[Music] [Music] i [Music] feel hey
[Music] good evening everybody here to call this meeting to order of our regular meeting city council April 8th 2025 at 6:30 p.m thank you so much for all you guys being
here and next up we're going to have the invocation if uh Pastor Jeremy can come come up and give us his blessing thank you let's pray dear God in heaven thank you so much for the privilege that we have to be here together tonight i thank you Father for access that we have
to you now because of your son Jesus lord I thank you for these honorable men and women and the work that they do lord they've come together tonight to do your business i pray that there would be peace in this room i would pray that that Lord that there would be harmony in hearts and I pray dear God that that you
would help each one here to do your work your word says that they are your servants Lord to bless this community and to help this community and I pray dear Father for this town i pray your grace and your mercies upon Titusville and I pray for these men and women Lord that they would have your courage
tonight to do right your fear would be upon them Lord that would each of our words and the things that we say the way that we look at one another may we be an encouragement and a blessing and a help to each other dear God give us your wisdom this evening i thank you for Jesus dear God I thank you for the cross
and what Jesus did there we celebrate the resurrection of Jesus and we celebrate Lord because we know that he is your son and he is my savior and we pray these things tonight in Jesus name amen amen amen thank you very much Mr pastor Jeremy all right all right if you
all stand with me for the pledge of allegiance of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all thank you very much city attorney do we
have a quorum yes sir thank you city clerk yes sir individuals wishing to speak on agenda items must complete a signup card prior to the item being introduced those wishing to speak on quasa 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 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 request must address the pending issue and citizens will be given three minutes to speak on all agenda items 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 all signup cards and exhibits being submitted to city council shall be placed in the box on the table thank you very much uh city clerk I just
want to make an announcement if anybody would like to yield their time on a particular issue uh let's say hypothetically what is it 10 is it what's the window over item oh 9B 9b if
you would like to yield your time on 9B to another individual please indicate that on your signup card otherwise then you would have to speak everybody got that are we good alrighty member Nelson move to approve the
minutes of the regular city council meetings on February 25th 2025 at 5:30 February 25th 2025 at 6:30 March 11th 2025 March 27th 2025 at 5:30 and a
special city council meeting on March 20th 2025 second thank you very much i have a motion by member Nelson second by Vice Mayor Cole any discussion seeing none all those in favor say I any opposed motion carries unanimously thank
you very much city manager good evening Mayor Vice Mayor and Council we have one presentation and that's a proclamation for Fair Housing Month and I'll read the proclamation official proclamation of the city of Ty of Florida whereas April
11th 2025 marks the 57th anniversary of the passage of the Fair Housing Act which affirms the national policy of fair housing for all who live in the United States and whereas the Fair Housing Act prohibits discrimination based on race color religion sex
handicap family status and national origin and whereas the act provides equal housing opportunity for all Americans regardless of race color religion sex or national origin as well to ensure that fair practice in the sale rental or financing of property and
whereas the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988 added new rights remedies monetary penalties and strengthened its enforcement procedures and whereas the Fair Housing Amendments Act seeks to provide equal housing opportunities to
affirmatively further housing choices to eliminate legal barriers to equal housing and to emphasize equal housing as a fundamental human right for all and whereas economic stability community health and human relations in communities are improved by diversity
and integration and whereas the city of Titusville is committed to fair housing and promotes services and activities pri provided by private and public entities for equal housing opportunities for all residents and prospective residents and whereas the city of Titusville fully
supports the intent and purpose of the federal fair act local fair housing laws and follows policies and practices in order to achieve its goal now therefore I Andrew Connors mayor of Titusville do hereby proclaim April 2025 as Fair
Housing Month in the city of Titusville encourage all citizens businesses and organizations to join me in this special observance signed Andrew Connor's mayor thank you very much we have other members over the association with us
good job [Applause] all right thank you very much uh city manager for reading that because I know how challenging those are city manager yes sir uh next item is the
boards and commissions and we have two items the first is the North Boulevard Commission on Parks and Recreations and they included a semi-angual report written report and no action is requested and the second is
the the Tidesville housing authority and they also submitted a semianual report and is included in the agenda packet and again no action is requested is any of them here to speak excuse me sir are any of them here to to chat with us
okay just wondering member Nelson uh Tom can you move your microphone over yeah we're having a hard time hearing you thank you very much any discussion on the boards and commissions presentation
semiannual reports seeing none move it did you just I did i'm sorry member MSO so I did have a question on the um the parks it looks like we have um Oh
I'm sorry we're on parks and commissions that's the next one never mind all right thank you all right city manager we on petitions or petitions and requests all right were you going to let me speak on that other one well there was no action
required so no we're just moving right along but it's petitions and requests time mr johnson you can get up there and talk okay you might not like to hear what I have to say all right uh I'm Thank you for let allowing me to speak at this meeting before you and u this has to do with
what I sent you today an email that that Wanda has and and you has been sent to you and it's about uh it's about this spraying uh people with sewage which um as an engineer I follow God's laws
cause laws like water flows downhill F equals to MA and you're not supposed to harm people sewage is harmful to people i've been vaccinated for doing sewage work and I know of uh uh people who have
died because of sewage and uh so um the city should not be spraying people with when I when I say sewage it's also piss poop and pathogens the pathogens are organisms that are harmful
to human lives so right now the city is playing continues to play for over four years and I've been unsuccessful to stop the city although and the TEC has been unsuccessful north Bard members normers of North Bard Parks and Recreations have
been unsuccessful and yet the city of high school does this continues to have this policy unwritten policy and I've talked to uh a number of people like Mr ball and and Mr connors uh last few days so we have now
we have um the attorney broom and four of the five council members u say don't turn the fountains off but um Megan Mooso she says um she says that uh she
thinks it's bad for the for her children and uh I agree with her my grandmother agrees with her and I've got 40,000 other licensed professional engineers in the state of Florida that agree with me that won't dispute me right now mr cook he won't disagree with me but the thing
is you guys are not are allowing it to happen and Mr connors on a phone conversation said that legal legally according to his understanding of the charter laws and so forth is that is that the city or the
council members and the council cannot stop the city from uh continuing this and I cannot have the city turn off the the fountains so it continues and this is a horrible
situation that you have it's um it's negligence it's um it can be murder too people with so uh in the in the very closing I mentioned about second chances which the three of three of you here
have heard it from the um uh last u u service at Park Avenue Baptist Church about second chances so you have a second chance to undo what you've done thank you Mr johnson take the second chance thank you
okay can I answer i'd rather you not but if you insist ask Kevin Cook member Nelson uh if I can um Tom I'd like to ask Kevin Cook do we
have an unwritten policy that we are supposed to spray people with excuse me piss and poop uh no ma'am we've never had that policy correct okay well I'm glad we got that cleared up thank you you have the floor ma'am
dr kathleen Otisville resident i think it's about time that someone came out here and addressed the real facts on the issue between Andrew Connors and Vicky Conklin that has caused an unreasonable expense for the citizens of Titusville there's a misconception replying the
need to hire an outside attorney that needs to be cleared up so let's start with Andrew's assertion that he's a victim here as if somehow Vicky Conklin did him wrong this is so far from the truth that it would be laughable if his arrogance wasn't costing the taxpayers a
lot of money i'm going to describe the sting operation Andrew conducted to illegally win the election he placed distorted signs of Vicki including her name misspelled the use of a Democratic logo and no discernable identification of whose signs these were i'm not
talking about his red corner signs that we got to know so well since they were everywhere and by the way he did this before he was elected so why are the citizens paying his legal fees for him andrew put these distorted signs in the area where Vicki was set up to greet
citizens in the hope she would remove these signs because if he did if she did then he could charge her with theft and ironically Vicki was legally required to remove the signs because they didn't meet the requirements of political signs and her name and pictures were on them
andrew also had his team of low lives driving around so he could catch Vicki in the act of removing these signs and smear her reputation enough to gain some votes and that part worked at least for now but Andrew is not only a sleas he's also an egoomaniac so even though the
scam won the election for him and many many people including city staff have asked him to drop these charges he won't do that we can only guess why but and this is very important the reason Vickiy's lawyers requested these public
records from the city was to protect her from the false charges that Andrew filed vicki has not filed a lawsuit against Andrew vicki has not filed a lawsuit against the city and if Andrew dropped the charges everything would simply go
away the city would not have to provide Vickiy's lawyer with the public records he requested the city would not need to pay these outside attorneys a lot of taxpayer money the only reason we're in this situation is because Andrew cheated in the election and to protect his very
vulnerable ego he will not drop the charges he illegally filed and this is why I suggested previously that Andrew pay the costs rather than the citizens he caused this mess he lied about what he did he pretended to be a victim when he was actually the perpetrator and he
won't drop these charges because he doesn't care about anybody other himself as long as the citizens are footing the bill this is the mess Andrew has created stop bailing him out thank you you're more than welcome
Andrew hey who wants to go next dwight Sigler she is so correct mr mayor save the citizens some money drop this crazy suit and the other
thing the city needs to do is stop and drop the lawsuit that you have against the citizens when 82% of them voted for clean water it's the dumbest thing you ever heard of now you want to use the citizens money to pay for an attorney
when you're suing the people that won something on the ballot is it Russia China or what you guys sit up here know that you're doing wrong and think the people are
stupid you you you do things like you have you appoint to a board if you're appointing a member to a board a member of this board shouldn't be on the board that's being appointed to that's that's to Mr
cole you can't be on a hospital board or in bed's board if you're on this board that's appointing to that board anybody don't see a conflict of interest you either step off one board if you want to be on this
one or stay on this one and step off of that one but that needs to be fixed if you going to continue to do all these crooked and wrong things then how you going to call f say somebody else is not following the policies if you guys are
leading and not following them bad example i'm not yielding my time so I'm just going to use it all somebody please make a motion to drop these lawsuits that the city has against
amen thank you Miss Vicki member Nelson I do want to address this um when we are sworn into office when I was sworn in as prosecutor one of the things
we have to do is say we swear to uphold the constitutional laws of the state of Florida there was a question about the right to clean water another district court of appeals had found that it was
unconstitutional it was preempted by state statute so to me we need to make sure that the our district court of appeals says yes is right we
put it in no it's wrong we don't put it in so our district court of appeals says it's preempted we cannot put it in the charter that's their ruling and so now we have two district
court appeals that have said it is preempted um we do have people on boards some people are appointed by our county commissioners
some pe excuse me some people are appointed by our county commissioners some are appointed by us that's true we cannot appoint two people to the same board but we can't stop the county commission from
appointing somebody to the same board which makes it sort of a problem um but that's neither here nor there just an explanation of how that sometimes happens thank you Member Nelson who
would like to go next elizabeth Baker Augustine mor is absolutely correct that really happened nobody is here to pick on you Mr connors you created that
situation it didn't have to happen miss Conklin didn't do a darn thing to you other than just run against you in a political race it should have been two adults running a
clean race based on credentials ideas how they connect with the people she's a nurse she was a registered nurse for many many years a hospice nurse did you know that
did you know that she had the privilege of holding people's hands while they went on to meet their maker for years she was also married to a lieutenant colonel in the
military she was recently widowed just months before you decided to put up those fake signs you should be ashamed of yourself our city should not be paying for this you know you created this situation and
because of that situation I as a citizen cannot trust one single thing you do i can't help that i don't trust you and a lot of other people don't this is insane that our tax
dollars are paying for what you did thank you anybody else all right moving on city manager next is consent agenda uh we have uh any
member of council wish to p pull any of the items from consent member Nelson A and I all right any others other than A and IO yeah um H A H and I
city clerk any cards for citizens to pull items yes sir we have um four cards for consent all right can you call the first card please oh I'm sorry read the titles can you read the titles please he
said he couldn't hear what Wanda said i couldn't hear oh she has four cards okay four cards so now we'll read the items that you don't want to pull okay and we'll take cards on those items and then we'll take the pulled items individually and so the speakers realize you can speak on the items we're about to read
but you can also get three minutes for each item pulled it any questions ask me all right first item is consent agenda item 8A landscape trust advisability approve the advisability directing the
staff oh wait a second that that was pulled um 8B approve the use of source well contract number 011822 JHK with WHP training towers for replacement of the doors in the fire
training tower agenda item 8 C resolution number five-2025 Titusville Community Service Award item 8D resolution number
6-2025 amending resolution 13-2016 by amending the location and powers and duties of the flag and memorial committee consent agenda item 8E Department Florida Department of Law Enforcement Titusville Police Department
TPD online sting grant award 8F task order KHT 008 for construction services for Riverside Drive force main project 8g valve replacements Armstrong
facility 8j task order ACOM T07 for the Hopicus Avenue sidewalk infill and 8K Ciseron subscription upgrade thank you very much city manager um city
clerk can you call the cards please the first card is Stan Johnston and I just want to remind everybody these cards will be on the items that were just read items A H and I call for those separately so you'll get three minutes on the ones we just read and if
you want to speak on a H and I you'll also speak on those separately hi mr johnson you have the floor okay all right so I'll do the three minutes right now i I'll do it on on uh
I'll include 8B if that's the fire department uh 8E that's the Titusville Police Department and 8F is the water resources and they have something in common these
three items they in and these three uh departments and I think you know what I'm talking about what do they have in common they all allowed the spraying of people with sewage when we
had sewage spill in Sanpoint Park that went to Space View Park and we had this the sewage spill in Baker subdivision that went to the senior park
pond all of them have supported leaving the fountains on all of them and I want you to know that that's not illegal it's hugely illegal it's hugely illegal and as per God's law that you're not
supposed to harm people and actually God's law is saying is that it's toxic thank you uh for for um uh uh uh the the our first responders are caretakers
of our community and when our when our people get sprayed with with with sewage which happened for months and that like Mrs mrs nelson explained in October and November at council meetings in October and November of last year she said that
that that the city had received comments from an anonymous person in FD that that they can the city could leave the fountains turned on when we had sewage in the fountains that is I do not believe that i do not believe it because
it can't be true that that someone would who is who has the responsibility would allow that because there is no sewage treatment plant in the United States that will spray sewage in air to ariate it for for cleaning it none of it the
only place it's done is here in the city of Titusville the only place on the planet that I know of is right here in the city of Titusville shamefully done it shamefully oh my golly what have you done what can I say to
you i'm shamed it's disgusting and you will see me for the rest of my life as far as coming here and saying the same thing is what you're doing is disgusting humiliating to me and I've got over 40,000 other professional engineers who
will not dispute me and I don't I don't see that that he's going to dispute me either he's not going to do it and Mr kb Aosu he agrees with me so does what's her fa most coast co that's I didn't say it right but what the blonde girl over
there she agrees with me too thank you Mr johnson so I'm asking you to make a motion please anyhow these things I oppose all of them oppose because the cover is expired thank you thank you are for the items that we pulled Thank
you Mr johnson please have a seat okay i'll call you when it's your turn again member Nelson so I would move to approve consent agenda B through G J and K second i have a motion from member Nelson and a
second from Vice Mayor Cole any further council discussion all those in favor say up sorry i thought about it yep can I have a roll call vote city clerk yes sir u member Muscoso yes member Nelson yes mayor Connors yes vice Mayor Cole
yes member Stol yes uh those resolutions thank you city attorney all right uh city manager i'll read now consent items 8A landscape trust advisability approve advisability directing the staff to propose a resolution to amend the
landscape trust fund reallocating the remaining funds toward the required match for the urban and community forestry grant with the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services 8h is a task order
KHT00009 for the Delhon Trail Design approved award of task order KHT00009 to Kimley Horn and Associates for the amount of $223,322 to provide engineering consulting services but not limited to data
collection trail plans drainage design and permitting and authorize the city manager to execute the task order and 8 I task order KHT 000010 for Harrison Street Riverfront Park Concepts approve the award to
Kimley Horn and Associates in the amount of $84,000 to provide engineering consulting services including but not limited to data collection stakeholder and community engagement concept development and authorize a city manager to execute
the task order thank you city manager um we're on A so we'll kick it off with there can I call the cards for 8A first before we get into it city clerk 8A please and actually whether there's a card or not if someone wants to speak on 8A
because we've pulled it you'll have an opportunity to speak because when you put your card in you may not have known it was being pulled so 8A clear first card is Stan Johnston i don't know what you said we are talking about the landscape trust item 8 i said if anyone
wants to speak on 8A they can speak and they get three minutes that's me that's you you're one of them all right 8a uh I'm Stan Johnson 860 Poinsetta Avenue and um I'm not against this but uh I
think we should be careful how we're um spending our money and and I'm not pleased with the way the city is spending the money because there's a lot going for fraud and um illegal activities that the city is doing like for example building all these dams in
the city they're all illegal over a million millions how many millions of dollars have we spent in that I don't know but uh so this looks like a good idea I'm I'm not against it thank you thank you Mr johnson city clerk tony Shuffalo i'm sorry Miss Tony i didn't even see
you back there hey Tony Shel Tropic Street um I see no problem utilizing the $65,050 from the landscape enhancement program to more than match the $50,000
urban and community forestry grant for the urban forestry master plan which we're spending money on which however I see no reason why this would require amending the landscape trust fund this fund acrews money
continually when developers cut down trees without replacing them that's called tree medication and that's how this fund grows and since they're always cutting down trees without replacing them that fund continues to grow so you don't want to take all the remaining
funds because the current um currently this fund indicates that the funds are to be utilized for beautifying public properties by landscaping planting trees in the urban forest is beautifying public properties
by landscaping on a hopeful scale hoping we live long enough to see them grow into maturity and be a nice tree canopy with cooling shade and healthy air so why not just amend the sunset dissolution of the landscape enhancement
program to return the $65,000 to the landscape trust fund which funded the landscape enhancement program in the first place and use that amount to match the urban forest grant and the rest of the um money to plant
trees so I think it's just a matter of semantics that I'm worried about in this i think the wording is not right thank you thank you Miss Shiff i agree city attorney no no i I understand the point and and
you're right it's not the landscape trust fund itself is being amended what you're amending is the previous authority where that money was allocated to reallocate it to the trust fund so two things I would suggest when you do your motion on this it's to come
back with a proper resolution to reallocate the funds and also if my understanding is correct there may be more money that's left than just the match so it's not only putting the money into potentially to do the match but any other
monies could be to be allocated so you're going to have to allocate all the 65 so there may be more than just putting it into the match so you might want to ask staff those details when you do your motion we're real clear on bringing back a proper resolution to reallocate the funds which I agree isn't
necessarily amending the the fund but it's doing a resolution to reallocate the funds from the previous program and then it would be making sure where those monies go so it' be the match if that's your desire and if there's any extra monies where those monies would go as
well thank you city attorney city clerk the last card is K St age everybody was getting ready to jump in there and I wanted to make sure we get to that last card thank you Miss K k st anil Avenue Titusville Tree Team
thank you very much for your explanation attorney Broom that was my concern uh it just didn't seem like there was any reason to change the resolution amending the landscape trust fund um and so I wondered if I was confused but uh it
does sound like you you're going to keep the landscape trust fund to acrue monies uh as a result of tree mitigation efforts when developers cut down trees without replacing them and and you would continue to use these mitigation funds
to uh beautify public property through landscaping very good that's what I was hoping that you were saying um according to the accounting manager Gina Ryan in August 2024 I know that was a little bit ago but I tried to get the current information but in August 2024 that
landscape trust fund had $640,000 in it now maybe some's been used since then i don't know i I contact tried to contact her and get the current fund sums but uh never received a response but yes please approve
advisability reallocating the remaining funds of $65,000 from the landscape enhancement program to match the $50,000 urban community forestry grant for an urban forestry master plan but without revising the landscape trust fund we the
landscape trust fund is just fine the way it is um retain the the language of resolution 30201 regarding the landscape trust fund allowing mitigation revenues to acrewue to be utilized to beautify public
properties by landscaping yes indeed in this way the landscape trust fund's mitigation fees can be used to implement the urban forestry master plan that's the idea so I'm I thank you for your
clarification and I'm would be happy to see that $65,000 match the bin forestry grant i don't you got 1500 left over maybe we can do something good with that too thank you very much thank you Miss Kay any other cards city
clerk uh no not on this particular item but I have two cards from Adele Parsons and a chair Patterson I believe that did not write which item they want to speak on we got to wait till number 12 okay
okay thank you city clerk me stole yes um my my question was kind of brought up already i think that when we approved the matching grant it was for 50k and we have the 65,000 so my question was one we will have some excess funds and so
two can that mean that we can just make a motion to put all the funds into the landscape trust fund and then it can be allocated out as appropriate or do we need to be more specific would that give you the flexibility to use the funds because I think even with the matching we weren't
even planning to use the full 50,000 potentially because we could count staff time as part of the match grant so the grant was approved with a match where half of that match would be coming from your general fund and the other half would be staff time so if this found
money basically is with your approval can be used towards that match that will save the general fund and also save us having to count staff time towards it so it could be dedicated entirely to um experts to help us develop this plan and
all we're asking is that um that match is up to $50,000 so what is remaining we would recommend going into the landscape trust fund or whatever your direction okay yeah and that's kind of what I was thinking we could just move have that 25,000 up to 25,000 go toward this
matching grant and then have the rest go into the landscape trust fun recommending that 50,000 you have 65,00050 here that 50,000 of that be allocated towards the match of that grant thereby saving you 25,000 from the general fund and the 25,000 of staff
time and then the remaining here the difference be 15,50 that could go back into the landscape trust fund or some other program that you'd desire okay i guess my question is can we put all of it in the landscape trust fund
and you all have the ability to use up to the match as needed or does that require us to make that decision if you decide to put all of this money back into the landscape trust fund the landscape trust fund is very specific it must be used for planting and
enhancements in public property i'm not aware that we can pull from that to use it towards a match of a grant okay um I'm fine with what he's recommending um so I don't know if anybody else had any comments thank you Member
Stokl any other discussion all right um one thing I would just like to comment is I know a lot of us have you know kind of um strolled around Astronom Memorial Park and want to see some beautififications happen there and I know Miss uh Kay did uh some work to develop you know a planting regiment so
I mean that was like $350 and that would fall in line with what the landscape trust fund is for so you know I know we're probably going to make a motion on advisability but my request is you know we could use some of that money to fund some of that tree planting out of the
remaining 15,000 so that'd be just food for thought for you guys member Nelson I I think you're right we could do some tree planting ever for Space View Park where Kay had talked about um right now
they want to come up with a concept plan on what they want it to look like and Parks and Wreck has offered to do the planning i hate to take your job away from you but uh
Parks and Wreck has offered to do the planning there they've offered to do um some pressure cleaning of the uh sidewalks the space space view spacew walk hall of fame is supposed to remove
the monuments and I believe public work or is going to come up with an idea for lighting and irrigation i think that's how I think Sandy agreed on your behalf so I think that's coming but I'm not
sure it needs to be part of this yeah so I just wanted to bring it up as a food for thought in terms of utilizing that uh extra money if uh if 50,000 of the 65,000 is going to that match just wanted to bring up different projects that could be utilized for um but can I
have a motion yeah uh I'm also going to say Riverfront Park could use some extra trees too um move to approve advisability directing the staff to propose a resolution amending the landscape trust
fund i'm sorry I didn't want to interrupt but based on the discussion as written you might want to delete the words to amend the landscape trust fund how about and add to the end after C agriculture and consumer services and the remainder to go to the landscape
trust fund i would if I say come back with a resolution to reallocate the funds uh back to the landscape trust fund and to [Music] um the required match for the urban and
communities forestry grant with the Florida Department of Agriculture does that work you forgot in consumer services i'm just kidding and consumer services and cons
thank you Member Nelson second i have a motion i have a second any further council discussion all those in favor say I i all opposed motion carries thank you very much um now I believe we're on 8H uh city clerk are there any cards yes
sir we have Stan Johnston all right Mr johnson 8h Dion Trail Design no uh Stan Johnston uh I want to give you a little bit of a story what happened here in the city county uh is that uh uh I came here I
was hired paving engineer to uh help with the paving in the city of Titusville and uh we had some dirt streets that were to be paved uh I went to my boss and I said "Well we can pave them just like uh just
like I've done in the other places is that we just go ahead and pave it and we get little to no permit from St john's we don't have to do a lot of engineering work we don't have to do so forth." Well he didn't agree with that and so
what we did was we spent a lot of money on surveying and engineers and so forth like that to to pave some unpaved streets whereas the Bvard County went ahead and paved about I think it was over 90 miles when Robin Fischer was was the commissioner and they did it easily
they just went in there and what did they do they paved the dirt [Music] streets without without all these engineering plans and so forth i'm mentioning this because the city can can way over expend on things that are
complete nonsense like for example sidewalk infill getting some that's going to be another one but in this case is that we should have what we've had before in the city here we should have a design team that takes small projects this it appears to be as likely a small
project that what I have done before and what the county has done before is instead of somebody having somebody prepare some plans engineering work costing hundreds of thousands of dollars like for a sidewalk we'll go in one person goes out and stakes it out what
the sidewalk is supposed to be elevation and all that's all it is it's real easy to do you don't have to have all these fancy plans so this it appears is likely one of those situations is where we spend a whole bunch of money and and and
we're getting it could have been done for it says 200 200 some thousand save over $200,000 and do it in the house so um I'm just uh I'm not against the project but I'm against for hiring people to do
work that is so easy to do it could be done without plans very little plans so um that's that's what I'm sharing with you and and I'm I don't think anybody agrees with me because they can even spray people with
sewage okay thank you thank you Mr johnson city Clerk Tony She Tony Shuffalo Tropic Street i object to this on December in December 2020 you awarded Kemley Horn
$84,490 20 Miss Stokel to provide engineering and to review multiple locations for bicycle improvements and one of the recommendations was to construct a trail along the Leon Avenue from Harrison to Day Street and do you remember the derision that that was met
with weren't you here in this room i was nobody liked it and here it comes again tonight you're being asked to award Kimley Horn $223,322 to provide one point one mile one10enth one and onetenth mile of a
bike trail nowhere in a neighborhood that people don't want it amen great and I'm saying that because I go to the concerned citizens i'm a member of that group and I don't know why the right hand doesn't know what the left hand in
the city is doing but the concerned citizens are working with the CDBG money and Terry Franklin over in community services neighborhood services saying what do we want to do with we want to get some lighting pedestrian lighting down to Leyon and people are saying well
you know that be a waste of money because even though there's five foot sidewalks on either side of that stretch of road nobody walks out there so why are we going to put a bike trail that doesn't connect to anything else and then they're going to put
pedestrian temporary traffic control plans will be prepared and will be included in this 220 nobody walks out there on those sidewalks and if they do they're walking down the middle of the road so my husband came up with a great idea the bike trail crosses over to Leon
right up there below Garden Street and stuff you know that bike trail that goes all the way up to Mims why not use some of this money to develop the bike trail in town that would connect to that 1.1 mile that
nobody would get to otherwise and also you could use some of that 223,000 that Stan is right about that we they already got a 5-ft sidewalk i don't know if you look at the plan only going to be shown in some places and it's
going to be completely removed in other places or maybe left there as the bike trail goes off somewhere and cuts down a lot of trees but um why not fix up that stretch of road where the bike trail comes off onto Main Street and is dangerous and I pointed that out to CRA
before and to this council if you're riding west on the bike trail on Main Street you cross over the railroad tracks and you're in oncoming eastbound traffic and there's no place for the bikers to go i ride that way cuz I ride
to city hall all the time and I ride on the sidewalk and I chief doesn't arrest me for that thank you city clerk we received two additional cards for this item after it was introduced would you like to hear
them uh yes yes yes um Dwight Seagler $223,000 is a total waste of money designed a bike trail when the school the elementary school was back there the kids rode on
that sidewalk with a 12t ditch 12t deep ditch there anytime they would got off course and go down in that ditch you're going to break your neck no safety rail along there
sidewalk right next to the ditch there's no there's not even a good rightway there so if you if you had a problem in your car you going in the ditch and we talking about $220,000 nobody walk that the elementary school closed there's nobody walking
that but you got bus stops there now through this through that the Leyon area now and you don't even have a bus bench and a shelter i rode the bus one day and I stood out there at Sycamore and the Leon waiting
on the bus almost died cuz the sun the heat if people didn't have a tree in their yard that I went and stood up under probably would have passed out and we count $223,000 for something that people's not
even going to use we haven't nobody came to us with a talking about a design you just going to come in here and do something in the neighborhood and say here's take it why is there no meeting to that let's sit down and if we were even going to do this it looks like we would not even
going to be included one day you guys gonna start listening to Stan Johnson just because you don't like somebody but they got great ideas and they got the back the education and experience to back it up you keep
looking at them and laughing like everything's a joke you guys are a joke [Applause] thank you city clerk the last card is Jesse right good evening jesse Wright 3550 South
Washington Avenue i was just looking at H and I i have a subdivision in California about 41 subdivision lot and it's been in this county of Sanina for about almost two
years finally they came up with the same entity Kimley Horn Associates we ended up paying $10,000 i don't know who negotiated these numbers i mean I'm looking at HNI comes up to about
$37,000 in consulting fees that is really ridiculous i'm not really saying anything about you know who the person was that negotiated this but um maybe the city should really look at getting
second or third opinion i'm against it amen thank you city clerk anything else no more cards all right member Nelson um I'm not sure who to ask Brad or Kevin
did anybody talk with the concerned citizens about this project i would sort of like to see it tabled if the citizens aren't really interested in having it then one it's a lot of money
it is a lot of work i went through um what all they had to do and I'm not an engineer but I was like "Wow." Um because when I first saw it I thought that's a lot of money and then as I'm
reading it I'm like "Okay you have to do this you have to do that you have to do this." So it is a lot of work but if the citizens don't want it I'd like to table it and let the citizens come back maybe
t have a community meeting with Let Terry have a community meeting and let us know before we spend the money [Applause] we can certainly do that we can provide that to Terry and let her take it back to the citizens group i think it'd be
worth it all right um you could also vote to just say no you don't have to table it um but member Mscoso yeah I I pulled this because I had a lot of the same concerns as um the citizens um you know it's a
$223,000 project um that is just for the consulting fee and if you read it the consultant is going to hire another consultant inside of it yeah so there uh there are a lot of issues just with that um to me um that
area I did drive through I've driven through it different times i drove through this afternoon and people were using the sidewalks um but I would agree with Mr seagler there is that big ditch there as well there's also a storm water pond right next to the apartments that I feel is extremely dangerous for any
children over there so there's a lot lot to think about with this project um so I definitely have some some concerns i'm really glad to hear from members of the community that are saying we want to be involved in this i say we either table it or we need to have a presentation i I
know that this was kind of looked at in 2020 and so this is a I mean Kevin do you know how much at the I mean just for consulting it's 223 but what are we looking for for the cost of completion you estimate that design cost 15%
construction are 1.5 million okay so yeah I think I think we either need to table it and and get the community involved um but this definitely needs to be looked at again thank you Member Moscow so member Stokl yes um I had two
questions one could somebody just briefly touch on the history of why this is on the agenda kind of why we brought it up and then two uh the bidding process did this go out to bid and Kimley Horn was the one that won it or and that those are the two questions I
have okay so this so the planning department developed a mobility plan some years ago where they looked at opportunities for bicycle improvements sidewalk improvements intersection improvements leading to pedestrians using nonautomotive functions when they
did the study into the bicycle lanes you recall the inroad bicycle lanes were not favorably accepted by the council at the time so none of those have come forward those are going to restrip our roads putting bike lanes in so forth that's not been done it's only been done on Hopkins uh so one of the items that was
identified was the opportunity to add a 12oot trail along to Leyon to provide that bicycle amenity without using it in road moving the trail this much like rail trail is an off-road trail for US1 this would be an off-road trail for this section of one of our collectors mainly
the only collector has a rideway big enough to accommodate a trail most other collectors don't have rideaways so we've had in the budget a number of mobility plan items coming forward most of which have gone sidewalks through impact fees this is the one coming forward as a bike
lane improvement so so that's why it got here as far as selection of consultants we solicited for consultants under competitive consultant negotiation act which is not a bid they cannot use price in that it's a protected statute we selected five total consultants two of
which are qualified to do general services which would be the road streets parks landscaping that being ACO and Kimy Horn they go back and forth you saw the last meeting and this meeting ACOM and Kimley Horn are both being awarded consulting services hopkins Avenue being ACOM tree
survey on the fire tower is also ACOM this one's Kimley Horn it also ties Kim Horn on this project they did the original study that created the concepts attached to work order if you have to restart that process that other consultant has to pick up and start it fresh so they would not have had that a
little bit extra input as far as reviewing aerials and seeing what the workload was going to be but but it was a competitive negotiation RFP i think we had 20 some odd consultants five came forward the other three are utility only so we have five total but three are restricted water sewer
thank you Vice Mayor Cole my question is the funds that we have are they designated that they have to be used for this or if the community wants something else can the funds be used for that this in a capital project of the general fund
so it's not a restricted fund it is labeled mobility but it can always be changed to a different project if because if we get with the the people in the community and they decide they would rather see something else in the community rather than the bike trail the the funds could be utilized for that
yeah we certainly can bring that back as an option to to change projects as long as it's a capital improvement not an operating improvement okay thank you member Nelson so I think I'm going to recommend or my suggestion my vote would be to deny it and let Terry get with the
community and find out what they want and then come back please make a motion if you're here and do so okay move to deny a task order KHC00009 to Kimberly Horn and Associates for the amount of 223 322 second i have
a motion and I have a second any further council discussion seeing none all those in favor say I i any opposed motion carries unanimously thank you very much now we're on to consent item I which is Harrison Street Riverfront Park
Concepts city clerk can you call the first card please yes sir stan Johnston i go Stan Johnson professional engineer i worked here for the city and was been got a pension from it retired in 2008
and I have seen some things that I was not very pleased that Kimley Horn did especially the uh counting the parking spaces that the city has available and what we can do and so forth so the the city was considering
having this big $6 million parking garage and so forth which u we've had I don't know how many concrete structures built that failed um such as the u uh bridges and so forth that it's I don't
think I don't know whether we can handle that but here's what's going on is that we have spaces over here on Indian River Avenue across from city hall never were recognized never were recognized it's it's area over there we have we have a
area that was used for parking when we had special events like uh the water festival we used to have here in river festival and uh running races and swimming in the river and so forth th those were taken away when we put those
those islands in there and have it had it a wider parking area all those spaces were removed and then it so so uh then what we did was we did do something maybe good and that was one way on Main Street so we put parking on point of order
stand we're talking this is what Kimley Horn did we're not talking about Kimley Horn we're talking about the riverfront park concepts and this is what I is about you haven't spoken to anything about I point of order is recognized stan please
get on topic we're on I yes oh I was talking about I 8J excuse me i was on 8J thank you for stopping me stomping me though okay this is also a Kimley Horn thing but but uh they did some things which which I don't
know so u um um so I'll um uh I think that that we could again do uh engineering and in-house to do that and the but the other one was when I was talking about I was especially talking about 8J all right so u um I think that we we should
have people that can do our parts in house here thank you thank you Mr johnson city clerk Tony Shel um Shifilot Tropic Street on on the consent agenda not counting Jay if that was part of it kimley Horn was going to
get without any discussion $385,617 on three contracts three items uh Kimley Horn has a continuing service agreement with the city and was selected blah blah blah blah blah no bid contracts i'm here to talk about the Harrison Street property which was
acquired in 2006 and um the IBI group developed a Titusville waterfront design master plan which provided a concept for the use of the Harrison Street property u yet to see this we've asked u people that were
on the uh riverfront referendum committee have no recollection of there having been a plan um it said in the perspectus that two engineering firms are typically utilized on a rotating basis to provide engineering support on an asneeded basis as Mr cook was saying
um unfortunately Kimley Horn was the luck of the draw on this one and um once again their plan their vision for Titusville is a nightmare i have pointed this out since 2017 when it first was presented to council and Brad knows that
um my my problems with it are still the same that have been from the very beginning the plan has not evolved or changed despite all the community input anyway the previously developed concept for the Harrison Street property um I suggest we do nothing to this
beautiful piece of undeveloped property with a natural shoreline and a tremendous view across the Indian River Lagoon to the space center the city's comp plan has a section on shoreline mixeduse goals and objectives and objective 1.12 says lays out two main
goals to preserve and enhance the visual and functional use of land along the Indian River Lagoon east of Highway 1 while providing public access so um I would request that the shorelines be protected not hardened and and be
allowed to return to a natural state you know if you're going to make it a park perhaps you can install educational projects such as mangro plantings and the seaggrass reclamation it's a beautiful stretch of land um my suggestion is to keep it in perpetuity
naked and empty for citizens um so that we can go and share the magnificent view of the Kennedy Space Center across the river from that from that empty lot every time I drive by it I love that property and it and I always sing and I'm going to do this for remember
Cole let's make a gateway to the stars build a walkway to the moon make it just a little simple park and get citizen input don't let Kimley Horn
get it thank you city clerk [Applause] amen to the clerk Laura Ward she's hard to follow that
or juggle or juggle you could juggle so this uh parcel was the second parcel purchased with the riverfront referendum uh back in 2004 that was created the intent of the referendum was to provide
open windows view to view that the citizens could stay connected to the river that's so important to the community and the uh riverfront park down south across from Ellie and
Ceda is the first one and it's been completed it's been developed and it's a very very popular park people use it all the time for different things but it's especially popular for missile viewing and it's under some stress because there
are more people that want to view missiles there than there is room to park so this parcel that's so centrally located uh in the middle of a city
center is very very important and I feel that in the future we'll know what it should be used for but I don't feel like we know yet uh there's not been this kind of use for it that's come up and
made itself apparent but as a city grows and changes and shifts and gets bigger a use for that will come forward so what I think should happen now is we need space
for visitors to park where they won't get run over like down on Riverfront Park and watch the missiles that are being launched and that's the use that I think is apparent now but it could be a
temporary type of use we could use that big parcel for parking and missile viewing true now keep it real simple like everybody's
saying and then in the future uh when a a defined need for it in that location comes up then we can change and go to that because its
waterfront is centrally located it's very very special and I do think that in the future it'll be used for something real important to the city [Music] um I think you should
uh have if you use a design firm uh I think you should have them produce for you now a very simple but flexible uh Thank you Miss Laura i gota I got to
cut you off beg pardon i got to cut you off thank you oh oh thank I had a question for her before she sat down all right member Stokal next yes um if you recall when we were having the discussion about Riverfront Park I I
really like when we the council at the time we talked about that being citizens park because it was a citizens money that need to fund that um and it's a beautiful piece of land i will say I think for me at least driving by I'm like it's very underutilized i don't
want something there blocking the view it's a beautiful view i see it every day um and I I do see the draft of what the design could be i guess my question is I I don't want to just kind of sit on it
and just like just let it sit there as it is because I don't think it's being utilized at all by any citizen um I'd like to see something happen where we could name it potentially Citizens Park and have people frequent it um but it sounds like you just don't think we're there yet in your opinion no no no
that's not I didn't make myself clear i think you should use it now okay i think there are things you can do to that are minimal that uh will allow use um but I think instead of getting all involved with this uh community outreach
and everything at this point what you can do you want to get it cleaned up you want to remove the peppers you want to uh make sure there's some parking that's stabilized i I think you could form like a committee of interested citizens that
could bring you back some ideas for that maybe get Laura Lee involved with it the committee and uh get some ideas for how to stabilize a shoreline and what to do about that and then come back to you with that
uh and then go forward with how to do something minimal there now that will allow use but will also leave it available for when you come up with the final solution that will be the final
use for the park when you go into big development on it okay that'd be my thought yeah I just I I do want to move a little bit forward with it i mean I'm not like we need to do it tomorrow but I would like to us to start kind of exploring in it remain a park and a
beautiful park and where citizens can utilize it right and the important thing also that I didn't get to tell you is uh if you have some kind of a generic idea that can be flexible in the future
uh you could go ahead and start doing things like planting canopy trees on that thing uh because trees can be used to define spaces and like that uh and you could start planting the trees now so that when you're ready to make it
into a full citizen use uh place then you've already got some decent cany trees growing that Thank you thank Okay thank you thank you Miss Ward member Nelson
so when I suggested that we look at this park or this piece of property as a park my vision was we leave the mangroves there we build a platform looking over them so that we could see the river we
can see the space center and plant some trees so that it provide shade for people and a little bit of parking um when I read what Kimberly Horn was suggesting and it was three plans and
one plan included a water feature and I was like that's just not what I was envisioning um and I did talk to Miss Ward about it i think I think we're okay we're on the same page um but just
something every time I go past it it's like this bare piece of property with no trees Brazilian peppers out there and I'm sort of like you know it's just not attractive um there's no shade to invite people to
come over and see it um and I was thinking you don't want to get rid of the mangroves because the mangroves are there to protect our shoreline but we can trim them down maybe do some kind of of uh space where
you can overlook it um and I didn't want a whole lot of impervious pavement because that's something that is important to our environment so I don't know i I looked at Kimberly Horns and I
thought "This is not what I envisioned." I don't know if Mr cook feels comfortable coming up having a staff member come up with that kind of design and maybe bring it back to us but I
think that's really all that's needed thank you Member Nelson member Mscoso yeah I think there were some really good points brought up about um perhaps putting together a committee i love the educational part of it if we could educate people about our lagoon um you
know I was looking somebody posted this on Facebook and I was kind of looking at some of the comments and would this be a city maintained park or a county maintained park it would be a city-maintained park unless we made an addendum to our currentou with the county okay so that
was one of the questions I was seeing i I utilize that park a lot when there are rocket launches and what I love about it is um it it has like a sense of community i don't know where you guys watch your launches but if you go there when there's a launch you have my kids
sit on the car people are all out there and just talking about it and I really love that aspect and so I don't want to see it be turned into this park where there's six parking spots you can't go because there is this um there is this community feel to it if you know there's
a launch in 10 minutes you can easily drive down there get a spot and just sit on the car and watch a launch and I think that's really special so I I love keeping um doing something minimum now until we have um an idea of what we really want to use that property for but
it really is this this special little place I think for the residents of Titusville that I don't feel like all the tourists know about and I I kind of like that thank you member Moso vice Mayor Cole well I was around here when the
referendum came up and Miss Ward was intimately involved with that and I accept what she has said that I don't think we need to have this grandiose plan out there it could be very and I
agree with everyone else that it could be minimalist and uh I think we should table this and look into seeing if we could get a committee together of people that are concerned about it to come up
with some ideas of what we could do there and then work from there that would be my proposal thank you uh Vice Mayor Cole um my recommendation would be vote to just
kill it and then direct staff to put together a committee i would my vote would be to kill it to deny it and then ask to staff to come up with a committee to work with staff because I think
staff's import input is going to be important we can do this we can't do that um and sort of provide some guidance on what put that in motion yeah you got to put that in motion that's why I said my I would you because I can't yes
move to deny the award of task order H KH10 to Kimberly Horn and Associates in the amount of $84,000 um for the Harrison Street Riverfront Park Complex
second we have one card left oh see they get all excited city clerk who's that last card jesse right okay okay thank you all right i have a motion and I have a second any further discussion all those in favor say I i any opposed motion carries unanimously
thank you very much and then I think we need advisability a motion to approve advisability um for staff to come up with a committee and come back with a a plan for the
Harrison Street Riverfront Park city attorney a committee of staff members i want to be clear committee of citizens plus a staff member i'm I'm not sure how Kevin's going to come up with a committee of citizens do we need to
appoint him if you if you create a committee to come back to you you're talking sunshine and then you all the rules that go with sunshine when you designate a committee i want to be real clear on what we're doing what if we could have a community meeting versus Sure you could ask versus a committee community meeting workshop or whatever
you want to do but when you do designate a committee to make recommendations you start invoking sunshine and I don't think they want to go do that because then they're restricted on their ability to speak so can the motion should be um to have Kevin and staff come up with a
concept plan and then we have a community meeting sure all right i have a motion second any further discussion from council anybody out in the audience want to chime in all right seeing none all
those in favor say I i all opposed motion carries thank you very much before we move on I have a a point of uh order for city attorney um does 12A need to be taken off the
agenda because I just received word that the North Boulevard Economic Development Zone is no longer in existence yeah I actually spoke to Troy Post about this and he said that that would not affect this project because it's county versus city money and that there would
be the funding i don't want to speak for him but it the funding would be there for this project so after it leaves here correct it needs to be approved by county commission it does have to be approved by the county that's correct so I can't say facts i mean if Oh hold on
we're just talking information but right now procedurally we're not actually bringing up your item i'm sorry i don't feel comfortable giving an opinion based on what may or may not be happening okay uh our money in our small tiff goes to the zone that's the agreement we don't
have our own so the agreement was to use our tiff money for that but it was a zone grant so the agreement is you know if we couldn't cover it then the zone would step in there's a lot of things in that contract that have to do with the zone so to say that if the zone doesn't
exist it stands on its own I would have some question about that so I think those are things that really need to be looked into thank you so whether you want to move forward or you table but I would not feel comfortable in an opinion based on what may or may not be happening somewhere else
all righty we'll move on to 9A city manager 9 or public hearing action uh 9A is easement vacate application number 3-2024 1558 Metal Arc Drive and that's to deny the easement vacation and
related resolution number 7-2025 to vacate a portion of the 20oot public utility and drainage easement on property located at 1558 Meadowark Drive at this time I want to read the quasi judicial
rules during the public hearing portion of this meeting anyone wishing to speak on a quasi judicial item must first sign a public hearing agenda card and sign the oath contained thereon swearing to tell the truth the full truth and nothing but the truth these cards are located on the table at the entrance of the chamber and should be provided to
the clerk those speaking in favor of request will be heard first if you have photographs sketches or documents that you desire for the city council to consider they must be submitted into evidence and will be retained by the city please submit such exhibits to the city
clerk city clerk have you received signed oath cards from persons wishing to speak before the city council swearing to tell the truth the full truth and nothing but the truth yes sir to staff and applicant please ensure that all witnesses that intend to speak have signed an oath card and have
presented it to the clerk if there is anyone present who has not signed a note card that does wish to speak on a quasi judicial item please submit a card to the clerk at this time city clerk have all agenda items been properly advertised yes sir in the event that a council member has
received an exparte communication either verbal or written outside of this hearing the council member shall disclose the identity of the person group or entity with whom the communication took place and the subject of the communication including all opinions or facts discussed any written
communication must be disclosed and made a part of the record also in the event that a member has conducted an investigation or site visit or received any expert opinions regarding these quasi judicial items said visit or opinion shall be disclosed all right thank you city
attorney any disclosures from council see no lights thank you very much council um is the applicant here yes all right i'm assuming he filled out a card sir you have the floor good evening my name is John Do
um it's been a long arduous process i think we've finally come up with a uh resolution to allow my application to vacate this easement to um finally be approved by the planning and zoning board um and I'm in favor with um what
that what they've set forth and um hopefully you folks will agree with that and we can move on and complete this process all right mayor if I may y just briefly describe um on
page page 220 of your application of the agenda you'll see an illustration of what Mr ducko is suggesting that he would like to put on the back of his property um the agencies that he was requested to get uh letters from all had no objection
to them except public works made a statement that they had no objection provided that the um drainage would be compensated somewhere else within the easement so he's asking to re uh vacate 10 ft of this 20 foot wide easement this
he initially proposed um this illustration you see on page 220 uh then at a planning and zoning commission meeting he asked for it to be the full 10 ft and then they asked for this application to be sent back to us we sat with Mr we've also uh visited the site and if
you look on page 23 of your packet you'll see an aerial just to give you some context here in the back of this property and this and several properties along this row here there is a swale that was approved per the site plan of the
subdivision and there is a burm behind that swale mr deku is asking to be to have a portion of this easement to be vacated in order to allow his patio area to encroach into that easement which is the swale itself he's indicated to us and it was um pictures were brought
before the planning and zoning commission at the time that there is no swale but that is not the case there was an approved swale per the site plan it may have not been maintained so the condition that the planning and zoning commission recommended which is on page
On page 202 of your packet they recommended that approval with the condition that the vacation will not be recorded which is a resolution until the applicant obtains a permit showing how the swale will be realigned within the remaining 10-ft
easement for the flow to be maintained within one year and that was approved unanimously by the planning and zoning commission so we do have a permit in review it just means that the applicant will have to provide evidence that that flow can be maintained or redirected and
that will most likely require him to provide some kind of engineered plans in order to get an issue permit for the patio so that we'll try you know we have KB or civil engineer of the city of Titusville uh here to answer any questions if you have any but um the condition that the planning and zoning
commission recommended as such thank you very much Brad uh city clerk are there any other cards uh Stan Johnson is the only card all right we're going to allow Stan Johnson to come up mr johnson
stan Johnson i've looked at the plans of this and uh I'm uh mystified that that uh the way that it is worded that we're going to accept it it appears to me is that is that what we have is an application with
insufficient information to have a delay or something to say well we're going to approve it if you do something why don't we go ahead and have an approved plan so that we can approve it and approve it or deny it so what I'm saying is that to me
it appears that your the information that's been that has been provided is insufficient so I don't think that you should make a decision on information that is insufficient i don't know if you'll catch my drift
but in order to make a decision I believe you should have sufficient data and not have this rambling about trying to accept something later thank you thank you Mr johnson member Stokel yeah question for staff
since your original recommendation was to deny it with the new condition that PNZ put on it would you all be in favor of uh going forward the condition um asked the applicant to prove it so the the
resolution's approved to vacate it'll be held in escrow basically not recorded until he complies and gets an issued permit and constructs the um the patio and so he has about he has one year to do that so we're we're satisfied with
that okay and that was my main thing is um I want to be able to allow citizens to do what they want with their property assuming that everything's protected and so it seems the staff's okay with it seems like the applicants uh agreeable to it um that I would be in favor of it
any further discussion seeing none can I have a motion to approve move to approve resetting Wait a minute wrong way remove move to approve easement vacate application number
3-2024 for 1558 Meadowark Drive with the condition that a vacation not be recorded until the applicant obtains her permit showing how the swell will be realigned within the remaining 10-foot easement for the flow to be maintained
within a year second thank you Member Nelson vice Mayor Cole I have a motion i have a second city Clerk member Nelson yes mayor Connors yes vice Mayor Cole yes member Stokl yes member Muscoso yes motion carries thank you very much
congratulations sir mr parish KB thank you guys i appreciate it uh we're going to take 10-minute recess before we move on thank you very much yes it's been an hour and a half it's time patience as we uh all need to take a
much needed stretch of our legs city Manager we're up to 9B and that is the reasonzoning application number 1-2025 Windover Farms Cheney Highway and recommended action is to conduct the public hearing and final reading of
ordinance number 12-2025 for reszoning application number 1-2025 Windover Farms Cheney Highway and the city attorney will read the ordinance ordinance number 12 2025 an ordinance of the city of Titusville Florida amending
ordinance number 5193 of the city of Tyville Florida by amending the zoning map made a partisan ordinance by reference by removing all previous conditions of approval originally applied by ordinance number 27208 and ordinance number 29 2008 for a
25.9 acre property within the regional commercial RC zoning district located at 8225 Windover Way with Bard County partial ID number 22 35 530 AV65 providing for severability repeal of conflicting ordinances and providing
for an effective date and again this is quasi judicial so the exparte uh disclosures would apply if there are any to be made at this time thank you city attorney city council any experte communication member Stokel yes um I spoke with the applicant Cole Oliver um
spoke with him a few times one when this was at city council before when they were trying to do multif family there um spoke to them after that with some concerns I had with if this were to come off would this potentially be a live local project
um and just trying to help uh figure out a win-win for this situation but no a formal opinion has been made i also received an email from Sandra Clinger um on some reasonings as to uh some concerns that they have uh with the
access and um again no decision has been made at this point was that Thank you me was that email is that the one that's on our desk dated April 7th yes and I did confirm that the applicant did receive that as well so I did want to be clear on that clerk do you have a copy of that
and did you receive a copy thank you member Nelson and I'm like uh member Stokequel i did talk to the applicant last time and I asked him this time if the Excuse me i asked him this time if
the rumors flying around town were true as to the utilization of the project or the property um also got the email from Sandra Cling member Scosio yeah I received the email
from Sandra Clinger thank you very much i have also received many emails from uh people that lived in Windover i've also spoken with the applicant um I've also bumped into people that live in Windover on the street at the 321 fest so I could not
remember their names unfortunately but um no decision has been made and it does not Is it possible to describe the substance of the communication if you would with the applicant with others yes um Mr oliver asked me if I had any questions on this project and I said "No
I'll look at it when it comes before council." And uh obviously you got a copy of this email and uh the folks that were bumped into me at 321Fest they said "I'll see you on the 25th." And I said "No you won't our meeting's on the
27th." So that was pretty much it thank you very much any other questions for me city attorney all right Vice Mayor Cole yes I too received the email and I too have talked with uh Cole Oliver but I have
not made any decisions on anything i did have some questions about the property but it did not influence my decision in any way and again could you describe the substance of your communications i was trying to determine what the property was going to be used for
and I No I don't know all right city clerk how many cards we got on this thing we have a total of 23 cards um three of them are marked that they would be the speakers and 21 additional cards said
they're yielding their time to the three speakers okay so there anybody else speaking that is not a part of the yielding there is not other than the applicant okay so I just got to worry about calling on four people correct three three and then the applicant mhm
all right just making sure thank you very much and at this time we're going to close off cards so that we can um make sure that we keep track of everything all right Mr oliver I believe you are up did you want a presentation from staff first is it Oh sorry Mr parish sorry
i'll keep it short so the staff report begins on page 238 of your packet um which you know gives a little bit of history about the the property itself but on 239 of your packet you'll see the request is specifically just to reszone
the property the current zoning of the property is regional commercial it's being reszoned if it's approved to regional commercial the difference is removing conditions of approval of the original zoning so it's essentially a reszoning of the property to a new district and so you'll see there at the
top of the page there it's community um you know with regional commercial with concept plan and if approved be regional commercial without concept plan and conditions on page 240 of your packet there are several conditions that were approved with the original resoning
ordinances and there were two resoning ordinances in 2008 that were approved that amended certain portions of the property cumulatively together as regional commercial and each ordinance had several conditions for to allow for development on the property they
included the concept plan including a development agreement included um uh screening and buffer requirements compliance with state and federal requirements and wetland regulations a habitat management requirement uh requirement that they adhere to the St john's Water Management District and
requirement that they adhere to handicapped parking spaces requirements and the submitt of a traffic study that has to be reviewed by Bvard County and FDOT we did provide an analysis of each of those specific conditions on page 240 or at least a statement of our opinion
about each of those conditions the first one is the binding concept plan our code says that if you submit a binding concept plan with or a concept plan with a resoning it becomes binding on the property now what that means is when they submit to us a site plan for engineering it generally has to be
consistent with that concept plan and administratively if we decide or determine that it's uh deviates significantly from that concept plan then they have to go back and get the zoning conditions including that concept plan amended by uh council through the resoning process the applicant again is
not doing that they want to remove that completely uh the plan illustrates four driveways on Windover Way and one ingress only driveway on State Road 50 Cheney Highway um it is questionable whether the FDOT will permit a driveway from I95 from the I95 off-ramp into the
development as illustrated in the plan the parcels are owned by the separate entities removal of the concept plan could result in separate developments uh the development agreement is generally a contract between a property owner and a developer we're not sure why that particular condition was applied here because that
would require another set of public hearings and a negotiated contract in order to allow development on here so you have a concept plan on the property governing how the property will be laid out when it's constructed but yet it's also a requirement that you have to go through a development agreement to negotiate something it didn't the
conditions don't describe what that's supposed to be screening and buffering the city's code requires a 10-ft landscape buffer yard um and screening of mechanical equipment dumpsters and loading and unloading zones and we believe the conditions
unnecessary uh the compliance with state and federal wetlands and wildlife regulations this is already required by state and federal require regulations and we believe that condition is also unnecessary uh we had similar statements for the rest of the conditions related to habitat management apply uh adhering
to St john's water management district it's a given you have to anyway uh distribution of handicap parking spaces that's a given of any development and the same thing with the traffic study we believe we're going to have to require a traffic study but there's no requirement in the code that the traffic study has to be reviewed or approved in some way
by another agency such as FDOT or the county in other words we can't deny a permit based on another agency's approval or denial so we believe that condition is also unnecessary now however you may believe that as you
go through this that there may be a need to keep the concept plan or ask for a revised concept plan or may find that the concept plan is unnecessary uh you may believe that the development agreement is probably something you can still utilize and keep as a condition or modify or keep some of
the existing conditions on there um but our statement is here on page 3240 as um as far as our opinion on each of these conditions on page 242 of your packet you'll see an aerial i'm sorry on page 242 I just want
to describe the area a little bit excuse me not the aerial um so I just want to summarize some of my comments here in the report the existing zoning districts were established over a period of years from 1993 to 2008 subsequent the city's
administrative reszoning which has happened in 1993 there have been two parcels resoneed to regional commercial north of the property by ordinances 14-96 and 40-98 the tour zoning district along Windover Way was approved by ordinance number 41 1998 the existing RC was intended to
serve the city's regional commercial needs the existing zoning is consistent with the city's conference plan and that it encourages clustering of commercial uses along the commercial segment of State Road 50 and 985 the current commercial zoning ordinances include several conditions for specific commercial development which I've
already described what we're trying to get here is that there used to be a tourist zoning district on this property and other zoning districts in 2008 all of that was resoneed to two to regional commercial the concept plan includes the property immediately north of the subject property
we did do an analysis based on concurrency based on what is could be allowed at full development based on the concept plan versus what could be allowed under the existing the conditions of the existing of a regional commercial zoning without any conditions
in other words just straight up developing under our current code so the resoning was reviewed based on a commercial retail buildout of potential of a 30% coverage in the R regional commercial zoning district a commercial
retail development utilizing a maximum buildout potential of the RC zoning district is consistent with the development in the area the area within one half miles of the subject properties a mixture of vacant regional commercial tourists and large lot single family residential which is the Windover farms
to tit of Titusfall removal of the concept planning conditions will allow the property owner to develop under the existing zoning conditions uh development standards described in section 28-315A of the code the code says the the purpose
statement of the RC states districts intended to provide for intensive highly automotive oriented uses that require an accessible location along Thorophares designated as arterials in the comprehensive plan and these regulations so you have to through this quasi judicial process determine whether this
resoning is consistent with that purpose statement and the development standards and intent statements of the RC zoning district our staff comment on page 243 the reasoning request meets the purpose of the RC zoning district described in that same section of the code development on the subject property may
utilize an existing access easement through the property located immediately to the north to directly access state road 50 which is an arterial road in addition to segment of Windover Way between State Road 50 and the southeast corner of the subject property may be utilized to access the arterial there
are commercially zoned and developed properties that use the same local roadway segment as a means to access an arterial there are other local segments with similar zoning and commercial developments in the area the segment of window way trail between State Road 50 Columbia Boulevard and the south municipal boundary is currently used to
access an arterial road similarly on that same page 243 and 244 our recommendation is as such approve the request to remove the concept plan and conditions adopted with this ordinance number 27208 and 29 2008 in the regional commercial zoning district
the recommendation is based upon staff analysis information and evidence presented and in accordance with the city charter of the Titusville code of ordinances and the less section 34-40 of the code the adopted comprehensive plan and provisions of chapter 163 and 166 of Florida
statutes i do want to refer you to page 252 and I promise I'll be quick the applicant did provide a narrative attached to their application they are specifically requesting to remove the prior concept plan that is impossible to be developed due to the
concept plan covering properties that are owned by multiple different land owners i'll leave it to the applicant to to answer the question as to why that was placed on there on the first place on page 256 of your packet you'll see the concurrency analysis and this is
a preliminary concurrency analysis that we do with every reszoning every land use and every concept plan master plan or even uh site plan as they come in there is a formal one that's more detailed later on but this concurrency is based on a full buildout potential which I already described 30% of this
property being developed for commercial and retail and we believe that it will require a traffic study to be submitted um and it would it's generally consistent with the full buildout potential of the current concept plan so based on that we don't believe
that what's being requested is much different than what is already would be approved under the current concept plan on page 2757 of your packet you'll see an aerial the property it's uh has been scraped or has been cleared because of a
prior uh development that was proposed many years ago you'll see a wetland area on the south part of the property the property is is has different two different land uses and two different zonings so on page 259 of your packet
you'll see the land use which is commercial high intensity which is consistent with all the other properties that also have commercial high intensity along this entire thoroughare of state road 595 the south sliver of the property has a
cons uh conservation land use although the majority of the wetland that's in the south part of the property is in underneath that commercial highintensity land use on page 262 you'll see the resoning map the only portion this the the map
won't change it's currently RC the boundaries won't change it's just the conditions will be removed the concept plan that was approved with the resoning in 2008 is on page 266 of your packet and you can see the north
part of that concept plan includes the property to the north we believe that the at the time this applic um the property owners um the at least the property owner of the property to the north was not party of that application we do not know whether they
objected to this or not the city council approved the resoning with the conditions with this concept plan governing both properties so we believe that at the time the justification was this to allow this resoning from tourist to RC
uh based on this concept plan so that um the applicant would work with the property owner to the north in order to develop consistent with this concept plan the conditions specifically of the ordinances that were adopted in 2008 um
are on page 268 and 273 of your packet uh with that I'll try and answer any questions you have can I confirm staff are you offering your staff report and all exhibits presented into evidence yes thank you
thank you Brad member Stoke yes brad could you just briefly clarify the binding the the concept plan and the development agreement so I think it's the recommendation to remove the concept plan but is there a development agreement already in place and is it
recommended that that stays in place if so the there is we do not have a devel development agreement for this property if you keep it it does give you an advantage to negotiate a particular type of development because it is a condition that's still governing okay I saw the
conditions require a submitt of a development agreement so that condition would go away so if it goes away then um with all the other conditions and the concept plan then you are left with just the zoning district only okay and then my um last question is and I don't know
if you can answer this in your opinion um is there what can actually be developed there currently with the concept plan that's in place so the concept with the restrictions sure the concept plan to to us looks like it's strictly our strip type development so
you have anchor stores retail stores with ancillary parking to serve those stores and restaurants that's what we see on this concept plan that's on page 266 okay so that would be the only thing that could be developed right now as you see from the planning perspective with
this correct if we receive a site plan it would have to be in general conformance for that okay all right thank you member Stokal um applicant Good evening cole Oliver uh for the applicant uh business address is 516
Delano Avenue Coco Florida um been here a couple times on this matter so most of you been here tonight uh a couple times before you all so um first I'd like to thank staff for their report and working
with us um on this application the I'd like to give a little brief history of how we got where we are and where we hope to go and then answer any questions that you all have might have and then afterwards we'll take public comment i'd reserve the right to you know rebuttal
on um anything that's stated so this property has been under the process of being developed since approximately 2006 the developer who put this property and Mr denell's property did that back in 2006 during you know the big development
boom that was going on in Florida unbeknownst to the land owners we did not know this is I wasn't here at the time so I'll just blame my father-in-law but did not know that a concept plan that is shown at a hearing becomes binding on the property forever going
forward that was unknown to us at the time hence the development agreement which would come in and go through the process at that time nonetheless the world kind of turned on us in 2008 2009 and with the great recession the person that had it under
contract and had the right to come in before the city and present that concept plan dropped the contract and is subsequently we do not know where he is nonetheless at the time of that application the only properties that were before the city were the property
that is before you tonight so one of the arguments you'll hear tonight is that procedurally Mr denell has to be a part of this process he wasn't a part of the process when this was put in place and there's no reason for him to be a part of the process
now subsequently after the city approved the reszoning with the concept plan in place and the other conditions that were within the ordinances the landowner received its
uh St john's water management permits for the filling of the wetlands and donated a couple hundred acres of wetlands to the St john's to mitigate that as well as keeping the six acres of wetlands on the south side of the
property under perpetual easement that is to the benefit of the St john's Water Management District concurrent with that the city of Titusville issued a filling permit and clearing permit based on a different concept plan that was submitted to them at that time so we
proceeded under work under that different concept plan again no one has told anyone that that concept plan that was presented in 2008 is binding forever going forward without going through another public hearing so subsequently to that we approached
the city with the wind the Bristol project that we were before you all last year on in which we proposed reszoning the regional commercial property to a PD zoning district at the same time we were going through a a comp plan land use amendment um that did not meet favorably
with the council or with the citizens that live in the winter farms area there was extensive testimony given at that time that regional commercial was the correct zoning district for this property and that it should stay as
regional commercial going forward and to the minutes speak for themselves but that was one of the only components that the mayor stated as his vote against the project was it was regional commercial and that is the correct zoning now that
zoning as we're here before you tonight included this binding site plan that had multiple access points onto Wind River Way and access onto State Road 50 um I gave uh each of you all and um Mr parish
a binder and if you look at exhibit one that is the 2008 concept plan that was shown to the city at the council and so therefore under the city's code became binding we're here before you tonight because that concept plan covers
property which is not ours and cannot be developed as you know because we don't have control of the property of the north additionally this concept plan did not take into account the Titusville water and sewer mains that run along the
north side of the property that under the easement if they have to be relocated the city has to pay that cost at their expense and the concept plan here takes no account for how the water gets drained without moving those lines so in
order to build this plan the city would have to at their expense relocate the water and sewer lines this concept plan here has um I forget the exact total number of square footage that is contained just on
the Windover Farms owned piece not Mr dell's piece if you look at exhibit two in your book there is a traffic impact uh analysis from the reszoning that was done for Bristol Farms the importance of
that is that this shows that the property as zoned with this site plan would generate about 8,700 trips per day so that would be the maximum that the current site plan traffic would generate
we would propose as developers that despite whatever regional commercial would allow if it was developed more intensely we would keep it at that same traffic number of 8,700 cars so we would not go above what has already been approved by the city from a traffic
perspective that goes the same for the access points on the Wind River Way the existing site plan that the city has approved the citizens have testified was correct with the access on the Wind Riverway and the previous mayor
testified or voted as that was a basis for his uh vote against it was it correctly zoned shows two access points from our property there there two others on the Wind River way access that um would be on Mr denell's property we
would propose tonight that if this finds favorable we would limit any access on a winover way to those two access points we would seek no more which again keeps us consistent with what the city has already approved so we're consistent with traffic we're consistent with the
access now you're going to hear a couple more arguments tonight from the the and they were in the letter you received and I received um as well and essentially they boil down to the procedural argument that this shouldn't be proceeding without Mr denell's permission again we've already addressed
that he wasn't a part of the initial proceeding he wouldn't be a part of this proceeding the second is an argument that a removal of the concept site plan would create an inconsistency in the regional commercial that wouldn't meet your code
and that's just factually incorrect if you look at exhibit five that's section 28 3:115 of your code and it states the regional commercial district is intended to provide for intensive highly automative
oriented uses that require an accessible location along thorough affairs designated as arterials in the comprehensive plan in these regulations we have the access onto an arterial road State Road 50 the Wver Farms folks at the planning and zoning
committee meeting introduced a letter stating they agreed with that to the letter you all received they state they agreed with that if you look down at the bottom notes it says the footnote one says must have frontage on an arterial
and higher classification thoroughare and be located within 1,320 ft of an intersection of at least a collector road and the required frontage road the frontage road that we have bought our property has,300 feet of frontage on I95 which your code
identifies as an arterial road that is section 9.4 of your technical manuals and if you look at the definition of your code that's exhibit six that you have before you um it defines frontage
the second page if you flip through as linear distance measured along abudding public rideways we directly abut I 95 and a budding though I could find no definition in your code to what a
budding is oxford English dictionary states is to be next to or have a common boundary with Marian Webster says to border on to touch along an edge of the rightway which we do which is the I95 rightway further you're going to hear an
argument that there should be no access to Windover Way that it should only be accessed along State Road 50 as an arterial road that's just not what your code says your code says an accessible location along Thoroughares designated
as arterials which we have there's a 66 ft easement that connects to State Road 50 the citizens previously testified at the prior hearings that we should use that access there's testimony in that hearing that they've contact connected with FDOT who said they would work with
us to utilize that access and we agree we will work with FDOT to utilize that we know we have to have access on the state road 50 so and when you look at I I hate to get into being an English nerd here but my aunt made me that way um but
utilizing the word an is an important distinction in your code when you look at your general rules of statuto interpretation you look to words in a statute or code with the concept that the drafters use words knowing that what they meant and intending what they
meant if the drafters of the code intended to limit access only to the arterial roads they would have used the word the which the definite article and particularizes the subject which it precedes as a word of limitation and is not a word of limitation so the drafters knew how to
state that you can only connect to an arterial arterial or collector road if that was their intent to further hit on that point and to show that that is how the city has reviewed this and exercised the code
in the past if you look at exhibit nine of your book this is the property that the Lowe's is on and if you'll look at it the regional commercial property there the only frontage it has on public roads is on the I95 frontage and along
the western leg of I believe that's Foley Road that comes down so their connection is to two access local roads one being Foley Road one being Serpentine Road which is the road that runs out to um State Road 50 they do
have access across another piece that goes up the other Foley Road and ties into um comes out by the Audi's if you guys are familiar with the area so this is a property of regional commercial that the city has allowed to be built that has only frontage on
I95 and two access points on two different local roads consistent with my interpretation of the code if you look at exhibit 10 this is the Aldi's property if you'll note it has no access to a public road other than through an
easement that comes back to the same road that is accessed through the Lowe's parcel so it has no access points onto a collector and arterial road from its property this would be consistent with ours
finally if you look at exhibit 11 that's been provided to you this is the Home Depot shopping center they actually have no frontage on a collector arterial road at this time their frontage and their access points are all along Windover Trail and along
Ronald McNair Way which is not identified as a collector arterial road by your code they have an easement that cuts through next to the Wendy's that ties into State Road 50 but they have no frontage along
either of those at this point now so what I'm saying is in summary the reading that you're being asked to as a council that there can be no access onto a local road is inconsistent with the plain language of
your code and inconsistent with the prior practice of the city in applying it stepping back again the plain language of your code says that we have the 1300 footage of frontage along an arterial road which is
I95 frontage is specifically defined in your code as a budding linear it does not say that it has to connect at that point and then the other piece that I forgot to touch on was the 1300 um I
believe it's uh it's the distance between the connection of at leage road that is being addressed and the collector arterial road and that criteria is 1320 ft
we're within 500 ft of the collector road that ties in there that's shown on the survey that is uh exhibit 7 via and that takes us through the easement that gets us to that intersection now you're also going to hear a lot
about comprehensive plan codes we're not asking for a comp plan change we're not here for a future land use change the city's already decided that this regional commercial at this hearing and at the 20ou at the hearing in July and August of last year and in
the hearing in 2008 what we're asking is to simply remove where these buildings are located on this property so that whatever buildings can come in we're stating that we will limit the traffic to the same as
is already granted by this site plan we will limit the access to the same that is granted by this site plan and further I've heard some comments that um you know there's concerns of he's doing this for a live local project we would voluntarily put on a restriction that
there will be no live local projects done on this project so there's no concern that this is an endound uh to that process um let me check my notes but I think I'm getting to the end of mine but I will answer any questions that you
have so again in summary we're consistent with the future land use that is here as the highintensity commercial we're consistent with your regional commercial zoning requirements and we meet every portion of the code on that and we're going to remain consistent with the existing access points from the
previously approved concept plan and we will keep our traffic at or below the traffic that would been generated from that plan um that said you know there was one comment that was uh stated as to the rumors of running around the community
of who it is previously when I was requested to disclose I was under under an NDA and I wasn't allowed to speak of it tonight I can confirm that the Starling family is looking to relocate two dealerships to this property that is their intended use now they cannot
submit a con concept site plan due to restrictions by the manufacturers who have to approve anything that goes through and so I can state that's what their intended use is but as [Music]
the council for the seller you know we don't want to find oursel in this position again if for some reason the economy turns and the seller has to walk away from the contract so we can't show you any concept plans because of the way the city code is set you know all I'm
asking to is um give us a shot under the same traffic the city has already allowed under the same access points the city has already allowed and you know with that I'll take any questions you have for me now or I can sit and wait for um rebuttal
would council agree to wait for we hear everybody before you guys ask questions or uh I do have two questions which are basically legal questions i'm sure Sarah remembers this but it was probably six years ago that
we said that concept plans needed to be binding because somebody came before us with a concept plan and then what was developed was totally different and so at that point we said that concept plan should be binding but what you're
showing is a concept plan that was submitted before that ordinance i believe that the ordinance on the concept plans wasn't existent in 2008 i I I don't know that for sure you know I defer to staff on that it was binding at
the time the code the code said it would be binding say again correct my understanding and and staff can confirm i have the code in front of me was that concept plans presented as part of a presentation at the time this
was presented the code said they would be binding okay i I do believe u Mr brim is correct that that that ordinance was in place at the time you know shame on the land owner and the applicant for not knowing that specifically at the time
okay so that was yeah that I needed to clear up because I was like if you presented us with a concept plan before the ordinance went into effect would it be binding at this point second question
is if this agreement did not include the guy George who owns front property how is the act of council back in 200 was it seven how can that be
legal because we're binding somebody who has nothing to do with this the binding concept plan would be binding to the applicant so if he wanted to get permits to construct the development pursuant to his concept plan
it'd be incumbent upon him at that time to be able to get either unity of title purchase that property or some other legal mechanism by which he could build on Mr donald's property and able to get his permits so it wasn't binding on Mr donald but the concept plan was binding
on this applicant that his reasonzoning was contingent on his ability to legally develop both parcels and it would have been incumbent on him to be able to do that so as stated you didn't bind Mr donald but you bound this applicant to use Mr
donald's property if he can't do that he couldn't develop okay that's my understanding mr burman and I have spoken on that i don't disagree with his analysis that um you know Mr denell would not be bound and then we'd be in a real pickle where if he sold to someone else and they came
in to develop yeah so okay thank you thank you Member Nelson thank you Mr oliver um city clerk who's next um you we have the three speakers for Windover the first one Sandra Klinger
okay and how much time is she getting i do not know okay so we that's up to council yeah that's Give me one second Sandy how many cards do we have yield their time we have including the three that are going
to speak we have 23 cards okay Miss Andy before we 24 right before we get started uh are you taking the majority of the time a third of the time majority of the time mayor can I ask a question real quick um mostly and this
will be mostly for um Sandra and the speakers for me just because I've been heavily involved with this project and I can't speak for the rest of the council going back when we had the discussion over multif family versus commercial there was a lot on commercial and this being the appropriate use so it would be
beneficial for me if you could highlight um if you guys are still in agreement with it being commercial and if so what are the main concerns that are faced so thank you all right uh thank you member Stokal um yeah if my math is correct I
believe the three of them have 72 minutes it won't be that long right so that's up to council we we technically don't have a rule where you know you could bring 100 people and they all give three minutes but I understand they want to have spokespersons and they certainly would be entitled to more time than the
three so you might want to ask them is it 20 minutes 30 minutes what do they want as representatives to speak i understand that but they they all yield their time so I'm just tallying up the total and then I would need council to agree to you know wave the rules of council and allow this to go down
correct sure to have the representatives and then curious as far as how many representatives do we have and how they wanted to divide time i just want to make sure we get to it have folks here that are ready to raise their hand if you want to do it in three minute increments and say I yield my time yeah we we had them sign saying sign saying sign saying sign saying sign saying sign saying sign saying sign saying sign
saying sign saying sign cards i just wanted to know how to break it up between the three of you to make sure you know we kept good track of that stuff so Nelson so my question Sandra my question okay I'm trying to figure out how much time the other speakers would need i you know if we
said everybody total time is 20 minutes 30 minutes how much time do you need how much time the others need that would be helpful you said how many i probably need 10 minutes so 10 minutes i think 20 minutes maximum for me hopefully 15 i'm
going to try to Okay actually just give them up to an hour even though they won't use it because that's the amount of cards that we have i just didn't want you know you to talk and be really passionate and then all of a sudden it got to them and I hate to be the bad guy and go "Oh y'all are out of time." You know especially want to do this thing so
I would suggest 30 minutes 40 minutes for me for the three to 15 for you i don't know yeah i would just move to give them up to an hour i don't think they'll take that much time but that's how much with the cards and the three that would be my motion second i have a
motion i have a second any further discussion all those Did you have discussion okay all those in favor say I i all opposed motion carries thank you very much you have the floor sandra Clinger 2680 Bobcat Trail um I uh we have submitted written comment letter that you all uh
stated that you received uh consolidating our position on request on the requested resoning and updated and expanded on our previously written comments for resoning 1 2025 windover Farms community has consistently participated in public
hearings related to development plans on the subject property that affect development density traffic noise public safety quality of life for the our residents or negatively impact our community's character we have strenuously and consistently voiced our support for the city's existing adopted
policies that are intended to prohibit access for highintensity commercial or highdensity residential land use from being located and receiving access onto local roads like Windover Way windover
Way is different than a lot of all of the other local roads described by the applicant windover Way is the main access point for a 600 home residential community it is not a local road built
to access commercial development like every other road mentioned we care a lot about it this is how we come and go from our homes so when we see orange signs go up on Windover Way we pay attention
when I first heard about this request to remove the concept plan my initial thought was "Wow finally this might be one we don't have to object to." But then we looked into it and we
would not object to it so long as the removal did not create or cause a violation of the city's comprehensive plan policies land development regulations or cause the necessity of a variance to those laws a particular concern for us is the
potential to circumvent the requirement of high density or high commercial resid or high high intensity commercial or high density residential developments from gaining access on a local road instead they
should be placed on collector or arterial roads based upon the planning department staff report the applicant is requesting the removal of existing concept plan for 25.9 acres of the property included in the concept plan and the conditions
adopted with ordinance 27208 29 2008 and retain the existing regional commercial zoning and open space and reg recreation zoning established under those ordinances removing a concept plan for a development no longer viable seems
pretty straightforward and easy to understand but in this case it is not as simple as just removing the concept plan you have to understand and consider the role that very concept plan played in the consideration and approval of the
adopted regional commercial zoning that occurred on the subject property in 2008 according to the staff report the subject properties concept plan has a unified commercial retail strip center on the subject property and neighboring
property to the north owned by Mr denell the application to remove the concept plan effectively decouples these two properties the removal of the concept plan removes the linkage to its north that provides
the lot with frontage onto State Road 50 in Arterial Road this would cause the subject property to no longer be in compliance with the LDR zoning district standards for regional commercial subsequently changes to the
conditions under which the RC zoning subst this substantially changes the conditions under which the RC zoning was approved by council in 2008 this creates policy non-compliance problems under the LDR requirements for
regional commercial related to lot with requirements and location proximity to collector red intersections so we have submitted in our package some 2008 resoning facts and evidence in 2008
the applicant requested a resoning from tourist to regional commercial on the subject property within the context of a multiparcal unified concept plan submitted as part of the resoning application included in the concept plan
was the Windover Farms Inc property 25.9 acres and 6.94 acres of Mr denell's property to the north mr denell's property provided needed direct frontage on State Road 50 and arterial
roadway and already had the regional commercial zoning in place since 1998 you can see exhibit C in our packet the inclusion of this property was of particular importance during the city's resoning hearing because the lot to the
north provided that minimum lot width frontage on the arterial road the fact that the city relied on the multi-partial concept plan during the hearing to resone the subject property from tourist to regional commercial is provided in the following
records of fact the applicant submitted concept plan included the subject parcel of 6.95 acres of Mr donnow's trust see exhibit D the staff report to council agenda package for the August 28th 2008 public
hearing on page 154 of 499 under staff analysis included the statement the concept plan proto proposes two restaurants along the northern area and will be designed around the existing gas station which is also proposed to be remodeled in the near future see exhibit
E in the staff report to council staff conditioned a recommendation of approval on a unity of title being provided minutes from the August 28th 2008 city council meeting public hearing on this resoning the stated ordinance
28-208 and 29-208 changed reszoning from tourist to regional commercial and was stated to include a total acreage of approximately 32 acres which is the total of the subject property plus Mr denell's
property the applicant Wendover Farms was requesting an amendment on the property located near the intersection of I95 and State Road 50 they're repo proposing a retail shopping center and it would encompass approximately 32
acres while Mr oliver stated they had no idea why the other land owner was included and seemed confused or stated that there was no knowledge on their part in fact at the
August 28th 2008 public hearing Mr swan the land owner spoke in favor of the adoption of the resoning for the concept plan he knew he was there in person and has voted in favor of it that's exhibit
F parcel and zoning maps show the Denell trust property zone portion of the property in the north provided the 200 foot wide lot width aerial frontage for regional commercial zoning removing the concept plan creates a
non-compliance problem for the subject property to meet the re regional commercial zoning district standards alone without the property to the north the purpose of regional commercial zoning is to provide intensive highly automotive oriented uses that require
accessible location along thorough affairs designated as arterials in the comprehensive plan and land development regulations having a side of your property about I95 is fantastic let them put their access point there
then but it can't do that can you no so that does not meet the intent of that in policy the purpose let's see the specific regional commercial zoning district standards in LDR 283
315 require a minimum of 200 ft lot width frontage on an arterial roadway and be located within 1,320 ft of an intersection of at least a collector and arterial road this matches with the described use for
regional commercial as being highly automotive you would want it on arterial roads you would want it near hight traffic intersections the regional commercial zoning lot width and aerial aerial road fronted requirement
is only met when the subject property is combined with Mr denell's property the subject property does have a 66- foot wide easement access for State Road 50 but that does not meet the regional commercial zoning district lot width
frontage as required for arterial on arterial roads there are any number of different zoning districts commercial zoning that would not create the non-compliance issue had the applicant's reg zoning request to remove the concept plan also included a
change to a different zoning district that could perhaps also meet their proposed plan that we just heard about tonight it is understandable that the applicant wants to remove the 2008 concept plan because that development is no longer
viable however the regional commercial zoning district standards that they asked to be put on their property cannot be met by the subject property alone without linkage to the property to the north the planning and zoning commission
discussed the regional commercial zoning district non-compliance issues that would be created by removal of the concept plan in detail ultimately they voted to deny the requested application with all but one member voting to deny the one member who did not vote to deny
said he didn't understand what the uh he didn't understand the issues so was going to vote in favor we have other ongoing issues and concerns regarding staff's discussion and description of allowing highintensity commercial and
highintensity residential developments along local roads the Windover Farms community strongly objects to the assertion in the planning department staff report that access from a regionally commercialzoned highintensity commercial property should
be permitted onto Windoverway a local road that has a limited right-of-way width of 50 ft in violation of the comprehensive plan and LDRs windoverways rightway width actually shrinks as it approaches state
road 50 and it is bound by the adjacent community commercial property on both sides of the road the two gas stations that are brought up as justifying putting more commercial access points further up Windover Way they fail to
mention that those two are actually exist at the intersection of Windover Way and State Road 50 not further up Windover Way let's see oh that's in exhibit G in our packet in addition with signal placement
closer to Interstate 95 it is unlikely that Windover Way will ever be a candidate for signalization to accommodate traffic from a development with higher intensity commercial or residential zoning it is concerning that staff continues to push a functional use
narrative at these meetings this has no basis in policy as an encourage and is encouraging continued development actions in violation of both the comprehensive plan and LDRs there is nothing in the city's adopted policy or in any way that supports locating
highintensity commercial or high density residential zoning on local roads and diverting all of that associated traffic onto a local road there are important and wellsupported reasons why the comprehensive plan and LDR policies
direct more intensive commercial and highdensity residential away from local roads and why the existing roadway classification and their underlying engineering right-of-way standards exist the planning department staff report on
page six lines 5 through 8 claims without any policy support the segment of Windover Way between State Road 50 and the southeast corner of the subject property may be utilized to access the arterial this is in complete violation
of comprehensive plan FLU policy 1.9.1 policy 1.9 LDR section 28-3 315 and LDR development review procedures manual sections 9.4 4 and 9.5 equally nonsensical is comparison of
the segment of Windover Way from the subject property to State Road 50 and the segment of Windover Trail from south of the municipal boundary to State Road 405 the fallacy of this argument is plainly clear when you look at these two
roadway segments factually prior to 2007 I would agree with them in 2007 prior to in 2007 Windover Trail and Windover Way were both two-lane roads with similar rightaway widths until that time commercial development had frontage
access on State Road 405 then in mid 2007 the Home Depot Petco Target commercial developments happened and concurrent with those developments Windover Trail was widened from two lanes to four lanes
for this road segment c exhibit H this type of roadway widening with multiple lanes turn lanes and the ability to signalize the intersection with the arterial roadway is just not possible at Windover Way and State Road 50 unless the city plans on exercising
imminent domain and can convince the Florida Department of Transportation to revise signal signal placement along State Road 50 the comprehensive plan and LDR policies referenced in our submitted document are
good governance and protects residential communities on local roads from increased traffic impacts including quality of life from the high number of trips generated from new highintensity commercial and highdensity residential
demand development it is a sound approach and good public policy to direct highintensity commercial development to larger roads with wider road widths to accommodate turn lanes that protect traffic flow and where signalization can be employed to keep
traffic moving we don't object to the development of this property i know it probably feels like that i honestly when I first heard this I was like yay okay great but when you look at your
policy this was adopted as a joint project it was reviewed under that context it was approved under that context now we're talking about pulling out a portion of that and the applicant has said he would generously keep the
number of trips to the same for the whole thing just from his portion of the property i'm not sure how that's generous the subject property when viewed alone just does not meet the regional commercial zoning district standards for lot with and
frontage on an arterial roadway without the inclusion of the Denell trust property to the north its removal would create non-compliance with the LDRs and changes the entire context under which the regional commercial zoning was approved for the subject property in
2008 therefore it should not be approved as submitted because the the applicant's property alone does not meet the regional commercial zoning district standards thank you thank you very much
the next card is Kristen Bolan um Lindsay Grizzle she's the third one good evening lindsay Grizzle um 2605 Gator Trail um the city council meeting on March
11th um this team rejected the planning and zoning commission request to modify the comprehensive plan the future land use element policy 1.9.1 that requires highintensity commercial development to be located on
interior or collector roadway they wanted to add flexibility to the locational criteria so that beyond roadway classifications certain roadway characteristics and functionality could allow for commercial use well you voted
um to reject the revising this policy so had you not done that um I guarantee you that this segment at least of Wind River Way would be the among the first local roads that would have characterized that the staff would have tried to characterize as functionally able to act
as a collector section 28315A describes the regional commercial district is intended to provide for intensive highly automotive purposes you u oriented uses that require the an accessible location along thorough
affairs designated as arterials period staff response in their so staff's response in their report directly related to the subject property and this particular LDR section um they said there are commercially zoned and
developed properties that use the same local roadway segments as a means to access an arterial there are other local road segments similar with similar zoning and commercial developments in the area the segment of Windover Trail between State Road 405 which is Columbia Boulevard and
the south municipal boundary is currently used to access art roads bringing up another um other non-compliant examples should not be an argument for further non-compliant actions even still staff for the SSA
this SSA tonight and their staff report during the and during prior PNZ meetings and the first meeting they've have attempted to use this certain roadway characteristics and functionality to allow commercial land use onto the local road they're still trying to use this
even though you clearly rejected modifying the policy 1.9.1 on March 19th when the staff team was questioned about the planning commission or by the pling commission about their recommendations for this SSA that would create a non-conformity issue
their response was to bring up other parcels in the surrounding area that are in non-compliance related to lane use and access to an arterial collector roadway and frontage the road segments they are using as justification are non-compliant road segments segments
that are classified as local but have commercial access points they brought up Windover Trail at that time Ronald McNair Way and um later Hower Boulevard those are one specifically mentioned mr oliver brought up other ones tonight
using roads that are in violation as further justification for making violations shouldn't be occurring in the first place but let's look at these particular roads that will surely be brought up again in staff's attempt to compare their function to Windover Way the actual current design as Sandy said
to the purpose of Windover Trail was to sport um commercial traffic this segment of the road widens as you can see in that image and has turn lanes and has controlled intersection at 407 or Walmart intersection
um Rondover Trail is not similar to Windover Way plus the plus non-residents do not drive into Windover via Windover Trail non-residents don't use Windover
Trail to get in to come out onto um State Road 50 someone would not go south on Wonder Trail to get to Highway 50 as opposed to commercial traffic coming onto the segment of Windover Way that we're talking about that would surely generate commercial traffic through our
neighborhood and to other commercial destinations like Target and Walmart windover Way is not functionally similar to Windover Trail and should not be able to be used as justifications for further non-conformity and the segments um
segments like this should have been classified as collector in the first place if they meet the criteria for Ronald McNairway this is not at all similar to Windover Way in its function it's a 0.1 mile segment with its purpose adjoining the two collector roads 405
and 50 there's yielding and merge lanes there ronaldo McNair um way currently provides access points to busy McDonald's and Home Depot and there's no residential area right there doesn't make sense why staff would use these road segments as evidence for functional
equivalents to Windover Way last one is Hower Boulevard that was brought up um by staff again non-compliant use in an error may be made during classification but the road um functions as a collector
road which is not similar um in characteristics to our segment of Wind River the sole use again for this houseer road is to um support commercial traffic coming into um commercial type destinations it's very wide road and actually acts as the collector for the
hotels and restaurants and that's both the Cracker Barrel side and the Durango side should not be compared to whatever way it's not functionally similar if that's the angle that staffing team is trying to play using Hower as an example the staff has used past erroneous development approvals to justify
worsening the problem by putting even more development in violation of your comp plan on local roads instead of ensuring that new development is fully in compliance with the zoning that is on the property if the dissolution of the plan is granted the property is um will be
aggregated from the northward property um how are they going to remain in compliance with the frontage onto Highway 50 we would not be again we would not be objecting if the applicant was requesting removal of this concept plan and concurrently was requesting a zoning
that was more appropriately fitting to this property um standing alone without their um adjoining um frontage on State Road 50 thank you thank
you and city clerk can you call the name please the last card is Christine Bolan thank you uh Christine Bolan 2755 Armadillo Trail all right uh first I want to make it clear that Windover is not opposed to
responsible development on Mr swan's property as long as it aligns with the city the city's land development regulations and comprehensive plan the main concern here is not development itself but the scale and nature of what's being proposed
i think one of the biggest issues with the property in question is that it does not support the level of commercial value that's being suggested zoning it for something that is a lower intensity and allows access on the wind overway is really what's appropriate um even if
that doesn't maximize financial return for Mr swan sometimes that's just the reality of land use planning i understand that Mr swan's attorney Cole Oliver who is also his son-in-law is advocating strongly on his behalf that's
his role but your role as our elected officials is to uphold the rules and regulations that were established to protect the integrity of our city's development process we trust that given all the information before you you will do just that um I also want to raise a
broader concern regarding city staff staff members are employed by the city they work for the public not for private applicants yet time and time again we've seen staff attempting to reinterpret bend or even propose changes to the
rules in ways that seem to benefit select individuals this erodess public trust for example the effort to use instances of commercial access onto local roads that Lindsay brought up uh where those projects were arguably non-compliant or
not even comparable to justify setting a new precedent is troubling creating city-wide ordinance changes just to enable one project success is not sound policy it's not fair to residents and it's not the kind of planning that
serves our long-term interests i urge you to look closely at the facts see through the smoke and mirrors the semantics uh the I95 frontage that's semantics and protect the integrity of the process by voting to deny this
request i know it can be a thankless job um that you all do but we truly appreciate your due diligence and thank you for your time and for your service to our community thank you thank you [Applause]
no other cards right city clerk yes sir all right Mr oliver all right thank you for your time tonight and it won't be won't be long in closing as I know you have a lot more business tonight but kind of working backwards from the speakers there our
last speaker asked you know the semantics of the code and your road public trust the code's a code it specifically states frontage along an arterial road which we have and we have shown you there's nowhere in the code that says
that regional commercial cannot connect to local roads they did not once show you that tonight i gave you your code and showed it to you it says an access onto arterial road the then they're so we meet that we have shown you that
so the next part is the argument that we're trying to show you other examples of non-compliance as reasons why this one should be approved that's flipping it that's not correct what we're showing you is that our interpretation of the
code is the correct interpretation i've shown you both grammatically with the code itself and with the prior interpretation of the code they're asking you to apply the code in a non-compliant way so again I repeat nothing they've
shown you nothing in the code that says that these projects cannot connect to a local road it just requires an access to a collector arterial road to the initial comments on the public safety and traffic concerns we will meet all the codes and regulations
that are set forth by the city on that we're not seeking any variances we've not asked for any and there was a comment that this is the main access point to Windover Farms subdivision there are four access points to Windover Farms there are others this
is not the main access it's not even the only access there's four others one of them being as they have testified a four-lane road with signalization then the the broader issue is the decoupling the property and how this no longer fits your regional commercial code
if you look at the site plan that was approved based on the 32 acres that were shown though it's not what was applied for within there we meet the same portion we're seeking the same access points on the Windover way that was approved by the city the same access points that were on to the collector
road of State Road 50 we have the same frontage along the arterial road of I95 we're not asking to change anything other than the buildings internal to the property will meet all of the codes that the city has as it relates to setbacks
vegetative screening and everything else we just would like to use the property as regional commercial as is already zoned without the prior conditions that were put in place in the 2008 hearing um you know and again I repeat the prior concessions that you know though they
don't act like they're concessions that that we have proposed that we would limit traffic so we don't exceed the traffic that was approved in the prior concept plan we won't seek any additional access points that weren't approved in the prior concept plan and we also volunteered to restrict
voluntarily restrict doing any live local projects so that there's no con concern that this is an endound around around your code um you know with that I don't have anything further to say excuse me one last
point when I said there was no knowledge of the concept plan of course we knew there was there was knowledge of a concept plan being presented we didn't know if the city had a code that said concept plan becomes binding in the application of the property in the future no matter what i've done this for
almost 20 years this is the only city or county that I know of that has that in their code otherwise why would you call it a concept plan when you show up at a hearing but so I didn't say Mr swan didn't have any knowledge of the concept
plan he had no idea that said concept plan would become binding forever in the future and you know with that I will uh you know close my arguments but to the extent that you all have any questions I'm happy to try to answer them as best I can thank you Mr oliver vice Mayor
Cole yes cole is there do you have any estimate of what our tax revenue would be if that facility that you mentioned is built there so again without having the concept plans done I don't know exactly
the what the taxable value would be what I do know is that individual car dealerships and we're talking about two going in here individual ones depending on size and where they are within the county have
ranged between about 60,000 each up to 150 175,000 each and you know so that would be approximate I I don't know what Mrs blickley is going to to estimate them at but that's that's the average I've seen across the county okay
thank you member Stokal yes two questions one um can you I think you said it already um it was brought up that variances would be needed and I think you said you would not you're not requesting any variances or don't foresee any variances we're not seeking
any variances okay and then two since um you know we've been working on this project when it was proposed for multif family we said we wanted commercial um during trying to get commercial to potentially go into this piece of property and considering that the
concept plan prior was primarily retail could do you have any history on trying to get retail there um while you're trying to find somebody to purchase the property yeah we've had it on the market excuse me we've had it on the market ever since
um 2009 when the contract was dropped we received no interest in it for commercial as it was designed and you know I can't tell you if the lack of interest was the location or the lack of interest was not having an appetite to
come and the length of time it takes to go through these hearings to try to get that in place to remove the concept plan so that those people can do it when we came before you with the Bristol Development Group seeking the PD
um reszoning and comp plan change those gentlemen were the first that had come along with a serious um you know we that we considered a serious buyer um and they spent in excess of $200,000 trying to get the engineering and all the work
done to to get that project approved so that's just giving you a flavor of the constraints that it puts on the marketability of the property when anyone that's coming in has to go through that scope and scale of work to try to remove the
concept plan and and move forward with some sort of reasonzoning all right thank you thank you member Stokal any further questions mayor yes may I respond to some of the comments that were made sure
um I do want to remind you about the planning and zoning commission's denial they recommended denial um on the basis that there is no clear path forward on the utilization of the property once this has been reproved in other words conforming conformity to access in the property and conformity to the law with
in the zoning district and the separation of dissolution of the plan would create at least one non-conforming issue or at and present present a violation of the rule upon adoption of the change so that was PNZ's recommendation so just want to remind you of that um Mr cole is asking for two
access points i'm not sure if that means he's asking for condition or just allowance for that site plan so if this resoning is approved with all these conditions in the concept plan removed you'll go forward with a site plan application an engineered plan which means it would have to go through an
administrative process removal of the plan and all conditions will leave staff having to approve or deny an access point we'll have to make that call unless there's some condition describing how that would be done with this
resoning uh this will be for a commercial development onto Windover Way most likely if this we do receive a site plan for um a commercial development we'll require a traffic study and some kind of statement as to what kind of improvements might might need to be put
onto Windover Way at least that segment of Windover Way allowing this development to access Windover and to empty onto Arch onto State Road 50 that could mean a variety of things turn lanes widening the road improving the segment there that happens all the time
throughout the city when we approve site development permits that access a roadway emptying out onto a major road or even onto adjacently to a major road staff does not have the luxury of second-guessing this council or the past
council's decisions as far as consistency review of a land use or resoning so we have to look at your decisions as far as whether you decide that this resoning is appropriate on this property and we have to look at your past ones too not just this council but past councils to determine what is
appropriate so if it is left up to us to make that determination that's what we have to look at um to think otherwise would mean that we have the authority to second guess and somehow uh say that council was wrong council is the ultimate authority of what is
consistent uh the width of this what I would call a feeder road this segment of Windover Way and this is true of Holler um of uh some of the other local roads as Windover Trails and um uh the roads on that emptied uh allow some commercial
developments to empty out onto a state road is that it might have to be widened or improved uh with this middle of the site plan we'll review at that time as far as engineering window is not an exception to this um the binding concept rule was in
effect as far back we could see as as this as 2008 in 2008 the city relied on the concept plan to approve the resoning as consistent with the commercial highintensity land use and the regional commercial zoning that we we see from the
record the functional use narrative that was presented here there's no such statement we've never mentioned anything like that but I can say this about concurrency if you're not familiar with a concurrency it means that we have to abide by state law making sure that there's enough capacity on our roads to handle
growth one way you do that is not by emptying all traffic out immediately onto a major road because what you do is you cause that road to fail functionally to fail its level of service standard quicker than it would you would
otherwise need to allow that to happen you make sure you have other development standards in place such as adjacency of and um consolidating commercial developments together access points cross access shared driveways uh shared uh private drives shared
public roadways shared segments in order to empty out and use that same roadway to empty out onto a collector and have cross accesses points that helps you maintain your level of service standard on your roadways the code would does require cross access
points between adjacent commercial developments so this might be a requirement at the time of site plan submittal and making all retail to have individual driveways is not a good planning practice using shared driveways and existing road segments are
author um just for the record I have to say I disagree with the assertion that the resoning violates the comprehensive plan as I stated before uh policy 1.9.1 of the future land use element addresses the convenient and direct access
statement this is a policy not intended to be applied as a regulatory standard as you see typically in our land development regulations rather as a policy guide guiding the location of development if you look on page uh 259 of your packet you'll see the land use categories there
and how they're consolidated there you'll see the properties adjacent or not adjacent immediately to I95 or state road 50 it is a thoroughare these are able to directly access the main thoroughare either
through each other's properties or through shared driveways or shared segments of local roads and with cross access points policy 1.9A of the comprehensive plan future land use settlement states near intersections and clustered development
of commercial developments again look at page 259 of your packet and you'll see consolidated clustered commercial development and land uses near intersections staff also finally is in no way working for any particular developer i just want
to make that clear we try our best to objectively review applications as they are presented we work with applicants to determine the best paths forward for what they're proposing and a lot of times that doesn't work out a lot of applications a lot of proposals are not even brought up to you and so you're not
aware of them so I just want to make that clear i'll try and answer any questions you have further member MSO sure are there other options for zoning that would help this to be um compatible with our comprehensive plan
do you mean other zoning districts other zoning districts there are other zoning districts that probably could work here uh the other commercial zoning districts are community commercial tourist neighborhood commercial and office professional would low inensity commercial be an option here where it
would comply with our comprehensive plan are you referring to the land use category yes sorry commercial low intensity possibly could work here yes okay and that would have access to a local road so it would be compatible correct again that council would have to
determine what that would be appropriate uh so if you see that the current land use on the property which is not part of the request tonight is not compatible then you would have to go through a process to see if about amending the the comprehensive plan sure i just want to make it clear there are other options
yes thank you member Nelson but Brad I also understand what you're saying is the idea that traffic goes out on a local road to get to that collector road is acceptable
we have seen that in other places so if they see this particular segment if you look on page 259 of your packet you'll see a segment there of Windover Way and you have commercial developments or commercially zoned properties along that segment which would have to in some cases do not have immediate direct
access to State Road 50 so if we receive an application for development on there we would determine that that land use and that zoning was applied on that property appropriately by city council at the time whenever that happened okay we would look at the comprehensive plan and other policies to see if there's anything else that may intercede in
their ability to develop on there including the code okay and determine what they can and cannot do determine what that path is and that might be an administrative process through uh site plan or it might require them to have to go through a public hearing whether that's a reasonzoning or maybe a
comprehensive plan amendment that really depends on what's being proposed second question would a development agreement be good for this piece of property a development agreement would give you it's an extra tool that you could use to
negotiate with a property owner as far as what that development might be so it's kind of a a contract if you will typically you see those development agreements as more or less uh um laying out the u phasing of a development
schedule and timing um and it may include an exhibit such as a master plan or a more detailed concept plan uh associated with it okay thank you member Nelson seeing no further discussion i'm going
to Who jumped in oh sorry um Mr paris was you know stating if we were on the access points what we were trying to do is limit it so there would be no more than the two we're okay with that being a condition moving forward um
you know we're okay with the condition of a traffic study being conducted you know we did that previously and if we can't meet the concurrency whoever develops at that time is going to have to meet the city's codes and regulations to bring those roads into concurrency um to the point on the cross
access we already share cross access with our neighbor to the north you know that's our that's our access out to State Road 50 in and out of State Road 50 there so we share access with them already and we're going to be utilizing that one point there along with the windover way to move the cars in and out
and efficient safe manner and there was the question on the zoning district that would be compatible i think that presupposes that the existing zoning regional commercial is not compatible with the future land use which it is nothing further sorry thank you
seeing any further discussion all right i don't see none i'm going to close the public hearing at this point in time thank you for all the testimony and now I'll entertain a motion from council my motion would be Can we have discussion oh that's what we just did
sorry um I have a few more things i I just want to state that I think this is kind of opening up Pandora's box um because what we're allowing is the developer to um ultimately define what our code means and to interpret it instead of clearly looking at um I feel
like what our code says and so this isn't just a decision on this property this is going to affect multiple properties so what is going to stop the next developer from coming in and saying well that they said that that was a
collector and arterial or it could go out on the local road so I think this is a very uh we just really need to think about this i would like to read something i think this was from Miss Klinger and it says "It's the city's responsibility to ensure compliance of new development with their existing
policies grandfather them in if they predated the policy or redevelop the roadway to meet the engineering standards and definition of established adopted policies staff are using past and persistent violations as justification for more policy violations
going forward so I think this is more than just this project this is going to have farreaching consequences thank you Member Mosa member Nelson I would agree but I think this is something that has
Excuse me i think this is a president that has gone back many many years this has been the interpretation by staff of this particular part of the comp plan the code and so that was one of the reasons I
suggested maybe we'll look at how we define these roads because we don't have a definition so if you want to change it then that's something we need to look at changing um I mean it takes change she
has the floor sorry member no member Nelson you have the floor are you done all right member Stokel yeah um I've thought about this project for a lot in this piece of property um for me I think it's our role as council to interpret
our comp plan and so when we're talking about the access um and we've had several projects regarding access this one to me um I don't see an issue with the access points primarily because when you do look at as Brad mentioned page 259
you're surrounded by major roads like the intent in my opinion from the code is you would have to drive through a local road to get to said car dealership commercial whatever it may be um which you will not have to do with this it is
right off of 50 um so to me the access is not an issue uh again going back for me it's always been about what is the appropriate use for here and again looking at 259 you are surrounded by commercial highintensity like that that
is always been my number one thing um so I think for us um at least for me we have two options one um we could maybe add some conditions for the applicant that would uh that any council member
felt was needed um or two I would I would say remove the conditions it's regional commercial i'm happy with it being commercial i would like to have retail that would be my want um but again as a council person I have to make sure I balance
out addressing the community and respecting like what the community wants versus also respecting an applicant owning a piece of property and so um for this one I I it's strongly commercial in my opinion and I like I said I would like it to be
um more retail um but I think given the situation the facts that we were presented those are the only two options I see thank you Member Stoke member Moscoso you have the floor yes um I think if if they could have access to 50
but where 50 is um it's so close to 95 I really see that be being an issue and I think that's a a big part of it is I highly doubt I don't know that FO's going to give them permission to have that that entrance there so I don't see
that so I think that for me that's what I'm seeing is it's all coming out on a local road i mean it would be nice if it could go out on 50 but I I don't think that would be a good idea either a member Nelson and I think I would like to get rid of the one condition the
concept plan and maybe leave the development agreement in and I don't know how Mr oliver feels about it you know the the development agreement conceptually I don't really have a problem with the the bigger issue I have
is that twofold one there's no standards so when we come back in with a development agreement we don't really know what we're working with in said development agreement and two you know it's another six to eight months before someone can cut loose go into the engineering
process and everything else and they have no guidelines on what may or may not be approved at the development as the staff report stated the development approval uh development agreement is usually in place to protect the developer so if the city has rules that
change later in the future that cause more restrictions they're bound into what those rules were at that time which is there's some other projects in the city that have development agreements that have vested rights due to those development agreements so that's my
concern on using a development agreement so maybe without the development agreement but I'm I'm okay with removing the restrictions thank you Member Nelson member Mscoso um I I just want to know are we agreeing
that frontage is able to be interpreted as being on I95 that's cons with do you guys all agree that that is considered frontage on I95 i don't personally agree with that i'm just curious how you guys feel
yes no i sort of feel like if we don't define it i'm sorry we we don't really need to get in back forth everybody can say their piece and I would like to entertain a motion i see the discussion has reached its end point mayor could I
just want to point out again this is quasi judicial so absolutely well whatever the motion is whether it's approval denial with conditions is quasi there needs to be appropriate findings so I suggest if you're you know when we
do that u findings for approval denial whatever your basis is comprehensive plan code that would be appropriate discussion thank you very much so if you are making a motion uh for or against make sure you have a good reason okay motion to
approve ordinance number 5 or 12-205 amending the zoning map by removing the previous conditions of approval originally applied by ordinance number 27-20008 and 2920008
um based on the evidence presented today and the staff report second could I'm sorry could I ask I didn't hear Did you say the uh resoning number but did you also say the ordinance number i
did you say the ordinance number yeah ordinance number 12-2025 okay are you satisfied city attorney well I want to make sure if those are her findings to support and we have I was just making sure that you she got
the ordinance numbers correct and you were good with that all right it is ordinance 1225 i see second all right so I have a motion from member Nelson i have a second from Vice Mayor Cole any further discussion city clerk call the role please mayor Mayor Connors yes vice
Mayor Cole yes member Stokl yes member Muscoso no member Nelson yes motion carries thank you very much city manager moving on to ordinance first reading wait for everyone to leave do you guys want to take a quick break
everybody's piling out you can read this yeah feels like he has to yell because everybody's talking maybe five minutes break i'll read the block when you read this
hey guys we're we're still in a meeting so if you guys are filing out please please do it quietly we're on this one guys in the front row thank you city manager let's continue ordinance number 13-2025 revoking advorum tax abatement
for bricks project brewery LLC and recovery of abated taxes this is to approve the advalorum exemption for the portion of the tax year that bricks project LLC was in compliance of the ordinance number 27-2015
collect the amount of $4,347.79 for the portion of the tax year that Bricks Project Brewery was out of compliance due to the transfer of ownership and terminate the advorm abatement and prove related ordinance number 13-2025 ordinance number 13 2025 an ordinance of
the city of Tisville Florida revoking the economic development advorum tax abatement to bricks project brewery LLC and providing for an effective date thank you city attorney city clerk are there any cards on this we had one card and Mr johnson has left I believe all
right seeing none city manager oh do you want a motion this is first reading oh first so yeah make a motion to Let's continue city manager there was no cards we're moving on we
just did a first reading that was the quickest first reading I think that's right first reading moving on 10b ordinance number 14-2025 providing for appeals of boards of adjustments and board of adjustments and appeals decisions to be heard by the
city council and this is a first reading of ordinance number 142025 an ordinance of the city of Tyville Florida amending the code of ordinances by amending section 3155 appeal to decision of the board of adjustment and appeals to be renamed
appellet review of decision of the board of adjustment and appeals but by providing that decisions of the board of adjustments and appeals may be appealed to the city council by amending chapter 34 procedures article 5 variances and appeals by adding a new division 10 appeals to the city council including
applicability notice requirements by amending development review procedures manual section 17.4 board of adjustments and appeal fees providing for repeal of conflicting ordinances severability and providing for an effective date all right member Stok yeah sorry going
back to the other one I don't think it's a first reading i think that this was on our agenda before and it got pulled um but I don't think it's a I think we can vote on that one no if I'm It's first reading it was on before because it wasn't an ordinance it's coming back to
you as an ordinance first reading oh it doesn't say first reading in the report though either so that's right that that that then was approved it should say first read okay thank you all right thank you city clerk
we have um one card it's Kathleen Oort i'm the only card huh okay um I'm going to go through some quick things uh Kathleen Orook Titusville residents first of all I really I I wasn't quite prepared because I thought there would
be more cards ahead of me um I attended the infamous BAA meeting that sort of led to this and in that meeting clearly developers were heard citizens were not citizens fund this board and yet they
had no voice in addition to that and it was really serious that citizens were treated incredibly disrespectfully and I'm just reviewing sort of why we're where we are and particularly the chair munched on snacks while citizens spoke from their heart it was a terrible
terrible situation it was embarrassing and it was shameful so the process also overall is not fair to the citizens because quite honestly developers can pay a lot of money to lawyers and get their side presented because they have
the funds and citizens don't and the irony of this whole thing is in this particular case the citizens are not asking for an exception to the comprehensive plan they're asking for them to follow the comprehensive plan so if the city reviews these appeals as
suggested and I'm very grateful for this proposal i really am the citizens actually have a chance because right now what happens in reality is if the board of appeals makes a decision and the citizens would have to pay an exorbitant
amount of money to go through the legal system now I am just telling you what I've heard which is basically putting down about a $100,000 bond to do so so that we can cover the poor expenses of those poor poor developers so uh lastly
a change to the comprehensive plan is really dangerous to all Titusville citizens and thus any citizen of Titusville should have standing in a situation that could set a precedent and do some harm to the comprehensive plan
so I really thank you again particularly for hearing us and giving citizens the opportunity to have a voice this was really the right decision and hopefully we will improve the way citizens are treated at these boards thank you very
much thank you Dr stokal thank you uh city clerk are there any other cards yes sir all right it's a first reading we'll be back in a couple weeks thank you and there's there's no old business we'll go straight to new business 12A
North Boulevard Development District economic incentive agreement and interlocal agreement Titusville Mall redevelopment project recommended action is approve the economic incentive agreement in the amount of two $2.4 million to enable the developer to
qualify for the grant city clerk are there any cards yes sir um Mark Frank well good evening mark Frank 1703 Crossville Drive Titusville Florida um I've been working with this project
since 2018 now and we've been to several council meetings we got a lot of things approved uh I just look to see this council look forward and move forward on uh finishing this project with us and do the grant for the 2.4 million
thank you thank you James Wright good evening uh I'm Jesse Sun i've been involved with the project lately so in phase one of the project the following utility lines have been placed the FPL electric lines sanitary lines storm
water gas lines spectrum conduits what is left to be placed are the water lines connecting phase one to Hopkins FPL lines for light poles conducts for EV charges and in phase two of the project we still have 933 ft of water line that
is being installed to bring water to phase one the water line is a public line i've also helped with maintenance for the existing building owners as well i hope you guys approve this grant because we need a lot of money for this project thank you thank you uh city clerk yes um next card
is Chase Patterson chase Patterson Patterson Construction Group i'm the general contractor for the AOF portion of the Tatisville Resort and Destination Project um let me just pull up my notes and I was not expecting to talk first
anyway but yes uh I hope that you move forward with a grant on this project uh as it's needed to move move forward with this project that I believe will bring great economic opportunity to the city of Titusville and its residents uh thank you very much thank you sir city clerk
the last card is Dale Parson hello my name is Dale Parson's 1615 Edgewater Drive in Orlando i'm the architect and u the design build contractor for the Cambria Hotel i don't know if any of you all ever been to a Cambria Hotel or not but it's a the
premier brand for choice hotels it has its own division and I can assure you I've designed six of them around uh Florida and uh we built several of them it will be the flagship um Cambri Hotel probably in the United
States it's uh got a lot of very interesting um aspects to the hotel which are not prototypical um so I think it'll be a tremendous asset to the community and uh Mr wright intentionally wanted to build in a lot of features
that were that would be usable by the the local community not just travelers coming in to see the space shuttle um it it'll be a really nice uh venue for weddings overnight uh family reunions and those kinds of things so I would
highly recommend you support the project thank you thank you city clerk all right can somebody give me a motion to approve and send to county commission council member Stokl yeah um
I don't know if I approve that's why um yeah I I looked at this i met with uh Mr post and I think somebody else before there's three parts to it and I mean we talked earlier about
$84,000 $200 $100,000 and now we're talking about $2.4 million like that that to me is a lot of money um this has three components an infrastructure component hotel component and the ALF i'm fine with the infrastructure because I do feel that will help the Indian
River Lagoon i think it would help the piece of property i have a hard time using taxpayer dollars to go toward helping with a hotel and an ALF um personally being developed so uh I would not be in favor of it i am in favor of the first part
thank you Member Stokel anybody else all right uh I'll call on you real quick uh uh member Nelson um just like to say yeah I don't think the county commission is going to approve it um given the recent vote tonight um and given the
fact that this is more of county money I say why not ask them the question i may need to address that all right okay just to make it clear hey I have actually a PowerPoint i don't know if that's but I'll try to hit some of those
points but just real quickly uh Troy Post with the um one second Mr post all right obviously he did not put a card in do you guys want to make a motion to give Mr post the opportunity to talk member Nelson I do all right all right i have a motion i have a second all those
in favor say I i all opposed motion carries thank you Mr post yours thank you Mayor i appreciate it so Troy Pose with the economic development zone um this particular project is being proposed for the use of city tiff monies uh you may recall that when the zone was
created back in 2011 that there was an agreement that came together with the two political jurisdictions the city of Titusville and also Bvard County so they created this structure that is the special district and in doing so provided the revenues through Oh okay oh
okay well here we go i'll try to skip through some of this stuff go to this chart here this may be helpful here so they created the um the two uh tax increment financing funds which would then take a
portion of the property tax appreciation and what was realized off of general fund tax a portion would go to the zone to do economic development activities and what you're looking at in this chart here this was actually something that we shared with the county commission at the recent budget hearings to kind of
explain the difference between the two tiffs as I call them you'll see there that on the left hand side just underneath the title of the slide you see a subtitle that says revenue allocation for the current year and these are all budgeted figures these are not actual figures these are what we
expected to come into the new fiscal year with which we're currently operating we uh had a revenue allocation of 14.7 million and the chart the pie chart breaks down that 14.7 you'll see the largest portion of that is balance forward and I'll get to
that in just a second but you'll see the other two categories the other two slices of pie there the county tiff was expected to generate 3.3 million that we would use and then the city tiff 800,000 now that alone wouldn't be enough to do an incentive like this but if you go
then to the balance forward amount which is in the bottom left hand side of that particular slide you'll see that that second line item is the city tiff amount that we're carrying forward and that's the 3.3 hopefully I can see that right 3.1 trying to squint to see it 3.1 million
is carried forward so there is adequate funding in the city tiff to be able to handle the entire incentive now the incentive is structured in a series of installments that the developer has to reach in order to get the grant fund because as many of you know our whole
model for this program is that we provide no grant money upfront we want to see the dev developer get to a point of completion on a project for this particular project we actually have three thresholds that they'd have to go through to be able to get the entire 2.4
million the first one is $800,000 based upon completing all the infrastructure elements in the project now that's ongoing at the moment but it's not finished yet and that includes all the utility line replacements and the storm water detention areas to support the first half of the project which is
roughly one half of the parcel that you see there mr p can I interrupt you for a second um can I get a motion to extend him how much how much do you need Troy hour i'll try to do it in 105 minutes
but I'll answer other questions that you have after I finish how about if we give you five more minutes can you make it i'll try to see if I can wrap it up five minutes okay and just to be clear like you know Mr post is a staff member at the county who runs this fund and so I
kind of you know in my mind have him as like our Brad and and Kevin over there so all those in favor uh say I i any opposed motion carries unanimously thank you M thank you very much so 800,000 for the first threshold is infrastructure
elements that includes also the um base roaded that would go into the first half of the property and also the retail pads and the hotel pad the pads to support the construction for the apartment and the ALF the second threshold is $800,000 if it gets to the completion of
the hotel and by that we mean getting to the point where he gets a co on the hotel building and actually operates it for a period of six months so you can see already with the timing there's no way that he could possibly get the entire 2.4 million during the current calendar year it's just not possible in
the timeline but if he does finish the hotel gets to the CO has the operation of it for at least 6 months he would qualify for the next threshold the final threshold is upon the completion of either the ALF or the apartment complex
there he could do both of those simultaneously or just one we do expect in the phase one development plan for him to complete all those elements that's the hotel the ALF and the apartment complex but he just has to get to one of those to get the final amount
now one of the things we pride ourselves on is always having a way to try to recapture the money if the project doesn't unfold the way the developer has described it to us so what you see are our clawbacks that we have on this project we have two clawbacks one is a
prohibition against him selling uh the property within a short period of time we do that so that no developer takes advantage of just inflating the value flipping the title real fast and unduly enriching themselves with the use of public money the other thing that we
have put on this one is a minimum capital investment threshold that he has to hit so he has to demonstrate that by the time uh th that money has been provided that there is at least that $32 million in minimum investment that's been put into the project so we'll be
tracking that and there's a formula that we have for being able to claw back a portion of that for every $1 million he falls below that that minimum capital threshold i'm trying to run through it real quick so I guess I'll stop at this point those are the main things that we wanted to emphasize but if you have any
other questions I'll fill those well I mean you you did run through it very very quickly there at the end because we thought you were going and then you stopped so member Stokel yep could you just clarify the amounts you said 800,000 for the infrastructure portion could you clarify the grant totals that would be for the hotel in
the ALF yeah so it's up to 2.4 million so it'd be 800,000 for the first phase which is all the infrastructure elements for phase one he's got two phases so he split the property in half to do this but some of the improvements necessary for phase one infrastructure like the utility lines will go into the other
part of the pro mall project and in fact if you go out there now today you actually see them working on some waterline stuff on that the second 800,000 is completion of the hotel and verification that is that it is in operation for at least 6 months he'd have to hit that then the last part is
completion of the ALF or the apartment he could actually do the hotel the ALF and the apartment all simultaneously that would be another way to qualify but we have to get the CEO on the hotel and have that operation and get completion of one of those other units member Vcoso um thank you so much
because this is in two phases um and the recent vote would Mr wright be coming back for phase two and possibly asking for more money or that would not be a possibility about that and we don't really have the monies budgeted for that and again one of the reasons we're really interested in this project is
well for several reasons it's both an infrastructure improvement project and a redevelopment project for us in the infrastructure improvement one of the key things is if you look at the site this is pre-demolition conditions you'll see the old Sears footprint there is the big block that's out there uh what you
notice is all the parking spaces with no storm water detention pond so that's a huge issue for all the water running off in the US one going into the lagoon so it's improving the infrastructure it's helping the health of the lagoon but it's also a redevelopment project because the old Sears building had
asbestos we think the existing building still has some material that's going to have to be removed so it's best just to take it all down and begin again and we all know that that old model the enclosed shopping mall is really not the way forward in the way of commercial retail uh lifestyle centers things of
that sort so did that answer your question okay any other questions what do you uh what do you think just estimate the taxable revenue to the city would be oh that's a good question i really like that so you know I could be
wrong on this but I think when Mr wright acquired the building in 2017 I think the tax assessor's uh trim statement if you're familiar with what that document is from the tax appraisers's office uh I think it put about a $7 million value on the property something like that now
he's projecting probably about 160 million in capital investment over the life of the entire project but this first part if you look at the hotel maybe being 25 million the ALF being maybe another 20 million the apartment complex being something similar that's
getting it well above 60 million and of course the infrastructure improvement which is probably going to top out above $7 million for the project for the phase one infrastructure thank you Mr president thank you all right
okay council i see no further discussion member Nelson well I've got to say I like it and I will remind me when we were out campaigning in 2016 and we ran into the guy from
Valuchia County who did economic development and he said he could not they could not compete with Titusville North Bard so I look at this and I
go we clean up the infrastructure we right now all we have is impervious parking lot you got rid of it uh no landscaping we have the possibility of
getting landscaping we have the possibility of helping our lagoon we have the possibility of increasing our tax revenue uh employing our people that's economic development so I'm okay
with it thank you Member Nelson member Stokl yes no and I do remember that conversation i agree the the zone is a great asset to our community my biggest concern is in my opinion the zone is created for
economic development um so when I hear that I think of high-paying jobs for our residents incentives that we can give them um and I also think of amenities for our residents so Titus Landing is a good example lots of retail shopping
there for our citizens to have again I I can't pick and choose what goes on the property just as we saw with the other um item we had today but I do I feel like I have a voice in saying do I feel comfortable giving taxpayer dollars for
an incentive for a hotel and an ALF for our citizens i don't and that's my biggest concern again I'm fine with the infrastructure component i feel like that would be great use of the money i'm fine with them doing the hotel in ALF i'm not comfortable with us giving money
for to help them do a hotel in ALF thank you member Stokel member Mscoso i just have a quick question is I know that there is going to be a mixeduse component I believe in phase two or is that phase one with isn't there going to be restaurants and retail may I get
three minutes i'm the applicant so can I get three minutes to talk about the project he put a card in after we started the item oh is that okay if you don't mind if you could just turn into the third page this is the result
of the u um the independent study that was taken uh with all due respect to Dr circle you know the project doesn't just generate after spending 800,000 for the
um for the infrastructure it basically does not we don't have enough funds to cover the uh the components of the hotel and also the ALF if the city of Titusville look is looking to get additional jobs this city has paid out
seven years ago seven 7.1 million dollars to the Titus Landing it only has two components medical and retail this is a five component project it does create close to about 1,200 jobs as you
can see this is I didn't make this up it was done already by a U by a firm that was u hired by the EM BMDZ and so if you look at the the third page and the fourth page you basically
see that how much revenue the project is going to be generating and we're at really at the um at the beginning as you're coming in from US1 the um the project is right there i mean you won't you won't be able
to miss it um in today's financing is almost next to impossible to get financing to build uh projects like this i mean we're looking at large interest rate hard you know and so for that reason um and this has been in work now
for almost two two and a half years this isn't we just didn't we didn't just didn't start that i'll be happy to answer any questions i'm sorry you you were asking uh members of sorry the mixed use the retail and the um the restaurants that's going to
be phase two or those components to it so the phase one covers four components it basically has the out parcel the hotel the assisted living and the multifamily and then phase two would be
about 110,000 square feet of retail medical offices and um which parish medical were working with them as far as taking some space there yeah four restaurants sorry
one restaurant total of four restaurants the hotel has a observation deck with a restaurant on top has its own restaurant on the first floor plus an additional restaurant next to the hotel the cost of the project as Dale mentioned is about
25 million thank you Mr ray be happy to answer any questions all right Dylan do you have any questions no no questions all right thank you city attorney did you have something to say yes sir again you certainly can approve
this but this is a three-party agreement this is not just a city we don't have a grant program you know we have money that goes into the zone grant but we don't have our own grant program so understand this is a zone grant so once you approve it it will need to go back to the zone and get all the parties if
if this is going to go forward can I make one comment too about that too that neglected to mention which is that um because of the way in which the ordinance was created any incentive even if it comes out of the city tiff it's if it's higher than half a million dollars
it does have to go back before the full county commission to get approved so on the agreement that was attached in your package you you might have noticed that there was a signature line for the county commission chair and that's the reason why so we will have to go through that step of the process too before we get full execution thank you sure just
want to make sure this is the first step and then it goes zone and goes to the county so I just wanted you all to understand that yeah just figured it'd be interesting to see what the county's going to do with it but me member Nelson would you make a motion for me my motion would be to
approve the economic incentive agreement in the amount of 2,400,000 to for the uh Titus Mall redevelopment project second thank you Member Nelson for the motion Vice Mayor Cole for the
second any further discussion member Moscow do you have something for discussion or just getting ready to vote yes I do have I I would agree with um member Stokal on this with the infrastructure now we don't know where this is going to go but um I'm okay with the 800,000 for the infrastructure
improvements which is a lot but I'm I'm not so sure about everything else all right clerk can you call the role please vice Mayor Cole yes member Stokel no member Muscosa no member Nelson yes
mayor Connors yes motion carries thank you city manager moving on to 12B Verona Village C final plat approve the final plat covenants and bonds for Verona Village C subdivision
and this is a quasi judicial item staff are you going to read the quasa judicial rules i think those are read before okay i just briefly state that this is uh one of several subdivisions for the Verona development um if this is approved
it'll add 500 plus single family lots to the city uh we did review it consistent with the code with the land regulations uh we reviewed it consistent with the conditions of the plan unit development zoning that's governing on this entire property including the master plan and
conditions and we found that everything's consistent we have the myar here um and we review the covenants and performance bond and everything's included in the agenda packet for you thank you very much uh Mr brad city clerk are there any cards
just the applicant is Steven White stephen good evening everybody steven White KB Home Orlando 9102 South Park Center Loop Orlando Florida again staff relay this is phase one of the Verona Village C final plat i'm happy to answer any
questions that you may have on this member oh I'm sorry all right i guess not uh any questions for any council members all right seeing none thank you very much sir sorry I accidentally hit the
microphone on me uh member Nelson we think we need a motion we do move to approve the final PL covenants and bonds for Rona Village C subdivision second i have a motion and I have a second cler can you call the
role please member Stokel yes member Muscoso yes member Nelson yes mayor Connors yes vice Mayor Cole yes motion carries thank you very much city
manager moving on to item 12 C the appointment of interim city manager council appoint an interim city manager and authorize the human resources director to negotiate the terms and conditions of his or her appointment subject to final council approval at a
subsequent city council meeting thank you very much city manager um I'll kick off the discussion i don't know about y'all but I think uh Tom's been doing a pretty good job of um searing the ship uh but city clerk are there any cards on this one card it's
Tony Shel i'm in shel tropic street i have um no no real response about the um temporary or interim city manager but I just want to
take this opportunity to remind you that I look through the whole thing about um the firm that you decided to have to do the search for the regular city manager and there's six to eight places for
community citizen involvement early on in the process and all through the process so I just want to remind you that as we um have an interim city manager that the search the
executive search is going on and I haven't been invited to participate yet and I know that you will have citizen involvement not necessarily me but citizen involvement in the process of
the search the interviews what we're looking for what we want our city manager to do for the citizens that kind of involvement that depth that kind of thought behind it i know there's
citizens out there that are capable of it beyond those of us in the room tonight i know they're there they've got to be this is the home of rocket science for heaven's sake you know thank you thank you Miss Shel city Clerk any other
cards all right any council discussion member Nelson i think Tom's doing a great job however we're sitting here looking at a budget and putting our budget together for next year and for that reason I sort of asked myself
Scott's very familiar with the budget the budget process and no offense to Tom but would we better be better off having Scott lead us for the next two months two and a half months i mean we're looking at
maybe four or five meetings at most and he has gone through this process before and he is very um knowledgeable about the process and what needs to be done so for that reason
I would suggest that we consider seeing if Scott would serve until the next person comes in member Mscoso yes um Mr what has been your main responsibilities as the um assistant city manager
well I've been assistant city manager for 20 years um and also uh support services director direct oversight of strategic planning and budget build for 20 years um finance information
technology human resources the marina and customer service utility billing all fall under my oversight for the past 20 years so you do have experience in creating the budget i'm sure you've already been involved in the process myself and and our finance director
build the budget absolutely okay thank you that answered my question and um just my opinion we're still saving about 230K a year so member Stokal yeah that's what I was going to say i think that uh Tom's
experience with the city um at length I think that he's doing a great job and a big part of it is knowing your departments and delegating appropriately and I will tell you um and I sent a message to or an email to Tom um just letting him know just in these past two weeks I've really appreciated his
communication to us um trying to highlight some of the positive things that we're doing um he's been very responsive um and I've been very happy with him so um I would I think Tom would be a great interim city manager and I would make a motion to make Tom the interim city manager and so
we find our permanent city manager second okay i have a motion uh by member Stokal i have a second by unanimously Vice Mayor Cole and member Nelson uh further discussion member Mscoso oh I'm sorry i just want to add I have sent Tom
um way too many emails and he has been so gracious at emailing me back and giving me more information than I probably even need so I I appreciate that all right all those in favor any opposed motion carries thank you very much Mr
tom and uh I'm sure HR will get with him and kind of work that out and bring that back to us the next meeting i'm I'm assuming correct may I ask a question yes does this include Does a motion include negotiating the terms and conditions yes yes okay
wait sorry can I just clarify i would assume it says subject to final council approval so will that come back before us come back on the 22nd okay great thank you and I I will say I do think this will be a cost savings for us as a city as well by doing this so
absolutely all right city manager moving on uh petitions and requests all right anybody like to get up to speak non-aggenda items now is your time hi Christina Michelle do you like history city Council
members on March 11th 2025 Mayor Connors when you called recess to approach me in the crowd you said you never lost a loved one to murder are you aware of the history of the KKK's involvement in the founding
and development of Titusville Florida i'll say it again are you aware of the history of the KKK's involvement in the founding and development of Titusville [Music]
Florida it's been 8 weeks since the murder of Tariier Charles shot in the back by Beaz a violent police officer under Chief Laauo's
supervision with a history of tampering with evidence since 2018 titusville Police Department but like a banana there are layers to its true form the five stages of grief are not
experienced in any particular order and are different for everyone denial a state of shock disbelief where a person may struggle to accept reality often seen in attempts to control
anger often misdirected frustration resentment and blame if you aren't outraged you aren't paying attention bargaining what me and many of my comrades are doing here looking for
answers what we've been doing looking for answers city hall on February 11th in support of Samantha Charles you were focused on order speech mannerisms even silencing supporters cheering on
those for speaking up bargaining Google defines this action as attempts to make deals with a higher power to reverse or lessen a loss but Samantha Charles will never get Jamaria
Charles back thank you for your time anybody else non-aggenda items all right seeing none questions I don't see anybody making the motion
thank you very much for coming in city manager ma'am you no longer have the floor please sit down thank you city manager oh Tony did you Tony Tropic Street at
the first one no I'm sorry just asking there's a lot i mean you've spoken a couple times i think you might i just wanted to step up so that this young woman could have time to step away this neighborhood is traumatized
thank you Miss Tony all right i don't see any others speaking for petitions and request i guess we're on to my report you Oh move to extend for 15 minutes second i have a motion to extend i have a
second all those in favor say I i all opposed motion carries thank you very much all right i want real quickly go through my report [Music] um what's interesting is you know I kind of put on my report and again I would encourage all of council to do this to
submit something like this uh to Christine so she can put it out the agenda so everybody can see what what you guys are doing as well um with the various different boards and councils that you are on um it's a good reminder to kind of let council know what what you're doing these various different things um the tourism development
council what I found so interesting about it is revenues are down and a lot of it's due to government travel you know we we kind of forget that we're very highly dependent on those government dollars so tourism is actually down in Bvard County um so that was kind of the big topic of
conversation there um I know there was um a beach reourishment committee meeting and uh our person that that went to that for us uh was very excited i need to get the lowdown about what happened on that um but North Vard Economic Development Zone they meet this Friday i'm sure that'll be interesting
commissioner of Parks Recreation meets this Thursday uh Space Coast DO meets this Thursday so I'll have a lot more to report at the next meeting um with that being said who would like to go next
i could do Nelson really short i went to the EDC meeting um Health First was the presenter it was interesting not a lot to say but I'll say this while Tony's here Tony came to the Boys and Girls
Club to teach the kids to juggle she was a lot of fun thank you very much mentioned uh since you mentioned health first and what's going on we're already seeing upticks in our ER um that are very concerning I
would say for for our our area and our residents but member Stokal yes um two things one I wanted to bring up or ask city manager uh about uh the search for a new city attorney um I reached out to
some of the members from our the young elected municipal officials group within Florida to see and a couple of them said what they did was get about f I don't know a panel I'm not sure exactly how many of attorney city attorneys from
across the state um they might have worked with Florida League of Cities and that's what I was hoping maybe our staff could do so having a panel of fellow city attorneys kind of do the search for us and bring it down to maybe the top five they had top five then from that
the council chose the top three they brought them in to interview one-on-one with each of the council members and then also did a public interview with the city attorney both of them said they loved the process and that they would do that same process again I didn't know if we've already started the process or what that looks like but I just wanted
to make sure as we know I think it's in May i I Yeah I want to plan uh sure we've uh uh put put the posting out for the city attorney through the Florida Bar through the Florida League of Cities through LinkedIn through every venue
that we have available a city website we've had 250 hits on it okay and we've had one application of a an assistant city attorney okay and we are hoping obviously to get a much wider
pool for council to down select to so um process is way under well underway and we're hopeful that we'll get a good pool of candidates for you to pick from um do you know the I guess the date of when it was advertised because so it's it's been
about a week a week okay and then do we have a date on when we're telling potential applicants to apply by do you know right now it's open till filled okay okay and we only we only have one application at this at the moment just one one one
applicant total and that person is a current okay and has um also um been a city attorney as well at a different city so okay we do have one applicant okay and then maybe that's something for us to maybe at the next council meeting see how many applicants we have at that
time and determine but I think the first step is making sure you know do we have an applicant pool what does that look like um hopefully we'll get some more applications if not I think we might need to restrategize our approach um and then two is once we have our applicant
pool what's the best way to go about it and so um wanted to bring that up for us to think about for our next meeting the other thing and I'll probably incrementally get into this at uh future meetings but I had the opportunity to go to the Southern Municipal Leadership Conference so my role with Florida
League of Cities be on the board i'm also part of the executive board which is a smaller group of us about 15 and this is my second year doing it and what's really cool about this conference one it was in Alabama probably would not have picked that as a place but uh last
year was in Mississippi what I do like about it has about 15 different states um I think 10 of them were uh present it's a smaller group and I just want to read you some of the titles that they had for presentations how to strategically communicate very timely I
think for our city um and how we can best put out information being transparent being open for citizen engagement um another one was from conflict to conversation um again how can we help leaders build ci civil uh
unity uh not only among us and staff but also the community um there was also a federal update which was really interesting and just kind of going into what's happening at the federal level and I think the biggest thing that I took away from it that they said is we
probably won't start to feel the impacts fully until 2026 so I think it's just would be prudent of us to kind of stay on top of what's happening making sure that we're building relationships and I cannot stress it enough the more we can better educate uh fellow elected
officials both at the federal and state level even locally I think that um that will I think we underestimate the power in that so um as I kind of work through it I I uh will probably bring some stuff forward at later meetings and that's all
I have thank you Member Stokal i reiterate that suggestion of hiring a a panel of subject matter experts uh to uh evaluate candidates because uh unlike Miss Nelson uh I do not have the capability to judge whether an attorney
knows their stuff or not i I will say I reached out to the county attorney's office and one of the assistant county attorneys I've worked with for I went to law school with her um Richard was there Shannon was there I
was there um we struggled we made it through but she's I was asking her "How did you guys pick interview the new new county attorney?" Um and she said what they did was they took the old county
attorney the assistant county attorneys county manager and interviewed the candidates so that would be something that we could do say Tom Richard Chelsea have them interview the
candidates and come up with maybe the top three the top five to give to us and let us ask questions i think that would probably be appropriate and the easiest way to do it
thank you Member Nelson member Mscoso sure i'll make this quick um I had a lot of questions this week and I'm sure you did about the development across from Publix where they're putting a car wash and a Chase Bank um that was actually a zone project i think they approved it for like 150,000 for infrastructure um
but if you notice that property has been clearcut and so that was kind of the concerns of people so I reached out to um K St an and part of that is there are no there's not a tree ordinance for commercial properties um which you know I would love to save as many trees as
possible but we also it just reminded me is we don't have a tree ordinance for multif family we do have a first single family and so that's something I would like and I think the TEC actually made a recommendation um in January that we look into that so that's something if if
you guys would be okay with it we could put it on I mean we could do step by step but instead of not just commercial but we could look at first multif family and how that could play a part i think we already asked Brad to do that you have advisability that was uh
direction from you for us to develop an ordinance on that which we are drafting we'll bring back to you eventually as far as that development you're mentioning um they the co the code allows an applicant to choose the option of utilizing adhering to the canopy
requirement which is required right now for single family development but a commercial or a multif family but can choose that option if it is beneficial to them and I believe that particular property that project is Titusville commons which is directly across the street from Publix on 50 yes they
utilize that option and so they actually have an area that they have preserved as a tree track which meets that minimum 20 to 25% minimum is it the area in the back yes the back and to the side okay it's just hard because they're just it I mean it looks clear it is clearcut
except for I guess those portions in the back we don't know the outline of the the property your turn member for your report okay member Nelson you went you're declining oh my gosh that
was crazy city manager under the city manager report I have noformational or action items however I would like to draw your attention to a a new um initiative that our sustainability coordinator uh Lily Gallow has been
working on and it's receiving a lot of success that we're we're holding a lunchon on the 22nd of April at Luca and she's got a lot of nominations for people that are doing really good work in the community as far as sustainability so and there's an invite
out to all council at that lunchon so we really want to show her some support you're doing a great job thank you very much city manager city attorney yeah same day city attorney uh yes sir at the city council meeting
on March 27th city council expressed an interest in having alternate members of the board of adjustments and appeals being permitted to participate in discussion of agenda items um although not voting and were not officially being appointed as a voting member at the
meeting uh I think there was discussion and I think in recent years planning and zoning commission amended their bylaws and they read as follows alternate members may be permitted to participate in discussion of and provide input on agenda items as a member of planning and zoning commission when not
officially appointed by the chairman to fill in for an absent regular member alternate members may not be appointed to vote unless appointed as a voting member and participation shall be in compliance with our resolution 24197 which is a quasi judicial
resolution and tell you I'm not aware of any provision of the code which would prohibit a similar process for baa you know um certainly the board of adjustments and appeals if if they'd like to do similar to the planning and zoning commission and amend their bylaws in a similar
way if council wants to take the next step of having made a code change that addresses all boards and alternates on all boards and providing that this similar process could apply to any alternate members of any city boards you
certainly could do that happy to answer any questions thank you city attorney glasses on member Nelson does BAA are they interested in amending their code to allow discussion you asked me are they interested mhm oh I I don't know i
haven't spoken to BA it was just a one of the members came up and brought it up at the last meeting and council asked us could they do something similar and I'm letting you know yes they could if they're interested in doing that if council wants to go a step further and leave it up to them or if council wants
to do a code change to provide that all boards you know I however you want to i'd sort of like to leave it up to them first and then maybe if they don't want to do it then have further discussion of whether we should do it for everybody
sure chelsea attends that board and she could certainly be involved in that discussion with them in a process to do that the similar to the way PMC did that if they want to do that well thank you and if for some reason they don't want to do it and council really wants to you could look at handling yourself through
a code change thank you city attorney um it's 10:45 so Megan Unless you're making a motion to extend that's what I need if we're going to keep talking okay i make a motion to extend for two minutes all those in favor say I two minutes
opposed all right thank you Herman megan sorry I'll just make this quick i do think that I mean the BAA they're not even going to be able to participate in that discussion because they have no seat at the table or computer so uh it'll be it'll be interesting but I
think I I agree with you all right thank you very much doesn't look like we're taking any action at this time hopefully BAA will make a good decision member Nelson motion to adjourn see
see we