Built from the City's minutes records — no AI-written textBriefing final
The City's record
What the City's record shows
Built only from the City's minutes (1429_PZ_Reg_Minutes_03_03_2021.pdf). Page numbers are the minutes' own. Discussion is in the minutes' text; it is not summarised here.
Attendance (the roll call)
Listed present when the roll was taken: Michael Dobrin, Al Washington, Jeri Blanco, Sherry Ervin, Trina Gilliam, Marilyn Green, Susan Mock, Russell Sengel, Aleck Greenwood
(Checked against the ballots and the printed roll lines; no independent membership list of this board is available to confirm that the roll is complete.)
Listed absent: Todd Anderson, Debbie Joyce
Also listed as present (staff and other roles): Kristin Eick (Board Attorney), Dodie Selig (Planning & Zoning Manager), Alix Bernard (Senior Planner), Lavander Hearn (Board Liaison), Monica Arsenault (Recording Secretary)
Named on at least one ballot later in the meeting: BLANCO, DOBRIN, ERVIN, GILLIAM, GREEN, GREENWOOD, MOCK, SENGEL, WASHINGTON (participation, which can differ from the roll: arrivals and departures are in the minutes' text)
Adopted actions (5)
to APPROVE THE MARCH 3, 2021 AGENDA AS WRITTEN (moved by ERVIN, seconded by GREEN); PASSED 9-0; ayes: DOBRIN, WASHINGTON, BLANCO, ERVIN, GILLIAM, GREEN, GREENWOOD, MOCK, SENGEL; nays: none — the City's minutes, pp. 1–2
to APPROVE THE FEBRUARY 3, 2021 MINUTES AS WRITTEN (moved by BLANCO, seconded by GREEN); PASSED 9-0; ayes: DOBRIN, WASHINGTON, BLANCO, ERVIN, GILLIAM, GREEN, GREENWOOD, MOCK, SENGEL; nays: none — the City's minutes, pp. 1–2
to RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO CITY COUNCIL OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING APPENDIX A, ZONING, ARTICLE XI, SECTIONS 4A, 5 AND 6 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF COCOA; LIMITING THE FUTURE APPLICATION OF THE RU-2-10 ZONING DISTRICT AND THE REGULATIONS THEREIN PERTAINING TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF SINGLE-FAMILY … (moved by BLANCO, seconded by WASHINGTON); PASSED 8-1; ayes: DOBRIN, WASHINGTON, BLANCO, ERVIN, GILLIAM, GREEN, MOCK, SENGEL; nays: GREENWOOD — the City's minutes, p. 3; the vote on p. 4
to RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO CITY COUNCIL OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING APPENDIX A, ARTICLE XI, SECTIONS 18 AND 22 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF COCOA; ALLOWING TOWNHOUSES AND SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES AS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION USE WITHIN THE CORE COMMERCIAL DISTRICT AND CERTAIN SUB-DISTRICTS OF THE COOCA … (moved by GREEN, seconded by SENGEL); PASSED 9-0; ayes: DOBRIN, WASHINGTON, BLANCO, ERVIN, GILLIAM, GREEN, GREENWOOD, MOCK, SENGEL; nays: none — the City's minutes, p. 6
to ADJOURN THE REGULAR MEETING OF MARCH 3, 2021 (moved by ERVIN, seconded by GILLIAM); PASSED 9-0; ayes: DOBRIN, WASHINGTON, BLANCO, ERVIN, GILLIAM, GREEN, GREENWOOD, MOCK, SENGEL; nays: none — the City's minutes, p. 7
Agenda (the City's wording)
The City's agenda for this meeting is on file (PZ_Reg_Packet_03_03_2021), but its item list has not been read reliably by machine yet, so no outline is shown.
Transcript Partial transcript
Machine transcription of the meeting recording. The words are the recognizer's, except where a passage is marked as corrected or machine re-recognized; most have
not been checked against the audio, so words, numbers and names can be misheard.
It describes what was said. It cannot establish who voted how, an amount or an outcome — the City's
minutes do that (above).
A time links to its passage, and “Copy link” copies that link. No recording can be started from here.
