civic record · cocoa, florida
Planning & Zoning

Planning & Zoning Regular Meeting

Date
2024-05-01
Status
City minutes and machine transcript available
Source
CivicClerk event #874
Built from the City's minutes records — no AI-written text Briefing final

The City's record

What the City's record shows

Built only from the City's minutes (1157_PZ_Reg_Minutes_05_01_2024.pdf). Page numbers are the minutes' own. Discussion is in the minutes' text; it is not summarised here.

Attendance (the roll call)

  • The roll call could not be read reliably from the minutes' text (the reading did not include BURGESS . oS, who voted later in the meeting), so it is not stated here; the first page of the minutes is the record.

Adopted actions (4)

  • to APPROVE THE MAY 1, 2024 REGULAR a MEETING AGENDA AS WRITTEN (moved by ANDERSON, seconded by BOARD : 7 MEMBER GREENWOOD); PASSED; ayes: PARK, ANDERSON, CHABOT, GREENWOOD, BURGESS; nays: none — the City's minutes, page not read
  • to APPROVE THE April 3, 2024 REGULAR : ; MEETING MINUTES AS WRITTEN (moved by CHABOT); PASSED 5-0; ayes: PARK, ANDERSON, CHABOT, GREENWOOD, BURGESS . oS; nays: none — the City's minutes, page not read
  • to APPROVE THE ORDINANCE WITH THE RECOMMENDED CHANGES AS DISCUSSED (moved by PARK, seconded by (not read reliably from the minutes' text — the page is the record)); PASSED 6-0; ayes: PARK, ANDERSON, CHABOT, GREENWOOD, BURGESS, STEWART; nays: none — the City's minutes, page not read
  • to ADJOURN THE MEETING (moved by MEMBER VICE CHAIRPERSON ANDERSON); PASSED 6-0; individual ballots not stated (the names read do not match the printed tally) — the City's minutes, page not read

Agenda (the City's wording)

The City's agenda for this meeting is on file (PZ_Reg_Agenda_05_01_2024), but its item list has not been read reliably by machine yet, so no outline is shown.

Transcript Partial transcript

Machine transcription of the meeting recording. The words are the recognizer's, except where a passage is marked as corrected or machine re-recognized; most have not been checked against the audio, so words, numbers and names can be misheard. It describes what was said. It cannot establish who voted how, an amount or an outcome — the City's minutes do that (above). A time links to its passage, and “Copy link” copies that link. No recording can be started from here.

Speakers were separated by voice. A plain name rests on evidence tied to that voice; “provisional” is a name from an earlier text-only pass and is not verified; “Speaker N” is an unidentified voice.

[00:00:02] Speaker 1
All right. You ready, everybody? Excellent. We'll call the meeting to order. Abby, do the roll call or Ms. Chabot?
[00:00:16] Speaker 2
I will. ‸ Chairperson Park?
[00:00:18] Speaker 1
Here.
[00:00:19] Speaker 2
Vice Chairperson Anderson?
[00:00:20] Speaker 3
Here.
[00:00:21] Speaker 2 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:00:21–00:00:22 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:00:23] Speaker 2
Board Member Greenwood?
[00:00:24] Speaker 3
Yes, here.
[00:00:25] Speaker 2
Board Member Lopez? Board Member Wheeler?
[00:00:30] Speaker 2 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:00:30–00:00:31 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:00:31] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio
[unclear audio]
[00:00:31] Speaker 2 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:03]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:00:31–00:00:34 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:00:35] Speaker 2
And City Attorney Ike?
[00:00:37] Speaker 4
Here.
[00:00:39] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
All right. Thank you. We'll do the Pledge of Allegiance. Please stand. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation,
[00:00:56] Speaker 3 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
[00:01:06] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
Next, we'll move on to item two. Number one, item one of section two, the agenda. Do we have any changes or have a motion to approve the agenda? Approve as submitted. Okay. Motion on the floor. Mr. Anderson? There's a second. Second. All right. We don't have a lot of folks, so. That's it.
[00:01:34] Speaker 3
Step up.
[00:01:37] Speaker 1
You got it. All right. So all in favor? Aye. Aye. Any opposed? All right. Excellent. Moving on to the minutes of last month. Any discussion or approval of the minutes?
[00:01:50] Speaker 5
I make a motion to approve the minutes from last month.
[00:01:53] Speaker 1
All
[00:01:53] Speaker 5
right. Motion. All second.
[00:01:55] Speaker 1
All
[00:01:55] Attribution uncertain
right.
[00:01:56] Speaker 1
All in favor? Aye. Aye. Aye.
[00:01:59] Attribution uncertain
All
[00:01:59] Speaker 1
right. Excellent. No old business. So on the new business.
[00:02:11] Speaker 6 + overlapping voice
Good night. Good evening, everyone. I just want to take the chance a moment to introduce. We have a new planner, Jennifer Webster. She's been with us now for four weeks. I just want to ‸ let you know in the future, she'll be handling the plannings on a board meetings.
[00:02:33] Speaker 6 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:05]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:02:33–00:02:39 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:02:39] Speaker 6 + overlapping voice
take over. So I just want to introduce her.
[00:02:41] Speaker 1
‸ Okay.
[00:02:41] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:02:41–00:02:42 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:02:43] Speaker 1
In lieu of you?
[00:02:45] Speaker 6
‸ Yes. I'm going to be doing the BOAs, the Board of Adjustments, and then
[00:02:48] Speaker 6 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:02]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:02:48–00:02:50 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:02:50] Speaker 6
Awesome.
[00:02:52] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
Nice to meet
[00:02:53] Speaker 3
you, everyone.
[00:02:54] Speaker 1
‸ Nice to meet you.
[00:02:58] Speaker 4
Okay.
[00:02:59] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:04]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:02:59–00:03:04 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:03:04] Attribution uncertain
I'm
[00:03:04] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice
the Assistant City Attorney.
[00:03:06] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:04]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:03:06–00:03:10 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:03:10] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice
This is a proposed ordinance that has some rather substantial amendments to the city's subdivision code. And due to that, I'm going to be the one presenting it this evening.
[00:03:26] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:06]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:03:26–00:03:32 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:03:33] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
I believe was the last time that this section of code was really touched. And so what we're focusing on at this time is updating some of what I'll call the ‸ procedures and application requirements that relate to subdivisions. The Chapter 18 does have quite a few other provisions in it. So, for example, if you were to pull it up, you would see that, you know, there are standards that relate to things like how thick does the asphalt need to be in a subdivision? How, you know, what are the slope ‸ ratios for a stormwater pond? Those things we're not touching at the moment. We're focusing more on, like I said, what are the application requirements for a subdivision and how are we going to process them? So, ‸ the amendments are in that vein. I'm going to walk. Yes.
[00:04:36] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio
[unclear audio]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:04:36–00:04:37 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:04:36] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01]
[00:04:37] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
Yes.
[00:04:38] Speaker 7
When you say subdivisions, then that means proposed subdivisions or existing subdivisions that want to enlarge? Or is it strictly any new subdivisions that come to the board is how this is altering it?
[00:04:54] Speaker 4
Yeah. It would primarily be new subdivisions. I suppose if there was a replat, for example, I mean, these provisions would apply to a replat. Is your mic on?
[00:05:08] No voice detected
I
[00:05:09] Speaker 4
don't know. There's no button. ‸ Is that any better? It doesn't sound like it's on. Okay.
[00:05:22] Speaker 7
Okay.
[00:05:23] Attribution uncertain
All
[00:05:23] Speaker 7
right. There we go.
[00:05:24] Speaker 4
Okay.
[00:05:24] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
Can we start in the beginning again, please? All
[00:05:26] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
right. What I said was that for the most part, this will apply to new subdivisions. If there was.
[00:05:36] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice
Consisting of how many?
[00:05:37] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:02]
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said) · 00:05:37–00:05:39 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:05:39] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
Okay.
[00:05:39] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
I will get into that. I will get into that. Um, but there could be a replats if, um, there's an existing subdivision, um, that there wanted, there was going to be further division of the land. Um, or sometimes you have a, uh, an amalgamation of different properties that are different part of already existing plots. These procedures would apply to them.
[00:06:08] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:04]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:06:08–00:06:11 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:06:11] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice
part, this is really going to, going to affect new subdivisions. That's what typically we see for, you know, for the most part.
[00:06:20] Speaker 7
And how many?
[00:06:22] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
How many what?
[00:06:23] Attribution uncertain
I
[00:06:23] Speaker 7
mean, when you say subdivision, are you talking about X number of units size wise or?
[00:06:29] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio
[unclear audio]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:06:29–00:06:30 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:06:29] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01]
[00:06:30] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
Okay. Yeah.
[00:06:32] Speaker 4
Okay. So the, the, um, I thought I would start out by, um, and, and I'm just going to go over the highest level kind of summary. I'm not going to go through every single change,
[00:06:44] Speaker 3 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
but,
[00:06:45] Speaker 4
um, I thought I would start out by talking a little bit about the, the current regulations and what, what they provide. So, first of all, the, the current subdivision code provides that a plat is required or a subdivision is required for all divisions of land into two or more lots with a couple of exceptions that are provided in the code.
[00:07:12] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:05]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:07:12–00:07:17 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:07:17] Speaker 4
State law requires a subdivision plat to be approved for divisions of land into three or more lots. So one of the changes, and that'll be actually on the next slide, but one of the changes is going to three or more lots for a full subdivision approval. Um, because that's consistent with state law. Uh, ‸ the current code also requires, uh, we Coco follows a, um, two step plotting process, meaning that we have a preliminary plat that has to be submitted first when someone wants to subdivide land. Um,
[00:07:56] Attribution uncertain
and
[00:07:56] Speaker 4
that authorizes the, uh, developer to install what I'll call the common improvements, right? The, the roads, stormwater infrastructure, utilities, the things that are common to the, to the, uh, to the subdivision. It does not authorize them to sell lots. The preliminary plat does not authorize them to sell lots. Um,
[00:08:20] Attribution uncertain
and
[00:08:20] Speaker 4
in
[00:08:21] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:06]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:08:21–00:08:26 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:08:26] Speaker 4
until the final plat is approved by the city council. And that's, that's the current, uh, requirement. Um, also to the extent that common subdivision improvements like the roads, utilities,
[00:08:40] Speaker 4 · Machine re-recognized
etc.
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:08:40–00:08:41 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
[00:08:41] Speaker 4
um, are not completed prior to, uh, final plat, uh, the submission of the application for the final plat. The current code allows the developer to submit a performance bond. Um, and that guarantees the construction of those improvements. Um, really the, the public improvements
[00:09:02] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:03]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:09:02–00:09:05 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:09:05] Speaker 4
um, which is a third party to, um, complete the improvements to the extent that the developer, let's say, uh, you know, files for bankruptcy or disappears, doesn't complete the project.
[00:09:19] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:03]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:09:19–00:09:24 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:09:22] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio
[unclear audio]
[00:09:22] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:02]
[00:09:24] Speaker 4
a three party agreement that basically allows the city to call on that surety to complete those improvements in the event the developer does not.
[00:09:37] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:09:37–00:09:38 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:09:38] Speaker 4
going to get into some of the proposed amendments here. So, as I said, one of the first changes is that we are now going to only require a subdivision plat to be approved when you are dividing land into three or more lots. And that is consistent with state law. That's what chapter 177 and Florida statutes requires. And there are no exceptions to that. There's no exceptions in state law for that either. So, at this point, um, we're, we're going to be consistent with, with state law.
[00:10:11] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:05]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:10:11–00:10:17 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:10:17] Speaker 4
a subdivision approval. Okay. Now, um, the, uh, it doesn't matter the size.
[00:10:27] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
Does
[00:10:27] Speaker 4
not matter the size.
[00:10:29] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:03]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:10:29–00:10:32 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:10:33] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
Half acre lots. Lots. Sure. And then. All right. Well, that ends up being an acre and a half project, which isn't very large.
[00:10:43] Speaker 4
Right. It, anytime you are dividing land into three or more resulting lots.
[00:10:51] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
Dividing more than what it is already existing. Right. Yeah. Go ahead.
[00:10:55] Speaker 4
Then. A subdivision is required.
[00:10:58] Speaker 7
Thank you.
[00:10:58] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:05]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:10:58–00:11:03 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:11:03] Speaker 4
You submit a preliminary plat and then you would have to get a final plat approval from the city council before you actually sell lots to individuals. Yes,
[00:11:13] Speaker 3 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
ma'am.
[00:11:15] Speaker 4
The second thing we've done is we have created now a more streamlined lot split process. So this is where we are going. We are creating a process whereby you can, if you have one, uh, parcel of land, you could now do what we're calling the lot split process to just split it into two. Right. You're creating only one more than currently exists. Um, and in that case, we're not going to require you to do a full plat, um, where and go through all of the public hearings that would normally be associated with that. But we're going to require you to, um, get, uh, approval from the city
[00:12:01] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:09]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:12:01–00:12:10 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:12:10] Speaker 4
So it will be by resolution, the city council.
[00:12:13] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:03]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:12:13–00:12:16 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:12:16] Speaker 4
So those will not actually come as proposed, will not come to the planning and zoning board for a recommendation.
[00:12:23] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:02]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:12:23–00:12:24 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:12:24] Speaker 4
a one time thing with the city council. Um,
[00:12:28] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:06]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:12:28–00:12:34 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:12:35] Speaker 4
Um, essentially they're all in, in,
[00:12:38] Attribution uncertain
in
[00:12:38] Speaker 4
your, uh, packet in the ordinance, but mainly we're asking that they're going to, um, provide legal descriptions of the two resulting lots and give us a survey
[00:12:50] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:02]
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said); a language review questioned the wording · 00:12:50–00:13:06 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:12:53] Attribution uncertain
the
[00:12:53] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio]
[00:12:53] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio
[unclear audio]
[00:12:53] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:13]
[00:13:06] Speaker 4
For example, when we look at that, um, they're going to submit a title opinion. Um, which allows us to see whether they have any mortgages easements, things like that, that would affect where that lot line might might be.
[00:13:22] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:04]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:13:22–00:13:26 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:13:26] Speaker 4
um, the mortgage or, or sorry, mortgagee, um, sign off on, on that, uh, lot split as well. Um, and we have them also explain how they're going to have access to these two new lots. Um, if they're going to do it through a cross access easement, for example, they're going to have to submit the easement for us to, to review and ensure that, um, it provides sufficient access to all the, the lots that are the, the two lots that are being created. Um, so the review criteria that we have, uh, included here, um, it includes that the application does not create lots that don't conform to city code.
[00:14:13] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:03]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:14:13–00:14:17 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:14:17] Speaker 4
We want it to comply with the dimensional requirements that are in the zoning code. Um, it provides sufficient ingress and egress to all the lots. It's compatible and harmonious with surrounding the surrounding neighborhood with respect to the size of existing lots. And we also did provide some special considerations for flag lots regarding the width of the flag, right? So if you have that narrow, uh, skinny strip of land that connects you to a public road,
[00:14:45] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:06]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:14:45–00:14:51 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:14:51] Speaker 4
be and so forth.
[00:14:52] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:06]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:14:52–00:14:58 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:14:58] Speaker 4
that have a separate process process. I guess I'll call it for flag lots and creating flag lots, but we're eliminating that with this ordinance because there's really no need to have any separate process for flag lots. We're just creating either you're going to go through a subdivision process or you're going to go through a lot split process. We don't need to have yet another process for, for flag lots.
[00:15:24] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:02]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:15:24–00:15:27 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:15:25] Speaker 7 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01]
[00:15:26] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio
[unclear audio]
[00:15:27] Speaker 7 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio]
[00:15:27] Speaker 7
Does that mean that you, uh, the city's getting in the position where they would prefer not to have flag lots created?
[00:15:36] Speaker 4
No, it doesn't express any preference. Um, it just says that if you're going to create a flag lot, um, for example, the width of the flag that reaches out to, to the, to the road would have to be a minimum of 35 feet wide, things like that. So there's not really a preference. It's just, again, um, there need, yeah, the criteria and there doesn't need to be a separate, uh, process that's different for flag lots.
[00:16:06] Speaker 7
Thank you.
[00:16:07] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:06]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:16:07–00:16:13 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:16:13] Speaker 4
that's approved, um, by the city council. And once you have one lot split, you cannot come back for another, um, on that. Okay. So you can't keep coming back for successive lot splits to avoid the subdivision requirement.
[00:16:30] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:06]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:16:30–00:16:36 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:16:36] Speaker 4
where you're actually not creating any new lots. You're just wanting to adjust the boundaries between lots. And, um, the application requirements are very similar to the lot split. We want to, uh, see that, you know, where existing structures are. Um, we would have a title opinion, ‸ things like that, that go along with that. And, um, this, this is actually done by, it would be approved administratively. So this would not be something that the city council or planning and zoning board hears, but it would be done, um, and approved by staff. And, um, after, so I,
[00:17:17] Attribution uncertain
I
[00:17:17] Speaker 4
put here, so lots,
[00:17:18] Speaker 4 · Machine re-recognized
less and
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:17:18–00:17:18 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
[00:17:18] Speaker 4
boundary line adjustment approvals will be mandatory. If you're going to either adjust your boundary or you're going to split your lot after June 1st,
[00:17:29] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:06]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:17:29–00:17:35 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:17:35] Speaker 4
city council by that time.
[00:17:36] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:06]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:17:36–00:17:42 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:17:42] Speaker 4
be required if you're, if you're going to split your lot that you have to go through this process, it's not, um, it's not optional. And, and to the extent that we receive development permit applications for lots that have not gone through that process, they will have to go back through it, um, and make sure that, you know, they've, they've complied.
[00:18:06] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:18:06–00:18:23 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:18:07] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio
[unclear audio]
[00:18:07] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:06]
[00:18:13] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio
[unclear audio]
[00:18:13] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:10]
[00:18:23] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:05]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:18:23–00:18:28 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:18:28] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
ordinance that if you are coming in, um, for your subdivision, you're supposed to at the same time, include your landscaping plans with, with your, uh, with your site plan. Um, you're going to have to submit a title opinion, which is very important in trying to review a subdivision.
[00:18:47] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:18:47–00:18:56 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:18:48] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio
[unclear audio]
[00:18:48] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:08]
[00:18:56] Speaker 4
the developer actually identify the setbacks,
[00:18:59] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:05]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:18:59–00:19:03 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:19:03] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:03]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:19:03–00:19:07 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:19:07] Speaker 4
notes, because, um, that is something that's important going forward for all the lot owners to know.
[00:19:13] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio
[unclear audio]
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said); numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:19:13–00:19:19 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:19:13] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01]
[00:19:14] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio
[unclear audio]
[00:19:14] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:05]
[00:19:19] Speaker 4
an established setback in the city code, right? It, it, it's, uh, dependent on, um, the final development plan that's approved. So we want that information to be in the plat. We have added, um, specific public notice provisions regarding both preliminary and final plat hearings. Um, ‸ surprisingly, the city code from 1963 did not actually specify.
[00:19:47] Speaker 4 · Machine re-recognized
how the city was supposed to provide public notice of our hearings on subdivisions, and so we have specified what we will do
Flag: the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 00:19:47–00:19:59 · gap filled by a machine re-reading (not checked by a person)
[00:19:59] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:06]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 00:19:59–00:20:04 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:20:04] Speaker 4
and going back to the first slide, I talked about the bonding process. So one of the things that we've changed here is that, um, we've changed the security where the requirements for security when someone is submitting their final plat application. If
[00:20:23] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:07]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:20:23–00:20:30 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:20:30] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:06]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:20:30–00:20:36 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:20:36] Speaker 4
owned and dedicated to the city. Once, once it's completed, um, the subdivision is completed. If they haven't substantially completed those at the time of final plat submission, the only form of security that the city will accept will be a letter of credit or a certified check or cash to be held in escrow. So we're no longer going to accept a performance bond and that's because performance bonds are, I would say, notoriously difficult to have sureties come in and actually complete the work. And so a letter of credit or cash allows, obviously allows the city to use that and complete those improvements without having to argue with a third party about their obligations to come in and actually do it. So it really is a protection for the city. Um, we, but if, if they have substantially completed, um, at the time of final
[00:21:34] Speaker 4 · Machine re-recognized
plot
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:21:34–00:21:34 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
[00:21:34] Speaker 4
submission, those public improvements will still allow them to submit a bond because in that case, again, you know, they're, they're close to being done. At that point, they have more, you know, punch list type items that need to be completed and, and we'll allow them to do a bond in that case. Um, but the city has increasingly seen over, you know, the last several years as we've had more and more subdivisions come through that.
[00:22:01] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:09]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 00:22:01–00:22:10 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:22:10] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 00:22:10–00:22:11 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:22:11] Speaker 4
included or they have actually constructed all those improvements because essentially they want to be able to sell lots and fund that construction as they're doing it right so this is sort of making sure that the city has sufficient security when we are accepting final plot applications. Also in that in that vein we also have a new provision that requires it ‸ to be it's an advisory that will go on the plat and ‸ it says that you know at the request of the developer the city is approving the final plat prior to them having reached substantial completion on all of the common improvements and that includes both public and private because, as you know, a lot of subdivisions now, the roads and stormwater drainage facilities, things like that, are actually private. They're going to be owned by the Homeowners Association or whatever. So we want them to we that's really more of a I guess I'll call it a consumer protection provision to make sure that people understand when they when they are purchasing a lot that those subdivision those subdivision improvements have not been completed yet and they should should understand that. So for final
[00:23:41] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 00:23:41–00:23:41 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:23:41] Speaker 4
prior to with their submission they also have to provide how those those common improvements are going to be maintained to the extent that they're not going to be dedicated to the city. So for example if the stormwater ponds and roads are going to be private and maintained by the HOA they're going to have to submit their HOA documents and their covenants and restrictions for review as well. And that that was just not in the code previously.
[00:24:19] No voice detected
The
[00:24:20] Speaker 4
also regarding and I think this is maybe the last slide regarding the processing of these one of the proposed the proposed proposed amendment here is that the city council will now be the body that will approve any site plans or ‸ final engineering drawings that are processed simultaneously with the
[00:24:43] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:02]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:24:43–00:24:44 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:24:44] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:04]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:24:44–00:24:48 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:24:48] Speaker 4
we are getting site plans that come and of course the planning and zoning board is the typically the board that approves you're the final approval body for a site plan.
[00:25:02] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:06]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:25:02–00:25:08 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:25:08] Speaker 4
approve the preliminary plat. So there's this strange situation where you all are hearing it first you're approving it and then the city council still has to approve it because if there's a plat that goes with it. So what we're saying here is when when those are processed simultaneously the planning and zoning board is just going to provide a recommendation and allow the city council to make that decision because they're already making that final decision on preliminary
[00:25:37] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 00:25:37–00:25:37 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:25:39] Speaker 4 · Machine re-recognized
And I think that's it. Those are the main changes that we're making. I know it's a lot. If you have any questions, I'm happy to answer them.
Flag: the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 00:25:39–00:25:48 · gap filled by a machine re-reading (not checked by a person)
[00:25:51] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 00:25:51–00:25:55 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:25:52] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio]
[00:25:53] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio]
[00:25:53] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01]
[00:25:55] Speaker 5 · Machine re-recognized
I live in West Cocoa. Hypothetically, I got
Flag: the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 00:25:55–00:25:57 · gap filled by a machine re-reading (not checked by a person)
[00:25:57] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 00:25:57–00:25:58 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:26:00] Speaker 5 · Machine re-recognized
If I divide that into three lots, I fall under subdivision then. Yes. And
Flag: the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 00:25:58–00:26:06 · gap filled by a machine re-reading (not checked by a person)
[00:26:05] Speaker 4 · Machine re-recognized
that is
[00:26:07] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:02]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:26:07–00:26:09 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:26:09] Speaker 4
I mean, really, all we're doing in terms of the number is we're changing our code to make it consistent with what state law requires.
[00:26:18] No voice detected
Cool.
[00:26:22] Speaker 3
I have a question.
[00:26:26] Speaker 7
And rather than take too much time with my questions, I'm going to spread it out so others can ask also.
[00:26:37] Speaker 7 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:10]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:26:37–00:26:47 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:26:47] Speaker 7
are we fine tuning and making it more correct when subdivisions are presented ‸ to the city rather than putting it, setting it up that people that are interested in creating subdivisions, we're not making it more difficult for them. We're not trying to prevent new developments. Am I correct in thinking that?
[00:27:21] Speaker 4
Yeah, I think ‸ that's correct.
[00:27:24] Attribution uncertain
I
[00:27:24] Speaker 4
mean, ‸ the idea behind creating the lot split process was to provide an avenue for someone who just wanted to split their lot into two to have a more simplified process for them to use. Rather than currently, you know, the city code provides if you are dividing your land into two or more lots,
[00:27:51] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:02]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:27:51–00:27:53 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:27:53] Speaker 4
And that, you know, that can be a challenging and expensive process. So the idea was to make it simpler for lot splits. Now, there are certain things, like I said, the security provision. You know, there are some things that we are making, you know, I don't know that I would say more onerous, but they're changing. And that's to protect the city and to protect individuals that are ‸ buying the lots. But for the most part, these ‸ provisions are intended to make the ‸ process simpler.
[00:28:35] Speaker 7
Okay, thank you.
[00:28:37] Speaker 4
‸ Yes. I mean, and I guess I will also say that in certain cities. So there were exceptions, right, to the definition of a subdivision. As I said, subdivision was required for anything two or more. But there were some exceptions. Most of those exceptions that are in the code now really are not, we can't really
[00:29:03] Attribution uncertain
understand that. That
[00:29:03] Speaker 4
really put them into effect because they conflict with state law. So if you're going to do three or more,
[00:29:09] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:04]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:29:09–00:29:13 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:29:13] Speaker 4
But ‸ there were some provisions that allowed, for example, it said the division of a tract of land whose entire area is not greater than two acres into not more than three lots. Well,
[00:29:28] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:02]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 00:29:28–00:29:29 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:29:29] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01]
[00:29:30] Speaker 4
That was exempt. So in those ‸ circumstances, somebody would just have to basically,
[00:29:36] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:05]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:29:36–00:29:41 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:29:41] Speaker 4
legal description and by deed. Right. And they would go to the clerk of the court and they would do that.
[00:29:49] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:05]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:29:49–00:29:54 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:29:54] Speaker 4
to ensure that ‸ when people are dividing their land, they're doing it in a way that makes certain that those lots are ‸ meeting zoning requirements.
[00:30:02] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:03]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:30:02–00:30:05 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:30:05] Speaker 4
are nonconforming and things like that.
[00:30:08] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:07]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:30:08–00:30:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:30:15] Speaker 4
to the clerk of the court. But that was a small number, I would say, of divisions that were allowed to do that anyway. Because again, generally, we required subdivisions for anything more than any anything more than two lots. So
[00:30:34] Speaker 7
can I ask another question? The current size of lots for you to be able to build in the city, correct me if I'm wrong, I think the minimum is
[00:30:46] Speaker 7 · Machine re-recognized
it
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:30:46–00:30:46 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
[00:30:46] Speaker 7
75 by 150.
[00:30:50] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
No, I mean, and I know that
[00:30:51] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:09]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:30:51–00:31:00 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:31:00] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice
that.
[00:31:00] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
Right. 50 by 100.
[00:31:02] Speaker 4
Yeah. Yeah.
[00:31:02] Attribution uncertain
I
[00:31:02] Speaker 4
think 50 by 100 generally.
[00:31:05] Speaker 7
Right.
[00:31:05] Speaker 4
But again, in PUDs, right, there's no minimum lot size. You all establish that when you look at a PUD.
[00:31:18] Speaker 7
Okay. Thank you.
[00:31:22] Speaker 1
All right. Any more questions? Concerns? Concerns? Okay. I'm going to go.
[00:31:29] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:31:29–00:31:30 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:31:30] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio
[unclear audio]
[00:31:30] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01]
[00:31:31] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio
[unclear audio]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:31:31–00:31:32 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:31:31] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01]
[00:31:32] Speaker 3 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio
[unclear audio]
[00:31:36] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:02]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:31:36–00:31:40 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:31:38] Speaker 7 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio]
[00:31:39] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio
[unclear audio]
[00:31:39] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01]
[00:31:40] Speaker 1
So, yeah, I talked briefly about some of
[00:31:45] Attribution uncertain
the
[00:31:45] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
items in the ordinances. If we can go over those, that'd be great. I appreciate it. Okay. So what is the wording for ‸ the seventh? Whereas it says the city of council. What's the proper wording for that?
[00:31:57] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
It'll just be city council. Okay. And I will correct that. I apologize for that typo.
[00:32:02] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:04]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:32:02–00:32:06 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:32:06] Speaker 1
Okay. I appreciate it. Um, next. Uh, so yeah, I was reading as I was reading through it and I see a lot of changes. So great job on everything
[00:32:22] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:04]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:32:22–00:32:29 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:32:26] Speaker 2 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:02]
[00:32:28] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01]
[00:32:29] Speaker 1
thoughts again, was, um, a few things declared to be, uh, in the second line, uh, the filing or according of a plat or subdivision
[00:32:42] Speaker 1 · Machine re-recognized
it
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:32:42–00:32:42 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
[00:32:42] Speaker 1
says, uh, declared to be a misdemeanor unlawful.
[00:32:44] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
Oh yeah.
[00:32:45] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
Do it just strike a misdemeanor.
[00:32:47] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
Yes. And ‸ yeah, that was struck at one point. I don't know how that happened. So
[00:32:54] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Machine re-recognized
yes,
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:32:54–00:32:54 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
[00:32:55] Speaker 1
I will fix that. Sounds good. Um, and just to make note, this kind of goes in the rest of it. Well, a couple of things, if you could help me understand division of land. Um, I see it used later on. It says, um, I got a couple of highlights here. Uh, so earlier in it, I think it says, uh, we, we say a division of land in the third line. It says,
[00:33:18] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:33:18–00:33:19 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:33:19] Speaker 1
at least we
[00:33:20] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 00:33:20–00:33:20 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:33:20] Speaker 1
to use this wording more often is, is it better to have the filing or recording of a division of land or of a
[00:33:28] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:33:28–00:33:29 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:33:35] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:19]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output; the machine readings disagree here; words the first reading may have missed; numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:33:35–00:34:01 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:33:55] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:06]
[00:34:01] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
Yes, ma'am.
[00:34:02] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
This is the filing or recording of a plat of a subdivision without the approval of the city council is declared to be, and it was previously a misdemeanor. I put that it's unlawful. Um, we also have further in this paragraph, I believe
[00:34:17] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:03]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:34:17–00:34:20 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:34:20] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice
filing or recording of any instrument effectuating a boundary line adjustment or a lot split without approval of the city council or the city manager or their designee because boundary line adjustments will be done administratively. Um, that is declared to be unlawful as well if it, if it happens after June 1st. So I think we've covered all of the different ways that you could divide the land. Okay.
[00:34:48] Speaker 1
And that, that follows on to another question and it kind of got me a lot was, um, and I just maybe just need a clarification because this is good. We referenced the
[00:34:58] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:34:58–00:34:59 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:34:59] Speaker 8
Yeah.
[00:35:00] Speaker 1
A lot when,
[00:35:01] Speaker 1 · Machine re-recognized
in our
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:35:01–00:35:03 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
[00:35:03] Speaker 1
where as is we talk about how the city council will be responsible for everything. But then in, in the added lines, like just like the one you noted, um,
[00:35:13] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:02]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:35:13–00:35:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:35:15] Speaker 1
of the city council. And
[00:35:17] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:04]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:35:17–00:35:20 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:35:21] Speaker 1
I just wonder if we're giving unchecked power on that one. And again, I think the city manager currently is great. I just worry about the next one and
[00:35:27] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:35:27–00:35:29 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:35:28] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01]
[00:35:29] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
think that because the city manager or designee is only, they're only referenced here because of the boundary line adjustment process, because that will be done administratively. It won't go to the city council. So that's why you see references to the city manager or designee.
[00:35:48] Speaker 4 + 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 · 00:35:48–00:35:52 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:35:52] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice
in this chapter, which means it would only be in the situation where the city manager is actually given that power. And that would only be for a boundary line adjustment.
[00:36:03] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
Okay, that helps me a lot. That helps me understand everything. And, uh, okay. I'm
[00:36:08] Attribution uncertain
going
[00:36:08] Speaker 1
to move forward. We're hitting a lot of good stuff. Trust me. I'm moving through it pretty good.
[00:36:15] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:02]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:36:15–00:36:17 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:36:21] Speaker 3
Yes. Why did we strike ‸ shall?
[00:36:27] Speaker 4
Um, so, I mean, and Lucy, you might want to chime in on this too, but, but essentially, we have, um, developers that come in for pre-application meetings and want to discuss with the city staff before they actually get to, you know, their engineering of, of the subdivision. They want feedback essentially on their ideas for the subdivision, how many lots, things like that. And so sometimes, I mean, the, the practice has been, you know, sometimes it's, it's great if they come in with as much documentation as they can for the city to give meaningful feedback, but they don't always necessarily do that. And so sometimes they just, you know, come in with kind of a sketch of what they're wanting. Um, and I didn't want to hamstring the city to say, well, we're not going to hold pre-application meetings with developers if you don't have these specific things. So that's why I changed the language from shall to should.
[00:37:32] Speaker 3
Okay. Yeah, because it's a pre-meeting. Right, right.
[00:37:37] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice
Yeah. Thank you.
[00:37:38] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:08]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:37:38–00:37:46 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:37:46] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
just three, just three. Three references showing items A and B in sketch form. Uh, I don't see, I, I don't see where items A and B are referenced or where those are. Okay.
[00:37:58] Speaker 4
Uh, I'm sorry.
[00:37:59] Speaker 4 · Machine re-recognized
we're
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:37:59–00:37:59 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
[00:38:00] Speaker 1
It would be page six of the ordinance.
[00:38:02] Speaker 4
Yes.
[00:38:03] Attribution uncertain
Um,
[00:38:04] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:38:04–00:38:08 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:38:04] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01]
[00:38:05] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:02]
[00:38:08] Speaker 1
in sketch form.
[00:38:21] No voice detected
Hmm.
[00:38:23] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
Yeah, that was actually in there before, but I am not sure. What's that?
[00:38:29] Speaker 6 · Unclear audio
[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 · 00:38:29–00:38:38 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:38:31] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio
[unclear audio]
[00:38:31] Speaker 6 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:07]
[00:38:38] Speaker 1
I
[00:38:38] Attribution uncertain
mean, there,
[00:38:38] Speaker 1
there is an A and B in 18-27. I didn't know if maybe that was what it was intending. It's close to saying B that gets he associates to, to, to items that are needed. ‸ Yeah. Yeah. And I know this wasn't yours.
[00:38:54] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:38:54–00:38:55 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:38:55] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice
Sure.
[00:38:56] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:10]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:38:56–00:39:06 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:39:18] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
Um, I will, I will look at that more closely because, um, I'm not sure that that even referred to something in the previous version of the ordinance. Yeah.
[00:39:32] Speaker 8
Okay.
[00:39:32] Speaker 4
Um, I think it may just refer to what's in one and two of 18-24.
[00:39:41] Speaker 1
All right. Thank you. Um, next would be section 18-29.
[00:39:48] No voice detected · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:39:48–00:39:56 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:39:54] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:02]
[00:39:56] Speaker 1
have and zoning added to it.
[00:40:02] Speaker 4
Yes.
[00:40:04] No voice detected
Thank you.
[00:40:05] Speaker 4
Where it says planning board.
[00:40:07] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
Yes, ma'am. And you did great changes throughout the rest of it. Yeah. Um, yeah. Just. Hear, hear, hear,
[00:40:19] Attribution uncertain
hear
[00:40:19] Speaker 1
my question and I don't mean to be nitpicky. No, I do. I do. ‸ And so,
[00:40:22] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:04]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:40:22–00:40:26 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:40:26] Speaker 4
Um,
[00:40:28] Speaker 1
later on, I think that the better word that is used in, in a addition you made is applicant.
[00:40:33] Speaker 2
Mm hmm.
[00:40:34] Speaker 1
Would that be a better reference for sections, um, 18-29 to 18-34 that references subdivider? Should it be changed to applicant? That way you can include not just subdividers.
[00:40:45] Speaker 4
Yes, we can change it to applicant.
[00:40:49] Speaker 1
Okay. And, and again, it's only because,
[00:40:51] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:05]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:40:51–00:40:56 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:40:56] Speaker 1
Uh,
[00:40:57] Attribution uncertain
you
[00:40:57] Speaker 1
do say the applicant shall submit evidence and that, I think that kind of proves that it's a good, uh,
[00:41:02] Speaker 3
a
[00:41:02] Speaker 1
good, a good grab. Uh, tiny, tiny clerical. ‸ For. Uh, section 18-30.
[00:41:15] Speaker 8
Mm hmm.
[00:41:16] Speaker 1
Really tiny. And in fact, you can just ignore it if you'd like, but I just gotta say it out loud or I can't go to sleep.
[00:41:20] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:05]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:41:20–00:41:25 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:41:25] Speaker 1
Uh,
[00:41:26] Attribution uncertain
the
[00:41:26] Speaker 1
date.
[00:41:27] No voice detected
Uh,
[00:41:28] Speaker 1
‸ look, I'm sorry, but the.
[00:41:30] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:04]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:41:30–00:41:34 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:41:34] Speaker 1
just above in
[00:41:35] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:41:35–00:41:36 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:41:37] Speaker 1
I.
[00:41:37] Attribution uncertain
Uh,
[00:41:38] Speaker 1
you don't wanna ‸ know what keeps me up. I'm sorry.
[00:41:41] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:41:41–00:41:42 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:41:42] Speaker 1
want to add that or not, it'd be consistent with what you have previously. And it's referenced in B also cause, uh,
[00:41:48] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:02]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:41:48–00:41:50 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:41:51] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 00:41:51–00:41:51 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:41:51] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
Okay. So you're saying insert the. Yes, ‸ ma'am.
[00:41:56] Speaker 1
‸ Yes, ma'am.
[00:41:57] Speaker 4
Okay.
[00:42:01] No voice detected
Okay. Yeah.
[00:42:02] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:15]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:42:02–00:42:17 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:42:18] Speaker 1
or site plan for the subdivision or unit division thereof. Does, do you wanna ‸ have or unit division thereof after every time it references subdivision? I say that because in A it says it without saying or unit division thereof and in following sections it doesn't say or unit division thereof. Um, and it's just twice more that, um, again, 18-30 A says, uh, ‸ proposed land subdivision without saying or unit division thereof.
[00:42:53] Speaker 4
Um.
[00:42:54] Speaker 1
And then 18-31 says the
[00:42:56] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:02]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:42:56–00:42:58 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:42:59] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
Yeah. I think that's really relating to, no, I don't think I want, I, I think that's relating to, um, like if you were going to do phases of a development. So I think that.
[00:43:12] Speaker 1
I appreciate it.
[00:43:14] Speaker 4
Should stay.
[00:43:15] Speaker 1
I think this is the last item and this is moving, uh, several pages ahead. It'll be under, um, appendix A, uh, with a page 19. We make reference from there on, um, to city manager or his or her designee, but previously and then throughout that, uh, zoning,
[00:43:37] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:06]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:43:37–00:43:42 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:43:42] Speaker 1
designee.
[00:43:43] Speaker 4
Mm-hmm.
[00:43:44] Speaker 1
So I didn't know for consistency if it later on is referenced in, um, you know,
[00:43:49] Attribution uncertain
uh,
[00:43:50] Speaker 1
E-1 says, or his or her, but then E-2 where it's old says city manager or designee.
[00:43:57] Speaker 4
Yeah.
[00:43:58] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:04]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:43:58–00:44:03 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:44:02] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio]
[00:44:03] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
And that would keep it consistent throughout the beginning of the ordinance and, and, and, and from there forward. Look,
[00:44:09] Attribution uncertain
I
[00:44:09] Speaker 1
think, um, thank you for sticking with me. I think that's all I have.
[00:44:12] No voice detected
Okay.
[00:44:13] Speaker 5
I got one more. Okay.
[00:44:15] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:06]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:44:15–00:44:21 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:44:21] Speaker 5
I have three children. I live on five acres of land.
[00:44:26] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:06]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:44:26–00:44:32 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:44:32] Speaker 5
I'm going
[00:44:32] Attribution uncertain
to
[00:44:32] Speaker 5
divide into three, but it's all in one family. Is that a subdivision then?
[00:44:41] Speaker 4
So, um, it would be, yes, it would be a subdivision. Mm-hmm. Yeah.
[00:44:53] Speaker 5
Okay. I just,
[00:44:53] Speaker 5 · Machine re-recognized
because
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:44:53–00:44:54 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
[00:44:54] Speaker 5
I just. Deeds.
[00:44:56] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:44:56–00:44:56 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:44:56] Speaker 5
for each plot.
[00:44:58] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio
[unclear audio]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:44:58–00:45:03 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:44:58] Speaker 5 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:04]
[00:45:03] Speaker 4
Mm-hmm.
[00:45:04] Speaker 5
And I just, I can see issues. I just, why would they, why would a family have to fall under a subdivision? I'm just asking.
[00:45:14] Speaker 4
Well, I mean, again, I think under, under state law, they currently have to, um, if you're going to divide property into separate lots with separate ownership, you have to do a subdivision. Um, so, you know.
[00:45:35] Speaker 3
Now with two, but in the future three. Yeah.
[00:45:38] Speaker 4
Yeah.
[00:45:39] Speaker 3
Well, that's from five acres.
[00:45:41] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice
So, like
[00:45:41] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice · Machine re-recognized
he
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:45:41–00:45:41 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
[00:45:41] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
said, if it's, uh, less acreage, it would not require a subdivision.
[00:45:50] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:45:50–00:45:55 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:45:50] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio
[unclear audio]
[00:45:50] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:05]
[00:45:55] Speaker 4
acres.
[00:45:56] Speaker 7 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:45:56–00:45:56 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:45:56] Speaker 4
Yeah.
[00:45:57] Speaker 7 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:45:57–00:45:58 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:45:58] Speaker 7
goes by the size of the lots.
[00:46:00] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice
It does not.
[00:46:01] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio
[unclear audio]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:46:01–00:46:01 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:46:01] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
It's, if you are having, if you have three or more lots, regardless of size or regardless of acreage, a subdivision is required.
[00:46:10] Speaker 4 + 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 · 00:46:10–00:46:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:46:15] Attribution uncertain
And
[00:46:15] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
that's three or more. Yes.
[00:46:17] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio
[unclear audio]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:46:17–00:46:19 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:46:17] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:02]
[00:46:19] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
Well, the size is. Yeah. As I'm saying, you couldn't break down a, a, a, a seventh acre lot. Yeah.
[00:46:27] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
Yeah. That's what I wanted to make sure I understood.
[00:46:31] Speaker 3
Okay. Any other questions or concerns?
[00:46:34] Speaker 1
I know it's, um, not customary, but I did cause a lot of the ruckus. So I'll, I'll make the motion. Okay.
[00:46:44] No voice detected
Um,
[00:46:44] Speaker 3
exactly.
[00:46:46] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
Yeah.
[00:46:46] Speaker 3 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
Yes. Thank you. Thank you. Todd.
[00:46:48] Speaker 1
Yeah.
[00:46:48] Attribution uncertain
I
[00:46:48] Speaker 1
would like to make a motion to approve with all the changes discussed and resolution ‸ of,
[00:46:55] No voice detected · Unclear audio
[unclear audio]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:46:55–00:47:02 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:46:56] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:06]
[00:47:05] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:47:05–00:47:06 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:47:06] Speaker 3
Yes.
[00:47:07] Speaker 1
So if
[00:47:08] Attribution uncertain
I
[00:47:08] Speaker 1
get a second,
[00:47:08] Speaker 3
I'll second. Go ahead. Who was first him?
[00:47:14] Speaker 3 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:47:14–00:47:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:47:15] Speaker 3 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:47:15–00:47:16 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:47:15] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio]
[00:47:16] Speaker 1
Second. ‸ All right. All in favor.
[00:47:18] Speaker 3 · Machine re-recognized
Aye.
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:47:18–00:47:18 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
[00:47:21] Speaker 1
Thank you. Anything else? Let's move on. Thanks for bearing with me guys.
[00:47:28] Speaker 7
We're all going to have our turn.
[00:47:30] Speaker 7 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:47:30–00:47:31 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:47:33] Speaker 1
Well, it's like you, ‸ Kristen, you did a lot of these changes or you did all the changes. Yeah. It was a ton.
[00:47:38] Attribution uncertain
It's
[00:47:38] Speaker 3 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
a lot of work.
[00:47:38] Attribution uncertain
It
[00:47:38] Speaker 3 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
was a ton. A lot of work.
[00:47:40] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
Yeah, exactly. So I appreciate it. And it's just that I saw that you were doing all this work and, and for me, why not make the final last changes to make it. Yeah.
[00:47:48] Speaker 4
No, I appreciate it. Thank you.
[00:47:51] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
All right. Moving on to tree business. Yes,
[00:47:58] Speaker 7
‸ you have something to share. Um,
[00:48:03] Speaker 7 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:07]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:48:03–00:48:10 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:48:10] Speaker 7
the city as a tree board, uh, USA that was lost and this board helped bring it back. And since we're, uh, I'm getting ready to talk about, uh, us being designated tree, uh, tree city, um, there is, and I think you all might have read it in the newspaper. Uh, I contacted and talked at length, uh, to the, um, lady that created a coalition in Rockledge for all the Oak trees that they wanted to trim. Um, and it went even further than that. Um,
[00:48:48] Speaker 7 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:02]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:48:48–00:48:50 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:48:50] Speaker 7
So it became a very big issue. And the reason I'm bringing it up is during the conversation. I had asked, uh, would they consider, uh, adding to their
[00:49:04] Speaker 7 · Machine re-recognized
correlation
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:49:04–00:49:05 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
[00:49:06] Speaker 7
uh, that they created, uh, for their concerns about the trees if they might consider letting,
[00:49:12] Attribution uncertain
uh,
[00:49:13] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice
the city of Coco also join in their effort to preserve the trees. They went one step further. Uh,
[00:49:21] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:06]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:49:21–00:49:27 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:49:27] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice
a
[00:49:28] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice · Machine re-recognized
historic
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:49:28–00:49:28 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
[00:49:28] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
value. So it's getting a little more complicated, but they did go ahead and do some light trimming in order to allow, um, uh, the, uh, garbage trucks to go through without having the issues of hitting some of the trees. But they're wanting to go one step further. This also includes, uh, what's coming up with, uh, septic tanks. And, um, I, I really am very concerned that by not looking into this more in depth, rather than stripping land to be able to, uh, include, uh, the requirements for septic tanks,
[00:50:17] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:06]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:50:17–00:50:23 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:50:23] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice
an alternative, uh, that may be some septic tanks, uh, because of where they're located and what would be required to actually, uh, put regular city water sewage rather than utilizing the septic tanks.
[00:50:38] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[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 · 00:50:38–00:50:51 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:50:39] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio
[unclear audio]
[00:50:39] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:13]
[00:50:52] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
Um, and what I'm interested in bringing it to the attention of the board, uh, is to see, uh, is this something that, um, the board might be interesting, uh, in supporting? Uh, uh, is there more information that you all might need? But basically these are the subjects that I was able to discuss with the, uh, lady that created the coalition. I don't know how anybody else feels on the board because
[00:51:20] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:06]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:51:20–00:51:26 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:51:26] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice
here about the septic tanks as an example, not just the trimming of them of the oak trees, but, uh, it's almost like be prepared. The trees are going to be removed and the city sewage is going to be installed. Trees are not making it an issue. And I really feel that it really needs to be looked more thoroughly into what other possibilities that could be, uh, able to do, uh, in order to salvage the amount of oak trees. And ‸ we're talking from Rockledge all the way up to Cocoa.
[00:52:04] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:05]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:52:04–00:52:09 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:52:09] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:06]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:52:09–00:52:16 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:52:16] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice
trimming, but this still is another issue that they're concerned about.
[00:52:21] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:02]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:52:21–00:52:25 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:52:22] Speaker 7 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:02]
[00:52:25] Speaker 7
Uh, I presented to the board the idea of, uh, getting our designation as a tree city USA, and the board, uh, approved it and, uh, it finally, uh, was brought to fruition. So, and that was, uh, I was very proud of this board to do that because it's our responsibility, uh,
[00:52:46] Attribution uncertain
in
[00:52:46] Speaker 7
reference to the, uh, tree, uh, board requirements that we stopped for a while. And now we've put it back together and we've, I, in my opinion, have saved a lot of trees. And we've also, if we lost an oak tree, at least we created one in another spot.
[00:53:06] Speaker 7 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:53:06–00:53:09 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:53:07] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio
[unclear audio]
[00:53:07] Speaker 7 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:02]
[00:53:09] Speaker 7
the, uh, the, uh, heritage that Cocoa has that many, uh, cities do not have.
[00:53:17] Speaker 7 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:06]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:53:17–00:53:23 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:53:23] Speaker 7
oak trees than many other cities other than Cocoa. Uh, and I think that's what creates the
[00:53:29] Speaker 7 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:06]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:53:29–00:53:35 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:53:35] Speaker 7
cities.
[00:53:35] Speaker 7 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:03]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:53:35–00:53:38 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:53:38] Speaker 7
on the verge of losing them. So this is another idea that I think maybe we should look into it. And I didn't know how the board might feel about this subject, either joining the coalition and showing support for what they're doing. Uh, that also could potentially, um, keep from us losing a lot of trees when the city sewage wants to be installed. And I don't know if how anybody else feels and I'd love to hear from the board about that.
[00:54:12] Speaker 1
Yeah, I'll tell you that I'm, I'm, uh, scared.
[00:54:17] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:02]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:54:17–00:54:18 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:54:18] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:03]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:54:18–00:54:22 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:54:22] Speaker 1
Um, ‸ I don't want to lose the trees either.
[00:54:26] No voice detected
But
[00:54:27] Speaker 1
actually, I think that we should have mitigation plans in place, right? If we do something like subject to sewer. But when it comes to requiring smart, uh, tanks, which will probably be required by the county or state,
[00:54:39] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:05]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:54:39–00:54:43 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:54:43] Speaker 1
money to the homeowners, me being one of them.
[00:54:46] No voice detected · Unclear audio
[unclear audio]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:54:46–00:54:55 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:54:47] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:03]
[00:54:50] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:02]
[00:54:52] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:03]
[00:54:56] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:03]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:54:56–00:54:59 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:54:59] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
the city to ensure that if we were to, which is, it's a long ways from being approved, right? They denied it the past few times they tried to do it. But if it was ever to be approved, we could find mitigation ways to mitigate, uh, tree loss. I'd, I'd prefer a zero tree loss, right? Shoot. I agree with
[00:55:15] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
your idea.
[00:55:16] Speaker 1
But
[00:55:17] Speaker 3 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
cause we don't have that right now. Yeah. And it says, uh, you know, who, uh,
[00:55:22] Speaker 1
who benefits more from hurting something else, right? Uh, that's it, right? And it's, uh,
[00:55:29] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:05]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:55:29–00:55:35 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:55:34] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01]
[00:55:35] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio]
[00:55:35] Speaker 1
like that. Um, the homeowners can benefit the fact benefit the fact that they don't have to, uh, pay for a septic tank every 20 to 30 years.
[00:55:43] Speaker 7 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:06]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:55:43–00:55:49 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:55:49] Speaker 7
history. There's a lot of buildings that get the designation of it being a historic building, especially those
[00:55:59] Speaker 7 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:02]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:55:59–00:56:01 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:56:02] Speaker 7
And it's a way to save those from being torn down.
[00:56:05] No voice detected
Yeah.
[00:56:06] Speaker 7
And, um, this is what I'm hoping that maybe we could do for trees.
[00:56:13] Speaker 7 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:56:13–00:56:19 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:56:14] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:02]
[00:56:15] Speaker 7 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:04]
[00:56:19] Speaker 7
And I think a lot of other people have told me that, uh, when I would bring the subject up, but I don't know what avenue to take. I'm thinking that this might be something that we could consider doing. And I know, um, uh,
[00:56:37] Speaker 7 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:03]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:56:37–00:56:39 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:56:39] Speaker 7
Uh, and then, uh, I'll get information that ‸ if the board is concerned and would like to have more, um, information, uh, received on some of the subjects that we just talked about. I think it's something that we should be seriously looking into and Wes, I'm with you completely. I agree with you completely. And, uh, it is not unique. I mean, we're already doing that to save our buildings. That's our history. That's our heritage, just as much as our Oak trees. And, um, I was curious how the rest of the board might feel. I know we're short on the number of people here. I regret that. But, uh, I wanted to at least start the dialogue.
[00:57:26] Speaker 4
Oh, I'm sorry. May I just ask a clarifying question? So, Mr. Greenwood, are you referring to trees in the right of way? Uh,
[00:57:34] Attribution uncertain
oak
[00:57:34] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice
trees in the right of way? Are you referring to oak trees on the individual's lots?
[00:57:41] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:03]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:57:41–00:57:43 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:57:44] Speaker 7
Mm-hmm. But see, that's the other thing I'm concerned about. If it's in the right of way, there's the total, uh, freedom.
[00:57:53] Speaker 7 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:57:53–00:57:55 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:57:55] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio
[unclear audio]
[00:57:55] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01]
[00:57:56] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice
And we had that in the city.
[00:57:58] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:04]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:57:58–00:58:02 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:58:02] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
taken down. Uh, even though they were in the right of ways. Yeah. Okay. So it's all about preserving what we have and trying to prevent, uh, the elimination of our heritage.
[00:58:17] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice
Yeah. ‸ And so just to remind the board. So under the current tree, um, or landscaping ordinance, um, if the city is going to remove an oak tree in the right of way, they do come to this board for ‸ recommendation and the city council makes that decision.
[00:58:37] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:58:37–00:58:40 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:58:37] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:02]
[00:58:40] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
way. ‸ I'm very proud of that.
[00:58:41] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice
Yes. And so that is in
[00:58:43] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:02]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:58:43–00:58:45 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:58:45] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice
And as part of that process, um, the staff would also make recommendations on replacements. So I just want to remind the board that that already is in the current city code.
[00:58:58] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:07]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:58:58–00:59:05 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:59:05] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
lots, um, they are ‸ exempt from ‸ the, the, uh, landscaping ordinance. So they can remove a tree without, for example, applying for a permit for removal. Um, single family and duplex lots are, uh, exempt. So just, just a reminder of what the lay of the land is currently,
[00:59:26] Speaker 1
but not commercial building commercial spaces.
[00:59:29] Speaker 4
Correct.
[00:59:30] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:59:30–00:59:35 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[00:59:32] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:03]
[00:59:35] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice
‸ Well,
[00:59:36] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
I'd like to have this subject. I'll probably bring it up to keep you all posted. ‸ That's ‸ great. ‸ How do you feel? Todd.
[00:59:44] Speaker 3
You're talking about supporting this coalition.
[00:59:48] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
Well, joining to help save them.
[00:59:50] Speaker 3 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
Yeah. I have trepidation of that about that. I don't know how we would make that connection. I think I don't either. I think we could show support the resolution or something to that effect. But as far as getting, uh,
[01:00:04] Speaker 3 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:05]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:00:04–01:00:10 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:00:10] Speaker 3 + overlapping voice
But,
[01:00:11] No voice detected
hmm.
[01:00:12] Speaker 8 + overlapping voice
I wanted to ask the question exactly what you were saying in my mind.
[01:00:15] Speaker 8 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:04]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:00:15–01:00:20 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:00:20] Speaker 8 + overlapping voice
with supporting organizations like that? Like how far can we go without getting in trouble or being on this planning and zoning board? ‸ Maybe a summary in the next meeting or
[01:00:33] Speaker 8 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Machine re-recognized
after
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:00:33–01:00:34 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
[01:00:34] Speaker 8 + overlapping voice
like what are ‸ legal ramifications?
[01:00:37] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice
Well, I suppose it depends on what, what it is, what action you wanted to take. So if you, if the tree board wanted to make a recommendation to the city council, that would be something that you could do. That's within your
[01:00:53] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:05]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:00:53–01:00:57 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:00:57] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice
what you would want to do if you were just wanting to express support for this group.
[01:01:03] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:04]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:01:03–01:01:07 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:01:07] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice
I'm not, I'm not, you know, quite clear, but
[01:01:10] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:05]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:01:10–01:01:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:01:15] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice
uh, that would decide,
[01:01:17] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:02]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:01:17–01:01:19 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:01:19] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
That's
[01:01:19] Attribution uncertain
exactly
[01:01:19] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
what
[01:01:19] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
we did when we reactivated our being designated as a tree ‸ city USA. And it was made as a recommendation. So should, uh, should I meet with you to discuss this any further and then go from there? Or what would your suggestion be?
[01:01:38] Speaker 4
Um, I guess my suggestion would be to speak with the city manager first and talk to him about your concerns or your plans. Yeah,
[01:01:48] Speaker 3 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
it is one of your concerns is we're on the outside watching the battle to with our friends to the south and this battle eventually will come to us. That's why I'm concerned.
[01:02:01] Speaker 7
Yeah,
[01:02:02] Speaker 3 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
exactly.
[01:02:03] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice
Okay. And that's why I'm thinking, well, heck, I
[01:02:06] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice · Machine re-recognized
got to
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:02:06–01:02:06 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
[01:02:06] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
bring this to the attention ‸ of the board because we might want to create another.
[01:02:10] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio
[unclear audio]
Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 01:02:10–01:02:10 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:02:10] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
just one step ahead of us, I think. Yeah. And I don't want to wait when it's too late because they've already started trimming. And when I was on the phone with her, I said, are you concerned? And she said, well, ‸ no, because
[01:02:21] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:02]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:02:21–01:02:23 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:02:23] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice
And there's quite a few that's in this core coalition that they created. A lot of people on river road are very angry and that's a large group of people. And so it allowed to minimize the trimming that they were going to do to be more minimal, which is what they've done now. But it's not over yet.
[01:02:44] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:04]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:02:44–01:02:48 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:02:48] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice
septic tank to sewage and all these other questions that have come up that have not been addressed. It's more like, okay, install, let's take, get rid of all the septic tanks and we're going to install
[01:03:00] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:02]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:03:00–01:03:02 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:03:02] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
and so
[01:03:02] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio
[unclear audio]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:03:02–01:03:05 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:03:03] Speaker 3 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:02]
[01:03:05] Speaker 3 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:03]
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said) · 01:03:05–01:03:09 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:03:08] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01]
[01:03:10] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
Definitely. Yeah, definitely. And, um, that's really the subjects of why I thought it was important to bring this up during this part of our agenda of the tree board. And I'm glad we weren't too late and not here too late because this is something that I'd hate to do if we had a full meeting here with other items that we needed to address. So, uh, I will definitely, uh,
[01:03:33] Attribution uncertain
uh,
[01:03:34] Speaker 7
speak with the city manager.
[01:03:35] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio
[unclear audio]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:03:35–01:03:36 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:03:35] Speaker 7 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01]
[01:03:36] Speaker 7
had some other issues I wanted to talk to him about. And then I'll bring it back to ‸ the next meeting and see how he responds. And I'm sure, uh, he'll come up with a very good idea. He's the best city manager we've had in years.
[01:03:50] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:04]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:03:50–01:03:54 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:03:54] Speaker 5
I'm sorry. You're not trying to tie the septic system to the trees. Uh, no, sir. I'm
[01:04:00] Speaker 7
trying. It's all about the trees and that. If the trees or a tree, uh, could be salvaged by going, uh, another route, then eliminating it for, uh, trimming or for the septic, uh, sewage, uh, city sewage to septic tanks. It's a way that right now is not available, uh, for protection of the trees. And it's another avenue that I'm hoping that could be looked into for the purpose of saving them.
[01:04:36] Speaker 7 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:04]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:04:36–01:04:41 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:04:41] Speaker 7
Yes. Uh, it could be a situation where it's, I know of homes that were built 1800s on river road and their septic tanks. Some of them are in the rear of their property. They're not in the front. They, they didn't have that foresight back then. And it becomes very expensive for some of these homeowners because of this as an example for them to connect to city sewage. And the one examples was they'd really be tearing up their yard quite bad, uh, which means removing of a lot of oak trees that are there. Um, so it,
[01:05:27] Attribution uncertain
it
[01:05:27] Speaker 7
just all, all this, this subjects about the sewer, uh,
[01:05:32] Speaker 7 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio]
Flag: a possible machine repair could not be placed · 01:05:32–01:05:32 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:05:32] Speaker 7
uh, city sewage to eliminate septic tanks.
[01:05:36] Speaker 7 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:05]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:05:36–01:05:42 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:05:42] Speaker 7
quite a bit. And that's why I thought maybe it's time that we have to look into it. So I'm going to be asking for recommendation from the city manager about that. And thank you for allowing me to speak.
[01:05:53] Speaker 1
Yeah, I know. Thank you.
[01:05:55] Speaker 7
Anything else for the tree ward?
[01:05:59] Speaker 3
All right. Yeah. New business. Any other business?
[01:06:04] Speaker 1
Any new business? Nope. That's it. Uh, so our next meeting is Wednesday, June 5th, 5 PM.
[01:06:12] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:06:12–01:06:14 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:06:13] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01]
[01:06:14] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
Motion to adjourn.
[01:06:17] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice
It says, yeah, it is at 5 PM.
[01:06:19] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 01:06:19–01:06:20 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:06:20] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
You're right.
[01:06:20] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio
[unclear audio]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:06:20–01:06:20 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:06:20] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio
[unclear audio]
[01:06:20] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio]
[01:06:20] Speaker 4
be.
[01:06:21] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:06:21–01:06:21 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:06:21] Speaker 1
Thank you. Thank you. Motion made by Mr. Anderson. And who's the second?
[01:06:25] Speaker 8 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:06:25–01:06:26 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:06:26] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio]
[01:06:27] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:06:27–01:06:29 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:06:29] No voice detected · Unclear audio
[unclear audio]
[01:06:31] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices
All right. Thanks for being.
[01:06:32] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio
[unclear audio]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 01:06:32–01:06:33 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:06:32] Speaker 8 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01]
[01:06:34] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01]
Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:06:34–01:06:35 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:06:35] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio
[unclear audio]
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 01:06:35–01:06:36 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:06:35] Speaker 7 · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01]
[01:06:37] Speaker 8 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:03]
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 01:06:37–01:07:18 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
[01:07:16] No voice detected · Unclear audio
[unclear audio — 0:01]

Transcript revision built 2026-10-27T12:06:18 · 7,572 ordinary words, 1,729 in suspect passages, 93 machine re-recognized.

Ask about this meeting

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