##VIDEO ID:jQC4iIAvka0## for e e [Music] [Music] welcome to the August 13 2024 630 p.m. city council meeting we do have a quorum so we call this meeting to order would you please join me in a moment of silence and the pledge to the flag flag United States of America the stands Nation indivisible for all city clerk would you please read the rules of speak yes sir individuals wishing to speak on agenda items must complete a signup card prior to the item being introduced those wishing to speak on claa judicial public hearings must complete a signup card and sign the oath sign up and oath cards are available on the table individuals wishing to speak on non-agenda items May do so under petitions from the public present this opportunity is offered twice in the meeting and individuals may speak at either the first or second petitions but not both no signup card is required citizens shall not comment on any issue more than once during the meeting all comments except petitions and requests must address the pending issue and citizens will be given three minutes to speak citizens wishing to speak on the consent agenda must submit a signup card identifying the items of interest each speaker shall be limited to three minutes to speak on the entire consent agenda all sign up cards and Exhibits being submitted to city council shall be placed in the box on the table thank you very much uh Council can I get approval uh of the minutes from the regular city council meeting on July 23rd 2024 5:30 p.m. meeting so moved second I have a motion and a second all those in favor say yes yes opposed am minut it's approved City attorney window sign in dialog ratio Tuesday August 13 point of business I'd like to bring up this point uh at your previous council meeting city council had voted to continue the hearing on scale amendment number 3 2022 which was Bristol that included ordinances number 19 2024 and 20224 and that was continued to tonight's council meeting uh these items will be heard during the public hearing portion of the agenda as part of that motion to continue There was a portion that recognized that certain number of speakers had spoken and the persons who had not yet spoken but had submitted speaking cards of course would be carried over to tonight's meeting uh to speak and that if they couldn't speak they could have you know individuals of course speak for them to the extent that that motion restricted any speakers other than those who had already spoken uh from speaking tonight I would advise that you resend that portion of the motion making it clear that the members of the public who have not already spoken on this agenda item are able to submit speaker cards uh tonight on this public hearing item can I get a motion to that effect hold on go ahead mayor can I be heard for a moment on that Meg again yes uh yes sir I you know I think it's probably best practice to go ahead and allow any additional speaker cards that have submitted speaker cards to hear tonight but I would like to Lodge a standing objection to any of the speakers that are presenting commentary on new cards after the I think it was 26 that were turned in that night under the basis that the uh section 2-26 rule 5B of the city's code of ordinance specifically states that an individual wishing to speak on a quasa Judicial matter must complete a oath card with their signature and submit it to the city clerk prior to the start of the public hearing this is a continuation of a hearing um but I I I this City attorney and I have spoke about it and I think the kind of resolution that we came to is that with a standing objection in place for the record that you know we think you should call the carts mayor I I clarification I just want to point out since that ordinance was enacted the law on public participation has developed and I believe it's the intent of chapter 286 of to allow that participation so an abundance of caution that's why I'd advise you know we would open it up to anyone here tonight that didn't have a card if they submit a card to speak it it sounds like you're saying attorney that um you're okay with that you just want to have a standing objection to it yes sir this specific city ordinance was passed on July 14th 2020 by the city adopting these rules and um but you know like I said if we have a standing objection to the later submitted cards you know we'll proceed we're just leery of the fact that this could get continued again depending on how many additional cards come in and it's a great expense and burden on my client both financially and um you know frankly they put their entire presentation and experts out there and there's been three weeks for you know the the public to research and come up with additional arguments to add and bring in additional cards and speakers to do that so we believe we're prejudiced by continuing but Council you hear the um both attorneys um member Nelson I would make a mo motion to allow people who have not spoken before to go ahead and put a card in second I have a motion in a second roll call vote member Cole yes member Nelson yes mayor diesel yes vice mayor Robinson yes member stokle yes passage unanimously got off track there now am my city manager yeah good evening mayor vice mayor and uh city council we are on item 6A which board of adjustments and appeals the board of adjustments and appeal semiannual report is provided for city council and the packet is written no action is required ired on to 6B the Titusville environmental Commission accept the resignation of regular member James Jim y y of the tville environmental commission the resignation was effective on 26 July 2024 Council any member stoko yeah um I when I had my briefing I will tell you this one was personally sad for me to see um I still call him Mr yon Dr he was my biology teacher at the college and I don't know staff do we know how long he's been on this board 20 years 20 years oh um so this was very disheartening to see and I would just like to say I'm not sure exactly why he's resigning I do plan to talk to him but um to lose somebody that's been serving for 20 years and I'm not seeing any real like medical reason or anything um I just think we need to be very careful of who we're allowing on our boards what the culture and climate is of our boards that we're not losing good people that bring a lot of value to the boards um and want to be here for the right reason so this again is very sad to see thank you member sto uh vice mayor yeah that's uh that's my concern because my notes say that I would like to know why yeah yeah I I really would like to know why he is um because I thought he was a great asset to the board and uh uh to uh the uh gec and I would uh if it's possible any way possible for us to just get a hint on on why he uh is terminating his uh his Services U because uh I'm just concern do we have the option um I'm assuming he's not here tonight do we have the option to uh table this vote until we hear from him City attorney it's council's pleasure whether do you want a table um member stoko you brought that up would you like to see that or I mean it doesn't look that difficult for yeah um I'm okay with either one I have a feeling it says it was effective end of July that even when I talk to him that he won't be coming back um I just want you we don't get to talk about things outside of our meeting and this just deeply concerns me um and I want again I'm concerned about our boards I want to make sure we have good people on there that are serving and doing what's right he has been invested in this community for years and has a very very a passion for this and for him to leave that this is it was just very concerning for me that's telling me that there's other things that are going on Mary there yes I think that we uh uh if we can if it's our pleasure uh to table it at least make an Ask okay at least make an ask on the on this because that is Con very concerning to me do we um we have any cards on this yes sir um I need a motion one way the other to move forward for or not member Nelson move to T table the resignation of Jim y of the Tec for the next meeting I have a motion and a second roll call vote member Nelson yes mayor diesel yes vice mayor Robinson yes stok yes member Cole yes and hopefully if nothing else is table shows him how much we value who what he's given us and our concern so I'll leave it at that uh petitions reest requests from the public can't say the same thing no new meeting Connie Milton wind over Farms I passed out a little research that I did this is researching ADV valorum taxes i' looked at five different apartment complexes in the city of Titusville and I've looked at two different subdivisions within the city of Titusville kind of looking at okay how many acres are each one and how much adorm taxes do we get how much does city of Titusville get for each one well if you look at summerh Hill Apartments it's oh it's 55 Acres but only about 20 acres of it is built on a lot of it's Wetlands uh wend Oaks is 19 so 20 close to 20 acres solir Grand 20 acres but now it's got a lot lot of buildings nine buildings 20 buildings for Windover Oaks 12 for Timber trays TW 14 for summerh Hill but if you look at the column for ADV valorum taxes on each one of these well you get about 179,000 for Timber Trace you get 44,000 adorm taxes for summerh Hill but that's total adalum that's not what the city of Titusville gets the next column over is what the city of Titusville gets in adorm taxes so if you look at summerh Hill they get 157,000 adorm taxes get another non-ad vorum of 28,000 that's for your your uh storm water and waste water okay now if you look down here at the last two rows that's subdivisions r1b subdivision two brand new ones in the city of Titus you got Country Club Estates and i' said okay let's take 80 homes there you can get at least 80 homes on 20 acres r1b allows a little more than 80 homes on 20 acres but we'll just say 20 80 homes out of 80 homes in that subdivision and also in part preserve subdivision 80 homes there you get for adalum taxes 4 8,000 for one 285,000 for the other but that's not what city of Titusville gets city of Titusville gets 149,000 for Country Club Estates on 80 houses and 102,000 on part preserve for 80 houses and then there nonv velor is about the same and the sub so if you build something on 20 acres whether it's single family homes or it's an apartment complex city of Titusville gets approximately the same amount of adorm taxes and non-ad valorum taxes as either development so just thought I'd let you know thank you thank you Connie petition uh yeah petition request yeah yeah come on up good good evening mayor diesel hi Mr vice mayor Madam Secretary council members as you know this is my third time appealing to you to please enforce your existing codes and laws about the excessively loud white F150 truck in Gardendale I am dumbfounded as to why you've allowed this to go on every morning since February unless it is true as the truck coner has boasted that he is quote friends with the cops unquote this issue has Disturbed myself and another neighbor most directly even though you also have a petition from 16 others and a mechanic statement attesting to the loud and modified exhaust system here here are some more laws which I did not get to read like last section 36.2 72 every motor vehicle shall at all times be equipped with an exhaust system in good working order and in constant operation including Muffler manifold tail piping to prevent excessive or unusual noise 13-12 which is a Titusville code is also noise related and basically states that all vehicles shall have quote all standard equipment manufacturers mufflers and noise reduction equipment in use and in proper operating condition Florida statue at or acts in such a way that breaches the peace is a violation and again year code 1303 section um 14 says that noisy equipment between the hours of 700 p.m. to 7 a.m. shall not be in use which is attended by loud or unusual ual noise I've done my share of volunteer work in Titusville and know and know for a fact that if a person causes a noise issue at the cold night shelter they are removed from the premises immediately I know for a fact that the airport in Titusville also routinely limits takeoff and Landing noise during early hours let me ask a question have you talked to code enforcement yeah I have and what's your what's your discussion what's your they they told me to take it to court I don't think I should have to take it to court when it's on the books and okay I offered to loan the guy money to quiet the truck down and he went like this and within a minute he told me he was friends with the cops all right obviously I I'm not the guy to to go out there and talk to the guy but I will say that uh in my inquiry and city manager you can confirm or or help me out here but code enforcement has been out there and they've even been out there in the morning when he started it up and basically their feeling is that is within the the numbers and that it's like a motorcycle and then he goes to work but I can only tell you that when you did speak we didn't say okay too bad we sent our code enforcement out there and that's why I was wondering if perhaps you were able to talk to them code enforcement was sent out a long time before I came to these meetings and they took a deciel reading allegedly 50 ft away from the vehicle as furthest away as they could get when the law reads they could actually take one right at the vehicle and it's interesting to me that the code enforcement officer that allegedly took that reading he no longer works for the I'm not going to get into all that I'm tell you that code enforcement has been out there and it's not my understanding they've been out there recently since you came to the meetings and um I would like for you to have an opportunity to speak with them because that's basically what we've got back is that you know whether it's too loud or when the train goes by it's too loud and like you said the airplan situation uh in that case obviously I I got I have empathy for you if it's too loud and we need code enforcement to do that but they have been out there we made sure they got out there and their report is that that it's within code they can't do anything with him right now so uh with that if I were you I'd call code enforcement and say this is what I got at the council meeting What can you tell me I will all right thank you but I'd like to let you know I took a decel reading myself and it's not a quiet well there's there's uh something to take to code enforcement thank you for your time thank you see you next meeting yep yep next up how you doing I'm doing great how are you doing good I just wanted to remind um Council about concurrency because I know I spoke briefly on it a while back but as our city grows and as we're looking to develop more and more of our city I think something that we really need to keep in mind is the fact that concurrency is legislatively enacted growth management tool and it's designed to ensure availability of Public Services to accommodate all development formation and implementation of the capital Improvement plan for delivering the essential public services in a timely manner linking approval of development to existing current or planned and funded future availability and AD of adequate Public Services it's a legal foundation and um under our comp plan we have a Capital Improvements program that's supposed to have a plan for meeting the level of service standards that uh program is supposed to have a fiveyear budget and I think it's very important to understand that under Florida statute 163318 developments that result in levels of service below our comp plan level of service are not allowed The Only Exception is when there is a budget planned to be implemented to support the levels of service um in this excuse me in our concurrency objective 1.3 it says the city will evaluate the impact of development on level of service facilities necessary to meet the level of service standards that are available concurrent with the impacts of the development policy 131 new development shall be in a manner that minimizes additional public Investments policy 132 prior to approval of a building permit or functional equivalent the city shall consult with a water supplier to determine adequate Water Supplies to serve the new development policy 133 expansions of urban service areas shall be reflected in in coordinated in the city's Capital Improvement program given the dominous amount listed as the utilities infrastructure line item in the budget and capital Improvement plan it appears that the unplanned for cost to the city for all of the developments we're building is a promise that we can't keep and it's going to fall on the taxpayers to pay these bills and I think it's unfair that the taxpayers are going to have to improve infrastructure as this city grows as opposed to the city planning for the growth appropriately um the other point I wanted to make is that we as a city should be looking at how can we make sure that our Workforce has an opportunity for real meaningful income and real meaningful workplace growth and I think we should be looking to develop some kind of uh I don't know a fabrication facility like a chip plant or some other fabrication opportunity in the Hightech realm for the space industry so that our young people can start training for jobs that will meet the future and give them the ability to buy their own homes thank you thank you perfect uh next up City maner onto consent uh city council consent is a items a through L do you have any questions of Staff or consent agenda items I've see none uh city council do you want to pull any of the consent agenda items for further discussion I see none city clerk are there any cards on consent mayor I'd like to read the titles for consent for the record thank you consented agenda item 8A accept the state assistance for fentanyl eradication in Florida Grant consent agenda item 8 B authorized to the mayor to sign a letter of support to apply for the Florida Department of Environmental Protection Trails go Grant letter of support consent agenda item 8 C authorize the mayor to sign a letter of support to apply for the Florida Department of Environmental Protection resiliency Florida planning Grant letter of support consent agenda item 8 approve the final rankings for fully insured plans for retiree Medicare Advantage plans and Part D prescription drug plans consent agenda item 8e approv uh Community Aesthetics feature agreement resolution number 12-22 consent agenda item 8f approve the allocation of the American Rescue plan I was talking to the applicant Cole Oliver um just about his property and what current restrictions are on it right now if it stays Zone the same way um what's preventing him from doing commercial um no opinion was formed with that as well vice mayor yes I I ran into Cony I think over the potatoes at Walmart and and uh she and I I I talked about it a couple of times and and I asked her a question no just general conversation you know but uh it was some nice po at Walmart I think we member call anything I don't guess people are talking to me because I didn't get any anything either so um City attorney just a reminder where we are at the last meeting we had the applicants presentation we we will continue that public comment of course at the close of public comment the applicant will have his opportunity for rebuttal before you deliberate okay and mayor just before just before we call the public comment cards um I believe the court reporter was not taking um notes earlier but I would just like to State on the record again my objection to any of the new cards being called that weren't previously turned in prior to the start of the meeting at the uh I believe it was the July 23rd meeting um and that's on the basis of the city's uh section 2-20 6 rule 5B of your code I believe thank you city clerk just for the record where how many cards were turned in after we allowed that um from the July 23rd meeting we actually had 27 cards left right and then we received six additional cards tonight but two of them have already spoke okay well then the two who already spoke obviously that's part of the deal they can't speak but that means you have four new cards I have a procedural questions I know that we were going to allow individuals to speak on behalf of individuals that could not be here tonight but some of these people have already spoke at the last meeting is that okay they're speaking for someone else so I don't have that problem but I do want to defer I I mean they're not really speaking they're reading somebody else's words but I don't want to violate anything so City attorney haven't encountered that if if they are reading we we did say that if they had something to read so wanted to read it for them they could do that work that's I'd like to stay with that um that's to me it's not the same as speaking twice or reading for someone else and that's a good procedural question I appreciate that um anything else we need to know before we go forward uh staff is here to provide you a process again I have point of order yeah point of of order attorney we're giving you a copy of this these are objection and we're giving a copy to each one of you tonight they will be provided to you by email this is on the record we're submitting objections based on the city council failing to follow the adopted rules of procedure during the July 23rd public hearing for the Bristol municip multif family development the city of Titusville adopted resolution 24-1 1997 to comport with case law and establish rules of procedure for quasi judicial hearings including expart Communications Rules of Evidence the burden of proof and the Assurance of a fair opportunity to present evidence resolution 24- 1997 has not been amended since its adoption uh May 27th 1997 that's an exhibit a of this package we just handed you uh combining the legislative and quasi judicial proceedings is procedurally improper and unfairly limits opposition's opportunity to present evidence uh resolution 24-1 1997 distinguishes between the legislative and quasi judicial actions and further defines the procedures for the city council to follow in quasi judicial proceedings combining the fact finding and evidence Gathering portion of both the legislative and quasi judicial proceedings is improper because these two distinct types of proceedings have different burdens of proof Rules of Evidence and right to cross-examine Witnesses and the Quasi judicial only during the hearing on July 23rd those speaking in opposition and as substantially Ed parties had to unfairly combine their objections to both the legislative and quasa judicial proceedings into one combined three minute Public Presentation uh point of order Bristol attorney Cole Oliver cross-examined Witnesses on their combined opposition testimony without a clear distinct distinction between the legislative testimony and quasi judicial testimony that he was cross-examining them on Witnesses may also be cross-examined in quasi judicial procedings on relevant uh quasi judicial evidence therefore Mr Oliver's witness cross-examination testimony should be stricken from the record the combining of the evidence Gathering portion of the