230 suspect passage(s) marked in place; inspection incomplete: language review.
How this transcript was made. New machine transcription of the whole recording, with 10 voices separated from the audio.
26 short machine repair(s) (30 word(s)) are labelled in place, with the original words beside them: an ordinary word was replaced only where two further machine readings agreed on a different one.
Checks run on this transcript: the recognizer's own warning signs and whether a voice was detected where the words are. Not completed: language review.
A second, independent machine reading was compared with it word by word: the same words for 86.1% of 8,740 content words.
Dotted words (301 places) are ordinary wording differences: hover or tap to see the other reading.
230 passages (23% of the words) are marked suspect: their words are not shown ("unclear audio") and support no statement: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ; the language review questioned them; or no voice was detected there.
Agreement between two machine readings is not verification.
Inspection is incomplete: language review.
Speakers were separated by voice. A plain name rests on evidence tied to that voice; “provisional” is a name from an earlier text-only pass and is not verified; “Speaker N” is an unidentified voice.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:00:07–00:00:10 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:00:17–00:00:18 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 00:00:34–00:00:58 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:01:18–00:01:18 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; words only one machine reading has (possibly not said); the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 00:01:26–00:01:47 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:01:53–00:01:58 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
All right. Since we're distanced, I'm going to take the mask off so you can hear me a little bit better. Okay. Um, so this item came before you some time back and the board had decided that, uh, there were a couple of members that had some concerns and so you tabled it to this meeting. I've met with both of those board members independently. And so I'm bringing the item back to you with a bit more explanation of ‸ how it works. Um, that hopefully
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:02:55–00:02:56 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:03:28–00:03:28 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
so I've tried it ‸ into a table for you to kind of compare, um, RU 17 is our standard single family zoning ‸ district. Then there's the RU 210, um, where we're removing this, uh, reference to. And then there's 215 and 225. And you can see here that they reference, um, building as regulated by 210. And that's the, the issue that we're, we're facing.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:04:43–00:04:53 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:05:01–00:05:03 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:05:10–00:05:13 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:05:18–00:05:21 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Yeah. The last time. So here's the, uh, all the setbacks. Um, again, you can see RU 17 and 215, or 210, excuse me, are, um, identical in their setbacks.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:05:40–00:05:44 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Yeah. Okay. So the, let me see if I can use this. We may have to do some zooming in, Monica. Okay. This, you see the sort of golden color? That's land that's RU 215. The pale yellow is the single family RU 17. And then can you zoom into kind of this area down here?
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:07:45–00:07:47 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
mouse, you'll have to hit it about three times to. There you go. Yeah. How's that? That's good. So we have some more 215 here, um, in this area. And then this darker brown color is the RU 225. And those are the only areas where we really have that zoning right now. And it's specific. The, the district for RU 225 is kind of like a consent decree. It's, it's geographically listed as areas in, in close proximity to the downtown.
you have 225 here and here, and then other areas of the city, like I said, we have 215 up here, the, this area and then sporadically other places, um, in the city.
example of a square, I mean a rectangular box, how it would fit on the dimensions of where there's a corner lot, where there's a regular inside lot, to make it obvious. But basically, the point was that sides seemed okay. Eight foot and, and, um, 15 foot, and the other ones were 25 foot.
