Good evening. I'd like to call to order this April 16th, 2025 meeting of the City of Titusville Planning and Zoning Commission. Uh, if everyone would stand for the pledge of allegiance to the flag 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. Uh, roll call, please. Chairman Eton, here. Vice Chairman Childs, here. Secretary Grant here.
Member FA here. Member Grod here. Member Scully here. Member Gellen here. Alternate member Finler here. Alternate member Rogers here. We have a quorum. Um, anyone have any uh
comments or changes of the minutes? I do. Member Rogers. Uh, page seven, last week's minutes. Um, I didn't say that Verona established a total for more urban sprawl. I said it
established a towhold for more more urban sprawl. If we care and you know about such things, that would be my edit. I used to be an editor. Okay. Anyone have any other corrections or changes? Anyone have a motion with
the change? I'll make a motion to approve the minutes with that correction. Second. All right. We have a motion and a second. All in favor? I. Anyone opposed?
Okay, minutes are passed. Uh, Chelsea, would you read the quasi judicial procedures? Yes. Tonight's agenda provides the following notice. All persons who anticipate speaking on any public hearing item must fill out an oath card to be heard on that agenda item and sign the oath contained
thereon. These cards are located on the table near the entrance to the council chamber or may be obtained from the recording secretary. This meeting will be conducted in accordance to the procedures adopted in resolution number 24-1997. Those speaking in favor of a
request will be heard first. Those opposed will be heard second and those who wish to make a public comment on the item will speak third. The applicant will make a may make a brief rebuttal if necessary. A representative from either side for or against may cross-examine a
witness. Anyone who speaks is considered a witness. If you have photographs, sketches or documents that you desire for the commission to consider, they must be submitted into evidence and will be retained by the city. Please submit such exhibits to the recording
secretary. Thank you. Thank you. Uh any petitions and requests from the public? Looks like none. Uh we have no old business and we have item 9A under new business.
Good evening. Uh Christy Anderson, senior planner. Um the item before you this evening um is a request to amend uh the master plan for uh Verona, also known as Willow Creek. The applicant, Mr. Honeyut on behalf of the owner of KB
Home Orlando LLC, owner of the properties, is requesting to amend the Willow Creek Plan development PD master plan on a property located west of Gryom Parkway, east of Challenger Parkway, State Road 407 and Interstate 95 at the western terminus of Willow Creek
Boulevard. The Willow Creek master plan, also known as Verona, was approved for the city's planned unit development procedures under comprehensive plan amendment number 1-20 2016 in February of 2017. The master plan was amended in February 2024 in which the light
industrial commercial area and transition zone were removed and replaced with a large lake with a recreational amenities and an added fifth residential village E consisting of 126 multifamily units. The development has approved maximum
allowable density of uh 1,277 residential units. The 2024 amendment also added the following allowable use. One model home per single family residential village. Ancillary parks are ancillary parking lots are
prohibited. After the agenda was published, the applicant revised the request and has provided a revised master plan. The revised master plan proposal was emailed to the commission on April 14th and is located on your laptops uh in a separate PDF file. There should be a tab at the top of your
screen so you can go between the agenda and the newly revised master plan. The master plan amendment includes the following. The original request proposed to amend the existing PD master plan by reducing the rear setback from 20 feet to 14 feet for designated lots
within village C. Additional justification was provided by the applicant which has been provided on page 63 of your packets. The applicant has amended the request to reduce the rear setback from 20 ft to 15 ft for designated lots
within village C. Number two, the request also proposes to reduce the minimum lot width from 40 feet to 20 feet for multifamily village E. The third part of the request includes uh the original request proposes to allow
model home clusters up to eight model homes in each res in each development phase of villages A, B, C, and E. Each model home cluster may include a real estate sales office and include an an adjacent ancillary stabilized temporary parking area for the model home
cluster/real estate sales office. The applicant has amended the request to allow one model home with real estate office and up to four decorated model show homes and one ancillary stabilized temporary parking area within each
residential village. Um, additional just justification was provided by the applicant which is on page 67 of your packets. Um, staff re is recommending denial of the request to amend the master plan by reducing the rear setback
from 20 ft to 15 ft for designated lots within village C. Staff recommends approval of the request to reduce the minimum lot width from 40 feet to 20 feet for multifamily village E. and staff is recommending denial of
the proposed amendment to allow model home clusters of up to four model homes in each development phases of village A, B, C, and E with each model home cluster including a real estate sales office and an adjacent ancillary stabilized temporary parking area for the model home cluster/real estate office. The
city currently does not have processes or procedures in place to approve the number number of model homes prior to platting. The city is currently working on developing cons procedures consistent with a new state law which requires local governments to establish a program
to approve residential building permits approved by preliminary plat if certain conditions are met prior to approval of final plat. Real estate sales offices are currently regulated as a temporary accessory use under LDR section
28-366 and staff is providing the following recommendation consistent with the LDR section and uh the Florida the new Florida state law. Staff recommends approval of allowing one model home with a real estate sales office and one ancillary stabilized temporary parking
area within each residential village with additional permits may be issued consistent with uh section 177.073 of Florida statutes. It should be noted that the city currently does not have procedures in place to issue a temporary certificate
of occupancy filed to prior to final plat. And in order for a model home to be occupied, both water and sewer clearances are required along with the conveying associated utilities through the city uh through a bill of sale and maintenance bond. Several conditions of
the current master plan were carried over to the amended master plan and are located in the PD resoning ordinance. The new proposed conditions of improv of approval include the following. Accessory building permits uh accessory building and structure setback standards
be incorporated into the conditions of approval. Town homes and multifamily developments shall have a uh minimum distance between structures of 20 ft and a maximum of six dwelling units shall be allowed in a building group of town home
townhouse townhouse units. Townhouse building groups shall also have staggered setbacks to reduce uh the straight row effect. And the final condition um added into the ordinance would be the one model home with the real estate sales
office and one ancillary stabilized temporary parking lot within each residential village with additional permits able to be issued consistent with the state law. And this item uh has is scheduled for a public hearing that will be held by city council on May
13th. uh 2025 and I'd be happy to answer any questions that you have from staff at this time. Thank you. Um Vice Chairman Childs, as far as the mobile or not mobile homes, the model homes, um why are we why are
those treated differently? I I don't I don't really understand why those are treated differently. Is it because they're earlier? they're built earlier than all the other houses or why do we have ordinances that govern that I guess? Well, we don't really have standards in place. We just have an allowable use. Um so that section that
we have in there does allow for model homes um and sales offices uh you know with certain restrictions. Um but um and now since you said that, I was thinking of the Florida law that was passed I
think it was last year about small business uh allowed in residential areas. Oh yeah, that's going to be under a homebased business. So would that not I guess would that not Yeah, I don't think that that's connected. Yeah, why
not? I don't know. I don't I I would think it would because it's still it's a it's a if you as far as a homebased business, you still have people coming to the house and they park outside. It it governs how the house looks. It says
it can't look like a business. A model home doesn't look like a business. It is similar, but it I believe it requires an individual to be living in the home and conducting the business. So, I think Good point. All right. All right. Thank you, Member Rogers.
Uh Christine, uh the you and I talked about this on the phone. So the maximum of six dwelling units in the townhouse units that was not changed to five in in a that was not one of the things. This this was like it was
no the um the proposal of the maximum of six dwelling units allowed in a building group um is associated with that straight row effect and that is something that is currently in our code that's under town home developments now. So we do have those standards in place
for town homes currently. Okay. And the you know we hear this term uh ancillary stabilized parking. What exactly is that? Um, it would have to be a prepared surface that would be, you
know, utilized for for vehicles. And so is that the kind of thing that sort of like later is torn up and replaced with grass or Yes. Um, so the the temporary parking lots are typically removed and then they're converted into yard areas for the because the house this is the
model home actually becomes a home and then correct. Okay. [Music] And there was one more. Oh, I know. Sorry. This the the new Florida law um that you mentioned. Can you explain one
more time is I guess my question is I if it seemed to me that maybe the problem was that we don't that there's a new law that might permit what is being requested but the city at this time doesn't have that
process in place and I guess my question is is that likely to so if we say no on the extra model homes um is that likely to I don't know come back around again simply because we've been trumped by the
law from Tallahassee. It was that wasn't asked very elegantly. You understand what I'm saying? I'm I I guess it's it's kind of like uh you know the live local act like have we been taken out of this equation? you know, Tallahassee said as many model
homes as anybody ever wants and so we have to do it or um I don't think the plat law is referencing model homes at all. It's just pertaining to expedited issuance of building permits prior to the final plat. Um and the city is
unable to determine how many you know permits will be issued under that process that's still being developed. So, we we we struggled with that because we don't currently have processes in place in the in the current code. Okay. Uh I think I think I get it.
