Planning & Zoning

Planning & Zoning Board / Local Planning Agency Meeting

Date: 2026-08-05
Status: Draft minutes and machine transcript available
Source: CivicClerk event #1393

📄 Read the City's record 📝 Transcript 📋 Agenda Packet (PDF, 14.7 MB) 🎬 Recording ↗

Built from draft minutes printed in an agenda packet — no AI-written text Briefing final

The City's record

What the City's record shows

Draft minutes printed in the City's agenda packet of 2026-09-02, pp. 8–12; approved as written by the Planning & Zoning Board according to the draft minutes of 2026-09-02 (that draft's own approval is not found in the records on file). The City has not posted the approved minutes as a separate file. The approving motion, “to APPROVE THE SEPTEMBER 2, 2026 AGENDA AND THE MINUTES OF AUGUST 5, 2026 AS WRITTEN”, is in the draft minutes printed for approval in the 2026-10-07 agenda packet (2537_10_07_2026_Agenda_Packet.pdf, packet pp. 8–12).

Built only from this meeting's draft minutes (2475_Planning_Zoning_September_2_2026.pdf, packet pp. 8–12). 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: Wesley Park, Marcus Wheeler, Ron Chabot, Tamisha Findlay, Susan Milhoan, Victoria Jones, Russell Sengel, Todd Anderson, Aleck Greenwood, Richard Cravens
(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.)
Absences: no absence line could be read from the minutes' text, so none is stated here; the first page of the minutes is the record.
Named on at least one ballot later in the meeting: Anderson, Chabot, Findlay, Jones, Milhoan, Park, Sengel, Wheeler (participation, which can differ from the roll: arrivals and departures are in the minutes' text)

Adopted actions (4)

to APPROVE THE August 5, 2026 AGENDA AND THE MINUTES OF July 1, 2026 AS WRITTEN (moved by SENGEL, seconded by JONES); PASSED 8-0; ayes: Park, Wheeler, Findlay, Jones, Sengel, Anderson, Milhoan, Chabot; nays: none — the draft minutes, packet pp. 8–12
to POSTPONE BOTH ITEMS TO A DATE CERTAIN OF SEPTEMBER 2, 2026 AT 6PM AT 65 STONE STREET, COCOA, FL 32922 (moved by PARK, seconded by JONES); PASSED 8-0; ayes: Park, Wheeler, Findlay, Jones, Sengel, Anderson, Milhoan, Chabot; nays: none — the draft minutes, packet pp. 8–12
to APPROVE (moved by JONES, seconded by FINDLAY); PASSED 8-0; ayes: Park, Wheeler, Chabot, Jones, Milhoan, Sengel, Anderson, Findlay; nays: none — the draft minutes, packet pp. 8–12
to ADJOURN THE MEETING (moved by PARK, seconded by MILHOAN); PASSED 8-0; ayes: Park, Wheeler, Chabot, Jones, Milhoan, Sengel, Anderson, Findlay; nays: none — the draft minutes, packet pp. 8–12

Draft minutes, as printed in a later agenda packet

Source: 2475_Planning_Zoning_September_2_2026.pdf, the agenda packet of the 2026-09-02 meeting, packet pp. 8–12; lines 238–433 of the City's text of that file. The packet's own page footers are left out below.

Read the draft minutes

MINUTES
CITY OF COCOA
PLANNING & ZONING BOARD/ LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
August 5, 2026

A Regular meeting of the Planning & Zoning Board Local Planning Agency
was held on August 5 , 2026, at City Hall, 65 Stone Street, Cocoa, FL, as
publicly noted.

I. CALL TO ORDER:

Chair Park called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM.
ROLL CALL:

Wesley Park Chairperson
Marcus Wheeler Vice Chairperson
Ron Chabot Board Member
Tamisha Findlay Board Member
Susan Milhoan Board Member
Victoria Jones Board Member
Russell Sengel Board Member
Todd Anderson Board Member
Aleck Greenwood Alternate Board Member
Richard Cravens Alternate Board Member
Kristin Eick City Attorney

PRESENT:

ABSENT:

Planning & Zoning Board
Regular Meeting
August 5, 2026
Page 2 of 5

STAFF PRESENT:

Luci Ribeiro , City Planner; Stockton Whitten, City Manager; Charlene Neuterman,
Community Services Director; Jennifer Justi niano, Community Services Manager ;
Breanna Earley, Recording Secretary.

Chair Park led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance.

II. Approval of Agenda and Minutes:

1. Agenda: Regular Meeting of August 5, 2026
2. Minutes: Regular Meeting of July 1, 2026

Alternate Board member Greenwood, wanted to bring attention to the City
Attorney’s wedding anniversary.

* MOTION BY BOARD MEMBER SENGEL; SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER
JONES TO APPROVE THE August 5, 2026 AGENDA AND THE MINUTES OF
July 1, 2026 AS WRITTEN.

AYES: Park, Wheeler, Findlay, Jones, Sengel, Anderson, Milhoan, Chabot

MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).

III. Old Business: None

IV. New Business:

I. New Business:

1. PZ 25-00900014 Ord No. 06-2026 3600 Grissom Parkway Zoning Map.
(POSTPONED)

2. PZ 25-00500006 Ord No. 05-2026 3600 Grissom Parkway Small-Scale.
(POSTPONED)

* MOTION BY CHAIR PARK; SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER JONES
TO POSTPONE BOTH ITEMS TO A DATE CERTAIN OF SEPTEMBER 2,
2026 AT 6PM AT 65 STONE STREET, COCOA, FL 32922.

AYES: Park, Wheeler, Findlay, Jones, Sengel, Anderson, Milhoan, Chabot

MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).

Planning & Zoning Board
Regular Meeting
August 5, 2026
Page 3 of 5

3. PZ26-02100005 155 Ruth St Zoning Map Amendment

Luci Ribeiro, City Planner, presented a PowerPoint for 155 Ruth St Zoning Map
Amendment1.

There being no questions from the Board, the discussion was opened to the public.

There being no questions from the Public, the item was called to a vote.

* MOTION BY BOARD MEMBER JONES; SECONDED BY BOARD
MEMBER FINDLAY TO APPROVE.

AYES: Park, Wheeler, Chabot, Jones, Milhoan, Sengel, Anderson, Findlay

MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).

V. Tree Board:
Alternate Board Member Greenwood, asked about the trees removed in front of City Hall.
City Manager explained they were dead and needed to be removed.
Greenwood went on to ask about the trees that were removed on 520.
Jennifer Justiniano, Community Services Manager, replied that the Ford dealership has
since applied for a permit.
Greenwood inquired if there was any word on what trees would be planted to replace them.
Justiniano, stated it was not known at this time.
Greenwood went on to speak about different sized trees.
Board member Milhoan, asked about the ordinance being changed to a higher penalty fee.
Luci Ribeiro, presented a PowerPoint on trees2.
Board member Sengel, asked for a definition of a public and private right of way.
Luci Ribeiro, explained.
Sengel elaborated his question.
Lui Ribeiro, provided the example of an HOA.

1 Exhibit A: PowerPoint Presentation
2 Exhibit B: PowerPoint Presentation

Planning & Zoning Board
Regular Meeting
August 5, 2026
Page 4 of 5

Board member Jones, inquired about what happens if a property owner refuses to comply.
Charlene Neuterman, Community Services Director stated they would be taken to code
board.
Milhoan asked when the clock starts for noncompliant properties.
Board Attorney Eick explained the process.
Community Services Director, spoke further about the code board process.
Greenwood, asked if the ordinance established what trees need to be planted if a tree is
removed.
Board Attorney Eick, detailed the ordinances and Florida law.
Alternate Board member Greenwood spoke further about updating the ordinance.
VI. Open Discussion:
VII. Other Business:
Board member Anderson, asked for an update on the property that the old bank is on.
City Manager explained the process and the steps being taken to move the project along.
Board member Sengel, asked about the data center discussion.
Board Attorney Eick, clarified the conversations happening with staff to present City
Council with more information.
Vice Chair Wheeler, asked about the intersection at Clearlake Road and who is responsible.
City Manager spoke about discussions that have happened about the medians with FDOT.
Vice Chair Wheeler spoke further regarding the look of the four corners.
VIII. Next Meeting Date: Wednesday, September 2, 2026, at 6:00pm, at 65 Stone Street in
Cocoa, FL
IX. Adjournment:

* MOTION BY CHAIR PARK ; SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER
MILHOAN TO ADJOURN THE MEETING.