And that was basically something that I showed a concern about, and I think that, uh, uh, Sal did too. Who? I mean, um, I'm, Susan, I'm sorry. I'm thinking too fast right now.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:12:25–00:12:31 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:13:00–00:13:02 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
case another question comes up. Thanks. Um, yeah. So the, yeah, there's the, the setbacks you're talking about. Right. So what we're saying is that what's proposed, if you build in 215, you're given the option of going with the 215 size, um, ‸ or going with the RU17 size? Well,
it's the RU7 and the 210 that would allow only that depth in the rear backyard. Um, the sides, the setbacks, I can work with that. I mean, not that I can work with it. What I'm trying to say is it makes sense because as a developer, the six foot setback really is more like 16 feet between the houses, even though you don't see the, the setback when they're on the inside
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:13:59–00:14:00 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
I have five foot. You even have five. Yeah, that's right. So it's 10. ‸ So that seems okay. And a corner is anywhere from 25 to 30, but it's the rear backyard. It's like, and then you, if you have a neighbor on the opposite side of you, you're only 30 feet away. And what can you do in a backyard 15 foot deep? You definitely, I don't know. Can you put a pool? No, no, I didn't think so. I mean, that's the only issue I see. As something that might, to me, not be attractive construction. As a matter of fact, we had Larry here, not too long ago, where he was, uh, discussing with everyone here about putting too much building on a piece of property. If y'all basically that's the bottom line. And this is doing exactly that,
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:15:12–00:15:14 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:15:14–00:15:16 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
if there's a drainage or utility easement, so that would maybe be five feet already. So now they've already lost five feet and they only have 10 to do anything. I think that was our concern last meeting.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:16:29–00:16:30 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:16:34–00:16:36 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:17:06–00:17:14 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
And the city went behind this one lady's house ‸ and created in the easement behind her house a retention area that didn't exist before. Because it's an easement, the city was allowed to do it. And she's had nothing but flooding. I don't know if any of y'all were there at that meeting. But now she's got a flooding issue that didn't exist until that was done.
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:17:50–00:17:51 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Anyway, I just have one. I don't know if the city of Cocoa is. In the rear easement, if the accessory structure is on concrete, then yes, it has to be out of the easement. If you're just putting it on skids where it can be
An accessory structure has to have a five foot setback of its own from the property line. Which, most of those older lots have a five foot easement anyway, so ‸ that usually is comparable.
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said); a language review questioned the wording · 00:18:59–00:19:05 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:19:14–00:19:19 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
going to mirror? And so what we've said in the ordinance is to say, you have a choice, you can either build under the 215 regulations or the 17, right?
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:19:54–00:19:57 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Yeah. Sorry, Dodie, just to add to that. So the, if you were to choose the RU17, then you would have the larger lot sizes. If you would choose the RU215, then you would have smaller lot
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:20:14–00:20:14 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Sorry. Well, because you said the open space, let's face it, most of these lots in this area are older lots. They're not going to be, they're not going to have to have an open space because you're only going to be building one house. Right? Is that right? Well,
And I want to tear the house that's on there down and build a new one. Okay. It's a single family home. Right. Which is what most of them down here is going to be, correct? Right. Right.
individual will be told that if you build your house this size, you only have a 15 foot rear setback and they could elect to reduce the footprint on their own.
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:22:30–00:22:30 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:22:36–00:22:36 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:22:41–00:22:43 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:22:52–00:22:55 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:22:57–00:23:00 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:23:00–00:23:01 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:23:13–00:23:13 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:23:15–00:23:19 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:23:26–00:23:29 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:23:29–00:23:31 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:23:50–00:23:52 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:24:09–00:24:12 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:24:14–00:24:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:24:27–00:24:29 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:24:33–00:24:33 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:25:32–00:25:32 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:25:37–00:25:39 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:26:15–00:26:20 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
remains the same as it was that we approve the ordinance ‸ as, well, no, not as written. I apologize. You all have a revised copy that the attorney just provided us that does make a slight change,
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:26:43–00:26:43 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:26:57–00:27:04 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
if I have this backwards, Kristen, but the intent really is to make sure that we're not creating non-conforming lots. So if something's existing now, we didn't want to create a scenario where something would be unlawful.
Thanks. Just Monica's got to swap out my presentation. Sorry. We're moving away from the podium and the laptop here. And so she's going to in future be ‸ having
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:28:36–00:28:39 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:28:44–00:28:47 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
infill development, um, in, in those areas, uh, where we have a lot of these older lots that are small, um, and couldn't, uh, really become a larger, wouldn't, wouldn't be large enough without combining with a, a number of other parcels in order to support commercial, um, or larger residential development. Um, and I want to show you where we're talking about Monica. Can you do my other
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:29:35–00:29:35 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Okay. So this is the, I didn't have a chance to get with IT and do a proper map for you, but the red outline is the area where the core commercial zoning district exists. So this is actually the waterfront overlay map. Um, so this area here north of, of,
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:31:32–00:31:32 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Um, I have a question. What basically brought on this idea for us to review as changing the use for the area that you just identified on the map? What created the... The ordinance
or the need for the change? Right. Right? Um, two things. One, actually three things. One is there's an individual whose family home, uh, is the one little piece that's on the north side of 520, um, who would like to redevelop the house, or the property. And he's gonna ‸ have to take the house down in order to go two stories.
