We got Mr.
Wheeler, we're ready to rock. All right, so we'll call the meeting to order. Everyone, please stand, face the flag.
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 00:00:10–00:00:10 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
pledge allegiance.
I
pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
All right. Yes, early, can I get a roll call, please?
Okay, Chairperson Park.
Here.
Vice Chair Anderson. Here. Board Member Chabot. Here. Board Member Finley. Here. Board Member Greenwood. Here. Board Member Jones. Here. Board Member Stewart. ‸ Board Member Wheeler.
Here.
Board Member Sengel.
Here.
Alternate Board Member Wall.
Here.
Second alternate Bichon. ‸ And City Attorney.
Here.
All right. Thank you, ma'am. All righty. Moving on to item two, one and two, which is the agenda. Regular meeting agenda for this evening, August 6, 2025. Has everyone had time to review the agenda?
Yes. Yes.
Yes,
sir.
All right. ‸ Any movement or motions?
All 1,052 pages.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:01:27–00:01:31 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
All right. Chair will make the motion to approve the agenda as ‸ written.
Second.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:01:40–00:01:41 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Did anyone make the
motion?
I did. Oh,
okay.
Thank you.
So, any further discussion on the agenda? All in favor?
Aye.
Any ‸ opposed? Ayes have it. All right. ‸ Second item is the minutes from last month's meeting on July 9th. Does everyone have time to review the minutes?
The only thing I saw was not a unanimous vote
on the...
[unclear audio — 0:08 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:02:13–00:02:21 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
That's true. Yeah.
Otherwise...
Otherwise...
So, you want to make the motion to approve with the striking of the unanimous from that? Do you see where that is,
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:02:40–00:02:40 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Yes.
Okay. Yes. Thank you. All right. Motion... By Mr. Anderson. Second?
Second.
All right. Thank you. Second by Mr.
Sengel.
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:02:51–00:02:52 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Any further discussion on the minutes? All right. All in favor? Please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? All right. Motion passes. Unanimously. Item 3 is old business.
We
have nothing under old business. ‸ Move on to new business. Item 4. And we have the 2025 City of Cocoa Evaluation and Appraisal Report based amendment.
All right. I'll kick it off.
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:03:25–00:03:28 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:03:30–00:03:35 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
So, tonight's presentation will outline 10 of the elements. There's currently 15 in the existing comprehensive plan. We've made updates to the 10 before us. And essentially, a lot of these are timeline and deadline references, but additional updates to the future land use and ‸ sanitary sewer elements specifically.
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:04:02–00:04:06 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
seven years for every municipality and county. These are ‸ state mandated. And in 2024, the City of Cocoa received a letter that the amendments or the ear would be required. And amendments are due September 20th of 2025 for review. Just as a refresher, the comprehensive plan is a long-range planning document. Essentially a blueprint to the City. And much like a book, a comprehensive plan has elements similar to a book.
It
has chapters. These include policy goals and objectives. They're all outlined within the comprehensive plan. So, the timeline started back ‸ when the City received the letter back in September of 2024, but we initially kicked off the project in January and had additional research ‸ and discussions with staff, the City Manager, through April, and then completed an assessment report of the City, which is essentially our findings and analysis through April and July. And then now we are here with the finalized text and map amendments with a transmittal and public hearings. ‸ Following tonight's meeting, this will go to the City Council, which would transmit this to the Department of Commerce for a review and consideration, and then
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:05:40–00:05:45 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
year. So, I'll go through the 10 elements that we've updated and provide key highlights of what changes were made. The first is the future land use element. This designates location and the various land uses, such as residential, commercial, and conservation alike.
[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:06:08–00:06:14 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
to all land use categories subject to review. And then the second one is to add text that removes residential design standards to single-family and two-family dwellings. I do want to note that the residential design standards may not be applied to specific areas, such as a CRA.
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:06:39–00:06:43 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
So, those could still be applied there. The transportation element guides the City transportation and addresses needs for road capacity, as well as bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure. The key changes here were updated to the jurisdictional assignments. We worked with the Public Works Department to identify which roads and jurisdiction assignments were for each.
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:07:10–00:07:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
identified, is that these are also city and county roads. The housing element outlines strategies and principles related to adequate housing, affordable housing, and also eliminates substandard housing.
[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:07:33–00:07:38 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
This is a ‸ state statute that was approved in 2023 and is not outlined in the current Comprehensive Plan. Essentially, it's a tool that provides workforce housing or affordable housing for ‸ new development. We also eliminated references to any dates that have since passed. The sanitary sewer addresses wastewater collection and treatment services. The key changes here ‸ includes updates to level of service standards and dates that were noted within the existing Comprehensive Plan. The significant changes in this one includes three additional policies, which is outlined.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:08:29–00:08:35 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:08:36–00:08:38 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
that were included,
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
essentially to identify where these developments are that are currently on septic and would need to convert to central sewer.
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:08:50–00:08:54 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
And then ‸ the second policy that was added is, does the city have capacity to serve? Working with the utility department,
it
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:09:04–00:09:08 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
to serve.
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:09:09–00:09:11 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
to serve. Essentially, this ties the Comprehensive Plan with the wastewater capital plan and gives an idea of how this would be completed. Potable water elements
ensure
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:09:24–00:09:26 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
safety and reliable water supplies for residents and businesses. ‸ This is critical for sustainable growth. Updates include level of service standards and coordination with the utility department. Natural water, natural groundwater and aquifer element is to protect and preserve freshwater aquifer and recharge areas. This added text was to link back to the sanitary sewer. So having similar policies within various elements only makes that element a little bit or those policies stronger. So this was one that was applicable to add in the groundwater aquifer element as well. Coastal management provides a clear defined coastal planning area and also protects the coastal wetlands and marine resources and estuary water qualities. Updates here were also timeline and deadline references throughout this element. Public schools facilities element. This
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:10:44–00:10:48 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
City of Cocoa. ‸ The key change here was to update text related to proportionate fair share payment and concurrency related to development timing. Conservation element. Essentially the framework that protects and maintaining the city's natural resources. Again, we wanted to tie back the the sewer element, the sanitary sewer element that was included. Again, only making it a bit stronger.
Okay.
And then lastly was the capital improvement element. This is essentially the monetary backbone for implementing the comprehensive plan. The major key change here was including the CIP from 2025 through 2029. In addition to the text, we also updated maps in
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:11:59–00:12:01 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
There was approximately 27 maps total.
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:12:05–00:12:10 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
and current, the city's boundary has essentially changed due to annexations and so therefore updated those. We also work with various departments and government agencies to update these as well. So these are in the staff report, but they're also the criteria essentially listed in the LDC that allow for an amendment to the comprehensive plan. I won't go through each one of these, but essentially it's no substantial change that would have an economic impact to the city. The amendments will not have any effect on natural or historical resources. And the ear-based amendments do not modify density or intensities in any of the land uses. Through this criteria, staff recommends that the planning and zoning board recommend approval to transmit the proposed ‸ coordinated state review, comprehensive plan, text, and map amendments to the city council. And then, so the next steps following the decision that you all make tonight would go to city council in a few weeks towards the end of August. Based on city council, should they transmit to the state, state will review. And we'll meet our deadline of September of 2025. And then following state's review,
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 00:13:41–00:13:42 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
be brought back to city council for adoption and completion. Myself, Alexis, and Erica are also here to answer any questions you guys may have.
All right.
Thank you, Patrick. Thank you.
Does
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 00:14:00–00:14:00 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
have any questions for staff? Good.
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:14:02–00:14:33 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:20 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:07 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:14:33–00:14:37 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:14:39–00:14:40 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
All right. Yes, sir.
[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:14:44–00:14:50 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Yeah. Can I give
this one over to you? Sure.
Sure.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:14:55–00:14:56 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
as
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:14:56–00:14:57 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
As
Patrick said, this was probably the most substantial change hitting on what was said earlier and what was asked by Mr. Greenwood. This update,
this update,
we were very narrow in our scope.
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:15:07–00:15:11 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
could change. We ‸ said, ‸ these state law changes occurred. This policy doesn't match with that state law. Let's fix that one policy. So that's why your package, while lengthy due to the data and backup, the actual amendments are pretty minimal in nature because we just made those state law change type policy updates.
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:15:31–00:15:36 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
That was, again, a change to state law. And from a big picture standpoint, the state of Florida, we're obviously a coastal state. Natural resource protection, coastal water protection is of huge importance to the economy, quality of life,
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:15:53–00:15:54 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
So the state legislature looked at, you know, groundwater is super important to us. How can we start looking at improving this? And so they said, well, one of the issues we have is with with antiquated older septic tanks. New ones function pretty good from what experts say, but we've got a lot of old pre-flatted subdivisions, small lots with a high density of old septic tanks that are now getting to be 50 plus years old. And so the legislature said, if we want to target water quality improvements, let's look at where we've got a lot of these old septic tanks together in one place where there's, you know, if all of them start leaking at the same time, we've got a substantial issue in this one localized area. So the state law said, if you've got a subdivision of 50 lots or more on septic, you have 10 years to figure out a plan to convert them to a centralized sanitary sewer source. So let's take these larger subdivisions and get them on on centralized sewer. If you've got, you know, if you're Brevard County or you've got larger lots where there's not a high density of septic tanks, it's not as big of a concern.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:17:10–00:17:12 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:17:13–00:17:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
compared to other jurisdictions we worked in
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:17:18–00:17:22 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
of confidence, say they can do this in 10 years. So when we looked at it and worked with your utilities department, we felt that ‸ and we've run these policies
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:17:30–00:17:33 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
say you've only got two subdivisions that are 58 lots or more and that are still on septic. So that's good. You only ‸ have these two areas. Then we said what would be the wastewater facility servicing that it's the
jerry
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:17:48–00:17:48 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
sellers, as Patrick noted and good that has capacity in it for those homes. And by the way, your
utilities
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:17:54–00:17:55 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
department, when we asked them, hey, are you aware of this? Actually, they were all over it. They Mr. Walsh already had like a memo prepared with all this information for us.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:18:04–00:18:05 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
but it is really the data already available within the city because they were working on this. So, yes, your wastewater plant has the capacity.
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:18:14–00:18:19 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
to the home and getting it to the wastewater plant, which we've got. Ten years to do. And the policy notes that they will continue to evaluate work that into the wastewater master plan. And then the state funding piece is that the state can't levy an unfunded mandate on a city. They can't say, hey, fix all these problems that cost millions of dollars and do it in 10 years and buy. They ‸ have to help where help is needed. So that's where we included the clause where state funding is available. Certainly the city has resources and will work on these things. But we wanted to include that flexibility in the policy that really the state needs to ‸ partner with municipalities to make these important changes.
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:19:02–00:19:07 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:19:07–00:19:12 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
deadline. And I hope ‸ that answers the question.
Sort of.
Okay.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:19:19–00:19:21 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Yes. So we look at a bigger picture because the city is cut up all over the place.
[unclear audio — 0:09 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:19:29–00:19:38 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
has it been asked, ‸ can we facilitate that? Can we handle that amount of stuff?
Yes.
[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:19:47–00:19:53 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:19:53–00:19:58 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
I know we can't mandate, you know, under the umbrella city of Cocoa, it had to go to, you know, Brevard County. So I was curious, does the county also have something similar to this and is going to also mandate it based on the same language? The
county will have to evaluate where they have subdivisions of 50 lots or more and then evaluate if there's capacity in the plant that serves that area and come up with a plan if additional capacity is needed. Fortunately,
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:20:27–00:20:31 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
out how to get unincorporated subdivisions onto their sewer system. And we're really just required to evaluate within our city limits what, where are the subdivisions that are mandated? And we identified them and we do have capacity to connect each and every home in those subdivisions to our centralized facility. So.
Is the, is the number 50, the number, does that come from us, you, the state?
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:20:59–00:21:01 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Okay. That's all I do. Thank you.
All right. Thank you.
I didn't see any reference to reclaimed, uh, past or future projections. Is reclaimed water, uh, part of this study as well?
We're not required by the state to have reclaim. So we, we, again, we're only looking at state mandated changes. ‸ Okay.
Because I didn't see any reference in there. So ‸ it's not standard state mandated. It's not state mandated. Correct. Okay.
Thank you.
Good question. Anyone?
I
got one. On the sewage. Um, I live in Carlton Terrace. Um, I just put a septic tank in two years ago and there's other people that's got new septics. So that means everybody will have to hook up or if they have a newer system.
‸ Unfortunately, this, and I'll defer to Christian as well, but the statute doesn't state if the septic tank is X years or newer.
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:22:02–00:22:06 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:22:06–00:22:12 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
that the city consider the feasibility of providing sewer.
[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:22:17–00:22:23 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
as, as Alexis was explaining, we have the capacity, um, and that the city believes it's feasible to, to do so. Um, provided that there's funding to, you know, to actually, um, make those projects happen. So there right now,
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:22:44–00:22:45 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
the comprehensive plan or anything that is mandating ‸ connections or anything like that. Really what we're just, we're tasked with doing is determining whether or not it's feasible to bring sewer to these areas. And the state asked us to study this and put it in the, in the comp plan. So that's, that's what we're doing.
Okay.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:23:07–00:23:11 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
my neighborhood that know I'm on this board and they think I'm doing more than what I'm really doing. Um,
and
they want me to ‸ answer every question that comes up at city council. So, um, now I can ‸ be very educated and tell them, chill out.
But, but
[unclear audio — 0:07 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:23:36–00:23:43 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
‸ it and an advanced septic system.
Um,
so that there, there may be the confusion there. If you're in the B map area, which is primarily, I'll say, let's just say primarily east of us one. You are required by, I think 2030 to be on an advanced, uh, septic system. Okay. Yeah. Thank you.
All right. Any other questions for staff? Mr. Wall.
Just
want to make sure.
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:24:16–00:24:19 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
but otherwise I don't see anybody else in the public. All right. Sorry about that. All right. Anybody like to make any moves? Motions on, for the board here. All right. Mr. Chibot, make the motion to do what, sir?
[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:24:40–00:24:45 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Working on it.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:24:47–00:24:48 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
No, I'd like
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:24:49–00:24:50 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
I
[unclear audio ▶]
But I just,
did
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:24:51–00:24:51 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
not the best. All right. So we have the motion, second and the second. Uh, any further discussion on the item? I thought the questions
are
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:24:59–00:24:59 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
very good. All right.
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:25:01–00:25:04 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
All
right. The motion passes unanimously.
Thank you.
Thank you. Excellent job. All right. So we'll move on to item number five,
the
tree board. Anything we have for the tree board? There's nothing ‸ on here currently. Anybody like to discuss anything on the tree board? Go ahead. Mr. Greenwood.
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said); the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 00:25:26–00:25:31 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
to what we're doing in this city.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:25:48–00:25:50 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:25:50–00:25:58 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:11 ▶]
The handout that I gave you was something that I also underlined in red, the areas that were
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:26:09–00:26:12 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 00:26:14–00:26:17 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
And I'm hoping that we're going to be putting more attention like this one did on the day that ‸ wasn't
even
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:26:29–00:26:29 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
here on the importance of that.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:26:33–00:26:35 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
It's no secret. You can lower temperatures by almost 20 degrees based on the shade that trees provide. They also help by eating up excess water during hurricanes, things like that. And I just wanted to bring that up. That it's important because there's some new projects coming up that I'm going to be really hoping to preserve that what we have. And hopefully with new projects coming up that they might end up adding even more. And I'm talking mainly ‸ not just
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:27:14–00:27:16 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
And that puts us on the map, which is oak trees, live oak trees.
[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:27:21–00:27:27 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
And actually the roots are something that can be worked with. It's the tap root, the main root that goes down from the base of the trunk all the way underground. If you alter that you can kill the tree. Now in downtown Cocoa Village a lot of people don't know this. But when ‸ I was on the original board we ‸ had engineers design something that would allow workability if roots do come up.
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:28:06–00:28:10 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
So what they did was they compacted the soil. They made arrangements to plant it and then they put another layer. It's like lime rock on top of it and the brick paver and that's compacted. And the brick pavers go on top of it. Now the reason that it's done that way. If there is a root that comes and causes one of those bricks to rise.
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:28:37–00:28:40 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
You remove ‸ the bricks.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:28:43–00:28:45 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
root is causing the problem. And you put it back together like a puzzle. It's something that can be corrected in a matter of a few hours. That's why
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:28:55–00:28:58 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:28:59–00:29:03 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
to say. That I've heard say. Well you know the trees cause an issue. A maintenance issue with roots and things like that. Well you have to do a little more homework under that subject.
And
then realize that live oaks. They do have roots that go out. But they need to be planted correctly. New ones.
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:29:25–00:29:28 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
This is why the brick pavers were designed that way. So we could work with the trees that we got. Instead of slowly eliminating them. I don't know of Melbourne. Especially Cocoa Beach. That can be recognized with the number of oak trees that they have in the city like we do. We are very unique. And that's all I wanted to share with everybody. Unless there's some questions anybody has.
Thank you. Thank you Mr. Greenwood. Any further discussion on the
treat
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:30:06–00:30:06 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
for the tree
board
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:30:07–00:30:07 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Yeah ‸ I have
a request from
staff. And I think this is something that's doable by the next time that we meet. I would request or like to request staff to provide a ‸ list or an inventory I should say of the trees that may potentially be impacted by what we talked about last month. The 430 Brevard Avenue mixed use development agreement.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:30:36–00:30:37 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:30:37–00:30:40 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
And I went over there after the meeting and looked. And it ‸ looks like 15 or 20 trees. So I would just like to have a beginning inventory of how many trees may or may not be impacted by that future.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:30:55–00:30:56 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:30:57–00:30:59 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
I agree completely.
Just like a starting point so we know exactly how many trees are there and what their sizes are for future use.
So I would just suggest that that information will come back to you when there is a site plan that you're requested to approve.
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:31:18–00:31:18 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
to be required to provide a landscape plan ‸ as well as a tree survey to tell you.
Okay. So ‸ they do a
tree
survey of ‸ what is current before they present? Correct. Okay.
Yes.
All
right.
That's what I wanted to see.
They're also
in the public right-of-way. It's not part of them. Well,
as
long
as I just wanted to make sure that the inventory was done early so that we don't lose anything.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:31:46–00:31:47 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
No.
Well,
I would suggest to the board that I think it would be best. My recommendation would be to wait until they present that to you ‸ so that there's not any concern about presenting it outside of the hearing where they're present. ‸ I wasn't
sure that they did that prior to the construction.
They
will.
They will.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:32:12–00:32:16 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 00:32:17–00:32:39 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:22 ▶]
said. Yeah.
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:32:41–00:32:43 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
With all that being said and done, I think the proactivity of this board is requesting is that the applicant is made aware that this is something that's going to
be. I
don't know.
I
could be in you guys' pre-planning sessions.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:32:54–00:32:56 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:32:56–00:32:59 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
‸ favorably looking at. We're looking forward to seeing in our next occasion of them coming forward, which I believe should be rather
soon right
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:33:08–00:33:09 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Well, they have another presentation before the counselor's second reading. After that is probably when they do the development agreement, and then they're going to come before us. Am I wrong or right about that?
No. The development agreement ‸ has already been approved by the council. There's not a second hearing on that. But they do have. I think it was 15 months.
They
have quite a while.
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:33:36–00:33:40 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
They have, I believe, up to 18 months to submit their application. So it's really in their hands to determine when they're going to submit.
Thank you.
Yeah.
All right.
Thank you. That's good.
Any other items for the tree board?
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:34:00–00:34:03 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
All right. Moving on to open discussion. Anybody have anything for open discussion?
I need to make a request in reference to our paperwork that we get, because we've got a lot of new people that are on staff now. I don't have a computer that's capable ink-wise or paper-wise for me to print off of a computer what the agendas are. And I was hoping that I could still request that a hard copy is left downstairs at the security guard counter where I can pick it up like I used to do.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:34:39–00:34:42 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:34:42–00:34:42 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
I'm
sorry.
Well, ‸ that's
okay. ‸ I went and spent a lot of time on the computer to play catch-up.
Yeah. Yeah. Alex, I did the same thing yesterday.
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:34:51–00:34:54 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
They didn't have it up there. They did a little bit of research and found that it was back in the, if they don't have
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:34:59–00:35:02 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
the
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:35:02–00:35:05 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
All right. Thank you. And then I also wanted to establish I'm not at a computer 24-7. And I know a lot of people that work in offices are.
[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:35:18–00:35:24 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
the computer until I have time to go read all the emails. So it's easier if you want a quorum or whatever. Monica used to just call and ask me if I'm going to show up or not.
Okay. So you would like to receive a phone call? I think it'd be
easier for everybody.
Okay.
Let's just take a special vote for everybody that wants an email versus a phone call.
And
then I can. Okay.
Yeah. That was a multiple ‸ questions.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:35:57–00:36:01 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:36:02–00:36:04 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
I don't use it for that because I had somebody try to
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:36:07–00:36:14 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said); numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:36:15–00:36:21 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Any other items for open discussion?
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:36:25–00:36:27 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
All right. Then I'll say happy birthday to the United States Coast Guard. That was on Monday. It was their birthday. And tomorrow is Purple Heart Day. So keep ‸ those who are no longer with us and with us in your hearts. All right? Because they worked hard for us to still be here. ‸ Moving on to other business. Nothing's under other business.
[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:36:47–00:36:53 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
here at the City Hall.
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said) · 00:36:55–00:36:58 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Yes. Those were just, there were a few maps in your packet that were updated. So those are just the revised maps.
All
right.
Yeah. Thank you. All right. Anybody would like to adjourn?
Motion to adjourn. Second.
Anybody have a motion and a second? Any further discussion on adjournment? All in favor, please say aye.
Aye.
Aye. Any opposed? All right. Motion passes unanimously. Have a good evening.
Great meeting. We've only
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:37:35–00:37:36 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:37:37–00:37:40 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:37:40–00:37:45 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]