AYES: Park, Wheeler, Chabot, Jones, Milhoan, Sengel, Anderson, Findlay

MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).

MEETING ADJOURNED AT 6:48 PM.

Planning & Zoning Board
Regular Meeting
August 5, 2026
Page 5 of 5

______________________________
Wesley Park, Chairperson

Respectfully Submitted By:

______________________________________
Breanna Earley, Recording Secretary

Agenda (the City's wording)

No time links are shown for this meeting.

An item without a time link may still have been discussed; the link is only added when the automatic match is strong.

I. Opening Matters

1. Call to Order
2. Pledge of Allegiance
3. Roll Call

II. Approval of Agenda and Minutes

1. Agenda: Regular Meeting of August 5, 2026.
2. Minutes: Regular Meeting of July 1, 2026.

III. Old Business

IV. New Business

1. 3600 Grissom Prkwy Rezoning (POSTPONED)
2. 3600 Grissom Pkway Comp Plan Amendment (POSTPONED)
3. PZ26-02100005 155 Ruth St Zoning Map Amendment

V. Tree Board

VI. Other Business

VII. Next Meeting Date

VIII. Adjournment

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. “▶ Play” opens the recording at that moment, as the City's file, in a new tab.

How this transcript was made. New machine transcription of the whole recording, with 13 voices separated from the audio. 18 short machine repair(s) (21 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 93.3% of 6,755 content words. Dotted words (178 places) are ordinary wording differences: hover or tap to see the other reading. 148 passages (20% 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.

[00:00:00] ▶ Play Speaker 1

If everyone could please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance.

[00:00:06] ▶ Play Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:00:06–00:00:11 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:00:11] ▶ Play Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, invisible, with liberty and

[00:00:17] ▶ Play Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

justice

[00:00:17] ▶ Play Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

for all.

[00:00:18] ▶ Play Speaker 1

Thank you. Mrs. Early, roll call?

[00:00:23] ▶ Play Speaker 3

Yes. Sorry. Chairperson Park.

[00:00:27] ▶ Play Speaker 1

Here.

[00:00:27] ▶ Play Speaker 3

Vice Chair Wheeler.

[00:00:29] ▶ Play Speaker 4

Here.

[00:00:30] ▶ Play Speaker 3

Board Member Chabot.

[00:00:31] ▶ Play Speaker 4

Yes, ma'am.

[00:00:32] ▶ Play Speaker 3 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

Board Member Finley. Here. Board Member Milholm. Here. Board Member Jones. Here.

[00:00:38] ▶ Play Speaker 3 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:00:38–00:00:39 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:00:40] ▶ Play Speaker 3 + overlapping voice

Here. Board Member Anderson.

[00:00:42] ▶ Play Speaker 5

Here.

[00:00:42] ▶ Play Speaker 3

Alternate Board Member Greenwood.

[00:00:44] ▶ Play Speaker 5

Here.

[00:00:45] ▶ Play Speaker 3 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

Alternate Board Member Cravens. Here. Thank you.

[00:00:48] ▶ Play Speaker 3 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:00:48–00:00:49 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:00:49] ▶ Play Speaker 6

Here.

[00:00:50] ▶ Play Speaker 3

Thank you.

[00:00:50] ▶ Play Speaker 1

Thank you very much. All right. Moving on to Section 2. We'll do the Approval Agenda Minutes. Has everyone had time to look over today's agenda?

[00:01:00] ▶ Play Speaker 5 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

Mr. Chairman. Yes, sir.

[00:01:01] ▶ Play Attribution uncertain

[00:01:01] ▶ Play Speaker 5 + overlapping voice

need to bring something up because it could affect the way that the agenda is today. I understand that our attorney that's here today is celebrating a 20-year wedding anniversary. And I don't know how much time she has to be involved with the issues, especially the tree ordinance. So I just wanted to bring that up in case she's comfortable enough to go ahead and pursue this if she doesn't have any other plans.

[00:01:32] ▶ Play Speaker 5 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:01:32–00:01:37 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:01:32] ▶ Play Speaker 6 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]

[00:01:37] ▶ Play Speaker 6 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

about trees. Well,

[00:01:39] ▶ Play Speaker 5 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

you're at it.

[00:01:39] ▶ Play Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

Congratulations.

[00:01:41] ▶ Play Speaker 5

Congratulations. Congratulations.

[00:01:45] ▶ Play Attribution uncertain

You

[00:01:45] ▶ Play Speaker 5

need to write a book for 20 years.

[00:01:46] ▶ Play Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]

Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:01:46–00:01:48 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:01:48] ▶ Play Speaker 7

Yeah.

[00:01:50] ▶ Play Speaker 5 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you very much.

[00:01:54] ▶ Play Speaker 8 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:01:54–00:01:56 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:01:56] ▶ Play Speaker 8 + overlapping voice

Yeah.

[00:01:59] ▶ Play Speaker 1

Okay. All right. Does anybody like to approve the agenda?

[00:02:03] ▶ Play Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio ▶]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:02:03–00:02:09 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:02:03] ▶ Play Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]

[00:02:09] ▶ Play Speaker 2 + overlapping voice

second.

[00:02:11] ▶ Play Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio ▶]

Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 00:02:11–00:02:11 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:02:11] ▶ Play Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:02:11–00:02:13 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:02:11] ▶ Play Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]

[00:02:14] ▶ Play Speaker 1

All in favor, please say aye.

[00:02:15] ▶ Play Speaker 9

Aye.

[00:02:16] ▶ Play Speaker 1

All right. Motion passes. The second item is our minutes from the last meeting on July 1st. Everyone's had a chance to look over those minutes. All right. We do have a motion.

[00:02:33] ▶ Play Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio ▶]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:02:33–00:02:34 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:02:34] ▶ Play Speaker 2

Second.

[00:02:36] ▶ Play Speaker 1

A couple seconds. I like it. Any further discussion? All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed? All right. Then we move on.

[00:02:46] ▶ Play Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:02:46–00:02:48 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:02:48] ▶ Play Speaker 1

So we'll move on to new business, section four. We have the first two items under new business. So I'll make the motion to

[00:02:58] ▶ Play Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:07 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:02:58–00:03:05 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:03:05] ▶ Play Speaker 1

p.m. here at City Hall. If I could get a second.

[00:03:09] ▶ Play Speaker 9

Second.

[00:03:10] ▶ Play Speaker 1

All right. I have a second. Any further discussion on postponement? All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Any opposed? All in

[00:03:21] ▶ Play Attribution uncertain

favor, please go on

[00:03:21] ▶ Play Speaker 1

to item three under section four.

[00:03:24] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:03:24–00:03:30 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:03:30] ▶ Play Speaker 10

Street, are you present? Yes. So this item was originally from Jennifer Webster. So I'm taking over for her. Unfortunately, she's no longer with us. So I will try to, if you have any questions related to this item,

[00:03:44] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Machine re-recognized

I'll

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:03:44–00:03:45 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[00:03:45] ▶ Play Speaker 10

try to do my best to answer your questions. So this ‸ item is ordinance 12, 2026. An applicant initiated zoning map amendment

[00:03:57] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:03:57–00:04:02 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:04:02] ▶ Play Speaker 10

The request is

[00:04:03] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:04:03–00:04:09 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:04:09] ▶ Play Speaker 10

0.9 acres. Tonight, ‸ staff will summarize the request, explain the site's history and surrounding contacts, review the applicable rezoning criteria, and present the recommended motion.

[00:04:22] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:04:22–00:04:28 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:04:28] ▶ Play Speaker 10

application. So the main goal is to amend the officials on a map

[00:04:34] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:07 ▶]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:04:34–00:04:41 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:04:41] ▶ Play Speaker 10

family residential. The subject property is generally located south of 520 and west of Ruth Street, east of Virginia Avenue, and north of Jackson Street. So

[00:05:02] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:07 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:05:02–00:05:08 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:05:08] ▶ Play Speaker 10

0.4 acres and

[00:05:10] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:05:10–00:05:16 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:05:17] ▶ Play Speaker 10

Together, the parcels total approximately the 0.9 acres. They are generally, as

[00:05:23] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:05:23–00:05:26 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:05:26] ▶ Play Speaker 10

The surrounding area is primarily residential. To the south, the adjoining

[00:05:32] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Machine re-recognized

properties

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:05:32–00:05:33 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[00:05:33] ▶ Play Speaker 10

already zoned

[00:05:33] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:05:33–00:05:37 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:05:38] ▶ Play Speaker 10

And there

[00:05:39] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:05:39–00:05:43 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:05:43] ▶ Play Speaker 10

The western side of the parcel remains in Brevard County and includes commercial and industrial uses. This parcel was annexed into the city in 2004 as part of a large annexation.

[00:05:57] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:05:57–00:05:59 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:05:59] ▶ Play Speaker 10

residential future land use designation with a maximum density of seven dwelling units per acre. However,

[00:06:07] ▶ Play Attribution uncertain

[00:06:07] ▶ Play Speaker 10 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

city zoning category was never assigned. That omission creates uncertainty because the parcels lack a city zoning district with permitted uses and dimensional standards. This designation will resolve the gap without changing the adopted future land use. So here, just for reference, as mentioned, we do have a future land use low-density residential assigned to the parcel. As part of the rezoning analysis, staff review, whether assigning a zoning designation could create any conforming lots. At the time of annexation, both ‸ parcels had a Brevard County zoning classification of RU 19, as previously mentioned, which is also a single-family residential zoning under the Brevard County zoning

[00:07:03] ▶ Play Speaker 9

district.

[00:07:06] ▶ Play Speaker 10

The parcel remains vacant and undeveloped and staff determines that both parcels meet the minimum performance standards of the city's RU 17 zoning district. And we will be considered conforming in regards to lot size and other

[00:07:24] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Machine re-recognized

both

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:07:24–00:07:24 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[00:07:24] ▶ Play Speaker 10

regulations.

[00:07:32] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:07 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:07:32–00:07:39 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:07:39] ▶ Play Speaker 10

of the

[00:07:39] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:07:39–00:07:42 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:07:43] ▶ Play Speaker 10

And that consists to make sure it's consistent with the surrounding area, that is consistent with the future land use designation, that are not expected to create a burden in the public facilities or increase any traffic, to expect to be able to comply with drainage, his compatibility with other public safety concerns, and establish clear standards for the future residential development that these two parcels will be able to accommodate. Also, staff analyzes in relation, I'm sorry,

[00:08:23] ▶ Play Attribution uncertain

[00:08:24] ▶ Play Speaker 10

just jumped ahead, consistent with the City of Cocoa Comprehensive Plan, and it is consistent

[00:08:30] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:08:30–00:08:33 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:08:36] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:08:36–00:08:41 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:08:41] ▶ Play Speaker 10

itself, under Ordinance 11 2004, that was adopted in May 18 2004. So staff requested the Planning Zoning Board recommends approval to the City Council of Ordinance 12 2006, an applicant initiated ordinance amending the official zoning map designation of two parcels of real property, totaling 0.9 acres, more or less, and located generally south of 520 west of Roof Street, east of Virginia Avenue, and

[00:09:09] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:09:09–00:09:12 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:09:13] ▶ Play Speaker 10

I am available if you have any questions.

[00:09:16] ▶ Play Speaker 1

Thank you, ma'am. Does anybody from the board have any questions for staff? All right, then we'll close it to the board, open it to the public. Anybody from the public like to speak on this item? I don't have any cards, but just to open it up.

[00:09:33] ▶ Play Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:09:33–00:09:35 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:09:35] ▶ Play Speaker 1

What are the wishes of the board? I'd like to make a motion to approve.

[00:09:39] ▶ Play Speaker 9 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio ▶]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:09:39–00:09:39 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:09:40] ▶ Play Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

Motion to approve and with a second.

[00:09:46] ▶ Play Speaker 9 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio ▶]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:09:46–00:09:47 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:09:47] ▶ Play Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio ▶]

[00:09:47] ▶ Play Speaker 9 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio ▶]

[00:09:50] ▶ Play Speaker 6

Well, do we have any members that are absent? Okay, then Mr. Green, when you're not permitted to make the motion. Oh,

[00:09:57] ▶ Play Speaker 9 + overlapping voice

yeah.

[00:09:58] ▶ Play Speaker 9 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]

Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said); the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:09:58–00:10:02 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:10:00] ▶ Play Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio ▶]

[00:10:00] ▶ Play Speaker 6 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]

[00:10:02] ▶ Play Speaker 9 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

Thank you very much for

[00:10:03] ▶ Play Attribution uncertain

the

[00:10:03] ▶ Play Speaker 9 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

clarification. That was good. So, I'll make the motion ‸ to approve the staff recommendations as written on the agenda.

[00:10:14] ▶ Play Speaker 1

So, we have the motion now? Do we have a second? ‸ Second. Excellent.

[00:10:18] ▶ Play Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:10:18–00:10:19 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:10:19] ▶ Play Speaker 1

Any further discussion on this item? All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? ‸ Passes. Congratulations. So, we'll move on to section number four with the tree board.

[00:10:45] ▶ Play No voice detected

[00:10:46] ▶ Play Speaker 5

need a point of clarification now that we're at this location.

[00:10:51] ▶ Play Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:10:51–00:10:54 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:10:54] ▶ Play Attribution uncertain

[00:10:54] ▶ Play Speaker 1

is of the topic.

[00:10:55] ▶ Play Speaker 5 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]

Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:10:55–00:10:56 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:10:56] ▶ Play Speaker 5 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]

Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:10:56–00:10:58 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:10:58] ▶ Play Speaker 1

‸ Okay.

[00:10:59] ▶ Play Speaker 5

I was curious. Does anybody know why the trees in front of the city hall was recently removed? Yeah.

[00:11:11] ▶ Play Attribution uncertain

They

[00:11:11] ▶ Play Speaker 5 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

were not oak trees. But I was just curious. Oh.

[00:11:15] ▶ Play Speaker 8

I thought I,

[00:11:16] ▶ Play No voice detected

[00:11:16] ▶ Play Speaker 8

apologize. You asked me that question.

[00:11:19] ▶ Play Speaker 5

I thought I got back to you. They were, they were dead. They were dead? ‸ Yeah. And are they going to be replaced or left like it is or?

[00:11:29] ▶ Play Speaker 8 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

Yeah. Statues.

[00:11:31] ▶ Play Speaker 8 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:11:31–00:11:32 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:11:31] ▶ Play Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio ▶]

[00:11:31] ▶ Play Speaker 8 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]

[00:11:32] ▶ Play Speaker 8

I think, I think we're planning on replacing them. Oh, you are? Yeah.

[00:11:35] ▶ Play No voice detected

Yeah.

[00:11:36] ▶ Play Speaker 8 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

Oak trees? No. Well, no. I thought your question was going to be, they were not oak trees. They were. I know. Yeah. They told me what type of trees they were. Yeah. But we do plan on putting something back there.

[00:11:48] ▶ Play Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:11:48–00:11:52 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:11:49] ▶ Play Speaker 8 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]

[00:11:53] ▶ Play Speaker 8

‸ Was the recommendation magnolia or oak?

[00:11:56] ▶ Play Speaker 5 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

I'd rather have oak if you want me to be pushing. That's our heritage. You know that. And I'm big on that.

[00:12:03] ▶ Play Speaker 8

Yeah.

[00:12:04] ▶ Play Attribution uncertain

[00:12:04] ▶ Play Speaker 8

apologize for not getting back.

[00:12:05] ▶ Play Speaker 5

Oh, it doesn't matter. That wasn't important. So, thank you. And then, uh, of course, I was curious if there was any other, uh, information in reference to the missing trees on, uh, 520 that

[00:12:18] ▶ Play Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:12:18–00:12:21 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:12:21] ▶ Play Speaker 5

Uh, and it was in, it's in front of the, um,

[00:12:25] ▶ Play Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:12:25–00:12:29 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:12:29] ▶ Play Speaker 5

new people to get over, I think. And I was curious if there was any updates in reference to that.

[00:12:38] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]

Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said); the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:12:38–00:12:42 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:12:41] ▶ Play Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio ▶]

[00:12:41] ▶ Play Speaker 10 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]

[00:12:44] ▶ Play Speaker 11

Um, the current Ford dealership has applied for the permit. Um, the public works department, the arborist, is actually supposed to be sending information to planning and zoning to get a tree violation report that would be sent with the notice of violation by code enforcement so that they could apply what is in the report and all the requirements to satisfy the trees being removed in order to get that after the ‸ pact permit.

[00:13:14] ▶ Play Speaker 5

Um, thank you very much. Um, I guess this is going to be an ongoing thing because it's just got started and I was, uh, curious if you had any, uh, input or,

[00:13:30] ▶ Play Attribution uncertain

uh,

[00:13:31] ▶ Play Speaker 5

what the plans might be for the replacement trees. Because, uh, they were quite large. I mean, we're, they were, what,

[00:13:39] ▶ Play Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:13:39–00:13:42 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:13:40] ▶ Play Speaker 12 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]

[00:13:44] ▶ Play Speaker 5

Easy.

[00:13:44] ▶ Play Speaker 12

Yeah.

[00:13:44] ▶ Play Speaker 5

Easy. And they were large. And how many of them were there?

[00:13:49] ▶ Play Speaker 11 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio ▶]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:13:49–00:13:50 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:13:50] ▶ Play Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio ▶]

[00:13:50] ▶ Play Speaker 11

I think there were about 12 total. Um, they went from the front of the property near the parking lot where most of the vehicles facing 520 were and then closer to the building. Um, so within public works, they're going to have to determine how close they were, especially the ones to the building, if the root system was impacting ‸ the building at all in the foundation. Um, but if not, that's all the sizes and everything that will have to be put together in the report for the mitigation, um, with the size of the lot and where it is, whether they can replace or the alternative,

[00:14:22] ▶ Play Speaker 11 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:14:22–00:14:26 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:14:26] ▶ Play Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:14:26–00:14:29 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:14:29] ▶ Play Speaker 5

but, uh, um,

[00:14:31] ▶ Play Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:07 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:14:31–00:14:38 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:14:38] ▶ Play Speaker 5

lost. Um,

[00:14:41] ▶ Play Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:14:41–00:14:44 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:14:45] ▶ Play Speaker 5

we have a, we have an ordinance here, uh, that basically dictates the size of trees that need to be put in place. And I'm hoping that there could be an exception made to where we put larger trees there to make up for the fact of how long the original ones were there. Uh, is, is that even a possibility instead of planting two or three inch round diameter trees to replace that are missing? If we could actually increase that size or I don't know how the board feels, but I was thinking maybe to address this for, uh, the ordinance to be changed to replace with larger trees rather than three inch diameter. I don't know how the board feels about that, but I'd hate, it'd be great to see replacement trees there, but nothing that's as tall as I am and I'm not very tall. I'm just hoping that that could be a possibility. I don't know how the board feels.

[00:15:46] ▶ Play No voice detected · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]

Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said); a language review questioned the wording · 00:15:46–00:15:53 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:15:47] ▶ Play Speaker 12 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]

[00:15:49] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]

[00:15:50] ▶ Play Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio ▶]

[00:15:50] ▶ Play Speaker 10 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]

[00:15:51] ▶ Play Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio ▶]

[00:15:52] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio ▶]

[00:15:52] ▶ Play No voice detected · Unclear audio

[unclear audio ▶]

[00:15:52] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]

[00:15:53] ▶ Play Speaker 13 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

Um, I've looked at the ordinance and the maximum penalty is $5,000. Can the ordinance be changed to something that is more, a more stringent up to $25,000?

[00:16:07] ▶ Play Speaker 13 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:16:07–00:16:11 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:16:11] ▶ Play Speaker 13 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]

Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 00:16:11–00:16:13 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:16:13] ▶ Play Speaker 13 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:16:13–00:16:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:16:15] ▶ Play Speaker 13 + overlapping voice

prohibitive in a big commercial development. It's a drop in the bucket.

[00:16:20] ▶ Play Speaker 13 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:16:20–00:16:25 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:16:25] ▶ Play Speaker 13 + overlapping voice

trees that are missing by, you know, looking at the ground and what's left of the tree. But I'd like to suggest that the ordinance itself needs to have some repairs done to it.

[00:16:36] ▶ Play Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]

Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:16:36–00:16:37 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:16:37] ▶ Play Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]

Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:16:37–00:16:38 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:16:38] ▶ Play Speaker 1 + overlapping voice

I think

[00:16:39] ▶ Play Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · Machine re-recognized

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:16:39–00:16:39 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[00:16:39] ▶ Play Speaker 1 + overlapping voice

need to go through this first. That way we can get a clear, uh, definition of what we're looking for.

[00:16:44] ▶ Play Speaker 10 + overlapping voice · Machine re-recognized

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:16:44–00:16:44 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[00:16:45] ▶ Play Speaker 10 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

just wanted to point it out. Even if the board decides to make any recommendations to changes, a new ordinance would ‸ have to be approved and that would not affect the property in question. Right.

[00:16:54] ▶ Play Attribution uncertain

[00:16:54] ▶ Play Speaker 10 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

it's not retroactive?

[00:16:56] ▶ Play Speaker 7 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

Just to

[00:16:56] ▶ Play Speaker 10

let you know.

[00:17:01] ▶ Play Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:17:01–00:17:06 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:17:06] ▶ Play Speaker 5

to make it more stringent.

[00:17:10] ▶ Play Speaker 10

Yeah, so staff has prepared this presentation in response to the concerns regarding the process and penalties for trees removed without the required permit. We will then explain how the tree removal permitting process works, how replacement and mitigation requirements are ‸ calculated, and how violations are addressed by staff.

[00:17:27] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:17:27–00:17:29 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:17:29] ▶ Play Speaker 10

is to ensure that the board understands not only the penalties established by the landscape ordinance, but also an overview of the tree removal violation.

[00:17:43] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:17:43–00:17:49 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:17:50] ▶ Play Speaker 10

Open space areas of developed properties and also public or private right-of-ways. Does not apply to single family and duplex lots.

[00:18:02] ▶ Play Attribution uncertain

[00:18:02] ▶ Play Speaker 10

no permit is required to move a tree if the single family or a duplex lot already has a building in the particular parcel, ‸ just to let you know. So to go over some of the definitions. The

[00:18:19] ▶ Play No voice detected

definitions.

[00:18:20] ▶ Play Speaker 10

The tree is a woody or fibrous perennial plant that normally grows at least 15 feet tall and has a trunk diameter of at least 6 inches measures

[00:18:30] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Machine re-recognized

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:18:30–00:18:30 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[00:18:30] ▶ Play Speaker 10

dbh, 4.5 feet above grade. Palm trees are regulated only if they have a dbh of at least 12 inches and can reach at least 15 feet and high.

[00:18:41] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:18:41–00:18:44 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:18:46] ▶ Play Speaker 10

What is a specimen tree? Any hardwood tree excluding exempt species having a trunk diameter of 24 inches or greater measure at dbh,

[00:18:56] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:18:56–00:19:00 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:19:01] ▶ Play Speaker 10

The ordinance also established land clearing requirements, identifying the circumstances under which land clearing is permitted. And as for the definition of land clearing, ‸ the removal or destruction of trees, ground cover and vegetation by manual, mechanical or chemical means. So once a potential tree removal violation is reported to the code enforcement, typically through a complaint or order ‸ notification, code enforcement conducts an initial site assessment. During this assessment staff documents the available evidence including the tree species, size, diameter, and breast height, and whether the trees qualify as a specimen tree.

[00:19:54] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:19:54–00:19:58 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:19:58] ▶ Play Speaker 10

whether a tree removal permit was issued.

[00:20:01] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:20:01–00:20:04 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:20:04] ▶ Play Speaker 10

violation report based on the findings of code enforcement and public works. The report identifies the trees that were removed, the applicable code requirements, any required replacement, applicable civil penalties, and the timeframe provided for the property owner to come into compliance.

[00:20:29] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:20:29–00:20:35 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:20:35] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:20:35–00:20:40 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:20:40] ▶ Play Speaker 10

along with the required ‸ supporting documentation.

[00:20:46] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:20:46–00:20:48 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:20:48] ▶ Play Speaker 10

for consistency with the ‸ violation report in the applicable code requirements. Once the permit is issued, the property owner must complete the required corrective actions such as installing replacement trees or providing an approved contribution to the arbor mitigation fund.

[00:21:07] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:21:07–00:21:12 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:21:12] ▶ Play Speaker 10

have been completed. So to go over the report, what we covered is our portion of ‸ the violation. To explain how we prepare a report for a tree removal without a permit, the process begins where we receive the field assessment from code enforcement and public works. Staff reviews the information provided regarding

[00:21:35] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:21:35–00:21:38 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:21:38] ▶ Play Speaker 10

status, and the total inches removed. ‸ We then confirm public

[00:21:43] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Machine re-recognized

words

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:21:43–00:21:43 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[00:21:43] ▶ Play Speaker 10

determination of the required tree replacement based on the city's replacement standards. If the required replacement trees cannot reasonably be accommodated on the property, staff calculates the applicable arbor mitigation fund contribution. We then prepare and issue the final tree removal violation report.

[00:22:07] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:09 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:22:07–00:22:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:22:15] ▶ Play Speaker 10

penalties, and the compliance requirements. ‸ The report is provided to both the property owner and code enforcement so the compliance process can move forward. After the tree removal violation report has been issued and the property owner received a notice of violation, they must submit an after-the-fact tree removal permit application to planning ‸ zoning. The application must include supporting documentation explaining why the trees were removed along with any applicable documents, such as a tree inventory and survey, tree replacement plan, tree maintenance plan, grading information, and a landscape plan if applicable. These documents allow staff to verify the location and size of the removed trees, evaluate existing site conditions, and confirm the proposed method of replacement for mitigation.

[00:23:18] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:23:18–00:23:24 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:23:24] ▶ Play Speaker 10

report, and the applicable code requirements. Staff confirms that the required tree replacement or arbor mitigation requirements identified in the violation report have been incorporated into the application. Once all required information has been submitted and the applicant has satisfied the corrective requirements, the after-the-fact permit may be issued. So

[00:23:52] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:07 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:23:52–00:23:59 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:23:59] ▶ Play Speaker 10

The preferred option is always to plant replacement trees on site whenever feasible.

[00:24:06] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:24:06–00:24:09 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:24:09] ▶ Play Speaker 10

be a last resort alternative. It is only considered when replacement trees cannot reasonably be accommodated on the property after other design alternatives have been reviewed. The applicant must demonstrate that site constraints prevent the requirement replacement trees from being planted.

[00:24:27] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:12 ▶]

Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:24:27–00:24:39 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:24:40] ▶ Play Speaker 10

or insufficient space for the tree to be properly established.

[00:24:45] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:24:45–00:24:51 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:24:51] ▶ Play Speaker 10

such as planting and maintaining trees on public property, supporting the tree canopy for the city of Cocoa. So to cover some of the tree replacement requirements,

[00:25:07] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:25:07–00:25:12 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:25:12] ▶ Play Speaker 10

the contribution must be $100 per inch not replaced for 24 inches or greater or specimen trees is $200 per ‸ inch not replaced. Also, a replacement trees must be maintained ‸ a healthy living condition for at least two years. Any replacement tree that dies, becomes diseased, or is damaged during that period must be replaced by the applicant. The city retains ongoing authority to ensure compliance. So as part of the after-the-fact permit application, they do have to submit a plan to maintain those trees for at least two years. To review some of the penalties, the ordinance established civil penalties based on the severity of the violation. These violations and applicable penalties are included in the tree removal violation report that we issue. The failure to obtain an after-the-fact permit is handled through the code enforcement board. And may result in daily fines until compliance is achieved.

[00:26:19] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:26:19–00:26:23 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:26:23] ▶ Play Speaker 10

if a specimen tree was removed or land clearing occur, whichever is greater. Planning and zoning identifies the applicable penalties related to the tree removal itself.

[00:26:35] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:26:35–00:26:39 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:26:39] ▶ Play Speaker 10

specimen trees, if all evidence of the tree has been removed and the DBH cannot be determined, the ordinance

[00:26:46] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]

Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 00:26:46–00:26:47 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:26:47] ▶ Play Speaker 10

a $5,000 penalty per tree.

[00:26:49] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:26:49–00:26:55 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:26:56] ▶ Play Speaker 10

These civil fines are separate and do not replace the applicant's obligation to restore the site, replace trees or

[00:27:04] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:27:04–00:27:08 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:27:09] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:27:09–00:27:14 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:27:14] ▶ Play Speaker 10

well. So to go over a case study,

[00:27:21] ▶ Play Attribution uncertain

[00:27:21] ▶ Play Speaker 10

are going to have two case study. The first one is violation corrected within the compliance period. So the scenario is a commercial property owner who removes one 8-inch DBH live oak without forcing or obtaining a tree removal permit. The live oak, it is a protected tree. The tree ‸ is not a specimen tree because it's less than 24 inches DBH. The owner responds to the notice of violation and completes all corrective actions within the compliance period. And the required corrective actions would be

[00:27:58] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:27:58–00:28:02 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:28:02] ▶ Play Speaker 10

Provide supporting documentation identifying the removed tree.

[00:28:05] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:28:05–00:28:12 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:28:12] ▶ Play Speaker 10

inches. Maintain the replacement trees for two years. So to go over this case study, the applicant is responsible to paying for the irreversible civil penalties. 18 inches calculated at $100 per inch is $1800.

[00:28:35] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:28:35–00:28:40 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:28:40] ▶ Play Speaker 10

site for some reason and has to contribute to the Arbor Mitigation Fund.

[00:28:48] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:28:48–00:28:50 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:28:51] ▶ Play Attribution uncertain

[00:28:51] ▶ Play Speaker 10

[00:28:51] ▶ Play Attribution uncertain

would

[00:28:51] ▶ Play Speaker 10

be replacing. Also, that would be the replacement requirements. I apologize. So the replacement require for those

[00:28:57] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:28:57–00:28:59 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:29:00] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:29:00–00:29:03 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:29:03] ▶ Play Speaker 10

purchase those trees to be replaced. Then we have the

[00:29:07] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]

Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 00:29:07–00:29:08 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:29:08] ▶ Play Speaker 10

permit. They have to pay the fees and apply for the permit. They have to do the two-year maintenance plan to keep those trees in good healthy conditions. And there will be no applicable

[00:29:21] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Machine re-recognized

fine

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:29:21–00:29:21 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[00:29:21] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:29:21–00:29:25 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:29:25] ▶ Play Speaker 10

replanted the trees on site. So the case study two is when the specimen tree violation remains uncorrected. So a developer removes one 30 inches dbh live oak specimen tree without a tree removal permit. The tree qualifies as a specimen tree because it's a known exempt hardwood tree measuring at least 24 inches dbh. The property owner receives a notice of violation. The owner does not submit an after-the-fact permit or complete the required corrective actions. Case brought to the code enforcement board. For illustration, the property owner remains out of compliance for 60 days after the compliance deadline set by the code enforcement board. They require corrective actions.

[00:30:18] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:30:18–00:30:20 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:30:20] ▶ Play Speaker 10

to submit an

[00:30:21] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]

Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 00:30:21–00:30:22 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:30:22] ▶ Play Speaker 10

removal permit to provide a survey or other best available evidence to showing the location of these trees and the size, whatever information they have available. And to replace a minimum of nine trees or provide replacement inches equivalent to the 30 inches removed. So if ‸ the trees are not replaced, ‸ so the arbor mitigation, if approved, because on-site replacement is not feasible, they will have to pay for the arbor mitigation and also pay all applicable civil penalties and accrue daily fines.

[00:31:02] ▶ Play Attribution uncertain

[00:31:02] ▶ Play Speaker 10

on top of those penalties, there's also fines that are applied. So for us,

[00:31:11] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Machine re-recognized

is considered irreversible penalty

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:31:11–00:31:13 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[00:31:14] ▶ Play Speaker 10

So for

[00:31:14] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:31:14–00:31:18 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:31:18] ▶ Play Speaker 10

So the

[00:31:19] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:31:19–00:31:25 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:31:25] ▶ Play Speaker 10

A failure to comply, so just for his illustration, we are saying that they didn't comply

[00:31:31] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Machine re-recognized

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:31:31–00:31:31 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[00:31:31] ▶ Play Speaker 10

60 days has passed by, is $500 per day would accumulate to $30,000 for those 60 days of non-compliance. If they have to contribute to the art of mitigation, then would be the 30 inches multiplied by the $200 per inch would ‸ be equivalent to $6,000. And then there is also the after-the-fact applicable fees related when the developer comes forward into compliance. If they do not come forward, those daily fines still apply until they come forward and comply. I'll be available here if you have any questions.

[00:32:12] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:32:12–00:32:18 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:32:18] ▶ Play Speaker 10

know, running the Code Enforcement Department,

[00:32:20] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:32:20–00:32:24 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:32:24] ▶ Play Speaker 10

also ‸ responsible for the code. Enforcement Department.

[00:32:29] ▶ Play Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:32:29–00:32:30 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:32:31] ▶ Play Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]

Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said) · 00:32:31–00:32:34 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:32:31] ▶ Play Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio ▶]

[00:32:31] ▶ Play Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]

[00:32:33] ▶ Play Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio ▶]

[00:32:33] ▶ Play Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]

[00:32:35] ▶ Play Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:32:35–00:32:39 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:32:35] ▶ Play Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]

[00:32:39] ▶ Play Speaker 4

Or give me an example of each?

[00:32:43] ▶ Play Speaker 10

That would be just your normal right away. So normally every, like when you ‸ have a parcel, when you have a property, a portion in front of that property is dedicated to public, you know, utilities just for,

[00:32:58] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:32:58–00:33:03 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:33:03] ▶ Play Speaker 10

that is required. So it is considered city property.

[00:33:08] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:33:08–00:33:12 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:33:12] ▶ Play Speaker 10

So we have roads that are under FDOT jurisdictions and it'll be your state roads.

[00:33:19] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:33:19–00:33:20 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:33:20] ▶ Play Speaker 10

state right-of-ways. We have under the county. So the county is, has ‸ jurisdiction for certain roads within the city. And then you have your city roads where public works is responsible for that portion. So when you have a property,

[00:33:37] ▶ Play Attribution uncertain

[00:33:37] ▶ Play Speaker 10

lot of, there's a lot of misconception that people think that their property line goes all the way to the road. But in reality, there's always, you know, 20 feet or, or 10 feet

[00:33:49] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]

Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 00:33:49–00:33:50 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:33:50] ▶ Play Speaker 10

for right away.

[00:33:53] ▶ Play Speaker 4

So is there a difference between a public and private right away?

[00:33:57] ▶ Play Speaker 10

If, normally private, if

[00:33:59] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio ▶]

Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 00:33:59–00:33:59 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:33:59] ▶ Play Speaker 10

like developments, like we have PUD, planning unit developments under our code. And those, sometimes the roads are considered private. So, for instance, if you have a development where, you know, is a PUD subdivision with 300 single family homes, everything inside the subdivision, all the roads are considered private. So normally they are run and managed by the homeowners association. Okay.

[00:34:26] ▶ Play Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:34:26–00:34:30 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:34:30] ▶ Play Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

like that. We're really talking about an HOA?

[00:34:33] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:34:33–00:34:35 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:34:35] ▶ Play Speaker 4

All right. That's all I got. Thank you.

[00:34:38] ▶ Play Speaker 9

Yes,

[00:34:38] ▶ Play Speaker 4

ma'am.

[00:34:39] ▶ Play Speaker 9

My question is, what happens if the property owner refuses to comply beyond the timeframe given?

[00:34:46] ▶ Play Speaker 10

I would have

[00:34:47] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:34:47–00:34:51 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:34:51] ▶ Play Speaker 10

‸ code enforcement to to follow with the process. I'll let them answer.

[00:34:56] ▶ Play Speaker 10 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:34:56–00:34:58 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:34:58] ▶ Play Speaker 10

Miss Jones?

[00:34:59] ▶ Play Speaker 9

What happens if the property owner refuses to comply?

[00:35:03] ▶ Play Speaker 7 + overlapping voice

We will take them to code board. Their notice of violation has a certain amount of time to comply. And then they would go to code board and then the board would define what the penalties are for non-compliance. And ‸ they would have so many days to rectify the situation or a daily fine would be imposed. Right.

[00:35:26] ▶ Play Speaker 7 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio ▶]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 00:35:26–00:35:28 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:35:27] ▶ Play Speaker 9 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]

[00:35:28] ▶ Play Speaker 9

Oh, okay.

[00:35:29] ▶ Play Speaker 9 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio ▶]

Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:35:29–00:35:29 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:35:29] ▶ Play Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio ▶]

[00:35:29] ▶ Play Speaker 9 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]

[00:35:30] ▶ Play Speaker 9

Okay. Yeah,

[00:35:31] ▶ Play Speaker 10

eventually they'll probably get a lien.

[00:35:34] ▶ Play Speaker 1

Yes, ma'am. Go ahead.

[00:35:36] ▶ Play Speaker 13

When does the clock start running?

[00:35:38] ▶ Play Speaker 13 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:35:38–00:35:42 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:35:43] ▶ Play Speaker 13 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:35:43–00:35:48 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:35:48] ▶ Play Speaker 13

it start, you know, the clock

[00:35:51] ▶ Play Speaker 13 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:35:51–00:35:54 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:35:54] ▶ Play Speaker 13 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:35:54–00:35:56 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:35:55] ▶ Play Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio ▶]

[00:35:56] ▶ Play Speaker 13 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio ▶]

[00:35:56] ▶ Play Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio ▶]

[00:35:56] ▶ Play Speaker 13 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio ▶]

[00:35:56] ▶ Play Speaker 6 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:35:56–00:35:59 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:35:59] ▶ Play Speaker 6

period required by the code enforcement board to comply. The property owners are given several chances. You know, when they get a code violation is started, they get a notice of violation. The city code enforcement staff give them a time to comply in that notice of violation. Only if that has expired, do we then bring them to the code enforcement board and the code enforcement board. This is and this is all a statutory process right under Florida law.

[00:36:32] ▶ Play Speaker 6 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:36:32–00:36:36 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:36:37] ▶ Play Speaker 6

And if they

[00:36:37] ▶ Play Speaker 6 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:36:37–00:36:41 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:36:42] ▶ Play Speaker 6

Thank you.

[00:36:43] ▶ Play No voice detected

Yeah.

[00:36:45] ▶ Play Speaker 6

Sorry, let me let me clarify the daily fines.

[00:36:48] ▶ Play Attribution uncertain

The

[00:36:48] ▶ Play Speaker 6 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

daily fines. Yes.

[00:36:49] ▶ Play Speaker 6 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:36:49–00:36:54 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:36:54] ▶ Play Speaker 6 + overlapping voice

to get like their after the fact permit, there is the penalty for the irreversible part of the violation, which is that the tree that was removed is gone. It's not coming back. So there is a that irreversible penalty that would be paid. And that is owed, you know, even if they don't get to the code enforcement board, even if they come into compliance, which is why we gave you two different case studies of if they if it remains uncorrected versus they actually come into compliance in a timely manner.

[00:37:27] ▶ Play Speaker 7

And should it go to code board, the staff does recommend the maximum penalty allowed for a daily fine. That does not always mean that the code board accepts that penalty so that we are at the mercy of the code board at that point to determine that penalty for us. So we may say the maximum fine is $500 a day and they may drop that fine. So we do have to take that order.

[00:37:52] ▶ Play Speaker 7 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:37:52–00:37:57 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:37:59] ▶ Play Speaker 5

Mr. Greenwood, thank you.

[00:38:03] ▶ Play Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:38:03–00:38:05 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:38:06] ▶ Play Speaker 5

Does the ordinance establish what kind of tree to replace the ones that were removed or can you is it set up

[00:38:16] ▶ Play Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:38:16–00:38:20 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:38:20] ▶ Play Speaker 5

like tree? Is it going to be oak trees like was there or not?

[00:38:29] ▶ Play Speaker 6

It. Sorry, we want me to answer. ‸ The ordinance does say that whenever possible and practicable trees should be replaced with the same species that it's removed. But we also if we recall, we incorporated the right tree right place concept in the ordinance. And so there is a possibility that a different species under the UF IFAS Florida friendly plant selection and design list could be chosen depending if there's an issue with the species that you know was removed.

[00:39:08] ▶ Play Speaker 5

Well, in reference to the right tree for the right place. The trees that were there are

[00:39:16] ▶ Play Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:39:16–00:39:19 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:39:19] ▶ Play Speaker 5

and they've been there for over 20.

[00:39:23] ▶ Play Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:39:23–00:39:24 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:39:24] ▶ Play Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio ▶]

[00:39:24] ▶ Play Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio ▶]

[00:39:25] ▶ Play Speaker 5

I mean, I can I can I can't even remember. But as a kid, I remember when they were

[00:39:31] ▶ Play Speaker 5 · Machine re-recognized

planted

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:39:31–00:39:31 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[00:39:32] ▶ Play Speaker 5

The point I'm bringing that up is that the current ordinance, which means we're probably going to have to put a discussion on the agenda to maybe fine tune the ordinance. If that's the way the board feels. But here's an example on the picture you have here of that's what the tree is going to look like that we would require them to replace compared to

[00:39:55] ▶ Play Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:39:55–00:40:00 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:40:02] ▶ Play Speaker 5

So ‸ this is one issue and then also the other issue that Susan brought up, I think is important that might we might need to fine tune the tree ordinance because now we're getting involved in it. And it's becoming more clear of how the solutions is going to be handled. So I don't know how the board would feel about this subject, but I think it's time that we might need to go over it or fine tune it. And I don't know how the board feels about that, but I really think that we could tweak it more than what it is. I don't know how the board is. That's all my questions. Thank you. All right.

[00:40:42] ▶ Play Speaker 1

Thank you. Any further questions?

[00:40:51] ▶ Play No voice detected

‸ Any

[00:40:51] ▶ Play Speaker 1

further discussion on the tree board? ‸ Okay. Then I will move on to item number six other business. Does anyone have any other business?

[00:41:07] ▶ Play No voice detected

Does

[00:41:08] ▶ Play Speaker 12

staff have any updates on the large project for the Barnett Bank? Yes.

[00:41:15] ▶ Play Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio ▶]

Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 00:41:15–00:41:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:41:15] ▶ Play Speaker 12 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio ▶]

[00:41:15] ▶ Play Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio ▶]

[00:41:15] ▶ Play Speaker 12 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio ▶]

[00:41:16] ▶ Play Speaker 12

The local village? Any updates from staff?

[00:41:19] ▶ Play Speaker 8 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

Right here. Right. Yeah.

[00:41:20] ▶ Play Speaker 12

Yeah. The Bank of America, I guess they call it now.

[00:41:23] ▶ Play Speaker 8 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

‸ Yeah. Um. Is that progressing? Yeah. There's a tax increment. Um. Reimbursement process that I think they're going through. I think we come back to the council. This is August, maybe. It'll.

[00:41:40] ▶ Play Speaker 7

It'll be September.

[00:41:41] ▶ Play Speaker 8

Yeah.

[00:41:42] ▶ Play Speaker 7

The

[00:41:42] ▶ Play Speaker 7 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:41:42–00:41:43 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:41:43] ▶ Play Speaker 7

That's

[00:41:44] ▶ Play Attribution uncertain

awesome.

[00:41:44] ▶ Play Speaker 8

And so, and so they've requested some reimbursement of the, of the tax revenue that they've generated, that they will generate for the project there. So there's a process that's contemplated by the, uh,

[00:41:57] ▶ Play Speaker 8 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio ▶]

Flag: a possible machine repair could not be placed · 00:41:57–00:41:58 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:41:58] ▶ Play Speaker 8

CRA to do that. Um, and so I think that's the next step that we're going through in the process.

[00:42:04] ▶ Play Speaker 12

Okay. So it's moving along slowly but surely.

[00:42:08] ▶ Play Speaker 8 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

Yeah. It's, it's, it's moving. Okay.

[00:42:12] ▶ Play Speaker 1

All right. Good question. Any other items? Mr. Russell.

[00:42:17] ▶ Play Speaker 4

‸ I was, um, hoping to get more information or, or something on the data center that we spoke of last meeting. Um, I w we were at our last meeting and you said that the, the,

[00:42:29] ▶ Play Attribution uncertain

the data center, and the

[00:42:29] ▶ Play Speaker 4

attorney said that we couldn't, um, do a moratorium on it. But then I read Titusville currently has a moratorium on data centers. Um, just curious to clarify ‸ that.

[00:42:43] ▶ Play Speaker 6

Um, I can't comment on another city's decision to do that.

[00:42:50] ▶ Play Speaker 6 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:07 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:42:50–00:42:57 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:42:57] ▶ Play Speaker 6

present to the council, the topic of data centers. You're, uh, I know that you all made the motion that you wanted that recommendation brought to them.

[00:43:08] ▶ Play Speaker 6 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:43:08–00:43:10 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:43:10] ▶ Play Speaker 6

We may be supplementing that with some additional, you know, research and information for them, but we are working on that.

[00:43:17] ▶ Play Speaker 4

Okay. Thank you. All right.

[00:43:21] ▶ Play Speaker 2

Good evening. Um, I, I, and going in tandem with the, um, tree initiative, I, I, I, I'm just asking for a matter of clarity.

[00:43:29] ▶ Play Attribution uncertain

[00:43:29] ▶ Play Speaker 2

was driving through cocoa today and commencing media.

[00:43:32] ▶ Play Speaker 2 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:43:32–00:43:35 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:43:33] ▶ Play Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio ▶]

[00:43:33] ▶ Play Speaker 2 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]

[00:43:35] ▶ Play Speaker 2

Correct. So therefore F dot is responsible for the installation of those trees along that thoroughfare.

[00:43:41] ▶ Play Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

Like it's counting.

[00:43:43] ▶ Play Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]

Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:43:43–00:43:45 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:43:46] ▶ Play Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

It's a state. Okay. So check mark. That's terrified. So

[00:43:52] ▶ Play Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:43:52–00:43:54 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:43:55] ▶ Play Speaker 2 + overlapping voice

So we know that's an F dot road.

[00:43:57] ▶ Play Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:43:57–00:44:08 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:44:00] ▶ Play Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio ▶]

[00:44:00] ▶ Play Speaker 2 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]

[00:44:03] ▶ Play Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio ▶]

[00:44:03] ▶ Play Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]

[00:44:08] ▶ Play Speaker 2 + overlapping voice

Who owns those

[00:44:09] ▶ Play Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · Machine re-recognized

medians?

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:44:09–00:44:10 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[00:44:10] ▶ Play Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]

Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:44:10–00:44:11 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:44:11] ▶ Play Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

Yeah,

[00:44:12] ▶ Play Speaker 8

it's, it's, it's still, it's still state road. We may have an agreement with them there. And it's kind of funny because I, I've talked with the public works director about, um, those, whether they're city or county, most people don't know.

[00:44:28] ▶ Play Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:44:28–00:44:36 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:44:29] ▶ Play Speaker 8 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:07 ▶]

[00:44:36] ▶ Play Speaker 8

layout for what she's done thus far, because you'll see we've done a little bit in some of them that are within the city there, but, but, uh, talking about, um, enhancing those mediums.

[00:44:47] ▶ Play Speaker 2

Excellent. So I see that there was already in motion what I viewed today, because there's some inconsistency now once you make that turn.

[00:44:55] ▶ Play Attribution uncertain

And

[00:44:55] ▶ Play Speaker 2 + overlapping voice

so I began to see the inconsistency in terms of what has been done.

[00:45:00] ▶ Play Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]

Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:45:00–00:45:01 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:45:02] ▶ Play Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

It's glaring now that those wonderful trees are removed. So you see the more inconsistencies we drive through. So when you, when, when I look at this and, and forgive me for my, you know, limited knowledge of the world, but there should be a look at uniformity for a gateway going into a city. So we always talk about gateways and presentations. We always talk about four corners,

[00:45:22] ▶ Play Speaker 12

but

[00:45:23] ▶ Play Speaker 2 + overlapping voice

our gateway is inconsistent. And so that's something that I, that I, it bothers me because if you want uniformity and all these nice

[00:45:30] ▶ Play Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:45:30–00:45:33 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:45:34] ▶ Play Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

the things that you guys can manage and control, there should be a little bit more uniformity. So I said it, I'm the bad guy. Well

[00:45:41] ▶ Play Speaker 8

said. No,

[00:45:41] ▶ Play Attribution uncertain

[00:45:41] ▶ Play Speaker 8 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

we're, I'm, I'm on the same page there.

[00:45:44] ▶ Play Speaker 8 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Machine re-recognized

Because

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:45:44–00:45:44 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[00:45:44] ▶ Play Speaker 8 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

remember when you get off of I-95, uh, Sam's club is the city. Then you go into the county and you come back into the city there.

[00:45:54] ▶ Play Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:45:54–00:45:58 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:45:54] ▶ Play Speaker 8 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]

[00:45:58] ▶ Play Speaker 8 + overlapping voice

will give over the mediums there because they don't

[00:46:00] ▶ Play Speaker 8 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:46:00–00:46:02 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:46:02] ▶ Play Speaker 8 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

Right. You know, and so our issue is going to be the irrigation and the maintenance.

[00:46:07] ▶ Play Speaker 8 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:46:07–00:46:11 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:46:11] ▶ Play Speaker 8 + overlapping voice

it's, it's FDOT really issued it.

[00:46:13] ▶ Play Speaker 8 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:46:13–00:46:18 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:46:18] ▶ Play Speaker 8 + overlapping voice

want there.

[00:46:18] ▶ Play Speaker 8 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:46:18–00:46:19 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:46:19] ▶ Play Speaker 8 + overlapping voice

able to, um, maintain them and, and put irrigation in there, which brings me to amendment three. No, I'm joking.

[00:46:29] ▶ Play Speaker 2

And I know Alex is always a component of the old

[00:46:33] ▶ Play Speaker 2 · Machine re-recognized

tree,

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:46:33–00:46:33 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[00:46:33] ▶ Play Speaker 2

but we do live in Florida. So I probably

[00:46:36] ▶ Play Speaker 2 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]

Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 00:46:36–00:46:41 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:46:37] ▶ Play Attribution uncertain

the

[00:46:37] ▶ Play Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]

[00:46:41] ▶ Play Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

But the reality is because, um, even when you're coming down at Clear Lake today, it's very obvious what you're

[00:46:48] ▶ Play Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · Machine re-recognized

planting.

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:46:48–00:46:48 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[00:46:49] ▶ Play Speaker 2 + overlapping voice

So, um, that's, I probably counted 30, excuse me, 30 palm trees a day. Nice ones in my opinion, but nonetheless, that's better than nothing. So I'm just saying we need to have some

[00:47:00] ▶ Play Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio ▶]

Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 00:47:00–00:47:01 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:47:01] ▶ Play Speaker 2 + overlapping voice

uniformity for what we do.

[00:47:03] ▶ Play Attribution uncertain

Um,

[00:47:04] ▶ Play Speaker 2 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:47:04–00:47:06 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:47:06] ▶ Play Speaker 2

I'm going to say it, because once again, I think we always tend to go to the, in my opinion, the lowest option.

[00:47:14] ▶ Play Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:47:14–00:47:18 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:47:15] ▶ Play Speaker 2 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]

[00:47:18] ▶ Play Speaker 2

So we got option A versus option B, and if it was $200 for this one, maybe $250 for the second. I see we consistently pick the $200. So it starts to wear a look after a while. And I'd rather ‸ just not spend anything at all if you weren't going to spend it to efficiency.

[00:47:34] ▶ Play No voice detected

[00:47:35] ▶ Play Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

I'd rather you buy one good tree than buy 10 bad ones. That's what I'm saying. Cheaper is not always better. Exactly.

[00:47:44] ▶ Play Speaker 1

Very good. Anyone else?

[00:47:48] ▶ Play Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:47:48–00:47:50 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:47:51] ▶ Play Speaker 1

All right. Our next meeting is Wednesday, September 2nd, 2026 at 6 PM here at City Hall. And with that, seek adjournment.

[00:48:01] ▶ Play Speaker 4

Motion to adjourn.

[00:48:03] ▶ Play Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio ▶]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:48:03–00:48:04 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:48:03] ▶ Play Speaker 12 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]

[00:48:04] ▶ Play No voice detected

Second.

[00:48:04] ▶ Play Speaker 1

Excellent. All right. Before I close it, I'll just say this Friday is not only the 102nd anniversary of your, this city's American Legion, right on the other side under the water tower, but it's also ‸ National

[00:48:19] ▶ Play Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:48:19–00:48:20 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:48:21] ▶ Play Speaker 1

My company had a Purple Heart thing today. That's why I'm in purple. So, you know, maybe a moment of silence for them. Actually, if you don't mind, we'll do one real quick. Okay. Just a quick moment of silence for that. I appreciate that. I appreciate that.

[00:48:38] ▶ Play Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:48:38–00:48:38 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:48:38] ▶ Play Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio ▶]

[00:48:39] ▶ Play Speaker 1

So, with that motion to adjourn, all in favor? Aye. ‸ Go in peace.

[00:48:44] ▶ Play Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio ▶]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:48:44–00:48:45 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:48:52] ▶ Play No voice detected

Thank you.

Transcript revision built 2026-10-27T14:25:50 · 5,404 ordinary words, 1,400 in suspect passages, 18 machine re-recognized.

Ask about this meeting

Use the search to ask a question about this meeting in particular, or compare it across other meetings in the archive.