Remarks by Dr. Sarah Stoeckel
61 remarks on the record, newest first · Page 1 of 3
- Play at 40:56
“I JUST WANTED SOME CLARIFICATION. WAS THIS BROUGHT ON HERE BECAUSE IT'S ALREADY ZONED OFFICE PROFESSIONAL AND YOU'RE ADDING AN ADDITIONAL USE? I DON'T THINK WE ARE LOOKING TO CHANGE THE ZONING. CAN YOU JUST EXPLAIN THAT?”
City Council · Sep 22, 2026
- Play at 41:13
“This is just so this is currently office professional. And I think to the mayor's point, he's thinking that he would like and I understand it allowing restaurants and maybe more commercial go in here. So if we wanted to do that, what would be the process for changing the zoning essentially rather than adding an additional use?”
City Council · Sep 22, 2026
- Play at 41:59
“Okay. And I think that's what I was seeing from this. I think that's a separate discussion. So this one is relatively minor because it's adding use to an already office professional where I don't think restaurants fits in the zoning of office professional. So I think we go along and pass this. And then I think during council discussion, talk about if there are certain pieces that are zoned a certain way that maybe would benefit from having a different zoning.”
City Council · Sep 22, 2026
- Play at 48:01
“Yes. Um, so our current standard right now is one parking for 25 if we don't do anything. And I'm on page 132 in the summary.”
City Council · Sep 22, 2026
- Play at 48:28
“And so if we did nothing, that is what somebody wanted to do this. And I think the intent was that's probably not needed. So if we were to remove that requirement, There's no protections in here. Is there any protections in here? I guess would be my question to prevent them from, you know, still adding more concrete space and more many warehouses because now they don't have to do as much parking.”
City Council · Sep 22, 2026
- Play at 48:53
“OK, so I guess my question then is. I want. I'm not for that because I think that defeats the whole intent behind what we're doing. If we just take that parking requirement out, there's nothing in here to say that that's benefiting the city of Titusville. So I don't even see the purpose of doing that unless we add something else in here or we shift it potentially. So With these two requirements, would this be the parking requirement would still be there and then this would be an option? So in lieu of the parking requirement, they can do this?”
City Council · Sep 22, 2026
- Play at 49:35
“Or how you're putting it here, is it remove the parking requirement and say no matter what, if you're doing this kind of use, you have to do one of these two or both of these?”
City Council · Sep 22, 2026
- Play at 49:49
“So I just wanted to see how you all feel about that and then we can have more discussion.”
City Council · Sep 22, 2026
- Play at 51:02
“Brad, what about if we lessen the parking requirement and required a certain percentage of open space?”
City Council · Sep 22, 2026
- Play at 51:12
“Okay. And I guess where I'm, I have a problem with it being too prescriptive, where we kind of are like, here, this, and somebody looks at the code and is like, where's this weird thing coming, like, I'd rather, I think our intent is to have more open space and to prevent flooding. So, um, I think something that would fit everyone, no matter where you're at and where you're located is if maybe a X percentage was open space. So that kind of solves the issue of us building on every square inch of green space and then adding, oh, here, but do this of vegetation or the bioswale?”
City Council · Sep 22, 2026
- Play at 51:53
“So you're saying maybe add in a third option.”
City Council · Sep 22, 2026
- Play at 54:55
“I would agree, but I feel like that's another agenda item that we will need to bring forward. Which I'm open to.”
City Council · Sep 22, 2026
- Play at 55:07
“It's going to need to be re-advertised regardless. I already know that.”
City Council · Sep 22, 2026
- Play at 55:33
“So, okay, so one, I think we're on the same page that we will need to re-advertise this. I think we need to be on the same page as far as a parking requirement, and I don't know if, Brad, if you have a recommendation on that, if we do want to lessen it, which I think we do.”
City Council · Sep 22, 2026
- Play at 55:58
“Okay, do you have enough information? And does that include the mayor's comment about not allowing them in the downtown area?”
City Council · Sep 22, 2026
- Play at 57:07
“No, I think we were looking to lessen the parking requirement.”
City Council · Sep 22, 2026
- Play at 57:28
“And then do we need a motion or do you need a motion for the mayor's other ordinance to remove the many warehouses in the downtown area?”
City Council · Sep 22, 2026
- Play at 1:27:23
“Yes. With this text, it sounds like you said, please go forward rezoning his property without. So, it sounds like you're okay with him going forward with rezoning his property.”
City Council · Sep 22, 2026
- Play at 1:34:53
“Yeah, that kind of goes along with it. I'm assuming that the cards were sent out to neighbors in the surrounding area. Within 500 feet.”
City Council · Sep 22, 2026
- Play at 1:35:02
“OK. And I think that was my and I haven't heard any neighbors coming out opposing this. Like we are used to that for a lot of these rezoning. So I just wanted to clarify that and make sure. OK, that's all I had.”
City Council · Sep 22, 2026
- Play at 1:44:18
“Question for staff. We do have general use zoning throughout the city already.”
City Council · Sep 22, 2026
- Play at 1:44:26
“So the same thing that we're considering doing here, those could, in theory, do the same, go through the same things that are happening right now and the same concerns we have, we'd have no control over.”
City Council · Sep 22, 2026
- Play at 1:45:05
“OK, thank you. Yeah, this one is relatively easy for me. I'm in favor of it. I think it's consistent with our comp plan. I think it kind of reminds me of when we were going through the Royal Oak and they had a lot of signs that said we prefer cows because it is general use. So I think we're here to represent our citizens. I think we know about the flooding and it's not every day that we actually get a piece of property that's trying to do less dense items and preserve green space. So for me this isn't easy. Yes.”
City Council · Sep 22, 2026
- Play at 1:47:21
Not quoted here: it may name a member of the public. Hear it at the meeting.
City Council · Sep 22, 2026
- Play at 1:47:52
“No, that's fine. And my last comment before I make my motion is I just would like council to consider, because if someone were to come in and start developing those homes right now on how it's zoned, we have no say in that, and I would guarantee that there would be citizens upset. Okay.”
City Council · Sep 22, 2026