in his case, it's the second change we're proposing, um, that affects ‸ the waterfront overlay. He wouldn't be able to build a house structure. The way that waterfront overlay district works, and I know it's impossible for you to read this, uh,
The sub-districts allow uses, but these up here in the table, this list on the left is the sub-district name, and then across the top there are building types. And a house is a building type, and
And house is not an option. It's not that he couldn't have a single-family home, it's, it's not about the use in the table, it's about the form. And so house wasn't an option for him, but that's what he'd need, and so that's why the change, that change. Um.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:33:29–00:33:34 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
what started more the, the looking at the whole area was two things. One is, um, at the very south end of, I'll hold up the map, uh, for you again. Down here at the
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:33:49–00:33:51 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Um, we have a potential project that the city did an RFP, a request for a proposal a couple of years ago. And that was proposed to be townhomes, but they're not allowed ‸ in the core commercial district. So, that was a potential issue that may be coming up, and so we're trying to correct that, um, and kind of be, you know, a bit more, uh, consistent. And then we also have a, a development, um, potential
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:34:19–00:34:19 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
So, um, that's when we started taking a look at what, what else was built through there, and I discovered the other single family homes, which we have up at the north end of that, that stretch,
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:35:12–00:35:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:35:39–00:35:39 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
You know. And then he could do it. What's that? If he left up a couple of walls and did not demo that whole house, he could build a house. That's the way I understand it.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:35:58–00:36:00 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:36:03–00:36:04 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:36:27–00:36:31 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:36:39–00:36:40 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Because at that point, they're not demoing the whole house. Right. He tears the whole house down. That's different. That's different. But if he leaves two walls on the foundation. Yes. He's remodeling at that point. Right. Even though it's major. Yes. But theoretically, he could get away with doing that. Um. So it's not gonna matter if you change it or not.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:37:38–00:37:41 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:37:45–00:37:52 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:38:01–00:38:05 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
I understand where the townhouses were proposed. Um, I know that across the street, the Mexican restaurant is up for sale. If somebody were to buy. That property. Yeah. And it extends pretty far back to the property. Does this. If I'm reading this right.
Small and medium. And institutional. Which would be like a school, a library. Okay. Fire department, that sort of thing. Um. And then the single story commercial is an option on that lot.
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:39:36–00:39:36 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said); the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:39:53–00:40:00 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:40:24–00:40:26 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
The other thing that is that finding it says here, um, in the downtown area where the CC district is located would allow, if we approve this, infill redevelopment
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:40:49–00:40:53 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
No, no, um, it's to allow somebody to build on those smaller lots that exist without having, you know, so you could build a house on a lot rather than having to buy several lots in order to build a commercial building.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:42:00–00:42:01 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
um, I think we've covered most of what I had in, in there. Um, that it would allow the, yeah, townhomes and the sub districts. Um, and single family and duplex uses, uh, in the other districts.
to rebuild the house, um, where he couldn't do, do so in the King Willard sub district, um, with a house building type. Um, so staff's recommendation obviously is, uh, is that you approve, uh, the changes, um,
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:43:09–00:43:10 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
the city was going to put an RFP on it. Uh, if we, if this is not approved, it basically would mean that the parcels, a large one like that would be for, um, a large multifamily project, um, and or commercial.
So it basically, according to Susan's point, that you could still build commercial there, even though we approve this. So if the one person that has the one house, which is right dead, where 520 traffic, that curve slows everybody down. Um, that could be rebuilt as another house with nothing but commercial all around it.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:44:36–00:44:37 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:45:14–00:45:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
that... I thought you were telling me that the whole purpose, that was one of the reasons that the, there's a request to change this idea to what's before us now, was for him to be able to rebuild his house. Yeah. Did I misunderstand something?
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:45:57–00:45:58 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 00:47:03–00:47:05 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
have a house that's there now. Right. Yes. Right. So if we don't do anything, there's still going to be a house there. Right. Exactly. But it will be a commercial.
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:47:47–00:47:47 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:47:52–00:47:55 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:47:56–00:47:57 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
anyone else wanted to do this, what this gentleman's requesting, they would have to have a special exception as well. Each and every time. Is that correct? Yes. That's
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:48:16–00:48:17 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said) · 00:48:18–00:48:20 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Yes. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it looks like, based on this drawing, that it would be a substandard lot for improvement for a residential property. So that's where the special
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:48:35–00:48:37 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:48:46–00:48:46 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:48:53–00:48:54 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:48:56–00:49:01 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
that house. Not really. Because I've had a non-conforming lot of record. And there were two parcels I did on Peachtree Street near the river. And I had to go before the board to get approval for enhancing the non-conforming identity of that property.
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said); the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:50:17–00:50:17 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said) · 00:50:23–00:50:26 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:50:28–00:50:28 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Can't you see ‸ in our code, it says you can ‸ rebuild a single-family home on a non-conforming lot of record if it's in a zoning district that allows single-family homes. And this isn't just. So, right. You can't rebuild. Unless you make the change.
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said) · 00:50:54–00:50:57 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Yes. Well, no, yes. ‸ If we approve this, there's a special request, a special exception that needs to be made for his needs for that lot even though we approve this.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:51:19–00:51:23 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:52:29–00:52:31 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
So the former arborist for the city is now a project manager and, um, and not actively, um, under his, his former license. However, um, public works tells me that there are two more people who are in the process of gaining,
I have a question on the subject. Has there been, I've noticed that it's been very quiet about any tree issues that, uh, there was a concern about having them removed or not. Has it been quiet or has there been any issues? Nothing
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:53:50–00:53:50 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:53:54–00:53:58 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Well, the other good news is that now, and I was discussing this with the city manager, that, uh, we have, uh, excelled the time it takes to get a permit.
And one was, uh, given as an example of a person needing to replace, uh, their windows with high, uh, impact windows. And that was done online like that. Uh, there was a two others and everybody is just excited about that because it is a good way to change the reputation we had. And I've said it before that you, if you want to build something,
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:55:17–00:55:19 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 00:55:20–00:55:22 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
in the newspaper as a matter of fact yesterday. I didn't read. I just saw the headline. I haven't read it yet either. But I did see an email come across to say that yes in fact that that had been announced. But I don't know exactly when they're going to actually break down.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:56:32–00:56:37 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:56:41–00:56:41 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said); a language review questioned the wording · 00:56:41–00:56:51 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
We are actually just, ‸ that was approved, the one you're talking about for the Winn-Dixie site. Yeah, that went to council and was approved. But there's conditions on the approval and I'm needing ‸ a set of plans to be sent back, to be revised and sent back to us. And then the development agreement needs to be signed and that's going to be like the next step. So there's still, ‸ it's a process.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:57:17–00:57:27 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:57:29–00:57:29 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
changed based on whichever brand, hotel brand. Because they'll bring their own, you know, needs or preferences. And so that may. So that's, we're okay then I
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:58:40–00:58:41 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:58:45–00:58:49 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:58:52–00:58:54 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:59:18–00:59:19 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:59:20–00:59:21 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 00:59:22–00:59:26 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
She's right. You know, since I've been on this board, we have changed that, the zoning code, I don't know how many, how much there was. But look at how many apartment buildings and businesses and everything
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:59:37–00:59:40 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output; the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 00:59:43–00:59:50 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 01:00:13–01:00:17 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:00:20–01:00:20 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:00:29–01:00:33 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:00:34–01:00:40 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said) · 01:00:47–01:00:53 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:00:58–01:00:59 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said) · 01:01:03–01:01:09 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:01:12–01:01:13 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:01:14–01:01:16 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 01:01:32–01:01:33 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:01:34–01:01:35 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording; numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:01:38–01:01:58 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording