It's now called to order. I'd like to welcome everyone here. Seating arrangements are a little different for obvious reasons. And Monica, call the roll.
I will. Michael Dobrin,
here.
Al Washington. Todd Anderson.
Here.
Gary Blanco. Here. Sherry Urban. Here. Trina Gilliam. ‸ Marilyn Green. Here.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:00:30–00:00:35 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Glass. Alec Greenwood. Here. Debbie Joyce. Here. Thank you.
Okay, and thank you. And we do have a quorum. At this point, if everyone could stand up and face the flag. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United
[unclear audio — 0:09 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:00:57–00:01:07 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Thank you. Okay. According to our agenda that's been prepared, ‸ something called presentations.
And
I'd like to welcome back Todd Anderson. Todd is known to us. And welcome back.
Yeah.
Okay.
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Flag: the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 00:01:28–00:01:33 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Glass.
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:01:35–00:01:35 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Okay. I'm able to make it tonight.
Okay. And this is Ms. Debbie Joyce. Yes. Debbie,
welcome.
Debbie,
yes.
Thank
you. She's here on behalf of the city, but also the school board. And I had an email from the school board rep. I wanted me to just say that they had intended to be here to welcome her and introduce her to you, but they weren't able to. And so I just kind of wanted to say that she had emailed me and said, we appreciate her commitment to serving the students of Brevard. So
I'm going to
share that
with you all.
Okay.
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:02:11–00:02:12 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
No, I don't, but I have a school-age child that is attending Brevard County High School.
Okay. Hopefully the schools will open up before Labor Day again.
‸ That's the hope. I'm also a registered volunteer for Brevard County Schools. So I do a number of volunteer activities.
That's always a bit of a challenge. Yes. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Our next job or task is to approve the agenda. I think the members of the board, you've all seen the agenda. Do you have any questions, any comments, additions, deletions, anything? If not, is that a motion to approve? Motion to approve. Second. Second. Okay. All those in favor, say aye. Aye.
Aye.
Okay.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:03:03–00:03:05 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Okay. The agenda is approved. Now the minutes. We have the minutes in front of us. Do the ones at home have the minutes? Monica.
Yes. They were in there. Okay.
It
was included in the packet.
Okay. Does anybody have- Monica.
Yes. Chair, I have two corrections. Okay. On the minutes. Are they on the first page?
I want to
turn.
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:03:36–00:03:37 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
me? Are they on the first page?
On page one, I wasn't at the meeting. Yeah, I know. I fixed that
before
we started. Okay.
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:03:47–00:03:54 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Okay.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:03:56–00:03:58 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
Okay. Any other changes? Do we have a motion to approve? Second.
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:04:09–00:04:09 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Okay.
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:04:11–00:04:14 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Okay. All in favor, say aye. Aye. Opposed?
Aye.
Okay. Okay. We're going to move on to the agenda now. We do have four items tonight. And hopefully everyone has read through these. We'll start with the first one. Monica. I mean, I'm sorry.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:04:42–00:04:43 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Sorry.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:04:45–00:04:45 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Okay. Okay. I know you won. So.
There it
goes.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:04:52–00:04:53 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Okay. So this is a text amendment, self-storage facilities. Excuse me, self-service storage facilities. This is making changes under several zoning districts, CR and CG in particular, where they're currently a special exception. We're adding the use under the CW, which is Wholesale Commercial District, with
some
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:05:27–00:05:28 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
same conditions as applied with CR and CG to be consistent. We're removing personal storage and personal storage warehouses from the CBD Central Business District and the M2, which is the Manufacturing Industrial Zoning Districts. And then we're amending the definition to personal storage warehouse, retitling it as self-service storage facility. And we're also changing parking requirements for storage facilities to provide for the self-service storage facility use in ‸ all the districts so that it will be consistent.
[unclear audio — 0:07 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:06:09–00:06:16 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
parking and storage for major recreational equipment. So this is under Ordinance 06-2020. And staff is recommending that the Planning and Zoning Board recommend approval to Council of Ordinance 06-2020, providing for the amendment permitting location for self-service storage facilities and further amending regulations related to the use.
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:06:38–00:06:42 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
And I'll be happy to answer questions.
Questions. Now,
are
the applicant expanding its business?
Yes. This was started from an existing self-storage, or mini-storage is what we've been calling it up to now, facility. And they have bought adjoining parcels, and they're wrapping all that into one, and they're planning to build an additional building. They built a new building fairly recently, in the last year or two, and they're expanding the use. So in looking at what they wanted to do, because they're zone CW, ‸ we don't allow it, but we have an existing use that's predated this code by quite a few years. So to get it consistent, to clean things up a bit, we took a look at it throughout the city, and then recommend these changes.
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said); a language review questioned the wording · 00:07:44–00:07:50 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
No, I did take a look at every one of the ones that we have in the city now that I could
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:07:56–00:07:58 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
self-storage.
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:07:59–00:08:04 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
it wouldn't create an inconsistency for anybody else. The one, you know, one that's existing that had or has some parking out in front of their buildings, and I let them know that they would need, under the new, you know, if it passed, they would need to screen it. But
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:08:24–00:08:29 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
one, and they've decided, they emailed me back and said they're not going to have the storage there. They need it for septic now, so it was going to go away anyway. So they wouldn't be impacted.
Okay. The city sees this as a routine expansion of existing business.
Yes. Yes. Yeah. In CW, storage is already a permitted use by right. You didn't have to come for a special exception, even. So there's a fine line between storage and self-storage.
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:09:03–00:09:08 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
But at the same time, they're very similar uses. So, you know, I felt it was a rational, you know, add to ‸ that district.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 00:09:16–00:09:32 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:07 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
[00:09:37] ▶ Play Speaker 9 (introduced as “Mark Barnaby” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice
Good evening. I'm Mark Barnaby, representing Storage Cap Cocoa.
[00:09:41] ▶ Play Speaker 9 (introduced as “Mark Barnaby” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:07 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:09:41–00:09:48 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:09:48] ▶ Play Speaker 9 (introduced as “Mark Barnaby” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice
unusual circumstances.
[00:09:49] ▶ Play Speaker 9 (introduced as “Mark Barnaby” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:09:49–00:09:55 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:09:55] ▶ Play Speaker 9 (introduced as “Mark Barnaby” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice
throughout the state,
[00:09:58] ▶ Play Speaker 9 (introduced as “Mark Barnaby” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:09:58–00:10:01 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:10:01] ▶ Play Speaker 9 (introduced as “Mark Barnaby” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice
in operating over 100 storage facilities throughout the country over the years. They own the property
[00:10:10] ▶ Play Speaker 9 (introduced as “Mark Barnaby” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:10:10–00:10:16 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:10:16] ▶ Play Speaker 9 (introduced as “Mark Barnaby” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice
And so, it's in a relatively industrialized area, as you well know. And it's totally appropriate. In fact, there are actually two houses on the corner that we're looking at removing because it makes sense for our expansion purposes and probably more appropriate from a land use standpoint. ‸ This property is zoned CW with a relatively intensive use.
[00:10:39] ▶ Play Speaker 9 (introduced as “Mark Barnaby” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:10:39–00:10:43 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:10:43] ▶ Play Speaker 9 (introduced as “Mark Barnaby” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice
could do storage there, we couldn't do self-storage there.
[00:10:46] ▶ Play Speaker 9 (introduced as “Mark Barnaby” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:10:46–00:10:49 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:10:49] ▶ Play Speaker 9 (introduced as “Mark Barnaby” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice
a good thing for the city to look at.
[00:10:52] ▶ Play Speaker 9 (introduced as “Mark Barnaby” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:10:52–00:10:55 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:10:55] ▶ Play Speaker 9 (introduced as “Mark Barnaby” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice
has worked hard with us. Just a couple of things we'd like to look at. ‸ We'd like you to look at. By the way, we support the ordinance as a whole. And no matter what, we'd like you to pass it.
[00:11:06] ▶ Play Speaker 9 (introduced as “Mark Barnaby” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:11:06–00:11:09 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:11:10] ▶ Play Speaker 9 (introduced as “Mark Barnaby” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:11:10–00:11:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:11:15] ▶ Play Speaker 9 (introduced as “Mark Barnaby” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice
three categories that you're looking at. We have, as ‸ I noted, lots of experience in dealing with self-storage facilities. And so, one of the things
[00:11:25] ▶ Play Speaker 9 (introduced as “Mark Barnaby” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Machine re-recognized
we
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:11:25–00:11:26 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
[00:11:26] ▶ Play Speaker 9 (introduced as “Mark Barnaby” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice
like to look at is,
[00:11:27] ▶ Play Speaker 9 (introduced as “Mark Barnaby” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:07 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:11:27–00:11:34 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:11:36] ▶ Play Speaker 9 (introduced as “Mark Barnaby” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice
Subsection B there, it talks about parking requirements under that section. And right now, all the parking requirements are fine, except what has been recommended here so far is one space for 50 units. We think that's what's really needed. If you've ever been to a
[00:11:57] ▶ Play Speaker 9 (introduced as “Mark Barnaby” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Machine re-recognized
storage
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:11:57–00:11:57 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
[00:11:57] ▶ Play Speaker 9 (introduced as “Mark Barnaby” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice
facility, there's almost no one ever there.
[00:12:00] ▶ Play Speaker 9 (introduced as “Mark Barnaby” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:12:00–00:12:03 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:12:03] ▶ Play Speaker 9 (introduced as “Mark Barnaby” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice
parking for our folks. But we could certainly live with one to 100. That would be a good ‸ compromise. And we'd like you to consider that, at least for that zoning district, which is the most intensive group.
[00:12:15] ▶ Play Speaker 9 (introduced as “Mark Barnaby” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:12:15–00:12:16 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:12:16] ▶ Play Speaker 9 (introduced as “Mark Barnaby” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice
look at is in regard to subsection F4. That provides, keep in mind that it allows, as proposed, it allows for RVs to be parked on site. But does not allow for cars or trucks. We have snowbirds that come down here. They may want to park cars, not necessarily at their house for security reasons. You have commercial vehicles, smaller commercial vehicles that may be appropriate to park on site, not necessarily in somebody's neighborhood, some of the nicer neighborhoods in Cocoa. And so it makes sense to us that you
[00:12:55] ▶ Play Speaker 9 (introduced as “Mark Barnaby” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:07 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:12:55–00:13:02 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:13:02] ▶ Play Speaker 9 (introduced as “Mark Barnaby” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice
as may be appropriate. We think that's
a
good defense. And if there are only two changes, again, we really think this is a great ordinance as a whole. And I'm happy to answer your questions.
Questions?
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:13:18–00:13:22 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
far as the fire suppression sprinkler system in CW Warehouse, is it the same as the self-service storage? ‸ You
know, ‸ that's a building code
issue
with fire code.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:13:36–00:13:38 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
I would have to find out from our building official.
Okay.
Thank you. Okay. Thank you. You were aware, Dodie, of the changes that were being recorded?
I, yes, we discussed them, Ms. Farmy and I, beforehand. I looked at what's in the code. What I'm proposing is for parking is one for every 50 units. And I counted up, you know, where, where they're at now, what they were proposing to add, as far as units, the number of units, to see how would that impact their proposed expansion.
[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:14:20–00:14:26 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
So I don't see the need to increase it, to allow less parking, if that makes sense, to require less. Because if you
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:14:33–00:14:38 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
And so our feeling was it meant everybody
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:14:43–00:14:45 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
And they're, what they ‸ can pay to me, at least, would
eat
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:14:49–00:14:50 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
it as well.
[unclear audio — 0:08 ▶]
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said); a language review questioned the wording · 00:14:52–00:15:00 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Sorry.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 00:15:00–00:15:01 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
So staff's position was, well, you have a vehicle. It's typically in a garage. If you're wanting to store it and you, you know, don't have room in your garage, like most of us don't, then, you know, that's kind of what those storage units are for. The kind you need to roll up the drawer and drive in.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:15:22–00:15:25 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
storage to be for the oversized recreational vehicles. So that was the intent. We just could see an issue developing if we allow cars and trucks. And it could happen with boats and RVs as well if you kind of have,
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:15:43–00:15:48 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
And so we were just trying to kind of avoid potential code issues down the road by limiting it.
Mr. Chair, if
I
can add.
Yes.
I could tell you from my perspective and what I've seen throughout the city, we are seeing a lot of commercial vehicles parked in the residential neighborhoods, and they are in violation of some of our codes.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:16:10–00:16:13 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
gentleman,
but if we don't have a place for them to park, then I don't know what we're going to do because
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:16:20–00:16:22 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
about some of the commercial ‸ vehicles that are actually parked in the residential areas, ‸ whether it be the yards or in the driveways. So it's just something that I'm seeing throughout the city, and I don't know where these vehicles will be allowed to park, you know, other than at their residence. I mean, it's just
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:16:43–00:16:50 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]
allowing a place that wants to do that, to do something like that or allow that. But I understand where the staff is coming from as well. But it's just something that I see that can
‸ help
us, but at the same time, you know. But Oh, yeah. Yeah, we're seeing a lot of that because we've got a lot of lawn businesses right now, and
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:17:14–00:17:17 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
that are actually parking in the residential, you know, in the driveways and stuff. And it gets to a point to where it actually hinders your vision when you're coming on a roll at times.
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 00:17:31–00:18:10 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:25 ▶]
I
can't hear anything.
‸ Yeah, we've all got to use mics.
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said) · 00:18:14–00:18:24 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:10 ▶]
Mr. Chairman, if I might, to answer Mr. Anderson's question, I think that you were asking, just for the person on the phone, you were asking if there's a way to handle that with the trucks and how that might be done around the country. One of the ways, a lot of jurisdictions are all different, but certainly one of the ways that it has been done is with the weight. And certainly a 5,000-pound weight would be more practical. We're not looking for big, ‸ in fact, we don't want big vehicles in there as to the cars and trucks. I think that would be just fine.
And
that is not unusual.
[00:19:08] ▶ Play Speaker 9 (introduced as “Mark Barnaby” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 00:19:08–00:19:11 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
if I may. This is Board Member Blanco, if I may. The mayor makes a valid point as well because of the new developments that we're
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:19:21–00:19:25 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
There are, you know, restrictions on parking commercial vehicles in your driveway.
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:19:34–00:19:38 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
can't, then there is ‸ very little alternative for some of these employees that work for companies that have company vehicles. They have to drive home. If they don't have the option of leaving them parked at their place of employment. So I ‸ do see the gentleman's point as well.
‸ Perhaps it's just me. How do you determine the weight of it? Every vehicle has a weight. You can't really tell by looking.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:20:19–00:20:24 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:20:25–00:20:31 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]
Because I see what you're saying as far as, you know,
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:20:35–00:20:37 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
But I think there is a solution to what the ‸ builder is trying to do ‸ and what's good for the community. And I think going by weight is probably the most accurate way to do it.
I'd kind of like to, I guess, do a little looking into that. Maybe talk to code enforcement and see if it isn't a bigger problem or if we need to look at an additional solution than just adding it to these few storage places. Because our code assumes, I think, that if you have a commercial vehicle, it's a company vehicle, and therefore it's going to be parked at the company at night, you know, and that people aren't taking them home. But the reality is that, you know, times change and we have more people,
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:21:33–00:21:37 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
where you do take the vehicle home.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:21:43–00:21:45 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
I'm talking more, you're seeing more of your lawn businesses with ‸ these lawn, these large trucks. And then you have your concrete pumping businesses that people operate out of their homes.
That's
where their offices are.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:21:58–00:22:00 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
they got these big old spray tanks, and I forgot exactly what they do. It's something to do with homes and pressure washing.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:22:07–00:22:09 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
and they are parking these big old trucks ‸ in their yards. And after about 5 p.m., code enforcement is gone.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:22:17–00:22:18 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Even bobcats park their trailers in front yards in residential neighborhoods. And that's what we see every day.
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:22:24–00:22:27 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:22:27–00:22:29 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
So, yeah. We
need, yeah, that's bigger than just the storage use, parking for vehicles once you get into that whole equipment thing. We almost need a series of sites where you truly have, like, fleet parking as a use, which is something we don't have in the code, and it's something I've been thinking we really need.
Yes.
I think that might be a better way to address this.
[unclear audio — 0:15 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 00:23:03–00:23:36 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:11 ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:23:37–00:23:40 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
I know one just south of it right on Wickham.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said); the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:23:42–00:23:45 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
It's
a
very good idea.
It does exactly that.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 00:23:48–00:23:49 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:23:49–00:23:52 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:23:52–00:23:54 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:23:54–00:23:54 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Well, and, you know, we allow that now as auto storage in M2. But I don't think it's, I have to look at the code.
book to
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:24:04–00:24:05 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
see if it's
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 00:24:05–00:24:05 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:24:06–00:24:08 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
we're talking about our commercial zoning, right?
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:24:11–00:24:16 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:24:18–00:24:22 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Most of the CW is not. But not all of it. So,
so somebody who owns a, is, if a property zone commercial, they can park their commercial vehicles there.
[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:24:34–00:24:41 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Right. Large vehicles. But a lot of companies have pickup trucks that have their company name on the side of it. But I own a pickup truck with no lettering on it. And I park in my driveway. I'm not
breaking the problem.
Correct?
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:24:56–00:25:03 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
is it just that it's a truck? A large truck. Oh.
Hmm. Is
that, is there a distinction there in the?
I'm
trying to remember.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:25:13–00:25:16 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
Size issue. ‸ I
would
think
so. So,
in residential pickup truck, even though it has a commercial name on the truck, it's parked in the driveway, that's not against the code. A regular pickup truck.
Yeah, a regular pickup truck with a name on it. It's not. But in some neighborhoods that have these homeowner's associations,
you
can't have any, any, yeah.
Jake, that's also true in some conduit associations.
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:25:42–00:25:44 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
You
can't have commercial vehicles parked,
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:25:47–00:25:49 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
It doesn't matter the size. It's the commercialization of the vehicle that's prohibited. Mm-hmm.
So, if
you have a vehicle like a truck, a regular pickup truck that you've got your business advertised on that truck, like a wrap on it, you can't park it in the driveway. It has to be garaged.
Mm-hmm.
Mm-hmm.
Well, we're talking about parking a commercial vehicle at the storage area, correct? Consider that. Suppose they're the commercial. A person to do that, but if their private residence is a mile or two or three away, how'd they get home?
Right.
That's
a mover. Yeah, it's not designed for that. You're going to swap out that. Yeah.
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said) · 00:26:41–00:26:43 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
I
think it doesn't work. I don't think it really works with self-storage.
I have a
question for Dodie. Yes, ma'am. ‸ The gentleman that spoke earlier from the representative of the company, can you ask him if they have restrictions in place at the facility that only
allow
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:27:04–00:27:04 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
certain types of vehicles so that they don't get inundated with vehicles that they wouldn't necessarily want to see parked on site?
I think, Mr. Burnley, heard most of that. One moment. Yep.
Yes, we have a restriction. First of all, we don't want junk vehicles. They have to be operational. ‸ Absolutely do not want junk vehicles on site. And so we obviously abide by the city requirements related to no semi-trucks, that sort of thing. We don't want semi-trucks either. Or large truck vehicles. I don't know what else. ‸ Cement mixer. We're not talking about anything like that.
[00:27:46] ▶ Play Speaker 9 (introduced as “Mark Barnaby” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:27:46–00:27:52 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
the side, your smaller
[00:27:54] ▶ Play Speaker 9 (introduced as “Mark Barnaby” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Machine re-recognized
event
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:27:54–00:27:55 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
that sort of thing that might be ‸ prohibited ‸ in a subdivision or a condo, or might be inappropriate in certain ‸ zoning areas.
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:28:07–00:28:11 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:28:07] ▶ Play Speaker 9 (introduced as “Mark Barnaby” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
car out and park in one
[00:28:12] ▶ Play Speaker 9 (introduced as “Mark Barnaby” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:28:12–00:28:14 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
And that's how we trade it out.
Okay. Okay.
Any
other? Does anybody
out there have a question they would like to ask?
Okay. We're always hoping to
get
up to the public, really, in case you do have a question. Are we ready to talk about?
‸ I'm not sure we're
ready to make a motion yet because we've
had
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:28:44–00:28:44 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
several options.
But
if someone were to make that difficulty right now, listing options. I guess one thing is to park the personal vehicle at that site and then get in the commercial vehicle.
And,
which is what you're recommending, correct? Yeah. You certainly don't want junk vehicles. You don't want vehicles abandoned.
You'd
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:29:09–00:29:11 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
have to monitor that. By the way,
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 00:29:14–00:29:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
you had to do that. Well, this is a legal process. Are you an attorney?
I am.
Very good. You guys get a bad rap on occasion. All right. Do you feel ready to make a motion or something you would like to make a motion to clear?
‸ I guess it depends on how you feel about, you know, if you're wanting to incorporate that or you don't. I mean, I had a question
about the weight we mentioned. Yeah. How do you determine, you mentioned 5,000 pounds. I could look at a vehicle. Maybe Russ is better at it.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:29:57–00:29:59 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Well, I guess.
I'm very obvious.
I have an F-150. I go to the dump quite often and mine's like 5,400 pounds. But I'm sure that you can just Google a vehicle and find the gross weight.
We could probably. Kristen, do you think, do we, we don't have anything in the code that defines commercial vehicle, do we?
We
don't have a definition for that.
Not that I'm aware of.
Yeah, I didn't think
so.
Because, I ‸ don't know. I mean, I could see allowing that, like in the CW, because ‸ it's a light industrial host, warehousing district. So, if you have the truck with the trailer with the, you know, lawn equipment kind of scenario. I ‸ guess I could see that there.
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:30:56–00:31:01 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
next to residential.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:31:03–00:31:04 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
city. And CG is really, I don't know, it's a little, it's more retail and restaurant kind of use. Although, ‸ the code, regardless, requires screening.
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:31:21–00:31:24 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
that a little undecided.
Dodie, could we approve the ordinance? I don't have the ordinance in front of me.
[unclear audio — 0:08 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:31:32–00:31:40 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
an addition to, all you'd have to do is a one-line amendment to where it says RVs and boats and recreational type vehicles.
[00:31:53] ▶ Play Speaker 16 (introduced as “Catherine Bonadio” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
Yeah. To
also include commercial vehicles, 5,000 pounds or more.
Yeah, I mean, we don't have to make that change now.
I
think that having brought up and especially what the mayor shared about it being a code issue, you know, kind of throughout the city, it fares a little more look into than making a quick decision, you know, tonight.
There's a lot of special use vehicles like the mayor had mentioned. Everything from, you know, pumping concrete to a boom truck to a bucket truck, all types of vehicles that are not recreational. Right. But are also not junk vehicles.
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:32:32–00:32:38 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said) · 00:32:38–00:32:44 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
I'll make a motion to approve the ordinance with an amendment.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:32:47–00:32:48 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
In reference to commercial vehicles.
And your amendment is that we consider.
An amendment.
An amendment in the future to address.
To accept
commercial vehicles.
To clearly
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 00:33:02–00:33:02 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Got it.
Okay. Okay. Can I clarify though?
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:33:08–00:33:13 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
that in all the districts?
Anything just, it just specifically pertains to this ordinance.
Right. So this ordinance, it affects
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:33:24–00:33:27 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
I thought it was just CW. Is that where you're going?
Well, because we have a nested zoning code, if you, if it's allowed in M1 ‸ allows any use that's a principle of use in CW and in CG. ‸ So.
The mobile storage requirements aren't going to change from one
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:33:54–00:33:57 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
to another. I wouldn't think.
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:34:04–00:34:09 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
So whether you have an RV, a boat, or a commercial vehicle. Right.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:34:14–00:34:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
three,
I
don't see what the difference is.
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:34:21–00:34:24 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
would really allow for that. Even the last line said,
you
know, ‸ further amending regulations related to this use. So it leaves it open to make further amending regulations.
Well, it, it, that's kind of, it's, um, it's always, yes. Um, that was really the shorthand version of saying,
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:34:54–00:34:58 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Um, so shorthand for what was in the, in the ordinance itself.
[unclear audio — 0:10 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:35:02–00:35:12 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
commercial vehicle storage. And we would have to add, create a definition for that, um, you know,
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:35:19–00:35:20 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
and therefore the, that would allow it in the M1 as well, which makes sense. Then, then, you know, we can, we can certainly bring something back on, on that, a change to it later.
Um, or, you can, you
can, you can, ‸ I mean, if that's.
So, um,
I
want to say it's cleaner to pass it now and I'll bring you back some changes later so that it continues to move forward because it's going to go to council next week. Um,
you
could make the recommendation that we change it between now and then, but it doesn't going to give us staff time to really look and see the impacts to the, you know, the rest of the city.
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:36:11–00:36:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
at that, um, and, you know, adding that. But Kristen, were you about to say something? Oh,
I was going to suggest either you continue it, you continue this item and have Jody bring back something that, you know, would deal with commercial vehicles or you make your recommended motion and that's what the council will, will review. Yes. And, and if, you know, and Jody can look at it also in between and make a staff, I mean, obviously the council will look at your, the planning and zoning board's recommendation, but they'll also consider staff recommendation at that time.
That's a
good way
to.
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:36:52–00:36:55 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
back to the meeting. Right. Right, it will go
through first and second reading with the council. So they
can make the,
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:37:01–00:37:02 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Mm-hmm. So should we call the question? Do you want to restate?
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:37:09–00:37:12 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Yep.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:37:13–00:37:14 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:37:14–00:37:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
You have a second.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:37:16–00:37:18 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Any other questions?
Is there
a microphone on? No. Okay. Any questions for the board, the rest of the board?
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:37:27–00:37:27 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Okay, we have a motion on the floor in a second.
Mr. Chair.
Okay.
[00:37:31] ▶ Play Speaker 9 (introduced as “Mark Barnaby” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
Can I ask a quick question? Yes.
[00:37:33] ▶ Play Speaker 9 (introduced as “Mark Barnaby” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 00:37:33–00:37:35 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:37:35] ▶ Play Speaker 9 (introduced as “Mark Barnaby” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice
Because I don't want to get us delayed in getting it adopted because it's important to get ‸ adopted for the overall ordinance. So my understanding is it's moving forward. It's going to first reading. Sometime between first reading and second reading will come back to the plan? No. No.
[00:37:54] ▶ Play Speaker 9 (introduced as “Mark Barnaby” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:37:54–00:37:56 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
[00:37:55] ▶ Play Speaker 9 (introduced as “Mark Barnaby” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
No.
[00:37:58] ▶ Play Speaker 9 (introduced as “Mark Barnaby” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
That's what my concern is.
No, I'm sorry. It would be, there's a recommended motion to approve the ordinance with the changes suggested. And then it would just go through first and second reading. With counsel.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:38:14–00:38:16 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
It will not come back.
Right.
It will not come back.
Okay. And so in the meantime, we can work with Dodie maybe with some language that will address the concern that the planning and zoning board has raised. Sure. Okay.
And seeing that I'm the liaison to the planning and zoning board, I hear what's being said here.
So
I will be there and I will relay that to the council as well. I
appreciate it.
You know, ‸ we'll stay today. Excellent. Okay.
Certainly welcome your additional dialogue, further dialogue.
[00:38:45] ▶ Play Speaker 9 (introduced as “Mark Barnaby” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
Yeah. Yes. I think we can. We can get ‸ it pretty narrowed down by then. It's always
good to clarify.
Yes. Come on.
Okay. We have a motion
the
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:38:54–00:38:54 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
second. All in favor, say aye.
If I could. Okay. Mr. Anderson. Yes.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:39:01–00:39:02 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Because there was a lot that was said after you made that recommendation. Can you read what
you wrote down at this point? Well,
my motion was to approve the ordinance as submitted with a review of.
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:39:20–00:39:41 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:13 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Yeah. Okay. They are saying. ‸ Yeah.
Mr. Chairman, if I may. The gentleman brought up the idea to consider
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 00:39:52–00:39:52 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
parking from one space.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:39:54–00:39:55 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:39:56–00:39:59 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Are we going to address that? Oh, I'm sorry. I thought I heard
a
motion. Second.
No, but I wanted to say something.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:40:07–00:40:08 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:40:08–00:40:10 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
Monica? Yes. Sorry. ‸ Debbie's wanting to speak, but you'll be next.
Okay.
Okay.
The gentleman brought up the ‸ issue of considering expanding the parking from one space for every 150 units.
[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:40:28–00:40:34 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
units.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:40:34–00:40:35 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
Do ‸ we want to examine that at a later date? That's up for discussion.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:40:47–00:40:48 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
I
didn't hear her.
She was wanting to know if the board was interested in considering expanding ‸ the ratio for parking. Staff was proposing one space for every 50 storage units.
[unclear audio — 0:11 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:41:04–00:41:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
from what's required, being proposed to be required. Thank you.
Well, I support with staff. I agree. I concur.
Monica? Yes.
Go ahead.
May I speak? Yes.
You can speak.
Okay. It's Marilyn Green. Florida statute 320.01 defines what a commercial motor vehicle means.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:41:46–00:41:48 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
to that when they're talking about, you know, if there's something already defined by the state, we shouldn't second guess that. And it basically says, you know, it
has
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:41:58–00:42:02 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
So again, ‸ I think we can get caught up in the details of this. But as far as the CW and what the staff recommends, I think I'm more inclined to go with just the general ordinance number 06-2020, providing for the amendments permitting locations for self-storage facilities and further amending regulations related to the shoes.
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 00:42:31–00:43:08 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:21 ▶]
We're
a little more specific.
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:43:08–00:43:10 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
They also create ordinances that fine-tunes the needs of the cities themselves. And this could be something that clarifies it clearer than what the Florida statute state and
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:43:26–00:43:31 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Group and myself have put together some ideas so I think that we should leave that up to the council this is where it's going after the way the board votes here and I'm sure that by that time there might be other points that the council can bring up if they
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:43:49–00:43:52 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
that until that time but I think the staff has done quite a bit of work on it already and
[unclear audio — 0:08 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:43:57–00:44:05 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
this project a little ‸ more fine-tuned If it involves legalities, like for example the conflict of the support of
statues
and all that, we'll have the city attorney at that time that would be able to address it after tonight's meeting.
okay ‸ since I clarified that wait
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:44:28–00:44:32 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
the second are we prepared to
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:44:42–00:44:44 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
We have a
motion. Okay, the motion to recommend approval
for
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:44:53–00:44:53 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
the City
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:44:54–00:44:57 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
providing for the amendments permitting locations for self-service storage facilities and further amending regulations related to this issue
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:45:05–00:45:07 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 00:45:07–00:45:17 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
okay
We're going
to
take a vote now. right all right Okay, all in favor, say aye. aye
aye aye aye
opposed okay it's unanimous Thank you very much.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:45:33–00:45:35 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Thank you.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:45:37–00:45:38 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
thank
you for the words
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:45:46–00:45:47 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 00:45:48–00:45:49 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
okay this item is also a text amendment this is related to pharmacies and medical marijuana
[unclear audio — 0:07 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:46:09–00:46:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
In 2018, the council approved an ordinance, this was 1-2017, which enacted a ban on medical marijuana treatment center dispensing facilities, prohibiting them from locating in the city. Recently, council provided staff with the direction to revisit this, and so we have an ordinance now before you that would add language that's shown below under principal uses, under RP, which is residential professional, PS, which is professional offices and services, CR, which is restricted commercial, CN, which is neighborhood commercial, and UMD, which is urban mixed use districts. It would remove pharmacies from a list of principal uses for the CBD, which is central business district,
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:47:13–00:47:17 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Removal of the prohibition against medical marijuana treatment center dispensing facilities would also occur under the ordinance. Pharmacy, this was the proposed change, would incorporate the additional language you see before you. I won't read it all. But it basically would provide a prohibition of location within 500 feet for real property for a public or private elementary, middle, secondary school without council approval. And it was a map that was incorporated in that as well for you to show you where those zoning districts are and where schools are in relation to those zoning districts.
[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:48:08–00:48:14 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
And so staff looked at that through the various zoning districts and also looked at the consistency with the city code and provided for you. There's goal 1.3, which the city will enhance the quality of life and prosperity assistance through the retention and creation of a wide range of profitable business opportunities and jobs. So staff is recommending that the Planning and Zoning Board recommend approval to council of ordinance 05-2020, which provides for the location of pharmacies and medical marijuana treatment center dispensing facilities.
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:48:54–00:49:01 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
That was a city council decision. So I kind of have to say I ‸ refer that back. I'm not really sure.
I thought it was because the state was telling us how we could do it and we didn't want them to tell us how we could do it.
The prohibition was put in place.
Right. Because the state wanted to control how that would happen in our local area. And so you either said yes to that or no. And so the answer was no. We don't want the state telling us.
Right.
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:49:32–00:49:37 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
case you have to treat all pharmacies the same way.
or you
Flag: the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 00:49:41–00:49:42 · gap filled by a machine re-reading (not checked by a person)
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 00:49:42–00:49:42 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
option as a city to opt out and say no and enact the prohibition, and that's the course that the city took back then.
Flag: the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 00:49:42–00:50:01 · gap filled by a machine re-reading (not checked by a person)
So the changes are redefining a pharmacy? No,
not defining pharmacy, but just adding this. Adding
the
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 00:50:01–00:50:01 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Right.