Member Gar. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um Chrissy, I've got a couple of questions for you and I spoke with Chrissy earlier in the week as we're allowed to give a call of kind of heads up and what I want to make sure the commission understands as I understand it. Make sure I confirm it through staff and also our legal
counsel. The way I see the applicant's request, there's three facets of it. Two of those facets are really related to zoning regulations. They're not codified as a building code international or state
or any relationship to building codes. The other two are zoning codes. One is to have model homes that differentiate from the standards in effect for the city and in some regard how that's differentiating meaning the stabilized
parking in the multiple numbers. Those are zoning restrictions. On the other side of that coin is what I understand to be an international building code congress which is the reason you can't have a temporary co. You either occupy a building in accordance with those codes
which are adopted at state and federal and national international levels or you don't occupy that excepting for the construction crew. One might think well why can't I be in the building if the construction crew comes? It's a whole different point of view. So the
deviation that they're trying to incorporate in this plan development amendment, a zoning amendment, is coming forth in conflict with a code that isn't a zoning code and not subject to me, in my opinion, local government's ability to grant approval. It's a standard that
isn't variable through this commission's recommendation or for city council vote. So I'm asking two questions. one. Am I correct in what I assume two components of the three meaning clustering the parking and the multiple numbers of
these are zoning related and subject to a review by the applicant's request. One of those being temporary occupancy under a temporary co simply can't be reviewed for approval or recommendation because it's not subject to our authority or the city council
authority. So that'd be Chelsea. I would push that. So yes, I agree with your assessment that there's three facets and the separate decisions should be discussed individually. And as to the question
with the model homes, it it it's it's a bit complicated because the city's intent with our plat ordinance is just quite different from what the request is. And so I would agree with staff's recommendation just
to allow the one. Um but I'm not sure I'm quite understanding your entire question. The question would be in the three facets. I'm of the opinion the international building code congress standards in effect in the state of Florida for the city of Titusville do
not provide a waiver of an certificate of occupancy and therefore absolutely not that's correct the occupancy by visitors tourist by homeowners by anybody that would be an occupant because it does not possess a certificate of occupancy when it
possesses a certificate of occupancy you can occupy the building construction workers are the exemption because you're building it that's my understanding that's correct And my understanding is that the building official is going to be at the city council meeting to speak to those points. So for the commission, I don't think that's a debatable matter. Just my opinion. For the other facets,
the other two and the components within it, it may be more than two. It's stabilized parking, multiple numbers, and then all this stuff with setbacks. That's subject to a PD, a planned development or planned unit development. And that's a negotiated zoning district.
It's we're discussing I hesitate to say a business proposition, but we're discussing an offer to do something and our agreement to allow it to be our agreement to recommend it, city council to approve it. But that's a zoning regulation and that is something city council through our recommendation may
do. Does that sound correct? Yes. Thank you. I see no other comments, so I'll open the public hearing. And uh Mr. Honeyut, good evening. Uh Rodney Honeyut, 3700 South Washington
Avenue. Uh good to be here tonight. Thank you for the opportunity. Um I want to address these what I think are the easiest to the hardest. That could be famous last words, but um the
uh the first one is um allowing a 20 foot wide lot in the multif family units. That's in the current R3 code uh allowed for town homes and that's the proposal uh for those is to allow 20
foot wide uh lots. Currently, the PUD uh minimum lot width is 40 ft. And so, um, that's what that request is. Um, any questions about that? I'm assuming that kind of got lost in the
sauce as that was converted from the commercial to the multifamily. Is that kind of how we got to 40 instead of 20 or is that not accurate? Um, it was it was probably my understanding that that might be apartments, but I don't think the multif
family ever was intended to be apartments after talking to the owner. They intended to be town homes all along, so it should have been addressed in that amendment. Thank you. Um, the second one is the model homes. And so I'm I'm not
um u I'm not sure that we're all on the same page. Um here's what the proposal is. We already have and I don't even know that model home is in the code. I think it says a retail sales office and it
mentions ancillary parking. Um that was approved in the last amendment u but not the ancillary parking. So the intention here for me was to make sure the ancillary parking and it's definitely needed. You don't want people parking on
the street and blocking the street. You know this I've I've been in these places because they're all over the place. I mean Melbourne and Vieier I've been there recently. Uh and people park on both sides of the street. It's a 24 foot wide street and so one car can maybe get
through and so it's much better to have an ancillary parking lot for that. And so that ancillary parking lot is typically a lot that would future be a home site because the sales retail sales office they use the garage for the
sales. They they have doors instead of the garage door. They convert all that back. It's a regular house. they sell it and then they build a house in the ancillary parking. So in addition to that and and you see it all over the place, they would like to have other
models to display. It's very helpful if you're a customer. Uh not a lot of home buyers understand the blueprint, but when they walk into a house and they see it, they understand the layout, how big the rooms are and everything. And so
they would like to have some of their models to display. Originally they had asked for eight. I think that's all. They've reduced that uh considerably now. I think the three or four in the email four I believe it's four mile
homes with one one that there's only one real estate sales office in in each village. Um, and so that home would be constructed by pulling a building permit for a spec home. It would meet all the setbacks. It
would be after the plant is approved. It would um it would do everything needed to get a CO and they could pull that. Uh they don't and so that means you have to hook up the water and sewer. They don't
necessarily want to have the water and sewer turned on because some people can abuse that. Kids run around the house. But anyway, that would all be there. Um, it would be a home that when somebody goes into retail sales office, the salesman could take them down to look at
this what I'm calling model. Uh, it it's really a speck home. And eventually that spec home which um would um be sold and it meets all the city code uh for setbacks um building code CO and
everything. And that's what that is. Uh this was me trying to clear that up and and ask what I understand that staff has recommended approval is that the retail sales office
in in a home uh with ancillary parking would be uh acceptable and the home the the developer could build other homes as a spec home and
goes through the process and get those approved. And so that's acceptable um to us if that's what if that's what staff is saying and it that's correct. Okay. So the the plat's approved everything no home is built without an
approved plat. And so that's the second request. Um I don't know if we need to discuss that now or go to the third one. Member God, did you have a question? I do that. So the original application is for eight clusters. Yes, it was. And the
illustration that has been provided which is a copy of the Verona Plat illustrated I guess it's on page three of four of the master plan which is the tab that was referred to earlier that identifies the lot you're seeking a reduced rear set back in. I can't find the illustration where the eight
clusters are. And I I was wondering when you said eight now it's three. So, so it changed from eight to whatever the owner decided because we met with staff a couple of times. And so, um, in in order to have a more favorable submitt, they
reduced the number and that's why that's now three. They said that three is enough to give an example. That has nothing to do with the rear setback request. That I understood. My question is where are they? Where are they located? Three. I mean, are they just
somewhere in the subdivision? or the Yes, it would be near the It would most likely be adjacent to the sales office for staff. Is that typical that a model center request like this is part of a zoning district regulation is going to be ambiguous to where the location is? It's just
somewhere. Well, I mean, the locations are identified on the on the plan as a a lot, but we we don't identify the mile homes um or at least they haven't been done in the past. I guess my question would be very
specific here. Um, a person who would perhaps myself be interested in purchasing a lot comes and sees what they see and goes to buy the lot and finds out there's a model center next to my house. I have personal experience living and purchased a modeled home after it was converted. And
people knocked on my door for several weeks after that knocking to see if they could see that model home they'd been into the last visit. So, I'm a little concerned that we don't have a specific location for the model centers. I understand flexibility needs to go anywhere in the subdivision is so suited
by the developer. But counterpoint is for the public's knowledge making available where are they if somebody asks, how do they know where they are? How do we know where they are if we recommend or not recommend their location? So, do you know where they're going to be or not? Um, I can't answer
that. the uh developer is here and they might could answer that. I would kind of also ask is staff comfortable with ambiguity on location for such a use. I I don't think that the model home locations are required to be part of the master plan is somewhere in there they
may be. That's fine. I say comfort. Thank you. Uh, member Rogers, I just want to Christine uh clarified this for me earlier, but I just want to make sure
that um uh that Mr. Honeyut and and the owner agree. Um, so these model homes are counted in the 1277 number. They're not 1277 plus the model homes.
That That's correct. These homes are part of the 1277 and they the model homes will be converted into permanent dwellings. So they will not be adding any additional units than what's already approved. Right. Thank you. Secretary Grant.
Um village E is um multif family. Am I correct? Yes sir. You wouldn't need model homes in village E, would you? It says here that um um villages A, B, C, and E would you
have the uh model homes? Why would E have model homes? Um I'll let the developer answer that when they come up. That's Thank you, sir. So, back to me. Oh, I beg you pardon. I just lost.
happens to me all the time. Back to you. So, um, if there's nothing else on that one, the last one is the reduction the rear setback from 20 ft to 15 ft. And, um, recently,
um, the the owner has come up with a new model and it's, um, it's, uh, let's see, it's 20 feet wide approximately about 80 feet deep. is single story. Um I think there might be some
information in your packet that the developer provided uh separately. Um and so it's become a popular model for I think senior citizens and some others because there is no second story. Um the
the plaid is recorded in um village C and that's where they're requested. Uh if you look in your packet, you'll see there's um some lots that are designated only to those lots to be the reduced
setback. And all of those lots back up to a storm water or open space area. they don't back up to a separate lot. Um the the reason being so it didn't make the homes any closer. Um I think the
reason uh this is the tougher one is um staff is concerned that with the reduction in the rear setback there's going to be um residents that come in and request a variance to use that part of their pool
or um accessory structure. And so, um, the the buyer of those lots will be notified, uh, when they buy the lot that they have that reduced rear setback.
Um, also, uh, and I think this may be provided in your packet, they've now opened the amenity center, which has a large pool and a lot of a lot of other things, too. Indoor, recreation, um, meeting rooms. They actually have
pickle ball courts, too, and open space, a tot lot. And um they didn't have this till recently. And um the first phase of this project um was completed before any of this
happened. And there's like nine or 10 pools there. U village D was actually cons constructed. Most of the homes were mostly built uh before the amenity center was completed. And um there's
only still only one or two pools there. And in village B, which is the current one, which is uh mostly after the amenity center was open or almost open, they knew it was going to be open. There's not any pools yet. Uh I don't
know if anybody's applied for them, but there's not any. And we don't think that this will be a a big issue. Um, but it it's important uh to be able to have those lots available for the deeper
homes. uh when the staff report came out 2 3 weeks ago um and I passed it on to the owner, it's important enough for them that the president of Central Florida KB Homes uh two vice presidents
and the local reps came over to talk to staff about it, you know, and try to convince and that's why they provided more information. So, it's very important them to be able to offer this model in some of those lots. And so, um, just trying to give you a full picture
of of where we are with that. And certainly, uh, if you have questions on that, I'd try to answer them. Member Gran. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have a couple questions, Mr. Honey. Um I'm re I'm somewhat familiar with
with plan development districts providing for various setbacks based on circumstance and in the case of as I spoke with staff about you know the the the the interation of setbacks stem from tenement housing and the purpose
was to open buildings up for air and light. That's where the origins of zoning setbacks come from period. The development of rules over the past hundred and some years since tenement houses created the rules have seen all kinds of variations in plan
developments. You kind of see that in my opinion and that's how I read your request. You're only requesting to put the type of unit with this need of a reduced setback on lots that abut open space as you mentioned earlier and that for the purposes of zoning standards
where you have a need to preserve open space so light and air goes between buildings. you don't compress them to where you have no access or limited access um is still there if you reduce the setback because everyone enjoys looking out over the retention pond or
the depression area or the landscape area. So, it serves the same purpose. I would imagine and I'm sure you could imagine that a homeowner that goes to buy a home is told, "Well, you know, model A down the street that's not on the retention pond cost a dollar, but if you want the nice one on the lake, it
costs $2." So, you get a premium lot when you're on the open space. And again, it reflects on why is that a premium lot? It's because it's open behind your yard, not looking at your neighbor's back windows. So, to my opinion, I can understand the nature of the quest. I'm only concerned in my
purpose of my question is on the illustration that's on the master plan in village C where the red lots are identified as the reduced setback lots. You see a few exceptions to my statement. One sits on the middle of the picture as I call it dead center between
the two blue spaces which are retention lots and it's a single lot that's asking a reduced setback that otherwise is a budding what I think is some kind of pathway and that pathway appears consistent around your retention lakes.
Is this designed to provide for pedestrian access around the retention areas and open spaces or is that maintenance provisions where those are only used during maintenance periods? the um and um the developer can can also
add to this, but those lots that were selected are their small open space areas behind homes. And I don't know of any trail or anything that would be there. The big trails are along the the
boulevards that tie into all the sidewalks and the main one is there's one all the way around the 34 acre lake. Right. I just comment because if you look at the illustration, it shows a line running around it within the boundary. I think that represents the bottom of the storm water pond and the
top of the um the slope. Yeah. Okay. And so with the first question I had was there's an exception to the request if open space is otherwise provided as in zoning regulations for light and air and this is a normally reasonable request to
reduce setbacks because you provide for that with the butdding to an open space. the exception are a handful of lots which actually frankly don't abut open space. So I don't understand why a reduced setback would be of any benefit on lots that don't share that open
space. Um so there's not any intention to do you see the ones I'm speaking about you look at the illustration Billy J right upper three benches is written and just below that there's two lots which are exception to a budding open
space and if you continue to the bottom left you'll see one single lot down above the words village seat and then there's I think yeah I don't um the exception when you enter the project which uh a dead kind of the
center up three benches and below that it's a handful of lots which again only one or two of them above the open space. So I'm kind of trying to consider your request as compromise provided by setbacks by your reduction seems okay but you've got
exceptions to that by having lots which aren't abing open space. I I see um a couple maybe you're talking about I see now um where there is open space that allows access for mowing and stuff
like that back to the pond. Maybe that's what you're talking about. not familiar with your picture. So, yeah, I don't have the I don't have the full picture here to see exactly
which ones you're talking about. Above the V in Village C. So, uh it's not the intention not to back up to open space um or a stormwater pond. So if if your request was considering that as I just
mentioned that I understand it myself and I see the benefit of having reduced setbacks when you otherwise are still providing open space. I would have an exception to that consideration for those lots which do not share that benefit. So you you don't have a heartache if the lots which are not
abuing those retention lakes or retention de depressions or open space those would be the ones subject to review for this consideration and except those that were strangling out there uh that are individual and not related to that open space benefit. Yeah, I think
the ones that we looked on the screen I would agree with it. Yeah. Thank you. Member Rogers. Um Mr. Honey cut. Was it um is it still 14 or was it 15 ft that you said would be sufficient? 15. It was
revised to 15 15. And um in your experience, which I understand is is fairly considerable uh in these areas. Um is 20 ft uh 20t is the standard rear setback, is it not for a single family residence?
Um it varies. Uh I think um you see 25 and you see 20 in uh a lot of different areas. Uh I'm given to understand that occasionally in something like a maybe a mobile home park or something like that you would have less but for an actual
single family dwelling 20 ft would tend to be the minimum. Is that correct? I think in the in the Titusville code it it might even be 25. in the county code, it's probably mostly 20 unless you go to
a modular home development or something like that. I actually uh I actually take your point or the owner's point on a lot of this. Um uh but uh I guess obviously I think that
there would be worry about establishing a precedent that you know then would not you know it would be hard to defend you know the 20 if you've already granted 15 but um do you perhaps the owner would rather speak to this but uh do you have
some commentary on the the cost of the 1637 versus uh the other average costs of of of the two-story homes in that area or um it would be better for the owner to answer the cost question. All right, sir. Thank you,
Em. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I've remembered my question. I had a fading moment on and it's twofold. So, kind of I need staff's request to also consider what I'm asking as well as Mr. Honeyut. In the platting process, are you able to
build concurrently infrastructure, roads, streets, sidewalks at the platting process where you've passed through sketch plats, I call a preliminary, and you've presented
an engineering improvement plan, which gets approved that allows everybody know what's going to be built, it's going to be built according to the approved plan, quote unquote, and that construction commences is during that phase prior to the development of a recordable
instrument a plat so that infrastructure is being developed hopefully and completed and then you move into the platting recordation procedures. Are you able to build the homes concurrent with that? Forget about the CO question
concurrent construction of homes simultaneous with infrastructure. Does Titusville subdivision code allow that? Answer is no. Answer is no. You have to get two. I was I was going to say I think I believe that's what we're working on in response to the new state
law. Thank you. And the reason I ask it, Mr. Chairman, and other members is that's that's not an uncommon uh rule. Other communities have developed rules like that. I can certainly respect I in my career worked with KB Homes. They're a nationwide builder and they experience
things that vary from community to community based on the community standards. But here what's happened with the state law is they said we all need to be the same because KB could build in any one of the 67 counties and they all ought to be about the same rule. So that
what ends up being is for expedited development you build concurrent so that poof one day you've got roads, street lights, stop signs and houses. You record the plat and people start selling houses. Thank you. Any other questions? Uh, see none. Thank
you. Good evening everybody. Stephen White, KB Home Orlando, 9102 South Park Center Loop in Orlando. I got down a couple of questions that everybody asked. I'm just start at the top. If I missed any, please feel free to fire them at me. Uh I think one question
Gard Gar sorry the model homes location those I don't pick those there's a marketing strategy I know as a community goes forward they have the big yard signs that go right in front of the front door
that says private residence but we know some people won't read those. So there's steps put in place for houses in that area and throughout the community as it's going that says this is a private residence. So those procedures are in place in place in the
yards. Uh village E. Yeah. Who asked about the town model homes in village? Member Grant. Mr. Grant. Yes, we do have models and town homes cuz what it does is it still allows uh customers to come in and see the layout cuz the model home
on the very end, we'll say if you're looking at it on the left is going to be different than the middle or the right with the orientation and how it is on the inside. So, it gives everybody that view of how it's set up, how the furniture fits inside, the feel of walking through it, and getting a visual of what the inside
is going to consist of. Just a real quick question on that. So from a counting perspective, the that would be if you're asking for three that would be three town homes, not three buildings. No, it would be one I
call we'll call it a cluster because that's the going term tonight. It would be one set of the town homes. Okay. So it's not going to be town home town all this model. Just want to make sure uh the Len Village C you asked about I looked on my phone cuz engineering plans are easy to read on a phone. the small
track that looks like it was to the right is a storm drainage that runs through there and then there's a TT track that runs behind it which is a open space tree planting track behind it. There's not a walking trail but
usually in Verona most of those it's going to be the top of the slope of the pond and there's some trees and landscaping put through that area. So it's not a budding another residential lot. It is another tract, but it's not a lot. Not a lot. I think the construction prior to
the plat, that's um I think it would be a business standpoint for us to make sure we have the correct infrastructure in the ground because we wouldn't want to start a house and then have to come in and dig storm, sewer, and water through the front, the side, down the road. you
know, we have processes that we get done because you have equipment going on it before you get the ground compacted and the right material set up to construct houses. And I think it's a growing pain for every municipality and it's going to change again in 2026 where it's going to go from 50% to
75% can be permitted. So, there's a lot going on with that and a lot of questions. Uh, Mr. is it Rogers? Yes. You asked about the cost. I tried to get a quick message. They said that model compared to other similar ones that were looking for the setback reduction is
roughly $38,000 base price cheaper that most of the other homes in in in these different villages will be twotory or or not. It it we don't preposition the houses. Everybody, the customers us unless they buy a spec home or something
happens and a contract falls out, they pick it from the location to the orientation to the facade on the outside. But the base price of this is about is a savings of about $38,000 compared to the other similar models and
the twotory and and and the base price $38,000 less. What is the base price of of the 163? They didn't give me that. I heard your question. and I tried to get an answer for you real quick, but that was the gist of the price I got. And again, that can fluctuate with cost
and everything that's going on. Yeah, sure. The specifications, the materials and all that. Correct. Uh is is there any kind of I mean you guys sell a lot of homes and I'm sure that uh you know I know the prices change but at the
moment I don't know like what is your most popular model and what is it selling for in this particular development right now that I I can't give you an accurate answer tonight. If I pulled out a number, I'd throw that on Powerball. I I
don't I don't have a good number to give you for that as in even the model with this phase taking the preliminary calls that hey, this phase is coming. A lot of there's been far more interest in the
1637 because it's a one-story. It has the extra bedroom and that's the gist of what drove the master PE amendment. I I will say it's a very compact design. you've packed quite a bit in and I can't imagine that there's a whole lot more
that you can pull out. Um but I guess um I think probably at least to me and to a couple of other people here um I know that the um an appeal is well okay a little bit of more affordable housing in the Titusville area which is that is
appealing but I guess I was just you know like it's great if it's $38,000 cheaper but like if it's $38,000 cheaper than $650,000 still not affordable housing you know. Well, that's why the affordable housing, I try not to use that term because that is a whole
different meaning. It is a more attainable and it is a cheaper I don't want to say cheaper. It is a lower initial cost of a home. Thank you, member fac. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, two
questions for the the applicant. I apologize for not remembering your name. Uh you understood my question regarding the lots which are not configured along the otherwise retention areas shown in blue and the lots which and the cells do not abut open space that reduce setbacks
there make to me no sense. Do you have a heartburn if those aren't part of your application that is an exception to your reduced setback for those lots which don't adjoin themselves to an open space. Open space meaning as illustrated by retention areas of well TT the tracks
that it is dedicated as are open space tree. That's why I asked specifically not a 10- foot wide strip with a tree in it. I'm talking about your illustration enjoying the open space of a retention lake as shown in blue. A wide vast area looking. So you you're asking if
it but it would not be next in open space but I have to back up to a retention. I just want to make sure before I answer you we're on the same page and I understand because yeah I I think the applicant in the initial discussion said that this is lots which are but open space and I kind of
embellished on that a little bit about open space and kind of conversed about the benefit of old zoning laws came about in the 120 years ago. My question is to you the exception to the open space are a number of lots. They aren't numbered. They're not illustrated.
They're not captured by reference. I can just point at my computer screen. So I would have to leave staff with the idea that if it's favored in the request, the exception to my support would be those lots which are not abudding those blue
areas that they're just abudding other lots or tracks which are used for maintenance or tree planting. I see the two completely different. Okay. No, that's that's why I just wanted to make sure we're on the same page because TT is is called out and dedicated as an open space tree planting tract. So
that's lots which don't abut blue areas on that concept. We can look at the map for a second before I see there are looks like about a dozen and rough count and for example the one that's up here that's a cluster of five I guess or six
if I'm count five two or one and a half abuts a blue dot and the others don't. So I wouldn't see that cluster as being applicable to a reduced setback in whole. I can't imagine how staff would police that when a building permit comes through to know that lot three of
village two is okay and lot one of village two is not okay. That's an impossible task. It be impossible for me. It may not be impossible for others. I have a similar concern. I wish I had the authority to say yes. Sure. But if you were to make the motion
that they would only or if the approve a condition is it backs up to only to a storm water track then that's privy and the view I think everybody can understand that idea if it's expressed that way then I can go back to my bosses and say I gave up these lots when I
don't have the authority to do that and let's face it I like what I do and I don't want to look anymore. So second question I have for you. Uh the staff's report talks about the pending development of a regulation and it may come from examples of other communities
that may be polished to be more specific for Titusville. It may be Titusville's uniqueness creates a standard but it's certainly a case that the standard that's forthcoming will potentially be different than the standards in effect today because it's trying to compromise
with the new statute and other matters. So as staff develops that rule, would KB homes be amanable if this goes favorably for your request pursuing the model homes and whatever fanfare of
regulations gets developed in the future. Let's say it's in a year or within a year or within two years. Would you be comfortable that the uh KB would be an agreement of one of two ideas? I would have one, you'd give a year time
in which you'd have to come back here, give staff a year time to develop the rule. If what you get tonight is approved in concert with what may be a rule, it may be moot and maybe you don't have to come back if it's otherwise in compliance. If it isn't in compliance
andor if you haven't developed all of the model centers in one year, then coming back would subject those model centers to review of what the standard the city has, which may be what you're doing based on what might get approved
tonight. Or it may be slightly different in which case then you could dovetail your request into whatever the future standard with. My attempt is not to create an exception to a rule that's not reasonable, but also not to provide a a
a an exception in perpetuity wherein you haven't even built the model center. The new rule gets adopted and you get to build under some deviated standard. Would you be willing for some time limit on this request to allow staff to dovetail the future rule with what is
going to be adopted potentially with what you already have? Do you understand what I'm trying to suggest? I think you're kind of talking about the model home regulation. So, the current um the current ordinance that we're working on in response to the state law
does not reference model homes and we are that's the platting process. Correct. And we're not uh currently working on a model home ordinance uh standards. You're only working on the concurrency of houses with subdivisions. Correct. For the planning process only. Thank you. Do does the members
understand what that means the difference? Thank you. Um a lot you want. Okay. Now because if a year we're we're far from a year of starting our next phase, there's a lot of other things going on depending on
the master lake. But a lot of the times that change instead of us coming back if some if the city makes a change to land development code and say the model centers anything that's not covered in our plan development or PD automatically
reverts back to the city code. So either way we are going to be in compliance with either the PD that with the zoning that council grants us or if it's not covered explicitly it would fall back to land development code. So whatever's in there will be in compliance with the city of Titusville. Well, let me try and
spread some information that does occur, did occur. I'm recognizing that occurrence when I speak about this benefit to the business side of the argument you're doing is to have a model center configured for construction and then people shop by visually, as you
said, exploring the model and purchasing and then developing, building, buying their unit and that neighborhood builds out. Hopefully, it manifests itself in the sessation of that model center's need because it's all built out. And then another phase is under construction
and it repeats itself until the three sites you have proposed are used up and everybody's living in their home and splendor. I frankly know factually that master builders can choose option B, which is I have the right to maintain
my model center by my zoning rule. I choose to maintain my model center. I don't choose to expend money for future model centers. I'm just going to have everybody from the three phases a half mile down the street always come to the same neighborhood and visit. That is
where my experience personally came from and I was a regulator and watched it happen in which for a year and a half after the developer was well past that phase, it was to their advantage to maintain the model center. Everybody got to shop and I got to have cars parked in
front of my driveway and people knock on my door. That's a reality. It occurred to me personally. I'm under I could be under oath and tell you the story. So, I'm concerned with the potential that the model center would remain indefinite. Conversely, I'm more in favor that you put a terminus to it. You
terminate the use. You either reapply or you vacate the use because you've moved on. Whether it's 12 months, 24, it's some time period. Are you comfortable with the time period that you would cease that model center on assuming sales manifest itself for your benefit
that you sell out move on your own accord but otherwise we could say the city you've got to stop using it now you've built out that that is a condition I don't have the authority to say sure on that but I can tell you in other communities that sorry that we
currently have I do reside in a KB neighborhood we had 16 lots left for BTO, which is build to order. And we are down from three models and the sales office to just the sales office. They've
already been the landscaping has been replaced and they're for sale. So, we're not to sound harsh, but our sales team and the construction when that's done are moving to another community. They try and keep the sales and the
construction team for that continuity and between construction and sales to the next community. So, we're not going to have cuz every municipality has different a lot of them are going out to different architectural standards. We don't have the same
models. There's different elevations, different driveways. We have some in other municipalities that aren't concrete driveways. They're pavers for driveways. That's not up here. That's down south. So, everything's different. even in the Orlando division. So, it could be what you see in community A
might not be the same. It could be the same model, but not the same elevation. Right. I I understand part of to to answer the short, we we're not in the business to hold on to model homes to drive from because even that if somebody's Well, if you're looking in
Pulk County, if somebody told me, hey, go ahead and drive over to Titusville and look at this model. No, I'm not talking about driving 50 miles. I'm talking about driving within a planned community that could be a quarter to a half mile. I'm talking about the intensity
occurring in a neighborhood past the time it should have moved on. I'm talking about the business side of this is to maintain it to the last possible choice. In other words, if there's a 100 lots and there's three model homes, build 97 lots and then sell out the three model homes. I'm talking about
something slows down the progress and the three model homes remain because you don't want to build another three somewhere else and it's easier to facilitate looking at those units down the road by golf cart travel by road by direction by signals and that is a problem why I've spoken to staff as they
develop rules staff I believe needs to develop a rule that has a time limit it can be predicated on something and you're ready to tell me what it is so se section 28-366 6 for real estate sales office. When a real estate sales office
is contained within a model home, it has a maximum time frame of up to two years. So this request would terminate the model sales the three fa three clusters and their use for the real estate office. The real estate sales office
cannot operate any longer than a maximum of two years under that code requirement when it's when it's within a model home. But the model home that could be accessible to the public that would park their car out front and go tour correct one two three could do that without a real code currently allows it and like
if they wanted to build a a temporary structure to house the sales office they're allowed to do that for up to one year um like a like a temporary structure. Um, and then if they include the sales office within a model home, then they can have up to two
years to operate the sales office. I'm guess I'm dense. The single family or multiple family or attached single family homes are cluster built and they're a model center A, B, C, D. D has got a real estate office in
the converted garage and people come and look at A, B, and C and decide which one they want to buy. It may even be D because it's one, too. and they contract some business relationship there on site real estate transaction that use real estate transaction ceases in two years
by the city code. That's correct. The A, B, and C model homes or the D model home with the converted garage turned into a real estate office. If the real estate office vacates the garage, but it's still a modeled home, how long is it remained? The city has no
regulations for model homes. so timelmiting the exposition of those model homes where they're configured for display for untypical traffic. Cars parked, people knocking on the door saying hello. Um, that should be time limited.
Is KB willing to put a time limit on that? It could be qualified in months or years. It could be qualified with the buildout. In other words, when the culde-sac is built out accepting for these units, you have to vacate the use. Do you understand what I'm trying to I
understand? And I I think for me is even if it's not a model center and as Christie said, if we can pull a permit and keep it as a speck home is there's, you know, it's hard to say there's a time because if it's not a
model center and we have three speck homes for people to look at. I I mean if that if I not opposed to a recommendation that it equals what's in the code for the center if it's allowed the two years.
Um I don't have a good answer for that. I honestly don't cuz some villages this I think village C in total is 529 homes. If that sells in two years, thanks. You know, just there's no with
the the way market is and marketing and sales, I don't know because right now we're only doing one part of Village C until we can get the master lake going. There's a lot of internal parts for us prior to even home construction and even infrastructure in the ground that have
to take place. I I understand. So, there's a lot that goes into if we get these in, but then we can't go forward. do we do this one? And then you have a builder's like, "Okay, we're going to go from this side of the road to this side of the road and now it's a new sales center. So, we have two more years in
the same spot." Well, I guess the answer lies in the request you've made hasn't been approved. So, if you have to live with the request you've made being modified by conditions of approval, that's the rule. Whatever those rules that get adopted by city council, that's the rule. Yes. My question for staff, so
as the applicant mentioned this speck home, so if speck homes are allowed to be constructed, as the applicant just put forth, and they can be used and people park on the street and walk in and tour and look in perpetuity, there was no time limit as the applicant
inferred. That's okay with city code. There's no real estate office on side. It's just a model home with a nice picket fence and nice landscaping. the Robin model sitting on a little stick out front and the Walrus model on the next one or whatever they canote them to
be. They're all going to be model homes and this goes on daily, monthly, yearly because it's a spec home. That's okay. I'm not aware of any regulation in our code that would would address that. So, the
applicant doesn't have to request model homes. He's just requesting temporary real estate offices. The temporary real estate office was already approved in the previous PD amendment, but what we're looking for with the modified the modification previously for this one and the agenda,
I believe it's just for the model center and the parking lot. Correct. The the model center and for and the parking. What we don't have now is we don't have the parking lot. What that does, it keeps people off the street crossing the street. It's a I'm good I personally I'm good with
the with the applicant application. I'm good with the attributes of it. I'm concerned about the timing and the perpetuity issue. And now that I've deter been advised that really you don't have to ask to develop a model center. You really have to ask to develop a
temporary parking lot on a residential lot. And you have to ask to have a temporary real estate office deviating from the code. the code being a typical zoning district as opposed to a planned development zoning district. Back to my first comments in the beginning. So I I
just again stress I think timing should be part of the consideration here that you aren't operating this use potentially in perpetuity. I just don't I don't support that myself. Thank you. That's all my questions for uh just a comment. Um, I I tend to agree
with member Gar as it relates to the backing up onto the um retention areas. Uh, it looks like there's several lots that that technically back up into the side of another lot and those are the ones that
I would be concerned about. So, I think the best way to police that is the the language that I expect to be proposed as to um to that. Uh, member Rogers Just a little bit of information. Uh although it may not have direct bearing on what we're doing right now, but um
but you're used to that from me. Um on the KB Verona website, the cheapest homes listed right now, single floor, about 360,000 uh dollars. Um and uh member Fendler who
who actually lives in in that development uh says that um a lot fee is required uh with that that does not include the actual price of the dirt. Correct. That if that's any building you're going to have and
depending as member Gard said if there are lots that are considered that are premium that have more. I don't establish those prices. I don't know what they are. But but but he said maybe 10 or $15,000 on top of that. So for a
total price roughly of 330 or 335 or 340 345. So the um $38,000 discount represents somewhere in the neighborhood of a 10% discount which of course is nothing to sneeze at but still results
in um you know in a home that's uh you know pushing the mid300s. Um, so I guess I'm just going back to the idea that if we're going to have affordable housing in this area, it will need to be priced lower than that, I think. Um, although of course
everything's more expensive, isn't it? Okay, I see no additional questions. Thank you. Thank you. Um, with that, I'll close the public hearing and bring it back to Commission. Any comments or anyone care to make a
motion? Member Garen, I just a comment from the commission and I hope I haven't overwhelmed board or otherwise talk too long about this, but the uh point of what I'm trying to uh present is that lacking a standard in effect today and a
request being made in this planned development zoning district, we have the opportunity to create the rule by recommendation and by condition supporting hopefully by the city council, but that way the applicant gets what he's looking for and perhaps the public and long term is protected. And
I've tried to express some of my concerns on my experience where without some restriction to time, it can backfire. It can become a nuisance. It can become a problem. And where the argument made about, as you've just mentioned, about open space, I see
favorably, but I disfavor the idea that you just have lots that are just typical to any lot. Therefore, I reduce the setback. I don't see the need for that. Um, that's what I'll share with everybody. Thank you, Vice Chairman Childs. I'm just trying to
um get my head around the whole the uh recommended action C um for the the model homes cluster. Um is is is the reason why um that you guys are recommending denial
of that is because of the whole you can't do it in concurrency is that you can't build the besides it. So, can you build the the real estate office ahead of platting or I guess I don't understand why.
So, staff's concern with this is that we don't have standards in place for model homes, standards for the parking lots and where they can be and setbacks and things. So, that's why staff had difficulties, you know, offering a recommendation or approval because we
don't have standards within our code as precedents for this. So, so even though it's just like a I mean basically they're building a house that they might show like any other house that a realtor might take someone in and look at it
that's uninhabited that that was at one point had people living in it. Um so you're not against I mean so it's really just what they're going to be it's just going to be an empty house, right? They're just going to build it before all the other houses. They're going to build those houses before all
the others. So then they can take and they'll have one that's still just the real estate office and the other three they're just going to show like any other regular house. Right. So that's correct. But you don't have but your denial is based on that you don't have
procedures around because it's technically a model home. Right. Sure. Okay. Yeah. I Yeah. I just don't see I mean I I think if they were using it as a real estate office um then I would see trying to Yeah, I think staff is being
very reserved with that recommendation just because we didn't really have a whole lot to work on. So we're kind of you know providing the information and kind of leaving it up to you to discuss. I can understand. Yeah. If you thought well you just want to make it clear that they cannot use that as a real estate
office, right? The other three that they use one correct. Yes. as as a real estate office. The other three there's no procedure and we're not going to yeah approve those and um don't use them as real estate office but okay. And then
um and for the for a um as far as the 20 ft I think they requested 15 now. Um yeah 15. your your recommendation is denial because the standard is in in the
code. We're concerned about you know the potential of increased variance request. Um and then also that we don't have a precedence in the city. This would be the narrowest rear setback for a single family town home type development. Um so
we that's why we offered that recommendation. Got that. Okay. Thank you. member GR struck me in and this discussion about potential variances I kind of cringe on because it
seems like it's not part of the discussion. There's no hardship unless you've self-imposed it. The relationship to a variance is that I would say on my lot, why do you get to be closer than me? Your lot's the same as mine otherwise. That's why it's increasingly
important for variance potential that we in our consideration identify the exceptional standard. Your lot is different than my lot because I'm on open space. Now, if you pick up one of those ones that's not, I'd make a really good argument at the board of adjustment hearing about why are you
differentiating my lot, which is just like your lot. It doesn't have a retention lake behind it. So, that's why I was so concerned about focusing on the open space. I agree with that. Thank you. That said, we need a motion.
I just had one question. Oh, member Rogers. Sorry. Um, so Christie, the model homes, they follow the exact same building standards as any other house in the development. It's just that they for it's this is not a question about their their structure.
It's just a question about their use for a period of time. Um, that is to say, the issue that Titusville that staff has with it is is it's not that they're concerned that they aren't built properly. It's just that it's it's the timing and
the and the approval of of them because of their use. They're not Yeah, we don't technically have standards for um operations of model homes. We have the standard for the operation of the retail sales office, but we don't have any
standards in place regulating the duration of a model home within a subdivision. But as far as a construction goes, the the exact same standards for are followed for a model home would be for correct one at a time. Go ahead. No, you first. No, I was say I was just gonna say
you're gonna take them one at a time, right? I I just have one okay one remaining question goes back to the applicant has reduced the request from more clusters to less clusters. The applicant is now seeking three clusters of these model
homes. Is that what I understood? So there was a change you mentioned earlier, right? I just want to read it verbatim. Um, so one model home with a real estate uh real estate office and up to four decorated model show homes and
one ancillary stabilized temporary parking area within each residential village and as depicted. Second question, as depicted on the Verona master plan, I see it identified village A, B, C, D, and E. And there was
conversation about C, I think earlier. Um if it was included in that that would be in each of those villages there would be potentially a site which would have four of the town homes and a temporary real estate office. Correct. Villages A,
B, C, and E. So for perception, the saturation would be very minimal. If you look at the number of lots each of those villages contain, the number that'd be devoted to the modeled use, the temporary parking and the real estate office would be the vast minority of the
area. I would agree with that statement. Okay. Thank you. Now, now we're ready. Now we're ready. I can I had a little experience with model home development. I'm sorry. I apologize. Seems like you may have a few nightmares. I am not a rocket
scientist. I promise you that. U so in in and I got to call this up again in in kind of concert with the staff's recommendations but somewhat deviating from them based on the applicant's request to reduce it. So uh I would be
recommending approval of the request to develop the cluster model centers in the three in the villages at the maximum of that request three with their temporary real estate office and their temporary gravel
parking improved parking. So um to allow model home clusters of up to four model homes in each development phases of village A, B, C, and E with each model home cluster including a real estate sales office. Yes. Then in concert with
the staff recommendation not to reduce the setback on lots which are not abudding the open space identified in blue on the master plan which presumes it's a retention lake. Only the lots which abut those
retention lakes would be authorized for the development of the reduced setback the 15t in lie of the current 20 where lots don't abut that open space identified as a blue lake on the master
plan those are not recommended for reduction to the 15t setback I'm only recommending approval to reduce setback Can we do one at a time? One at a time. So, so on page point one was clusters of
three and can we do a a is a is the setback. Y if we could moving on to the next part of the request. I began by saying there's many facets of one application. In this case, the request to reduce
setbacks affects a number of properties illustrated on the master plan in red. Correct. The recommendation is to approve the requested 15 foot setback reduced from 20 but only for those lots abuing what's
identified as a retention lake colored in blue. If the lots are not abudding that boundary sharing the benefit of the open space I can't I don't recommend they reduce the setback. Is that okay? Mhm.
Um B is the lot with which they recommended approval and the Yeah, the the lot with everybody's comfortable with the request you've said recommends approval. So it would contain B as part of the
recommendation. I'm sorry. Are um can we do each item into like make a motion for each? Well, I just went backwards. I'm sorry. So let's start with the easy one. Yeah, cuz we do each do one motion for the rear setback and then we can move on to the
lot width. Okay, we we got the rear setback down to Blue Lakes recommend approval to reduce setback if you abut those water bodies. So that's a motion. That's a motion. Okay, let's vote on that motion. Yes. Do you want to take Okay, now I understand what you want to do. All right, you want
to do it? Fine. I understand. So that's a motion. Okay, so that would be item A on page 30. Um, and sorry, member Rogers, I just u maybe this is splitting hairs, but uh
it seems to me that a few of those lots a portion of them abuts the the water, but a portion does not. And so perhaps you'd want to modify that slightly to say that the 100% of the lot abuts the water.
Or maybe you don't. I wished I had numbers to be able to reference. I'm sorry. I do not. So, um I if if the continuity of the buffer is is the entire lot width, that would be the lot applicable to reduce setback. I
understand Mr. Rogers point. Okay. So, the entire lot width must abut uh the lake storm water pond area. Let me be honest. It's very difficult to deal with something that's as abstract as little squares and little bonds and
little colors. So, it's difficult if not impossible to codify a recommendation in that matter. So, I'm doing the best I can. Yeah. I mentioned earlier in Mr. Rogers, your comments on point that there is an exception to the budding the open space. There's a cluster of lots. We'll call it in the center of the
picture. In the center of the picture, there is a red box of five lots. And that center of the picture is red box of five lots. The middle two above the blue dot. And that's literally what I'm looking at. I don't support those lots reducing
setback because it's impossible, I think, for staff to differentiate which of those five are the ones that get the 15 foot setback and which are the ones that don't. And the people next to me that get the reduced setback go, what about me? So, I wish that I could be clearer in what I'm trying to envision
as a recommendation, but I can only look at this map and say it's the red lots in village C. I'm sorry, it's the red lots and village seed that abut the
rectangular blue retention lake. Do you see those? So the the identified lots but only the identified lots that are the the full extent of the rear property line must abut the storm water pond marked in blue. That yes, I think that
is accurate. And and what I what I'm trying to suggest and Mr. Rogers brought it to my attention to make a a lot about but the blue spaces the criteria is good. I like that. But however, in this red box of five lots, two of but the
blue and three do not. And I can't see why the three on the outside. It's ridiculous. I wish the applicant had been addressing this with identifying numbers so it was easier to make a recommendation. That helps us helps me. So my motion stays the same. The
recommendation modified by Mr. Rogers to only be those lots which are but the blue open space 100% would be applicable to the reduced setback and not approve those five lots I refer to as in village C in the north
part of the village which are a cluster of five drawn in red. I'm sure everybody can figure out which one obviously not abudding the blue areas. And if I may, if staff would present that to city council in a colored rendering that would show maybe the applicant can do it
that would be less and except the ones in yellow would be helpful. You you understand, Mr. Honeyut? Thank you. That's the motion. And I second. All right, we have a motion and a second. All right. Roll call vote, please. Member
Grod, yes. Member Scully, yes. Vice Chairman Childs, yes. Member Gellen, yes. Secretary Grant, yes. Member Fen, yes. Chairman Eton, yes. All right. Um, you want to stay on a
roll for a motion on the role item item B in the staff report? Uh, I recommend approval based on the staff's recommendation to uh reduce the minimum lot width from 40 to 20 feet. Second. Billy G. I second. Member FA and
seconds. Roll call vote, please. Secretary Grant. Yes. Member FA. Yes. Vice Chairman Childs. Yes. Member Scully. Yes. Member Grod. Yes. Member Gillan. Yes. Chairman Eton. Yes.
All right. On to item C. As a motion, I would recommend that in concert with the staff's recommendation um um to deny the cluster of four model homes in each development since the
applicant has reduced the number from prior a larger one to only three. I don't see that. So, I recommend approval of the requested three sites. Would that be the correct language? Would that make clear sense to
everybody? You have three sites for your model homes. You mean besides the real So, because the four is talking about the the four model homes with one of those being the the real estate sales office. That's correct. Correct. Yeah. That one application the applicant seeks
to have three of. Correct. No, four. That's four. It went from eight to four. Four. I thought I heard three. I apologize. So, it was it's eight became four, but you want four sites of clustered town homes with one of those units being a real estate office. Is
that correct? I think it's four plus one. I can read it. So um it would be to allow model home clusters of up to four model homes in each development phase of village A, B, C, and E with each model home cluster including a real estate
sales office and an adjacent ancillary stabilized temporary parking area for the model home cluster/realestate sales office. So in the end you'd have one cluster in each village period. Correct. With one real estate office in that cluster. Correct.
I would make a motion to approve that part of the request. Four sites of attached town homes in clusters of town homes actually only E town homes and others are single family model homes. So in the town home it' be
four four town homes. One's a real estate in the other phases it would be detached houses but there'd be four houses. I'm comfortable with that part of your applicant's request to recommend approval as as the applicant requested of the cluster of four with one real
estate office with one in each village. Is that correct? Correct. Within with an ancillary stabilized temporary parking area for the sales office. Yes, I second. Oh, okay. Member. All right. No lights
on comments. Okay. Roll call, please. Member FC, yes. Member Gillan, yes. Member Grod, yes. Member Scully, yes. Vice Chairman Childs, yes. Secretary Grant, yes. Chairman Non, yes.
