The City Council’s regular meeting on February 10, 2026, concluded with a decisive vote on the controversial Gemini Lakes development (formerly Royal Oak Golf Course).

Before the Gemini Lakes debate, the Council voted 5-0 to approve the items on the Consent Agenda, which are generally routine:

• Resolution No. 2-2026: Appointing members to the Titusville Social Services Ad Hoc Committee.
• Change Order No. 1: Approving a change order for additional engineering services related to ACOM WR016.
• Trenchless Rehabilitation and Maintenance: Approving the slip lining of sewer lines and manholes.
• Updated 5-Year Capital Improvement Schedule: Approved as part of the Consent Agenda.

Comments on the Gemini Lakes Project
The lengthy public comment period provided a clear division of opinion regarding the proposed project, which intends to convert the former golf course into a residential community.

The developer’s representative requested the Council transmit the amendment to the state for review, arguing the action was not final approval. Key arguments included:

Unit Density: The current master plan caps the project at 511 residential units (approximately 3.7 units per acre), a count lower than the five units per acre legally entitled under the requested Low-Density Residential designation.
Consistency: The Low-Density Residential land use is consistent with adjacent land use categories and surrounding neighborhoods.
Fiscal Benefit: The developer advertised that the project would generate approximately $1.4 million a year for the city’s general fund at full buildout.
Staff Recommendation: City staff had a positive finding and recommended approval, specifically stating the application would not encourage urban sprawl.

Public Comments from Residents (Opposition)
The majority of public comments came from residents of the Royal Oak neighborhood who strongly opposed the transmittal, expressing concerns over legal, fiscal, and environmental risks.

Legal and Procedural Risks:
Permanent Leverage Loss: Residents argued that voting to change the Future Land Use Map to residential would be a permanent loss of legal leverage for the city, making it harder to defend future development denials.
Against P&Z Recommendation: Comments cited the Planning and Zoning Commission’s unanimous decision to recommend denial of the transmittal, instead advising the Council to conduct a small area study—the path ultimately chosen by the Council.

Environmental and Infrastructure Concerns:
Stormwater/Flooding: Concerns were raised that the former golf course currently functions as an essential stormwater retention infrastructure for surrounding properties.
Erosion and Instability: One resident association formally objected, citing an ongoing infrastructure failure and documenting a loss of 25 to 30 feet of association land due to erosion at an outfall pond.

Fiscal and Compatibility Concerns:
Unverified Revenue: The developer’s claim of $1.4 million in tax revenue was challenged, with opponents calling the figure “sales materials” due to a lack of transparent, independently verified data.
Incompatible Development: Concerns were raised that the project, allowing for smaller lots, six-plex units, and multi-story buildings, did not meet the “like-to-like” planning concept of the existing neighborhood, which is primarily large-lot detached homes.

The Final Vote: Transmittal Denied
Following an extensive and impassioned public hearing that required a motion to extend the meeting, the Council ultimately denied the developer’s request to transmit a Comprehensive Plan amendment to the state

The public hearing focused on the developer’s request to transmit a Comprehensive Plan amendment, a procedural step that would change the land use from conservation/recreation to Low-Density Residential.

After deliberation, Councilmember Nelson made a motion that was passed by the Council: “I would move to direct the staff to conduct a small area study to guide redevelopment of the area and to deny the transmittal of the comp plan amendment.”

This motion rejects the developer’s proposed change to Low-Density Residential while directing staff toward a more comprehensive, planned approach for the property’s future.

Ultimately, the Council’s decision reflects a prioritization of long-term planning over immediate development pressure. By opting for a small area study rather than a quick land-use amendment, the city has signaled a commitment to data-driven growth that respects the existing infrastructure and the environmental integrity of the Royal Oak area.

While the future of the former golf course remains an open question, the February 10th vote ensures that any eventual redevelopment will be shaped by public scrutiny and municipal oversight rather than the developer’s initial template.