legislative and quasi judicial process muddies the clear distinction between evidence testimony being presented and the respective Rules of Evidence and burden of proof point of order substantially affected parties uh opportunity to present competent substantial fact-based evidence unfairly truncated the applicant is given unlimited time to present evidence and unlimited time for rebuttal after opposition testimony an opp an opportunity to use graphical and multimedia forms of presenting evidence via PowerPoint presentation the unfairness of the process is evident when compared to the opposition who gets three minutes to present policy and fact-based substantial and competent evidence making cohesive and effective presentation of fact is impaired by the opposition having to try to parse their fact-based objections into three minute bites and have been denied the a fair and equal opportunity to present substantial and competent evidence via PowerPoint C exhibit a we sent an email to the assistant uh City attorney actually went to the uh city manager as well and uh we were denied combining the fact-f finding portion of the proceedings unfairly impacts the opposition's ability to present evidence by even further compressing the time provided to prevent evidence for both both legislative and quasi judicial items in the same three minutes with their different burdens of proof and evidence uh the city of Tito's Land Development regulation section 34-12 c States quote the burden of persuasion on the issues of whether the development will comply with the requirements of this chapter remains at all times on the applicant the burden of persuasion on the issue of whether the application should be denied rest on the party or parties urging that the requested per permit should be denied by combining end quote unquote by combining the legislative and quasi judicial proceedings and limiting time available to provide a persuasive P fact-based argument even when the opposition presents a unified objection or names a representative to speak on their behalf creates an unfair Advantage for the applicant point of order Prejudice and expar communication for quasa judicial proceedings expar Communications are to be avoided outside of the public hearing and limited to inadvertent Communications inadvertent deliberate Communications such as meetings inperson discussions over lunch or telephone conversations or planned meetings uh are deliberate they're not inadvertent Communications resolution 24-1 1997 section 4.1 uh intent states it is quote it is the intention of the city council for its boards to avoid contacts other than at hearings before the board and that it is the desire and intent of the city council to establish a process and procedure for disclosure of inadvertent expar Communications City Council Members did not disclose all opinions or facts discussed during exp parte discussions with the applicants land owner or other Representatives including a lobbyist who is here tonight failure to disclose all opinions and facts discussed denied the affected parties the opportunity to know specifically what was discussed and have a reasonable opportunity to refute rebut or respond to the communication while all the opposition's written expar Communications were forwarded to the applicant by the city of Titusville giving the applicant without the same disclosure with specific detail of all opinions and facts discussed in expart Communications with the applicant gives the applicant an unfair advantage over those in opposition to prepare rutal resolution 24-1 1997 section 4.2a States quote in the event a member member of a board receives an expar communication outside of the hearing or proceedings before the board said board members shall disclose and make a part of the record before final action is taken the identity of the person group or entities with whom the communication took place and the subject of the communication including all opinions or facts discussed said disclosure shall be made before or during the public hearing at which a vote is to be taken or said matter and any person's having opinions contrary to those expressed in the expar communication shall be given a reasonable opportunity to refute rebut or respond to the communication unquote point of order city council discloses at the July 23rd 24 me hearing regarding expar communication uh did not disclose all uh disclose of all opinions and facts discussed as required to remove the presumption of prejudice pursuant to resolution 24- 1997 section 4.3 disclosure only remove the presumption of prejudice if complete and made if complete and made in accordance with the process and procedures described in section 4.2 failure to disclose all opinions and facts discussed in expar Communications as required in resolution 24- 1997 4.2 causes the disclosures to be insufficient to remove the presumption of prejudice arising from those expar Communications with representatives of the applicant land owner or any other representative supporting their application including lobbyists resolution 24-1 1997 4.3 States quote in the event an expart communication should should occur as described herein and disclosure is made in accordance with the process and procedures described above then in that event any official action taken by the board in any quasi judicial uh proceeding shall remove any presumption of prejudice arising from said expart communication where an expart communication was has occurred endquote point of order this city the city council members disclosed there were expart Communications with lobbyist Robin fiser and Jason Steel in advance of the public hearing meeting with the lobbyist in support of the project pending before the city council is always presumed president pres prejudicial in quasi judicial proceedings the city council must be a neutral decision maker relying on competent and substantial evidence presented during the public Hearing in Jennings V Dade County 587 South 2 1337 Florida District Court appeal 1991 found exp parte Communications are inherently improper and are antitha to quasi judicial proceedings quasi judicial officers should avoid all such contacts where they are identifiable C exhibit D we provided that as exhibit D if further found behind the scenes lobbying for the purpose of influencing the outcome a quasi judicial proceeding violated the due process prisions of 13451 1351 the United States and Florida Constitution Prejudice is to be presumed from the mere fact that the city council granted a private audience to a lobbyist whose purpose was to influence the council to vote a certain way in a quasi judicial proceeding for reasons not necessarily addressed solely to the merits of the application before the council quote lobbying is defined as any personal solicitation of a member of a legislative body during a session there thereof by private interview or letter or message or other means and appliances not necessarily address solely to the judgment to favor or oppose or to vote for or against any Bill resolution report or claim pending or to be introduced by any person who is employed for consideration by a person or Corporation interested in the passage or defeat of such Bill resolution or report or claim for the purposes of procuring the passage or defeat thereof blacks Law Dictionary 1086 rev fourth edition 1968 point of order expart lobbying of an administrative body acting quasi judicially denies the party's Affair open and impartial hearing Suburban Medical Center versus olith Community Hospital we'll give you a copy of of this so you'll have it uh 226 Kansas 320 uh 597 p2d 654 1979 adherence to procedures which ensure fairness quote is essential not only to the legal validity of the administrative regulation but also to the maintenance of public confidence in the value and soundness of this important governmental process ID 597 p.2d at 662 citing 2 am Juris 2D administrative law 351 point of order the Quasi judicial process for the Bristol hearing is prejudiced by city council members receiving monetary donations from individuals and the lobbyist that are acting on behalf of the BR Bristol project while the matter is pending campaign contributions public records show that several City Council Members have received monetary campaign donations from Elizabeth Cole who is the director of Windover Farms Inc C exhibit B Elizabeth Oliver Cole Elizabeth Oliver director Windover Farms Inc the land the land owner set to benefit from the BR Bristol development wind Inc owns the 20 five something makres that Bristol is trying to develop on Mr Cole Oliver is the attorney for Bristol and it's his wife that that is principal on Windover Inc who has provided uh monetary donations to miss Sarah stokel um and uh Cole Oliver the attorney representing the Bristol project before the city council Miss Oliver does not live in the city of Titusville or even County District within which the city of Titusville city the city of Titusville city is located council members also received monetary campaign donations from Robin fiser and Jason Steele in particular Miss stokel in addition we found out Miss stokel has a pack she's received $10,000 from Robin fiser into that pack uh the same lobbyist council members disclosed the city council had expart Communications Jason steel is also a seated County Commissioner and served as an expert witness on real estate for Bristol at the July 23rd hearing and Mr Steele is here tonight I believe also that he was he's here point of order during a quasi judicial proceeding the city council is acting in a Judiciary capacity as a fair and neutral decision maker relying only on the substantial competence evidence presented during the hearing just as it would be disqualifying for a judge to accept money from one party in a legal action before them the same is true for the city council the same is true in Jennings V Dade County the court found the Constitutional com compulsions which led to the establishment of rules regarding the disqualification of Judges apply with equal force to every tribunal exercising judicial or quasi judicial functions 1 am Juris jury 2D administrative law 64 at 860 1962 in the city of Tallahassee versus the Florida Public Public Services Commission 441 South 2D 620 Florida 1983 you have a copy of this by the way Mr Brom standard used in disqualify ing agency head disqualification now we're talking about that uh disqualification agency head is same standard used in disqualifying a judge see also Rogers V fredman 438 F Supplement 428 e d Tex 1977 rule as to disqualification of Judges is same for administrative agencies is as it is for courts citing K Davis administrative law 12.04 at 250 197 72 Ritter V Board of Commons at uh ad Adams County 961 2D 503 637 p.2d 940 1981 the same point of order speaker card presentation order procedural error and Robin fiser reviewing the submitted speaker cards a card was submitted for developer lobbyist Robin fiser however he did not check whether he was speaking for against or neither then check Mr fiser has lobbied for this pro project with the city council members and has lobbied for approval of the Bristol development and expart Communications with the city council members Mr fiser needs to either resend his speaker card or he must be the first Speaker tonight at the resumption of this meeting the city council is not following the procedures established in resolution 24997 and resulting in an fa process for those for substantially affected parties who participated in the legislative and and quasi judicial process this was submitted as representatives from uh Windover Farms Sandra Clinger and Lindsey Grizzle and the uh Windover farms uh Home Owners Association thank [Music] you all right we're good City attorney uh you know I'm not a real judge and I'm not a real lawyer I didn't stay in holiday in last night so I'm really going to need you to clarify these things where you at well with regard to your resolution on expart Communications under 4.3 in the event an exp parte communication should occur as described herein and disclosure is made in accordance with the process and procedures described above then in that event any official action taken by the board in any quasi judicial proceeding shall remove any presumption of prejudice arising from sidex parte communication where an expart communication has occurred that's why at the meeting I ask you to disclose and that's we go through that process to remove and the point of doing that process is to remove any presumption of prejudice so that that is why we we do the expar um presentations with regard to the hearing yes there is one public hearing but you do vote and we take each item separately the L use is a legislative decision you'll vote on that as a legislative decision uh and then the Quasi judicial will be based on that evidence presented and separately so we do handle those separately although they are presented in one hearing okay well I'm going to ask this one too because this is uh the way we do this is the way it's been presented to me and the way I watch previous mayor do it before me um and basically the way I'm guided to do it and that is the applicant is Unlimited in time and I've understood there's a concern that the applicant which has always had their chance of presentation and then uh cards come up for three minutes explain that one please that is correct the the applicant is supposed to be given a reasonable time it's his burden he has to be given a reasonable time to present and we do not have specific limit in our procedures for for that applicant other than we know they have to be given a reasonable time and then of course public comment is 3 minutes for each speaker under public comment okay so with that being said clearly there is some con you know concerns expressed um what is your uh thought on where we're at right now just go forward with their concerns where we are is we're in public comment and of course we will take the cards we've opened that that up for anyone who wants to speak they'll have three minutes to speak on that item at the close be rebuttal and then of course you will take those items separately your legislative item and your cuse I judicial and you will deal with those separately at the end of the public hearing two clarifications on real quick two clarifications on the point of order for as far as cards are concerned uh we were told to combine our discussion within three minutes for both quasi judicial and the legislative action we believe that is unfair we were not able to to uh present and also uh the attorney questioning the speakers did not identify whether it was quasi judicial or uh legislative he's not supposed to uh question on legislative only on the Quasi judicial so he did not clarify that or or separate that in any way and the robin fiser card it should go first or not at all all right um City attorney can continue what that that's true when it comes to cards we take those for first those against but you cannot require someone to speak if they have a card they certainly wave whether they want to speak or not you cannot make someone speak if we're going to continue to go down The rules in section 5.10 A of the public comment cards it doesn't say you take them in order of for against or neither you take them in the order that they're signed up and turned in so this idea that for some reason Mr fiser has to go first is just inventing a rule that's not in your process all right all right hold up hold hold up we're we're not going to go back and forth with this group and that group um not consistent with what Mr brim read at the beginning of the hearing say again that's not at all consistent with what Mr broom read at the beginning of the hearing where he says those in favor speak first then those opposed he presented the order of of the public hearing did you not all right Miss go ahead and sit down let me have him answer and then we're going to go forward here go ahead yes those are the procedures that we read at the council meeting tell me again yes those are the procedures we read at the council meeting certainly someone could have a card neither I'm not sure what a speaker card says but again if a speaker wants to speak they will speak if they don't want to speak they're not required to speak and just for purposes of the record I'm not sure where Mr broom was reading those rules from but the resolution that they're referencing from 1997 specifically States in 5.10a that the public comment taking speakers in order they signed up and allow cross examinations of the witnesses by applicant and staff Representatives all right so City attorney uh at this point we are going to move the cards that we had um La uh last meeting and we'll start with those now all right let's go call the cards that how many and that was about 30 cards now yes all right 30 cards Christine Bolan Christine Bolan mayor um staff did want to talk to you about first I'm sorry let them speak and then you go first okay thank you ma'am all right get back thing in order staff you will present whatever you're going to present and then we will start with Miss Poland and we'll go from there I just wanted to remind the council where we are and the procedure I'll be real brief um and just refer you to our findings recommendations on page 252 for 253 of your packet 252 and 253 of your packet you'll see the findings and recommendations from staff and our report as far as procedure um you'll make a decision as to the land use Amendment after that then you'll make a decision um if the land use is approved then you'll make a decision on the well proed to den nine you make a decision on the resoning The Next Step would be that zoning that's that quasi additional step uh I just want you to be aware that if the land use amendment is not approved then and the existing commercial land use uh stays on the property that the rezoning that we have presented to us with the conditions related to the rezoning PD zoning and the master plan we would find that to be inconsistent with the current commercial land use after that land use is is decided on and the resoning is is decided on if they are both approved then on your next agenda item is the transmittal hearing only of the text Amendment to the comprehensive plan which is agenda item number 9B to include or incorporate the maximum density into the comprehensive plan if that is approved then that will be sent to the state will wait for their response and they if they do not have any objections we will go forward with adoption hearings and those hearings will mean an ordinance in order to amend the comprehensive plan with that maximum density uh and that would probably happen maybe about four or five months after uh these hearings with that I'll try and answer any questions you have any questions up here all right Miss Poland thank you Christine Boland uh armadilla Trail wi over Farms um Miss Sandy Clinger just uh gave you guys a hard copy of a supplemental to um our objections this a yes and she sent an email earlier today you have an email of it didn't get there yet but all right the Windover Community submitted for the record a 35-page policy based objection letter with exhibits digitally and as a hard copy from Sandra Clinger to the city council at the July 23rd 2024 public hearing speakers in opposition tonight in July 23rd are in support of the objection letter Windover Farms is a ploted residential rural community with over 600 single family homes on 1.5 Acres each typically and is adjacent to both the east and south side of the proposed Bristol project Windover Farms will be negatively affected by this highdensity multifam 304 unit plan development additional factual data and written addendums will be presented by speakers with testimony detailing the proposed bristle development inconsistencies with the comp plan and the ldrs the primary Ingress and egress from Windover Farms is Windover Way a sixmile long local roadway that winds through the neighborhood and was constructed as part of the ploted subdivision the city of Titusville has established procedures and criteria both the Planning and Zoning commission and the city council are to follow during consideration of both legislative and quasi judicial applications and has been codified in the Land Development regulations chapter 34 Article 2 and in resolution 1997-2020 the the first criteria for consideration by the city council is whether the applicant has provided evidence demonstrating the proposed land use zoning change and development is consistent with the adopted comprehensive plan and Associated elements that are implemented through the adopted ldrs ldr chapter 33-8 establishes the review criteria for applications specific to a PD which includes consistency with the comprehensive plan internal compatibility external compatibility with surrounding residential and conservation uses the very first external compatibility review criteria ldr chapter 33-8 through 3A States the proposed development shall not negatively impact the quality of life or any adjacent residential uses negative impacts can include a a decrease in property values and any substantial increase in noise or traffic any traffic impact shall be demonstrated with the traffic analysis and the developer in accordance with the comprehensive plan shall mitigate the impacts thank yeah I I had a little bit more but you got a few thank you okay next um Sandra Colmes speaking for Barbara Aubry perfect thank you hi I'm Dr Sandra comes and I live at 8038 wend overway and I own four additional homes in the city of Titusville as well as a business um I would like to say that the existing commercial high intensity land use is correct as testified by your planning staff on 723 the existing commercial high-intensity land use is consistent with the comprehensive plan the comp plan future land use element objective 1.9 States the city of Titusville shall provide for appropriate and adequate land for commercial land use through the designation of commercial High intens and Commercial low intensity land use designations on the future land use land use map the proposed rezoning would continue to reduce the amount of commercial land within the city of Titusville City Council Members have repeatedly publicly expressed concern over the continued loss of commercial and Industrial land use within the city the city staff testified on 723 that the city already has less than 20% combined commercial and Industrial land available within the city city staff also testified that maintaining adequate commercial and Industrial land uses is important for the economic resilience and stability of the city the proposed land proposed change of the future land use for the subject property is a legislative action by the city council maintaining appropriate and adequate land for commercial or commercial use is a r rational basis for denial of the proposed SSA 32022 from commercial high intensity to PUD see the supplement Al exhibit um C6 for Florida Court rulings on that for the city to remain attractive to current and future residents of the for the city needs to needs a good mix of commercial uses that provide residents needs for goods and services and employment opportunities even though telecommunity for some Industries has increased there