And I'd also request a motion to be made to add the additional conditions. Um, so several conditions of approval from the current master plan were carried over to the amended master plan and are located in the PD ordinance. Um so the new proposed conditions of approval include the
following. Accessory building structures and setback standards be incorporated into the conditions of approval. Townhouse and multifamily development shall have a minimum distance between structures of 20 ft and a maximum of six dwelling units shall be allowed in a
building group of town home units. Town houses building groups shall also have staggered setbacks to lessen the straight row effect. That would be my motion and the applicant understands that as well.
Yes, that's my motion. This is stated by staff. We have a second. Second. Member Secretary Vice Chairman Childs. Second. Uh, roll call, please.
Member Gellen. Yes. Member Gar. Yes. Secretary Grant. Yes. Vice Chairman Childs. Yes. Member FA. Yes. Member Scully. Yes. Chairman Eton. Yes. We
good? I got a thumbs up. We're good. All right. Thank you. All right. That was our last item, our only item of new business. Moving on to our second petitions and requests from
the public present. See none. And so we'll move on to reports. City staff. No reports from city staff. Chelsea. I
have no report. Uh I have no report myself. Any members have any reports? Member Grant. Secretary. I don't have a really a report, but I have a something that I um came across today.
I was uh what's that on the website talk oftisitisville.com. They're talking about the um county commissioners defunding North Bard economic development zone and said that Titusville may
follow. It's very interesting article. I was uh curious about this. and we'll see what kind of uh um feedback or rebuttal that you guys may have. If you don't mind, I'd like to read a small portion of that. It says that the um future of the
North Bard economic development zone hangs in the balance after Boulevard County Commissioners initiated steps to withdraw funding. Amid this shift, Titusville mayor has signaled a strategic pivot towards new economic partnerships and streamlined initiatives
potentially including a localized approach to business development. Excellent. On the 14th of April, uh, Mayor Andrew Connors emphasized resilience, framing the North Bard economic development zone's potential dissolution as an
opportunity to refocus and reimagine economic growth. His remarks suggest a move towards localized industrial specific strategies, particularly with the space sector and small businesses.
Key elements of his plan could include, because it's not nothing has been set in stone yet, a streamlined process for uh permits and approvals to attract investors. In fact, I think that's going on now with the um live local, etc.,
enhanced infrastructure to support commercial and residential projects such as the shores at Tranquility and the uh redevelopment of the Tisville Mall, targeted tax exemptions aimed at high wage job
creation. The mayor's focus on partnerships, innovations, and targeted investments align with existing city programs like the Spaceport uh commerce park and incentives and small business assistance. This raises the possibility of a new
local board or task force to centralize efforts with space industry leaders, entrepreneurs, and groups like NASA's Office of Small um business programs. under the um heading of what a local board could mean for Titusville.
It says, "While the mayor did not explicitly announce a new board, his emphasis on collaboration with regional partners and local entrepreneurs suggest a potential restructuring of economic development efforts such as such a board
and such a board could one leverage space industry ties by capitalizing on uh Kennedy Space Center's presence to attract aerospace suppliers and tech firms mirroring L3 Harris expansion in Palm
pay two, expand incentives, offer tailored tax breaks, grants, and fasttrack per permitting similar to the North Boulevard economic development zone previous redevelopment programs. And three, boost small business small
businesses partnered with uh NASA's office of small business programs to host networking, etc., etc. It also goes on to say that if Townsville establishes a localized board, it could focus on high-tech manufacturing building on expansion by
firms like by firms like uh Rogue Valley micro devices in Palm Bay. Again, Palm Bay is being uh mentioned here. And as you all probably know, Palm Bay is probably the fastest growing city in the county population wise is really
zooming. Um the board could al also focus on tourism and retail strengthening initiatives like the launch from here campaign to attract visitors and business and housing and infrastructure balancing residential
growth with commercial needs as seen also in Palm Bay's 9,264 unit housing popline pipeline and said while the north of our economic development zone fate remains uncertain. Titusville appears poised to
adopt a more agile communitydriven model by deepening ties with space industry and entrepreneurs. The city could emerge as a self-sustained hub for innovations, proving that its economic ambitions extend far beyond the uh north boulevard
economic uh development zone era. I like myself, like a lot of other boomers, um like the small town feel, but I think it's unre unrealistic to think that's going to be sustained
forever. Um primarily because of the location we're in. We're right right across the river river from the space center. We're in the heart of it all. And I think I have a feeling that your job is going to get much more
um what's worth. Yeah. Um because um we're already um worried about our infrastructure now with all the building we're doing and I don't know maybe with 10 years or
less we we could incorporate MIMS into Tisville. Port St. John would be a better deal, but I think they're already associated with Coco, you know. Think of all that. They're just dating. They're not married. Who said that? Think of all that tax revenue tax
revenue that they could get because it's already established. And uh if they add multif family to it, which they don't have in Port St. John, they could quadruple it. Things are going to get a little busy around here, I think, in the next few years, especially if u Mr. Connor, Mayor Connor,
uh decide to go the way this article implies that he might. Anybody have an opinion on that? So, it's it's interesting. So, first of all, I've I've disconnected for quite some time intentionally lately and I've
I've been forced to reconnect uh to the going zones of Titusville. Uh hearing that there's that we are the county is defunding the North Economic Development Zone. Um, from years past, there's been some
really good things that have happened in Titusville. Um, as we know, we are kind of limited in space as far as where we can grow. Okay. 95 has really limited us from going west and so we can only go north and south. We can go north and south. That's it. Say again. We can only
go north and south. That's it. We can only go north and south. Um, with the with the defunding of North Development, uh, whatever, nidbiz, whatever it's called, right? Um, I don't have a particular problem with that, but where you
reinvesting those dollars and as I look as I look it up real quickly, doesn't put any money into it, county does, and BAR County put $3 million into it. So, when they do fund that, that's that's good. Um, I love talking about industry.
It it's great to to bring industry here, but what about other services? There's so many other services that's needed here. Um uh low paying not low paying jobs, but like service jobs, grocery stores, and things that that people need
to live. Um Titusville has a unique opportunity. I believe it can maintain the small town feel while growing. I believe it can, but it has to be intentional. It has to be intentional. It has to deal it starts
with uh community. It starts with developing a sense of community within this environment. Um and right now we don't have that. I think when we lose small town feeling is when we lose sense of community. When people are so disjointed and so separated and that that they don't get out and handshake
with one another, that's when you lose that small town feel. It's not about growth. Um I look at Sanford. Sanford is much bigger than Titusville and yet it still maintains its small town feel. Um I've been out to uh Lake something another way over there. They still
maintain their small town feel. Sanford is not on the on the on the coast. It's not it's not it's not. But what I'm saying I think our location has a lot to say about how far we grow and how fast we grow. Well, I I I think what Sanford has done has has done a lot of things to
be able to bring the community together. So, like around the lake, there's a lot of there's a lot of getting out there. Um, when they've reinvested money into the downtown and grew that downtown where it's it's kind of like a mix of some of the old housing as well as downtown feel and it's very very
walkable. Um, Sanford has been able to foster community thereby that's what the planners that's what they do. I I I agree. I agree. But it also it also takes us it takes us spreading the word that some of the growth that's happening in Titusville isn't isn't bad and that
we need it. Not only do we need it, but we also need the residents to support the growth as well as come out and support activities and and venues. We need the community to get out and be community. That that's why that's why that's what I think.
