Regular City Council - November 22, 2022 at 630 PM

City Council

Regular Meeting

November 22, 2022

The City Council of the City of Titusville, Florida met in regular session in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 555 South Washington Avenue, on Tuesday, November 22, 2022. 

Mayor Diesel called the City Council meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. Present were Mayor Daniel E. Diesel and City Council Members Herman A. Cole, Jr., Col USAF Retired, Jo Lynn Nelson, Joe C. Robinson, and Dr. Sarah Stoeckel. Also present were City Manager Scott Larese, City Attorney Richard Broome, and Assistant City Clerk Jolynn Donhoff, who completed the minutes of the meeting. 

Mayor Diesel requested a moment of silence. He then led those present in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. Assistant City Clerk Donhoff read the procedures for public comment and participation. 

xxx

Council made two modifications to the meeting agenda. 

Motion:

Member Nelson moved to add agenda addendum item No. 6 C - Titusville Environmental Commission to the Council agenda and move agenda item 9 A - Appeal of the Historic Preservation Board's denial of Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) case No. 3A-2022 for 422 Julia Street immediately after Boards and Commissions. Member Cole seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. 

xxx

SPECIAL RECOGNITIONS & PRESENTATIONS

Letters of Appreciation – City Manager Larese read the employees’ names that recently received letters of appreciation including Ronald Smith, Jr., Firefighter/EMT and Jeff Trafton, Firefighter/Paramedic. 

xxx

BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS

North Brevard Commission on Parks and Recreation - The North Brevard Commission on Parks and Recreation's semi-annual written report was included in the agenda packet. No action was requested.

xxx

North Brevard Library District Board - The North Brevard Library District Board's semi-annual written report was included in the agenda packet. No action was requested.

xxx

 ADDENDUM ITEM No. 6 C - 

Titusville Environmental Commission (TEC) – The request was to appoint three regular members to the TEC, for terms to expire on November 30, 2025. The terms of regular members Michael Myjak (resident), Hector Delgado (resident) and James Yount (non-resident) were due to expire on November 30, 2022. Each of these individuals desired continuing to serve as regular members on the TEC. 

Two additional applications were on file for Council’s consideration, from Stan Johnston (resident) and Todd St. Louis (non-resident).  Stan Johnston reviewed why he was a good candidate to serve on the TEC. 

Motion:

Member Nelson moved to reappoint Michael Myjak (resident), Hector Delgado (resident) and James Yount (non-resident) as Regular Members of the Titusville Environmental Commission, for terms that would expire on November 30, 2025. Member Cole seconded the motion and the roll call was:                           

                                    Member Cole                          Yes

                                    Member Nelson                      Yes

                          Mayor Diesel                          Yes

                          Vice-Mayor Robinson            Yes

                                    Member Stoeckel                    Yes

The motion carried unanimously. 

xxx

AGENDA ITEM 9 A (ORDINANCES – SECOND READING, PUBLIC HEARING AND RELATED ACTION) – 

Appeal of the Historic Preservation Board's denial of Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) case No. 3A-2022 for 422 Julia Street – City Manager Larese highlighted the request provided in the Council agenda packet. The request was for Council to consider the appeal of the Historic Preservation Board's denial for a request to paint the structure located at 422 Julia Street, a locally designated historic resource, with colors incompatible with its historic context. For background purposes, the following information was provided in the Council agenda packet.   

At the May 2, 2022 Historic Preservation Board (HPB) meeting, the HPB approved COA 3-2022 with a condition that the proposed building colors at 422 Julia Street be white, off-white, or cream color and the proposed blue Coastal Cool Cay color be used as a trim color.

At the October 3, 2022 Historic Preservation Board (HPB) meeting, the owners of the building, Titusville Playhouse Inc., requested to amend the building colors condition of approval and allow the primary building color to be one of the following options:

Option 1 - Blue Jasmine;

Option 1-A Sea Creature;

Option 2 - Aquamarine;

Option 2-A Restorative; and

Option 3 - Bayside Blue with white as the trim color.

The reason for the building owner's request was to reduce maintenance costs as the owner and their contractor believed that the white and cream colors would require frequent power washing and repainting, due to dirt and grime from the railroad and windblown street dirt. 