Flag: the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 00:50:02–00:50:06 · gap filled by a machine re-reading (not checked by a person)
That's what it's really. Right.
Okay. And if I could
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 00:50:06–00:50:06 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Mr. Chair, it was basically
Flag: the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 00:50:06–00:50:07 · gap filled by a machine re-reading (not checked by a person)
‸ The same.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:50:08–00:50:09 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
it up anywhere. ‸ Right. And we didn't want ‸ these facilities to go up just anywhere within the city.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:50:16–00:50:34 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:16 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:07 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:50:36–00:50:43 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Are you aware of what they're doing?
Yes, sir. Some of them took the same stance.
[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:50:48–00:50:54 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
they were looking at that bottom line, ‸ those dollars that it was going to bring in there. So money talks. But a lot of your smaller cities took
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:51:03–00:51:07 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Yeah.
Because it was such a new law that we just wanted to be cautious for our citizens. And we decided to just kind of wait and see how it played out in the other communities. We could give that. I mean, actually, I haven't seen any adverse effects. And I
really don't like it being thrown in the mix with
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 00:51:28–00:51:29 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
and
that really bothered me.
So just to be clear, the staff is approving these changes. So we're basically saying, yes, marijuana dispensing facilities can be in the city, just not 500 feet to
a school.
It can be
in any of those zoning districts where you can already have a pharmacy, but not within 500 feet of a school. That's correct.
So a pharmacy could be within 500 feet of a school
currently? Currently, yes. Yes.
But this whole pharmacy is
out of that.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:52:09–00:52:12 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Correct.
Just
so we can. No,
no, that's
not
correct.
Sorry. Medical. It's only medical marijuana treatment dispensing facilities that cannot be within 500 feet of the school without council approval. And that's allowed by ‸ state law. That's one of the few restrictions that you can have that's different from a pharmacy.
Okay. Thank you for clarifying.
‸ Theoretically, Walgreens or CVS can sell this stuff.
[unclear audio — 0:10 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 00:52:40–00:52:50 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:52:53–00:52:57 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:52:57–00:53:09 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:10 ▶]
or aspirin, you're not going to go to these places, right?
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:53:11–00:53:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Well, we already
have a lot of locations that sell it right now.
Yeah. We have no applicants at present time?
No, this is strictly staffs bringing us forward at, you know, council direction to look at this and bring something forward.
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said); the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 00:53:35–00:53:42 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
He had to go to
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:53:44–00:53:47 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
He implied, ‸ is money a factor? The fact that Coco could derive funds from this, is that a determining factor?
It wasn't ever expressed to me. I hadn't heard that. No
different than other businesses that operate.
Right, yeah.
‸ I
mean, any business that starts up, you know, generates revenue for the business and, ‸ you know, increases a tax base, of course. Yeah. But I don't think that's a...
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:54:22–00:54:26 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
this, pro or con? Open to the public? Open to the public, really.
Mr. Chair, I do... I have a comment I'd like to make. You know, in regards to the 500 feet from any school, public, private, elementary, middle school, secondary school, but in neighborhoods that are in close proximity to schools, but
are
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:54:46–00:54:46 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
outside of the 500 feet zone, there's still a potential for them to put a medical marijuana treatment center within a proximity of a neighborhood where a lot of residential areas, ‸ that maybe the residents would not care to have that type of facility, you know, within a certain proximity of their neighborhood. And I think that needs to be looked at a little bit closer.
Doty, would the zoning in residential permit?
Not in residential? Let me pull that map back up.
But you have commercial zones that are in close proximity to residential areas that these facilities could potentially open up in because they would be outside of that 500-seat restriction.
Yes, you
are... This is not
a CBG store.
[unclear audio — 0:09 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:55:48–00:55:56 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
different things. Correct.
So,
yeah. It's not
a treatment center, just to be clear. It's a dispensary.
It says right there, medical marijuana treatment center, dispensing facility.
Medical marijuana dispensary location, that's what I see on the... It's retail business, right? Yeah. Which has been voted on by the state and the citizens to allow.
[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 · 00:56:34–00:57:13 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:10 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:57:16–00:57:17 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
I'd like to make a motion.
Okay.
I'd
like
to make a motion, staff recommendation. To approve.
I second. Okay. We have a motion, a second.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:57:37–00:57:39 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:57:40–00:57:43 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Okay.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:57:44–00:57:45 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
I'll
go further than that.
But the people of Florida voted for it by a supermajority.
Mm-hmm.
We may not approve of it, but we're a government of the people, by the people and for the people. But the supermajority voted for it, however foolish we may think it is, and I don't have a problem.
Okay.
So, anyway, we do have a, sorry for my editorial comment, but we have a motion and a second,
is
it fully understood?
has
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:58:17–00:58:18 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
any last been comments from the public? Okay. Okay.
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 00:58:23–00:58:26 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Aye.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:58:27–00:58:29 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
Okay.
I
believe it's unanimous.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:58:33–00:58:34 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Wait, ‸ okay.
Who
voted? Alec. Alec. And two others. Oh, so it's three. Okay. I'm going to
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:58:40–00:58:42 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
you
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
No, no, please do that.
Okay.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:58:47–00:58:49 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
Todd Anderson.
Aye.
Jerry Blanco. Aye.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:58:55–00:58:55 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Sherry. Marilyn. Marilyn.
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:59:05–00:59:06 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
I never
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:59:08–00:59:11 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
was a motion to approve the item.
As
it's written? Yes. Okay, then I'll say aye.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:59:19–00:59:21 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Aye.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:59:21–00:59:22 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Aye.
Alec Greenwood.
No.
Thank you.
Yay.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:59:29–00:59:33 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Monica?
Monica, you missed.
She's a non-voting member. Oh,
that's right. Okay. Sorry. Well, not an
alternate, but just a non-voting. Okay. Yeah. Sorry. Sorry.
[unclear audio — 0:08 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:59:43–00:59:51 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:59:51–00:59:52 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Okay.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:59:54–00:59:56 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
So
it's okay. That's what I heard.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:59:58–00:59:59 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Okay.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:00:05–01:00:05 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Okay. Third item is a future land use map amendment. These are for some properties that were annexed last year and that are ‸ west of the city.
And
having annexed them, we are now at the process of applying a future land use map amendment. So there are 59 parcels altogether.
The
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:00:45–01:00:45 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
future land use map amendment would apply to all 59. The action is to change future land use from the existing Brevard County residential two units per acre ‸ designation to a city of Cocoa low density residential designation.
[unclear audio — 0:07 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:01:05–01:01:12 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
our applicant tonight. The other 16 are individually owned and the city is the applicant in that case. This is a map of the area. To give you some idea, it's on the north side of 524 and 520, just to the west of Adamson Road.
There's
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:01:35–01:01:35 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
a blow up of those parcels. All of the blue is a parcel that's involved. So it isn't just the little small red rectangles, ‸ but the background space in between is actually a parcel of its own. And this map...this was...earlier this was actually from the annexation point, but I included it because it showed you the green was the applicant's parcels and then the gray are the individually owned parcels separate from the applicant. The parcels are,
[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:02:16–01:02:22 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
per acre, which can be increased to 2.5 for where there's a planned unit development. Under the city's low density residential designation, this is intended for neighborhoods of single family detached ‸ houses, limited multifamily attached housing, and limited clustered single family attached houses.
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:02:46–01:02:51 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
wherein the primary property owners agreed that any PUD project eventually developed on the property, their 122 acres, would have the following characteristics.
[unclear audio — 0:09 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:03:05–01:03:14 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
of four dwelling units per acre, which is less than what the city's low density residential dwelling...
future
Flag: the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 01:03:22–01:03:25 · gap filled by a machine re-reading (not checked by a person)
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 01:03:24–01:03:26 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
So they are...although
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:03:27–01:03:32 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
because of the development agreement, the properties,
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:03:35–01:03:39 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 01:03:39–01:03:40 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
There's lot widths and lot sizes that were required of that agreement as well, as well as sidewalks, preserving wetlands, internal driveways.
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:03:57–01:04:01 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
theory. They will come into play later down the road when the PUD rezoning application comes forward. So the assignment of the future land use designation has to be consistent with the comprehensive plan for low density residential. This is ‸ to provide buffers and a nuisance of nuisance effects.
[unclear audio — 0:07 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:04:23–01:04:29 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
would be unwarranted due to environmental constraints. So we did a little comparison of the future land use designations and zonings and land uses in the area to see kind of what was currently there. And then provided this ‸ future land use map of surrounding future land
uses
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:04:50–01:04:50 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
at least within the city.
We
didn't incorporate the counties. But just to give you a general idea, there's medium density residential just to the east of this area. And then commercial just to the southeast. So this change won't, it would provide a negative impact or diminish service level public facilities. These are criteria that are considered. Whether the tree and wetlands, wildlife and wetland studies, they would have to be provided prior to a site plan or subdivision. Meeting the goals and objectives and policies, the comprehensive plan and the east central Florida comp plan.
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:05:38–01:05:43 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
consistency with the comp plan and these other items. And staff's determination was that there was consistency there. So the staff is recommending approval to the planning board that they recommend approval to the city council. The comprehensive plan map amendment changing the future land use map designation of the subject properties from Brevard County residential two units per acre to city of Cocoa low density residential. Before I turn it over to the board, I have a couple of folks that have contacted us. Do I need to read the emails entirely? Okay, so bear with me, folks.
[unclear audio — 0:09 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:06:22–01:06:31 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:09 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:06:32–01:06:41 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
And then I had another phone call from Tammy Green, who had concerns about flooding and access to some airboats that they keep on.
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said); the recognizer flagged its own output · 01:06:55–01:06:58 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Two of, I'm going to move back up so that we can address that one a little more. So, the Greens live, they have a home here. Which was outside the annexation area. It's still county property and zoning. But they also own these two great parcels here. There's nothing,
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:07:33–01:07:36 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
What was mentioned to us staff on the phone was storage of airboats, but there's some additional information that I've got in the later email. And so, there they were, I just wanted to let you know that there was a disconnect there between the house being outside of the area and then these two parcels being inside. I had an email from Tammy Green Clower. She says, I own the property mentioned above. This property has been in my name for well over 30 years. It's my understanding that this parcel is being considered for rezoning from Brevard County to the city for the purposes of residential double occupancy. Since 2009, my property taxes have more than tripled for a piece of land locked land. There isn't any home or residential dwelling on the property. I do have a storage trailer and a pole barn where a boat is kept. Like I mentioned in 2009, the taxes were $81.66. And
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:08:46–01:08:57 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
they
[unclear audio — 0:10 ▶]
2017, $312.28. In 2018, $404.06. In 2009, $318.48. Other than the fact that I own this land in your jurisdiction, what am I paying for?
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:09:12–01:09:17 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
to school.
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:09:17–01:09:21 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
If this is rezoned to the city, my concerns are first and foremost the development around my parcel resulting in overcrowding, which means this will no longer be a safe place for storage.
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:09:32–01:09:35 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Second, this area is a marshy swamp area prone to flooding.
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:09:39–01:09:42 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
of this property for access and dug a pond where the excess water runs. Even with all his hard work, the property still floods with heavy rains. With the surrounding areas being built up for housing, we will certainly be underwater. Which leads to my next concern for the deer, hogs, bobcats, turkeys, snakes, and countless numbers of birds in the area, where are they going to go? I was also informed that someone wanted to purchase my parcel to build on. My question is, am I going to be strong armed out? If this is in happening with the thought of being the current owners out, shouldn't these owners be contacted first? My dad has a home on a parcel linked to mine. We have been in this area for close to 40 years.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:10:27–01:10:30 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Before that, we had cows, pigs, chickens, rabbits, horses. We built bonfires when played in the woods. It was on this property where me and my sisters learned to drive. Yes, in the woods, with the windows down and the radio blaring, hitting the ruts and laughing. There isn't any amount of money in the world that can buy the memories this property holds for us. So in the interest of me and my family, we are sincerely against the rezoning of this area. It will also be cold.
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:10:58–01:11:02 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
We'll have snowblers and icebergs before I would sell these memories.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:11:06–01:11:06 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Tammy Greenblower. And then our last one is an email from Dwight Corsi. He says,
I
have tried to email the link given in the header I received about the public hearing tonight, but the link does not accept traffic. Would you please forward this to the proper office?
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:11:25–01:11:29 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
in question for several reasons.
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:11:31–01:11:36 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
As it goes against Section 333.02, subparagraph 9, which cites the need for discouragement of urban sprawl. If you look at the map of Cocoa city limits, the city resembles a cancer in its ragged spread around individual properties.
[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:11:51–01:11:58 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
discourage the proliferation of urban sprawl, which include under number two, promotes, allows, or designates significant amounts of urban development to occur in rural areas at substantial distances from existing urban areas while not using undeveloped lands that are available and suitable for development. The city owns over 129 acres of land that is currently zoned for residential use,
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:12:22–01:12:30 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
2435-24-003.
Under number four, fails to adequately protect and conserve natural resources such as wetlands, floodplains, native vegetation, environmentally sensitive areas, natural groundwater aquifer, recharge areas, lakes, rivers, shorelines, beaches, bays, estuaries,
and
systems,
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:12:48–01:12:51 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
The buildup of this land for the proposed use will result in the loss of natural lands that are being used by wildlife and will likely cause flooding to occur along Adamson Road during heavy, prolonged rains. Under number five, fails to adequately protect adjacent agricultural areas, activities, including civic culture, active agricultural and civic culture activities, passive agricultural activities, and dormant, unique, and prime farmlands and soils. Part of the land being annexed now is being used to keep chickens for the purpose of having fresh eggs. If this land is annexed into the city, that activity would have to cease. Number eight, allows for land use patterns or timing which disproportionately increase the cost in time, money, and energy of providing and maintaining facilities and services, including roads, potable water, sanitary sewer, stormwater management, law enforcement, education, healthcare, fire and emergency response, and general government.
[unclear audio — 0:07 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:13:52–01:13:59 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
the city will have to run water and sewer lines into the county to connect these newly annexed parcels of land.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:14:05–01:14:08 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
pollution of the groundwater and cause problems for stormwater management. Then under number nine, fails to provide a clear separation between rural and urban uses. A cursory look at the city limits of Cocoa already shows a flagrant disregard for clear separation of rural and urban uses. In conclusion,
it's
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:14:26–01:14:26 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
clear that the city of Cocoa has land it can develop for housing already in its possession, and this land grab from Brevard County is unnecessary at this time. If the space industry does take off and moral housing land is required, I suggest that subdivisions be planned using the land already encompassed by the sprawling city of Cocoa. Regards, Dwight Corson.
[unclear audio — 0:08 ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 01:14:49–01:14:57 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Let me just check. Did we have any public comment on the line?
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 01:15:03–01:15:06 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Okay.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 01:15:06–01:15:07 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
When was this property annexed? Two years ago?
No, last year.
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:15:14–01:15:16 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
It has already happened, yes.
Yes. Yeah. And
it has to be rezoned one way for the property.
Well, right now, ‸ what we're talking about tonight is only the future land use, application of a future land use to the property. Zoning will come later, but the ‸ future land use has to be applied first.
I have a question. Monica, can you hear me?
Yes.
Okay. ‸ The previous email ‸ that
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:15:50–01:15:52 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
I think was her name?
Yes.
Where is her property in relation to this parcel? This big piece of, ‸ do we know?
Yes. The ones that they were talking about, let
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:16:07–01:16:10 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
see the parcels. So there's two. Do you have the map in front of you that has the green and gray? Okay. Yeah, I do. So the
[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:16:21–01:16:28 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
They're the closest to Adamson Road.
And State Road 524.
Yeah, and the intersection with Adamson and 524.
They're the two gray parcels.
Yeah.
In
that
corner. Okay, I'm looking at
a black and
white
print, so.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 01:16:48–01:16:49 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
787, you said? Yeah, 787. Okay, I see ‸ him. I see him. Okay. Okay.
Yeah,
I
guess gray and green would look all gray.
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:17:02–01:17:17 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:12 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Yeah,
the
house is 751. And then.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:17:23–01:17:24 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Those two are the.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:17:27–01:17:29 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
‸ That helps you.
Did you hear that, Marilyn?
I can hear it. I was the
one
that had the question.
Yeah, did you hear what they said? She's residing on.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:17:42–01:17:44 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
the parcel she's talking about that. Well, her dad's for the storage and everything or
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:17:48–01:17:51 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Yes.
Correct.
I think. Okay. Okay.
I have a couple of questions.
Her dad's
for the storage and everything on
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:17:59–01:18:02 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 01:18:02–01:18:03 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Okay.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 01:18:05–01:18:13 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 01:18:15–01:18:16 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
The green represents.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:18:20–01:18:22 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
And the gray represents.
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 01:18:24–01:18:25 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 01:18:26–01:18:28 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:18:28–01:18:32 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
list. Correct. And I'm just trying to get the big picture here. So this was annexed. ‸ And so there's no houses or buildings on these properties.
To the best of my knowledge there are
properties. In the
green
and gray, sir.
Now.
It's undeveloped.
Correct. The ‸ property
appraiser
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:18:57–01:18:57 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
listed all of them as undeveloped properties.
And we're here to determine the future land use classification for this area.
Right. She's just trying to match it basically from what it was in our county to the same thing. Correct. There's really no change. It's just mostly a legal
‸ maneuver
that we have to do.
And a future date, the zoning will be determined.
Correct.
Is that a month from now or six months from now?
I don't know. It couldn't happen ‸ sooner than the future land use ‸ process playing out. And that will take several months. Okay. You can't apply zoning to ‸ the property if it doesn't have city future land use. So ‸ the applicant will probably come back to us in the fall would be my guess. But probably not before September or so.
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:20:01–01:20:08 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Easements. Yes. So I'm presuming when it was originally platted that those were potential roads, but they're not there.
Don't assume they'll be roads.
They're
paper
roads. Right.
I see the FPL right away at the north.
Yes.
But is that for ‸ high transmission lines? Right.
Yes.
Not residential power.
No, no. That's a ‸ distribution line that
runs east to west. So a lot of these properties look landlocked. ‸ They
are right now. That's correct. Yeah.
But I see one owns a lot of it.
Correct. Yes.
Applicant one.
Yes.
‸ So
future land use, how much of this is designated as wetlands?
There is wetland. There's also a floodplain. All of those issues are going to have to be resolved when somebody develops. Right.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 01:21:07–01:21:08 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
That was going to be my question. Yeah.
There's wetland.
[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:21:17–01:21:23 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
‸ Basin, which is sort of right across the street. Right on the south side of
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:21:28–01:21:31 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:21:32–01:21:33 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
on the wetland map, more or less in the middle part of, if you look at the whole of that ‸ whole parcel conglomeration, there is wetlands on there. And they'll have to be mitigated or preserved depending on ‸ what kind of design ‸ the applicant comes forward with. Yeah.
Yeah.
Tony? Yes. Are you done? I'm finished. Thank you.
Yeah.
Why ‸ are we changing it to low density and not very low density as it relates to the other neighborhoods? Because Todd said we're not changing anything, but we really are. The county is two units per acre.
Yes.
Low density is four units with the ability to do multiple homes, correct? Multiple residences? ‸ Multifamily. Multifamily?
Well, the ability to do multifamily has to do with the zoning.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:22:31–01:22:37 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]
it's institutional.
High level.
Yeah. ‸ It's generalized. It doesn't separate out multifamily so much. It does in the zoning districts that are allowed within that future land use category. So I need my table.
Why are we not asking it to be ‸ very low density at four units per acre?
‸ Very low
density is four units per acre, correct?
Very low is four. That is correct.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:23:06–01:23:11 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
No, we don't have a very, very.
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:23:13–01:23:13 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
So we have no future land use classification for two units per acre.
We don't.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:23:19–01:23:22 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Yeah.
So why are we not asking for that?
For a very low? You know,
we
looked at this a
while
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:23:30–01:23:30 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
ago. Adamson
Creek is very low.
They are. Emerald
Lakes is very low.
Part of that is that this is what the applicant has requested. The city has looked at what we don't want to do is apply one future land use to the applicant's parcel and a different one ‸ to the, I won't say the city's parcel. These are individually owned, but the other parcels because they are in the midst of, you know, a larger area and surrounded by. Okay.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:24:04–01:24:06 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
You're changing it. So wouldn't you be doing that anyways?
No,
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:24:10–01:24:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
the same future land use to ‸ both of those. Both the applicant's parcels and the individual parcels. Right. So it is consistent.
I get that.
I
just, ‸ I'm trying to figure out why I know that I know what the applicant wants. Right. He wants to put as many pieces of property on there and make a lot of money. I'm just trying to be consistent with the area.
I
mean,
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:24:41–01:24:43 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
you know, when people, you know, they come ‸ talk to me about
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:24:47–01:24:51 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
And I'm just trying to be consistent. And this doesn't look consistent.
It's in between, you know, we could, you could go with very low, but you've got medium density right across the street and the neighborhood right across the street. So, I mean, it's not out of the realm of consistency. You're right. Adamson is listed as very low. So, ‸ we didn't feel it was too inconsistent to go with what the applicant had requested. It doesn't really change a great deal because the applicant's already limited to four units an acre in the development agreement. So, you know.
‸ If they are, then what's the difference of doing just very low?
I would say at that point, probably that's a question
we'd
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:25:48–01:25:49 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
need to talk with the applicant about.
I
assume the applicant's here. Yes, they are.
‸ Okay.
I normally wait until I listen to everybody, but I just wanted to get a clarification.
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:25:57–01:26:01 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
On the application.
Okay. Would you come up and address, make a statement or, hold on, I want to hear.
Yes, yes, that's your podium.
Good evening,
members
of the Planning and Zoning Commission.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:26:17–01:26:18 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 01:26:18–01:26:21 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
I am representing the applicants, First National Real
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:26:25–01:26:28 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
As you're aware, this is already annexed. I looked at the annexation ordinance. It was
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:26:36–01:26:38 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
recorded in the public records January 17th of 2020 of this year.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 01:26:41–01:26:42 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
this annexation ‸ is not subject to challenge at this time because
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:26:46–01:26:47 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
We are asking for the change, or actually the application of future land use to the now city property of 122.5 acres of land.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:26:58–01:27:00 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
are owned by the other owners in the area, the gray parcels.
Again, this is not a rezoning. We have looked at drafts of the PUD. There are a lot of wetlands. We're trying to work with the city as to whether the wetlands should be in the PUD or out of the PUD. The code is a bit ambiguous about open space, so that's something that's being worked on. The applicants I named are also still acquiring other lands because we're going to have access for all these lands. Whether we own them or not, we have to. So they
Flag: the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 01:27:06–01:27:33 · gap filled by a machine re-reading (not checked by a person)
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:27:34–01:27:35 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
easements through the PUD as well. But we're not at the zoning stage. This is a legislative decision regarding ‸ future land use. As to the future land use assignment, we originally had looked at either low density or medium density, and ‸ because medium density is adjacent to it, that's the only thing you have adjacent to it in the city is medium density residential. But the pre-annexation agreement does limit to four units to the acre and that's all we'll ever get. However, that came from the city manager at the time. He's the one who directed us to do low density residential. And I assume it's because it's next to medium density residential. You have a ‸ big gap between medium density residential and very low density residential. So ‸ that's what we did, that's what, and I don't have the ability to say we're willing to do something else because my clients are in Miami and they're in quarantine. They couldn't be here. So the low density residential is what we've asked for. The ‸ conditions that were agreed to by the applicant
in
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:28:40–01:28:40 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
the city in the pre-development agreement are very similar to that in Adamson's Creek.
I
mean, the lot sizes are similar, the amenities will be similar,
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:28:49–01:28:50 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
That pre-development agreement was actually recorded in the public records back in November of last year, and there were public hearings on that development agreement as well. So it's been pretty clear what the applicants are trying to do. They want to do a PUD. They have challenges because of the wetlands. That's why there's a lot of that property that won't be usable and ‸ have to be conserved. And I know we're not here on zoning, but I know there have been questions. My clients have gotten calls.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:29:20–01:29:23 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
We've heard you're doing all kinds of things, and that's not the intent. It's going to
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:29:26–01:29:28 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
With that, I can answer any questions you have.
Questions?
I
have a question. Next. Who's that? You have to come up to the microphone.
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:29:44–01:29:46 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Well, let me hear from the board, then we will call upon you. Okay. Anything? Okay. We'll hear from the other
channel.
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:29:57–01:29:58 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Thank you. Okay. Would you please come up and state your name? My name is George Floyd.
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 01:30:04–01:30:06 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
One of the questions I have there was in your PUD thing. You said multiple housing units. Is that like the Trump Tower and the Empire State Building? What does that mean? When you have four buildings on a piece of land, is that a housing
unit?
What is it?
[01:30:26] ▶ Play Speaker 16 (introduced as “Catherine Bonadio” — machine-transcribed, not verified)
What
is it?
I understand what the CUD is.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:30:29–01:30:31 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Single family. It said
multiple families.
Is it a townhouse? Is
it a
townhouse? Is
it
a apartment
building? Is it low class, low class, or low, low,
low,
what am I trying to say? Low, low. Low
income,
housing?
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:30:47–01:30:47 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Low
income. There you go.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 01:30:49–01:30:49 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
What is it? What the applicant is.
I've got an
idea. We're dancing around it. You know what you're going to do in six months to a year.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:30:57–01:30:58 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:31:00–01:31:01 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:31:01–01:31:02 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
That
little, okay. I got you.
Can I ask a question? Sure. This is something, Mr.
Chairman, that I wanted to ask before
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 01:31:12–01:31:13 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
very,
[unclear audio — 0:12 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:31:14–01:31:26 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
construction, where it basically leaves you to form per acre? Is that how that's set up? Is it going to be similar to that? Or is it
somewhere?
No, that's
much denser. That's much denser.
All right. So, ‸ what we're talking about
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:31:41–01:31:46 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
you
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
the age
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
Do you
put wide front lots?
At this point, you know, we don't have any of that information. What we do know is what the applicants agreed to in the development agreement, which is the, I believe they were 50 by 100. Do I remember that right? Yeah. I don't have the page now.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:32:07–01:32:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]
Well, it would be a single family home, and it would be a
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:32:22–01:32:25 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
So, that, if you're not familiar with Adamson.
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:32:32–01:32:35 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
It's very
standard, yeah, housing size now. Emerald Lakes is, I think, you're right, ‸ like that. The new subdivision we're about to do for Lakeside Palms, those are 54 by 100.
Probably Coco North would be a good example.
56, thank you. Coco
North would be a good example.
Coco North, okay. Yeah, not coming.
Yeah, not
coming. But it's in that area
next door. So,
it's a ‸ standard size of single-family homes throughout the city.
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:33:07–01:33:09 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
had multi-family residences listed. Now, you're telling me it's a single unit home, 50 by 100. It can't be both ways.
The-
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:33:18–01:33:19 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
make up your mind one way or
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:33:20–01:33:21 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
He's referring to-
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:33:23–01:33:24 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
Is it-
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:33:32–01:33:33 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
Well, the thing is, that intersection there, as you all know, is very dangerous.
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:33:41–01:33:45 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
with us. That's their way in and out.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:33:47–01:33:47 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
come, that road out there, and ‸ all day long, I watch the trucks go back
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 01:33:52–01:33:53 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Now, if we're going to put a large family housing unit right behind me, right now when it rains, my backyard floods.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:34:01–01:34:03 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:34:03–01:34:06 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
I see where it says multi-family now. I found the slide where they referenced that. Yeah. That is, it's not specific to this project. It's a general designation for the low density residential designation, which can allow these things. However, the applicants already entered into an agreement that they're going to do single-family homes of this lot size.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:34:30–01:34:34 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
And why are you fighting so hard against the lower limit?
I'm not trying to fight against the lower limit.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 01:34:42–01:34:44 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
But
I
can tell you that, yes, wetlands are an issue. It's an issue throughout the city.
We
have a whole lot of wetlands. Every developer that comes forward has to address wetlands that are on their property and has to mitigate stormwater and competitive storage and provide that. It
just doesn't work sometimes.
So
that is true. Sadly,
that's true.
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 01:35:09–01:35:11 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
And you are surrounding us. Your city map looks horrible. You've got a lot of vacant spots in it,
like
a cavity on a
tube.
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:35:20–01:35:20 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
You're not using ‸ land you've already got. Let them go back up there by Walmart.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:35:26–01:35:31 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
city. I know you do, sir. And the people who live there, 51% have to vote to be part of the city and they haven't. So they maintain their county status in the middle of our city, which I ‸ would prefer that they would be part of the city. I'm
sure you would.
But ‸ this is democracy. If the owners don't want to be a part of the city, then they don't
have it.
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 01:35:54–01:35:55 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
You took Mr. Green's land and his land.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:35:59–01:36:01 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:36:01–01:36:05 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:36:06–01:36:08 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
receive anything saying, hey, we're going to take you into the city. He didn't know anything about it. And all of a sudden you're saying, oh, it's been over a year. It's been five months, four months that this was done. January this year. That's not over a year. And you annexed the city without a vote.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:36:25–01:36:27 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
How did that happen?
Are you adjacent to the annexed area?
I'm adjacent to it, sir.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:36:32–01:36:33 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Since you don't own the property that was annexed, that's why.
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 01:36:38–01:36:40 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Why didn't you take me?
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 01:36:41–01:36:42 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
What's to keep you from doing it this week?
I don't make those decisions, sir. My neighbor
across the street. He's not part of your city either. You
have to choose to come into the city. Yeah. I
realize that, sir. The only thing that separates this property from the property you're trying to take is your dwelling.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:36:57–01:37:00 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Your own property. We're not. Property owners want
it.
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:37:07–01:37:09 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
They never do anything about it.
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said) · 01:37:10–01:37:14 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
When I get out of the city, I don't want to be in the city. And
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:37:18–01:37:20 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:37:21–01:37:25 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Yes, okay. ‸ Yes, you may.
[01:37:37] ▶ Play Speaker 19 (introduced as “Christine Booth” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 01:37:37–01:37:39 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:37:40] ▶ Play Speaker 19 (introduced as “Christine Booth” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 01:37:40–01:37:40 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
[01:37:40] ▶ Play Speaker 19 (introduced as “Christine Booth” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio
[unclear audio ▶]
[01:37:40] ▶ Play Speaker 19 (introduced as “Christine Booth” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
I'm sorry. My name is Christine Booth.
[01:37:42] ▶ Play Speaker 19 (introduced as “Christine Booth” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:08 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 01:37:42–01:37:50 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:37:51] ▶ Play Speaker 19 (introduced as “Christine Booth” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:37:51–01:37:53 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:37:53] ▶ Play Speaker 19 (introduced as “Christine Booth” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
I ‸ like chickens and squirrels and stuff. You see ‸ the
two
[01:38:03] ▶ Play Speaker 19 (introduced as “Christine Booth” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
gray areas right there? Yeah, ‸ one of them's Tammy Green's and the
[01:38:08] ▶ Play Speaker 19 (introduced as “Christine Booth” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Machine re-recognized
other is
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:38:08–01:38:08 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
[01:38:08] ▶ Play Speaker 19 (introduced as “Christine Booth” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice
mine. She's my niece.
[01:38:10] ▶ Play Speaker 19 (introduced as “Christine Booth” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:38:10–01:38:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:38:16] ▶ Play Speaker 19 (introduced as “Christine Booth” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice
‸ Like she said, is my property taxes going to go up? I didn't ask to be in the city. I do not want to be in the city. And nobody told me I was in the city.
[01:38:27] ▶ Play Speaker 19 (introduced as “Christine Booth” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:38:27–01:38:30 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:38:32] ▶ Play Speaker 19 (introduced as “Christine Booth” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice
So how do I get out of the city? That map looks fine and great like it is. But it's all swampland. I mean, ‸ even the pieces that's right next to Adamson Road that's got houses built on them. We built mountains to put the house on to keep them from flooding. You go out in your backyard and you
[01:38:52] ▶ Play Speaker 19 (introduced as “Christine Booth” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 01:38:52–01:38:53 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:38:53] ▶ Play Speaker 19 (introduced as “Christine Booth” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice
And when they build all these other houses there, they're going to bring in more dirt. And what it's going to end up being is whoever has the most dirt wins. Because their dirt is going to flood my septic tank. And then when I put in more dirt, that's going to flood somebody else.
[01:39:09] ▶ Play Speaker 19 (introduced as “Christine Booth” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:39:09–01:39:10 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:39:10] ▶ Play Speaker 19 (introduced as “Christine Booth” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice
I know ‸ somebody said it's 35% swamp. But if you walk through it, you'll think it's all swamp.
[01:39:17] ▶ Play Speaker 19 (introduced as “Christine Booth” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:39:17–01:39:19 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:39:19] ▶ Play Speaker 19 (introduced as “Christine Booth” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
to get out. ‸ Can anybody tell me?
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:39:25–01:39:29 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:39:25] ▶ Play Speaker 19 (introduced as “Christine Booth” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 01:39:30–01:39:33 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
[01:39:31] ▶ Play Speaker 19 (introduced as “Christine Booth” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
[01:39:33] ▶ Play Speaker 19 (introduced as “Christine Booth” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice
a couple of times.
[01:39:34] ▶ Play Speaker 19 (introduced as “Christine Booth” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:39:34–01:39:36 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:39:38] ▶ Play Speaker 19 (introduced as “Christine Booth” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice
I
[01:39:38] ▶ Play Speaker 19 (introduced as “Christine Booth” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Machine re-recognized
own
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:39:38–01:39:39 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
[01:39:39] ▶ Play Speaker 19 (introduced as “Christine Booth” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice
the gray one there. Did not.
