Built from the City's minutes records — no AI-written textBriefing final
The City's record
What the City's record shows
Built only from the City's minutes (478_PZ_Reg_Minutes_10_02_2024.pdf). Page numbers are the minutes' own. Discussion is in the minutes' text; it is not summarised here.
Attendance (the roll call)
Listed present when the roll was taken: Wesley Park, Todd Anderson, Aleck Greenwood, Frank Manfredi, Marcus Wheeler, Ron Chabot, Marybeth Burgess
(Checked against the ballots and the printed roll lines; no independent membership list of this board is available to confirm that the roll is complete.)
Listed absent: Tamisha Findlay (listed absent at the roll call; named on a later ballot), Katherine Stewart (listed absent at the roll call; named on a later ballot)
Also listed as present (staff and other roles): Abbey Bass (Assistant City Clerk), Jennifer Webster (City Planner), Stockton Whitten (City Manager)
Named on at least one ballot later in the meeting: ANDERSON, BURGESS, CHABOT, FINDLAY, GREENWOOD, MANFREDI, PARK, STEWART, WHEELER (participation, which can differ from the roll: arrivals and departures are in the minutes' text)
Adopted actions (5)
to APPROVE THE OCTOBER 2, 2024 REGULAR MEETING AGENDA AS WRITTEN (moved by CHABOT, seconded by ANDERSON); PASSED 7-0; ayes: PARK, ANDERSON, GREENWOOD, CHABOT, BURGESS, WHEELER, MANFREDI; nays: none — the City's minutes, pp. 1–2
to APPROVE THE SEPTEMBER 4, 2024 REGULAR MEETING MINUTES AS WRITTEN (moved by CHABOT, seconded by MANFREDI); PASSED 7-0; ayes: PARK, ANDERSON, GREENWOOD, CHABOT, BURGESS, WHEELER, MANFREDI; nays: none — the City's minutes, pp. 1–2
to RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF ORDINANCE 08-2024, A CITY-INITIATED REQUEST OF A FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT CONSISTENT WITH FLORIDA STATUTE CHAPTER 163 TO CHANGE THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION OF (20) PARCELS OF REAL PROPERTY TOTALING APPROXIMATELY 3.36 ACRES FROM “COMMERCIAL” TO … (moved by GREENWOOD, seconded by MANFREDI); PASSED 7-0; ayes: PARK, ANDERSON, GREENWOOD, STEWART, BURGESS, FINDLAY, MANFREDI; nays: none — the City's minutes, p. 3
to POSTPONE THE ITEM TO THE NOVEMBER 6 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING (moved by ANDERSON, seconded by CHABOT); PASSED 7-0; ayes: PARK, ANDERSON, GREENWOOD, STEWART, BURGESS, FINDLAY, MANFREDI; nays: none — the City's minutes, pp. 4–5
to ADJOURN THE MEETING (moved by ANDERSON, seconded by GREENWOOD); PASSED 7-0; ayes: PARK, ANDERSON, GREENWOOD, STEWART, BURGESS, FINDLAY, MANFREDI; nays: none — the City's minutes, pp. 4–5
Agenda (the City's wording)
The City's agenda for this meeting is on file (PZ_Reg_Agenda_10_02_2024), but its item list has not been read reliably by machine yet, so no outline is shown.
Transcript Partial transcript
Machine transcription of the meeting recording. The words are the recognizer's, except where a passage is marked as corrected or machine re-recognized; most have
not been checked against the audio, so words, numbers and names can be misheard.
It describes what was said. It cannot establish who voted how, an amount or an outcome — the City's
minutes do that (above).
A time links to its passage, and “Copy link” copies that link. No recording can be started from here.
105 suspect passage(s) marked in place; inspection incomplete: language review; 2 stretch(es) where a voice was detected and no words were recognized.
How this transcript was made. New machine transcription of the whole recording, with 11 voices separated from the audio.
4 short machine repair(s) (4 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 73.3% of 5,306 content words.
Dotted words (119 places) are ordinary wording differences: hover or tap to see the other reading.
105 passages (39% 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.
Voice detected, no words recognized (2 stretches). Something may have been said here that the transcript does not have:
00:24:47 (0 s) — neither reading has words
00:28:04 (1 s) — neither reading has words
Speakers were separated by voice. A plain name rests on evidence tied to that voice; “provisional” is a name from an earlier text-only pass and is not verified; “Speaker N” is an unidentified voice.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:02:11–00:02:13 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
All in favor? Aye. Aye. All right. Any opposed? Excellent. Second is the minutes. Has anybody, does anybody need some more time to review them? You're welcome to it.
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 00:02:51–00:02:52 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:02:58–00:03:00 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
this item is for a, uh, commercial general zoning district text amendment. Uh, the request is for an amendment to appendix A, article 11, section 12. Uh, the initial application request was to include major recreational equipment, uh, to be per, a permitted use in the commercial general zoning district. Uh,
the CG zoning district is intended to serve commercial needs of the community while also protecting and promoting adjacent residential and non-commercial uses. Uh,
typically along two and four lane thoroughfares. Staff believes that the major recreational equipment and special, uh, commercial vehicles and heavy equipment warrants its own subsections with conditions. Uh, the proposed change is specific to sales and rentals of equipment. And
lengthy edition. But in summary, it is to include, again, major recreational equipment sales and or rentals with accessory uses and also commercial vehicles and heavy equipment sales and or rentals with accessory uses. Again, the request includes five sections for conditions. This includes
Flag: the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 00:05:21–00:05:52 · gap filled by a machine re-reading (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:05:53–00:05:55 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
safety and welfare of the community. For instance, unenclosed trailers are to be limited to one every 30 feet along the frontage of the street. In addition, it's prohibited to have front of the, excuse me, unenclosed utility trailers shall be prohibited forward of the front building lines of the principal structures. They should not be larger than 13 feet in height and shall also not be used as living quarters. Due to the general location of this particular request and the commercial general category, the comprehensive plan is also commercial use and is automotive oriented. Also includes ‸ equipment, storage garages, automobile, laundry facilities, or car washes. The amendment would broaden the use for commercial uses and services in the community. Uh, the providing of design standards, uh, creates a sense of aesthetics and protects the, uh, overall, uh, aesthetics of, of major thoroughfares. The request is, uh, has consistency with, with several comp plan policies, uh, two of those of which, um, again, provides design standards to emphasize the aesthetics and promote a sense of place while also encouraging the redevelopment of areas where vacant or dilapidated properties currently exist. ‸ Staff recommends to the planning and zoning board recommended ‸ approval to the city council regarding the proposed land development code amendment to appendix a article 11 section 12. To
limited commercial vehicles and heavy equipment sales and rentals to the list of permitted uses in the commercial general ‸ zoning district. And to provide design standards for major recreational equipment and or sales to the commercial general zoning district. The applicant is here and for questions, uh, turn it back over to the board. All right. Thank you. Appreciate it.
Chair may, may I say just a couple of things also to, to clarify. So when we're proposing to add the sale and rental of, um, we, what we termed as limited, um, commercial vehicles, commercial, commercial vehicles and heavy equipment. That's a defined term in the city code, but we are limiting it to, um, enclosed and unenclosed utility trailers only. So
tractor trailers and things like that. We are not proposing to allow that to be sold in the CG. It is only the utility trailers and I'm sure the applicant can talk about that as well. What, what, uh, give you examples of, of what they're, you know, proposing to sell. Um, but I wanted to be clear that it is only utility trailers and then major records. And
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:09:48–00:09:48 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
All right. Uh, how is this similar to, and correct me if I'm wrong on 520 going west? How does this compare or is it different than the heavy duty equipment rental business that I see on 520?
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:10:18–00:10:20 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
I'm not sure either, but I was just curious, uh, if the way that that is set up is what we're doing here, even though you told me there'd be no bulldozers. How does it compare or different is really what my question is or what's there already? Um,
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:10:55–00:10:56 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Probably is in the county, right? Yeah. But for, uh, dis, for discussion purposes, is this what this company is wanting to do similar to that setup or do we know?
I think it's been, I think it's been discussed that it's just going to be open or enclosed trailers. Well, I read that part. Right. But I think they're limited to that
Flag: the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 00:11:42–00:11:45 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 00:12:16–00:12:23 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said); the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:12:30–00:12:42 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up; a language review questioned the wording · 00:12:55–00:13:17 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
not. So, that's the definition ‸ in the code. I guess I will also point out that in the CG, we already, the city already does allow the sale of mobile homes. Okay. So, this would add the major recreational equipment, which I just described, and then the utility trailers as well.
Mr. Chairman, is that okay? Yes, sir. Okay. Thank you. What is existing on the property that you're looking to do this on? Or are you having to build or alter? So,
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output; the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up; a language review questioned the wording · 00:14:37–00:15:10 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output; the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 00:15:24–00:15:31 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
the front and the trees per 30 or 40 lineal feet. So, but we will address that when we review the site plan and we'll make sure we have those recommendations. Well, I'm
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output; the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 00:16:44–00:16:49 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 00:16:50–00:16:55 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 00:16:56–00:16:58 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said); the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 00:17:07–00:17:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Thank you. All right. Anybody else from the public like to speak on this? Excellent. Then I'll close it off. I'll bring back to the board before we make any motions. Just a couple of items that were well written in here. The, uh, anybody who puts the trailers, uh, or puts, uh, the recreational vehicles in line of sight based on this, they have to show it to the city where they plan on putting these vehicles. Right. And, and have, they'll have knowledge of that. So that'll be good. You can't just put it wherever they want as
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said) · 00:17:57–00:17:59 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:18:20–00:18:21 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
second, please. Second by Mr. Manfredi. All right. Any further discussion before we go into vote? All right. All in favor. ‸ Any opposed? Motion passes unanimously. Yes. Thank you guys. Thank you, gentlemen. All right. Moving on to our next item, I believe it would be the trees. Because we are, uh, item B, 3B is, uh, postponed. So moving on to the tree ‸ board.
Okay. So, uh, since I'm listening, I'll, uh, I know we're all here, but yeah, make a motion that our next planning and zoning meeting, which is on, uh, November 5th? 6th. Okay. Which is on November 6th at 6 PM. Will be, uh, when we review this item to be postponed. Can
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:19:32–00:19:34 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:19:37–00:19:50 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
So I guess I should ask, uh, is there a certain radius under which I would have to recuse myself? I don't know the distance. Is it one mile, two miles or?
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:20:27–00:20:27 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:20:45–00:20:56 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:21:05–00:21:07 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:21:13–00:21:16 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said) · 00:21:38–00:21:51 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
All of the, all the shavings, they, they, uh, they did a stump grinding so you can see where it is. It's on the backside of Cocoa High. When you take Range Road around to Michigan.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 00:22:49–00:23:19 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 00:23:36–00:23:48 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:23:52–00:23:54 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:24:01–00:24:04 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Thank you. But the reason that I'm bringing this up is that this now brought to not just my attention, but ‸ several business owners and people in this city have come to me because of this loophole that was in this ordinance. And
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 00:24:47–00:26:38 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
you buy a house that's in the neighborhood down the street from a dump that we have in Cocoa or at an airport, the cost of that house is not going to be as valuable as the cost of a house that isn't near an airport or a dump. There's things that causes property values to go up and down. And this was a prime example where people, the public, would lose a tremendous amount of property value
I mean, ‸ this board does have the authority to recommend amendments to the city council of the zoning ordinance and to study the ‸ zoning ordinances. So
that is certainly within your authority to do. I'm not exactly sure, Mr. Greenwood, what specifically you would want to have the board take up and analyze.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 00:28:04–00:30:12 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
that I need to see if I can send a message to the council and go from there. So do you all feel it's something that could be looked into and ask for more information? Are you all interested in that avenue or not?
I mean, Mr. Greenwood, what I would suggest is if there is, you know, the board is interested in looking into it, what I would suggest is perhaps at the next meeting we have staff present an overview of the existing- Perfect.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:31:06–00:31:06 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:31:18–00:31:21 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
whether or not there's further interest in trying to change that at all. But I think it might be good as a baseline for everyone to understand the overlay and what the uses are allowed. And- Well,
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 00:31:48–00:33:08 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
you know, as sort of providing, like I said, a baseline knowledge of what the overlay provides for already. And I think the idea would be we would walk you through that before you make any, you know, recommendations on changes. Yeah. Okay.
I was going to, what, an idea for an approach would be to put together an overview, ‸ as council was saying, of what the code says currently and present that to you and,
think that you all, as you do your work, you notice something and then bring it to our attention. But there are two things that could be presented, you know, right away. And that would be to prevent what we've already, that the appeal was for. That's one example. And see if it's the same. And it is, that's something that could be corrected. And
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:35:22–00:35:24 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:35:28–00:35:28 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:35:57–00:35:59 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:36:10–00:36:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:36:21–00:36:24 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:36:32–00:36:35 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:36:35–00:36:36 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:36:40–00:36:41 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
US 1. So let me just express my heartache that we lose Wendy's and it turns into a smoke shop. It looks beautiful, but I don't need a smoke shop and we lost our Burger King for a decade. I agree.
And the owners, uh, said that they would go out of business if FDOT six lane that road, it took away their turnarounds and they stood right in here and I fought against it and I lost. That's
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:37:31–00:37:35 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
we lost half the businesses on US 1 because they put those stupid turnarounds. And it's going to affect 520 as well. ‸ Yeah. Let's do those turnarounds. But
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:37:45–00:37:46 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:38:00–00:38:02 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:38:05–00:38:07 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:38:11–00:38:12 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:38:19–00:38:21 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
November 6th, day after election day, uh, 6 PM. All right, so everyone has a good, uh, Halloween and, and election day and it's going to be good one way or the other. Good. Say