The Historic Preservation Officer (HPO) report stated that it was hard to recommend approval of a cool color as opposed to an earth tone for a Spanish Mediterranean building. The palettes included in the original report showed some cooler colors, but those were typically used for trim/accent, not the primary surface. The HPO's recommendation was the same as with the original review, that the proposed building colors at 422 Julia Street be white, off-white, or cream color (earth tones) and the proposed blue Coastal Cool Cay color and or the proposed primary cool colors be used as a trim color. 

The Historic Preservation Board (HPB) denied the applicant's request to use a cool color on the primary surface instead of on the trim/accent surfaces of the structure. Subsequent to the Board's action, the applicant submitted an appeal to the City Council pursuant to Section 29-120(g) of the City’s Code  of Ordinances (Historic Preservation Ordinance).

As required per Section 29-120(g) of the City’s Code, the applicant submitted the notice of appeal within 20 days of the rendition of the written decision of the Historic Preservation Board. The notice stated the grounds for the appeal with a summary of the relief that was sought.

Community Development Director Brad Parrish reviewed information from the Historic Preservation Board’s or the Historic Preservation Officer’s Report, which was provided in the Council agenda packet. He also reviewed information provided by the applicant (Jim Ball on behalf of Titusville Playhouse, Owner) and the applicant’s proposed paint colors, which was also provided in the Council agenda packet. 

Member Nelson and staff discussed her questions on the color schemes of other buildings. Not all buildings were designated as historic. The Historic Preservation Board or Officer’s recommendations were based on an individual, qualitative, historical review of 422 Julia Street (not any other buildings) and there was a desire to be consistent with the building’s history. When researching an individual building’s past, items such as architecture and paint colors were part of the research. An appeal process was provided in the City’s Code, if the Historic Preservation Board did not approve an applicant’s request. 

Member Stoeckel and staff discussed her questions on the process to get a building listed on the Historic Registry, whether there was interpretation problem of the Code or guidelines, the source of the colors deemed acceptable by the Historic Preservation Board or its Officer, once a building was formally deemed historic, this designation stayed with the property, even if property ownership changed, etc. 

Vice-Mayor Robinson and the applicant, Jim Ball, discussed his questions on the reasons for the applicant’s request and proposed paint colors. Jim Ball felt painting the building white would show grime and dirt quickly and easily and it would require more maintenance and frequent repainting. Vice-Mayor Robinson desired keeping to the building’s historical past or value as much as possible. 

Member Cole and staff discussed his questions on the process of applying and receiving the local historic designation for a building. Staff reviewed information that applicants should be made aware of up front, reasons some desired having their properties designated on the historic registry, some felt it was a benefit, while others did not, etc.  

A brief and separate discussion on the old (nearby) Café Chocolate building and its owners obtaining grant funding was briefly discussed. 

Mayor Diesel invited the applicant and public to speak. 

Jim Ball, the applicant and on behalf of the Titusville Playhouse, distributed information. Mr. Ball reviewed information to persuade Council why they should consider approving Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) case No. 3A-2022 for 422 Julia Street. 

Steven Heron, on behalf of the application, reviewed information on the property owners’ goals for 422 Julia Street (Titusville Playhouse). The building’s owners desired more vibrancy in the downtown. He encouraged “it was just paint”. The desire was to make the building vibrant and to attract visitors to the playhouse. 

Mr. Ball advised that the building owners had an issue with the recommended colors for their building, which they felt were not in the historic context of the building’s history or local area. He argued Titusville was a coastal city. The building owners wanted a darker shade. The owners also did not think white or cream was mandatory. To this, Mr. Ball thanked Council for providing an appeal process. Mr. Ball also felt the Historic Preservation Board or the Officer’s decision on these matters was subjective. He added Titusville was changing and the community sought to bring in more young people, murals, vibrancy, etc. 

It was noted that 422 Julia Street received its historic designation in roughly 2016. 

Nicholas Stamos supported the applicant’s appeal, for reasons he explained. He wanted color because it encouraged youth participating in art education. Mr. Stamos also desired revitalization of the downtown, bringing life to the area, and preserving the history. 

Stan Johnston supported the applicant’s appeal and he liked the idea of vibrancy for the downtown. 

Alan Kiesel, Chairperson of the City’s Historic Preservation Board, was available to answer questions. 

Member Stoeckel and Mr. Kiesel discussed her questions on the proposed paint colors, concerns and information the Historic Preservation Board (HPB) considered when making a decision, the HPB was not the “paint color police”, but took into account the U.S. Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation by reference and for use in the review and issuance of Certificates of Appropriateness, which the City had adopted these standards into the City’s Land Development Regulations and Code Section 29-119(i), etc. 

Mayor Diesel asked if the HPB was subjective about the applicant’s request. Mr. Kiesel indicated it was a small or minor point and which he explained the guidelines used in evaluation of this and other types of requests for historic structures. The purpose of the guidelines or rules were so that property owners could not significantly alter their properties, so that they were no longer considered historic.

Mayor Diesel and Mr. Kiesel also discussed his questions that if the color(s) the applicant desired were not any list, was there an opportunity for discussion between the applicant and the Historic Preservation Board or Officer. Mr. Kiesel indicated there was a prior suggestion for the applicant to meet with the Historic Preservation Officer and staff to discuss the color palette. Mr. Kiesel advised that he initially recommended earth tone colors for the applicant’s building, which was consistent with the architectural style and satisfied the applicant’s concern about repainting in the future. Mr. Kiesel advised that earth tone colors were dirt colored and could satisfy all concerns.  

Vice-Mayor Robinson advised that not all structures were the same and his desire was to be careful when making a decision. He did not support the idea of the City’s downtown looking similar to one particular California city that had a mixture of colorful buildings. Instead, Vice-Mayor Robinson hoped the applicant and City could come to an agreement. He also wanted to control or regulate these matters somehow and bring young people to the area.  

Michael Myjak expressed concern for the City’s remaining historic buildings and resources. He desired keeping the City’s historic area “historic looking” and avoid (example) having purple dotted buildings. Mr. Myjak also supported the principle of “buyer-beware” and he supported the HPB’s recommendations. 

Member Stoeckel noted the tough decision at hand, because she saw both sides. She also felt the Council should have more discussion on these general matters in the future. Member Stoeckel felt the HPB did their job and she believed the current property owners would not have chosen the historic designation for their property themselves. To this, Member Stoeckel desired being careful not to set a precedent the City was not ready to uphold. Instead, she desired abiding by the current rules.  

Member Cole was conflicted. He was an architect and supported the HPB’s recommendations; however, he also did not like the idea of the applicant having to repaint (repeatedly) their building to keep it looking nice. Member Nelson advised she was conflicted. She liked the colors selected by Jim Ball ad she felt a light color on the building would look horrible. 

Mayor Diesel was also conflicted. The Titusville Playhouse was located in a unique art-like center (area) and the applicant’s request could be merited. He supported vibrancy and bringing more life to the area. Mayor Diesel did not want to set a precedent though that could encourage more historic (designated) property owners submitting appeals for paint colors on a regular basis. Vice-Mayor Robinson desired having Jim Ball and the Historic Preservation Board (HPB) working together and reaching a compromise. Member Nelson commented that Council might consider tabling the appeal to a future City Council meeting and then Mr. Ball and the HPB could work to reach a compromise. Mayor Diesel did not like this idea.  

Motion:

Member Nelson moved to deny the appeal of the Historic Preservation Board's denial of Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) case No. 3A-2022 for 422 Julia Street, with the understanding that over the next six weeks the applicant and the Historic Preservation Board would come-up with a plan. Vice-Mayor Robinson seconded the motion. 

A request for more discussion was indicated. 

Mayor Diesel did not think the City Council could require the other parties (indicated in the aforementioned motion) to come back together and review these matters. City Attorney Broome advised the applicant’s request had been heard by the Historic Preservation Board (HPB) and the Board had made a decision. The request at hand was for City Council to approve or deny the appeal. 

Mayor Diesel further advised that he liked the applicant’s color suggestions, but he did not want to set a precedent. He also desired reviewing the related Codes or procedures in the future. The Playhouse was in an art-like area and he supported having more color in or around the site. 

Member Nelson withdrew the motion on the floor, due to it had not been presented to the entire Council for a vote. Vice-Mayor Robinson (who had seconded the motion) did not object. 

New Motion:

Vice-Mayor Robinson moved to deny the appeal of the Historic Preservation Board's denial for a request to paint the structure located at 422 Julia Street, a locally designated historic resource, with colors incompatible with its historic context (Certificate of Appropriateness case No. 3A-2022 for 422 Julia Street), based on maintaining as close as possible to the historical value. Member Stoeckel seconded the motion and the roll call was:     

                                    Member Nelson                      No

                           Mayor Diesel                          Yes

                           Vice-Mayor Robinson            Yes

                                    Member Stoeckel                    Yes

                           Member Cole                          No

The appeal was denied by City Council, by a vote of 3 yes to 2 no. 

xxx

PETITIONS AND REQUESTS FROM THE PUBLIC PRESENT (NON-AGENDA ITEMS)

Thomas Perez read from a prepared statement that reviewed his concerns on the General Election of November 8, 2022 and the Right to Clean Water City Charter Amendment, which a majority percentage of citizens voted in favor of its adoption. He disagreed that the charter amendment’s language should require any further review and he felt it should be immediately codified into the City’s Charter. 

Mayor Diesel advised the next step was to ensure the charter amendment’s language was not unconstitutional or preempted by Florida Statutes. City Attorney Broome commented briefly on the legal question(s) that were pending on the charter amendment and that it was going before a judge to determine if the language was in compliance with the law. 

Nate Slusher referenced sections of Florida Statutes and the City’s Code. He felt the City was obligated to certify the results of the Right to Clean Water Charter Amendment. He also advised or felt Florida Statutes provided procedures for amendments to be contested later in the process. 

Kathleen Perez advised the Right to Clean Water Charter Amendment was legal and an outside judge (or two judges) indicated this information; therefore, the City must certify the election results for this item. She also felt the City was “judge shopping” on the matter. Additionally, Ms. Perez expressed her disagreement with a former Council Member’s comments that were made at a Council meeting and in response to a citizen’s comments about the prior City Council Member. Instead, she felt that elected officials should take-up personal responses to citizens’ criticisms in private. 

Member Stoeckel desired clarifying for the record who Ms. Perez referred to, when she indicated two outside judges had indicated the Right to Clean Water Charter Amendment was legal. Brief discussion ensued. Ms. Perez explained her understanding on her comment. City Attorney Broome advised that no judge had yet ruled on the matter and no expedited hearing had been held. To this, Ms. Perez conceded or retracted her comment. 

City Attorney Broome further advised that it was agreed by both sides or by current counsel for the City that the matter would be filed with the circuit court, where other or similar government agencies pending charter amendments were also filed in circuit court. 

Ms. Perez questioned why the City Council would not immediately certify the election results for the charter amendment. She felt if it was later determined it was preempted by State law, the charter amendment could be struck down later.

Michael Myjak disagreed that the focus had been shifted to the content of the language on the election ballot for the Right to Clean Water Charter Amendment. He felt the City Council’s sole role was to put the language on the ballot and it did not have a legislative choice otherwise. He further commented on the pending legal or court evaluation of the charter amendment and whether it was unconstitutional or was preempted by State law. He felt the voters should override these matters regardless. 

Stan Johnston expressed concern on the cost to tax payers to evaluate whether the Right to Clean Water Charter Amendment was permissible by State law, etc. He requested City Council immediately certify and codify the results of the General Election on this matter. 

xxx

Jim Ball felt additional communication with the Historic Preservation Board (HPB) was no longer possible for him, on the matter of the HPB’s denial for a request to paint the structure located at 422 Julia Street. For this reason, he requested Council and staff review the City’s processes on these matters and avoid unintended consequences. He also did not support that the Historic Preservation Officer was a contractor based in Orlando. Additionally, Mr. Ball felt the City’s Historic Preservation Code was too restrictive and it could cause inconveniences to historic property owners. His project (Titusville Playhouse) was also costing the building owners money. 

