##VIDEO ID:NuXyW37RJMk## okay we're about to begin good evening uh this meeting of the planning zoning Commission of October 2nd 2024 will come to order please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance Pledge of alance to United States of America rep for stands Nation IND andice rad call please Lori chairman Richardson here Vice chairman Eton secretary Grant here member Childs here member Gad member fa president member moso here alternate member Findler alternate member Rogers school board member mclin we do have a quorum and we don't normally um have a moment of silence but but um I'd suggest we take a moment of silence and remember the devastation of our state the West Coast of Florida Georgia South Carolina especially North Carolina and at done true Devastation it destroyed my cousin's house in Bradington and uh we used to have a cabin in the mountains of uh North Carolina and I don't know if it's still exist or not and I've seen some of the videos that I imagine all of y'all had that people have had no drinking water or anything for 5 days so let's take a moment of silence in respect for them okay uh approval there is no um approval of minutes of September 18th theyve um been a copy of the minutes distributed to you and they are in the packet any additions or deletions from the minutes anyone care to make a motion Mr facon I move that we that we approve the minutes of September 28th 2024 as written is there a second I'll second second by member moso any discussion all agreed say I I I'll opposed the minutes are approved uh next item is the Titusville plane language that I brought up and I would suggest we have that last come after item uh 10 D there may be some discussion does everyone agree do we have to vote on it as long as you get consensus that's fine yeah consent okay next item is item 10A resoning number 32024 Eddie before you begin that Mr chairman there is a petition and requests um in the agenda that starts oh yes it's changed to just remind the members of the audience the petitions and request is a section of the agenda that is for non-agenda items only okay is there anyone that wants to speak under citizens public pres and press anyone to speak okay now we'll go to item 10A Eddie thank you chairman good evening Commissioners item 10A begins on page 20 of 87 of tonight's packet the Titusville Resort and destination master plan was approved in October 2021 by ordinance 29 2021 and a site plan was approved by the city in October of 2023 after those approvals the city's Land Development regulations Section 2872 assisted living facility was amended to permit assisted living facilities in the Urban Village UV Zing District currently the approved master plan provides a total of 340 multif family residential units for building F and Building G combined the requested Amendment proposes 100 Assisted Living units in building F and 240 multif family residential units in Building G development review procedures manual 6 section 6.3 Amendment to the master plan sets forth criteria for minor and substantial modifications since the approval of the original master plan in ordinance number 29 2021 a minor modification was made to reconfigure buildings c d and e located on the west half of the property whereas the original layout proposed L-shaped buildings the buildings were reconfigured in a linear fashion and building e was relocated above both Building C and D and the courtyard between them in addition Building B was reduced in size by 3, 632 ft and no longer Projects South towards the existing office building on the adjacent property I did want to point the commission to a couple of uh pages in your agenda packet the first being section uh or I'm sorry page 23 on page 23 we have the general information um the staff analysis which uh most of that was read the uh additional information is the approved building Heights and so you can see the tallest building height in the approved master plan is 90 ft and then below that the table at the bottom of page 24 is the proposed amended uh building Heights the tallest being 75 ft and a conditional use permit number 2022 was approved with conditions to allow uh additional Building height according to the approved master plan the total number of required parking spaces for the site is 1094 spaces of which 44 spaces are required to be designed as accessible parking spaces complying with the Americans with Disabilities Act Ada in addition a development Review Committee waiver was approved in 2023 to allow reduced parking space dimensions the proposed master plan Amendment demonstrates A reduced parking demand due to the change of uses and provides a total of 992 parking spaces of which 41 spaces must be Ada Ada spaces this reduction in the number of parking spaces may require a waiver from the DRC the proposed Alf must meet the limitations of the use as described in the Land Development regulations Section 28- 72 building floor plans demonstrating compliance with the indoor common area requirements and the minimum required floor area per living unit will be required to be submitted during site plan review in addition section 2872 requires the ALF to provide a minimum of 50 squ ft per bed of outdoor recreation area this outdoor recreation area is in addition to and should not be credited from any required open space for the overall site no changes are proposed to the conditions of approval that were adopted with the current master plan ordinance the conditions of approval will carry forward forward as conditions of approval of the amended master plan and just to summarize the reason why this is being presented to you is because uh the original set the original master plan um specified which type which uses will be in each of the buildings and since this is going to be changing the uses by adding the AL use to building f um it revie it requires review by pnz and Council um last I just wanted to summarize the findings of Staff that's on page 29 the request findings the request is to allow a new use assisted living facility which constitutes a substantial modification to the master plan and requires approval by city council the request does not propose a change from the current Urban Village zoning classification an assisted living facility is a permitted use in the UV zoning District the request does not increase the number of res residential units or square footage of non-residential uses proposed for the site and staff recommends approval of the sub substantial modification to the Titusville Resort and destination master plan thank you are there any questions of Mr Galindo uh member of GAD um I had some email correspondence with Eddie and um I I think I want to frame later questions with a question to begin with the application makes the proposal subject to review as you introduced it you had an existing approved development and that's being deviated from for purposes which is a good plan by the way um but it's being deviated so it's a resubmittal of the whole information packet we got inclusive of all all the development standards within it that's all subject to our overview tonight for recommendation or is it we're only focused on putting in an ACL within the project the master plan as a whole is being reviewed tonight but the only change that's being proposed is the change to the uses and the height for buildings correct the reduction in height okay thank you um member Grant why is this call a resoning good question so the master plan that was approved previously was tied as a concept to the Urban Village zoning that was approved previously so in order to amend that master plan that's tied to the current zoning ordinance on the property it's a rezoning to to change that concept plan but we're not rezoning we're it's just technically it is it's we're not rezoning by changing the district to a different District it's a rezoning to the same district but changing the conditions or concept plan that's tied to that ordinance so it'll get a new ordinance number okay um while while you here page 26 um lines let we say 38 through 42 is that a new condition that you were speaking of here in addition to the conditions that you already have this is it's not a new condition in that um that requirement is tied to the AL use in general throughout the land development regulations the previous master plan did not propose an Alf so that limitation or that condition was not included I thought the assistant living was already in this in this plan initially it was a different type of care um that that is more it's um more more similar to a multif family use and so what they're proposing now is more uh is more intensive with the care okay all right thanks for the explanation thank you member of muskus so yeah Eddie you mentioned that um or the report mentioned that they may require a DRC review for the parking spaces um when you gave that number 992 um is that let me see how to phrase this so we're going from 340 to 240 multif family which would that reduce the amount of parking spots needed I mean I know the 100 is going over to the ALF um but Alf typically doesn't require as many parking spaces is so would that number go down from 992 that's correct uh so the applicant provided a parking demand study and they might be able to explain that better how that analysis was run um but in general because the number of multif family units is being reduced and then the conversion of not really conversion but the addition of the AL um you're right that the use an assisted living facility is going to have less of a working demand than a multif family use so it's kind of algebra um x's and y's and figuring all that out so they might be able to explain it better but that's why there's uh less parking proposed in this amended plan and um and they still will need to go before the DRC to get even more reduced parking spots if they want to or um because it said it may require for the sorry for the 992 will that require the DRC review or it's possible so parking um in our code we have a minimum and a maximum number of parking spaces some some developments uh request additional parking than what the code allows and I believe the number is 125% above the minimum is what you're allowed to to have without any type of uh waiver process um and so any flexibility if you're going too low on parking or too high on parking would require some type of of waiver request the reason why uh we state that in the report is because a waiver my understanding is a waiver was previously approved uh to reduce the number of parking in the original and further ring number even ified because of the of use that's going to demand less parking um it's still a reduction in the number of parking spaces for the master plan and so it could require that DRC review thank you that makes sense sure member grod I was going to ask in the development report or in the staff analysis it talks about reduction in spaces change in use but it also mentions size that there was a subject to this being a reduction in parking space size or did I misread that that's correct there was a previous approval to reduce the number uh or excuse me the dimensions of the parking stalls the parking spaces and the basis for that former approval for parking space size reduction what was the difference between the standard code size and what the applicant's proposing the um typically what we see is a request down to 9 by8 is the smallest allowed and that's um usually in concert with a development providing some type of low impact development um and so um it's it's what it is is a request to provide some sight flexibility and reduce the the amount of impervious surface that's required to provide the parking in order to U either have more building area or more outdoor recreation area and so it's just um a flexibility and the city standard is 10 x 20 okay thank you for regular spaces I should clarify M Charles this might sound like a weird question but for the 50 square feet per bed for outdoor recreation I know this sounds weird but would say if you had building and you want to put that that recreational area on top of that building you know would that count like is that something possible like if you had a you know a Turf on top of a a building and it was still Outdoors does that count as a as an outdoor recreation area it's an interesting hypothetical I don't believe the code addresses whether it can be outside on top of the building um so it's thought just thought it'd be an interesting way because it seems like 50 Feet's a lot but I don't I mean obviously they need some place to go outside I just try to imagine it but okay thank you any other questions before uh we call the applicant to address we um I need to disclose something and I think a couple other people do I was at the Titusville Mall debate Friday uh Friday evening and uh uh talk to Mr Mr Wright we did not discuss anything to do with this we're discussing how hot it was in the mall that was a limitation of our discussion does anybody anyone else want to disclose anything yes um I actually I have had lunch with Mr Wright to discuss the debate and talk about those things and I was also at that debate I was at the debate we did not talk really about that but um yeah okay the applicants can speak now hi good evening I'm Chelsea Anderson I'm an attorney at Mangrove title and legal uh 1530 US Highway 1 Rock Ledge and I'm here with Jesse Wright um on behalf of the property owner Titusville Mall LLC and JW Resort LLC so um thank you Eddie for the the staff report um he covered a lot so I'll try to address some of the questions um that came up uh basically like Eddie said we are here requesting a substantial modification to the existing approved master plan for the Titusville Mall property um currently the plan has buildings FNG um both as multifam uh uses um building F was specifically a senior it's Independent Living um so it's basically an apartment or a condo type thing that's limited to seniors um just age restricted but it doesn't have the type of care and amenities that uh an assisted living facility would have and it's also not licensed through the state as an assisted living facility um so uh as Eddie uh said buildings have and G currently are approved with just multifam 340 units combined um we'd like for building F to be changed to assisted living facility specific use with 100 beds and then 240 units um in Building G that will remain uh normal multif family type units um so we're not proposing to increase any residential units with this um we're not increasing any non-residential square footage with the request um as the site or as the staff report notes uh the impacts from the request are actually would be reducing the demand on water sewer Transportation because the AL use uh puts low lower Demand on those Services than a a typical uh multif family use wood um we are running a site plan modification because the existing site plan is approved without the AL use it's approved with a multif family use um so we have a a concurrent site plan modification running at the same time as this application before you today um and uh the the staff report notes that there are specific requirements in the code for Al uses and one of those requirements is the um additional Outdoor Recreation Area provided solely for the AL use and it can't double dip with the rest of the site so this would be in addition to what's required for the overall site development um and we are working with staff and showing in our our site plan modification that we will meet that requirement um with the outdoor recreation use we do have proposed um some of that will be you know not rooftop but part of the you know elevated um like a floor of the building um and staff has said that that would count as long as it's not enclosed and it's it is amenitized um you know you can't just have a patio with nothing in it there has to be um you know tables and benches things like that to amenze it as an outdoor area um to count towards that outdoor recreation that we need to provide um on the building Heights so yes we did not propose a change of the building Heights with this the site plan itself shows and I know it's not before you today but we are actually not building the the buildings to the maximum height that's allowed in the master plan um building F the main roof deck is only 44t and then Building G um I think the main roof deck is 62 feet and then there's some areas I think that are it might get into the 70 foot range but um we're not utilizing there's not 90 foot buildings on the on the site um and then okay the parking so yes under the current existing site plan that is approved without the ALF use we did request um a DRC waiver administratively and we did get that approved to reduce the size of the parking spaces um and then also to reduce the number of the parking spaces and in exchange for that we incorporated low impact development um uh you know aspects of the of the project um and we have an entire uh recorded covenants against the property that say we have to provide the low impact development and designating a maintenance entity all of that has been done um what Eddie pointed out in the staff report is since we are changing the use to Al um and we are reducing the number of multif family units we actually are also we're reducing the nonresidential square footage I think by 3600 square feet in one of the other buildings um obviously we're recalculating what the required parking for all of these use changes are under the code and then what were able to provide on the site um with the constraints of the site my traffic engineer is telling me that under code we only are required to have 951 spaces and we are providing 945 they are at the reduced size um so they're we're not sure if the staff is going to require us to get another DRC waiver to reduce the size again because we did change you know we're modifying the site plan so we're working through that with staff right now um that will all be at the site planning level if we have to get another waiver then we will comply with the requirements for that um but this was literally we were emailing about this with an hour ago before the hearing started so um we're still working through that um but beyond the the technical details of the site plan you know my client has looked at the the the area he's done market analysis he found that Al would be an appropriate use for this site it's something that there's a need for um in this city and you know frankly throughout Bard so that everybody's not going to Orlando to you know find care for their loved ones that need it um if you've driven by the project you'll see hopefully that there's there's a lot of movement going on we are full steam ahead we are very excited about this our team has been working very hard staff has been working extremely hard to help us make this a reality so we're we're very excited to be here and um we uh you know hope that you will support this request to add the AL use um and thank you for your time if you have any questions for me I'll be here um and Jesse would like to say a few things about the AL use and the project in general um as well member yeah I'll wait for for Jesse to speak okay okay no problem any other questions thank you thank you you want me to hold something we can't see it we can't see it I good evening Jesse R 3461 South Washington Avenue have you ever met an attorney that knows so much about the project ever she knows a lot and I appreciate you so basically if I can just approach there and I just show you what we're basically doing is replacing this building which is the can you stay close to the microphone yeah that's F okay so this building was a six-story building ilf all independent senior living and we're changing it to a forest story bringing down shrinking him by two floors uh 75 assisted living and 25 memory care that's all we're basically doing which is really a need we've done a marketing study and Analysis that the city really needs and assisted living uh more than ilf that's pretty much you have any questions on the on this picture but everything else basically the same this building here was uh seven story and now we're cutting it down to six everything else stays the same thank you um hold that thing up just uh I'm trying to orientate myself in that North northeast corner is that where the car washes now right okay and um we just took him out because he was ugly but other than that where's your chick leg going to be going we figed the residents going to wash their car go to t kingdom which is going to be changed to t kingdom but other than that we need those uh Parcels of Steal but um yeah the hotel is uh the pad is already ready as uh Chelsea mentioned um we're already moving forward as far as going from shovel ready to pad ready and so everything else basically the same there's just going to be a lot of ambulances going in and out and people checking in maybe not checking out but other than that everything else is going to be the same I'm sorry to say that but that's the fact remember faing the the ALF uh being that you guys are looking at doing an unlicensed Al so my question is what what drove the decision and I understand the marketing right but to Move It from multi residents to an unlicensed Al what was that decision like um and was the advantages what were the benefits to having an unlicensed Alf versus just taking the multif family leaving so and just conducting Al business well it is going to be a licensed by state it's not unlicensed okay okay I thought I heard say unlicensed that's why I asked the question oh so I was pointing out the difference between ilf and Alf because it the terminology is somewhat confusing ilf doesn't need State lure it's basically just an apartment or a multif family building that has a senior restriction on it um Alf does have to be you can't call something Al unless it's licensed as Alf by the state and it's actually a condition of the Land Development code requirements for Alf use in the zoning District that we have to get it licensed so we will it will definitely be licensed yes um I I forgot I also want to disclose that I was at the groundbreaking and got to shovel um some dirt that was really fun um so let me cover that for a second because the debate that is going to be a second debate coming up on the 19 was it sponsored by a different entity was it sponsored by tsvi mall LLC which has nothing to do with this project so we separated the two completely there was no discussion about this project in any other part of the debate I did make a little commercial to talk about the project but that was it it was really nothing else more than that I have another question um this might be a sore subject but could you give us an update on what's happening with Cumberland Farms okay uh so maybe you can just so Cumberland Farm which is on this in this corner right here has since 2002 uh it's been basically leaking and um and so we have not been able to come to any kind of agreement for them to take out their tanks and and replace it I try to get the city to go forward and to be part of this possible fight with Cumberland Farm but under the existing Administration the city backed out even though we went to the what is that name for the environc no it was oh the environmental board um Advisory Board here yeah Tec right right I went to that U meeting and I discuss it it was a unanimous vote I'm sorry was a unanimous vote to so that the city can write a very strong letter to Cumberland Farm to let them know that you need to do something I mean something is leaking for over 20 years and that's a subject that we're going to have to bring over with the new administration because of right now I don't think the existing Administration is going to want to do anything so we are expecting the city to be involved simply because of the fact that just because fdp says there this is their jurisdiction and C says well we don't want to touch it because that's not our jurisdiction I think the um the residents the Citizens need to be protected we don't know if there's gas coming out of the ground closer to right now this portion this portion here is where the Jazz and ballet is they've been there for like 20 years the kids go there at the ages of about 5 to about 12 so right now it's in the limbo this does not affect us as far as the phase one development but it is going to affect us when we go to the second phase we take out the rest of the m and I'm hoping that the uh the the uh the Water Act Clean Water Act is going to be hopefully approved at some point in time and that causes the city to be involved to basically go and do something when it comes to are you speaking about the Clean Water initiative correct that was on the pallet two years ago okay right right so I'm hoping that would make a big change but as far as you your question it has nothing to do with the phase one we have different uh phase one environmental report on the uh on the east side that um there is no issues with any of that otherwise we would have a problem with the lender member Grant secretary Grant the cumber and farm issue here correct me if I'm wrong but are you saying that there is um leakage of ha Haus material or substance in our uh water system here and no one is doing anything about it that is correct the contamination is already below the ground as you know the water flow goes from west to east goes right into the Lagoon yeah and um I don't want to mention any name but there were representative of the city that basically said they don't want to be involved you sleep maybe I shouldn't say anymore thank you sir maybe you shouldn't member grad uh good evening I'm GNA have a couple of questions for you if you wouldn't mind but first I'd like to ask Chelsea and time flies as it goes when you get older we have two Chelsea are you familiar what used to be the abbreviation or acronym lust program under the state leaky underground storage tank no sir um the reason I asked the question is that program may have sunsetted I know I was involved with it at a local government level the attorney representing you may be familiar with but at the time it clearly was an aggressive program to cause property owners to excav excavate their leaky underground storage tanks when they terine and the rest follow suit I'm surprised that FD would not have had some program replacing that for older gas stations so certainly it's something to explore I'm going to look into it myself to see what happened to the program but it was all joking aside I was a lust administrator so it's one of those things I like to say something important to be called I'm not familiar with the lust program I'm assuming it was sunsetted um FTE is this is under their jurisdiction the the current contamination that's um present in the groundwater um that is you know crossing the boundary into my client's property I know that they are working towards um no further action on it I they don't have a timeline as of yet um because Cumberland Farms is undertaking it themselves and so I'm not sure that they have stated a timeline I have not seen one that's sad because under the programs Administration owners of such facilities were required to monitor it turn in the monitoring report as soon as you determine the plume was going where it was going they were given a time clock to remediate the problem and it was and and local government just had to administer how it programmatically took place so it'll be interesting for me to find out what happened to that program if it sunset it or if something replaced it but yeah they certainly they are still monitoring it um you know they have to do their their monitoring reports and submit them I think that the county uh and that may be where the where the ball lies with the county maybe the administrator as opposed to the city when it's within that jurisdiction that that's something again something to look into but for those it was a program they actually aggressively as I described it made people do this adversarially well they found out that the tanks were leaking in 1995 and then I was administering the program in 199 and then and then they changed the tanks in 2002 and it's almost like watching the pain dry in a way delineation putting Bing on the ground they've they've been doing Bings on the ground for and I have to give them permission to come on site and do that it's been like about 30 or 40 of but it's almost like fdp is giving them a card Bunch because they're comberland Farm that's the way I see it maybe there's money under the table I guess we'll find out it it it's a it's a sad situation in some cases they don't actually they can't even remediate it they end up having to come in and vacuum cl bring it up and reduce the plume by whatever they can or minimize its continual flow downhill um but those things do exist in the State of Florida and you apparently are lucky enough to be next to one I'm not sure member gr what is whether there was one in the State of Florida but there is a leaking underground storage tank trust fund within the EPA the United States Federal agency and I think that spun down in the state because the state administered the program through D at the time and then the local governments were monitoring for all the permitting requirements that took place to do it so that makes sense to me that it trickled down from federal funding to state to local but it was a programmatic thing that was pretty intense I seem to recall about 10 years there were even people that uh that was another side of the coin they made money by Excavating the dirt which was spoiled and people were taking it and burning off the hydrocarbons and then reutilizing the soil so there was a spin-off industry taking place quite frankly all over the state where people that could provide for that service once you got the dirt out you had to get rid of it and you couldn't just go take it in the woods so I I'd be interested for me just to find out what happened to it you know we went through the whole you know p package with Tec when I presented this and and I mentioned in that meeting is that you know all the borings are in this area here I was basically asking Cumberland from why don't you put some right on Cumberland uh on Countrywide to make sure there is no oil is Going Underground for these residents here more importantly why don't you put some out here on us one so then you can measure to see if there's anything going to the Lagoon none of that has been done certainly something the d ought to be able to address at some point U and I appreciate the dialogue thank you very much uh the question I had for you and I want to bring it to uh the commission's attention I have a picture I can hand to you since I want to be sure you've got what everybody else has yours happens to be in color just to emphasize my question and I've had a continual dialogue about a concern that surfaces when you go to multiple family buildings and the latitude within the city code to frankly interpret what is the building's height and that flexibility leads to a pertinence embellishments and accessory structure improvements that exceed what one might have thought they were going to see when they saw the rendering for example in your renderings and your sketch and if you look at the applicant's uh uh documents here beginning on page 58 uh the color rendering photographs illustrate a building which has a flat roof and that's easy when you see what I've passed out you'll notice the shadow um I want to call it a shadow survey you refer to as a shadow that it illustrates the cast as Shadows so that you know you're not shadowing somebody's property uh which isn't preferred if you're the property owner being shadowed so the illustrations are providing the shadow effect but what you'll notice in that what I've passed out is you'll see the Shadow from the Elevator Shaft Tower and what I'm kind of trying to talk through and I should have began by saying I support your project it's a Titus was lucky they've got such a well-planned project in your Amendment to the aclf is appreciated being an older person like myself the point I make is that herein you see a picture it's a rendering you won't have to comply with the rendering so staff can't hold the picture up on page 58 and demand you make a flat roof of course this is just for a purpose but the purpose speaks clearly of what happen happens when you build an elevator shaft with a cable elevator opposed to hydraulic and there are several buildings in Titus that have been a concern of mine simply because everybody knew how high it was going to be and 25% of the building exceeds that height with embellishments for architectural purposes and or structural needs Elevator Shaft buildings what I find when I do the math is if you reduce to 74 1/2 ft most of those Elevator Shaft Tower cable housings are between 10 and 12 ft high if you add 12T to 742 you're pretty close to 90 now you began your introduction by saying your buildings are not going to be as tall as what is conceived in your amended development and that's why I asked the question initially we're talking about something that is subject to discussion so when you introduced it as being it won't be as tall as said I have to ask the question if the condition of approval was to create the definition within your um projects uh flexible standards that the building maximum Building height would be inclusive of those three things a pertinence accessory structures embellishments you design it accordingly if your opening comment was it's actually going to be shorter than we're proposing at 74 and A2 ft it may be unnecessary to be concerned with but if you turn that around as I just mentioned and take 74 and 1/2 ft and add the elevator Tower and come back with an architectural rendering for a facade around the front all of a sudden somebody looks at the picture sees a flat roof and says oh it's only going to be 74 ft tall but all of a sudden it's not it's closer to 90 ft so if you can address that I'd appreciate it well all these Heights that you are looking at is incorrect all these I'm sorry the Heights The Heights that you're showing here is incorrect I think Eddie OU I'm apolog all this is to illustrate the shadow of what is the elevator power we've done a shading study that was went through the went through the city and it was disclosed that the the shade did not really bother any other residents number one number two is as Chelsea mentioned the 75 ft includes the Elevator Shaft and everything else we're stay we're going to be staying at below 75 and that includes the Elevator Shaft and all that so the residents are going to be up to the sixth floor the seventh floor would be just the observation deck it's a six-story building we're actually reducing as we mentioned before about 60,000 Square fet we're shaving off one floor on the top to be able to go below 75 ft including the Elevator Shaft and the canopy for the observation deck for the multiunit the other two buildings the hotel is a five story and the building after the assist of living is only four story and I certainly appreciate that and the confidence I have in what you say is what we get I appreciate that as well the purpose of my point is after the median is over the code is written to be 74.5 ft if there is no specific specificity as to what is the measurement point of 74.5 Ft the deference to the building codes interpretation will be that of the apperance are allowed to exceed the height as long as they don't exceed a percentage of the total bill height which leads me back to this you see the flat roof in the artist renderings and you see the flat roof in your Concepts but what you end up with is a excessive elevated building for facade purposes architecture all that's good but it's not what people expected to see and I've found several occasions where that's actually followed the suit Leed if tonight what you're saying is nothing's going to exceed in the short of it nothing's going to exceed the height limitations stated your development Port inclusive of elevator Towers accessory structures and embellishments we're we're I'm good to go I answer my question you don't have to take my word for it I think Eddie can vouch for it I mean you have the building Heights and I think Chelsea you have that as well I do so um this is all uh in the realm of our architects who are not here tonight and we are going through site planning so we're not quite at the full architectural rendering rendering stage yet um what The Architects have told me is building F the main roof deck is 44 feet um and there may be some higher roofed elements like stair and elevator areas um you know as necessary but it still is below 74 building f is definitely going to be below 74 Building G there is a roofed area that's 73 feet and 2 in so I'm not confident that there won't be anything yeah okay and that I I think that speaks that speaks directly to my concern what happens once it leaves a discussion and a public meeting where someone States it's going to be this tall and then it isn't because interpretations allow it flexibility in standard zoning districts where that is the code and that is how administrators administer implementation that code perfectly comfortable with unless the city chooses to change the way they Define buildings to be more specific however when you're dealing with an Innovative design zoning District the standard you're making is a zoning District standard it's not a building code and I've said this many times to the commission it is not subject to interpretation it should be what it is is what it is if you say it's 74.5 ft don't exceed it don't exceed it with any impertinence Embellishments accessory structures but conversely say it's 742 ft and stick a 15ft elevator tower on top and you have an excessive height and what I'm always concerned with from my prior life is now the staff is stuck in a conundrum did they mean to say that or did they say this and then it's well we'll defer to the building code and that I don't believe is the right deference because this is a zoning District standard not a building code standard not an architectural standard it's just a zoning District like 100 foot wide lot your Point's well taken and I understand the concern um it sounds like we're good to go if you're shaking your head it's not going to be that way and I just I want to point out that we're not we in this master plan we haven't created a new definition of Building height the the definition of the building height is what is in the existing code that that's right on the point of acing that's in the existing building code this is a zoning district code you're asking to establishment no different than the dimensional standards of your parking spaces or the floor area ratio of your buildings it's encompassed in your property boundary as a unique and specific code it's not available to others so if it was standard zoning I would be moot I wouldn't be speaking but yours is asking the city to embrace your design standards inclusive of that restriction and so what you see is what you get and that's why I would prefer that we make sure the definition within your development standards States maximum building Heights inclusive of a pertinent accessory structures and embellishments and that's the easiest way to solve the concern I have you have me on record we going to be below 74.5 or possibly 74.9 I'm not concern I'm more concerned with with what it says becomes rather than what we meant to say isn't what became so I'm comfortable with what you get and I'll end my question we're good okay any other questions of the applicant thank you any cards fory yes uh James Troutman uh James Troutman 1907 uh bar Avenue um I did put against that it's not really against it or four actually um one is uh for the Cumberland Farms I'm surprised that there hasn't been any inspections on these tanks or that would propose that there would be leaks being a retired uh petroleum inspector doing non-destructive inspections on above ground storage tanks and pressure vessels these are government regulations that have to be inspected on a regular basis they have to be visually looked at I know that these are underground but at some time they do ground penetrating radar do these type of things to look at these tanks so I'm surprised to see that we don't have any information on inspections of these tanks to see where this is that would just be my comment to to whoever if that wants to be looked into and my only concern would be let's not turn the parking lot into California you know I don't know how big or small like nine feet is but I don't plan on hopefully not to be living there but I know what it's like to get out and I've lived in California a couple of times I know what it's like to try and get out of a small car and back out so I that just be my only concern so that's all thank you next card that was last card last card we'll close the public hearing and I'll bring it back to the commission any further questions any questions of the staff anyone care to make a motion member fa I recommend making I recommend approval of um the resoning 3-24 toell resort and destination master plan Amendment as written I was second seconded by secretary Grant any further discussion this is recommending approval with the council Council will hear this when next week 22nd okay all in favor um R Calli member Gad yes member Childs yes member Moscoso yes Grant yes member facon yes chairman Richardson yes okay motion passes next item is the Building Trades Services cleanup ordinance yes sir this item begins on page 63 and the next three items 10B 10 C and 10d are all Cleanup items so um we're just doing a little bit of housekeeping while the applications are light tonight the building Trade Services item 10B uh City adopted a Building Trades and services ordinance number 30 2022 to expand the zoning districts where building Trade Services use could be established while drafting a separate PID white chaffy ordinance number 29 2023 to address development along White Drive and chaffy drive staff inadvertently used an incorrect version of the code which had not yet reflected the changes adopted in the Building Trades and services ordinance this draft ordinance proposes Corrections which were inadvertently added or removed in order to provide internal consistency and to enhance usability of the code um on page 66 you'll find the change the stricken through is what's proposed to be removed and the underline is what's proposed to be added um and the um what helped us identify that this was an issue within our code is you'll notice at the top of page 66 um in the community commercial CC zoning District the building Trade Services use is listed as a permitted use with limitations again that's under the CC zoning District you see the L there and when you read the limitations there are no limitations for cc and so when an applicant was asking for a a BTR their occupational license to to operate a business in the city um we we realized that we had this this conflict in the code so we're trying to correct that by uh looking at the past ordinances and what limitations were intended to be there and that's all I have on this item thank you uh secretary Grant uh Eddie on page I'm sorry page 66 uh item C4 you it says here that uh that will be limit in in community Comm U Community commercial districts would be limited to locations with direct access to collector and and arterial roads does that mean it needs both or just or I believe it means or it should have said or okay good catch otherwise you have to have it be on the corner right yeah okay thank you any other questions of the staff saying none I'll open the public hearing is there anyone that wants to address this item do you have any cards Lori I have no cards the public hearing is closed any other questions from the staff where have the City attorney let's get her involved anyone care to make a motion so I make a motion do we approve 10B Building train Services clean up ordinance to recommend approval to recommend approval any uh second to the motion second second by member Karan any further discussion roll call please secretary Grant yes member faon yes member Childs yes member Gad yes member moso yes chairman Richardson yes this will be this will be heard by I'm going ask you a question for public hearing on October 22nd okay October 22nd next item 10c outdoor storage cleanup ordinance moving right along in 2020 the city adopted a cleanup ordinance to correct discrepancies in the zoning code for use table for primary uses staff has discovered inconsistencies within the larger use table contained in section 2854 and the the individual use standards in section 28151 outdoor storage in an effort to correct errors within ordinance 25 2020 staff has reviewed the use table and the use standards table for internal consistency and correctness based on staff analysis previous code versions and existing code language this draft ordinance proposes Corrections which were inadvertently added or removed in order to provide internal consistency and enhance usability of the code on this one uh on page 76 that's the um the city's overall use table that has all of our zoning districts and all of the permitted uses in the city and we've highlighted in yellow um the row that's being changed the um if I zoom in here I'll be able to read that uh under M1 our light industrial uh zoning district and rmu 500 the code currently has L's for Li as a permitted permitted use with limitations um and the correction is to remove those you'll see on page 82 um that under rmu 500 the at the top of the table or at the top of the page bottom of the table r Ru 500 there is no l there and so it was not intended to be a permitted use with limitations in the rmu and then under M1 it the code currently has an L it's permitted with limitations but um if you read subsection C which is where all the limitations of the uses are provided there are no limitations for M1 and so um this appears to be to have been a an oversight when um we were doing a large cleanup ordinance and the outdoor storage was confused with the outdoor storage as an accessory use we have two different tables one is for outdoor storage as the primary the main use that's happening at the site and then outdoor storage as an accessory that supplements a business that H happens to have outdoor storage as part of it and so some of the L's and um L's and PS were were mixed between those two tables and so this is our uh proposed change to clean this up again the the the main issue is if we had a business that wanted to establish an outdoor storage use on a piece of property that zoned M1 they would see that it's permitted with limitations but then the city has no limitations and so we we became aware of the the conflict thank you member moso I know this is something we're going to discuss um in a few minutes but would this be something that we could look at um cleaning up and having it a little bit easier to understand because obviously the staff is having issues as well I mean it's it's a lot to take in and so this could be something maybe we consider um I don't know I'd love to see examples or I can look up examples of what other cities do but are other cities are theirs as complicated as this or is there an easier way to maneuver table what I will say is that our the people who use the code day in and day out our staff and and engineers and site designers who are looking for this information they find this format very easy to read okay um it's very well organized it's just difficult whenever we need to make amendments to it that we have to include the tables over and over again so it looks like a lot of information um but in the day-to-day when we're applying the code it makes it a lot easier this way I haven't seen very many codes designed this way though okay I agree with you completely I've been an opponent of this spreadsheet in fact we used to have a member secretary Grant I think was the only member of the commission that was here we had a a former planning commissioner from Minnesota and she printed out these things and she put them up in her den and they wrapped around the room twice but I've given up on fighting this any other questions any other open the public hearing is there anyone to speak I have no cards okay so I've thrown in the towel on this spreadsheet anyone care to make a motion yeah I make the motion that we recommend approval for 10c outdoor storage cleanup ordinance member Charles made the motion is there a second I'll second second by member Grant um you like these kind of spreadsheets don't you I do I love these I mean I'm like looking at this going this is pretty easy to read because I'm used to like reading Json data like data with you're a software person I'm an HR person yeah remember moso okay any other discussion roll call please member fac yes member Moscoso yes member Gad yes member Childs yes secretary Grant yes chairman Richardson yes and that will'll be heard at the same meeting same meeting next item is 10d legal ad requirement ordinance yes sir last cleanup item before we get to Titusville plan language um during review of the code of ordinances staff became aware that the requirement to advertise conditional use permits had been inadvertently removed from the code of ordinances specifically a portion of section 34-7 to procedure for obtaining conditional use permit was removed however after the removal of this language the city continued to properly advertise all conditional use permit applications as required by Florida Statutes this ordinance proposes to correct the oversight by restoring the language in section 3472 procedure for obtaining a conditional use permit um just reiterating that the city clerk's office confirmed that they had continued to advertise just as state law requires us to um when an ordinance in that section had been approved it removed that language there was no impact to the operations of the city um but now that we know that it's it's missing we want to add it back in thank you any discussion any discussion any any card Lori no cards okay comes back to the commission uh secretary Grant Mr chairman I recommend approve the ordinance has written was there second second okay second by member moso any further discussion roll call please member Moscoso yes member Gad yes secretary Grant yes member Childs yes member facon yes chairman Richardson yes okay we'll go back up to item 9A this as you recall I brought up a discussion item about a month two months ago I uh saw on Sunday on CBS uh that Maryland had adopted a plain language uh initiative where any of their regular uh ordinances or anything like that uh instructions they be changed to plain language and uh I brought it up for the discussion then and there's a copy of the the order that was signed by the governor uh about the plane language name was West Moore um makes it more readable some of them to the general public uh and I thought that was a great idea um and I was talking last week to Chelsey and uh Mr broom came in on this discussion I understand um why there's a lot of same kind of language the whereases and things like that but um I'm satisfied with that but as we saw in looking at some of the ordinances from Melbourne particularly there was much easier to read they were kind of in plain language and um you know it's like uh the language in the Bible you know there's a difference between King James and the hip-hop Bible if you've ever seen it and uh it's still I would like to ask the staff Eddie I understand yall have to write the ordinances with the help of the you know the attorney's office would this be beneficial to the staff to use plain language well I think that when the staff is trying to draft an ordinance in our Minds we're writing it in plain language because we want everyone to understand what we're what the rules are right that we're all playing from the same Playbook I think the Planning and Zoning commission offers a good opportunity for people who don't review things day in day out to give us a temperature for whether what we're proposing makes sense to the general public or if we need to go back to the drawing board um I don't know that an ordinance or a resolution to this effect is really is necessary because it is something that we it's on our on our radar um but um I understand the importance of it absolutely yeah anytime you write anything um I'll give you an HR perspective if you write rules and regulations you've got to make them plain enough so that anybody from the CEO to the you know the lowest employee understand them and I think sometimes the staff may get wrapped up and trying to explain things well something else comes to mind and we got to uh add some language that addresses that issue and that issue I know um there's an attempt to put it all in writing but I kind of think it loses some some of the meaning that would be obvious for just the average citizen uh Miss moso yeah so I I was looking this up and so Maryland Washington Minnesota and California all have um initiatives but there is something that I found and it was it's called the plane riding act overview or and it was signed by um President Obama October 13th 2010 and um really it actually applies for the whole country so the the ideas is that we're supposed to be doing this um but I think it it it is um specific to public facing materials such as brochures um websites newsletters and I think we do a good job with that I kind of agree with Eddie I think when they write the ordinances um you guys are planners so you have a whole another language that you're speaking but I do think that it it is maybe our job when something comes to us that we don't understand or maybe could be written in a different way that maybe that's when we propose that as well because I do think there is there is a law we just maybe need maybe I don't want to form a committee but as things come across we kind of go through and say this isn't as clear as we'd like it to be and kind of Point those things out and then obviously when you guys write ordinances or any material just keep that in mind which I know that that you do and so I think it's going to be working together of saying this might not be as clear as you think it is or could we add some different language and I think this is a good conversation to have like that 44 page spreadsheet we just saw that you may love do you want emojis or something what we are we talking here no I I think like a smiley face or a sad face but uh like you can't do this but I that might be helpful actually I think I think um we can suggest things as a come through I think uh if we I think we just have to keep it in mind and um anytime we we do ask questions I think when we don't understand some of the things and I think that's kind of a hint to them too like but I definitely understand where you're coming from I wish that we had like an example in front of us of one that is like confusing do you guys have one no but I would say also the longer you're on the board your language also changes and so you start using acronyms and things like that and so we also we need to remind be reminded ourselves that we uh we should explain those things um you know so it's kind of the same thing it's just from the board's perspective intend of bringing this up was not for our to clean up our understanding it's for the people out there yeah to understand what the city means by this ordinance because if you were not involved in pnz and you wanted to add something to your house and you got to look at the ordinances and you'd have to read it four or five times and this initiative would kind of simplify some of the language and it's fine with me if we don't recommend this to council but we need to REM remind the staff that need to make the language as simple as possible now I'll defer to Chelsea if she has anything to add to this conversation I appreciate everyone's comments and I do want to just reiterate that I think you guys are the Frontline for approval of any new ordinance or language that is developing our code and I look at you guys as a form of a gatekeeper when there is something that doesn't make sense um it is super helpful for it to be called out and Rewritten before it gets codified once something is in the code it's really difficult to take it out um and I'll just say that but another problem that I recognize from looking at minutes and meetings from the past is trying to rewrite an ordinance from the dis or during a meeting because that oftentimes doesn't allow for adequate review of unintended consequences and may not be the best language possible and so those are just two things that I think this body can do its best to um avoid or have those best practices in mind when you review ordinances and if there's a significant level of reworking or rewriting language then tabling is probably a good idea and I would add to that um I think when we have those scheduled calls with the staff member that's when we need to point out you really don't understand this section of the ordinance or the way this is written um that might be a way you can express that um and it trigger the staff's thinking well maybe we need to make that a little simpler um okay uh secretary Grant yeah to me jargon and acronyms is the language of of uh professionals it's what separates them from the rest of the people as far as I'm concerned and I'm curious about uh since this has been enacted since 20110 about whether there is any statistics to show how it's how it's been working as far as Community enhanced or improved Community involvement and stuff like that this is what this is about I'm sure right um not really really then what is it about then it's really to gain an understanding to put things in plain language we understand understand what's going on it's not directed at me it's directed at the public okay well I understandable to the public I just I don't know I just think it's a an attempt to uh continue dumbing down America but that's just me I as a HR person I take a I second that would it be I don't know when she said codified and I was I was thinking all right that might be a word that some people don't understand truly um and maybe maybe it's a lexicon type thing maybe it's a list of words that we have to like maybe there's a list of words we can think of of of not using instead of using the word codify we say make law or so you know I'm just saying but it didn't make it more wordy though because like that's a very specific word it describes you know a concept a complex Concept in one word but if we start using other words it makes it more wordy though but I'm just I don't know sure one other thing I just thought of is that when you all became members of the board and we introduced you to your role we handed you your uh public participation guide that was a document that we prepared to give people the tools the the vocab to understand and participate in this and so maybe um revamping that updating it making it more widely available to the general public not just to uh the members of the board might be helpful good idea M Gad what M musosa was mentioning about the pamphlets and literature that's associated with this sometimes at least some communities they'll provide the lay persons a bridged short list explanation of an ordinance together with the official document so that a person that isn't educated to the use of phrases and terminologies can read it in simpler language you were kind of explaining the difference in Bible writings I was thinking along the lines too that you know when you think about the way ordinances read if you read them state to state and now we've got this idea that you just do things different in each state what you would be thinking of and making it user friendly for the area you're in you could have in the South whereas comma y'all and then you have it and if you were up north you'd have whereas you guys so I think they somewhat they have to have that use people people okay remember moso yeah I would agree I don't really want to dumb down our ordinances I think um I I like the idea of having any of our like forward facing or public facing materials be in a way that everybody can understand but keeping our code as it is in my opinion and then helping as we go along if there's things and I think a great opportunity is those meetings when we're sitting with you guys and saying I don't quite understand this or could we make it easier um it's a good opportunity but I do I'm not opposed to us just talking about this in front of the the staff and the attorney but I think we saw when we compared the ordinances of the live local ordinances our ordinance and Melbourne's and some of the others it was shocking the difference they said the same thing but it said it in a different way so I would just say remember remember that point and um I wouldn't have to we could just talk about it occasionally so this item we don't want to recommend the council correct I don't no I do but that's okay okay next item is oh you want to talk there were two cards that just turned okay um James tropman all right so I'm working on this public speaking stuff here uh correction before I think I said 1907 was my address 175 bar Avenue sorry like I said I'm working on this public speaking stuff um I deal with writing techniques and procedures on a daily basis uh for an aerospace company here in town and um you are correct when you say that a lot of this in you know this kind of speech uh is a good is a language for that area um just move the microphone yeah yep sorry fantasting um and it is a an education thing that I believe an individual needs to take on themselves to educate themselves in this uh area um I don't expect somebody to come in and and be able to do my job now I write techniques and procedures to the lowest employee within our company um um so when I write out how to do an inspection um it's it's very plain it's hit this button turn this machine on do this uh now are all of my procedures and techniques like that no some of them I expect the technicians to understand that language that they're certified in that method so I don't break it down as easy um for them because it's just language that they know so I do understand the concept for individuals in the public that might not have that education to have that plain language but to a certain degree it comes back to you guys I guess y all are the front lines if it doesn't read comfortable to you I would say bring it up rewrite it or asked to be rewrote that' be my comments thank you next card Cas Childs case Childs 476 Fern hi Dad um uh I would be for keep um making uh something that says that we have to write them in plain English uh simply putting uh like what you suggested uh another paragraph that explains it in plain English doing something like that wouldn't really work as intended because uh the English language is very versatile but also it can be constraining uh for example just moving a comma in a sentence uh saying like singing to Grandma uh was the most important thing to the family versus singing to Grandma was the most important thing to the family one is uh Grandma finds it uh important that everyone needs to sing or she sings and the other one is the family thinks it's important to sing to Grandma uh that would be an example of writing uh out the ordinance in the not plain English and then uh someone who may be trying to learn the language uh and open up a business themselves or uh trying to just add something on to their own home maybe reading it and then they may misread it and then they go to the example and uh you can try to spell it out uh in plain English as an example but that's not the heart of what the ordinance might be so putting it out in plain English where um like she used the word dices um not quite sure uh what the context is because uh if I just do a speech ATT text and say dases and then look it up it says like the person who's in charge uh what's the bishop of a Christian something um so uh I didn't say dicese dases so that's what I heard though so it it's a a word that you know you may read it or uh say it and it means something completely different so in plain language where lexicon a uh would would be something where we can just kind of dumb it down where just anybody can read it that would be a lot easier so yeah questions thank you all right thanks any other card no more cards okay we'll close a public hearing at this point it dies as far as I'm concerned but I did make the point and we got to remember this I was going to say I like the I do like I wish we could do examples you know in the code but there's so many that like you would have to have tons of examples but I do like that IDE that is a common thing to try to explain people is using examples but when some some of these codes it's just like there's so many different things to it we couldn't couldn't possibly do enough examples for it but it would be great but okay the next item is petitions and requests from the public pres anybody want to speak now or forever hold your peace can I make a motion to get rid of the 10x10 um requ requirement for an ordinance for building a shed uh no well can I can I can I ask someone else here to make a motion on removing the requirement of a 10 x10 like that's the max that you could have um what suggest you talk to the that's the Florida building code yeah Florida building code because in in the in the county there's no uh restriction on like uh you have to get a permit to build um but but in the city of Titusville you have to get a permit to build uh 10 x10 shed it used to not be that way so and and that's what I would like to do is to get rid of that so that way we can just refer to the county for the shed even though we're in city limits but because we're in city limits we have to abide by that ordinance so if we could get rid of that that'd be awesome discuss that with your son just for clarification the city building permits are required for any structure over 120 ft or 10 x 12 structure anything smaller than that is exempt from the requirement so are you asking to get rid of the exemption so uh what I read was that if I wanted to build a 10x10 shed I'd have to get a permit I'm not sure you read that right so plain language there's the point so that that's because when I went up uh what do I need to do to build a shed in my backyard um it basically says if you want to build uh anything that's like 10 by1 or larger you have to get a permit but in the county you don't have to so but she's saying that I'll have to I would just check with the building department of your plans and confirm that no permits are required for anything smaller than 120 square F feet okay so that be awesome thank you okay anyone else before we go into the reports I want to remind that I think you only have uh a day to respond if you're going to that um City recognition of boards and commissions you've got to say you're going by is it the fourth Lori do you know okay you've got only day or two you you all should have received the invitations is anyone going okay are you going yeah I'll be there you sorry are you going wa you crazy okay you've got to if you haven't confirmed you need to do it as soon as possible and we need to see if any of the alternatives alternatives are going too the staff never sits with us and those things so they have their own table away from us I actually let Lori know I won't be able to attend I'll be uh near where all the storm went recreating on Perry Florida okay reports you want to tell us about Ireland it was great um the only report I had for you was the uh boards and commission dinner on o October 17th so if you have an RCP um I think it's Lisa Marie who's coordinating that if not just let us know and we can we can get you in touch uh the next our next meeting how many items does it look like we'll have on the agenda uh one application I don't know if we have any additional cleanup or I don't think we have any other uh ordinances going forward so right now it's looking like one application okay thank you anything else yes City attorney um thank you for the recognition moment of silence this morning or the beginning of the meeting um you know I I think that it's very important for all of us to just take some time to um you know and share what we can with the folks from North Carolina and West Coast it's really terrible but you know other than that no update thank you I don't have any report do any members have a report okay this meeting is jour at 7:30 you do good