Dodie,
is
she in the city?
[01:39:44] ▶ Play Speaker 19 (introduced as “Christine Booth” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
Am I in the city? It was part of the annexation.
Are you legally
required to notify?
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:39:48–01:39:49 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:39:50] ▶ Play Speaker 19 (introduced as “Christine Booth” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
My name is Christine Booth. I never got a
‸ look into it. But yes, ‸ we did notify everybody. The property appraiser. We utilize the property appraiser. So every property owner that is listed with them, we sent notices to.
[01:40:04] ▶ Play Speaker 19 (introduced as “Christine Booth” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
I will look. I ‸ know that I didn't get one. But anyhow. I'm pretty sure they were.
[01:40:11] ▶ Play Speaker 19 (introduced as “Christine Booth” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said); a language review questioned the wording · 01:40:11–01:40:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Okay.
[01:40:19] ▶ Play Speaker 19 (introduced as “Christine Booth” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:40:19–01:40:21 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
two in the gray area. But just because there's no house there doesn't mean that I want to get rid of my chickens and stuff.
[01:40:28] ▶ Play Speaker 19 (introduced as “Christine Booth” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:40:28–01:40:31 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
that far from me, they're going to complain about the rooster.
[01:40:34] ▶ Play Speaker 19 (introduced as “Christine Booth” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 01:40:34–01:40:36 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:40:36] ▶ Play Speaker 19 (introduced as “Christine Booth” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:40:36–01:40:42 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
me wanting it. ‸ And it's swamped. It's going to be a nightmare. ‸ It's horrible. I don't think it's right. I don't know what else to say except it's crap. Thank you.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: flagged by the automatic checks · 01:40:56–01:40:57 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Okay.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 01:41:13–01:41:13 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Yeah.
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 01:41:16–01:41:16 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 01:41:16–01:41:17 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Okay. Okay.
Well,
you're next.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:41:19–01:41:20 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
How y'all doing? My name is Jamie Bunnell. I own
[01:41:27] ▶ Play Speaker 21 (introduced as “Jamie Bunnell” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Machine re-recognized
a
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:41:27–01:41:27 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
piece of property in the white on State Road 524 ‸ there. And I've seen a proposed site plan from her client that shows eight homes right on my property line. Right on the edge. So that right there is already showing four homes per acre. So from the edge of my house to my property line is 29 feet. So I imagine nobody in here has eight neighbors right on their same property line. Most people have got a neighbor on each side of them, behind them, or across the street.
[01:42:14] ▶ Play Speaker 21 (introduced as “Jamie Bunnell” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:42:14–01:42:18 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
seen they drew up.
[01:42:21] ▶ Play Speaker 21 (introduced as “Jamie Bunnell” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:42:21–01:42:22 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
neighbors. I'm agricultural. You know, I have airboats. I have toys or whatever. So if I'm out there working on something,
[01:42:35] ▶ Play Speaker 21 (introduced as “Jamie Bunnell” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Machine re-recognized
I
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:42:35–01:42:36 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
got to satisfy eight neighbors. And that's hard to do.
[01:42:39] ▶ Play Speaker 21 (introduced as “Jamie Bunnell” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:42:39–01:42:43 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
You know, everybody's got different options. We've got three children. That's loud, crazy. And I'm not going to be that guy. They're out there to my kids and say, hey, y'all can't run around and act like kids. You know, because I'm disturbing everybody. I'm polite to everybody. I want things to go good. You know,
[01:43:08] ▶ Play Speaker 21 (introduced as “Jamie Bunnell” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:43:08–01:43:09 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
But
[01:43:11] ▶ Play Speaker 21 (introduced as “Jamie Bunnell” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
where I am behind me, it's all wetlands all the way around. Well, they're going through part of the wetland that they're probably ‸ going to try to mitigate. Well, what I'm looking at between the walmart
[01:43:27] ▶ Play Speaker 21 (introduced as “Jamie Bunnell” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Machine re-recognized
distributes
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:43:27–01:43:27 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
[01:43:27] ▶ Play Speaker 21 (introduced as “Jamie Bunnell” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice
everything that's happening, all this wetlands that we're mitigating, what's it going to do? Future use.
Future
use. This is our drinking water that we ‸ rely on. Everything. I just think that it's going to get too impacted and it's ‸ not going to be good for the city or county,
[01:43:47] ▶ Play Speaker 21 (introduced as “Jamie Bunnell” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:43:47–01:43:50 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:43:51] ▶ Play Speaker 21 (introduced as “Jamie Bunnell” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:43:51–01:43:53 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
So I want y'all to think on my part as it was y'all's part, you know, if you left there too.
‸ Thank you.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:44:06–01:44:12 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
I need to state my name and my address and everything else.
Sarah Wagner, [address]
I don't abut this property, but I will tell you this is now my second time coming before
this
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:44:25–01:44:25 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
zoning because
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:44:25–01:44:30 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Like, we're kind of sick of it. So in regards to
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:44:35–01:44:38 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
she doesn't even know if her client would be opposed to doing very low density. It's just what they applied for by the city manager's suggestion. So before we get all of our skirts twisted up, can we just go back and ask them,
will
they settle for very low density? Number one. I mean, why can't we do that?
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:45:00–01:45:05 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
But just like with what Russell said earlier, you have Adamson Creek that has very low density. Why can't this be very low density? And you guys know the very well reason why they went from very low density to low density is because they want to put in multifamily homes. Let me clarify that.
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:45:24–01:45:29 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
So you can say that it's single family, and as long as it's 50 by 100 on one single lot or parcel, then it meets the requirement by the ‸ city. And that's what these people have a problem with is that you have people who
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 01:45:43–01:45:43 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
annexed into the city that never wanted it. And it's going to keep coming down Adamson if it doesn't stop somewhere. Just like what the gentleman said back here, someone has to be the squeaky wheel. This is the second property that I own that's going to be affected by this. Like, the city needs to stop the ‸ urbanization of county areas. That's fine if the property owners ‸ want it, but there's three property owners that
Mr. Zanka
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:46:08–01:46:09 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
represents. There's three homeowners that sit here with just because it's a smaller parcel doesn't mean they get less of a vote. Yeah, they have a smaller lot, but listen to these people. They don't want to be a part of it. They should have the same power as those people who own the 122 acres. It's unfair to them.
Please step up. Yeah, to the microphone and identify name and address.
[01:46:44] ▶ Play Speaker 16 (introduced as “Catherine Bonadio” — machine-transcribed, not verified)
My name is Catherine Bonadio. I have a quick question. The future land use map shows nothing west of Adamson Road until this. If this passes, that's a precedent for everything all the way to the river, all the way up north to the dump or past it. And the applicant, I believe, for this parcel owns multiple acreage to the north side of that FD&L right away. So I don't know why they're not asking to do all of it at once.
[01:47:18] ▶ Play Speaker 16 (introduced as “Catherine Bonadio” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:47:18–01:47:22 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:47:22] ▶ Play Speaker 16 (introduced as “Catherine Bonadio” — machine-transcribed, not verified)
farms for miles and miles and miles. Thank you.
Any other comments from the public?
Hi, my name is Jerry Wagner. I have a home, well, I'm building a home right on Adamson Road just north of this new annexed PUD. My questions are, one is,
[01:47:51] ▶ Play Speaker 22 (introduced as “Jerry Wagner” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:47:51–01:48:00 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
it
[01:47:52] ▶ Play Speaker 22 (introduced as “Jerry Wagner” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:07 ▶]
You could push it to two and a half. So you annexed the property, and now you have to do a conversion from what the classifications were at the county to what the classifications are for the city of Cocoa.
[01:48:15] ▶ Play Speaker 22 (introduced as “Jerry Wagner” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:48:15–01:48:20 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
is slightly erroneous. More maybe, like, very low density, which still allows more homes for acreage. So, the other thing is, so ‸ I would think very low density, if many people would be happy if the guys would go with a very low density instead of low density.
[01:48:45] ▶ Play Speaker 22 (introduced as “Jerry Wagner” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:07 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:48:45–01:48:52 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
the record. It is, is it at all legally binding? And
[01:48:57] ▶ Play Speaker 22 (introduced as “Jerry Wagner” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:48:57–01:49:03 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
means an average for all the property, which includes wetlands and everything.
[01:49:08] ▶ Play Speaker 22 (introduced as “Jerry Wagner” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:49:08–01:49:11 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
And, like Jamie said, you can put eight of them, more than eight of them, on an acre when you average everything.
[01:49:19] ▶ Play Speaker 22 (introduced as “Jerry Wagner” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:49:19–01:49:25 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
acre. It has a lot of conservation areas. So, when you drive through where the homes are, you don't really see it.
[01:49:32] ▶ Play Speaker 22 (introduced as “Jerry Wagner” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 01:49:32–01:49:34 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
[01:49:33] ▶ Play Speaker 22 (introduced as “Jerry Wagner” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
[01:49:34] ▶ Play Speaker 22 (introduced as “Jerry Wagner” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice
but the other property does exist.
[01:49:38] ▶ Play Speaker 22 (introduced as “Jerry Wagner” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:49:38–01:49:41 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:49:42] ▶ Play Speaker 22 (introduced as “Jerry Wagner” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice
Anything that I've seen does not show the site plan for the entire new annexed property, which
[01:49:49] ▶ Play Speaker 22 (introduced as “Jerry Wagner” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:49:49–01:49:49 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:49:49] ▶ Play Speaker 22 (introduced as “Jerry Wagner” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice
We've only seen one portion of it, which shows, as they have
[01:49:54] ▶ Play Speaker 22 (introduced as “Jerry Wagner” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 01:49:54–01:49:55 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:49:56] ▶ Play Speaker 22 (introduced as “Jerry Wagner” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
single, separate houses on their own independent lots, not town homes or anything. But, the east side, nothing is showing. So, we don't know what's going to be there. So, of course, there's fears that something else could occur there. So, very low ‸ density allows clustering. You can have a cluster of seven homes an acre for up to 49, is that correct? And, ‸ half the clusters have to be a half mile apart. So, you could only have one cluster due to the sizes. You can't get half a mile. There's no half ‸ mile in there. So, there is still the capability of putting a cluster somewhere we don't know anything about.
[01:50:38] ▶ Play Speaker 22 (introduced as “Jerry Wagner” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:50:38–01:50:41 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:50:42] ▶ Play Speaker 22 (introduced as “Jerry Wagner” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
And, I don't know, maybe there's a similar agreement they could work out with you with wetland mitigation and stuff with a very low density.
[01:50:51] ▶ Play Speaker 22 (introduced as “Jerry Wagner” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:50:51–01:50:57 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
[01:50:52] ▶ Play Speaker 22 (introduced as “Jerry Wagner” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Texas, does anyone know?
Probably Cocoa Fire Station 3 on 524. On
[01:51:03] ▶ Play Speaker 22 (introduced as “Jerry Wagner” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
524?
Okay.
[01:51:09] ▶ Play Speaker 22 (introduced as “Jerry Wagner” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice
Oh, yeah, plus, so, low density has a 65% pervious surface ratio. That's a lot of water shed. Does any, is that all set up? Everybody knows where the water flow is going. Everybody's already complaining here about flooding.
[01:51:27] ▶ Play Speaker 22 (introduced as “Jerry Wagner” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:51:27–01:51:28 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:51:28] ▶ Play Speaker 22 (introduced as “Jerry Wagner” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice
There are some areas. When they did Adamson Creek, they built that whole, the whole subdivision up above Adamson Road.
[01:51:37] ▶ Play Speaker 22 (introduced as “Jerry Wagner” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:51:37–01:51:38 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:51:40] ▶ Play Speaker 22 (introduced as “Jerry Wagner” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice
So, I'm on the other side. I haven't seen any water problems. But, all that stuff
[01:51:44] ▶ Play Speaker 22 (introduced as “Jerry Wagner” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:51:44–01:51:46 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:51:46] ▶ Play Speaker 22 (introduced as “Jerry Wagner” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
So, I'm
just
[01:51:47] ▶ Play Speaker 22 (introduced as “Jerry Wagner” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
curious how does, you know, as the St. John's water shed, have they approved that? You know, have they even looked at any of the stuff? Or is this stuff still
[01:51:57] ▶ Play Speaker 22 (introduced as “Jerry Wagner” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 01:51:57–01:51:58 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:51:58] ▶ Play Speaker 22 (introduced as “Jerry Wagner” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice
determined? So, like I said, you guys advertise four units an acre, but that's for gross acres.
[01:52:05] ▶ Play Speaker 22 (introduced as “Jerry Wagner” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:52:05–01:52:07 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:52:07] ▶ Play Speaker 22 (introduced as “Jerry Wagner” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:52:07–01:52:08 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:52:09] ▶ Play Speaker 22 (introduced as “Jerry Wagner” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice
It looks like the layout so far is pretty nice with the way they've used the common areas. But, there are some concerns, like I said, about density. The other thing is, yeah, is there, are there any incentives for government subsidized
[01:52:29] ▶ Play Speaker 22 (introduced as “Jerry Wagner” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:07 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:52:29–01:52:43 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
[01:52:36] ▶ Play Speaker 22 (introduced as “Jerry Wagner” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:07 ▶]
[01:52:43] ▶ Play Speaker 22 (introduced as “Jerry Wagner” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 01:52:43–01:52:44 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:52:44] ▶ Play Speaker 22 (introduced as “Jerry Wagner” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
developer to adding them to this area?
No. The answer is no.
[01:52:53] ▶ Play Speaker 22 (introduced as “Jerry Wagner” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:52:53–01:52:56 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:52:57] ▶ Play Speaker 22 (introduced as “Jerry Wagner” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
No. So, they can build and sell to whoever they want, the developer? Of course,
if they're ‸ property,
yeah. Okay. All right.
[01:53:06] ▶ Play Speaker 22 (introduced as “Jerry Wagner” — machine-transcribed, not verified) · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 01:53:06–01:53:06 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Doty,
to clarify
one thing in my own mind.
On future land use development, this board has
the option of going
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:53:20–01:53:24 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
correct?
[unclear audio ▶]
You have the, I'm sorry? Oh, I'm sorry. I was going to say, there is an application that's been submitted for low density residential. ‸ So, ‸ you would make a recommendation on that application.
Okay. So, ‸ either vote up or down on that specific. Okay.
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 01:53:46–01:53:46 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Go ahead, please.
Flag: the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 01:53:53–01:54:15 · gap filled by a machine re-reading (not checked by a person)
Since Rita Pritchett isn't available to, and the county commissioners are out for the month, can we table it for next month then if a decision doesn't want to be made? We can't even get a hold of our commissioners at this point. Because they don't meet before the board for June. So can we table it?
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: part of a long flagged stretch · 01:54:18–01:54:28 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:54:29–01:54:31 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
annex. I'm asking them to table it because we still want to be represented by our county commissioner, which is our right as a voting citizen. So
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:54:46–01:54:47 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
we can't be seen before the county commission this month. So all I'm asking for is an extension for just tabling it for them.
I don't believe we're meeting in July would be August. Correct.
Yes.
I got a quick question. Um, we vote this down. Can we make another motion to change it to very low density or it's just up and down?
You make a recommendation up or down. Um, because again, you have an application that's before you. So, but
Okay.
And this will come back to the council. So by the time Rita them get back and I don't know what difference is going to make it's still, you know, they have time to address the council. You know, this, you guys are recommending and it still have to come back to us.
So,
you
‸ know,
I understand council can override.
[unclear audio — 0:12 ▶]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 01:55:49–01:56:01 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
‸ I
would like to see the future land use be actually two units per acre.
since
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:56:10–01:56:11 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
we
have what's called very low is four. And so I that's, that's where I would, I would want the recommendation to be do not approve this and come back as very low.
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 01:56:32–01:56:51 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:07 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:56:51–01:57:02 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
‸ this
is Sherry I kind of agree that I think it should just stick to the two units per acre in that area I'm real familiar with that area and
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:57:13–01:57:17 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
well just just for clarification the city doesn't have a two unit per acre designation so
[unclear audio — 0:13 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:57:28–01:57:41 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
new designation on
the spot on
the spot or and to do so would be a rather that's a very complicated comprehensive plan change that would take a very long time
you're
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:57:55–01:57:56 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
looking at a good six months minimum but so so when you hear is ‸ you have an applicant who does have the right to develop and move forward so ‸ they do have an application into to you know to develop a property and their their presentation although it does say low density you know do keep in mind that it really they are limited to four units per acre you know by that
by
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:58:23–01:58:23 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
that agreement so well
[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:58:26–01:58:32 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
four units per acre they would have asked for a very low density well
actually I remember that meeting I do remember the former city
manager
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:58:39–01:58:39 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
saying it ‸ should be low density so that's you know probably where their recommendation came from no I don't remember honestly discussion of why that versus very low density but just because this
developer doesn't you know it sometimes these developments fall through and then a new developer comes in and ‸ then they get to play by the rules of what we what we set in place and we we're leaving out a lot of flexibility for clusters and building up the property which ‸ not really it doesn't fit the neighborhood and I can't support low density
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:59:28–01:59:54 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
so no
yeah yeah
quite
a bit
Well, that's another recommendation
Flag: the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 02:00:02–02:00:04 · gap filled by a machine re-reading (not checked by a person)
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 02:00:04–02:00:04 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
city manager that was mentioned by the
Flag: the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 02:00:04–02:00:06 · gap filled by a machine re-reading (not checked by a person)
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 02:00:06–02:00:07 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
I'm also more inclined to the two units
Flag: the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 02:00:07–02:00:13 · gap filled by a machine re-reading (not checked by a person)
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 02:00:13–02:00:13 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
I know that we don't have that designation. But that would probably
Flag: the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 02:00:13–02:00:19 · gap filled by a machine re-reading (not checked by a person)
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 02:00:19–02:00:19 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
I would make a decision.
Flag: the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 02:00:19–02:00:29 · gap filled by a machine re-reading (not checked by a person)
Okay. Do you have something more to add to this? We're about to...
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:00:39–02:00:41 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
The the applicant had already submitted um during the annexation process um with school capacity determination letter. So the school board has already looked at it and determined that there's capacity in the neighboring schools. For the projects. Kind of general
‸ Okay. Okay. Look, okay right now we can talk about this all night. Right now we have to either vote this up or down. question what's that
yeah
that's what i'm doing right now up or down and i think i have a feeling to have the boards leaning larry would you like to make a
‸ motion to approve well it's ‸ 220.
well i
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 02:01:43–02:01:44 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
larry to make the motion oh
well he made a motion he made a motion
I'm sorry. ‸ You said oh
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:01:52–02:01:52 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
We're on oh
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:01:53–02:01:54 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
I'm gonna ‸ put my glasses on. I'm sorry. Yes, you're right.
okay
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output; numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:02:06–02:02:20 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Okay.
We
‸ have a lack of a second. Is that correct? Okay, Larry, you're on. Give us a motion.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:02:32–02:02:35 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
Second. Okay, we have a motion to a motion. Okay, we have a motion and a second to deny the recommendation. ‸ Okay, all in favor say aye. Aye.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:02:51–02:02:52 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
What's your vote? You're opposed or? Opposed or denied. Whatever. If you can figure that out, go ahead. Opposed
or
denied. Okay, the motion is denied.
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said) · 02:03:09–02:03:14 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
recommendation to turn this request down.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:03:21–02:03:23 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Of this.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:03:25–02:03:38 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:08 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
I think, ‸ I'm going to have, we're going to move on to the next one.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:03:42–02:03:44 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Okay. We're going to move on.
The short answer is you can make an application to do that.
Okay. That is a process.
Thank
you very much.
You're
welcome. Last item on the agenda.
Okay. This is a preliminary subdivision and a large scale site plan for Lakeside Palms West. The applicant is requesting approval of this subdivision and site plan. It's for a parcel of land on the west side of Clear Lake, roughly 27 acres. It's currently vacant. The intent is to create a subdivision with 87 single family lots.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 02:04:23–02:04:24 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
orange grove with a wetland along the west side. There's the general map for you. And we're down to the end.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:04:36–02:04:38 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Okay. I
think they're happy.
The subdivision was originally submitted to the city in October of 2018. So if it looks familiar to some of you, you have seen it before. It was proposed as 89 lots. There was a development agreement to add community, a couple of lots for open space, amenities for the community. That brought it to 87, which is what you have in front of you. There's the general layout.
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:05:14–02:05:18 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
and council then approved it
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:05:22–02:05:27 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
But that approval has since expired. So in February, well after February 13, there was, in relation to those conditions, a resubmittal plans to the utilities department that was approved by utilities, which addressed the conditions specifically related to the utility issues. In late January of this year, 2020, applicant approached the city with a desire to move forward again with the project. They had a new prospective buyer who was considering the property.
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:06:02–02:06:07 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
to extend the plat, which as I said, it ‸ expired. So on the 11th of 2020, City Council approved an extension of the permitting timelines in the development agreement for a 12 month period, which will allow the owner to refile for the large scale site plan and preliminary subdivision. May 4th of this year, they submitted the previous subdivision ‸ plans, which are two of your exhibits, B and C. Staffs reviewed the conditions attached to that conditional approval granted by council back in 2019, as well as requirements of the city's comp plan and zoning code, and determined there's two items that need yet to be addressed.
One, a conservation easement for Track C to be provided, and then
Flag: the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 02:06:51–02:06:56 · gap filled by a machine re-reading (not checked by a person)
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 02:06:56–02:06:57 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
applicant must provide compensatory storage as required by the Comp Plan, which is Policy 6.1.3.6, or provide sufficient evidence that such provision is not environmentally sound or economically
Flag: the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 02:06:57–02:07:09 · gap filled by a machine re-reading (not checked by a person)
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:07:09–02:07:12 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
conservation easement was an unmet condition on the 2019 Council approval. However, the Comp Storage requirement was
Flag: the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 02:07:12–02:07:21 · gap filled by a machine re-reading (not checked by a person)
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:07:21–02:07:24 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
application review process
[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:07:26–02:07:33 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
but unfortunately and they did so and addressed chapter six I believe it is in the city code, but did not look at the comprehensive plan for the compensatory storage portion. so
the
applicant, well the attorney's office, excuse me, has provided the applicant with
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:08:04–02:08:08 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:08:08–02:08:10 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Yeah.
All
right. That was
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:08:15–02:08:17 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
the application that was reviewed, the consulting firm and
looked at
the fire ‸ flood damage excuse me code.
[unclear audio — 0:38 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 02:08:32–02:09:10 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
condition of approval on that original submittal about trees to be planted along the Clear Lake Road frontage. On the plans, they are listed as live oak trees. However, there are they sit right under an overhead line and staff had requested that the tree species be
changed to something that wouldn't grow quite so tall and be, you know, then it's the right tree, right place issue. So, we've all seen the live oaks that wind up getting
Flag: the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 02:09:25–02:09:38 · gap filled by a machine re-reading (not checked by a person)
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 02:09:38–02:09:39 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
by power line crews. So, we just requested that those tree species
Flag: the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 02:09:39–02:09:45 · gap filled by a machine re-reading (not checked by a person)
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:09:45–02:09:48 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
have to be decided now, but it could be worked out with the new buyer and the public works ‸ department. in terms of consistency with the comprehensive plan and this is where our staff report got rather long I'm sorry but it's a technical matter and we needed to we need to address it fully I know it's been a long evening but I ask for your patience for a little bit longer on this one because we have never as ‸ staff applied this section of the comprehensive plan with this caveat that the comp plan
is that
compensatory storage can be essentially waived if there's an economic or environmental reason so I'm going to go through a lot of that what's in your staff report the comp plan
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: a possible machine repair could not be placed · 02:10:42–02:10:43 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
it's policy 1636 I won't read the whole thing to you but you've got it there essentially boiling down to the environmental soundness and economical feasibility impact
[unclear audio — 0:07 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:11:05–02:11:12 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
to economic feasibility providing that compensatory storage provide staff provided them comments back and they provided us additional information
[unclear audio — 0:26 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 02:11:25–02:11:51 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
the environmental and physical parts.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:11:58–02:11:58 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Take it from there.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:12:03–02:12:04 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
I'm the public works director.
I
haven't met some of you, ‸ but it's good to meet you. I'm just going to give a brief overview of floodplains and how they're typically handled with developments like this. So as Dodie mentioned, our comp plan requires a one-to-one compensatory storage. So basically what that means is, and here's a graphic up here as well that can kind of show you the volume of dirt that you're putting into the floodplain, you should provide an area of storage for that as well.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:12:34–02:12:36 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:12:36–02:12:39 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
If you can't meet that requirement, then you need to show that either economically or environmentally. The way ‸ floodplains generally work is if you look at the stream channel here, you have a lot of rain, that would rise. And ‸ this floodplain is kind of a natural low-lying area that would help provide the storage for that. When you fill in too much of that, what happens is you ‸ would in turn raise the floodplain in other areas. And we'll talk a little bit more about that with the St. John's Basin itself. Any questions on just floodplains in general? I know that's a real quick overview of them, but pretty much ‸ you want to provide storage for what you take away from it. This site in particular, so here's a rough outline of this site.
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:13:31–02:13:34 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
That's special flood hazard area. It has an elevation of around 17 feet.
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 02:13:39–02:13:42 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:13:42–02:13:44 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
waters would come up to 17 feet. That's based on what FEMA has developed through their studies. And then you can see there's some small orange portions here that are shaded. That's called shaded zone X.
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:13:56–02:14:00 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
They're higher.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:14:01–02:14:02 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Those would ‸ typically be kind of your uplands areas.
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:14:06–02:14:10 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Usually the areas
you only focus
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 02:14:12–02:14:12 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
on are the special flood hazard areas, which is your AE, your A's, and things of that nature. So you can see on this site, there's not a lot of space to provide any kind of storage. So we kind of looked at, you know, what would be the options here if you did it on the site? If you remember in the site plan, track C is a preservation track or a conservation area. It kind of ranges from about here coming down. It's mostly wetlands. In order for them to provide the storage in there, you would have to scrape wetlands. And that's where you get into the environmental aspect of it. Is it environmentally sound to basically scrape natural wetlands in order to provide minimal storage?
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:14:56–02:15:00 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
So in terms of storage, you're really not gaining a lot for what that potential environmental impact can be.
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 02:15:08–02:15:08 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
will get more into the cost of that as well. But in order to do that, anytime you touch wetlands further than what you've already been permitted for, you sort of start that process over. So they would have to further mitigate more wetlands. They'd have to show a design for the compensatory storage as well. And even to mitigate a wetland that size, it'd be tough in this area. Oh, really? Yeah. So the other option that we looked at is, well, you leave the preservation track, and what if you eliminate some lots? We did some rough calculations. You probably lose at least 30 lots out of their 87. So now you get into the cost standpoint. Their cost per lot to a developer has increased significantly.
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:15:53–02:15:55 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
The roadways, everything has to be redesigned to accommodate the loss of lots.
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:16:00–02:16:03 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
So
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:16:03–02:16:07 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Everyone would start over. You'd basically start the project from scratch.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:16:12–02:16:13 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
option we looked at is to do it off-site. And I don't think we have a full picture of the floodplain, but the
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:16:20–02:16:21 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
So it starts at the headwaters down south and works its way all the way up. So you could, technically,
you
could provide storage somewhere else.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:16:30–02:16:32 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
If that was an empty parcel, if you could figure out a way to connect it to that area, you could provide your storage in that location. There's not a lot of vacant upland property available to do that, and any upland property in this area comes at a ‸ huge price, especially just to essentially dig a hole for storage. The cost side of that would, once again, put your cost per lot up. The other way that you can do it is buy a site that has wetlands, and you would scrape that down. So as long as it's adjacent to the floodplain, then you can provide that storage. We get back into the environmental side on that, where now you're impacting more wetlands to provide storage. And then you're running into other issues where most of those properties that are available are closer to the river. And when you're scraping, you need to provide some buffer between the groundwater table and how deep you go. So if you scrape into the groundwater table, you've eliminated any storage that you have because as the groundwater comes up, there's ‸ no point there. So in terms of this project alone by itself, the amount of fill that's being placed here within the entire St.
Johns
River Basin is probably not going to cause enough rise to even measure. Our code mentions a foot. You wouldn't even be able to calculate that based on this.
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:17:59–02:18:03 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Typically, ‸ that's the issue here. You'd look at what happens to the water when you're ‸ filling that in. It's such a big basin that the impacts, like I said, would be very minor. If this was a real small pond or something of that nature that you were filling in at that scale, then you could potentially have issues. You can kind of look at it. If you had a bucket of water and you stood in it, it'd probably overflow. If you go stand in the Indian River, you're not going to notice the water come up. That's kind of my overview of the floodplain in this site. If you have any questions pertaining to
it,
I can answer them. Otherwise, I'll pass it back to Dodie and she'll talk
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 02:18:44–02:18:44 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
So here's the dot here. So it's about here and then comes up. Yes. And so this is lakeside east over here as well. Yeah. We've already developed that one. This is
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:19:03–02:19:03 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:19:04–02:19:05 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
That's ‸ correct. The east side was all in zone X, so there was no floodplain issue there.
Yeah. Yeah. That water storage from the Robert Anderson Park there, is that just considered a pond, a lake, or is that a reservoir?
That's a stormwater management facility. Mm-hmm. Yeah. So it's similar to kind of what we have up at Bracco, where a lot of these areas…
But is that
controlled by St. John's or just Rockledge? Rockledge, I believe. But there's a St. John's permit. And then we also contributed to that as well because some
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 02:19:41–02:20:01 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:14 ▶]
And we know that they have low areas back there in that corner. Mm-hmm. And that's where the main ditches run to the St. John's, all the way from Range Road and everything ‸ goes up to the river. If you build up all that, you'll be displacing a sizable amount of water. Is it going to affect them negatively on that end? Yeah.
The likelihood of this particular project doing that would be pretty low, mainly because this is on the outside of the floodplain. So it's the very end of it. It would be hard for me to say whether it will or will not. Just the likelihood overall would be low. I know the EOR is here, ‸ engineer of record for the project. He can speak to that.
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 02:20:44–02:20:47 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
reviewed that as well and said there'd likely be minimal rise. I believe the whole site is 29 acres.
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:21:01–02:21:05 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
It's close. How many homes are you building on that
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:21:12–02:21:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
On
the east side.
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:21:19–02:21:22 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 02:21:22–02:21:40 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:08 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:08 ▶]
So the proposed changes, the conditions that were laid out, is to mitigate the stormwater on this development. So it does two things. It doesn't cause flooding to a neighboring community. And obviously this developer doesn't want to build a bunch of housing and people move in and they're flooded. Meaning self-flooding. So the changes that are made are lowering the risk for that happening, what I just described.
It's hard to say for the surrounding properties. The likelihood is low.
It's
just such a large basin that you really can't measure that. The properties being built there are required to be elevated. So it's just a matter of the size of the floodplain and this property affecting
it.
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 02:22:41–02:22:41 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
If every property in the floodplain developed, then there could be potential rises.
See, that was my next question. ‸ This may not be a big impact now, but as the city has more and more development, it's cumulative. And I don't know, I did see a GIS map of gray versus green of cocoa. Is that part of the stormwater plan, management plan, that the city has? Oh, okay.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:23:19–02:23:22 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
if, let's just
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:23:24–02:23:27 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:09 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 02:23:28–02:23:37 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
I would think the city would be interested in knowing that going forward. So when you make agreements with developers, you can say, hey, we're at our limit. I know adding more houses
mean
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 02:23:51–02:23:51 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
there's more revenue for the city. And the space program
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:23:55–02:23:57 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
So the city's going to grow. All the cities in
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:24:01–02:24:02 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
are going to grow.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:24:03–02:24:04 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
on that either, on that ride. Because we've been here long enough, the
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:24:09–02:24:10 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
things come and go. But so getting back to my point, stormwater management is a big picture,
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:24:18–02:24:20 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
not just this development in this corner of the city. And we're talking about how to mitigate it.
Yeah. As far as the stormwater aspect, there's a difference between stormwater and floodwaters in some situations.
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:24:36–02:24:39 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
They're permanent through the St. John. So they're going to store their stormwater. Whatever excess comes, then it'll come over into the Rockfish
Pond.
But
[unclear audio — 0:08 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:24:48–02:24:55 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
And you can quantify the amount of water that they're displacing into that's being reduced. The issues with floodplains is it could rain down south, theoretically, and you could have no rain here, and the floodwaters are rising. Right. It's likely that. That's why these are all the percent annual chances.
It's complex, so it's hard to calculate.
And so what kind of to touch on that, what we're presenting is the comp plan allows for the developer to submit and set in lieu of the one-to-one to provide the information to be reviewed, whether it's economically or environmentally, ‸ for them to provide that. That's kind of the presentation here.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:25:41–02:25:43 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
on it.
Thank you.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 02:25:49–02:25:50 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Thank you. What's your degree in? Civil engineer.
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 02:25:56–02:25:56 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 02:26:01–02:26:02 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Okay.
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 02:26:02–02:26:14 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:12 ▶]
And actually, he's addressed the first part of this for you, really.
[unclear audio — 0:08 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:26:23–02:26:32 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
And then, of course, there's the environmental impact of disturbing the wetlands. However, we did run through the numbers to
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:26:41–02:26:43 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
There's the original cost acquisition. You add in additional surveying that would have to be done.
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:26:52–02:26:57 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
the
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 02:26:57–02:26:59 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
storage.
[unclear audio — 0:07 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:27:00–02:27:07 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:08 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:27:09–02:27:17 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
this market. With the compensatory storage
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:27:22–02:27:27 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
cost for the 87 lots would be roughly $21,000, a little over,
[unclear audio — 0:07 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:27:33–02:27:40 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:09 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:27:42–02:27:51 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
roughly, for the $14,000 per lot, for the 87 lots.
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:27:54–02:27:57 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
for the cost for storage.
[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:27:59–02:28:05 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
homes. Using a $212,000 per house for the 87 homes.
[unclear audio — 0:09 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 02:28:14–02:28:23 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
‸ costs. Which doesn't include, like, debt service or other lot finishing and subdivision costs, construction costs. The applicant stated that new homes generally sell in the area at an average of about $250,000.
[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 02:28:36–02:28:43 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
But this demonstrates a profit that may be achieved for
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 02:28:46–02:28:46 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
overall. But doesn't leave much room for the debt service and subdivision construction costs.
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:28:54–02:28:58 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
lots were removed, then the financial impact to the owner. You're looking at $600,000 for the acquisition plus the $250,000 for resurveying, or the initial surveying plus $250,000 again, because you have to redesign the project. So roughly $1.1 million. The
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:29:21–02:29:26 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:11 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 02:29:26–02:29:36 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
So very, very, very tight margin. Using off-site wetlands, assuming parcel would be available to purchase with a water table low enough, would also involve similar
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:29:51–02:29:55 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Plus, of course, you have the added expensive property acquisition costs. So the financial impact on the applicant is considered in light of the St. Johns River floodplain,
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:30:07–02:30:09 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
The amount of fill proposed by the applicant in
the
floodplain is not insignificant. And the cumulative impacts of the development may cause floodwaters to rise as more and more development is added. However, as he also mentioned, the...
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:30:30–02:30:33 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
which was the city's contracted floodplain review firm, found that the proposed development wouldn't exceed or negatively impact the base flood elevation of that 100-year floodplain.
[unclear audio — 0:07 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 02:30:44–02:30:51 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
will not be environmentally or economically feasible for this site.
[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:30:54–02:31:01 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
100-year floodplain available on either on-site or off-site areas for compensatory storage because of the extent of the floodplain boundaries or because acquisition would be extremely costly.
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 02:31:12–02:31:18 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
cost that's prohibitive.
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:31:20–02:31:24 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
subdivision with the conditions set forth below, which are the large-scale site plan... Well, excuse me. And staff recommends approval of the large-scale site plan with the same condition set forth below, but the large-scale site plan shall not be effective until and unless the preliminary subdivision is approved by City Council and that the applicant provided conservation easement for
track
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 02:31:45–02:31:46 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
C
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:31:47–02:31:51 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 02:31:53–02:31:55 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Thank you for your patience. Not even sure what to ask. Yeah.
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 02:32:02–02:32:02 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 02:32:05–02:32:05 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 02:32:05–02:32:05 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 02:32:08–02:32:09 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
If the property's going to flood ‸ and they're counting on the St. John's to take it in, chances are the St. John's is probably flooding too and it's going
to
be backing up. So it's really not doing what you need.
I'm really not the best person.
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:32:31–02:32:34 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
I
think the developer wants to speak. Andy, I'll
answer
that one.
Hey. How you doing? Hi. Good evening. Andy Kerbach, Morgan Associates. I'm an engineer.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:32:48–02:32:50 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
‸ The stormwater code within the city requires that you meet the 25-year storm event criteria. We have provided for the 100-year stormwater criteria. So we ‸ have less discharge for the 100-year storm than we did in the pre-development stage. In addition, ‸ we're setting aside the existing conservation area, which is over six, almost seven acres, something like that, plus the stormwater pond, all
as
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 02:33:22–02:33:22 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
storage areas for floodplain.
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:33:24–02:33:28 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
The St. John's didn't want the conservation easement, even though we placed it under a conservation easement.
[unclear audio — 0:08 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:33:34–02:33:42 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
the previous approval, from Geosyntec, which was the city's consultant back last year in February of 2019. And I'm available for any other questions that you may have.
I have a quick question for our assistant attorney. Is there any, in the past, has any developer developed a subdivision and there was flooding, and the homeowners went back to the city and said, hey, you allowed this. Is there any liability to the city in these type of scenarios that I just described?
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:34:27–02:34:30 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
there are immunity doctrines, essentially, that apply, and the city is not designing this project. You know, we are approving a project, and that action has not been held to result in liability.
It's disconnected. We're disconnected from it, so therefore, ‸ we cannot be sued. But yet, we're making decisions that allow developers to do X, Y, Z.
Right. Yeah. I mean, ‸ the reasoning behind that is that if the city was subject to liability for every type of permit that we issue, it ‸ would, you
know.
Insurmountable.
It
would
be insurmountable. Yeah, ‸ exactly. And so there are, you know, there's core doctrines, basically, that find immunity in those types of
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 02:35:28–02:35:29 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Thank you.
Yeah.
Larry, to follow up on your question, there are
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:35:38–02:35:43 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
It's not like random and go for it. And they, they, all parties involved are not going to want to have a problem with them. And that's where your codes and your guidelines
for construction
if
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 02:35:59–02:36:00 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
all the numbers add up. And they consider all the negativity of the questions that you've brought up.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:36:07–02:36:08 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
I
mean,
the city might be,
yeah,
but there's efforts. I
understand. ‸ I respect. There's engineers. I respect. They know what they're doing.
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 02:36:21–02:36:27 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
and Zoning and the City Council make, to approve exceptions and things like that. That's all.
Yeah. Meaning, the ball.
My
response
is
that ‸ building department, that is their responsibility to go over to make sure
that they consider the
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 02:36:41–02:36:44 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:36:44–02:36:46 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:18 ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 02:36:51–02:37:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:37:15–02:37:16 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Second.
We have motion to approve in a second. Any further comments? All in favor, say aye. Aye. Aye.
Aye.
They're awake?
Any opposed?
Nay.
Nay. Nay.
You
have one nay.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:37:44–02:37:46 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
That's what I
want.
We can
show them. Okay. All right. We have any other old business? You want to discuss or new business?
I
had a request from your last meeting for a recent development update. I asked Angela to pass it out. ‸ I made you a map.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 02:38:11–02:38:13 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
I do have, but I don't have, I didn't have a chance to print out for everybody tonight.
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:38:19–02:38:19 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
email them to you. Blow-ups of the ‸ various applications that are listed there, or the projects, I guess I should say. ‸ They are some commercial, some residential, some industrial. But just having the verbiage really kind of wasn't enough. You really have to, I think, see the layout of what's proposed to have it make more sense. So that's a start. So
that's a start. And
I will provide you, I'll email you the, as I said,
the
various site plans that are in related to those projects.
The other item I want to just quickly touch on, we had talked about a tree board update related to the list of city-owned properties for potential planting of trees. I spoke with the public works director about that earlier today. And we actually, the recommendation is that we continue to recommend when a tree needs to be replanted
Flag: the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 02:39:02–02:39:30 · gap filled by a machine re-reading (not checked by a person)
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 02:39:30–02:39:30 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
on city property that we continue to use
[unclear audio — 0:07 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:39:34–02:39:47 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
count
the trees.
Yes, exactly, and
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:39:50–02:39:55 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
So rather than kind of making a stab in the dark right now, ‸ they'd like to wait until we get some of that feedback. It'll probably be next year, but
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 02:40:04–02:40:10 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
are planted. There's certainly quite a
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 02:40:13–02:40:17 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
And then the other item we had was the Urban Forestry Tree Institute's tree canopy event that was in March,
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:40:29–02:40:34 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
which
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:40:35–02:40:37 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
and ‸ Larry attended day two.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:40:39–02:40:40 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
And
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:40:41–02:40:43 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
and let you have that. So that's yours.
So
[unclear audio — 0:07 ▶]
the
question.
I want to, while that's loading up, ‸ we are skipping July's meeting. It is the Wednesday right before the holiday and staff just didn't have time. We now have an added requirement in utilizing this new format for our agendas. It bumps my time frame out like two weeks, so I just couldn't get together the ‸ other things we have out there in time to do a July meeting. So we're going to have an August meeting as usual, but just FYI, we will be skipping July's.
All right. Good evening, everyone. Angela Essing. Yes, and I was fortunate enough to attend the first day and Mr. Cross attended the second. So I'm going to go over, the first day was really quite a broad overview, which was very nice. And
[02:41:56] ▶ Play Speaker 19 (introduced as “Christine Booth” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
I think Larry got to do a more detailed
overview. So I think our two presentations work well together and I'll go through this pretty quickly. So really the focus of the conference was on the canopy cover and ‸ really discussing what is a tree canopy. And
that
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 02:42:14–02:42:15 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
it's basically a layer formed by the branches and the crowns of all the trees and plants
[02:42:20] ▶ Play Speaker 19 (introduced as “Christine Booth” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
within the community.
And there's a lot of discussion around the importance of such a tree canopy because it can...
or
the specific, why the specific measurements are important and because it can show the health of the canopy, right? When
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:42:48–02:42:52 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
say the following five years, if your tree canopy is getting smaller, is it because you've deleted the trees or is it because the health of the
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:42:59–02:43:03 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
with this and kind of understanding for a while their tree canopy was actually getting smaller because of the health of the trees.
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:43:10–02:43:14 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
getting smaller because of development. So they've really been monitoring it for the different reasons as to why it ‸ expands and contracts.
[unclear audio — 0:09 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 02:43:23–02:43:32 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
within your city, which gets into things like we've talked about tonight with stormwater and things like that. So why measure the tree canopy? Why is it important to the city? Because it provides cooling, it reduces storm runoff and it provides habitat for animals. And
‸ not to mention oxygen.
Not to mention oxygen. Exactly. The most important piece, right?
The
most important piece, right? Exactly. So then I know we've had a lot of discussion in the, in the, with the tree board, right? So I pulled a few pieces that I felt specifically you guys could use. And this is one of my favorite ones. And they really stress this throughout my day is that the success of a long-term ‸ canopy is that you have no more than 20% of one particular tree. Now I know we love our Oak trees and I know that they look beautiful, but I wanted to stress this because I also,
um,
in my college studies, um, was told this too, way back in the day, that the strength of your canopy is
diversity,
diversity. Exactly. Exactly. Um,
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:44:47–02:44:50 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
on looking at the economics of various neighborhoods and that low income neighborhoods really see,
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:44:58–02:45:03 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
And it was interesting too, because some of the, um, communities around Florida have found that it's expensive to maintain trees. And so not necessarily, um, well, it is a choice of the citizens of that neighborhood because maintaining these trees, even if they're given away free, you still have to water them. You still have to do, um, maintenance and things like that.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:45:27–02:45:29 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:45:29–02:45:34 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
and understanding how they can expand that tree canopy in neighborhoods that, um, are lower income. ‸ And then this was a big point
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:45:45–02:45:49 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
going to touch on a little bit more is that we design for the gray and then insert the green. So we design our buildings, we design our parking lots, we design the driveways, the access points, all those
type
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 02:46:05–02:46:05 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
of things.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:46:06–02:46:08 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Whatever's left, that's where we stick in our ‸ trees. And so there's a lot of discussion about that and ways that, um, we can look at this differently in the future as far as maybe starting with the green and then working in the gray.
And I'll let, I'll let Larry kind of go into more detail about that.
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:46:29–02:46:33 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Obviously this is kind of, uh, something that we've talked about a lot, right? The right tree, right place. I love this. Sorry for the, I said, I, it was a, I took a picture of the slide. Um, but this is a good one too. You, you notice that largest tree there. It says it wants 50 foot, uh, 50 feet of space from the center of it. Um, and that's where our oak trees fall. And so again, we're, we're kind of putting those oak trees. I'm not, I'm not against oak trees by any means. I don't want this to sound like that. But, but again, ‸ right tree, right place. And it's showing that we need to have those 50 feet from the center away from power lines, things like that.
Buildings.
Buildings. Uh, yeah.
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:47:14–02:47:16 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
So any structure can apply there.
Um, and then notice in this one too, which I'll bring out here in a few more of my slides, there's a palm tree in that picture too. There were a few, uh, landscape architects that came and presented to us about how to design, uh, how to work with your tree canopy through design and regulation, i.e. the city code. And they really recommended that us as planners be flexible, um, with our codes. And by being flexible, they wanted us to consider right tree, right place. And a lot of times we can write all the codes we want, but it comes down to right tree, right place. So if we say we have to have a particular tree in parking lots, depends on what you're driving through those parking lots, what kind of trees you may need there. And,
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:48:12–02:48:17 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
um,
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
particular site that, that, uh, you're looking at reviewing.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:48:21–02:48:23 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
thing they really stressed was that, uh,
trees
and palms are both incredibly beneficial. And we are so lucky that
we live in an
area where we can have palm trees. Uh, there's a lot of areas obviously outside of Florida, right? That can't have palm trees. And so we need to use, uh, our climate, um, and the ability to have palm trees because there's a lot of places that they can be used. Now they did recommend that a maximum of 35% palm trees per site really is probably the limit to that. And I have some great pictures in here too. So
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 02:49:02–02:49:14 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:07 ▶]
great mix. They have a great mix of palm trees.
[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:49:17–02:49:23 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
the university there is amazing.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
I live there closer to the beach.
Right. Right.
Right.
Okay.
Okay. And then we, there was a lot of discussion on, on, uh, Arbor, uh, the Arbor Day Foundation and giving, uh, trees away, those type of things. And of course the best way to get trees planted is to give them away free. And there were quite a few cities that, that talked about different programs that they have and giving them away free. And, and we do here too in Coco.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:49:54–02:50:02 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
The cities who were the most successful with giving away their trees were partnering with the extensions, the universities, utilities, um, the forest service, um, to enhance the program as far as the giveaways are concerned.
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:50:20–02:50:24 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
when I grew up growing up here in the communities that I've lived in, pine tree forests.
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:50:31–02:50:34 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Like I can't find one pine tree in that neighborhood today.
Yeah.
You talking anything about, uh, people don't like them or some reason they cut them down like.
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 02:50:45–02:50:50 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
or the eradication.
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 02:50:51–02:50:54 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
That
was not correct. Uh-uh.
But yeah. Monica,
I
have a question.
Um, hang on just a second.
No
problem. Oh, okay.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:51:06–02:51:07 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Go ahead.
Okay.
Uh,
quick question.
Uh,
Larry and Angela, are you guys on the Cocoa Canopy, tree canopy committee?
No.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 02:51:23–02:51:25 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Yeah, I
wasn't. I guess what's, who's the.
Are you talking about tree USA,
uh, uh, uh,
uh, tree city USA? Is that
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 02:51:35–02:51:35 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
referring to?
No, um, I think actually the mayor and some people from, uh, the city are on the tree canopy review committee. I mean, that was brought up a while ago.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:51:49–02:51:50 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
No, it wasn't a committee. They were just doing a study on the, our trees and that's part of the grant. Yeah.
Yeah. Maybe. I think that's his next slide. So, um, and this is what I was going to end with. And I think about four months ago, this was like going to be my big news for you guys that we received the grant. But
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:52:10–02:52:19 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
So.
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
but yes. And so we did receive this amazing grant. Um, and
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:52:23–02:52:29 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
and, and, and deserves all the credit for this. And, um, ‸ yeah, we're good. So we're going to take a look at the inventories and assess all of the public trees within the city. We're going to get to, um, understand our, and measure our tree canopy as we discussed kind of in those first slides. And the reason this is so amazing is referring to kind of some of the other cities like Tampa that have watched their tree canopy grow and decrease and change over time. This is our base. This will allow us to start doing that too. So this is an amazing grant, a huge opportunity for us. So very excited about it.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:53:07–02:53:13 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
uh, correct me if I'm wrong,
[unclear audio ▶]
public works, but the first year is to, to measure, identify.
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:53:19–02:53:24 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
a maintenance program, not only to plant new trees, but to maintain the ones you have. And then the third year, they want you to do Arbor day, give trees away, right? Participate in Arbor day every year. Are these the three requirements?
For, for the most part. So the first year is the tree inventory, which we're getting ready to put out the RFP for that shortly. They'll basically tell us all the trees in the city that are trees you want and then invasive trees as well. The next plan year two of the grant is developing a tree ordinance or modifying one you have, and then also creating a tree management plan. Year three is implementing the plan. So they'll, they'll match a certain amount of funds to actually do the plantings and cover that cost of the tree and whatever labor it takes. One. Oh, mm-hmm.