is still a demand for restaurants entertainment retail and service oriented commercial businesses on July 23rd one of the Developers expert Witnesses stated that in his opinion other cities are using 10% um commercial as a guide as he stated is for commercial don't be fooled or let astray the Titusville 20% commercial plus industrial not just commercial So 20% commercial plus industrial requirement is correct the existing Regional commercial RC zoning is correct according to the testimony of City staff and the written staff report the existing Reg Regal Comm commercial is correct there have been no substantial changes in the areas surrounding the subject property since the RC zoning was adopted in 2008 resoning review criteria in the ldr section 34482 States the existing zoning if deemed consistent with the comprehensive plan which it was shall be presumed correct unless substantial change in the area has occurred since the original zoning the applicate are you close um yeah thank you um the proposed um SSA 322 is associated rezoning in the master plan for the Bristol multif family development are inconsistent with the city's comprehensive plan thank you so much thank you next up Scott R 5875 windway mayor council members evening good evening um so staff report states there is no significant impact to window away however the Bristol study makes makes decisions and recomend recommendations based on the emission of analysis of important significant Road segments literally only half of the effected roads around the development were looked at look at the large exhibit the road segments in yellow were the only ones analyzed the read and omitted Road segments and obviously that obviously should have been included the Bristol traffic study omits pertinent analysis of Road segments that will certain be used by Bristol residents the segments include Windover Way to and from Windover Trail the blind sharp 35 degree intersection wind Trail to and from State Road 405 the Walmart intersection the road segments are not only omitted the trips toward and away from these segments are marked as zero trips they are saying single every single car leaving the Bristol development will use the yellow highlighted Road segment really in addition the traffic study omitted information on how Bristol residents will go West on State Road 450 toward Orlando the current best route is pulling out on 50 East and then quickly cutting across three lanes of traffic to make a U-turn clear exhibit at Starbucks and Lowe's or you can cut across with a bit more time Dodge to the right hand turns coming off four5 and make you turn a exit exhibit at 50 and 405 and head back West toward Orlando these are very dangerous traffic patterns that were analyzed but were certainly not used in the by Bristol residents an increase to high density residential traffic would have detrimental effects in this area this degree of admission and inaccurate information screams deception you really you rely on accurate information to make your decisions you should immedi medely deny this traffic study and deny SSA 3- 2022 please vote to deny SSA 3- 2022 and deny CPA 2 d224 else I and I believe you're about there yeah I think we're good yes all right thank you yeah next one up please Elizabeth Parker I'm sorry I didn't hear that Elizabeth Parker Parker Parker back back again Elizabeth Parker 3444 3446 traba Circle um excuse me wind overway defined in the city's ldrs as a local roadway is the primary Ingress and ER for over 600 homes in the Windover Herms Community Windover Way is approximately six miles long and was constructed as part of the platted subdivision the applicant submitted a master plan the traffic study um in the master plan the traffic study States the proposed direct access for the proposed highdensity multif family PD development is on to wind overway with f full access driveway C exhibit A1 Bristol master plan this is not consistent with the city of Titusville ldr section 33-5 A2 access for a development in a PD zoning is required to have direct access onto an arterial or collector roadway C exhibit A2 Titus Val Dr section 33-5 A2 wind overway is classified as a local roadway according to the city of Titusville roadway classification and Titusville ldr development review procedures manual section 9. 4 see exhibit A3 it is also classified as a local roadway in Bard County wind over ways right of way is 80 ft wide in adjacent to the platted residential homes and is further reduced to 60 feet wide from the northeastern boundary of the Bristol property to State Road 50 the city of Titusville ldr development review procedures manual section 9.5 States the minimum rate of way for the collector roadway shall be not less than 90 ft and the minimum right of way for an arterial roadway shall be not less than 120 ft C exhibits A4 A5 and A6 the applicant has access onto State Road 50 through their existing 66 foot wide easement that connects an to an existing and historically used access driveway on the eastbound Lane of State Road 50 an arterial roadway the applicant notified the city that they had nment with access to State Road 50 that could be used if required the Bristo development expert witness um in his testimony said in his opinion fot would not rep permit the existing driveway access onto State Road 50 based on access management standards but they have produced no correspondence from fot to support their opinion representatives of the Windover Farms Community contacted fot permitting safety and planning staff making it clear that this is not at all the case other speakers will address the correspondence with fot in more detail I support the submitted objection document submitted by Sandra Clinger and Lindy Grizzle and urge the city council to deny SSA 32022 It's associated resoning and master plan the city council must not approve a master plan with direct access onto the driveway of window over way with a full access driveway I've got to say um listening to their expert speak he made the comment well it functions as a collector Road I could function as a school bus however if you put 60 children on my back I'm not going to get them to school it's it's just a point that has to be made thank you thank you than next up um Jackie leader say again Jackie leader hi Jackie leader 87 7762 wind over way I forgot my own address wind over way um I'm here to talk about the live local act it it's says that we've been we've been hearing that um if this development doesn't get approved then there the application will be changed in order to obtain approval under the live local act um and that's not likely to occur or get approved I think it's been talked about before you have exhibit C3 that consists of a letter dated January 9 2024 from City staff Mandy L Deputy community community development director to kimley Horn developer the letter contains staff review concerns an applicable policy constraints for the Bristol project if pursued under the local act the letter states that the proposal is not in compliance in multiple areas the first being parking space requirement states that available parking must be calculated at 2 and a half parking spots per dwelling unit to be composed of two spaces for dwelling unit unit and half a space of guest parking per dwelling unit and that's C coot TM Transportation infrastructure section 9.16 table 9164 the proposed development is also not in compliance with a second requirement multifam medium dsal resid and Regional commercial developments require the parcel to AB but or be adjacent to an arterial or collector Road wind overway is defined as identified as a local Street that's drpm section 14.5 20.8 ldr section 28 uh d306 ldr section 28- 315 and coot comprehensive plan policies 1.9.1 1.4.5 and 1.14.3 six so even under the local live local act the access point must still be on an arterial or collector Road The Proposal is not in compliance with a third requirement which says the minimum paved width required for a local road is 26 ft the minimum paid width required for collector road is 38 ft the width of the PID portion of the row of window wind overway is only 22 ft the fourth item on the list pertains to the mixed use of things that can't be done pertains to the mixed use element as required in the live local act the mixed use element of the proposed development is missing for ordinance 48-30 23 whoops you're good thank you okay that'd be another step anyway next up Vicky Conlin I'm sorry I didn't hear that Vicky Conlin hi Vicky conin I'm Vicky Conlin 2920 Royal o Drive Titusville Florida and I would just have a question point of order is it policy for the applicant to position at the staff table for an entire city council meeting um I don't I can ask that question like I do but I can tell you that when we've done the before attorneys do go ahead there's not a rule on where an applicant can sit we have to have them on the record we do have a microphone there but we do not have a policy on where the attorney will sit that Council if you want but that's it's he has to be on the record it just seems the Optics is not so good just a comment thank you Vicki excuse me go ahead so the Bristol plan development master plan identifies wind over way a local Road for both primary and secondary access which is not in compliance with the city of Titusville uh land use development plans and I would cite chapter 34 Article 2 Division 1 Section 3440 a 1B and section 335 A2 also Titusville plan development standards require PD zoning developments to be located with direct access on a collector or arterial Road and I would remind you we're probably upcoming with several more projects coming towards the city that we really have to be careful as a city council to break the rules now because then we're going to set precedent for future projects and it's really not fair to the current residents or future residents if we don't follow the comprehensive plan Windover Way is well established as a local Road City of Titusville has verified this calling it a collector Road does not make it so that sounds like something a politician would say uh I like Liz's analogy about the school bus and I think that's better analogy that I can make but as elected officials I'm going to remind you again you are stewards of the comprehensive plan you took an oath to follow the comprehensive plan and you have an obligation to follow it again we have to protect the rights of the current and the future homeowners by being consistent with the plan then Connie is indicating here what these land development Rags are and I know you have them in your documents as well so I would close with saying please vote to deny SSA 3 2022 and to deny cpa2 2024 thank you thank you Vicki we have Diane bro f r o g g for John Aubrey Diane frog speaking for John Aubrey uh I live at 5825 window over way the reality is that a regional commercial property on just this 20.4 Acres would generate less trips into and impacting window over Farms local road then this high density residential project would generate remember when it comes to the comp plan you are evaluating protection of adjacent residential areas please consider the very different difference between destination and origination points when it comes to trips impacting the surrounding areas all commercial properties are destination points all Residential Properties such as homes or apartments are origination points and as uh Miss jool ly Nelson brought up um about Target and Home Depot that they have access points onto wind over trail that is true but what is also true is that those are all destination locations and destination locations are totally different than origination uh points people come target Home Depot destination points from outside Windover and leave and go back to their homes that are outside Windover so they have no need to come down window way or wind over Trail because they do not live there if they exit into wind over Trail they head to the light at State Road 405 at the Walmart and they exit that area that way never impacting wind over Trail or wind over way this would be the same if a commercial development was built on the proposed Bristol property people would come from Highway 50 use a commercial resource at that location at the destination point and then exit back on the highway 50 and return to their origination point no need to come down Windover Way or Windover Trail only people whose origination Point living in Windover would come into Windover and furthermore destination trips would occur throughout the day instead of the peak apartment origination trips occurring in the morning and after work which would generate intense clustering um which is really against your comp plan now let's compare if the proposed number of apartments are built on this site with the access onto window way the apartments would be the origination location for the 304 residential units which would be about 600 residents all these residents and their cars would leave daily an estimated 1400 times going to destination points where do you think those destination points are likely to be Walmart Target Wendy's work or Space Center they and they will return back to their original ation point location by using the least restrictive path down wind over Trail take the 35 degree hairpin turn onto Windover Way and then turn left into the apartment complex massively impacting residents of wind overway and Windover Trail thank you next up Cynthia Taylor hi Cynthia Taylor 8158 Wonder way standards for PD city of Titusville ldr 33-5 A2 States a plan development shall be so located with respect to arterial streets collector streets and other Transportation facilities as to provide direct access to such PD without creating traffic along local streets in residential areas or clusters outside the PD C exhibit A2 PD review criteria cyia Titus ldr 33- 8 a3a external impact states the proposed development shall not negatively impact the quality of life for any adjacent residential uses negative impacts can include a decreased in property values and any substantial increase in noise or traffic any traffic impact shall be demonstrated with a traffic analysis and developer in accordance with the comprehensive plan shall mitigate the impacts the traffic impact study that and AD Adams that the developer submitted failed to include critical Road Race segments impacted from high frequency in a pre predictable trip attractants such as Home Depot Staples Target or the Space Center where the shortest path is turning right out of the proposed full access driveway sending traffic into wind Farm's residential area via wind way and wind Trail for the projected taily trips the Bristol high density multif family will create the be Focus was solely on assessing the level service impacts and failed to include required analysis of traffic impacts on quality of life and property values of adjacent residential areas the traffic analysis the developers submitted to the city assumed zero of the 1,44 expected daily trips turn turning right out of personal developments full access driveway onto wind of way to wind of a trail in addition they only analyze traffic during what they projected would be Peak War travel times a in it n PM this only accounts for 241 of the 1,44 predicted daily trips where is the analysis of the projected impacts from the vast majority of the remaining 1,163 trips and the shortest path to predictable destinations the developers own traffic engineer Josh Black stated that people going to are going to take the fastest route to where they want to go video public hearing testimony 72324 at 2 hours 19 minutes yet the traffic study he prepared for Bristol omitted analysis of predictable high frequency destinations Like Home Depot Target in the Space Center and the shortest path to get there was from B's proposed driveway see supplemental Exhibit C one to demonstrate the shortest path to these high frequency destinations we have provided a simple Google Maps navigation to Home Depot Target and Space Center from the proposed Bristol driveway for each of these popular destinations the shortest path was turning right onto wood way to W Trail and into wood Farm sub Vision this reasonably puts a substantial percentage of the 1,44 daily projected trips into the wind farm sub subdivision negatively impacting the residential homes thank you thank you next up Thomas Karan good evening good evening Tom Curran 3491 Foxwood drive all commercial properties are destination locations all Residential Properties and apartments are origination points there's a very distinct difference and traffic pattern for Destination locations version versus origination points if a commercial site were to be built on this 24 20.4 Acres of buildable property this would be a destination point and customers would be coming from the outside window over to the commercial location use the services and then leave the commercial location and go back to their homes this follows the comp plan and does not negatively impact surrounding residential areas or create clustering along our local Road there is absolutely no doubt this developer is attempting to build a highdensity multif family development of 15 homes per acre under the guise of a PD and attempting to say it would have less impact than commercial property they are using a defunct 2008 PR project traffic report to swear you to believe them the 2008 16-year-old RZ RC zoning site plan was for a large square footage retail and restaurant for the subject property plus another approximately 7even Acres of adjacent commercial property with development this is the definition of comparing apples and donkeys it should be no surprise that this old larger project predicted more generated trips in a worst case scenario that ignores many other permitted uses as possible under the existing commercial land use and RC zoning such prevented uses under the RC zoning include art studios hair salons coffee centers Auto Sales repairs P shops boat sales Car Sales rentals bakeries delies a bank professional offices and grocery stores under the RC zoning most of the printed principal uses are lower intensity when generate far fewer daily trips which wouldn't result in incompatible height and visual blight they would be more compatible with the adjacent residential area and would not further erode their percentage of land dedicated for commercial use in city of Titusville RC zoning would still have a direct access Frontage on arterial roadway so they would not be creating increased traffic on window overway see exhibit C3 letter from the city staff that 2008 project has long ago exceeded the S site plan duration is now defunct one of the principles is now bankrupt the Bristol project will negatively impact our quality of life increase traffic noise privacy safety and decreas property value and is in violations of the city's comprehensive plan please vote to deny SSA 32022 and it's Associated resoning master plan and deny CPA 22024 thank you thank you Tom next up Frank Row for Kevin Coler hey buddy Frank 8201 wonder overway you guys got to be tired of seeing me [Laughter] C exhibit C2 fdot and exhibit A7 survey with 66 60 foot foot wide easement the Bristol master plan shows direct access with a full access driveway onto Windover Way a local Road created in a plat for Windows Farm subdivision even though they have an easement for access on the state row 50 and arterial roadway the applicant is asking the city council to approve SSA 3-20 22 its Associated resoning and master plan in violation of their adopted comprehensive plan and ldr policies such as Fu 1.3.1 and ldr section 33.5 A2 designed to protect single family residential areas from encroachment by multif Family development and negative impacts to quality of life such as traffic impact from traffic the applicant's expert witness Josh Black has claimed it is his in his opinion fdot will not reissue a permit for the existing driveway access point due to proximity of off ramp from I95 but even after two years Bristol developers have not provided any actual direct evidence or correspondence from fdot corroborating that opinion so we contacted the fdot District 5 office traffic engineering and permitting office Engineers fdot planning department and the fdot safety engineer Anthony no no and ask them directly we have submitted a written summary of this correspondence to supporting Florida administrative Cod and fdot supplied safety dat C data C exhibit C2 the three most important facts learned were fdod fdot provides free pre-application reviews cch1 14- 96.3 two Bristol could have met with FD D5 fdot traffic engineer Chad linger Felder for pre-application conceptual review of their site plan and traffic study three fdot District 5 traffic Services engineer Zachary yeah Zach that's a nice last name zal morenus was asked directly how fdot would evaluate a project like Bristol in a permitting review where the city has a lu/ zoning requirement for direct access onto an arterior or collector roadway if the use has changed and the fdot fdot access management setback from ramp could not be met 2009 chapter 14- 97 faac he said fdot would not deny an access permit because of access management setbacks if the property land use and only required arterial or collector access and that they would work with the property owner he further said looking at his this specific location go ahead finish that sentence there are a number of opinions fdot would consider such as revising the ramp yield Lane profile and mitigate access management setback requirements thank you Annie Bridges hi I'm Annie Bridges I'm 6375 Windover Way um I want I'm going to take a look at exhibit A4 and A5 uh Windover Way is classified as a local roadway according to the city of Titusville roadway classification in Titusville ldr development review procedural procedures manual section 9.4 see exhibit A3 Titusville ldr roadway classification list windovers right ways right of way width is 80 ft wide in proximity to the ploted residential homes to accommodate wide swes to provide storm water drainage Windover Way was constructed as part of the subdivision plot specifically for Ingress and egis for the Windover Farms Community Windover Farms is a large lot one acre minimum rural residential Community located adjacent to the proposed development on the south and east sides however from the northeastern boundary of the Bristol property to State uh sr50 Windover ways right of way is reduced to 60 ft wide see exhibit A4 Windover Farms unit six plat map and exhibit A5 parcel map the city of Titusville ldr drpm section 9.5 States two significant facts C exhibit A6 Titusville ldr section 9.5 first the minimum right of way width for the a collector Road roadway shall be no more no less than 90 ft and second the minimum right of way for an arterial roadway shall be no less than 120 ft Highway 50 is an arterial Road the property has a 66t wide easement between the property and Highway 50 c exhibit A7 service and the ex an exhibit A8 that was a notorized easement creating Road right of way signed by both property owners in 1998 this is a viable easement already used by trucks entering onto Highway 50 through the 66t wide access was a truck stop the gas station right along the boundary of this 66t easement and a Greyhound bus stop right at the 66t wide entrance to Highway 50 it is used today we and Windover believe in the land should remain commercial but the 5.5 Acres ground Troth Wetlands into o zoning and conservation land use like your policy requires make all access onto Highway 50 any commercial destination on that property will better serve its customers with access onto Highway 50 not wind overway which is a local Road please please vote no thank you Carolyn padfield for Ron ball Carolyn padfield replacing Ron V as Speaker look at exhibit A2 and exhibit a-4 that Sandra Clinger has provided to you email and hard copy quote figure one standards for PD city of Titusville ADR 33-5 A2 two a plan development shall be so located with respect to arterial streets collector streets and other Transportation facilities as to provide direct access to such PD without creating or generating traffic along local streets in residential areas or clusters outside the PD Brad Parish sent Bristol an email to the developers on July 22nd 2022 that notified them that access would need to be located on an material or collector roadway yet the developer submitted plan ignored that observation and is proposing access onto Windover Way a local Road proposed access for this PD onto wind overway is not consistent with Titusville ldr section 33-5 A2 and review criteria Titusville ldr chapter 34 AR Article 2 Division 1 Section 34-40 a1b access for development and PD zoning is required to have direct access onto an material or collector roadway on the BR on the Bristol master plan both direct access and secondary access to the apartment development are proposed to be onto Windover Way which is a local road to note the latest and greatest traffic addendum tries convincing the reader that travel down wind over way to wind over Trail is not likely to happen with without using any sort of actual model they did a distracting time travel analysis with an arbitrary end point by the Northbound I95 ramp yes it would take less time to travel to the Northbound I95 ramp using Highway 50 versus Windover to Windover Trail but most people coming from their apartments are going to be traveling to destinations such as Walmart Target Home Depot out to the Space Center and the traffic study provided to you did not even address those destinations don't be fooled by the arbitrary endpoint which supports the traffic won't go into our neighborhood and impact us C exhibit a-4 wind overway was built as part of Windover Farms unit six platted subdivision with Windover Farm single family ploted lots south and east of this property also seen in the Windover Farms unit six plat provided to you as exhibit A4 shown Windover Way only 60 foot with up to 60t width up to Highway 50 why would the city staff report to fail to identify that the wind overway right of way actually shrinks down to 60 ft wide from the subject property to State Road 50 especially since the initial correspondence from the city community development director on July 22nd 2022 notified the applicant that Windover Way is not an arterial or collector Road sections 9.3 and 9.4 of the city's Transportation infrastructure texal man manual and that wind overway is a local Road and appears to have limited capacity to State Road 50 please vote to deny ssa-3 d222 and deny CPA 22024 thank thank you Glenda Row for rain Lane Rogers good evening glender row 8201 wind overway C exhibits A3 A5 through a12 Bristol PD master plan identifies wind overway a local Road for both primary and secondary access which is not in compliance with city of Titusville ldr chapter 24 Article 2 Division 1 Section 34 through through 40 a1b and section 33 to 5 35 335 A2 also Titusville planned development PD standards require PD zoning developments to be located with direct access on collateral or ar Road the property has established has an established 60 ft I'm sorry the property has an established 66t wide easement across the adjacent 6.98 acre property to the north providing direct access to sr50 and arterial roadway C exhibit A3 Titusville ldr roadway classification list exhibit a 72 22 boundary survey depicting easement from Bristol property to sr50 and EXA exhibit A8 official record of easement this easement can and should be used as access to Highway 50 for this property and not wind overway is clear the property owner who was even aware back in 1998 that it was important to maintain an access connection to sr50 C exhibit A8 from the clerk of court that is notorized uh legal easement creating Road right of way signed by both the land owner went over Inc and George dongle on January 27 1998 it is important to note that the easement connecting to an established improved concrete driveway see exhibit A9 photos of existing driveway on sr50 with an existing concrete and turn lane this EX existing driveway was historically used as an access point for semi-trailers as a truck stop operated on the property where the easement is located C exhibit A1 historic aals of property used as truck stop the applicant notified the city that they had an easement with access to sr50 that could be used if required C exhibit a-11 Bristol concurrency application with exhibit a12 yet the existence of this easement is also inexplicably completely omitted from the staff report and background materials included for your review why did the staff neglect to tell you about this 66 foot wide easement to Highway 50 the new July 17th traffic addendum provides you with an opinion thank you Carla here sending Carla hen Carla hen address 7323 wind overway a quote from the Titusville comprehensive Plan F future land use element objective 1.9 the city of Titusville shall provide the appropriate and adequate l for commercial land uses through the designation of commercial high density and Commercial low intensity land use designations on the future land use map um quote the existing commercial high intensity on the subject property is intended to serve the city and Regional commercial leads the existing future land use is consistent with the city's comprehensive plan in that it encourag es clustering of commercial use along the commercial segment of Cheney Highway and I95 Pages 6 81516 of the staff report included in your agenda package State the existing commercial high density land use and Regional commercial zoning and consistent with the city's comprehensive plan and are correct Titusville has made great strides in accomp accommodating the house crisis now we must keep our commercially zoned properties for commercial development I'm sorry um the wording in your staff report does not support the proposed request of changing the commercial land to residential page five in the staff report says based on the most recent reports the existing vacate vacant residential land use designations sorry have more than enough vested and available residential units to accommodate growth Pro projections to 2030 six rental apartment developments are currently in sight plan review on our under construction in the city has less than 20% of combined commercial and Industrial land use categories the amendment will continue to reduce the ACC cumulative acreage in non residential land use categories let's keep current clusters of commercial business together instead of creating clusters of cars where the PD city code clearly restricts it along local roads like wind overway the majority of commercial business within the city of Titusville are one story high very few are even two stories high which can be shielded from view from vegetation to setbacks traffic for commercial well will produce very little traffic and noise during the hours adj adjacent residents are home from work commercial is correct and acceptable use for these properties thank you thank you get that little girl of water Dale Coler hi Dale Kaylor 2865 morning dway in Windover farms uh resoning re review criteria requires that you look at the environmental impact of the pro proposed rezoning this is requesting to remove existing conservation land and l r zoning and low development density on the wetlands in place 5.5 Acres conservation easement which is all Wetlands into a PD zone with 11 Point zoning with 11.7 units per acre over the whole 25.9 Acres including the conservation easement obviously placing a high development density zoning on conservation easement wet lands under PD zoning encourages it development over time the protective protective zoning and land use would be gone bulked into a plan development the concern is that by applying a blanket High development density over the whole 25.9 acre parcel of land the city has removed the low density protection of the conservation land used to back stop and it's solely relying on St John's River Water Management District district conservation easement to protect the 5.5 Acres of ground tro Wetlands from incompatible development activity excuse me the adjacent property to the south and east are currently conservation open space and Recreation and this 5.5 Acres that are all grounded trust Wetlands should remain protected as conservation or o the staff report indicates an existing Wetland located in the southwest portion of the site is currently located within a conservation easement conservation areas will be owned and maintained by the owner based on best management practices well what constitutes best management practices for a development when maintaining a conservation easement if this portion of the property is res resed from conservation o to PD now it will remove the Public's ability to be notified if there ever is a proposed change to the conservation propor portion of the property and a simple administrative move prompted by the property owner to the St John's River Water Management District could result in mitigation Wetland development is INS sensitized a St John's River Water Management District conservation easement can be removed at any governing board meeting so long as some equivalent area is protected somewhere else which does nothing to protect the functional functional value of the wetlands within the city this is a particularly of heightened concern for this project Mr Cole Oliver who has represented himself as the land use attorney for the developer Bristol Group LLC is also appointed to the governing board member of the St John River Water Management District it seems like administrative approval for mitigating this portion of the wetlands would be an easy feat for for Bristol if he's on their board please deny thank you thank you Paul leader thank you I guess it's on now got it it's uh Paul leader 7762 wind overway um the community is really coming together here uh because they care about Windover farms uh I'm going to go offs script a little and uh uh Connie is probably going to kill me on it but I'm going to do it anyway and also I haven't I thought I was back in working uh with the IRS the Internal Revenue code with all these sections the community has done a really really good job in doing their homework bringing all the facts sections and everything uh to your attention I'm just going to read one um one thing that relates to what uh Connie has here uh back in uh 20 [Music] uh 14 uh the owner of the property uh filled in about 20 acres of land which basic of the 29 Acres or 25.9 acres and that made him go uh have a mitigation ruling against him to have to put 5.5 in his Conservation area by the uh flood uh District St John's river flood District uh because of that that the developer now is using the full 25.9 uh a uh acres and not subtracting out the 5.5 Acres that uh are mitigation so that basically means that uh instead of 304 proposed Apartments it should be 65 less number one the number two is the beauty of window Farms I'm going off script now uh my teleprompter isn't working but uh basically um Windover Farms is in a buffer zone as I call it when I look to buy a house in a in a community in uh Titusville I looked for some place that was kind of U quiet and segmented out of the busy parts of a a city or a town with the 9 5 on the West Side 50 on the North side Columbia Boulevard on the east and south side you had an automatic buffer zone where I thought there wasn't going to be some 20 story or even five-story condominiums or um place um apartment houses put in well then when you're talking about a fivestory condomini um apartment house what you're doing there is you are uh changing the environment of the whole Community because of it being a buffer zone when I lived in Miami Lakes I had the same buffer zone for 31 years and was great please vote no against this proposed change thank you Paul next up Zachary fluenza I probably pronounce that incorrectly um Zachary thank you no Zachary go ahead next up Megan moscosa which is replacing Christine kler good evening hey how are you Megan moscosa dearit drive and I just wanted to remind you the pnz we did recommend denial of this 7 to zero so I hope you take that into consideration um also the pnz we received um an ethical training from the Assistant Attorney Chelsea frell and one of the things she told us in our training um was that if we even drove past a property that we needed to disclose that so it's quite disappointing to know that um certain members of council have taken money from lobbyists attorneys and expert Witnesses um memb stal I would ask that you recuse yourself from this vote for ethical reasons but we're going to look at exhibit A2 the ti to spill Land Development regulations in regard to plan developments section 336 A4 States maximum Building height building Heights must comply with any designed standards or other other plans or policies provided for in the area of the development or must be compatible with the surrounding existing development patterns in the area the Bristol site plan shows six apartment buildings that are four stories 50 fet High two to three stories higher than adjacent properties and one full story taller than vegetation could possibly Shield there is no not a precedent for this building height in Titusville east of I95 until you reach the riverfront developments the proposed development is not compatible with the surrounding existing developments see page three of the staff report under surrounding property information there are no developments to the south of the property the area south of the property is conservation open recreational and includes a large pond south of this Pond is Windover residents homes on Foxwood Drive to the east of the property are all single family over 1 acre Windover Farms properties established in the 1980s directly adjacent is a field off of Penrod Rose Road used for model airplan flying this field creates no visual or sound blockage from a proposed four-story development directly adjacent to the west of the property is Interstate 95 some Hotel buildings to the west of 95 are four or more stories however there are no adjacent residential homes to these buildings to the north and Northwest of the property there are no buildings more than two stories and these include one story abandoned gas station and field two single family window over homes one story gas stations and two story hotels a four-story high density a four-story high density multif family apartment complex with 304 units next to single family homes is not a transition it's an AB it's abrupt and in congruent it will NE negatively impact the quality of life for the adjacent single family homes including traffic noise privacy and property values please deny SSA 32022 for this and many other reasons laid out before you the community as you can see are to the four story high apartment buildings being developed on the property if the proposal was only two stories high and did not access a local window over way but went out to Highway 50 that would be more plausible thank you thank you lindsy Grizzle lindsy Grizzle 2605 Gator Trail I'm going to pick up on some speaker packets that weren't um finished um you the previous speaker talked about F do traffic study um and that the their bristles engineer said that it was his opinion that fot would not let Cars come out of that property onto that easement that's already um establish so we contacted um fdot um and they said that not only um part of it was that there was a um a safety concern for the cars coming off of I95 onto that ramp and I think he gave a number of eight accidents per year and that would be a a challenge of putting the um their driveway on to 50 because of the increase of accidents that that could cause so we contacted them we talked to them and they said that um it was not eight accidents a year it was what was it two accidents um in the last four years that resulted in no injury so minimal accidents um coming off of 95 going on to 50 at that access point or at that point um okay um let's see what else I have okay so this is far fewer accidents so 6 67 per year average than what the applicants expert witness stated an average of eight accidents per year this 95 and 50 area is not considered a traffic safety Problem Problem by fdot and if they had concerns about that um then they could have asked and presented you the information that fdot told us we cannot go onto Highway 50 and they haven't done that so there is a chance and according to what we've asked fdot that the that we can't that they can go onto that on Highway 50 instead of putting their access roads on TI or into on window okay I just wrote something while I was sitting there so I'd like to read it um so in regards to L we've walked this together you're willing to hear us and incorporate our recommendations from the research that our team uh was committed and conducted um and that was a month after month process that we worked together and supported the team and supported the city with our recommendations um which some of those were adopted we are here and trusting that you will uphold your comp plan for the good of all of the comp plan for all the residents in Titusville so this is a section of the comp plan that if you choose to violate it by voting for this access point and this development to go on to Windover it's setting the precedent that all of the comp plans is not um should not be taken seriously thank you so much may have a quick question yes question yeah um you might not know this Lindsay or somebody but in regard to your your comment about they may be able to exit on to 50 is that based on your conversation that with fot that they just haven't asked them yet so it's potentially possible so you're saying that we don't know because they haven't even asked to see if that's possible we don't have any documentation on that we asked them in a situation where a land use and a zoning is required to go onto an arterial collector Road MH and the arterial collector road is at a point such as 995 and um 50 coming off of that ramp there's a requirement for the number of feet before that driveway okay right so that's what we said in the event that that property cannot access Windover right and must access arterial Road what happens then and they said we cannot deny a a property from accessing um their collector Road and that they can work that they would work with the applicants to come up with other further Solutions as far as changing the yielding structure of 95 um so there's they said there is numerous number of options that they could present and that they could have communicated with them about um regarding the access point okay um I'm sorry I have further question on that and this might be for the applicant is do you have access with where you own your property to get onto 50 or would you have to go through somebody else's property to get on it the access would be via an easement across um our neighbor property to the north so we have a legal right to go across that property via the easement but again you know our experts and our correspondence will present and rebuttal with fdot State and show that they would likely deny that access okay all right thank you thank you can I add this go ahead um member Nelson and I was just going to add this because this is uh from Miss Clinger uh paperwork and it basically says um fdot is unlikely to proove direct access to sr50 if it is less than 100 feet from the tapered end of I95 so I mean we've all driven that road I mean it's Titusville we drive 95 we get off whatever and looking at the map it looks really close so I would sort of suspect they're not willing to do it all right now next card Connie Milton you're passing that down right I see this there's extra rows now on this one so I like you to look at the extra rows the expert witness oh don't start yeah yeah pass it on make it down thank you okay I can't get it apart there we go Connie Milton wind over Farms um okay here we go clock there's extra rows on here the expert witness one of the Mr Steel in fact I think had said it was 750,000 adorm taxes wow that was supposed to be wow wonderful right well the reality is and comparing all these other apartment buildings within Titusville and the single family homes within Titusville the reality is not 750,000 adalum maximum maximum if you compare to this solarin solar solar mayor the maximum would be 630 but Sol's got nine buildings not just six okay it's 20 acres but it's got nine more it's got three more buildings so reality is it's more going to like an adorm of 400,000 but Titusville if you look at the comparison of all these Titusville would get maybe 150,000 of that ADV valorum you would get about 28,000 of non-ad valorum out of that out of this property so 750 and it um the other thing is the fdot when we spoke to fdot they indicated that they would not insist on the 100 ft they would reconfigure they could reconfigure that uh exit ramp put a light there and um they would work with the land owner to get on to 50 because your requirement says they have to use a collector Road or arterial Road for a development like that so fdot would not deny access you've got an existing access right there it's a gas station they do it all day all day long right there so that's 66 foot wide easement if you look at that uh survey that we've been showing it the 66 the 66 ft wide easement right here is right next right next to that gas station in fact can use part of that gas the concrete that's there for the bus stop and the and the uh truck stop the concrete's right there so it's been used for years so there is no and and the fdot said that they will work with the owner uh that has to have access on the 50 they would not deny them access so that's not that's not a an issue um do you city council ever research what a so-called expert witness says or do you just assume because they are quote expert witness that they will tell the truth or that they never make errors in judgment we looked into this statement the 750,000 that's the that's the results those are actual on the ground results that you have in your Bard County Property Appraisers page today you can look it up yourself uh I've got a a bigger spreadsheet that tells you who the owner is and by the way all these apartment buildings are owned from people outside of the state State now I think one's in West Palm Beach but it's all not local people um to and I generated the data by looking at uh Bard County Property Appraisers The Bard County Tax Collector's web page and actual data from each uh location thank you Connie sorry quick this will another question member stok with your conversation with fdot was that just via telephone or do you have anything that you could provide us that shows an email what they said we have telephone conversation and emails yes you do have emails in your package that supplemental package that we gave you the one yeah which exhibit is in there just so we can look at it this one right that one D2 Anis in our conversation with fdot they were looking at the actual exit ramp they were looking at the actual data exactly where where we're talking about it wasn't Theory it was actual the location okay and I yeah I see the one email here okay thank you thank you next up Linda Crawford for Paul malsbury under Crawford 2525 Bobcat Trail the plan development policy in the comprehensive plan indicates the existing zoning if deemed consistent with the comprehensive plan shall be presumed correct unless substantial change in the area has occurred since the original zoning the area zoning districts were established from 1993 to 2008 with no changes for the past 26 years there has been no substantial change to Warrant a change of Zoning for the property at 8225 wind way staff reports staff report supports this stating quote the existing RC zoning is intended to serve the city and Regional commercial needs the existing Z is consistent with the city's comprehensive plan in that it encourages clustering of commercial uses along the commercial segment of Cheney Highway and I95 the residents of Windover bought our homes knowing that the existing zoning districts uh what they were the staff report indicates existing zoning is consistent with the comprehensive plan and there have been no substantial changes to the area for decades we have clearly stated that access must be located on an arterial roadway or collector roadway Titusville access requirements for um one the regional commercial zoning requires arterial or Ro or collector roadway two the plan development zoning requires arterial or collector roadway and mult three multif family high density zoning which 15 units per acre requires arterial or collector roadway and four multif family medium density zoning requires arterial or collector roadway so anyway you look at it the pro the proposed development um it must get get access from an arterial roadway or collector roadway which is Highway 50 not on Windover Way which is not an arterial or collector roadway but is a local road so the only development for this property that would allow um um access onto wind way is a single family residential development like r1b zoned subdivision on 20 acres approximately 80 single family homes could be built there and allow access onto wind over way this would be a viable trans uh transition that would be acceptable to the wind community so we ask you to deny SSA 32022 keep our City's well established zoning patterns in this area deemed consistent while supporting the maintenance of commercially zoned properties and really in my opinion I mean there's something better that can go there than this thank you thank you Brandon Hollis good evening Brandon Hollis 2877 morning dve way in the July 17th memorandum submitted by the developer in it states it is their opinion that Florida Department of Transportation would not approve a driveway access onto State Road 50 citing f. access management standards for new access points adopted by the legislature in 2009 the full text of these regulatory standards is found in chapter 149 7.03 Florida Administrative Code the memorandum references a 400t spacing for access management points on class three roadways in the two years this has been before us the developer has not even gotten the free preliminary review by fot to indisputably verify whether they would repit existing and historically approved driveway onto estate Road 50 that predates adoption of the 2009 standards here is the f. policy florid Administrative Code 14- 97.3 connection permit application submitted pursuant to to rule chapter 14- 96 shall be reviewed subject to the standards of this rule chapter existing lawful connections median openings and signals are not required to meet the access management standards existing access management features will generally be allowed to remain in place but shall be brought into conformance with access management standards when significant change occurs or as changes to the roadway design allows today fot has not held a public hearing to withdraw approval for the access onto Highway 50 from the truck stock which is the exact location of the 66 foot wide Highway 50 EET access available for this developer to use now going back to the June 19th pz's meeting member Gat said he personally observed the intersection of wind overway and Highway 50 around 3M for 15 minutes and noted consistent u-turns being made in both directions which he felt was not adequately addressed in the traffic report and noted that what he observed would likely be worse during peak hours he expressed his concern that the intersection of wind overway and Windover Trail which features a curve intersecting a tangent Central Road with a single stop sign could posst significant traffic issues he said if there was any significant volume of traffic at that intersection and I quote it's just absolutely not too good he said Mr gad's final statement was the following and I quote as I read through the application the data as I've heard the presentation the concerns of the citizens and certainly my own concerns from my experience I believe that this is not the correct land use as a change requested in its principle because I don't believe it can support its Community with anything that provides for transportation to and from those residential units than a vehicle I think the existing land use and Zoning that there's that's there in the commercial sense and as was described that there's not necessarily A Hard fact line number and percentage of what we should have for commercial if Titusville is in a transition where we're growing residentially and we're shrinking what commercial areas we have it's going to become an imbalance if it's not already an imbalance and when you add to that the fact that folks in this neighborhood if the change is approved are going to be forced to drive cars with no no alternative available period I cannot support this request and I recommend denial end quote as with Mr Gad and the entire pnz zoning commission who unanimously recommended and I I also actually deny this resoning request thank you thank you next up Abby Hollis hi guys I'm Abby Hollis 2877 morning dway I feel like you need like 30 seconds jumping jacks after all this all right so you already heard about the 66 foot uh access onto 50 so I'm going to skip past that um the planed development zoning requires there to be a multimodal transportation purpose for PD zoning to be approved which is intended to reduce vehicular traffic around the area where the planned development is located in this case are no continuous sidewalks um from Bristol property to major transportation hubs such as Walmart Target you know that whole area there's no sidewalks um in the June 20th or I'm sorry the June 19th 2024 email from city planner Eddie I'm gonna botch his name sorry Eddie gindo uh to the pnz board member Ted Gad it was confirmed that the bravard County public works department has no plans for sidewalk improvements in or around the area of wind overway wind over Trail or on Highway 50 um also there are no bike paths in any of this portion of wind overway or wind over Trail um anywhere in this area so the intersection oh so once you get to this point right here where Windover Trail runs into Windover Way when you go out to 50 this direction when you go out to 405 this direction you know how on our roads the white line tells us where the edge of the road is the white line is literally on the edge of the pavement there's not even room to walk safely along either of these portions of Road and if you go out this direction towards Target right here where this water is there is a um guard rail on each side I didn't go out there and measure it but literally if you tried to walk AC across there across the grass you have to pay attention to traffic so you don't get hit by a car so um I just think that there's no plan for the foot traffic that is going to happen if we bring teenagers kids into this development how are you know they're going to go want to hang out at whatever Burger King I don't know wherever they want to go hang out these days um they have no way to go there except through the grass and so my other concern is just for these neighbors that live right along this area will the kids then try to just cross across property to get to you know the shortest way to get to the destination so I just asked that you guys would deny um SSA 32022 and deny the CPA 2-202 24 thank you Abby thank you um Brent Bridges even folks my name is Brent Bridges I live at 6375 wind overway so we keep hearing that if this does not get approved it could go live local act meaning if the developer does not get his way with his development then he will change his application to pursue the artment on the live local act live local act correction this is a scare tactic and not likely to occur or get approved see EX C3 which is January 9 2024 letter from City staff Mandy Lamont Deputy community development director to kimley Horn developer this letter contains staff review concerns and applicable policy constraints for the Bristol project to pursued under live local act the letter identified that the proposal is not compliance in multiple areas firstly parking space requirement must be calculated at 2.5 parking spots for dwelling that being two spaces uh common and one half for guest parking C uh city of tville tech manual Transportation infrastructure section 9.16 table 9.16 4 in addition uh the letter identifies that the proposal is not in compliance with this requirement multif family medium density of residential R2 and Regional commercial RC developments require the parcel to be be a but or be adjacent to an arterial or collect a road window overway is identified as a local Street reference drpm section 14520 do8 ldr section 28-36 ldr section 28- 315 and city of tville comprehensive plan policies 1.9.1 1.4.5 and 1.4.6 therefore under Li live local act the ACT ACC Point must still be on an arterial or collector Road Additionally the letter also identifies the width of the paid portion of the row of wind overway is only 22 feet wide the minimum paid width for required or required for a local road is 26 ft wide the minimum paved width required for collector's road is 38 ft additionally the letter uh states that live local act requires a mixed use element the mixed use element of the development is missing per ordinance 48-30 23 pursuant to chapter 20237 laws of Florida known as the live local act at a minimum 65% of the total square footage must be residential but no more than 80% shall be residential at a minimum 20% of the total square footage must be commercial new amendments to the live local act that were passed in 201 four and more are coming down the pipeline one significant Amendment includes hype protections for single family neighborhoods go ahe can and states of a property is adjacent to a single family Zone president or residential parcel with at least 25 contigous single family homes then the height will be restricted to the highest of the following 1 50% of the tallest adjacent resident or three stories so for window farmer that would limit the to two stories tall so scar taxes thank you y next up um Jennifer Ros r m o Ras not here okay um Jim is t h i b Au u tt not here no no um I don't think we can what was it say say again question for what can I ask a question in refence to two people yeah yeah come up here because I'm curious what your questions going to be about the people that aren't here thought you're going to ask a question of somebody who spoke I couldn't do that but I could hear what go ahead hit me up thank you good evening um I haven't heard much discussion about the utilities I think that the utilities is going to be a problem for the neighborhood it's already problem I got you that's not a question about the other two people but um do you have a card in or have you had a card in no I don't have a card in that's why I asked if I could stand in for the someone they had a card no we can't we can't do that but um can they put a card in yeah you can submit a card go ahead put a card in go over and put a card in and you can give me what you got to say all right while he's doing that go ahead and call the next one um Stephen it's f a s r e z Foster okay gotcha come on up Stephen I'm not going to refer to any uh of the of the uh uh visual uh figures you've been given or any of the codes what by name I'm going to talk to you about what I've seen what I've noticed and what I think give me your name and address please Steven Foster 799 window over way got it thank you um regarding the ad applicants resoning request we've first it was to be luxury apartments then we heard about the live local act being a possibility now it's back now that's been withdrawn and they're going the other route now without the live local request to change what their venue is going so they seem able to change their approach to this to somehow get this approved it it makes me wonder about the incremental changes might occur once this is built if it were approved okay um the current zoning is correct and uh I wonder why we're considering changing all that of course everybody gets to apply for you know an approval but um we've already got an established guideline the uh uh plan that's been set forth zoning and planning that you guys have done I don't know why we're here now trying to change that what happens if this is built and more changes are requested down the road to fix a mistake we once this is built and the access is a problem we get new traffic reports new safety reports and we have to add additional arteries or improve access to alleviate some of the pressures and you're going to have people from 304 units down here arguing with you like we are about the future of these changes and what's going to happen in the neighborhood okay um the traffic volume now in this Outlets if you notice we have um I95 merging we have traffic coming in from uh Highway 50 we have two gas stations a restaurant and uh a grham bus stop and two left turns across traffic now with u-turns I personally pull out a window over all the time on the uh uh 50 heading east and make that quick U-turn after Crossing three lanes of traffic I do it all the time now what's going to happen with that and then we've got to consider there's McDonald's Home Depot and the other entran there as well what about the the people that cross the street there pedestrians kids on bicycle skateboards people of all ages that are going be walking across the street there walking across those businesses to go to Walmart for example we already see people walking from the other side of I95 on the west side of 95 crossing under the overpass on foot to walk down to Walmart I suppose because there already is a convenience store on that side of the the the uh Interstate there that they could access that road with but um you know you also have this uh shuttered recently burned out truck stop with an unknown future what's going to happen with the traffic from that when it reopens as something else or another truck stop we all saw at the End of the Street there the damage to the streets and the curbs and the sidewalks from the trucks before if people live here long enough they can all remember that we had a lot of crime prostitution stray animals being dropped off a lot of people there and a lot of other got you and I appreciate that very much thank you thank you next up Frank rousell I didn't hear that say again oh there he is again there you are okay now I had a problem I couldn't see it and have my glasses with the card the question was I was name and address for the record then do your thing name is Frank Russo 7866 went overway there you go um I was at the previous meeting and uh if I recall correctly clock oh okay go ahead I'm sorry if I call correctly the when when the uh developer made the presentation he was stating that he's trying to use the analogy that if if you leave it commercial you have to re replace all the the force meain of the sewer lines coming from the plant that it wasn't adequate to put in for a commercial project but yet residential it's okay that they they can continue using the the same lines and my opinion is that uh I think it's going to overwhelm the utilities department as it is as it is now just not even just for the Wastewater but for the water department we have hardly any pressure now as it is that they have really difficult times and I think that uh it needs to be upgraded and I think that the impact that the project will put on that without considering that there's more that has to be done you know to upgrade the utilities that that I think that that's a major problem and I haven't heard anybody really discussing you know the the utilities part good point I mean that's all right anything else well that's it thank you okay thank you um sander Clinger for Sandy Russo thank you utilities that's you nobody's really talked about that sorry Sandra Clinger for Sandy Russo 2680 Bobcat Trail thank you um I want to talk about uh just a couple of things one being the council's latitude when it comes to land use decisions regarding how you feel about commercial uh property and the amount of commercial property you have in the city uh there doesn't have to be a set number whether it's 20% or whatever it's just the council has the latitude to decide there is concern of attrition and that's enough to make a decision that you do not want to change the commercial land use for this property um you've heard a lot of people um one thing do agree with the developers traffic engineer Jos black is that people when he stated people are going to take the fastest route to get where they want to go that was at minute 229 uh of the public hearing we agree with that and we were you know that's one of the things we've been asking for and complaining about from the beginning is that their traffic study did not show trips to known destination points that are going to be attractants for people on The Daily their analysis looks mainly at morning and afternoon what they call Peak traffic but when you look at the actual traffic even if you just look at Google at how many trips Google will show you a nice little graphic of how bad traffic's going to be when you're traveling somewhere the peak here in this area of wind way wind Trail is midday now their study looked at morning and night uh instead of midday and only accounted for 241 of, 144 trips when are the where's the analysis for these other trips where they're going imagine living in your res rural residential home and having a thousand more cars driving by every day when we looked at the analysis we looked at we just picked a few just say okay let's see where is the shortest path that people are going to go the one that surprised me was NASA if you look at the Bristol driveway and you look at the shortest path to get to the NASA cosm way it is into Windover Farms to Windover Trail and out now you actually heard another one of the applicants expert Witnesses say the space program is going to Boom you heard the Bristol um developer say they are planning a majority of their units are one bedroom who do you think that's going to serve space workers that's why they would build one bedroom so we have extreme concerns over what this is is going to do and that unfortunately their traffic engineer really only looked at level of service and did not look at the requirements for how the traffic patterns would impact adjacent residential areas that's it thank you thank you Jonathan last name is deesa Jonathan daa 2136 Canal R Drive how to will thank you the additional identified deficiencies and failure to comply with the Titus will comprehensive plan in ldrs a 322 and it's Associated resoning and Ras plan should be denied because of the following denied because of proposed access onto window defined by the city of titus's local Road does not meet the minimum standards for a collector R roadway as defined in Titus will ldr drpm section 9.5 with the RightWay from the developer property boundary to sr50 which is only 6 ft wide and not an arterial or collector as required by for PD development R criteria High spell ldr chapter 34 Article 2 Division 1 Section 34-40 a1b denied because the proposal further reduces the amount of commercial land use in the city of Titusville which is altered below 20% this is inconsistent with the comprehensive plan future land use element objective 1.9 deny because the opin failed to demonstrate compliance with planned ulet development policies in comprehensive future land use element 1.19.1 1.9.3 1.9.5 1.9.6 1.9.7 1.9.9 and 1.9.10 denied because it is not in compliance with the comprehensive plan conservation element strategy 1.6.3 do2 which requires Wetlands with 5 Acres of more to be placed in conservation land use deny because the existing zoning is correct the application the applicant failed to provide any evidence that there's been any change in the existing development patterns the surrounding area and the subject property to the to support the requested zoning change to PD uh tusv ldr chapter 34 Article 2 Division 1 Section 3440 a12 States the existing zoning if is deemed correct is sorry is deemed if deemed consistent the comprehensive plan shall be presumed correct unless substantial change in the year has occurred since the origional zoning review criteria Titus will ldr chapter 34 Article 2 Division 1 section 34-4 A2 denied because the advocate failed to provide any specific information to demonstrate how the project protects the Health safet and Welfare to a greater extent than the standard code review criteria Titus for ldr chapter 34 Article 2 Division 1 Section 34-40 A5 and PD criteria chapter 33-5 A1 denied because the op didn't fail to provide adequate buffering to prevent negative impacts to adjacent resid use uses review criteria tius forr chapter 34 Article 2 Division 1 Section 34-4 A6 denied because the proposal PD master plan failed to include a variety of residential designs re criteria Titus ldr Chapter 34 Article 2 Division 1 Section 33-8 A2 C please vote to deny SSA 3222 and it's Associated rezoning and master plan deny CPA 224 you're good okay can I have 30 seconds or thank you I know okay thank you thank you Katie Delaney hi hello Katie Delaney Coco resident um I was in agreement with what everybody said about the traffic so I'm not going to go over that again I think that's been talked about um enough but I'd like to mentioned that pnz unanimously denied this project and also this project will um have significant impact on an already overwhelmed uh infrastructure that we have um I'd also like to point out for the record Mr Robinson has accepted $1,000 from the lobbyist that is involved with this project um Mr Cole has accepted uh $1,000 during his campaign um from the same lobbyist Miss stokel has accepted uh ,000 doar from the lobbyist involved in this project for her campaign um along with $500 from one of the experts who's also a former lobbyist and $500 from the lawyer's wife um please do the ethical thing and recuse yourselves from this vote Bard is not d Tona or Miami let's keep it that way thank you next up the last card is Robin Fisher the last card is Robin fiser Robin fiser 1625 Garden Street good good evening uh Council um I like to uh say don't be intimidated and don't let your foot off the gas mayor I'm a 35e resident of bouard I me Titusville really 50 something bouard I've have a small business got a couple small business I'm a commercial real estate um um business I've also volunteer homeowner I I've i' I've been in business since 1989 I'm a consultant and I I advocate for positive growth in north rard and I will continue to do that and the county says that if you do that and someone compensates you for it you got to be considered a lobbyist so I guess I'm a lobbyist but I care about this community and what I want you to know is I think it's very interesting to listen to The Narrative that people think that we've got this big boom going on in this community and so happened I told you you know I moved here in ' 89 you know in 1990 the population of Titusville was 39,6 n people we were ranked 687 in the US in 20124 today 34 years later the population is 49,9 people so what's happened is in the last 34 years we've grown about 10,000 people and if you have it you average that out that's about 300 people a year now compare that to the rest of the county vard county has grown 255,000 people we've gotten 10,000 of them Palm Bay has gone from 62,000 to uh 47,000 so they've grown 78,000 people in that same 34e time frame so the myth that we're busting at the seams I'm just here to tell you we're not busting at the scenes and I mention that because there's a group and there's some candidates that are running that want you to believe that we we are at this huge growth mode and that uh we you know we're going to we're going to blow blow up I want you to remember something too you know back in ' 08 in 201 through 2008 and 2016 as y'all know I served as your county commissioner and this community was in dying straight in 2011 we were laying off people people were moving away and you know what there was a magazine that came out and this is what it said can I save it may there's some articles in there that talks about what was like in 2018 2016 it was dying so so we have my whole country down but this one was special so you know what we changed Thea the the trajectory we we we put the Zone in place we did Titusville Renaissance we did blue origin we put Titusville Landing uh redid the mall you know there's a lot of things we did WOW 3 minutes go fast let me say this to you give me the same privileges that you give Windover Farms I pay a lot of taxes in this town and so to 49 other thousand people and if you if you okay wrap it up wrap it up exended for9 just like 49,000 people I'm going to finish up Mary this is what I'm going to say to you give me the same privileges if I and that is you got all this ability I got you next card all right but with that said like it or not I have to take a quick break so five minutes don't leave don't run around it's GNA be quick I guess we got to do this real quick recess I got to go e e e e e e e e e e e e e e here come on up here now missing city manager supposed to well I gave him plenty of time all right ready all right we're back in session um City attorney uh guide me I guess we just move right over to uh the applicant yeah yes have we exhausted speaker card at this time yeah I've asked that twice yeah well that's why we took our break we weren't going to take it while they were still talking just want to clarify yes sir at this time the applicant will be entitled to rebuttal okay uh applicant and I'll just remind everybody to be respectful like you always are so we'll continue on with that uh good evening thank you council members um I say this with you know the caveat that I do have multiple pages of notes here but I'll I'll strive to be as brief as we can so we don't go as late tonight but we do have the uh predicate of laying the rec Rec um for the court reporter um so I'm going to take some moments to directly reot a couple of the statements that were said and then in a more General rebuttal and re um iteration of what we presented unfortunately three weeks ago because of the length of the meeting um you know first you know just the commentary on um you know donations and that's the First Amendment right of the public if any of the council members feel that it creates a bias and they can't make an independent decision they're free to uh recuse themselves you know I noticed that the last speaker Mr Delaney she didn't disclose to you all that she's taken a donation from wi Farms residents but that's her right to stand up here and speak so moving you know past that issue um you know there's a comment that we made a statement that this project would cause the utilities to fail on concurrency basis that was not the statement that was made we'll get into it later it was a statement related to the utility lines that the city has currently running through the property that has a caveat in the easement that if the future development is interfered with by those um sewer and reuse lines and the city would have to relocate them at their own expense uh it has not nothing to do with concurrency that concurrency in the staff report says that all indications are the concurrency is there um you know there was a comment as to the multi modal walkways we've agreed to put in the sidewalks and bike paths out to you know State Road 50 and that was one of staff's conditions and their staff report and we agreed to that the only caveat was we requested due to safety reasons that we had the option to put it through the easement instead of on wind ever way itself um moving on the easement up to where the bus stop is the greyh helm bus stop and the you know local bike path that runs across there and there is a local bike path there if you drive by it's painted on the State Road 50 that runs right along um the boundary of Mr Dell's property and the Shaw's property where the gas station is located um there was a comment that the 2014 filling was done and that the easements were put in place uh apparently as some sort of you know I don't know if he was meaning to but it seemed implied that it was done without a permit that 2014 filling was done via a valid St John's Water Management District permit and a city of Titusville permit and in conjunction with that filling the landowner donated over 170 Acres of property fee simple to the district along the St John's and in addition put the conservation easement that is on the property today you there was a lot of commentary that the St John's Water Management District could maybe be unduly influenced by myself to remove that conservation easement first off any conservation easement of greater than two acres goes to a full board vote so it would have to be a full board vote to remove that conservation easement and if that is a concern of the citizens you know the applicant has made taken a position they'll Grant an additional easement to the city of Titusville so that the conservation cannot be removed without the city of Titusville approval um you know that's just trying to address this allegations that the you know my fellow governing board members would act inappropriately um you know there were some kind of General commentary that you there's a lot of comments about the surrounding development patterns and we've got a lot of people that live two two and a half miles away speaking about you know the the immediate character of this development and the properties around it yet when it comes to the height concerns you know they seem to ignore that 400 ft away from this property are multiple four and five story buildings on the other side of the road and that this zoning as it stands today allows Heights uh in excess of 45 and 50 feet depending on the setbacks um and that's as it stands today that's as the code it sets so kind of moving into the other the more general areas that we heard a lot about tonight you we we we've heard a lot of commentary about traffic and um you know i' just like to point out that there's only two people in this room that have been qualified as experts in traffic and that's uh Mr Josh Black you know the expert hired by the applicant and the city's Zone traffic engineer um I'm just going to go with Mr KB um so that um you know I don't butcher his last name but uh you know the traffic impact analysis the traffic study and all the methodologies and updates to that have been run through and approved by the city's expert in the traffic and the independent expert and um you know none of the individuals that have spoken and given their opinions as to the quality of the traffic report provided any of background to provide uh test competent substantial evidence testimony on a nature that technical matters um it kind of I don't this is probably going a little off but uh I don't know if anyone's ever seen the movie The Big Labowski but there's a uh there's a scene in the movie where Jeff Bridges who plays The Dude is sitting there and he's kind of being talked to a lot and he just finally looks up at him and says you know well man that's your opinion um and that's what we heard a lot tonight on traffic was opinion but they're not qualified to give opinion expert or opinion testimony on the matters quiet so but if we want to look at the observable facts of the traffic at that area first the existing traffic at State Road 50 the experts have shown that has decreased by 15% over 4,000 trips I believe was the number over the last five years um going from 2018 to 2023 um you there was a lot of talk that uh you know allegations at fdot only told us and we didn't provide any Communications um regarding the access management and um State the fdot's position on that I'm going to enter into the record and provide to all of you all an email from Mr Chad lingan felter this email as uh yesterday's email just to make sure it's current Mr liell said Josh I concur that rule 14- 97.3 sub3 subh Flor Administrative Code which speaks to connections near interchanges would likely prohibit a connection to the Bristol easement you may have noticed that the easement has about half of the frontage along a limited access right away and then he goes on to speak about the previous statements that access would be grandfathered in because of the existing use of a truck stop there well Mr Lian Feller States directly to that is that truck stop has been closed one of the speakers previously said that well we could just go in through the gas station that it's existing there we have no legal right of access through that gas station that gas station has a separate and independent driveway from the easement that exists over this property so if you have any further questions on traffic after we conclude you know our expert is here I would ask you to ask those directly to him if you need any followup and uh and to your own staff any questions from Council on traffic member Nelson yeah um let me go back so they were saying some of the citizens were saying that there was no traffic study related to the potential traffic on wind over Trail and wind over way is that correct I can speak to that so when we did the traffic analysis we worked with KB uh to determine the scope and you know the distribution of the traffic and so the way that we did the initial study was looking at a worst case scenario basically every single trip that's coming out of that that's going to go hit the intersection at 50 at wind over way and we wanted to see if it would break because obviously that's going to cause some issues and so we did that and we showed that it didn't break we didn't distrib distribute traffic because we didn't want to make it look like we were trying to you know not show a problem that we could have potentially identified at that intersection now since then a supplicant uh study was done to look at other factors including putting all of the traffic going onto window over Trail out to the intersection and we still showed that it operated within Titusville adopted level of service and what level of service would that be a the very best okay any other um are you still going yeah I'm sorry I'm sorry um so the other question is the road withd as it hits Highway 50 can you address that well the that's a historical right of way you know that was done um in terms of capacity the two lanes of pavement that are on there with the existing and the proposed trips still functions within that acceptable level in terms of Titus ville's code versus rideway width I can't really speak to that that's you know what was established when window over Trail was platted um but as I mentioned the last uh the last meeting we had um you know because wind over Trail connects to arterials by do definitions it would function I know that that we had a fun uh joke about a boss but it would function that way because it's collecting residential traffic and distributing it to the arterial Network okay okay quiet please I think those were my questions and I think I had a question for staff I don't know if you want me to ask it now guys please be hold it down out there I can't even hear what she's saying go I have have one other traffic question I don't know if you want me to ask it now yeah yeah go ahead if it's still traffic so I think this is more staff um you do have 33.5 the ldr and we are putting traffic on a local road but as I as I read it it says um without creating traffic in residential areas am I correct do you f do you follow me am I making sense 33.5 of the code A2 that what's been brought up several times about access yeah yes it you you've stated it correctly with it so I think what you're saying is because the second half of it it says without creating traffic in residential areas that's correct okay so therefore in this situation it would be okay to go onto a local road because you're not impacting the traffic in the residential area am I right we stated it well let KB here back me up if if any but I we stated in our staff report that we did not see an impact on that segment of Windover okay thank you all right um cor member St yes that actually leads into my question uh for staff and probably KB can you just briefly explain the process of what you guys do look at for the traffic study portion so we have the applicant coming um and then we've heard from several of the residents traffic concerns so what does that process look like do you look and say okay here's the development because they have access to 50 we will assume that they will be going off that way or do we look at time which one would be quicker to go for different are what does that process look like uh it's normally a uh distribution of the trips from the site onto the surrounding Network and uh as uh the engineer uh mentioned in this case uh they considered a worst case scenario uh assuming that everything goes north on wind of way towards the intersection of 50 and if that intersection doesn't break then it's reasonable to uh to infer that if trips were to be distributed then that that concentrated impact would then be distributed to these other um segments and intersections okay and then is there a rational or reason why we assume that they will go on to 50 like how do we get to that assumption well that's the uh most direct uh uh route uh from the site to the surrounding Network okay um okay and then um I did this is somewhat related but can you define it might get brought up again the difference between a local Road or collector arterial road because I feel like I've heard both in this situation mentioned um how do we Define that or what does that look like in is there I guess gray area in that definition yeah so local roads are to provide access to properties and then arterials are to provide continuous travel otherwise called Mobility so collectors are somewhere in between those two and provide the connections from the local system to the arterial system and since they're in the middle they they provide some degree of access and some degree of Mobility so generally that would be the function of a collectors now let's remember the collectors it's a collector system we we wouldn't just isolate one road and say it's a collector there for it's it's it's it's working within a system of collectors which are typically interconnected and connect to the arterials and uh in that way provide this uh uh dual purpose of accessibility and Mobility is it possible for part of a road to be portioned as collector and then the rest of the road to be portioned as local um let me look at my map so when you look at the Titusville map we don't see that in Titusville but I say theoretically it could be possible but the way it's set up in Titusville we don't see that those are the ones in green this is from our um technical manual okay yeah okay that's all I have right now thank you any other qu traffic questions up here I see none go ahead go thank you all right uh thank you going on to the kind of the next general topic was the compatibility issue I already addressed some of that as it relates to the the height and the fact that there are tall buildings in this immediate vicinity you know yes they on the other side of I95 that's not the point it's still closer than a lot of these houses um you know but we've provided expert testimony and the staff's report agrees that um that the high-intensity commercial would provide a higher degree of noise and light pollution and traffic than what the proposed zoning request would would bring and again I I I can't stress enough the the standard is not what's there today as far as light traffic and noise the standard is what could be there today that's the standard where we measure the light traffic noise from and you know we have also had some commentary about the blighted condition of the neighborhood with the burned out buildings and this is the compatibility use would be a proper transition from the high-intensity commercial to the single family residential by prob providing a buffer area in there that cleans up a lot of that um blight and nuisance then uh next kind of general area we didn't touch on it as much tonight as previous uh hearing but the in propriety of removal of a conservation land use and taking that density that's just either a um you know unintentional or an intentional potentionally misleading on the issue staff has already stated that that's allowed both in the comp plan and in the Land Development regulations this city has specifically done that in plan development districts both at the Willow Creek uh plan development and at the South Carpenter Estates plan development the South South carpent new estate's development when that was done I was here before you making the same argument where that was a 70 acre property and the PD zoning took that instead of spreading out 71 acre houses they took 70 houses and pres on put them on about 30 acres and preserve the other 40 acres of wetlands in that PD zoning so that is consistently applied across the city in the manner that we're requesting it to be applied um I've already discussed that we would give an uh you know an additional easement to the city if there's any concern on the city on the fact that the other St John's Water Management Board District members would act inappropriately and remove the conservation easement on here but either way it becomes a portion of the binding site plan that gets app approved at the PD so there's no bait and switch going on here and um you know the next issue and you know we kind of jumped ahead a little bit there but this uh this discussion over the local Road and connection to wind overway and um the standards set by the city 33.5 -5 section two specifically says a plan development shall be so located with respect to arterial streets collector streets and other Transportation facilities as to provide direct access to such PD and here's the part that they just generally don't address it says without creating or generating in traffic along local streets in residential areas what we have clearly shown in the zoning map point of order go ahead M Nelson um I think miss Connie needs to sit down as opposed sign put the sign out there they they certainly didn't do that behind you so and it's kind of distracting if nothing else and I can't read it anyway yeah so that's true thank you go ahead thank you uh um the important Clause there is along local streets and residential areas if you look at the zoning map and we're not debating that this is a local Street or collector Street or an arterial Street we readily acknowledge this is the local Street the emphasis that we're making is that this is a local Street in a commercial area so we have direct access via a local Street in a commercial area out to the arterial Road of State Road 50 and there's nothing in your code that says you can't have other access or you can't leak through other neighborhoods and get there and in fact I'll hand them out now this is a collection of other uh puds and PDS that the the city has approved over the years years um you the first page here is the Willow Creek PUD I believe it's about 1,200 single family homes and um you know of not there it does not connect to an arterial or collector Road it goes through a local road with um I forget the name of it it goes through a local road until it comes out and attaches uh to Grom Parkway but that local road is bounded by commercial properties the exact same thing that we're asking for here and the other point on the Willow Creek PUD is they utilize the wetlands for the density purposes just as we're asking to do here as it relates to the Future land use side in the code this is all residential zoning you know it's there's no requirement for mixed use or commercial components required in there like uh a couple of the future land use elements that are you know questioned about uh as we're not complying with we didn't we didn't request a commercial PUD we didn't request a mixed use PUD the code specifically states that um 33-31 that the residential PUD may include single family detached dwellings patio homes town homes multifamily are combinations thereof it doesn't say that you have to include various numbers of them and the city doesn't apply that across the other PUD your your future land use does say encourage but it doesn't say require um the next uh P PD here on SE what I've labeled as number two is a recent PD that was approved by you know this Council on JJ Road um the PD approved this with a single connection to JJ road which again is a local Road in the city of Titusville and this is again a solid only single family homes within this PD so there's no variety of different housing products or Styles it's a single family Zone PD that connects to a local Road the third one is holder Road PUD while this one does have a direct connection to holder Road it also has a secondary connection that comes through and brings it out to Dairy Road and that that secondary connection goes directly through a single family residential subdivision the subdivision that's highlighted in yellow there the fourth page is a Sano PUD and and PD uh this is again all single family homes no variety of housing in there other than the single family homes not no problem with that I'm just showing that that is consistent with the comp plan the code and the city's application of the same and this one this subdivision has has direct access to cisem road which is a collector Road as defined by your tech manual but it also has a secondary access through Sano Boulevard which goes through a single family residential local Road um neighborhood so again this is showing that there is nothing inconsistent in your code with allowing a secondary access that would go through a residential areas such as what would be arguably allowed if the residents leave this osed PUD of the applicant and travel and come through wind over Trail and exit out that way yes they would be going through a couple of you know feet I don't know exact number maybe four or 500 feet worth of local residential roads which but that's consistent with the code and the application that this Council has done throughout the years the fifth page is The Yearling Road PUD again while this PUD has direct access onto Grom Parkway this section of Grom Parkway north of State Road 405 and therefore it's not classified as a collector or arterial Road in section um your tech manual as defined by the city so again another example of a PD zoning connecting to a local road finally uh section six is the Foley Road PUD this is a all residential but it's a mix of single family with a couple of town homes spread in and it has direct access to Foley road which is designated as a local Road by your tech manual and it also has secondary access through uh guir Drive which runs directly through a an existing single family subdivision so the point I'm trying to make is that the reading that the wind that the uh the public comment people are trying to make is asking the city to to take an interpretation of their code that's in Inc consistent with the way the code is drafted and it's inconsistent with the way that the city has applied the code over the years you know so but I don't have anything further to say on that unless you have questions related to that to me but if not you know I'll keep moving in order of trying to go ahead and keep moving I don't see any lights um finally you know there's public commentary there's been no no evidence of any changes to the the property or the area to support the requested rezoning again this is this is just not accurate um the applicants have shown that the property is no longer before the city with a joint application with its neighbor to the north when the prior RC zoning was put in place the site plan that was part of that zoning hearing applied a site plan over both Parcels that were owned by the U wind over Farms Inc and Mr George denell when the applicant in 2008 brought brought that forward they had both Parcels of property under contract and they had letters of authorization from both Property Owners allowing them to proceed before this body with that site plan that fell through these properties are no longer under unified control so neither property can develop without a rezoning hearing that removes that existing site plan so I think that is a big issue uh for the city and you know altern additionally we've uh shown that the fdot has changed its regulations relating to connecting directly to State Road 50 that prior site plan and Zoning had a direct access or direct exit off of State Road 50 it also had four accesses on the wind over uh way but that access is no longer allowed as evidenced by the email from FD that's been put into evidence and our experts testimony we've shown that the traffic patterns have changed change uh in this area if you look at the 2008 site plan it showed a traffic light at the intersection of Windover Way in State Road 50 and a full cut there those are no longer there fdot has closed that from a full access point and now it is what it is so that is a big uh pattern in the development that has changed and you know further we provided the expert testimony that markting conditions don't support this property to be developed as Regional commercial due to these changes and the tremendous amount of other commercial that has gone on since that time I believe the testimony um provided earlier was I think we have 10 hotels in the area there somewhere between 15 and 20 fast food we have every Big Box store you can imagine there is plenty of high-intensity commercial that has gone in in this area so that's that's really all I have as to what they said now I'd like to turn the focus to the staff's report and as I opened this hearing you know I told you all that you know we agreed with probably 95% of what the staff's recommendations were if you on the um staff report and the few areas that they said you know would support a denial it was because we hadn't provided you know enough evidence to them at that time when they wrote the staff report we have since then put that evidence into the record via our experts and um the exhibits that have been submitted but I'd just like to run through some of the notable points that your staff has put together here on page five it say the land use Arrangement will result in a land pattern that is compatible with the surrounding area a preliminary concurrence assessment was completed indicating available capacity for water sewer transportation and park to serve the proposed development the amendment will not require new infrastructure to serve the site the master plan will not result in urban sprawl the proposed residential land use within the context of the surrounding commercial and lowdensity residential land use lends to a sustainable development pattern the request for a comprehensive plan amendment in resoning is consistent with the comprehensive plan the proposed development would generate significantly fewer daily trips than a previously approved conceptual commercial development we've agreed to the staff's request uh as to the bicycle and pedestrian Lanes with the the recommendations as written as we move into the zoning criteria here are some other com quotes from the staff report the proposed rezoning to PD zoning district is generally consistent with the plan unit development land Ed the proposed multifam could be considered a less intense use with greater compatibility to the wind of farms Community unlikely that the proposed multifam will have an impact to the property values as compared to the potential commercial development currently permitted on the property this statement was reinforced by our expert testimony where they provided opinion estimates that this would not result in any decrease in property values page 15 we have a multifamily zoning behind a commercial zoning is an appropri land use pattern this statement was reinforced both through Mr mcnight expert report and his testimony the multif family development is not expected to generate any detriment to the public safety and Welfare of the general area the plan development will not create or generate traffic along local streets and residential areas going back to the prior Point these are not my comments these are not our experts comments these are comments from your staff the development appears to be the quote optimal land use pattern and is compatible with the surrounding area the multifam is an appropriate use to buffer the commercial and the single family uses and the parcel that is Zone residential manufactured housing to the southeast finally there are no adverse impacts to State Road 50 and there are no impa adverse impacts to wind overway now if we turn to the staff's recommendation to you all they bring up several points and support of approval and several points that needed some more information you know first they said consider the approval of the comp plan by considering the appropriateness of residential development in the form of the Pud land use as it relates to the location compatibility surrounding uses concurrency and access management consistent with a comprehensive plan as to location staff States a multif family zoning behind a commercial zoning is an appropriate land use pattern they state that the development appears to be the optimal land use pattern is compatible with the surrounding area the amendment will limit the residential density to a scale that is appropriate to the surrounding residential land uses multif family development is not expected to generate any detriment to the public safety and Welfare of the general area as we've already addressed the concurrency and the sprawls I'm now skipping through in the interest of time thank you for your patience um we've already discussed the access management and transportation issues um now to the areas where staff wanted more information I believe there were five areas um you know the first one related to uh a suggestion that the approval would reduce the land for commercial and Industrial Development below a 20% threshold you your staff has stated that that 20% threshold was one that was set in a live local act inapplicable here that's that's not what we're looking at your comp plan specifically sets the standard as adequate and appropriate um you know I'm going to ask Mr mcnight to clarify his testimony and on the what's adequate and appropriate as it relates to the commercial and Industrial percentage you guys are not held to an exact amount but I'm going to ask him to come up now if he will and make some statements on that Jim mcnight planning consultant uh to make this brief in reviewing uh Urban Land Institute and APA American Planning Association different standards for communities they vary but in no case did I find 20% as a standard and in within the document of the city of Titusville it does say adequate and appropriate I saw ranges combining commercial and Industrial between 7 and 18% as the very highest for basically Metro Olan areas Bard county is considered what we call an smsa standard Metropolitan statistical area so I I could not find anything that came up with 20% so that's not a standard that's normal for you know communities but uh adequate and appropriate is again as determined by the viewer so I would say it's a very high standard and probably not an inappropriate probably inappropriate for application here thank you so again the standards adequate and appropriate so the adequacy of the uh Comm the high intensity commercial land you think we've addressed there's there's plenty as Mr mcnight stated in the city now it may not all be in the exact location it's here but there's a lot the appropriateness of it I of this land specifically being high intensity commercial I think is something you know to take into consideration as the experts have stated it's not appropriate to put high intensity commercial directly abing single family land use that's also what your staff says you are supposed supposed to have a transitional buffer between those uses that is what this project would provide a transitional buffer between those two incompatible uses um next the staff suggest um that we could better address elements of the plan unit development um land use elements those were specifically 19.1 19.3 5 6 7 and 10 as I've already stated most of those are to encourage different types of inel uh development whether it's office or industrial or mixed use we didn't apply for a mixed use development and the code doesn't require you to um the city code specifically allows for multi all multif family units are all single family units uh I forget the project on US1 just north of Tranquility that is a p PD planned apartment complex it's all apartments um so all we're asking for is it's consistency in the interpretation of that part of it you know why is why are we going to be asked to be held to a standard requiring multiple different housing products in there when that's not the standard that's been applied on these other projects um we do feel there's a different there is a variety of style there's one bedrooms two bedrooms and three bedrooms and if you want a single family home you can go directly into Windover farms and move in there there is a that this provides a variety of housing needs in that area um you know they there's commentary that we didn't address the urban sprawl criteria and that was specifically uh brought up in the direct test testimony and it's also brought up in the in the staff report this will not result in urban sprawl Mr Knight mcnight Mr steel and the applicant all provided testimony as to the strong market demand the positive economic and fiscal impacts of this project those include you know the direct investment of I think the testimony was approximately $70 million into building this project and you know with all due respect to the prior commentary on the tax appraisers and the collections the number Mr steel the expert testimony provided were those pulled from similar apartment projects that were first put on the tax rooll last year so that tax appraiser she sets those numbers based upon the number of units not the number of buildings or the acreage of the project it depends on a variety of items the number of units the age of the product the rent that those product charges uh so there's a lot more than just the number of units and then finally you know the final comment at that staff requested some more information was some more specific information is how the project protects the health safety and Welfare to a greater extent than the standard code Mr McKnight's report directly addressed that in detail it includes such Provisions as reducing the expected traffic counts that would be generated by the existing code if that's built it reduce the maximum building coverage uh allowed on the site below that which would be allowed under the the existing codes it reduced the maximum lot coverage it provided great greater open space than required by code it would remove the urban blight that exists there now it increases the tax base greater than a commercial project would and you know as we discussed it removes a a potential large liability to the city to have to relocate that sewer and reuse line in the event that a project um that that sewer line would interfere with a future project and this applicant is willing to modify that easement and remove that issue upon uh building permits and site plan approval and that way the city can take that potentially liability off its book forever you know we have our engineer here he's if you if you want him to he can provide the testimony as to it but it's about A5 to10 million expected cost that is the city's to Bear if that line has to be relocated due to Future development this development allows us to put that to bed that is no longer a city's problem um you just have one quick moment to check my notes to see if I missed everything but I think I can wrap up in two minutes if you guys don't have anything additional on top of that member Nelson I do have one question yes ma'am for the engineer talking about the lines that may need to be relocated I'm sorry the engineer talking about the lines that need to be relocated could we have him talk about it for two minutes absolutely it's your discretion um re while he's walking up I will make one more comment and uh he can speak to it too on the uh buffering and setbacks you know I think the closest building of height here would be correct me if I'm wrong but I think it was well over a football Field's distance from these houses and we're maintaining the mature vegetation and just to reiterate that previously we provided and put into the evidence a line of sight exhibit showing you know what that would look like um with that I'll let Reed talk to the Sewer yes uh Reed Thomas I am a civil engineer for the proposed development as Cole had mentioned the existing utility eement that is on the site has stipulation that if it will impact the future development of that property then the city would be responsible for relocating those lines additionally it states that those utility lines could be relocated Elsewhere on our property so with the information we have at this time we've looked at potential other alternate routings and we've estimated an approximate construction cost from anywhere from $3 to $8 million the heavy portion of that cost would be relocating those utility lines across I95 of course dot is not going to allow disruption of their traffic therefore those lines would have to be directional drilled underneath and that is a heavy undertaking cost wise permanent cost engineering engineering design wise what are the chances of that happening well with the proposed development we currently have we are avoiding those utility easements and we are not proposing to relocate those utility lines I can't speak on future development of this property thank you y unless you guys have any questions for me that would uh conclude our rebuttal and comment any questions all right we're good thank you thank you uh go ahead Vice may I guess it's time for me to speak okay hold on sorry didn't R where we're at is uh at this time if the rebuttal is finished we will close public comment and open discussion against with council members no additional evidence may be introduced okay so we open discussion with council members all right continue vice mayor yes as I stated it I'm just a country fellow from Texas trying to figure out how you city folks work and um I don't like the hotels that are close to the freeway on the west side of the freeway so but that's me that because I like I like uh to see the beauty I wrote one word that that I saw that as I heard all of the conversation everybody pleading their case and you got did a wonderful job both sides but I like that word gateway gateway to Nature and I and I think part of what I'm supposed to do here today is try to figure out what I want Titusville to look like in the future what the citizen had hired kind of elected me to do to just Place Safeguard over Titusville and uh keep it as as close to Nature and beautiful place to come in as a as I possibly can do I travel a lot and I've I've traveled all over the world and I travel down 95 and I just don't like the look of buildings right close to 95 I don't like that look and this is not something that uh that uh because of what has been said if you can talk to a few people in this room today they could tell you these were my thoughts 6 weeks ago I I have a tendency when I make up my mind I'm that stubborn guy from Texas when I uh make up my mind on something you you really have to have a good argument for me to change it and I see Titusville as a beautiful city I like Windover you know if it wasn't so much water out there mosquitoes I would have build out there you know but it's too much water and mosquitoes uh I like the the new project that uh uh Cole is is presenting and I I think it's beautiful I just my opinion it's it's uh I want that property to to house something else other than an apartment complex that's that's my thoughts uh that's my thoughts on it and it's because I as traveling all over the United States traveling all through big cities when I go to New York and when I go to Philadelphia if I'm on 95 I'm passing down the freeway and I can see people uh uh uh laundry hanging on on the clothes line I don't like that and the gateway to Titus will mean something to me it means that Titus fi is it's a gateway to Nature you don't want to go have to go on the other side of the building to see nature you want nature to be right there in the front of you and as I've heard the argument I I'm I'm both sides I think you you had your ducks in a row you did have your ducks in a row but I had looked at this over the last 6 weeks I got enough paperwork in the front of me and that could you know I could probably keep warm in the wintertime for a long time but uh to have uh to to do that for me for Titusville for the future of Titusville uh to the the rest of the people uh who are here on the Das uh I think we should we only have 20% of commercial property and those I think we should keep it that way as long as we can if there becomes a extra need for people to have housing because of overpopulation and stuff like that then when over I'm coming at you because there would be a great need for housing but just to do it to for for Investments and for property uh I think that that my thoughts is that the property should stay on the commercial side more than residential that's my thoughts and if you want me to make a motion on we got lots to go member Cole I have a different perspective on this and my perspective is that land has been vacant for a very very long time uh we just had our budget meeting last week and right now you know our taxes that we receive from that property are pretty much nothing I my concern is we can say we want to hold on and have commercial there but what commercial are we having do we have you know as the old saying a a burden hand is worth two in the bush uh we have somebody that wants to develop the land the other thing that pushes me is the fact that if we do get commercial on that property that we have to relocate that sewer line that is additional monies that like I said we had our budget meeting last week that is monies that we don't have and that we would have to take away city services from our citizens that are taxpayers within Titusville that concerns me I actually walked that site about three weeks ago when I went on a ride along with tpd and we went to a UNH house site out there so I I uh I think we on Council has have a fiscal responsibility and my thoughts are we have some someone wanting to develop that property we're going to infuse additional monies into our tax coffers and I have a problem denying this uh member Nelson I sort of agree with member Cole and in part because you know Sarah and I walk the neighborhoods of Titusville and when I think about it and think about adding taxes to the people I'm really hesitant and this is what it means if potentially we're going to have3 to 8 million that we're going to lay on our people and I got to tell you Vicky came to to me with an idea for Royal Oak she came to me with a proposal which may or may never work I don't know we'll see but she had an idea of how she who was going to pay for it and I appreciate that so you come to us and I'm like it would cost each of your households $10,000 to cover this potentially but you have no idea on how we're going to pay for it because this what you want and to me that just sort of yeah uh we have residents in our city that can't afford another couple hundred a year um bottom line so that bothers me and then we have the testimony uh whether you like it or not that high-intensity commercial is not going to work there and you know thinking of the property I'm like I don't see a work in there so there's no access to 50 um this would allow us to physically or potentially or remove a liability and save a conservation easement you're talking about 25 acres and approximately N9 or 10 Acres being used and everything else being left um so I hate to tell you rem me here but I'm sort of more on this side I'm from scottp but that that does bother me and that concerns me yeah um as noted today zoning is presumed correct unless substantial change in recent years has occurred I think it's uh Zone correctly also noted uh commercially zoned property is limited in our city and uh commercial projects already been approved for this area a commercial project's already been approved for this area so to me to use an old adage if it looks commercial like a commercial Zone it's already been approved for commercial project and the Zone commercial it's probably not residential um I would say and and I felt this way for a long time if I was to look for a residential area I 95 and Highway 50 um I would I would say that I think that that's not where I want to go I think it uh is more appropriate for Comm commercial and to be more specific perhaps some kind of a truck stop right now and I get there's there's not a lot going on there but for the people who have that approved they've got an approved project right now and I haven't seen a place yet where people who want to do a project can't get it done and I happen to think that trying to put a residential in there is almost like magic it just doesn't look residential to me it doesn't feel residential I'll go back to zoning is presumed correct unless substantial change in recent years has occurred several people people said that I I had read that earlier in my readings and and I tend to agree with that um you know the Gateway is great traffic's an issue I I don't care what traffic study done there's some kind of effect on on the neighborhoods uh with traffic however I'm more focused on the fact that that is a approved commercial property uh Zone excuse me and there's a approved project that could go in there and it's not residential and and that's kind of where I'm at so I think cards are on the table member stok yep no I'll go this has been um one of probably the most difficult uh applications for me personally I think since we've been on Council we see a lot of um lately at least a lot of more applications for land use changes and rezonings and you guys know this I bring this map with me every time because I feel like the decisions we makeup here really do impact our vision for the community and what Titusville will look like I I've said it numerous times um and it's already been disclosed numerous times I want our commercial space that is probably my number one fear is US losing our commercial space um I've also kind of to the mayor's point when I think of multif family I don't think right off 95 um I I have a hard time with that I am starting to see it pop up in other areas but again and this was kind of to the vice mayor's point when you're coming out I I Envision commercial space getting off 95s people stopping picking up something to eat what have you um not really pulling off and then living there um so that that's been one aspect of it uh another aspect that's been very tough is that we've done up here is removing a lot of blight from our city um if you look back to even when some of us were first elected in 2016 there was a lot of blight and we have done a lot of Redevelopment so I think about that what again what do we want when people are coming in do we want vacant rundown areas or do we want um developments in whatever that may be housing residential commercial space um industrial space um the other aspect I keep thinking in the back of my head too is this won't be our last land use change uh request uh I think I don't know if you guys saw Sherwood that even though that's County you know they just had their pnz meeting this week um so that's happening we know what's going on with Royal Oak that should be um I'm sure there will be an application for that um among other land use changes so I I I think about these things when I'm making decisions of what makes sense for our community where where does multif family make sense where does single family make sense where does industrial make sense where does commercial make sense um that's constantly in the back of my head um which leads into I want this to stay commercial then you add on a whole another layer from the state that now says your commercial space can be multif family if you do affordable housing um and I know there's been different arguments here on as to whether or not that can happen that's something I've researched thoroughly um and that is something to be concerned about here um and it's it it's very possible to have happen um and so that that comes to mind for me when I start thinking about okay if live local does happen what are those requirements there um they have a 20% open space requirement but this PD requires a 35% so maybe there'll be less open space if they do live local so then then again that decision somewhat taken away from us um so yeah all these things kind of come into play as I'm making my decisions but looking for today and I feel like what's been presented for us um I have a hard time approving it just because what I feel firmly with I want that space to stay commercial I I feel like that's what's best for our community I feel like that's what our residents would want um whether or not it stays that way I I don't know I don't know if it will go live local um but I feel like that's just what I have to do today given the information and to to kind of reiterate you know and and uh Vice said it great presentation nice project and all that but it's not the right place in my mind and that's what we we're up here to do again I I think it just says so much zooing Z zooing zoning is presumed correct unless substantial change in recent years um and then on the the flip side and and certainly a lot of great things have been done over there but um I I know that I personally don't want to be 165,000 people like Palm Bay um I don't want to grow to I don't even want to be the way Vieira is going I don't even want to be Vieira so so I get that and and I'm the one that says an awful lot of times we're not that sleepy little town anymore we're growing we're thriving but we need to grow at our pace and uh you know you know whatever that number was you gave Rob and it was like wow yeah and they've got issues down there I don't even want to deal with um but that's not the Crux of where I'm at where I'm at is this is a commercial property we don't need and it's been said over here I just feel like that's what it's supposed to be it's done nothing in my mind to change again it's kind of like it the old duck thing if it looks like a duck quacks like a duck walks like a duck it's probably a duck you well if it does all the things it's supposed to do commercially including be approved for a commercial project already then it's probably commercial and it needs to stay commercial because we're losing our commercial area and and I want to keep that all together but uh we don't want to be Palm Bay so uh um are we to the point of a motion I think everybody said something just want to remind the council this is a motion on the land use which is your legislative decision after this we will move on to the resoning issue well she's not going to make it so member soal do you want to try to make that uh move move to deny small scale amendment number 3-2 022 Bristol Titusville ordinance number 19-22 4 and 20 no we're only dealing with ordinance number 1924 at this time okay 19-22 4 um based upon the findings and recommendations for denial as set forth in the staff's report I have a motion I have a second I need I have a motion and a second uh roll call vote vice mayor Robinson yes member stokel yes member Cole no member Nelson no mayor diesel yes passes three [Music] [Applause] to2 City attorney uh yes sir at this time we'll move on to resoning issue which is ordinance number 202 20 20124 um when to advised Council that um since the land use was denied the current land use of commercial is existing on this property and according to Florida Statutes 163 3194 Council cannot approve a resoning if the pro proposed zoning and is inconsistent with the existing L just for the record I'd like to make a statement that according to the Matrix in your code the PD designation is consistent with the underlying land use of commercial for the record all right uh City attorney so we need a second motion yes sir this time it' be appropriate to make a motion with regard to ordinance number 20 2024 number stal well with that I would like to ask Brad to clarify what um Mr Oliver just said Mr Oliver is referring to a zoning and land use Matrix if you have in the city's code identifies land uses and which zoning districts are appropriate underneath there's also another section of the code that talks about plan development zoning that's in section 33-3 A the last paragraph says all uses permitted in a plan development shall be consistent with the comprehensive plan land use designation for the subject site including densities and intensities of use So based on that we as I stated before because it's commercial land use on this property the proposed resoning is for multif family development I would consider that to be inconsistent with the comprehensive plan number toal uh move to deny ordinance number 20-20 24 amending ordinance number 5-1 1993 based on uh the Nal set forth uh in the staff report I have a motion for M go ahead more okay the question was whether you know it's not compatible with the land use I just want to make sure I I didn't quite hear the statement whether or not right well what's what okay because again you cannot approve land use a Zing that is inconsistent with the land use correct yeah so based on it's not compatible with the existing land use correct if that was your I wouldn't making a motion for you I just want to make sure I understood and your I said St findings but I've clarified want to clarify which findings you were yes member stokel made the motion vice mayor second uh vice mayor makes a second roll call vote member stokel yes member Cole no member Nelson yes vice mayor diesel yes vice mayor I mean I'm sorry mayor dies vice mayor Robinson we're good yes good thank you right thing to [Applause] do all right City attorney I always turn to you is there anything else we need to do on that right now the next not on that you you have concluded that item the next item is Item B which is comprehensive plan text Amendment transmitt we don't need to do that which based upon your vote there's nothing to transmit so I would say that would be moot all right with that we're going to take a five minute recess e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e have to ask for an extension yeah oh wow all right meeting back in order M Nelson move to extend the meeting to 11 o' second I have a motion in a second to extend the meeting to 11:00 all those in favor say yes opposed city manager yes sir um we are all the way to petitions and requests of the public non-agenda items I see nobody who hadn't already spoken so AR spoken thing mayor and uh Council reports I'm going to go ahead and give mine first real quick so I don't forget to do this because can we shut that door maybe um thank you so this is an FYI I will be coming from Boston from my wife's retirement trip she plays this real well we as soon as she retired she was supposed to retire but the person they hired she had to train they didn't hire her till late so she just really got retired this week so anyway we took a very short two- day three-day retirement cruise but now we're going to take a retirement trip for her um to Boston I've never been to Boston and that's kind of a bucket list for me and go to Fenway Park and all that stuff okay so the only place we could put it because she has this southwest ticket that has to be used before the end of August so long story short we're really sneaking it in there I will be flying back in from Boston at the the date of the next meeting I plan to be here vice mayor be prepared I plan to be here but we also have a stop over in Baltimore so you never know I will keep city manager up to um and all that stuff but uh it's I don't want everybody to think that oh he's skipping and no I I plan to be here but I've never tried to do a meeting the day that we're flying in town so I wanted that to be known before we came in I wasn't here tell him to make it short so what now short meeting we got a lot of catching up to do yeah he's got a lot of catching up to do so one every time I'm not here one of those you know vice mayor got aide here in 45 minutes yeah you had four things thing this one won't be I'm sure and I hope to hope to hope to be here cuz nothing else you hate to get stuck in an airport so just wanted you all know that and uh congratulations to my wife on retirement unfortunately we've got to use these tickets before August gets up all right so that's uh that's pretty much it for me so let's bounce to member sto first yep I have uh two items that I would like to see if we can seek advisability on um one uh specifically dealing with Liv local and the mixed use component that projects will have to um incorporate I would like staff to look at potentially redefining mixed use for us and the reason being I feel like um as we've heard about or discussed it with a couple projects my fear is uh the mixed use won't be the mixed use that we would potentially want uh potentially just a park or something that we don't really feel so I would like them to maybe investigate and look into it a little bit to see if that mix use could potentially be retail or something that we would have citizens frequent um don't know what that would look like but I would like to ask for advisability on that I have no problem with looking at it I do sort of like the idea of mixtures including a park um because to me that's something that benefits the residents as long as it's but it's I I guess my thing yes I want it to benefit the residents that are there but also be something that other residents within Titusville could go and visit I don't want to see them just put up a park bench for instance and I I would just like further clarification on that or what our options would be I think that was the intent of the law that was passed I generally have never had a problem with any advisability and I don't want to overburden staff any time I mentioned it already so no but the point I'm making is I I it's hard for me to be opposed to an advisability they always come back with such great information and shed light on things I didn't even know so I'm I'm going to be for it and I'll let everybody else decide what they want to say on this so let me go grab Brad off of the cliff so he doesn't jump out the Second Story window as as time permits and and I know we have a lot going on but I I think that's something especially as we potentially will get more projects um that we could clarify well and I don't think the advisability has to be you know you got to do this two weeks I mean just just something to something that's just not my idea and I'm H yes I just need so do we need to get a motion on that yes sir so that would be my motion okay member stoko made a motion for the advisability member Nelson second all those in favor say yes opposed thank you member stoko okay the second one I did not ask staff about this one because I just thought about it but before covid we used to have a pastor come and do a prayer during our meeting instead of our moment of silence and we did that during covid but I wanted to see if it was be possible to potentially look at having that back I really liked it I liked seeing different pastors from the churches in our community um to see if that's something that the pastors would be interested in doing again for our meetings city manager I know you have history and I'm all I mean you know I'm all for that sort of thing uh for sure but I know that I was around here not here but I was in in Titusville during the days when we had some Wiccan issues yes and as we all know and I'm all fortunate I'm not saying let's not take the chance remember we had this discussion two or three years ago it comes back I am not matter of fact you we try and maybe see how it works out and see because let's face it we have some legal issues if somebody like that does want to come in front of us and that kind of ruined my whole meeting yep and then I would say we revisit it if it does become an issue but I I really enjoyed it I I we we when we were on Council we never had an issue I I just kind of when we were on Council we didn't I have personally prayed did that yes numerous yeah I think I remember you here a few times so uh remember Cole my only concern would be that we need to make sure we cover every religion you know Christian Muslim Jewish what we had in the past we had a list and if pastors wanted to get on it we rotate through it I remember feeling better even after they did it you kind of got a little poke okay let's go yeah I I really like I think there's something I remember Pastor linc's doing it a few times but do remember you you can't pick and choose correct the county the county was in that issue and they had we've not done what the count we get advisability on this or do we just say let's try it or count yeah I've gotten a letter from the so what what I would like sir if possible would be to do advisability to come back with the yeah because it's been such a long time since we've done it what what was our procedures in the past what um what would you like to see and and then I think that's a good idea instead of just jumping in there let's go ahead and advisability for that and move that direction think that that's awesome totally want to prayer but I know that so that would be my motion then advisability on potentially having a pastor do a prayer as we've done in the past prior to co there's a motion I have a second so let me make sure Wana doesn't fall off the Second Story window on this one sorry I have a motion in a second all those in favor say yes yes opposed we will get an advisability on prayer before and my last item not advisability just informational uh the vice mayor and I will be heading down to the florid Liga City's annual conference starting tomorrow um and hope to represent you all well we're excited um it's their biggest conference that they hold each year so lot of information yes you good good well well done member stoko vice mayor remember last night was having M struggle and I was having uh uh roast beef I think or prime rib and chicken last night and it was a good meeting the presentation I had seen it before uh matter of fact it came to Rotary and did talking about the uh aquarium the aquarium over on the uh Cape canaval yeah we saw at Rotary we got it at Rotary yeah yeah we we had that and and that's good the um that's the area I retired from so having aquarium or my ship tied up right across the street oh wow yeah so but that's all I've done other than uh you know that other stuff that we having to do uh uh uh uh to uh uh now because of it's the time of the year but that's that's all I have how about your placement at the dinner are you moving up the tables and all that you've been there a while no but I got well but I got I have to tell you that she was so polite last night o she came by and she said she hasn't M St no did she said she said Joe you know where I'm going me she was going to the Head table well that might have been a little bit of you know yeah there we go all right uh member Nelson what he was good so remember last meeting Tony had that idea of we need to get what we're doing for the river out to the public National nights out is October first and so I talked to Scott about it I talked to Amy about it she is going to ask the different agencies to maybe put a table um out to sort of let people know what what's happening with the Lagoon uh you know because I sort of get tired of people saying oh nothing's going on you know blah blah blah and uh maybe having public works or um some of the city employees come down with different um boo setting up talking about what's going on what we're doing I think that'd be really nice and the other thing I wanted to say is the three rotary clubs are going together to do a spelling beat you're working on that no no joke no no so it will benefit um the playhouse and the boys and girls club I think it'll be fun the all of us are doing it unfortunately unforunately even even those of us that can't I'm I'm sitting at my team's table anyway so uh two of the guys from the playhouse are going to MC so I think it'll be fun it probably be a little crazy um but yeah I think it'll be worth it very good member call okay next okay I oh thanks a lot Mr may I uh just looking over you I just want to commend uh uh Titusville police department they formed a Community Service Unit made up of five people led by Lieutenant burn and I went on a ride along with them and we visited several of the unhoused sites the thing that they do that makes you feel good is they don't just go out and rast these people out they go in and they offer they give them a pamplet and they offer them uh that they're it's a very humanitarian approach if they want help with addiction if they need to go to Parish or wherever they need to go they are there I actually witnessed one guy that we that they were working with and that unit that he has is uh they're pretty cool and I I would recommend that if anybody got a chance to go on it it would be it's oh good it's an It's actually an eye opener to see we went to one site that up on the tree was a security camera really a security camera and the thing that's that's scary is they have generators out there and they use barbecue grills and it's in the woods you can't see it one of the sites is right across the street from the library and you know when we get into a dry season if you're using a generator or something there is a possibility to have fire so they they're doing a great job and I just wanted to thank the tpd for forming that Squad and uh the that they're doing to our community doing for our community is fantastic very well done city manager yes sir just uh our uh attached is the third quarter FY 24 um strategic plan accomplishments for your information and then the two budget hearing dates um are 12th September 2024 at 5:30 and the final hearing is 26 September at 5:30 p.m. and that will finish up the budget subject to your questions very good City attorney yes sir I have one agenda item for council's action and that is with regard to approving settlement of litigation in the duet versus city of Titusville case um in which the claimed is seeking compensation for his medical expenses and injuries sustained as a result of a city garbage truck backing into his vehicle um I have three report in there that details the uh mediation resulted an attentative agreement where the city would pay $127,500 to S A litigation and according to City's defense Council Joshua Walker and your risk management department they agree that this uh settlement should be approved and is in the best interest of the program to settle the claim so we're seeking for a motion from Council to approve the settlement in the due set case I need a motion I'll make the motion uh approve the settlement of litigation in ducet versus the city of Titusville and authorize defense Council city manager or design to execute the necessary settlement documents that's a pretty in-depth motion for you sir that's my first one M Nelson I have a motion in a second all those in favor say yes yes opposed passes anything else Brad anything you want to say no sir you want to go home all right meeting you J