Mayor Diesel desired having future discussions on these matters, because as he knew it, the City Council had never been asked to consider an appeal for paint colors. Member Nelson reviewed the history of getting an approved paint color for the historic Carter House (current site of the Boys & Girls Club). 

xxx

CONSENT AGENDA

City Manager Larese read Consent Agenda Items A through Q, as followed: 

amount of $615,152.68; and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract upon review and approval of City Attorney and City Staff. Additionally, approve the associated budget amendment.

Stan Johnston submitted public speaking cards on Consent Agenda Items B, C, D, F, G, H, I, J, L, M, P, Q. He reviewed why he was opposed to Consent Agenda Items B, C, D, F, G, and H, and why he was neutral on Consent Agenda Items I, J, L, M, P, and Q.  

Motion:

Member Nelson moved to approve Consent Agenda Items A through Q, in accordance with the recommendations. Vice-Mayor Robinson seconded the motion and the roll call was:         

                                    Mayor Diesel                          Yes

                          Vice-Mayor Robinson            Yes

                                    Member Stoeckel                    Yes

                          Member Cole                          Yes

                          Member Nelson                      Yes

The motion carried unanimously.  

xxx

ORDINANCES – SECOND READING, PUBLIC HEARING AND RELATED ACTION

Appeal of the Historic Preservation Board's denial of Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) case No. 3A-2022 for 422 Julia Street – Council considered the item (request) earlier in the meeting. 

xxx

ORDINANCES-FIRST READING 

Ordinance No. 38-2022 - Site Development Permit Expiration – City Attorney Broome read Ordinance No. 38-2022 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF TITUSVILLE, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS RELATING TO SUBDIVISION AND SITE PLAN TIMEFRAMES; SPECIFICALLY AMENDING SECTION 34-161 “DEFINITION”, SECTION 34-172 “PROCEDURE” AND SECTION 34-217 “TIMEFRAMES” TO EXTEND THE TIMEFRAME FOR SUBMITTAL OF A PRELIMINARY PLAT, FINAL PLAT AND SITE PLAN; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, REPEAL OF CONFLICTING ORDINANCES; AN EFFECTIVE DATE; AND INCORPORATION INTO THE CODE, for the first time by title only. 

City Manager Larese outlined the request provided in the Council agenda packet. He advised the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval with the following amendments: A three-year expiration plus two-year extension by City Council and all construction details to be followed at the time of permitting. 

Stan Johnston submitted a public speaking card. He commented on whether the proposed ordinance would benefit the City. 

The public hearing for Ordinance No. 38-2022 was scheduled for the regular City Council meeting on December 13, 2022 at 6:30 p.m.

xxx

Ordinance No. 39-2022 - Comprehensive Plan Capital Improvement Element Annual Update – City Attorney Broome read Ordinance No. 39-2022 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF TITUSVILLE, FLORIDA, UPDATING THE FIVE YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS SCHEDULE OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OF THE CITY OF TITUSVILLE FOR THE 2023 – 2027 HORIZON RELATING TO THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE, for the first time by title only. 

City Manager Larese outlined the request provided in the Council agenda packet.

Stan Johnston submitted a public speaking card. He was opposed to the proposed ordinance, for reasons he explained and due to concerns for stormwater. 

The public hearing for Ordinance No. 39-2022 was scheduled for the regular City Council meeting on December 13, 2022 at 6:30 p.m.

xxx

Rezoning Application (REZ) No. 2-2022 Skyline – City Attorney Broome read Ordinance No. 40-2022 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF TITUSVILLE, FLORIDA, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 5-1993 FOR THE CITY OF TITUSVILLE, FLORIDA BY AMENDING THE ZONING MAP MADE A PART OF SAID ORDINANCE BY REFERENCE BY ALSO AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 30-2004 BY AMENDING THE RESIDENTIAL DENSITY FOR PARCELS LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF PARRISH ROAD AND ON THE WEST SIDE OF NORTH SINGLETON AVENUE, APPROXIMATELY 74 ACRES IN SIZE, HAVING PARCEL ID NUMBERS 21-35-19-00-750 & 21-35-19-00-751; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE, for the first time by title only.

City Manager Larese outlined the information provided in the Council agenda packet. The applicant Victor M. Watson, on behalf of the owner of Skyline Real Estate Properties, LLC, owner of Parcel No. 21-35-19-00-751, was requesting to rezone parcels located at the southwest corner of the Parrish Road and North Singleton Avenue intersection. The applicant was specifically requesting removing the residential density cap on 74 acres with Brevard County Parcel Nos. 21-35-19-00-750 and 21-35-19-00-751 and that a residential density cap of 65 units be imposed only on Parcel No. 21-35-19-00-750. The parcels were zoned Single-Family Medium Density (R-1B) Open Space and Recreation (OR). The two parcels total was approximately 74 acres.

The Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z) tabled this item to their next meeting on December 7, 2022, 7-0.

Victor M. Watson, a real estate attorney and the applicant, reviewed the history of the subject site(s) and any prior, formal, land use designations for the parcels, the surrounding properties, a prior concept plan or site plan and prior proposed units, a proposed plat once indicated information on the east side of 74 original acres that had been split, his client had the developable side of the property, density cap, prior staff analysis, he and his client meeting all the rules, adjustment of the maximum number of units would be 65 units or below, why he and his client submitted and requested rezoning of the property, etc. 

Member Stoeckel and Community Development Director Brad Parrish discussed her questions on why the P&Z tabled making their recommendations to their next meeting on December 7, 2022. 

Stan Johnston submitted a public speaking card. He was at the P&Z meeting and he felt the request was complex, for reasons he explained. 

Member Nelson and Community Development Director Parrish discussed her questions on where the prior or original 73 units come from, which was noted was not included in the Council’s approval or changes for the property in approximately 2003 (formal actions taken by the City Council in 2003). Instead, staff’s research of the 2003 instruments and actions had identified 73 units in a drawing(s). The matter was historically abstract.

The public hearing for Rezoning Application (REZ) No. 2-2022 and Ordinance No. 40-2022 was scheduled for the regular City Council meeting on December 13, 2022 at 6:30 p.m. 

xxx

  OLD BUSINESS

American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) Affordable Housing Request for Proposals Funding Recommendation - City Manager Larese outlined the information provided in the Council agenda packet. The request was to approve the ARPA funding recommendation for the Forest Glen affordable housing development located at 2001 South Street and authorize the City to enter into applicable development agreements.

For background purposes, the following information was provided in the Council agenda packet.   

On April 27, 2021, City Council provided advisability for staff to design programs under the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) program, for community Development initiatives. Additionally, on July 13, 2021, City Council authorized the allocation of ARPA grant program funds to the Neighborhood Services Department for supportive services and affordable housing programs.

On June 21, 2022, City Council authorized the disbursement of the second tranche of ARPA grant funds for affordable rental housing projects; making a total of $845,410 in ARPA funds allocated and available for affordable housing.

On August 1, 2022, the Neighborhood Services Department issued a public Request for Proposal (RFP), for the funding opportunity for Affordable Rental Housing for Seniors and/or Workforce household units under the City's ARPA program. Additionally, the solicitation was provided by electronic mail to several interested parties who had requested a copy of the RFP.

On September 16, 2022, in response to the RFP, the Neighborhood Services Department received three (3) proposals. These included:

The following criteria and weighted values were also considered in the review of the qualified RFP:

15% Number of set aside units

5% Cost per unit

10% Net increase in affordable rental units

25% Readiness to proceed

20% Financial capacity and past performance

20% Organizational capacity and capability

5% Leveraging

Highlights of Forest Glen:

• New construction of affordable rental housing
• 72-units consisting of 38 one-bedroom and 34 two-bedroom units
• 100% rent restricted to households aged 60+ earning no more than 60% of the area median income
• 10% of the units are reserved for extremely low-income households with disabilities or special needs
• Special set aside units for qualifying veterans
• Utilizes the City's Local Government Area of Opportunity Funding Goal for the upcoming State Housing Credit Financing for Affordable Housing Developments (RFA 2022-201) located in medium and small counties for funding preference; and
• Leverages City and State funding with an anticipated $20 million in Federal Low Income Housing Tax Credits 

Project breakdown by unit size and income level:

Unit Type Very-Low Low Senior Units

1-Bedroom 5 33 38

2-Bedroom 3 31 34

Set Aside and Unit Breakdown:

Type Rent Rate # of Units %AMI

1br/1b Tax Credit $395 4 33

1br/1b Tax Credit $807 29 60

1br/1b ARPA $395 1 33

1br/1b ARPA $807 4 60

2br/2b Tax Credit $469 2 33

2br/2b Tax Credit $962 29 60

2br/2b ARPA $469 1 33

2br/2b ARPA $962 2 60

The Affordable Housing Advisory Committee (AHAC), along with staff, had provided the Neighborhood Services Director, with a consensus of a funding recommendation for the Forest Glen affordable housing development; after review of the RFP. The applicant would provide a brief overview of the Forest Glen development as part of the funding approval process, and was available to answer any questions.

Staff was seeking Council's approval to award funding to the Forest Glen affordable housing development, and authorization to issue an award notice to the applicant on behalf of the City's American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) program. Should there be additional forms requiring the City's signature to finalize the applicant's loan with the State's Low Income Housing Tax Credit program, staff was seeking Council's authorization for the City Manager and/or designees to sign such documents in accordance with City policies.

Additionally, staff was seeking Council's authorization to enter into a ARPA Subaward Agreement and associated development agreements, as reviewed and approved to form by the City Attorney, ARPA Third-Party Auditor, and other appropriate sources; for the Forest Glen project.

Should the State not select the Titusville project for award, staff would provide Council with alternatives uses of the set aside American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds at a future meeting.

Jason Larson of the Housing Trust Group, LLC, and Rob Crown of the Housing for Homeless, Inc. gave a joint presentation that reviewed the goals of their partnership, organizations, and information specific to their request, scope, and use of the ARPA funding, recommendations, and request for the Forest Glen affordable housing development. 

Stan Johnston submitted a public speaking card; however, he was unavailable, due to he left the meeting. 

Neighborhood Services Director Terrie Franklin highlighted information on the tax credit rate for the proposed project. She advised the Forest Glen Project was a mixed income housing development (for senior citizens, with a special set-aside for formally homeless veterans). 

Vice-Mayor Robinson supported the low rent costs in the proposal. He, staff, and the Forest Glen Project representatives discussed his questions on expenditures, allocation date or tax credit deadlines, project financing, the affordability period and procedures, rules for any changes for the location or project area, etc. 

Member Stoeckel, staff, and the Forest Glen Project representatives discussed her questions on funding limits, persons living on fixed incomes, mixed income housing, ARPA rules and criteria, whether applicants knew where tax credits came from, etc.  

Member Nelson and staff discussed her questions on using remaining ARPA funds to complete another project. Staff indicated caps or limits were applied on the number of units, which had bearing on the total funding that might be available to the Forest Glen Project. 

The project representatives advised a form that required signature as evidence of the loan was required and which the project representatives needed for their tax credit application. This also provided evidence of the local government area of opportunity and funding, which also gave the project a special preference. 

Motion:

Member Nelson moved to approve the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) Affordable Housing Request for Proposals funding and recommendations for the Forest Glen affordable housing development located at 2001 South Street, as recommended. The motion also included authorizing the City Manager or his designee to enter into applicable development agreements and documents, in accordance with City policies. Member Cole seconded the motion and the roll call vote was: 

Vice-Mayor Robinson            Yes

          Member Stoeckel                    Yes

Member Cole                          Yes

Member Nelson                      Yes

Mayor Diesel                          Yes

The motion carried unanimously.  

xxx

At 9:05, Mayor Diesel called for a brief recess. At 9:13 p.m., Mayor Diesel called the meeting back to order. 

xxx

NEW BUSINESS

Update Council Member Appointments to Serve on Outside Agencies – Members of City Council were (annually) appointed to serve on various outside agencies to represent the interests of the citizens. After brief Council discussion on their preferences, City Manager Larese reviewed Council’s self-designated outside agency appointments, as he understood them from the Council: 

• Florida League of Cities: Current Member – Dr. Sarah Stoeckel and Alternate Member– Herman A. Cole, Jr., Col USAF Retired

• Space Coast League of Cities: Current Member – Dr. Sarah Stoeckel and Alternate Member – Joe C. Robinson 

• Space Coast Transportation Planning Organization: 

• North Brevard Commission on Parks and Recreation: Current Member – Daniel E. Diesel and Alternate Member – Jo Lynn Nelson.

• Economic Development Commission of Florida Space Coast: Current Member – Jo Lynn Nelson (voting member) and Alternate Member – Daniel E. Diesel (non-voting member).

• North Brevard Economic Development Zone/Spaceport Commerce Park Authority:        Current Member – Daniel E. Diesel and Alternate Member – Joe C. Robinson 

Motion:

Member Nelson moved to approve and update Council Member appointments to serve on Outside Agencies, as read by City Manager Larese. Member Stoeckel seconded the motion and the roll call vote was:   

          Member Stoeckel                    Yes

Member Cole                          Yes

Member Nelson                      Yes

Mayor Diesel                          Yes

Vice-Mayor Robinson            Yes

The motion carried unanimously. 

xxx

PETITIONS AND REQUESTS FROM THE PUBLIC PRESENT (NON-AGENDA ITEMS) – None. 

xxx

MAYOR AND COUNCIL REPORTS

Mayor's Report - Mayor Diesel submitted his written report. 

xxx

Council Reports - 

Member Stoeckel highlighted the recent meeting of the Space Coast League of Cities (SCLOC) held in Titusville. She was voted-in to serve as the treasurer of the SCLOC (Executive Board), beginning in January 2023. She also served on the Florida League of Cities Board of Directors. 

xxx

Member Stoeckel further highlighted an upcoming legislative conference and the Council’s involvement, the next SCLOC meeting would be held in Cocoa. City Manager Larese commented that Member Stoeckel was a finalist for LEAD Brevard’s “4  Under 40” recognition event. 

xxx

Vice-Mayor Robinson highlighted the activities at a recent Veteran’s Day Ceremony and the significance of honoring veterans.  

Mayor Diesel advised that he and Member Nelson attended Eco Fest 2022. The chairperson of the Eco Club also gave him an appreciation certificate at the festival. He also commented on actions the City was taking on the environment, such as Low Impact Development (LID), Beemats, etc. 

xxx

City Manager Larese advised that staff had prepared and uploaded three videos on the City’s website concerning stormwater projects, etc.

xxx

Member Nelson and Mayor Diesel attended an opening ceremony for a restaurant that moved into the downtown (Café Paradiso). 

xxx

Member Cole advised that he looked forward to serving on the City Council for the next four years. 

xxx

CITY MANAGER’S REPORT

City Manager's Report - City Manager Larese submitted his written report. Two items required the Council’s consideration. 

xxx

Fiscal Year (FY) 2024 Strategic Planning Dates - The FY 2024 Strategic Planning Cycle would begin in February 2023, with two initial meetings that would be facilitated by Kristin Bakke of LEAD Brevard. By consensus approval, the Council scheduled the following meetings: 

xxx

Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Special Meeting Dates – The request was for Council to hold its annual CDBG special meeting in January 2023, for the purpose of hearing requests for proposals (RFPs) from agencies requesting CDBG funding for Fiscal Year (FY) 2023. 

By consensus approval, Council scheduled a special City Council meeting on Thursday, January 12, 2023, at 5:30 p.m., to hear requests for proposals from agencies requesting Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding for Fiscal Year 2023

xxx

The remaining items on the City Manager’s Report were informational only, as followed:

• Waiver of storm related building permit fees (due to aftermath of Hurricane Ian) for period ending on December 31, 2022
• Christmas parade – Saturday, December 10, 2022, 6:00 p.m., downtown Titusville

xxx

CITY ATTORNEY’S REPORT – No action. 

xxx

With no further business to discuss, the meeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m.