, we I think called your name and missed your downstairs. So glad you're here. >> Thank you. Uh I'm going to be reading uh on the behalf of a couple of attorneys
that couldn't make it tonight. So it asked for an extension maybe five minutes total in time. >> I would make that motion. I'll second. So is a motion extending five minutes on the three or five total just for
clarification. >> Total five. Okay. All right. All those in favor say I. >> Any opposed? Floor is yours. >> Okay. All right. So on behalf of Ralph Brooks, attorney board certified in city, county, and local government law.
When can you vote to deny a comprehensive plan amendment? It is well within the legal authority of the council commission to not transmit and deny a proposed applicant generated plan amendment to change the county's existing duly adopted comprehensive plan
guiding future growth. All comprehensive plan amendments are legislative decisions which can be denied for any rational reason. Coastal development of North Florida, Inc. versus city of Jacksonville Beach 788, SO2D204,
Florida 2001, Mina versus County Commission of Broward County, 783, SO2D 1054, 2001. The Florida Supreme Court in Coastal Development of North Florida, Inc. versus city of Jacksonville Beach
788 SO2D20204 Florida 2001 held that the comprehensive plan is a policy decision and represents a local government's fundamental policy decisions. Any proposed change to that established policy likewise is a policy decision. A comprehensive plan amendment
request will require that the governmental entity determine whether it is socially socially desirable to reformulate the policies previously formulated for the orderly growth of the community. This will in turn require that it consider the likely impact that
the proposed amendment would have on traffic, utilities, other services, and future capital expenditures among other things. That is in fact precisely that occurred here. precisely what occurred here. Such considerations are different in kind from those which come into play
in considering a reasonzoning request. The court will consider whether the local government's decision to maintain the status quo in the land use plan was reasonable from a planning, economic, environmental, and fiscal responsibility standpoint. As we said in Martin County
versus USUM 690 SO2D1288 Florida 1997, the fairly debatable standard of review for legislative comprehensive plan amendments is a highly differential standard that will sustain a local government decision on a comprehensive planning action even if
reasonable persons could differ as to its propriety. In other words, an ordinance may be said to be fairly debatable when for any reason it is open to dispute or controversy on grounds that make sense or point to a logical
deduction. Can fact-based observation lay person testimony be considered competent substantial evidence? The Florida Supreme Court explained that competent substantial evidence is evidence that sufficiently relevant and material that a reasonable mind would accept it. uh
Degro uh versus Sheffield 95 SO2D 912 Florida 1957 further even lay person or non-expert testimony in a land use or zoning case is perfectly permissible and can constit can constitute substantial competent evidence if it is fact-based
this can include fact witness observation testimony about relevant facts and documentary evidence including fact-based observations photographs aerials and maps metropolitan date county versus Blumenthal 675 5 S2D 598
Florida District uh AP 3D196. What are the private property rights of the applicant? A decision not to transmit one particular landowner's applicant generated uh request to change the duly adopted comprehensive plan can be denied and does not subject the county to liability. The applicant is
only entitled to some reasonable existing economic use of their land under the constitution which only requires that the property retain some use in economic value but does not guarantee a specific use or value. For example, agricultural land purchased at agricultural land prices retains value
in use for agricultural purposes. The court will also look at other lands owned by the applicant and look all possible uses on all the parcels including existing density and uses. The courts will look at the existing and what was allowed and what was not allowed under the existing zoning when
the applicant purchased the property. For example, if you bought a zoned land, you got a zone land. And if you bought a swamp, you got a swamp. And the applicant has no constitutional right to fill the swamp. The applicant does not have entitlement to an increase in density or intensity. Florida's Bert
Harris Act awards landowners damages for a mere uh de dim dimminution in value caused by a downsizing of property occurring after 1995. But Harris But Bert Harris Act does not award damages for the failure to increase density,
especially to a higher residential density and commercial intensity on the property that was not allowed by the duly adopted comprehensive plan and zoning code as it existed on the effective date of the Bert Harris Act of 1995. The city can and should retain the existing duly adopted comprehensive plan
as originally adopted and vote not to transmit and deny the land owners applicant generated a request to change the duly adopted comp plan. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Morris skill more skill.
>> That's all right. >> Give him five minutes. >> I I think what I think there might be miscommunication. I think they put into record 11 names that were waving their time. So residents that are here that are not going to speak so they would have an extra 30 minutes and I think
there must have been miscommunication on who would be speaking. So we had I believe is that your planner? >> Yeah. So I think he spoke for extra time and then I believe Joey was going to speak for extra time and was there one more? >> Okay. And that was going to be for six
minutes. So I I I would vote to give him extra time to finish because I think they did have three and we have residents that are waving their time. >> Okay. >> If I if I if I may u can I get a little bit clarification as to who will be
waving their time because I don't >> and then there's residents down >> stairs and then I did submit it to the clerk >> the names that were signed as well for the record so it would be documented. >> Awesome. >> Clerk, do you have all that? Okay. >> Okay. Thank you. >> As long as our clerk's good, I'm good.
>> Yes. >> Thank Thank you. All right. So, this is from Dennis Knox Bear, attorney and circuit court mediator from Flaggler Beach. Uh email to from him to to Vicky Conklin. Miss Conklin, I'm sorry to hear that Mr. Brooks cannot make the hearing this evening due to short notice. I am
not able to attend from Flaggler County. My background is 40 years as a Florida licensed attorney with extensive experience in land use and zoning matters. I have represented local governments, land owners, and citizens groups and also served as special magistrate for Bert Harris claims. As
discussed, the transmitt of the comp plan amendment is not an inconsequential action. It triggers a new level of land use entitlements for which all future zoning and land use decisions are guided by. Transmitt is a significant step required before resoning can occur. Any
relevant studies should be performed prior to transmitt as recommended by your expert Mr. Forgy and city planning staff. As an FYI, Mr. uh Forget is recognized statewide as an expert on
golf course conversion cases. I have worked with him on the uh Tamaka Oaks golf course in Orman Beach, Florida. Dennis, >> thank you. >> Thank you. >> State clerk. answer more skill
Morris Brian Jarnell. Good evening. Uh, my name is Brian Yarnell and I represent the Association of Fairways at Royal Oaks. I'm a lawyer with the law firm Gray Robinson and I guess since we're giving numbers of years we've been doing this. I've been
doing it 30 years. Um, I'm here to talk to you about several issues, but I'm going to skip some because a lot of people have talked about a lot of the issues I was going to talk about, but I do want to go over the deed. And I've provided you with a package and I'd like you to look at the deed and it's a tab a
of the package I've provided and I've highlighted certain language that I'd like to focus on. If you'll notice that the first thing is it's a deed from Royal Oak Development Company to the city of Titusville. So Royal Oak is the party of the first part. The city of Titusville is the party of the second
part. It's titled a fee simple deed. It's not titled an easement. It's not titled a prescription or prescription. It's titled deed. Now it says witness that the party of the first part um for an inconsideration of the sum of $10 to
him and hand paid um is hereby acknowledged has granted bargained sold and transferred and by these presence does grant bargained sell and transferred unto the set party of the second part all that certain parcel of
land lying and being in the county of Bvard in state of Florida more more particularly described as follows and then it gives the meetats and bounds legal descriptions. Now it does have the word easement in there but it doesn't
have the language of an easement deed. An easement deed has essentially a right of way of usage. This is not a right of way. This is not an easement. Now you've heard people call it an easement because they're picking up on this word out of the deed.
But it is clear that it's a fe simple deed and that and it it makes itself even clearer on page two it says together with all the tenementss herediments and opportunences with every privilege right title interest and
estate do and right of der reversion remainder and easement thereto belonging or in any ways appertaining to have and to hold the same in fe simple forever. This is a fe simple
deed. Now this >> can hold on. Time out. Time out. Stop the clock. I think our audio visual system kind of reset for a second. I cut out your mic. So, can you push the button and see if it turns back on? There you go.
>> Can I have a few more minutes to finish my discussion of the property? Three more minutes. >> Be up to council. I believe this was the last one that was requiring extra time from the group and so um how much time would you need? >> Just three minutes. >> Okay. I make that motion.
>> Second. >> I motion a second. All those in favor? >> I. >> Did you say I? >> Okay. Motion carries. Thank you. >> Thank you. So, here's the issue. The city owns the property. The developer does not. If you look at
the development plan, they're doing away with all the ponds. It looks like well in each of these ponds are these easements. The developer does not own the easement as it's called. And the only reason I'm calling it is because it calls it that
as a title. Since the developer doesn't own the property, it can't develop it on those little slivers of land that run between these ponds to promulgate the drainage. And who owns those? The city. Has the
city maintained them? Yes, over the past 60 years. But in the past decade or so, they haven't. And they're falling apart. They're put in there with this corrugated steel that doesn't last more than 60 years. And so they start caving in and they stop falling apart. But the
city has no plans to update that drainage. And so the second issue is even if you call it an easement, let's say Miss Treasure is correct that it's an easement. Well, the city has taken on the responsibility of maintaining the
storm water management system. And there's case law that says that when the city or a governmental agency takes on the responsibility, they can be held liable and negligence for failing that responsibility. And another issue is that the developer
can't just build up on the property without any concern for the neighbors. There is a concept in law that says yes, you can develop your property and yes, you can have a reasonable impact on your neighbor, but you can't flood them out. And we believe that's what's happening
here. Now, that's a problem that's going to be between the Royal Oak neighborhood and this developer because the developer will be impacting their property. But I think the city needs to first take a close look at what it owns and what the developer is asking to use that the city
owns. Thank you. >> Thank you, city clerk. >> Mayor Freeman. >> Sorry, who? >> Maril Freeman. Hi, I'm Barl Freeman. Um, I'm a native
Titus villain and I had my baby here. Um, I don't normally do this. I don't do politics. I work 40 hours a week. I raised three kids. I stay at home. This is crazy for me to be here on a school
night. It was really hard to get here. So, I hope you'll listen to what I have to say. So me and my family of five, we live between Knox McCrae and Country Club on Bara. We live in that little curve. You know what I'm talking about, the little
curve. >> Last year, a man who was going way too fast crashed into my neighbor's living room and displaced them for an entire year. It uh destroyed the structural integrity of their house. They had to get a new roof, new walls.
Two months ago, another man crashed into the sign in front of the um apartment complexes just south of us. Everyone's hit our mailbox. Everyone's hit our neighbor's mailbox, our next neighbor's mailbox, our neighbor's trees. If you go a couple houses down, you're going to notice that there's
these big wooden poles sticking out in front of his yard to keep people from running into his yard. Every single one of those poles is bent. Every single one of those poles has been hit. It's all we can do to make sure someone's not going to crash into our house. At this point,
if this happens and we have 511 new homes, if we're going to be conservative here, that's 511 new cars driving on my stretch of Bara every day. That's going to make it a lot less safe for me and my family.
That's being conservative. Most people have two cars. Most families have two cars. And these are single family homes, right? So, I don't think anyone's going to be considering I don't think they took the traffic of my little section of Bara when someone crashed into my
neighbor's house going way too fast in an area that no one is doing anything about to protect besides put a sign up that says slow. Didn't do anything. Couple months after that, someone crashed into the the sign. So, that
didn't help. So, I guess um my thing is if you're going to do a vote today, please don't do a vote that might get somebody killed. >> So, >> thank you.
>> Thank you. See you, >> Richard Odie. >> Who? >> Richard Odie. I think he may have left. It was a gentleman that came up earlier. Uh Laura Lee Thompson.
She's downstairs. >> Officer, can you let her know that she's up? But we can go to the next car while we wait for >> Vicky Nelson. Vicky Nelson. >> Is there a Vicky Nelson down there? >> Kurt Kelly? Good evening, Mr. Mayor, City Council.
Just want to address a few things. Of course, I did I agree with my wife about the developer bought the land understanding what it was and they were hoping to get it flipped so they could do their development. I agree with so many of the great points
here, the traffic, the uh water runoff, they're all wonderful points. What I would like to address is the concern of these these properties need to or the people coming into the city because of our space industry.
they're going to be enticed to live in these properties with their with their level of um income. I don't think these properties would ever entice these people. It would be below their pay grade. As far as the revenue goes from
these properties coming in, the level of scale that is happening with our space industry over the next 10 years, the revenue is coming. it is going to be Apollo times 10. So the revenue is coming no matter what for the for the
business owners. That answer is going to be answered and I don't think building this is going to make that happen or not happen. It's already in the pipeline. So I do agree with the residents. It should definitely stay the way it is for now. However, with the explosion of
population and investment over the next 10 years, the the land will probably use for something. I would say the next developer needs to punch up a lot higher for what Space Coast is going to become over the next 10 years. It's going to be
a revolutionary and the a revolution in this area. Like I said, it's going to be Apollo times 10. So, I think the next developer needs to punch higher and give us something that we deserve and we'd all be very proud about. Thank you.
>> Thank you, sir. Miss Lurley, >> you have something different for me. >> Has nothing to do with this. just the random things she wanted to bring me >> from previous conversations. >> Laurely Thompson, 3550 Irwin Avenue in
Mims. Um, we have a problem here in Titusville that became painfully obvious with the neighborhood flooding that occurred during the rain bomb event of last October. We also have a problem with putting too much fresh water into the Indian River Lagoon through our
ditches and our storm water conveyances. We've been draining wetlands on the western side of town that are in the St. John's River basin into the Indian River for decades. That is just wrong. St. John's River Water Management District says that the solution to Titusville's
flooding issues and too much fresh water going into the river is to build a collection of storm water parks throughout the city. What a wonderful vision that is. Parks throughout the city that will improve our residents quality of life and address issues with
flooding and too much freshwater going into the Indian River Lagoon. Royal Oak could be the crown jewel of the stormwater park system for the southwestern portion of the city. Greenspace is one of the best development decisions if one is trying
to repurpose a golf course. Green spaces are sustainable from an economic, environmental, and social perspective. Many communities suffer from a der of green space and natural areas, particularly in Florida, and are
unlikely to have that much green space elsewhere altogether in one area. Converting abandoned golf courses into storm water parks and recreational amenities for communities. That's not a new concept. It's being done all over
the state. Bobby Jones Golf Course, uh, Golf Club in Nature Park in Sarasota, Baypoint Golf Course in Pineelis County, Pinerest Golf Course in Largo, the O Golf Course Transformation Project in Cape Coral, Deer Run in Castleberry, and
I heard it earlier mention Rolling Hills in Longwood. The citizens um were able to get that turned into a really nice um storm water and recreational complex. So, I gave you a couple of concepts to look at so you can get an idea of the
possibilities. Um, the gentleman that spoke before me, you know, speaks the truth. The the economic development is coming to the town. Whether we want it or not, we want it.
But we also need to have green spaces and recreational areas for the new people that are coming to our community. And we have to get our storm water under control. And we have to figure out how to stop dumping our fresh water from wetlands that are supposed to be
draining into the St. John's River into the Indian River. Our planning staff says that an alternative to transmitt for Gemini Lakes is to study the issue, determine options, and develop a small area or neighborhood community plan. So,
we're fortunate to have this opportunity to talk about a vision for a redevelopment of a golf course. >> We deserve that chance. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Stay clear. >> Hey, St. Johnston.
My name is Stan Johnson. I've done a number of subdivisions and site plans in the city of Titusville. And I used to work for the city for eight years, about eight years. And uh uh I was not I was in public works and not in community development. But in what's going on in
community development now is same thing I've used the word but it's unacceptable and it's horrible. What I have done is I b I bought and I gave Laura Lee Thompson I gave her a stormwater master plan and I gave Brad
Parish stormwater master plan because they don't use it. They don't use it. So right now we're talking about a project that should be evaluated evaluated by the stormwater management plan. Guess what? Long time ago, we were supposed to
clean out the uh the drainage to South Lake. Long time ago, we didn't we we still never done it over 50 years later. It's still the same thing it was. It's still there. It's still being cleaned, but it's not cleaned like it's supposed to be. Same thing be similarly, we can
say that thing for the uh the big canal that we have the Ellis canal. You're was supposed to be It's supposed to be inspected and cleaned. We're not doing it. This is their fault. This is our community development faults.
They're not they're not reviewing the project as they should. That's serious. And of course, what have I done? I've already told you I contacted I contacted the FBI. It's so bad. What what we have here is is not just bad stuff, but we have fraud, false reports on
sustainability. these the how can you probably how can you possibly have sustainability when you cannot when you do not maintain legal positive outfalls you don't have it our city is in bad shape and I've
said that many times and you still aren't listening I don't know what it's going to make to take to make you listen but anyhow I want to just change subject a little bit is in 2012 I approached Barati and I said, "My god, it's only about $2 million. Why don't you buy
this? Why don't the city just go ahead and buy this Royal Oak 147 acres?" No, it's not a good idea. It's crazy. Well, the thing is, what I see crazy now is $48 million for a police station. They haven't been begging for one.
How are you going to spend your money? I don't think you're spending your money wisely. If you were doing wisely, you would have bought it a long time ago. I don't know if there's still a chance to do it, but that's what I would like to propose to you. Just buy it. Thank you. And you got 12 seconds left.
>> Thank you, Mr. Johnson. City clear. >> Jill Mcnite. >> Evening. At least it's not morning yet. Uh I'm Jim Mcnite and I am a professional planner, have served as an expert witness and I represent the fairways at Royal Oaks Association 96
unit condominium. This and I represent them on this request alone. My career spanned 42 years in local government in Bvard County, 36 years as a city manager. I have seen many requests for comprehensive plan amendments with the majority as a blank sheet of paper,
undeveloped land waiting for an appropriate use and never developed. This site owned by Tulon is hardly a blank sheet of paper. In 1989, while serving as city manager in Rocklage, we were hit by a similar rain event that you experienced last October. Of note,
it was in October also and it exposed storm water deficiencies in the city. It led to two major policy changes. One was land acquisition. We acquired land to build active stormwater lakes that
became storm stormwater parks. Secondly, we changed our standards for drainage retention for new development. Those two things have made a big difference in that city. I bring this up because it relates directly to the redevelopment of the Royal Oak Golf Course property.
There are many unanswered questions relative to drainage and there is a direct impact on my clients. two ponds are co-owned with Fairways Condominium and three and there has been no contact by the owner or developer as to how to
address this major issue. There is the question related to this 1964 fee simple easement recorded to the city of Titusville and providing responsibility to the city. There are damages acrewing to my clients from both
ponds and nothing has been addressed by the city or the owner of the golf course property. Additionally, there are remaining questions about property ownership. Research indicates that legal description has been pie together and actual proof of ownership is at least in
question. The advertisement map does not actually provide a legal description so it is difficult to ascertain if it is accurate. Of note is also that what you're seeing in the way of a master plan is about 40% more impervious. That's that's standard. Okay. And the
lake that we own is being shown to be filled in partially. They're half. That's going to be a big problem uh for the people at Fairways. So, how does this relate to the comprehensive plan amendment? As council will decide your
next steps tonight. Before entitlement is granted, these issues need to be resolved to the sata satisfaction of all affected parties. City staff has provided an alternative to complete an independent small area study to address
all the issues brought up tonight. An opportunity for collaboration to move forward with a comprehensive plan transmitt a different date. simply stated the process has not ripened to
move forward at this time. >> Thank you, sir. >> And it's Joseph Pier. >> It's Joseph. It's P I E R E T T I believe. No. And then the last card is Tony.
>> She's been downstairs. >> She's downstairs. speaking on. >> Okay, thank you very much. So, that concludes the cards, correct? >> Thank you. I believe uh the applicant has an opportunity to address council
and then once they do, I'll let council ask their questions. Assuming these mics don't cut off cuz the system just reset. >> What? >> Yeah, the screen just went all goofy on me. Yeah.
>> Yeah. Push the button on the thing because it reset. >> Thank you. >> There we go. Okay. >> Yeah. >> Good evening, Mayor. Uh, thank you for allowing us the time to uh discuss some of what we heard tonight. I'm going to start with Bruce Moya so we can talk about storm water and you can ask any
questions that you may have of him. >> Good evening, mayor, council. My name is Bruce Moy, president of MBB Engineering, Melbourne, Florida. Um, there was a couple things uh that said I believe are incorrect. So, I want to start with those. Um, one statement that
was made was that we didn't consider the properties a drain to the golf course uh storm water system. Uh, that's the first thing that we did. So, as as uh when you start a project like this, the first thing you need to do is to find the
basin that that contributes to the to the golf course. So, we went through every record we could possibly find, every permit, every map. We did um we looked at LAR, we looked at surveys, uh we looked at St. John's
website, got everything that was permitted, city of Titusville records to get everything we could get our hands on and did multiple site visits to field verify everything that we thought we we were seeing in the plans and information that we got. And based on that, we've
determined that there's a that there's a 300 acre basin that drains to this property, including theund about 150 that is the property. So overall, we know what's coming into the property.
Um, and when we learned about an actual 1966 master drainage plan that was, uh, thank you, Mr. Johnston, for bringing that to our attention. We looked at that, compared it to what our findings are and they are consistent. So what we
what we found and all our find all our research is even consistent with that 66 plan. So we know we have a a real good idea of what's happening out there as far as drainage and the best information that we have about what happens there.
We kind of got lucky. I think me personally think we got lucky to see because I heard real world mentioned. Well, we saw what happened real world in October here. So, we looked at our model and say, "Hey, does our model reflect what happened in October
based on testimony provided by the neighbors, photographs? We looked at our model and it is it reflects exactly what happened in October. So, we feel we have a really really good model of what's happening
out there. So we know that we can when we do our final design and we've done our conceptual design that we believe we're going to lower the stages elevations of those neighboring properties in the design storms so that
it'll be less of an impact on what's happening right now. Now, in addition, uh the second thing that I heard that was incorrect is that we are polluting the Indian River.
Um I hope not because if it was, it's been doing it for 60 years. But thank God this property drains west. It does not drain east to the Indian River. It drains west to the St. John's. So this this facility has no impact on the S on
the Indian River Lagoon. So, I think that's good news. Um, currently the system has zero treatment. Whatever water flows into those lakes goes directly offsite with no treatment
whatsoever. All those years of fertilizer and pesticides and all that and whatever is remaining continues to go offsite directly into your ditches out to the St. John's River. That's not going to happen when we
develop this property. We'll we'll be we will have to meet the brand new December 28th St. John or DP standards for additional treatment for reduction of nitrogen and phosphorus. So we think we're going to way way improve far as
water quality. It's not even close. It's going to be a massive improvement. Um there's a little bit of a problem with the existing system. There's two lakes that are isolated. They're not connected to any of the the
system at all. So, they just fill up until they overflow. They don't recover. They don't go to any other part. They just keep filling up, you know, whenever the rainfall events occur. So, um, and they're all interconnected by whatever
is interconnected is by some pipes that have been in the ground for probably 60 years that have a 25 year lifespan. So, some of the things we're going to do, we're going to interconnect all the lakes. We're going to replace all those pipes.
In addition, uh over on Nelson Place, and this we verified this through a field serve, actually did it myself. Um there's a pipe that comes off of Nelson Place. And if you look at the the pipe where where
it ends to go into the golf course, you can't see the pipe. is completely covered. So, it doesn't even have positive um flow coming out of the pipe. So, what we will do is actually bring that pipe directly into the lake so that
when water hits the street, it'll go directly to the pond. Um on Finster Wall Drive, there's two pipes that come off Finster Wall Drive and it has an inlet at the road, a pipe that goes down the side lot line and
another inlet at the at the end. So the water has to go into the inlet through the pipe and come back up through the top of the inlet to even start flowing. So if the inlets are at the same elevation, basically the water's already backing into the road before it actually starts to outfall. So, we're going to take that
inlet out and we're going to pipe it directly to the to the to the pond so that when the water hits that system, it goes directly into the storm water pond. The one of those one of those pipes is actually you can't even see the inlet. It's completely blocked, clogged, and
grown over. So, we think that we can make a very much of an improvement to the storm water system in this area. And um really, I think that we can do this. So, uh, we're hoping that you agree with that and we'll be here to answer any
questions regarding storm water. >> Vice Mayor Cole, >> you know, I think that one way we can help the community feel comfortable is if the city hires an engineering firm to
look at the storm water and actually see what the storm water does. Now, I said the city by would would do the contract. However, if the city's going to do the contract, who's going to pay for it? I would like to see if the contractor
would pay for the storm water study that would somewhat assure the residents that the runoff because storm water seems to be the strain that I hear running throughout this whole thing. It what
everyone is saying is storm water. So maybe we can solve this problem by you funding it for us to do a separate engineering study for storm water. Now maybe I don't ask you maybe I need to
ask them if they're willing to do it. >> All right. >> Yeah, you'll have to ask them. But you know if we if we do to respond to that. So it's going to be a pretty massive study. So I would think that if and this is what usually happens in other areas
is is we would do the study and normally the city and the St. John's and everybody else reviews it that you could have that third party review what we did instead of just recreate an entire study on it on their own. >> Order. >> Oh, >> come on. He has his time up here.
Council's asking questions. Thank you, Vice Mayor Cole, for the suggestion. We're going to keep asking questions of the storm water plan. Please don't interrupt. >> Member Nelson. >> So, Bruce, I have a question for you. >> Okay. >> Maybe I just don't totally understand that,
>> but I understand that the new development would be 3 feet above the flood plane. >> No. Well, I I can't really answer that. We haven't done a grading plan. That golf course varies from elevation 17 to
elevation 35 right now. >> Okay. So there's a there's an 18 foot grade differential in that golf course as it undulates from north to south. So you know we got to look at how we abut the the properties that we abut so that
we can maintain water flow and still make sure that the that the storm water doesn't exceed the bank. So if the storm water now and basically what we've seen is the storm water currently based on the photographs we saw from October. Yeah.
>> stage up to about an elevation of about 21. >> Okay. >> Okay. So, that's a little, you know, that's higher than some spots, lower than others. That's what we're that's where we have our design that we're maintaining it at that level through the post. So, once we even when we So, when
we did the analysis, even when we put all the lots and the roads in place, that water level doesn't go any higher than that 21 that it does now. >> Okay. other question >> and that'll that varies a little bit here and there but that's general
>> and I will tell you my dad was the original land developer so that was my playground for a while basically go out and play and leave me alone but it always seemed as a kid that
everything around Royal Oak and Royal Oak itself flowed down the the property was sloping toward that golf course. And so when you guys are look when
you're looking at how to create how to stop flooding, I know you considered the property in Royal Oak, but what about the property outside of Royal Oak? >> Well, yeah. So, we don't obviously
everything in Royal Oak does not drain to this property. >> Yeah. But about 150 acres of it does. That's what we've included and that's very consistent with that 66 master plan of where the limits of that of what actually flows to the property. So we've ground truth that so we have like I said
we have 100 about 150 acres of our property and about 150 acres of Royal Oak existing Royal Oak neighborhood properties that drain to our >> that drain to that system. So I'm wrong in thinking that the property surrounding Royal Oak doesn't drain that
way. >> It drains. Yes. So some of them just have the rear lots that drain there. Some of them um drain through pipes. Like I said, some pipes that actually come there, they they hit they come into the the neighborhood into the golf course lower than the than this than the
grade that it's supposed to drain to. So you have some that is positive and you have some that's a negative drainage. It actually has to overcome a higher grade to get to the pond. So we're going to fix that. So we're going to make sure that it's a direct drainage to the to
the pond. it won't have to overcome a mound or some other thing. You know, that's over time things have been whether I don't know if they've been filled in over time, but if you can go out there on that and at the end of that culde-sac and you try to if you see that the end of that pipe, it's about 2 feet under the ground. >> Okay.
>> So, it can't flow until it's >> fixed. >> So, we would fix that. >> Okay. Thanks. >> Thank you very much. Any more questions from this board to Mr. Vice Mayor Cole, >> I I don't know if my question was
answered. Uh, >> yes. Yes. >> Oh, there we go. Yes. >> There you go. >> All right. >> Way to call the question. >> Thank you. >> All right. Thank you, Mr. Moya. >> Okay. >> Yes.
>> Yes. Ju just to clarify again, Kim Rzanka for the uh owner and the um the developer. Yes. Coulter is willing to pay for that storm water plan that you've requested. Okay. >> All right. But I do want to point out um as uh one member of the audience
said, they've been fighting this for three years. They've known this is coming. There's a 240 page storm water report in your package. No one's discussed it. No one asked an expert to look at it. All they came here with their speculation, fears,
catastrophizing opinions. There are tons of reports that they could have looked at and all they did was just continue throwing their fears. And I understand that change is hard. People are used to using it as their playground. But it's someone's private property and it's
going to change. The developer bought a defunct golf course, defunct now for 10 years, and it's got drainage problems as we know. And you have a provision in your comprehensive plan and your code and in Florida statutes that deals with
infill. And this fits infill. No one said it doesn't. Someone said, "Oh, well, it doesn't meet infill." But no one told us why they think it doesn't meet infill. You've had a planner say this is infill. Um, I want to take you back to your expert planner, uh, community
development director Brad Parish. In his report to members of planning and zoning commission, the recommended action was approve the transmitt of the application to the state of Florida land planning agency. Mr. Paris is your expert. This is an
expert report that supports what we're requesting. If you look at the actual report, it also clearly supports transmitt. It's not speculative. It's not an opinion with no facts as one
attorney in a letter stated. Um this is shows you surrounding future land use and this is future land use. This is not zoning. This is not development. This is the maximum intensity of low density residential which surrounds this
property and actually there's higher density there's multif family high density near this property the condominium. So the surrounding property future land use is compatible is like for like it does not say you can build
five units. It says you can build up to five units. That's later a planning decision with a master plan a sketch plat all that other things. Then if you look at the comprehensive plan amendment review on page five of the staff report the summary of the
staff's finding based upon the criteria below the staff did not find the proposed future land use amendment will encourage sprawl. That's point one that supports this request for the comprehensive plan amendment. And you go further and it talks about
section 3423 in the criteria and it goes through them. Surrounding areas predominantly detached single family and multifamily residential again compatible. The extent of the population growth. You're having population growth. You need more homes. The extent to
adequate infrastructure to accommodate the proposed amendment. The preliminary concurrency evaluation provides that this will be these will be met. the extent to which the amendment will result in an efficient use of public funds. We're not using public funds. If
a CDD is approved or is suggested, you have to approve it. That comes to you. That's not before you yet. You'll have all the details of the CDD and you can vote it down if you don't like it and then the developers responsible for it all. So, the CDD is a non-issue at this point. Uh the extent of the amendment
will not result in urban sprawl. It won't. The extent to which the amendment will result in sustainable development pattern. Subject isn't an approved subdivision. There are no environmentally sensitive areas. The extent to which the amendment results in a positive market, economic and fiscal
benefit. The estimated population growth. Population amendments in line with typical growth patterns. Then it says consistency with comprehensive plan. And your staff says the comprehensive plan amendment and zoning is consistent with the comprehensive
plan and more specifically with the following objectives and policies of the comprehensive plan and lists a litany of comprehensive plans which this meets. That is your criteria, your comp plan and your urban sprawl and the criteria which you review. It's not your opinion.
It's not how you feel. It's not what the neighbors want. It's not 6,000 people click on something. It's the facts that presented to you that meet your code in your comp plan. The reoccurring theme here is substantial questions exist, but no one
has taken on these substantial questions even though we've provided all the evidence to answer those questions. Uh they talk mostly about the arguments against zoning and we're not at zoning yet. We're just at a policy decision based upon your comp plan or criteria
whether it makes sense to move this to medium density residential. Um you heard from Mr. Moya. >> Sorry, low density. >> I'm sorry if I said medium I misspoke. Ma'am, >> I'm gonna have to caution you for the outburst. It is low density.
There's there was discussion about scale and form and impact all of which are zoning concepts. They talk about other cities. There are over 900 cities in Bvard C and all of the state of Florida. This is not Edgewood. This is not Martin County.
This is Titusville with Titusville staff, Titusville studies and Titusville regulations. Uh drainage is not a criteria for land use, but Coulter is willing to take that on to prove to you all the decision makers that this is not going to impact
the neighborhood. In fact, that's a basic development principle that you have to retain all the storm water you're already retaining and you have to treat it now through the new rules. the fee simple deed. Again, there is no evidence to the contrary that the
developer doesn't own, the owner doesn't own. There's a warranty deed, so the legal description is well known. There's an atlas survey in your file that is well known. There's a title opinion that was issued to Tulon. If they want to challenge the ownership,
it could have been done in the past three years. if they want to challenge whether it's an easement or a fee simple deed, they could do that. We have title insurance. We'll take on that challenge. But no one's done that. They're just spewing speculations. And your city attorney and actually your growth
management director also says these are easements. They're not maintained by the city. It's unknown if the city ever accepted that fee simple deed to those easements. You have to accept it. It appears you didn't. So back in 1966 it got recorded
but you can record a deed but someone has to accept it. The attorneys and the planners made a number of comments either in person or by by letter. uh the comp plan amendments and I do agree with this. The comp plan amendment
is a policy decision. It is based upon your comp plan. It's also based on your procedures for amendment which are set forth in your code. They have to be based on competent substantial evidence and there has to be a logical reason. One of your planning members actually
said, "Oh, we can just do it because we we can just deny it because of our opinions." And no one challenged that planning member on that. And that's not true. You have to have a logical basis and competent and substantial evidence to support it. With that, we would request that you
transmit this to the state for review. Doesn't mean you have to approve it when it comes back. They'll look at it. There may be changes. We'll agree um culture will agree the developer to do a storm water plan during that time frame. Um, there's 180 days once this comes back
for you to do something with it. We have time and we're willing to do that, but we don't need another review of the golf courses. That study is very comprehensive. It included more than just Royal Oak. And the city council at that time decided not to adopt any ordinance to to manage the golf course
redevelopment because it is private property. It's not a public park. It's not a stormwater park, but it will act as a better storm water plan for you than you have now. Thank you. >> Thank you. Any other questions for the applicant, Vice Mayor? >> Uh, my question is for Brad.
>> Okay. Thank you. >> In the event that we approve this, does this does not change the land use at all and it doesn't change the reasoning. Am I correct in what I'm saying? >> Correct.
And tonight's action. All you'll be doing if you approve this is basically requiring staff to send this to the state. It doesn't change in the entitlements. >> And when it comes back for the state, is that when the resoning or whatever
comes into play? >> That's when we will schedule adoption hearings which will include the land use amendment and the reasoning on your agenda. >> Okay. Thank you. >> All right. Before anything else is said, can I have a motion to extend the
meeting, please? >> Let's say midnight. >> All right. I got a motion by member Nelson. I have a second by Vice Mayor Cole. All those in favor say I. >> Any opposed? We're still here. Member Stokel, did you have something? >> Yes, I had a question. Um, tapping on to
what Vice Mayor said. So would it be fair to say then if we feel as a council that it what's been presented it is not appropriate for this particular piece of property to be low density residential land use. We should
not send it to the state. >> You you have the option of not approving this request to transmit to the state. I would recommend that you state a reason for that. >> Okay. Um >> yeah, >> member Nelson,
>> my preference would be to not transmit it at this point and look at doing a small area study. Um I've been here forever,
long time getting longer. I remember Royal Oak as it was. Um, we had Tarzan running up and down the street.
Um, we won't discuss what kind of state he was in, but um, yeah, it let me say it was after 9:00. Um, it's a jewel and
I won't I want to make sure that whatever we do is in keeping with the neighborhood. That is something that
sort of blends in with it. And Josh, I will tell you right now, I sort of look at it and go, I feel like we're trying to shove a lot of houses in a small area
which aren't really matching the neighborhood. >> Um, >> Bruce, I will say you did a great job. Trust, you did a great job, too. You did a great job. I talked to one of your um
counterparts, a guy named Sid, who said to tell you, you're absolutely brilliant. Um but you know, the issues like with the the outfalls over by the conduct
and filling in part of that lake, that concerns me. It concerns me that we have two exits from Royal Oak um that we're turning around if we're
filling in part of a lake to make an exit and then there's an exit going out on Bara which seems to be really close to that intersection. And I just before we do anything, I want to make
sure that it is perfect, you know. Um, so to me, stepping back and solving all those issues is maybe something we should do.
>> Thank you, Member Nelson. Member Moscoso, please hold a pause. >> Thank you. Um, yeah, I would definitely agree. I think that we need to do our our due diligence. Um I I appreciate the speaker who spoke about the fiscal um impalis. I think that's extremely
important. I hadn't heard about that before. Um with this I think we've been talking to our residents a lot about a storm water management plan for the entire city. And so I've heard a few things about how we don't need to just look at one piece of property. We have to look at everything as a whole. And so
I feel like this would be very uh premature to um go ahead and transmit. And I just want to harp on this. It's not just simply sending it there. When we send it there, that means we are saying we think this property is okay to
have um more than 79 homes on. And what that does is when it comes back here, it makes it much harder for us to say we don't agree with the reszone. it makes it much harder because the developer can say, "Well, you guys did say this was
okay for for low density." And so, I just want to make sure that we're very clear on that. Um, I do feel like it is premature. So, I would agree with with Council Member Stokl and Miss Nelson. >> Member Stokel.
>> Yes. Um, I think member Nelson and I have been dealing with this issue for over eight years. Um, so very familiar with it and you guys are no stranger to me looking at this map every time um that we have a land use request before
us and was Michael that brought it up. A very good point that I always try to remember is we need to be very mindful of not spot zoning and looking at one particular piece of property. And so when I look at this and I see it's right in the center of our city, there's a lot of recreational open space conservation
area. Even though we're hearing things about the storm water and where runoff will go, if you start to look west of it, we know from the recent flooding issues, that's where a lot of our flooding issues happened. Um, so that gives me pause and concern. Um,
the other thing is it's hard for me to understand fully. Um, which is why I would want to get more information on while only while they would maintain half of it still open space, that also means the other half would now become impervious pavement. And so, how does
that improve the situation? So, I would want to learn more about that, how that can happen. Uh, the fe simple deed, I tell you, part of me wonders because I was not alive back then. Um what they were thinking though, part of me thinks
that they probably were potentially anticipating this and saying, you know, this area could potentially have issues. Maybe we need to put in some protections to make sure that this area does not flood. Um so looking through that, that also gives me pause. And then I believe
it was Connie that mentioned um and if you look at the proposed development, it is true that eight homes existing backing up to now what's proposed as 18. So, even though the current zoning on this on Royal Oak as it is is R1B, a lot
of the homes, a lot of the lots are much greater than the minimum requirement. Um, so I think to member Nelson's point, I'd want to make sure it's compatible. >> Um, so for those reasons, I would want to move to deny and take some more.
>> Can I ask a favor of all y'all? Can you just wait till we vote and then cheer? So we can conduct the business part of it. Yeah. Cuz we still need to hear. All right. Does anybody have any further questions of staff applicant or anything you heard tonight? Any further discussion from this board? I'm not
seeing any. Then I'll entertain a motion from councel. Member Nelson. I would move to uh direct the staff to conduct a small area study to guide redevelopment of the area and to deny the transmitt of
the comp plan amendment. >> Don't don't cheer yet. >> Getting ahead of yourself. >> I'll second that. >> All right. I have a motion from member Nelson. I have a second from member Mscoso. Uh seeing no further discussion. City clerk.
>> Vice Mayor Cole. Yes. >> Member Stokel. >> Yes. >> Member Muscoso. >> Yes. >> Member Nelson. >> Yes. >> Mayor Connors. >> Yes. Motion carries. Thank you very much. >> I am now calling a 10minute recess. Please exhibit the quorum.
>> City manager. >> Yes, sir. Moving on to 9C, the smallcale amendment application number 7-2025,400 Elizabeth Avenue. Uh Brad will read the ordinances, but first we'll go ahead and and read the rules of quasi judicial
procedure for the second ordinance. >> Okay. During the public hearing portion of the meeting, anyone wishing to speak on quasi judicial item must first sign a public hearing agenda card and sign the oath contained therein. These cards are located at the front of the council
chambers. Those speaking in favor of the request will be heard first. Those opposed will be heard second. and those who wish to make a public comment on the item will speak third. The applicant may make a brief rebuttal if necessary. Witnesses may be cross-examined by the applicant, council, staff,
representatives, and such other representatives as authorized by council. If you have photographs, sketches, or documents that you desire the city council to consider, they must be submitted into evidence and will be retained by the city. City clerk, have
any persons wishing to speak before city council signed an oath? >> Yes. >> Is there anyone present who has not signed an oath card and wishes to speak on a quasi judicial item? If so, please submit your card at this time. City
clerk, have all agenda items been properly advertised? >> Yes. >> Council members, at this time, would you like to make your ex party uh disclosures, please? If any >> none.
>> Okay. Thank you. >> Member >> MSOS. >> None for me as well. I would like to disclose. Can you turn these lights down? My eyes are killing me >> and it's cold in here since we're complaining. >> Yeah. Curtis, can you turn those down a little bit because my eyes are just
fried at this point. Or will you turn down the light? Those lights. Yeah. >> Stage lights. >> Yeah. >> Stage lights. Sorry. Like I literally I'm seeing spots, guys.
>> All right. So, everybody's made their disclosure. No exparte communication. Continue. City attorney. >> All right. City manager. An ordinance of the city of Titusville, Florida, amending the code of ordinances by amending ordinance number 60-1988,
which adopted the comprehensive plan, the city of Titusville, by amending the future land use designation on land located at the northwest corner of Elizabeth Avenue and Queen Street from lowdensity residential to highdensity residential on 3.61 61 plus or minus
acres of property having parcel ID number 22-35-09-02-star-7 providing for sever severability repeal of conflicting ordinances and providing for an effective date and the next ordinance for the reszoning an ordinance amending
ordinance number 5-93 three of the city of Titusville, Florida, by amending the zoning map made a part of said ordinance by reference by changing the zoning classification on land located at the northwest corner of Elizabeth Avenue and Queen Street from the single family
medium density R1B zoning district to the multifamily highdensity residential R3 zoning district on 3.61 61 plus or minus acres of property having parcel ID number 22-35-09-02- star- providing for severability repeal
of conflicting ordinances and providing for an effective date. I'll go ahead and the report. Um the staff report begins on page 1538 of your packet. Again,
this application um is to change the comprehensive plan future land use map by replacing the low density residential future land use designation with the high density residential future land use designation. And then if that ordinance is adopted by council, the next action
would be to consider amending the zoning map. Amending the zoning map by replacing the single family medium density R1B zoning district to the multifamily highdensity R3 zoning district. The staff reviewed this application. We
did found it to be consistent with the comprehensive plan. Uh the reasoning we found out also to be consistent with the code and the comprehensive plan. We recommend approval. We didn't see an issue with the um highdensity residential. Um however, we also looked at the medium density residential land
use category and saw that as probably a better alternative if that is council's desire. It does it does seem a little bit more compatible in that area versus the high density. But again, our from staff's perspective, we did not see an issue with the high density. Also, I did
will point out that at the planning and zoning commission meeting, the applicant I'm sorry, this the planning and zoning commission recommended recommended approval of the amendment to the comprehensive plan future land use map by changing the land use designation
from low density to medium density. Uh the approval was 7 to zero. Commission also recommended approval of the resoning from the single family medium density R1B to the multifamily medium density R2 zoning district instead of the R3 zoning district consistent with
the small scale amendment. Uh the applicant from what I understand at the PNZ meeting stated they were did not they agreed with or okay be okay with the change that the PNZ recommended but they also want to see if there's a possibility that the high their original
request could also be considered. So that is what's being recommended to you from staff's point of view. We did not see an issue with the high density land use category and the R3 zoning. We do see that the medium density and the R2 is probably a little more compatible.
PNZ picked up on that. That's what they recommended. The applicant still wants you to consider their original request. I'll point to you to the maps on page 1570 of your packet. There's an aerial
that shows the property at the north northwest corner of Elizabeth and Queen. And if you'll see, there's a large paper rideway or a public ride ofway that is unimproved within right down the middle of this property, including a pro uh piece there just on
the north side of this property, which is the end of Zerith Avenue. In addition to this request, there's another agenda item following this one that will ask you to consider vacating those uh public rights of way.
In the staff report, there is a table where we um identified what the densities would be in various scenarios and that is on page 1540 of your packet. So the low current
low density residential land use will allow 18 residential units. Uh they're asking for high density. It would allow them to be 54 residential units. We did a concurrency review on that and we believe that it would we didn't see an issue with the concurrency uh as far as
impacting our level of service standards. Uh we also didn't there wasn't a need to uh request for a stat a traffic study if they maxed the property out to that 54 units at the high density residential. Uh the alternative though would be the medium density which would
bring it down to uh or a max of 32 units per acre. But if the second agenda item is approved all that changes in the next column you'll see all those densities changed because now you've got added land to this property with the vacating of the rideway. And so all the densities
here change where if it is medium density that is selected it'll be up to 40 units per acre. And if I'm sorry 40 units total, excuse me, not per acre and then if the high density of course their original request is approved if there's a potential of allowing up to 60 units
66 units. The school district provided a report. They did not see an issue. There was a community meeting that was held on a on a Wednesday morning at 9:00 a.m. There were no one no one attended. >> With that, I'll try and answer any questions you have. We did find this to
be consistent with the comprehensive plan and the uh zoning code criteria. >> Member Stokel. >> Yes. Um, if we were to say that the medium density residential may be more appropriate as transitional land use, would they need to submit another
application or could we do that tonight? >> We didn't believe so. This was advertised at the higher >> level and so bringing it down uh did not necess necessitate us having to readvertise if that's the request. So we evaluated and the other thing reason why
we say that is because we evaluate evaluated both options. >> Okay. >> So it the analysis is part of your staff report. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Vice Mayor >> question. If we approve the first one and we
approve the second one, are we approving the first one without the rightway or does it go back? It seems like the rightway should have been first before this because then if we chose the rightway then we could
there's a different density for the rightway than without the rightway. So h how does that work? How would that work? If we approve this does that approve both of these the density with or without the rightway since we haven't
approved the rightway yet? >> Understood. If you go back to that um table on page 1540. >> Yeah, I'm I'm looking at that. >> Okay. >> Yes. >> So that table, the action tonight on
this particular agenda item right now, assuming you approve the land use amendment and the reasonzoning, both actions will only result in changes you see on the left hand side of that column. So it'll show it'll entitle them to the
lower densities you see here. So for example, uh they're entitled to 18 units total on this property because there's a paper rideway there. If this amendment and the reasoning is changed approved to high density, they'll be entitled up to 54 units.
>> Okay. So >> this can be approved without the rightway being approved first. >> Correct. >> Okay. Gotcha. I'm good. >> Member Stokel. Sorry, one more question. Brad, can you just explain um so the skinnier piece that's right on Elizabeth
to me? I could see you how that how you came to the conclusion of that being high density residential because it's right across. Can you explain the other piece that's larger when it right behind it is low density residential, how that
is compatible or how that made sense? >> Sure. We saw the entire so you see on the east side of Elizabeth you got the high density residential so it's just really an extension of the existing category going across the street it's we
didn't see an issue with that um we believe that the land de development regulations have enough uh performance standards in place to protect the existing single family uh residential uses from any new multifamily that would be put there. So, for example, there's a
20 foot landscape buffer requirement for a new multifamily development, and that we thought was would be a >> Thank you. That's what I was wondering. >> City clerk, there any cards? >> We have one card. Is Tony Shel Tropic Street.
I really don't have a pony in this um parade, but I do want to speak about the process. And in your 20,000page agenda, I'm sure you did not read, although Brad did mention the report about the community meeting
summary. No members of the community were in attendance. We started promptly at 9:00 a.m. and completed our meeting at 10:00 a.m. Not a single resident came to speak about it. I think there's something wrong with the process. We
asked the developers to have meetings. Coulter did in 2024. They had 151 159 people at the first meeting, 151 at the second, they said. And two years later when they had their next meeting,
they only had 80 people. And I heard in that neighborhood the talk was they just keep putting off the meetings hoping that we'll forget. And a lot of people probably did drop from 159 to 80. This this getting a a a notice about a
meeting that something is going to happen in your community in your neighborhood on your street often should bring people out to meetings. But I say that in workingclass neighborhoods, which is the one we're talking about, Elizabeth Street, a
meeting on a Wednesday morning at 9:00 a.m., how many working people can show up? Only retired people with nothing better to do like me can show up at those kinds of meetings. And this very
same group I know now I'm speaking of a pattern because on Friday the 6th, just past Friday, I received a piece of mail that was mailed
Thursday on the 5th about a meeting this morning at 900 a.m. about a piece of property being wanting to be presented to planning and zoning and to council to have the land use changed and the zoning
changed. Friday, I get a notice about a meeting on Tuesday morning at 9:00. Now, how many people do you suppose showed up at that meeting with me? One other person. There's something wrong with the process
that a developer has to have a meeting with the community and they can have a meeting that starts at 9:00 am nobody shows up and at 10 a.m. we completed our meeting. What kind of meeting is that? Please let's have some kind of tooth in
that requirement that they meet with the communities. You see what happens when communities get together? They have opinions. And I'm sorry, Miss Rosinka, opinions are important when you're talking about your community. >> I uh completely agree with your
assessment. And uh I even brought it up when we talked about the um historic building ordinance where we're talking about making laws that affect people's properties, you got to notify them. You know, you got to have that conversation. So again, I brought it up at the what
two meetings ago we had this discussion. So, I I'm completely in favor of us, you know, looking at those rules to make sure that there's certain parameters. You have to notify people x amount of time. >> I know I'm talking. You had your chance. Thank you. Let me let me Hey, I have not
talked early at all all night. >> Excuse me, sir. >> Please have a seat. Time's done. >> All right. Is there any other cards? >> All right. Have a motion from council. If there's not any, there's discussion. Member Nelson.
>> Move to approve ordinance number four-2026, which uh changes the land use the comp plan future land use map from low density residential to medium density residential. >> Second.
>> I have a motion and I have a second. Any further discussion from this board? Seeing none, city clerk. >> Member Stokel, >> yes. >> Member Moscoso, >> yes. >> Member Nelson, >> yes. >> Mayor Connors, >> yes. >> Vice Mayor Cole, >> yes.
>> I have a motion. >> And I would move to approve the zoning or the reszoning from single family medium density to multifamily medium density.
Second. I have a motion from member Nelson, second from member Stokal. Any further discussion? Seeing none, city clerk, >> member Muscosao, >> yes. >> Member Nelson, >> yes. >> Mayor Connors, >> yes. >> Vice Mayor Cole, >> yes. >> Member Stokel, >> yes. >> Motion carries. Thank you very much.
City Manager, sir. Moving on to 9D, the ride ofway vacate number 4-2025 Zerth Avenue and Yale Street. And this is the conduct a public hearing and consider resolution number 3-2026
vacating abandoning and discontinuing certain rights of way for Yale Street and a portion of Zerth Avenue. Thank you. City clerk. Are there any cards? >> Yes. So we have Joshua Wilson. My girlfriend's not too happy that I do look like this.
>> Anyway, members of the council, mayor, thank you for having us. I just wanted to speak to um the medium density versus high density. I think that Brad might have gotten some information from one of his senior planners that pertained to a different project where we were seeking
to still go after the high density residential. It's a much smaller single infill lot. For this one, we were completely um fine with the medium density. Uh we wanted to, you know, maintain that boundary and respect the residential community to the west. Um
and the development goal here is to, you know, bring accessible housing. And we're thinking about it not just from a uh how can we make money, but we also thinking about the end users. And what I mean by that is I don't know if you're familiar with the Fox Hollow development
that recently was completed. They had a slew of quadriplexes. I want to say like four or five. Um their plan was for two ones. Our plan is for two twos and three twos. And we believe that you know that additional bathroom will help to remove
some friction in uh times where you know members of our community need to subleasase their places and need to you know bring in family members to care for them. And so we're thinking about end users with the products that we're trying to deliver. Um, and I just wanted to share a little bit of the insight
into the thinking behind uh what we're proposing to do with with this site. >> Thank you very much. >> My pleasure. Thank you. >> Any other cards? Mr. Clerk. >> All right, >> member Nelson.
>> Move to uh approve resolution number three-2026 vacating, abandoning, and discontinuing the rightway. Second. >> Oh, wait a minute. >> No. >> With the an easement to be provided for the existing water stabout within the
Zer Avenue right away. >> Second. >> Did she get that right? I mean, my brain's right, so I can't >> She got it. That's correct. >> Okay. >> Wow. >> All right. Again, brain's fried, so I was just making sure we're good. I have a motion by member Nelson, second by
Vice Mayor Cole. Uh, city clerk. >> Member Nelson. >> Yes. Mayor Connors, >> yes. >> Vice Mayor Cole, >> yes. >> Member Stokel, >> yes. >> Member Muscoso, >> yes. >> Motion carries. Thank you very much. City Manager, sir, we have no ordinances first reading, so move on to old
business. And 11A is the community development block grant and home investment partnership programs for FY 2627 funding recommendations. And our neighborhood services director, Terry Franklin, is here to explain her staff's recommendations for allocating
these funds. >> Good evening. >> It's late. I know. Um so um you have uh the report before you which provides uh information on the process of the review of the RFPs that
our department received. Uh those RFPs have been analyzed and evaluated by staff. Um the following we I just wanted to go over the criteria of review of the RFP real quick. Um,
the CDBG requires that the programs funded with CDBG have to benefit low or moderate income persons. We also reviewed to make sure the activity uh needs and justification met the CDBG
program cost reasonleness and effectiveness. activity management and implementation by the agencies experience and past performance matching contributions. We also uh looked at duplication of
services. We heard that from the uh first meeting uh and the alignment with our consolidated plan strategic goals and objectives and of course application completeness. Just to summarize uh the tasks that were
involved in the process, um we did issue the RFP on uh September 4th, that RFP did identify uh 42,000 and estimated funds being available. We held a
technical workshop for all applicants on September 26th, which was mandatory for new applicants. Four of the six applicants did attend that technical workshop. We received a total of seven proposals.
Four were recommending funding for four of those proposals in your packet this evening. Uh three we were unable to recommend funding for for various uh criteria reasons and CDBG eligibility
issues and limited funding. The RFPs went through a three-step review process that includes an initial review for completeness, a formal review for compliance and recommendations and then a final
concurrency uh among staff. The process provided independent reviews by staff and a collective recommendation for funding. Each agency provided a presentation to city council if you recall that back in December in addition
to the formal review. Um staff used information from both of those sources, the presentation meeting and the RFP process. During the review where questions arose, uh staff did inquire with each applicant
for clarifications and additional information. We did have a little bit of a challenge this year during the RFP review process. Um, federal executive orders were issued uh, which required us to obtain
additional information from each applicant and an addendum to the RFP was issued as a result of those executive orders. Inquiries were made at two uh intervals of the RFP review process with each
agency concerning the limited amount of funding that the city had available and the minimum amount of need for their programs so that they were successful. Each applicant was notified of the funding recommendations being made at this meeting and was given guidance for
future application opportunities where uh funding could not be recommended. Um some of the challenges that we find through this process is not all agency programs align with CDBG.
Um there are internal policies and goals that agencies have that sometimes conflict with CDBG regulations and adjustments are just not always possible at their level. We do provide annual training to prospective recipients to
ensure programs are successful once they receive funding or potential funding in the future. Um, with that, if you have any questions, I'll be glad to answer them. >> City clerk, any cards?
>> Council, no questions. Um, personally, I think it's tough to see some of these dollars just the appearance of leaving Titusville. You know, don't get me wrong, like there's a lot of great agencies that
serve population in Titusville, but, you know, it's a perception, you know, we're allowing some of our CDBG funds to escape. Um, I was looking at the funding reduction request communications and I really kind of wish uh North Broad
Charities could have made it work for a less of an amount uh because you know I think that's an important nonprofit to support that is in Titusville headquartered here serving people here and especially that target population. So, um, those are just kind of my thoughts, council, as we kind of work
through this. And I know everybody's brains are fried, but, um, you know, I really would like to see if there is a nonprofit that can do it in Titusville, us support them. Member Nelson, >> I think Terry did a great job
uh, of sorting this out. And, um, that's how it goes. Yeah. Sorry. Sorry, mayor. Um, >> member Stoke, there's other discussion points. So, before you make a motion, member Stokal. >> Yes. Um, in my briefing when I first saw
that we weren't giving to all, um, I was like, what do you mean? And I started digging and upon getting more information, it looked like the ones that we aren't were also missing some information. And so I think to your point I I think the ones that we are not awarding I just would like to stress the
importance of certain criteria that they need to submit with their packet and then also with whatever they're funding um I think if it seems like hey we are requesting x amount of dollars for this one item and if we don't get the full amount we cannot do the project there's
no way we can fund partially and so we need to make it clear that whatever they're requesting um could they potentially be okay with lessening that amount and like use that money towards that. So, I think to the mayor's point, I I personally was disappointed to see that we were not able to give money to
North Charities as well. So, that would be my only thing. I think the recommendations uh you did do a good job on analyzing it and making sure they meet criteria. I think that I just want us to be able to help the nonprofits in our community. Um, and also to add to
that, and I needed to do more work on this specifically, I would love to see Fighting Edge get funds and LifePoint Ministries get funds for the things that they're doing as well, but I know there might be some challenges with completing the application and meeting criteria, but I probably need to work on that
personally. >> Thank you, member So. So, you know, kind of my point, right? We have great nonprofits in town. We got to help kind of encourage them along the way. >> All right. Now, I'll entertain a motion. Okay. Can I say I agree with you guys.
However, when an agency says um giving us part of the funds, we won't be able to do the project. >> Yeah, we going to do >> or you take funds from everybody else and give it to one group. That makes it
hard. So, >> I still think Terry did a great job. >> Yep. So my motion would be to approve the funding recommendations for the 2627 CDBG and home grant programs.
>> Second. >> I have a motion by member Nelson. Second by Vice Mayor Cole. City clerk. >> Mayor Connors. >> Yes. >> Vice Mayor Cole. >> Yes. >> Member Stokel. >> Yes. >> Member Moscoso. >> Yes. >> Member Nelson. >> Yes. >> Motion carries. Thank you very much. And
thank you for staying until past 11. >> How much did you get? A million. >> You get a million, right? >> Yeah. >> All right. Uh, thank you, Miss Franklin. Thank you, Mr. Parish. City Manager. >> Yes, sir. Uh, item 11B is the structural
and feasibility review of the police hall of fame. And this item is a followup to last meeting's financial report on potential acquisition of the police hall of fame. And Kevin Cook will give a short presentation which um
summarizes the 700 pages of documents in your package and his slides are considerably shorter. >> All right. So, as Tom requested, we'll make it short. Uh just going to go through a couple items of uh kind of highlighting the report. A lot of that report is
structural calculations that may interest Mr. Cole but no one else. >> Thanks Kevin. >> You're welcome. >> Introduction. The police hall of fame is a 52,000t building. It's 6350 Horizon Drive a little over 5 acres and
comprises 146 existing parking spaces. So, the consultant looked at three options uh to try to fit what we previously sized at 68,000 square feet uh the previous uh application of the public safety complex within the uh
footprint of the site and the existing building. Option A, adding a 16,000 foot addition to the building. Option B, essentially fitting in the existing building. And option C adding 21,000 square feet to the existing building. Just to go back in time a little bit,
this was the uh conceptual layout of the public safety complex main building which was uh considered to be the police and fire headquarters. Um the other two buildings on the site were logistics and a additional fire station when they were all going to be colllocated together.
Um, option A took the existing footprint of the building, uh, kept one lane of the, uh, firing range, added 16,000 square ft to the west, and I think laid everything except for code enforcement into the same building and and no fire
services within the building. Option B stayed within the confines of the building, took both lanes of the gun range out to make room for uh needs of the police department and consolidate everything within the 50,000 square footprint of the existing building. In
option C, the more most robust, added 21,000 foot to the existing, maintain both uh lanes of the gun range for use, and expanded the building to the west. Uh, one of the big issues with the site was parking considerations. Uh, only the
original complex needed 312 parking spaces to serve the community, PD staff, and stored vehicles, which would necessitate about 146 additional spaces at this site. There are the possibility of some additional land to the west that
the hotel is reserving additional room for to facilitate additional parking if needed. And then the big lift was the structural condition review. Uh the designer went through three iterations of review. Uh first being Florida building code raising it to risk category 4. Second
iteration is raising it to hurricane shelter standard was ICC standard. And the third option go to tornado shelter standards. Uh, design option two was selected under Florida building code 423 requiring anyone housing a 911 call center and USC must be designed to
hurricane shelters which significantly raised the structural needs of the building. >> Yes, vice mayor's not. When you said hurricane conditions, you know, when we discussed it before,
we talked about 170 m an hour. I We won't have 170 mph hurricane here. I mean, I I don't even know if there have ever been one that's 170 m an hour. >> Probably not. But the category 4 risk for that site is 167, like 167 and a
half. Um >> Oh, 167 and a half. Okay. Maybe we've had some of those. So that was the I did look at the the hurricane mapping and the wind load. >> Yeah. >> So >> so that's what option two is to design that roof >> and that total building to withstand
winds of 170 mph. You know when we had hurricane Floyd and all had all four shuttles at uh Kennedy Space Center the >> the buildings could only withstand winds of 110 120. Now, that was back in the
2000s, but that just seems pretty high. >> Yeah. And that is a challenge with the existing building. It was designed for 120 today. So, that's if you follow through. This is I'm not going to read all these. This is structural conditions. A lot of strengthening of
structural members, the roof seams, most of the steel framing all had to be strengthened to bring it up to that wind load. Um and then uh kind of the next key piece is a rough order of magnitude uh estimate. They did compare uh the
full footprint versus a renovation cost. We kind of went through this. This is just slide kind of demonstrating that this is a class five estimate considered conceptual in nature which is why we gave a negative 20 to plus 50% range. that estimate would refine as the system
went forward uh to full project design and into construction. But this is kind of a summary what we provided previously with the with our bond consultant was to talk about a new build option versus the renovation option. The low-end 640 versus you know
we get a 33 million for renovation plus 66 million for a new complex sitting on vacant land. And the 33 million is exclusive of the acquisition cost. So um again I won't read all this to you
but this is a summary of a procon that the consultant went through. Um couple advantages you very few windows which facilitates an EOC. Uh it is already sprinklered with a riser and it is available. So that was within their pros.
Again we'll run through the cons. There were some cons related to the gun range uh needing to be inspected, needing to be upgraded, concerns with site security, PD needing a very secure site. That building does have accessibility on many sides of it today.
Um then just again a summary of financial an financial analysis from previously debt service ranged from a little less than 3 million to a little over 4 million just to put that in perspective. That's about 13% of our current advorum budget to 20% of our advorum or a little less than 5% of the
entire general fund to 7.5% of the general fund in today's numbers. Um some alternatives that we kind of presented last time too to renovate the existing PD continue effort for a new PD building uh coming to we've added exploring a private partnership uh to build and then
lease back to the city which takes away the capital costs to the city but does extend a lease and then um some options to use the proceeds if we were to sell the existing uh Title Police facility. Be happy to answer any questions.
>> Thank you, Mr. Cook. Um something I I would like to say I think in this what fiscal market if you want to say as a government not knowing our future revenues I think it' be ill advised of us take on this level of debt at this moment. I I do think it's still a
worthwhile exercise to uh maybe explore some uh public private partnerships uh so that we we don't have debt but you know the analysis needs to come back. What were we paying in maintenance? what are these um loss of efficiencies that that we're experiencing probably in
electric because these windows are old or just all the the the regular maintenance and daytoday I think needs to kind of come into um account and us kind of just continue to explore the process as we look at as member MCO brought up the last meeting city hall
fire police I mean they're all kind of long overdue but uh I think the debt is kind of where I'm stopping that. >> MSOS. >> Yeah. Um, so this study, did you say we spent 30,000 instead of the 150 we had
aotted? Wasn't that I felt like >> Yeah, it was like 335 I think was the final amount. >> Okay. So, and we had talked about spending up to what 150 >> had a budget allocated, but yeah, but it only cost 33. I'm following Pompei as
kind of going through something similar. And um what they're doing, as much as I don't like to do a ton of studies, this could be something we look into is they're they just spent 78,000 to do a they have a contract. I'm just going to read it off with the Center for Public
Safety to conduct a comprehensive staff studying. Um and so what it does is it analyzes call volume, patrol deployment, minimal staffing, all of these things. and it does the staff studying. With the staff study, it determines how many people the department needs today and
the future and also the space that needs that they need and it calculates how much building those people require, which I thought was interesting. And one of the quotes from that meeting, the guy said, you know, every square foot in law enforcement facility has a dollar signed
attached to it. And so I think um we have to be very mindful of what do we actually need. So, we might not be in the position right now to purchase this building, but perhaps we we start with a study to see what do we actually need if we are going to build or if we're going
to renovate um what does that what does that look like? And so I just think that could be an option as well if we don't want to shut the project down completely and we want to move forward with knowing perhaps we use some of the funds that we had allocated for this for a study or at least just explore the option of what
that would what that would look like. >> Thank you vice mayor. you know, in listening to the mayor and uh member Mscoso, you know, I don't think we're ever, and I'm talking about future,
between city hall and the and the police, that's like 120 $130 million. I mean, I think we're going to continue to kick the can down the road. And I and I understand why we we we don't want to incur that kind of debt, but
Mayor Connor has made a good point. I and I don't know how many citiz the public private things. I know we did it uh we parish medical center did it at Titus Landing because we lease the
building at Titus Landing. Uh I know we need these things and I I just I mean I can't see us spending this kind of money really. >> Well, I can tell you that uh um that is a growing trend among municipalities and
counties that just the high initial capital hurdle is too much for many cities to absorb. So they look at having a third party come in, design, build a facility, and then lease it back to the
the entity for a longer period of time, 99 years or whatever. And that way you spread out the uh the debt. So that's that's becoming an option. And if council desires, we could have someone come in and do a anformational of what
that would look like. >> Thank you very much. Uh, Pal Bay also had the idea to sell their water utility the last meeting. So, that was a fun conversation. They were going to privatize it. Well, >> uh, they were thinking about exploring it. But, member Nelson,
>> um, I like the idea. I'd love to have more information, but just as a sort of aside, there are 7.42 acres where Wild Ocean is right next to the sheriff's department.
Uh it is for sale >> 2.5 million and of course the strip mall is separate but the two acres or two parcels together is basically 7 and a half acres
and to me it would be cool to have our police right in the center of town where they were accessible all the way around. It wasn't like they're way down on the
south end of town. Something happens on the north end where they have to travel. So, I don't know what the cost would be for a new building. Although, looking in here,
I don't know if I can count that high. But maybe doing looking at something like that with a public private partnership might be good. >> You that would to me that would
sort of uplift that whole area. You've got the school there and I think they sold the West Spring Hill school for a million. >> Um and that was 15 acres. We reszoned it.
>> Yeah. >> Yeah, we did. >> It's community commercial now. >> Yeah. But I mean, that would be a beautiful parcel. Again, you're right in the middle of town. You're uplifting a low income area helping it out.
Um maybe providing jobs in that area. So, I would rather see us do something like that than go way down to the south end of town. >> Thank you, Member Nelson. Member Stokel. >> Yes. Um, no, I agree with everything
everyone said. I think for me, before we spend any more funds, I'd almost like to go back a little bit and maybe revisit the idea of the industrial engineer or consultant to come in and help us see where we can become more efficient. our council retreat where we as a board
identify priorities and then we can set realistic timelines and goals for okay you know aging city hall we have the oldest city hall in the county what does our public safety complex what would that look like to Megan's point what how many how many people do we need to house
there and how big does it need to be um and just and then storm water what we keep talking about making sure like so >> for me before I we spend money I'd like to kind prioritize things and then set some realistic dates and timelines of okay, this is when we're going to focus on
this and this is what a budget could look like. This is where we'll ask for state appropriations which we could potentially get matching grants, private public partnerships. Um, including in that looking at all surrounding city property that not that we own, but that comes up because I did not know about
Wild Ocean in that property and just kind of thinking through and seeing can we take inventory of potential vacant land. Um, but those are a lot of things that we would need to and that that's what I'm hoping in our council retreat we can start to kind of work through this and see how can we prioritize as a
board. >> City manager, is there um there state statute that dictates how many police officers we need? >> Um, I'm not sure if it's state statute. I know there's concurrency requirements for the number of sworn officers. Yeah,
>> I think a lot of that dictates our staffing level in the same >> I know we're below that what we I think we want 2.4 and we're at like 2.1 per thousand. >> Okay. >> So, I mean a lot of it's kind of driven above our purview, so to speak, but you know, the facility is kind of within our
control. Member Nelson, >> I was going to say there's one other piece of property that the city owns and is over by Yeah. Why are you shaking your head? >> Why are you shaking your head? >> Because there's a better use for that property. >> Which property?
>> How do you know which property? >> How do you know which one? >> I'm reading minds. Reading minds. >> Okay. It's next to Stan Johnson property. >> No, no, you're right. I was wrong. I was 100% wrong. >> Yeah. And what is that? 15 acres.
>> But it's all wetlands, isn't it? >> Is it all wetlands? >> Yeah. Most of Stan's property is wetlands. No, our part that is our part. >> No, the whole back end is wetlands. The front ends is the storage for storm water. >> Okay.
>> Okay. We'll skip that idea. >> All right. Um, does anybody want to make a motion to give any staff direction or we just kind of putting it aside for right now? Member Nelson, >> I think every consensus is we're putting it to the side. >> All right. Well, then no motion is
really required. If we're not providing any direction, then it just kind of dies. So, we all good? >> Good. >> All good. >> All right. We'll we'll discuss more. Thank you very much for your >> willingness to read the seven 800 pages and break it down for us.
Um, city manager. >> The next item is uh new business 12A, discussion of the city internal order based on a request from council at an earlier meeting. Um, there's two attachments. One is a memo from the city
attorney. And the other is uh a memo from the current internal auditor who is describing responsibilities and and what she does in her day-to-day job. She's not here this evening. However, she has offered at council's desire to meet
one-on-one with each one of you to go over her duties, responsibilities, and maybe get some insight as to what she does as internal order. >> Thank you very much. Say clear, there any cards on this matter? >> Yes, sir. >> All right. Um, member Nelson, I I'll
call on you, but I just kind of want to kick it off since this is kind of an item I brought up. Um, you know, again, I think it's very important that we kind of have that checks and balances in government and that, you know, the internal auditor kind of report to the board. With that being said, the internal auditor needs to retain their
autonomy to do what they need to do. Um so that's where my recommendation I don't know if you guys remember back to the September meeting during budget is uh we should uh basically have one person uh kind of be that liaison between of us be the liaison between the
internal auditor and the the board so that they can make the reports too. let's just use the vice mayor as placeholder because let's be honest there's no real responsibilities and uh then that person just like you know report back to the the board so that this person's not inundated uh with
you know things I'm not saying that we can't talk to them it's just create that process um so that there's you know definitely a system there um and then I would also say that um no member of council will be able to direct internal
audit investigation unless they have the consent of counsel I think is very very critical um because this is something that again needs to be um impartial and let them do what they need to do on a day in basis but it is important that we
are kept in the loop as what's going on what the findings are and what is happening so that we know how to um conduct ourselves from a policy standpoint to make sure that um the city's taxpayer funds are are used accordingly and appropriately um with
that. So, member Nelson. >> Okay. I would like to kick this >> because >> can well because it is 11:35 and we're only safe until midnight.
>> So, and it would give us a chance to sit down and talk to our auditor. >> Okay. >> And find out exactly what she does. >> Okay. and then actually have a serious discussion on it instead of trying to do
this at midnight. >> I completely agree. Um, you know, I think it's an important thing that we needed to to to bring up and discuss. Um, member Stokl. >> Yeah, that's what I was going to say. I'd like time to discuss and have a one-on-one with our city internal
auditor and then maybe we can revisit this at another meeting. >> Yeah. And because we can't talk any any other time, I was just letting you know my thoughts on it because clearly I've been thinking about it for a while. Member Mscoso. >> Yeah. And last night at um League of
Cities, I spoke with our former interimm city attorney, Jim Stokes, and I spoke to him about this a little bit, and he he was going to email me a document. I can't remember which city it was, but he said it's the best practice that he's seen. And so I'd really like to get that as well and and get that distributed.
And then we talked to the internal auditor just to get some different ideas. >> All right. Do you want a motion to >> So my postponed? >> Okay.
>> So I would move to postpone this item. >> Second. >> I was going to >> Oh, but she was looking at her. You were you were saying postpone uh February 24th. >> Does that give everybody enough time?
>> All right. >> Second >> motion by member Nelson, second by Vice Mayor Cole. I already called the cards. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Any opposed? Motion carries. Thank you very much. Right. No repetitions or requests from the public. Present.
Non-aggenda items. >> None. All right. Thank you very much. Uh mayor and council's reports. I'm gonna pass on my report. Um, and I hope council will will do that as well. Um,
>> okay. Thank you very much. City manager, your report, >> sir. Unfortunately, my computer has data, but I do have the city manage report memorized. So, um, there's two action items. The first is um, selecting
dates for the budget workshop and the public hearings. I believe for the for the budget workshop I have the August 4th and August 18th and um our finance manager um indicated that if at all possible the primary date will be better
because it's earlier in the month and if there's a a need for a second workshop we can schedule one um before the public hearing. So, but both dates would work, but they would prefer to have it earlier in the month in case you'd need another workshop to clarify anything. And then
the other the second for the first hearing, um I know that there's no leeway because there's a conflict with the county and um the school board. So, that date is kind of set in stone. And the last two, I think, are 21st and
23rd. Um, those two dates would be at council's desire. Either one would work. >> All right. Um, typically we do these on Wednesday. So, I think if we go Tuesday for the first one, the fourth, I mean,
it doesn't matter if it's 4th or 18th in my opinion. But, if we're doing a Wednesday for the first public hearing, I think it' be makes sense to do a Wednesday for the second public hearing. Um, but again, hopefully everybody's checking their calendars. Any other opinions? Sorry. Um, I go to school on
Wednesday nights, so I can't. But if we did one, if I can miss one night of school, so I can miss one Wednesday. >> You're very smart. >> Yeah, I'm very smart. >> I'm okay with any of the dates. >> Okay. >> Can Can we repeat the dates again? I'm sorry.
>> So, for the first one, it's August 4th or August 18th at 5:00 p.m. They're both a Tuesday. >> I would say August 18th. I think that is the primary election night. Um, >> so let's do the fourth. >> Yeah. >> Then the first public hearing of the
9th. We're kind of locked in on that Wednesday. >> Yep. >> So September 9th for that and then to accommodate member Mscos. Is everybody good with September 21st, the Monday? >> Yes. >> Okay. It seems like we're all in
agreement. So the 4th, the 9th, and the 21st. Correct. >> So the next action item is to go ahead and implement a summer recess, which traditionally you've done for eons. And
that would give you a break from June 10th to July 13th. And that coincides with the county summer recess. >> I'll make that motion. >> I'll select >> out there. I have a motion. I have a second um for
the summer recess. Um any public comment on this item? Where's Mr. Johnson when you need them? >> Huh? >> What' you say? >> Okay. >> And just three more. Uh >> hold on. Hold on. We didn't take the vote yet.
>> All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Any opposed? Motion carries. Thank you very much. I do have three more uhformational items. One, there's a community care resource fair on the 19th of February in the flyer um details the various
services and food truck and um it's a good opportunity for information to get about services available through the Harry T. Moore Center. The second item is the draft request for the RFP for the health employee health benefits advisor. And what we're doing is we'd like to put
that out there for council and then I would get feedback from mayor and council and we would incorporate it into the final RFP for your approval. But I wanted to get a draft out there for council to come back potentially the next next meeting um and with your
input. And the last item is just the last one of the last uh surveys for the flash vote on public trees. And that's my report. Thank you very much, city manager. Did anybody read the RFP for benefits consulting?
>> I'm deferring to you, Mayor Connors. >> What I thought was interesting, it was a request for proposal for employee benefit and HR consulting. And I thought that was kind of interesting because, you know, I operate within my scope of practice as a benefits broker, right, as
an insurance agent, but I have no really scope of practice to give HR advice. Uh, so I think that was kind of an overlap that needs to be corrected. Uh, but there was a lot of things that I think that um it seemed to be intentionally written
for the incumbent to win. Uh, because if you look at the scoring analytics, because I know Joe's not here for me to ask him these questions, so I'm just going to say these things out loud. Um on page uh whatever page this is I don't have
page numbers. Understanding the scope and technical approach 30% points. That's pretty arbitrary. Uh experience with public sector benefit program 25 points. 25%. Qualifications of assigned
staff 15%. analytical compliance and risk management capabilities 15%. Cost and price transparency 15%. So for me the question is is just because you have experience in the
public sector doesn't inherently make that you're good at what you do. It just means you have experience in the public sector. Because what happens is the first question on here was uh give us in the last 5 years all the public sector
clients you worked with. Okay. Public sector clients across this entire county are hemorrhaging money on their benefits plan. So why would we want to hire somebody that's given bad advice somewhere else and bring them on to us?
>> Does that does that make sense to everybody? what would you experience? >> So I think a higher um concentration needs to be on analytical compliance and risk management. A track record of saving plans money and delivering high
results um to the members because when you have it set up like this it's going to be one digital locked in Garing Gber Gallagher. They're going to win because the whole RFP was crafted on the firm as a whole. Well, the firm as a whole, these massive brokerages of course have public sector
clients all across the world and they can go look at all these things that we do and but at the end of the day, who are they assigning this case to? Maybe somebody way down there, right? So, a a big thing that I think is important is to ask very specific questions on, you
know, are you a broker, are you consultant, are you adviser? You know, you can kind of start off with these type of questions as to the the mindset and the ideology. I think having a health Rosetta certification is critical. This is something that I don't even have. >> What is it?
>> It's it's a higher form of education in terms of the philosophy of being self-funded. So for information, we are a self-funded plan, right? >> It is a city's money partially insured. That that's not a real thing. All right? So for all intents and purposes for Orisa, we are full or self-insured. So,
we got to have people that really really specialize in being self-insured, not fully insured or or these kind of, you know, crazy strategies. And what I thought was even the most crazy is the whole last week's presentation was about
pharmacy, right? Not one question in here about pharmacy. That's where the biggest meat on this bone is is in terms of pharmacy and making sure that we're driving effective cost reductions not only for our plan but for our our our
employees. Good example, I took a uh my wife's previous employer um had a prescription that was like $40 a month for me. No big deal, but you know, you pay it. Now that she works at parish,
we go to the local pharmacy in Parish. I give the same prescription for $4. That's the kind of results that you're looking at trying to drive for the members, but it's also a cost savings for the plan. And nowhere in here does it talk about steerage
because there's a lot of uh references to high performance network, but nobody really defines what that is. And you don't want a high performance network. You want a high performance plan, right? Because that's our money as a city. Is that plan using its dollars cost
effectively to you know make good purchases uh steer the employee to the best doctors at the best results for the best price and that can be done. >> How would how would you change the evaluation criteria? Well, I would put
an an incredible amount of um weight on experience and past performance mechanisms, not in the public sector. >> And the private sector is where you're seeing uh needles being moved because remember when um One Digital came before
us a year ago, you know, they were $3 million over a budget at the county level and all they did to fix it was they raised the budget. If you did that in the private sector, you'd be fired. So, but as a number six, >> I'm looking at evaluation criteria.
>> Yeah. So, number six would be track record of results um reversing the trend. >> Okay. >> That's what I want to see because if you're losing money year-over-year or costs keep going up and up and up, what are you doing? What track records do you have to
take a pivot and go 180 with it? >> So, maybe that should be And that should be the 30 30 points. >> I mean, I'm I'm definitely uh you know, >> I'm sorry.
>> So maybe that should be number one and the other criteria should slip down and that should be the 30%. >> Yeah, I'm definitely fine with that being the 30%. I think the public sector benefits needs to kind of come out of
there personally. Um, and if it doesn't come out of there, then I think we need to compare like to like. And what I mean by that is if you've worked with the municipal government within say 50 miles, then you should provide a per member per month total plan spend
year-over-year for the last five years. So we can see your trend. you know, if you say you work with um you know, Bvard County or BPS or Coco and you know, if you're going to get credit for that as I work with public sector, but you're hemorrhaging money while you do that, I think there should be a ding against
you. >> Does that make sense? >> No, it makes sense. So, we want to wait that more, those two more. So, maybe
those are 20% each. Does that make sense? >> So I think track record of re track record of results of reducing the trend should be top. I think um qualifications analytical compliance risk management
capabilities with that health Rosetta component should be like number two. >> Does that make sense? >> Yes. >> Okay. So, >> and then experience with public sector. >> I'm sorry. I want to read after yours. >> It's easy. >> Yeah. Mayor, I was going to ask, do you
have a proposed percentage for each area that we can just think? >> No, I I didn't come up with a proposed percentage. What I did was I come up with a list of questions one should ask when hiring a benefits broker. >> That's fair. So you're talking about
analytical compliance risk management capabilities right with the Rosetta >> with the yeah experience and you know this together not necessarily experience with public sector but just experience analytical compliance and you know or
sorry technical qualifications uh with this these two kind of go together with the health Rosetta sorry I I jumbled that up my my work >> so experience with >> public sector is fine but they got to provide the data to back it up. >> Experience with benefits program,
>> analytical compliance and risk managing capabilities >> with qualifications. >> So you're actually combining all three. >> No, I I accidentally bumbled this with that. So I apologize. So number one
should be track again it's late. This is the problem with late track record of results. uh reversing the trend should be number one. Um number two should be qualifications of assigned staff, analytical, compliance, risk management capabilities. >> Okay,
>> so these two combined. >> Hold on. So we're doing track record for number one. >> Yes. >> Correct. >> What? Can everybody hear our conversation? >> Okay. >> Okay. I put track record as number one. >> Yes.
>> Okay. Number two, you're talking about what? >> Qualifications of assigned staff. >> Qualifications of assigned staff. Okay. >> And then that includes the health Rosetta. I'm trying to get somebody
that's better than me. Okay. Because I'm not qualified to do this, but I know how to judge who is qualified. >> That's fair. >> Okay. So, you're talking about those two. >> And then three would be >> analytical.
>> Analytical. Yeah. And then did you want to do cost and price next or experience with benefit programs? >> I think exper experience with benefit programs. I I think cost and price kind of are my 5%. >> Okay.
>> Because um again, you're willing to pay a little bit more if you're getting a little bit more bang for your buck, >> right? in terms of advice and I've even seen a lot of um municipalities and not necessarily municipalities but larger companies they pay a fixed fee to their
their broker that's kind of low year-over-year and then they also then incentivize them with a cost of savings and I think that's important to think about so that everybody's aligned on the same vision that we're trying to drive down costs we're trying to provide more efficient effective services um so
there's different ways to slight comp or to slice up compensation uh so that we get somebody that's willing to do the job at the >> What about understanding scope and technical approach? That one was the highest percentage. >> Okay. >> Understanding what their job is.
>> I'm asking >> I mean I really hope that's not a question. >> Okay. >> It's like if you hired a lawyer, hey, do you know what you're you're supposed to be doing? >> Do you know which way to the statute book? Okay. number over five then would
be track record of results. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> So do we have a number five? >> I think we have five if we include the cost and price transparency out of 5% and then we remove the understanding of scope and technical approach. We have
five listed there and then I think we just need to determine percentages. But let me just now where did you incorporate the portion that >> they should have experience working with self-funded
>> I think that's with the experience that's with >> and we just took out public sector so we made it more broad >> okay I'm good >> because there's a lot of I mean you could have a hundred employees uh enrolled in your health plan and be self-insured >> so
>> so is it more okay we got 5% for costs, >> price, transparency. >> Okay. And you said the track record was most important, correct? So 25%.
>> I'd say make it 30. >> I'd say yeah, probably at least 30. >> Okay. Qualification or >> that was number two. >> Staff >> 25. Well, let's try 25 and then we'll
see what percentages we get at once we >> So, right now we've allocated out 60%. So, that leaves us with 40% more. So, analytical and experience 20% each.
>> I hope you can read this. >> Oh, yeah. Yeah. Yeah. 20% each. Well, no, we got number five still. >> That's 5%. >> 5%. Yeah. >> So, this is what we currently have to amend. Track record 30%, qualifications
25%, analytical compliance 20%, experience with benefits programs 20%, cost and price transparency 5%. >> Is that a motion >> for I'm okay with it and this is again not my area of expertise. I do want to
make sure we get the best for our city. So >> before you make a motion, I would also hope to include uh questions uh that I have written up here about uh high performance components of a high performance plan so that we get real
time uh data on okay have you done this like uh transparent advisor relationship high performance plan design docs risk management uh independent active administration oversight valuebased primary care and patient stewardship uh transparent open networks, direct
contracts, and reference based pricing. Uh, major specialties and outlier patients. Uh, >> this is a questionnaire you would want included for the applicants to fill out with the RFP. >> Yes. So, I have a list of questions that I think make a lot of sense um in terms
of how we do this. So, again, we kind of ironed out like the rankings, but you know, how do you get to those rankings? I would make that motion the questions, right? >> The second. >> Again, I apologize. My my brain's f It's okay. I I I think that we all know that
this is your area of expertise and it is not for most of us. So, um it looks like you're still sticking to the same core criteria. We edited the the percentages and I think that if you have questions from your experience, we can definitely include that with the RFP. So, that
would be my motion. Uh just to reiterate for the record, track record 30% qualifications >> 25% analytical and compliance 28% experience with benefits program 20% cost and price transparency 5%. >> Second.
>> Megan says she third. Um >> any comments? >> You have three minutes. >> Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. All right. No cards on the matter. I'm assuming y'all don't want to say anything. Uh all those in favor say I. I. >> Any opposed? Motion carries unanimously. Thank you very much. Appreciate you
guys' time. I think we accomplished a lot in the last, you know, hour and 30 minutes or whatever we had to get things done. Uh, but still a lot more work to do and I appreciate all the citizens that were here tonight. City attorney, you're on the agenda, but I don't think you have anything. Am I correct?
>> Awesome. Very much. Member Nelson, make your favorite motion. >> Yes. Let's get out of here. >> Yes.