just food for thought for everyone um just to share a brief experience of it's happened before it will happen again I I started my career in a small town a small community and small time values 50,000 people in Ocola County is
a very small population I left in 20 at least that career I left in 2011 um there was 250,000 Wow. There's 328,000 people now and it's not even the census period. There'll be
400,000 people in 2030 and it's not letting up. One of the things that the county I worked in and the city's also started to recognize and I've spoken to staff about this and I'm sure you'll recall I've mentioned this a lot. Plan
development is a negotiating tool. The benefit to planned development on the city side is that you are open for negotiation. The benefit to the development community, you saw representative tonight, KB Homes. That's not going to be the first or the last
time you see international building stock exchange level corporations. They will become the normal. Joe the builder will not be in business unless he's filling in the infill sites because that's the nature of the economy. when
you have a rapidly growing population which you were correct to predict. I spoke to a friend today on the same measure talked about if I came and it was a TG Builders Inc. NY Stock Exchange
Corporation. If I went to Merit Island, where am I going to find 400 acres of property? Where am I going to find 400 acres of property in Merit Island with water and sewer available? Now, Titus is a different situation. They've extended their service lines in
an area that captures that urban service boundary and it's put the it's put the uh the bait, so to speak, out for development. That's what planners when they plan cities want to do. The revenue coming in from development works that way. No, I certainly don't think
Titusville should ever annex Port St. John. The the the cost effectiveness of that would be a catastrophe. which is why where I lived the unincorporated county has a I'm going to say 200,000 population uninccorporated community known as
Buentura Lakes and the city of CM is annexed around it cherrypicking the sites which were commercial. What's interesting is when they call for 911 and the city police have to traverse through four or five miles of unincorporated urban environment city
streets that the sheriff responds to and the county fire EMS responds to, not the city to drive through to go to the shopping center to answer the call of the person had the heart attack in Wind Dixie because the city annexed the commercial strip on the road. Or they can drive the seven mile drive around
the long way which they don't do. That's what happens when annexations occur haphazardly. Why annexations should be held to be compact. But most importantly is to recognize planned development zoning district is one that works best for both parties. When you see
innovative developers, you heard him tonight talk about is got this thing and it's hot potatoes. It's got to be sold. That's what they do is answer to the market. That's why their stocks go up. That's why the stockholders like them. That's why they get successful. but they have innovative designs that just don't
fit in the capture of standard zoning rules, standard county cut city codes, excuse me. So, the best methodology for trying to balance growth with benefit is to allow staff to start with the
negotiating tool. In fact, it it's can be codified that once you reach a threshold of acreage, you have to use that zoning district. You're not allowed to go into standard bill affair and just build houses. And I'll kind of bit that spin a little bit more. In the plan
development, there's usually a balance criteria between internal commercial, commercial, or maybe even a a job enhanced manufacturing, but you have to have something that supports that plan development as a community. You spoke about the community. You you really
can't walk from Verona to downtown Titusville. No, I can walk in downtown Titusville to downtown Titusville because it's two miles up to the river and two miles back down. And I did that today. I'm still able to do it, too. But my point is that's why Verona
is a planned development. It captures a community within it. But unless and until I think the city recognizes that, and maybe the mayor's comments are on point, that it's coming, the trains left the station. Yeah. The train's probably going to accelerate faster than it's
ever come at the station uh from the station in the past and it catches staff illprepared because they're usually overwhelmed. And that is something that council has to look at for staffing problems. But in support of that, back
to my whole point, maybe I'll win this one day. That's the best way to handle this kind of growth is to make that the requirement. So you can negotiate with developers the things you need to by percentage of commercial, locations of
commercial, the type of commercial. You can negotiate the road infrastructure. You know, um I don't know if you saw the tragedy that occurred in celebration. This kind of deviates from my point, but it doesn't. The celebration communities in the unincorporated Oyola County. It's
not a city. May as well be Mims. It's a community development district. So, it's got a degree of autonomous authority, but it's not it's not anything more or less than an unincorporated cluster of homes with some commercial. A lot of innovation came that way there.
Everything in that that you see, if you drove through it, if you've never driven through it, drive through it, everything you see is different. It was all negotiated and in some cases mistakes were made. Mistakes were made at turning radiuses where you know in New England the streets are skinny. Well that we're
not living in New England and fire trucks are 75 ft long and they can't turn a radius to get behind a home. And in fact a home burnt down for that reason. So they went back and improved radi because it wasn't working. But it all came through this negotiated
development rule that created that. In my humble opinion, hopefully maybe staff or some presentation is made through city council one day that can en enhance the recognition to council of what plan development really benefits. It benefits
both sides of the fence and it's a strong suit to lead because the applicant's requesting things that are innovative and different than the standard bill of affair. And if you offer it to only be in that category for certain large tracks of land, you'll be able to control growth much more
effectively than you do when you just lay out the standard bill affair. This width road, that kind of sidewalk, this kind of side, everything just looks so bland. Everything is just houses. The housing people are answering to the demand that business and I I mean it's
great, but reality is the business is on Merit Island. It's not in Titus. And I went out the other day and I was I was amazed and I grew up here but I was still amazed and I recognize how many people work at the space center but amazed was to go to Orlando for an early
morning flight and watch traffic stopped. Is that Gris? What's the road that goes to I95? Is that Gryom? Yes. Off I7. Yeah. That traffic light you hate to have to turn left on because if you don't get the left turn light, you
sit there for 40 minutes. the cars at whatever it was I was hitting the morning flight on like 5 5:30 in the morning. Lights were stopped around the curve down to Walmart. Lights were red lights solid all the way. All the way meaning they were over the bridge and
through the woods. And I sat there. I said, "There's probably 10,000 cars in an hour go that way." And all those people are coming from Orlando, let alone Merit Island and Melbourne and Palm Bay. and they're coming right here.
And I would say, how many people would raise their hand if I said, would you prefer to drive an hour to work or 15 minutes? Would you prefer to drive an hour and work that is only 30 miles, but it takes an hour or would you like 15 minute or your case, you might only
drive five minutes because you leave your subdivision and turn left, you're on the home. Where will people build? In my opinion, this is a target. It's and when you see big international builders like KB doing a project like Verona, it's there. And I want to add
one more and I and I really appreciate you reading that because that's right on point of what's going to happen. It's the future. I can recall that property. I worked one time for McDonald Douglas and I think that's who used to own
Verona that that real estate and they sold it. that in the very beginning when they sold it, there was a gentleman who was the uh city manager in CMI at the time. His name was OAM Aley. Nice man.
Um he came over here after he left the city management and was in the real estate business. And he came over here and negotiated the first plan development rule that laid down whatever that was back in the day. And this would have been 25 years ago, whatever
happened. He was working that project with folks like KB Homes or US Homes, Lonar Homes, master builders, and they want these plan development rules because they have the they need the flexibility. And of course, the counterpart is you can build into it a
lot of benefit for the community. Exaction's the word, but it's not legally the correct word, but it is what it is. You negotiate what they give, you give, they get, you get. And so hopefully one day in staff presentations
to afford trying to check that future rapid growth because it I mean it could be next week that we get a request for 400 acres off I95 for KB homes phase 2 or US homes phase one or whatever it is.
It is definitely coming and I say that because I watched that very subject. One day it was one application, next year it was five applications. The year after that it was 15 applications. It was still the same three people in the staff working, but you couldn't keep up with
it. And they were just it it it's my fear for Titusville is I think manifested in my retirement in my hometown where I grew up because you I can see it. I hope that the mayor, the city council embrace that and and face
that and prepare for it as best suited by having staff work on regulations that really make this be that place you want the community. Absolutely. The walkability, the location because if you're in Verona and it's got all those attributes, you're essentially in
Titusville. You're paying the taxes to Titusville, but you can walk to school and you can walk to the businesses. You're not in Port St. John having to drive seven miles across I 95 to get to US1 to go to Wind Dixie kind of story.
And Verona would have had even more if they had kept the commercial aspect of their project which they changed for with the um change out for the multif family. That's exactly what I'm saying in a sense is you've got to be aware that you can't just let residential come
in and say, "Okay, right, I'm a planned development. I get reduced setbacks, reduce lot width, and I get uh 5.6 units per acre gross density on my overall project, and I click that $300,000 mark per house, and I go, "Yep, I can buy that project." You have to be able to
negotiate. know for for a thousand homes you have to have 40 acres of commercial or that you have to have an employment base. If you want those homes you have to have provide a workplace. Just food for thought as I said. Yeah. And I only mentioned Port St. John
because uh Titusville city limits now goes to uh Kings Road I believe. So uh hey onward and upward. Member Rogers. I I'll be brief. Um I just uh I start to get a little nervous
um when I hear talk about economic development boards and that sort of thing. And just thinking about what member facing said about uh being intentional and getting the community involved, that sort of thing. Um sometimes you end up with a fox guarding
the hen house. And um I do think you have to be careful. make sure that uh all interests are represented and you don't have u mandates coming down from on high that this is the direction we're going to go and it's been decided and there's never been any input from the
public. So just a food for thought. So I am actually a member of the economic development zone north economic development zone board and have been since its inception. So, I'm can answer
most anything uh about it. Um, and you're just the kind of guy I'm talking about. I I believe we've done a tremendous amount of work. Please, I encourage everybody do your research. Um, everything from
Titus Landing to um Blue Origin and um what was one web now is um Airbus I think or something like that. Um uh all of those projects um we had a hand hopefully in in bringing
um the zone is a tax increment financing zone um somewhat similar to a CRA. uh it is completely funded by the increase in um property tax that is brought by the
commercial development initiated and originated by the zone. So, uh, does a lot of good things. Um, the, um, and and it was intended and and is built so that funds
related to commercial projects that happen in North Bard stay in North Bard. That is the part that's getting defunded. Um, it is not a done deal. I would encourage everybody uh to participate and voice your opinion if
you believe in it or and voice your opinion either way, but that um there are two more votes the county commission before it is um put into action. Um it was a 3-2 vote to defund. Uh so it could
go a 32 vote to maintain in either of those two meetings. Um it um uh the um money if it is defunded that comes from the county uh that would
that is the county portion would go back into the general fund and then would be controlled by the entire county. Um, and as it relates to oversight, anything over, I believe it's $500,000 from an award perspective has to go before the
entire county commission anyway. So, there is a tremendous amount of oversight related to the zone in its current form. Um, happy to answer any questions uh about it um that I can.
Um, but uh it is a very good thing. I would encourage, at least in my opinion, and would encourage um anybody who's in favor of Titusville and North Boulevard kind of controlling its own destiny to a certain extent um to get out there and
try to keep it in force. Member facing your lights. Oh, okay. That said, see no more lights. We are adjourned.