Do you have any other questions? Who
wrote the grant? ‸ It's the hard spot. Who wrote the grant proposal?
Uh,
nobody. It's not an easy thing to do.
Yeah, I'm trying not to take the credit for it. And this all, this all grew
on
this board taking over what was ignored.
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 02:54:47–02:54:49 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Isn't that wonderful?
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 02:54:51–02:55:04 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:11 ▶]
have a council meeting that was four hours. Pretty simple.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 02:55:08–02:55:09 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 02:55:09–02:55:23 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
too bad Al isn't here.
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said) · 02:55:25–02:55:29 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 02:55:30–02:55:35 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
There it is.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:55:38–02:55:39 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Okay. That should take it up.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:55:48–02:55:49 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Oh, I'm sorry.
I
thought I...
Mr.
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 02:55:58–02:55:58 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
I just wanted to remind you,
you
said something about revenue with the residents. But see, it's not always, it's just need and demand.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:56:06–02:56:08 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
to hire, open another, we might need another fire station, more police officers. So, it's really not.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:56:18–02:56:19 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Yeah.
My comment was, growth is going to happen. But if smart growth is how I like to look at it. Let's think about it. Not just welcome all developers, whatever, you know. I want to put brakes on it a little bit and control it instead of it just happening, you know.
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:56:44–02:56:46 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Yeah. But then you just said, oh, now you need more police, more fire, more public works, more staff, more...
So,
it's capitalism, right? Yay. All right. So, yeah, I attended on Friday. I went up there and it's a beautiful campus. There's old and new buildings, mixture, but they made the new buildings kind of go with the older style. This is a beautiful fountain as you walk up to the Student Union.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:57:20–02:57:22 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
‸ That's where the Institute was held. Just so people who don't know, ‸ the Florida Urban Council, it's made up of all kinds of people, professionals and people like you ‸ and me. So, on Friday, I picked from the list.
this
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 02:57:43–02:57:44 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
is the whole entire list of workshop or sessions. These are the ones I picked. Power of trees, wrong tree, wrong place, vegetation management, and
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:57:55–02:57:56 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
That really stuck out to me. So, I got to see that. So, and energized solutions. So, the first presenter for Power of Trees was really from the point of view of a utility forester, which is an arborist, just working hand in hand with a power company. And, obviously, if you're employed by the power company, you have their interest as part of your job.
[unclear audio — 0:07 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:58:26–02:58:32 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
customers, the power company customers that have trees in their backyard, and to deal with the clash that happens. You know, some people are, don't cut my trees! And, it's, well, you're going to lose power if we don't cut them. You know, it's the forecast, you know, maintenance.
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:58:54–02:58:59 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
USA. He talked about how ‸ it takes a lot ‸ to make urban forestry or urban trees viable. It's political, economics, it's very complex.
[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 02:59:15–02:59:20 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
work as a team. And, you can accomplish what the community wants, as far as their urban forest goes. Now, we've all seen these. Now, this is similar to Angela's photo, how these are actually, you know, the high transmission power lines, and how they need to keep trees away from them. Because, those high transmission power lines feed power to millions of people. These aren't the ones in your backyard. But, you see in this urban tree, it's been scalloped in the center there.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 02:59:55–02:59:56 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
And, obviously, wrong tree, wrong place. It would be nice if more power was underground. But, it's happening. It happened in my old neighborhood that I lived in. So, then I went to another session focused on the wrong tree, wrong place. And, the things that I learned that was interesting was the underground power isn't forever. I thought it was. No. It has the same 45 year life expectancy of a wooden pole. So, this is what I learned. That wooden poles have to be replaced every 45 years. And, even underground, you know.
Wow.
I thought it was forever, but it's not. They say it has to be on a 45 year replacement schedule.
How long?
Good to know.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said); the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 03:00:50–03:00:53 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
I don't know. I didn't ask if the same pipes are just new wires or. But,
[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 03:00:57–03:01:03 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
in. Or, just a homeowner is changing something about their property. They consider both. Above ground and below ground.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 03:01:11–03:01:13 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
In some places, they run the power under.
And,
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 03:01:17–03:01:17 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
right. A mixture.
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 03:01:18–03:01:21 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
If it costs less to go under, they go under. If it costs less to go over, they go over.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 03:01:28–03:01:29 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
remember, these foresters that work for the utility
company
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 03:01:32–03:01:32 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
you know, they're working for that company. But, you know, they also talked about the pruning techniques.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 03:01:41–03:01:42 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
talking with developers and builders. This guy cited one example where a subdivision was being developed.
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 03:01:50–03:01:55 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
need the x distance from our poles, you know.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 03:01:59–03:02:01 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
And, somehow, the landscaping company came in and put them right next to the poles. And, where the poles were going to be. And,
the
power company said, well, we're either going to find you or you move them. Because, you're incurring a cost in the future on us to protect our power lines. So, the builder had the
landscaper move
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 03:02:25–03:02:26 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
them. Fortunately, since they were brand new trees, it was easy to do. They hadn't matured or anything. So, that was a good example. I'm trying to move this along. Here's another picture showing you how to keep your tall trees away from power poles. This is interesting. This is FPL, Greg, Senior Vegetation Specialist. Lidar is a way for them to be up in the helicopter. And, what they're focused on is the high transmission lines. So, they have software and the Lidar is like infrared or similar. But, I didn't know this, that FPL has 7,000 miles of transmission lines and 5 million customers.
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 03:03:16–03:03:21 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 03:03:22–03:03:26 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Voltage, distance, and elevation.
And,
I didn't know why seasons was, but they said that was a factor too. But, they focus on any trees that are infringing upon the power lines. And, they'll take care of them first.
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 03:03:40–03:03:43 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
They use GPS. And, then the image on the right is what the scanning ‸ does. So, what you see in red is branches that are infringing upon the power lines.
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 03:03:53–03:03:56 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
to that site to take care of that red area. And, in the past, they would have to do this on the ground, the scanning. So, now this allows them to see more miles of wires faster. And, this was really interesting. This is Joe.
he's
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 03:04:18–03:04:19 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
using a principle of
[unclear audio — 0:07 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 03:04:22–03:04:29 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
So, you give them empathy, empathy, empathy. And, then this is really interesting. I think we all can be reminded of this. Don't listen to what they say. Instead, listen to what they mean.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 03:04:41–03:04:42 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
these are some of the things, the skills that he uses. Build trust and position yourself to meet those needs. Identify their needs and work out a solution. You know,
your
objective is to de-escalate any situation. Never belittle the customer. Explain the company's position and understand. Be empathetic. I never really thought about all that conflict that can occur between the power company and the customer. And, trees are in the middle of the discussion. Competing for space. This
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 03:05:28–03:05:31 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
He came all the way down.
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 03:05:33–03:05:38 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
And, then I'll finish up with the exhibitors. So, what was interesting, it's very important about air and water balance for proper tree growth. And, it's the chemistry. You know, it's the soil.
You
know. And, this is, remember this is focused on urban forestry.
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 03:05:58–03:06:01 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
We have urban trees.
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 03:06:03–03:06:06 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 03:06:07–03:06:10 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Well, these trees, no matter what you plant there, is only going to grow so tall because it's in a box. And, I know this from gardening in my backyard. If you keep a plant in a small pot, they'll never get really tall. As soon as you move it to a little bigger pot, it grows bigger. So, it's a relationship. But, they also said that urban trees do need to be replaced. So, they need to be part of the maintenance program. Not the live oaks, Alex. But, I'm talking about the smaller trees.
You saw my favorite. Yeah.
So, they call that the carrying capacity of the urban forest. And, they talk about data, you know, urban trees, different data than a forest.
You
know? Because
they're a
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 03:06:58–03:06:59 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
different environment. This is interesting. When I first pulled into the school in Deland, Stetson University, I parked in the parking lot. Fully paved. And, then they got the curves with a little green space. You know?
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 03:07:15–03:07:17 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 03:07:18–03:07:22 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
They'll put curbs around the green space.
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 03:07:26–03:07:30 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
green spaces. So, what he's saying is plant all your trees on the perimeter of a parking lot. And, have all your water from the parking lot go to the trees. I mean, just proper planning. But, if your goal is to control the height of a tree, yeah, put it in a curved, confined space.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 03:07:53–03:07:55 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Some, well, not in the, not at the land, not at the school. Well, maybe now that the Institute had used their facility, maybe they learned something from it.
And
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 03:08:07–03:08:08 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
So, there's a good book there he mentioned.
And,
then, conduit mats for tree roots to guide them.
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 03:08:14–03:08:19 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
And, on the right,
is
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 03:08:20–03:08:20 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
just how to think differently about how we approach urban forestry. Yeah. So, then they, they talked about the new statute that we all were aware of that says, the state of Florida says, hands off people's trees, you know, basically. But, they, the danger tree. So, they're saying that the new, new statute, you know, really doesn't address, really what it should have. Because, the danger tree before is the same danger tree now.
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 03:08:54–03:08:59 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
the statute. And, that not all arborists are trained for risk assessment. So, the statute really makes this giant loophole for you to get any arborist to show up that you know will be favorable to your desire. Am I saying that politically correct?
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 03:09:20–03:09:26 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:10 ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 03:09:26–03:09:36 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:08 ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 03:09:37–03:09:45 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 03:09:45–03:09:49 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 03:09:49–03:09:55 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
and it will last for days. So you don't have to water it every day. So, and then the other one ‸ was really cool, ‸ seeing structural soil. It was developed by Cornell University Research and just like
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 03:10:08–03:10:11 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
you design something, you can't profit from it. You have to give it to a corporation.
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 03:10:16–03:10:20 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
and well here's the tree diaper.
And
this is on the left is the instructions how to install it.
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 03:10:26–03:10:30 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
And you know, by the time the tree takes root and starts maturing, you can just leave it there and no longer use it. It'll just be a weed barrier. ‸ And then, see you ‸ structural soil. Now this is really cool about urban planting of trees. So, you can see the four pictures on the left is the rocks and the soil and you mix it and so the roots grow downward instead of laterally and you control the roots so they don't uplift the sidewalk. Brilliant!
‸ I
just love, you know.
Because the rock won't move.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said); the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 03:11:13–03:11:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
So, the stones are about, I think they say three quarter to one and a half diameter and then they have a special soil that they add to it and some clay loam and that's the right way to do it.
[unclear audio — 0:11 ▶]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 03:11:31–03:11:42 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
‸ So,
oh, Dodie, did I email you additional stuff that I... You
did. You did.
I
want you to pass
that electronically to save paper, to save trees.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said) · 03:12:01–03:12:05 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
I don't know.
I don't know. Did any of you get the additional PDFs, meaning the soil?
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 03:12:14–03:12:16 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
Okay.
Then I was probably intending to print it and I know I'll send a reminder.
I'll send a
reminder.
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 03:12:20–03:12:25 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
but yes. I can email you. Email me.
I'll
hear
it.
Larry, was it an attachment from Cornell University?
Yes.
Yes. I got it. I don't know who I was on the email, but...
The other one was like city planning from a city in Australia. Even though it was 2010,
it
still was interesting to read information.
Okay. Mr. Chair,
I'd like to make a motion that we separate
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 03:12:55–03:12:57 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
I have nothing against trees, but this was a...
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 03:13:01–03:13:06 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
So,
I would like to make a motion that we separate it. We can have a tree board or we can put a tree board with a sustainability board.
Can I respond to that?
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 03:13:17–03:13:18 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
This is getting really, really lengthy.
[unclear audio — 0:06 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 03:13:23–03:13:32 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[03:13:29] ▶ Play Speaker 21 (introduced as “Jamie Bunnell” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
[03:13:32] ▶ Play Speaker 21 (introduced as “Jamie Bunnell” — machine-transcribed, not verified) + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
interest.
And I have nothing against trees. I love trees. They're great. ‸ This is getting redundant.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 03:13:44–03:13:57 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:10 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 03:13:59–03:14:03 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
I did. I did. Okay. Can we have a vote, Mr. Chair?
Okay.
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 03:14:10–03:14:12 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
We
need some discussion
on the board, okay, before we vote.
Correct.
Follow the rules of water.
Sure.
Personally, I think it's something that requires some more discussion, perhaps at a later time.
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 03:14:27–03:14:31 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Exactly. So we will add this to the agenda for a future meeting.
We
have a motion on the floor. Yes, thank you. ‸ We have a motion of second.
So
any further discussion?
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 03:14:54–03:14:55 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Clarify the motion, please.
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
Clarify the motion, please.
I
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 03:15:03–03:15:06 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
Yes. They have
a
motion. You want me to repeat my motion?
Yeah.
Yes, please. I made a motion that we separate
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 03:15:18–03:15:22 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
a separate tree board or to take the tree board and transfer it over to the sustainability
board,
which I think is more in their, this is more in their purview.
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 03:15:39–03:15:44 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
discussion.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 03:15:46–03:15:49 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Yes. So can I proceed? Yes, you may.
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 03:15:53–03:15:59 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
basically the one that brought up, why the planning is only board was designated to be responsible for this.
[unclear audio — 0:08 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 03:16:08–03:16:16 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
decided that this was something important and it needed to be looked into. I don't think that the way it's being handled tonight, I think is a little rude to just out of the blue without any input from any of
the
board members that voted unanimously to start looking into our responsibility as the board for trees. You don't just bring up a motion. I didn't interrupt you. I didn't interrupt you. Whoever's talking, I'm not done.
It's just
rude the way it's handled. And I think that this should be addressed as a board that also unanimously voted to activate it again. There is a lot of history involved and I think we did a lot more good than it's being given credit for this board for taking the position of dusting off something that was ignored. There were other issues in the ‸ city that was ignored and I'm glad that that was brought up as well and it's been corrected. This is one of them, a major one. So just by deciding to make a motion out of the blue and seconding it,
I
guess, you know, it's the rest of the board members should be involved just like when I first brought it up. I asked for support rather than saying, hey,
I
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 03:17:37–03:17:37 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
make a motion.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 03:17:38–03:17:39 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
No, no. I got a
quick comment.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 03:17:44–03:17:45 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Isn't this a decision that council or would make meaning we can't decide.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 03:17:55–03:17:57 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Recommendation that the city council divides the two groups committees.
‸ Can I say something?
This
is Sherry. I know we've had this discussion last year about separating it out and then we decided we'd go ahead and keep trying to at least get it straightened out, but I think maybe it's at the time where we need to start thinking about separation.
‸ Okay, you do have a motion on the floor in a second. We will vote on that perhaps to, well, without prejudging, ‸ we'll vote on it. Is everybody ready for a vote?
Sure.
Okay. All in favor of that motion. ‸ Aye.
Aye.
Opposed? No. Aye. Okay. Motion is denied. We will discuss it again at a later date. Monica,
can
we have a roll call on
that,
please?
Yes. Yes, you can. Thank you.
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 03:19:10–03:19:12 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Nay.
Todd Anderson. Nay. Jerry Blanco. Yay. Sherry Irvin. Yay. Marilyn Green. Yay. May. Larry Koss.
May.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 03:19:30–03:19:32 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Alec Greenwood.
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 03:19:33–03:19:35 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
May I make a suggestion?
Thank you.
I noticed some of the board members are saying nay, and it's hard to understand whether it's nay or no.
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 03:19:43–03:19:43 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
I think they just really need to respond yes or no. I mean, especially over the intercom system. It's amazing. It's
like
pirate walk.
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 03:19:56–03:20:00 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Okay.
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 03:20:04–03:20:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
[unclear audio ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:05 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 03:20:15–03:20:19 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:04 ▶]
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said) · 03:20:19–03:20:28 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
In the circle? The traffic circle.
Oh, oh, oh. Oh, that's okay. Yeah. I
don't know. Brian might know.
Brian, do you know about that one?
Yeah, it was really rotten. Okay.
I'm
just curious what the plan is.
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 03:20:44–03:20:47 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Okay. Yeah, that would be.
Arborist report maybe?
Okay, we will meet again in August to the date to be determined.
Yes. We have a motion adjourned.
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 03:21:02–03:21:04 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
asked on the phone about the next meeting?
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 03:21:07–03:21:08 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Okay. Yes.
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 03:21:10–03:21:12 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
be the August meeting. I'll send out an email.
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 03:21:19–03:21:19 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio ▶]
Yes.
Yes.
Most likely. Thank you. Christian.
Okay. There being no further business, do we have a motion to adjourn? Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. All in
favor
say aye. Yes. Yes.
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 03:21:35–03:21:35 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Yes.
Thank you, ladies. Have a good night. Thank you. Good night.
Thank you,
Monica.
[unclear audio ▶]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output; words only one machine reading has (possibly not said); a language review questioned the wording · 03:21:44–03:21:56 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:02 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:03 ▶]
[unclear audio — 0:01 ▶]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 03:22:02–03:22:03 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording