Planning & Zoning

Planning & Zoning Regular Meeting

Date: 2024-04-03
Status: City minutes and machine transcript available
Source: CivicClerk event #954

📄 Read the City's record 📝 Transcript 📋 Agenda (PDF, 351 KB) 📋 Agenda Packet (PDF, 9.1 MB) 📄 Minutes (PDF, 708 KB) Watch on the City's meeting portal ↗

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 (1296_PZ_Reg_Minutes_04_03_2024.pdf). Page numbers are the minutes' own. Discussion is in the minutes' text; it is not summarised here.

Attendance (the roll call)

Listed present when the roll was taken: Todd Anderson, Wesley Park, Ron Chabot, Aleck Greenwood, Marcus Wheeler, Veronica Lopez-Valez, Katherine Stewart
(Checked against the ballots and the printed roll lines; no independent membership list of this board is available to confirm that the roll is complete.)
Listed absent: Merrybeth Burgess
Also listed as present (staff and other roles): Lavander Hearn (Councilman), Kristin Eick (Board Attorney), Lori Chabot (Recording Secretary), Abbey Bass (Assistant City Clerk)
Named on at least one ballot later in the meeting: ANDERSON, CHABOT, GREENWOOD, LOPEZ-VALEZ, PARK, STEWART, WHEELER (participation, which can differ from the roll: arrivals and departures are in the minutes' text)

Adopted actions (4)

to APPROVE THE APRIL 3, 2024 REGULAR MEETING AGENDA AS WRITTEN (moved by PARK, seconded by ALTERNATE MEMBER STEWART); PASSED 7-0; ayes: ANDERSON, PARK, CHABOT, GREENWOOD, WHEELER, LOPEZ-VALEZ, STEWART; nays: none — the City's minutes, pp. 1–2
to APPROVE THE FEBRUARY 7, 2024 REGULAR MEETING MINUTES AS WRITTEN (moved by PARK, seconded by WHEELER); PASSED 7-0; ayes: ANDERSON, PARK, CHABOT, GREENWOOD, WHEELER, LOPEZ-VALEZ, STEWART; nays: none — the City's minutes, pp. 1–2
to APPROVE ORDINANCE 05-2024. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COCOA, BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA; amending the Official Zoning Map designation of one parcel of real property, totaling 13.34 acres, more or less, and generally located on the northwest corner of Clearlake Rd and Sunhome St … (moved by GREENWOOD, seconded by ALTERNATE MEMBER STEWART); PASSED 7-0; ayes: ANDERSON, PARK, CHABOT, GREENWOOD, WHEELER, LOPEZ-VALEZ, STEWART; nays: none — the City's minutes, p. 3
to ELECT BOARD MEMBER PARK AS CHAIRPERSON FOR THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD (moved by CHABOT, seconded by WHEELER); PASSED 7-0; ayes: ANDERSON, PARK, CHABOT, GREENWOOD, WHEELER, LOPEZ-VALEZ, STEWART; nays: none — the City's minutes, p. 4

Agenda (the City's wording)

The City's agenda for this meeting is on file (PZ_Reg_Agenda_04_03_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.

How this transcript was made. New machine transcription of the whole recording, with 8 voices separated from the audio. 4 short machine repair(s) (4 word(s)) are labelled in place, with the original words beside them: an ordinary word was replaced only where two further machine readings agreed on a different one. Checks run on this transcript: the recognizer's own warning signs and whether a voice was detected where the words are. Not completed: language review. A second, independent machine reading was compared with it word by word: the same words for 89.2% of 2,501 content words. Dotted words (59 places) are ordinary wording differences: hover or tap to see the other reading. 74 passages (26% of the words) are marked suspect: their words are not shown ("unclear audio") and support no statement: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ; the language review questioned them; or no voice was detected there. Agreement between two machine readings is not verification.
Inspection is incomplete: language review.

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

[00:05:39] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

Oh, this clock says you're a minute early. Nobody knows. Okay, well.

[00:05:45] No voice detected

Nobody

[00:05:45] Speaker 2

knows.

[00:05:46] Attribution uncertain

All

[00:05:46] Speaker 2

right. There's the armor

[00:05:47] No voice detected

clock in.

[00:05:47] Speaker 2

All

[00:05:48] Speaker 1

right. I'll count this credit on the books.

[00:05:57] No voice detected

All the things.

[00:06:03] Speaker 3

All right. It's 6 o'clock. I'd like to call to order. The regular planning and zoning meeting of April 3rd, 2024. Lori, roll call, please.

[00:06:18] Speaker 4

First,

[00:06:18] Attribution uncertain

[00:06:18] Speaker 4

would like to introduce to everybody our new assistant clerk, Ms. Abigail Bass. She will be taking over these meetings in the near future, so we'll be communicating with her on that. Okay. Vice Chairperson Anderson.

[00:06:36] Speaker 3

Present.

[00:06:37] Speaker 4

Board

[00:06:37] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:06:37–00:06:38 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:06:38] Speaker 4

Present. Board Member Greenwood. Present. Board Member Lopez. Present. Board Member Wheeler.

[00:06:45] Speaker 3

Present.

[00:06:47] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

Alternate Burgess. And alternate Stewart. Here. Ms. Burgess did respond that she would not be attending.

[00:06:55] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

Wesley's present.

[00:06:57] Speaker 4

What's that?

[00:06:57] Speaker 1

I'm present.

[00:06:59] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice

Did

[00:07:00] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:06:59–00:07:11 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:07:04] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[00:07:04] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

[00:07:07] Speaker 3 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

[00:07:11] No voice detected · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[00:07:14] Speaker 3

All right. We'll stand for the Pledge of Allegiance.

[00:07:20] No voice detected

[00:07:20] Speaker 3 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:07:20–00:07:26 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:07:24] No voice detected · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[00:07:25] Speaker 3 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

[00:07:26] Speaker 2 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[00:07:26] Speaker 2

it stands, one nation,

[00:07:28] No voice detected

under

[00:07:28] No voice detected · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 00:07:28–00:07:32 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:07:37] Speaker 3

All right. All

[00:07:39] Attribution uncertain

right.

[00:07:39] Speaker 3

First part is approval of the agenda that is before us. Any changes, staff, or anything updated? Nope. Motion to approve as written.

[00:07:54] No voice detected

Say? What?

[00:07:55] Speaker 3

I was asking staff if there was any changes or interruptions or additions or anything like that? No. All right. Mr. Park made a motion to approve the agenda as written.

[00:08:07] No voice detected

I second.

[00:08:10] Speaker 3

We have a first and a second. All in favor?

[00:08:12] Attribution uncertain

First

[00:08:12] Speaker 3

and

[00:08:12] No voice detected

second.

[00:08:13] Speaker 3

Aye. Aye.

[00:08:13] No voice detected

Thank you.

[00:08:16] Speaker 3

All right. Next, did everyone have an opportunity to look over the minutes? Yes. Yeah. Okay. ‸ Any questions, changes, additions?

[00:08:28] No voice detected

All good.

[00:08:33] Speaker 3

Motion to approve the minutes? Thank you, sir. Just

[00:08:36] Speaker 3 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:08:36–00:08:37 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:08:38] Speaker 1

Do we have a second? Second.

[00:08:40] Speaker 3

Mr. Wheeler?

[00:08:42] No voice detected

Thank you.

[00:08:43] Speaker 3

All in favor? Aye. Aye. Aye.

[00:08:50] Speaker 3 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output; numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:08:50–00:09:01 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:09:01] No voice detected · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[00:09:08] Speaker 1

[00:09:09] Speaker 3 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:15]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:09:08–00:09:38 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:09:25] No voice detected · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

[00:09:27] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:11]

[00:09:38] Speaker 5

I'm not sure if we can get that on the overhead here

[00:09:56] Speaker 3

our

[00:09:56] Speaker 3 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:09:56–00:10:03 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:10:00] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

[00:10:04] Speaker 5

is a rezoning request at 1600 Flower Mountain Lane, also known as the Oak Meadows Apartments. Subject property is 13.34 acres is at the intersection of clear lake and Sun home street the subject property is currently developed as a apartment complex with 120 multifamily units that was originally constructed in 2009 and annexed into the city

[00:10:32] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:10:32–00:10:38 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:10:38] Speaker 5

property is medium density residential MDR allows for 15 units per acre zoning districts that are compatible with

[00:10:49] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:12]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:10:48–00:11:00 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:11:00] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:11:00–00:11:04 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:11:05] Speaker 5

assigned a zoning category. As you know, on

[00:11:10] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:11:09–00:11:14 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:11:14] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:07]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:11:14–00:11:21 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:11:25] Speaker 5

this request is to rezone the property

[00:11:27] Speaker 5 · Machine re-recognized

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:11:27–00:11:27 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[00:11:27] Speaker 5

RU 215 multifamily dwelling zoning designation Again, is currently unassigned. In 2012, the subject property was approved for the annexation and was given the future land use designation of MDR but nonetheless never had a zoning category given

[00:11:52] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; words the first reading may have missed · 00:11:45–00:11:56 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:11:57] Speaker 5

growth and appropriate compatibilities through the land development code. and Again, there's 121 units that are already on the property. the

[00:12:17] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:12:16–00:12:20 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:12:18] Attribution uncertain

zoning

[00:12:18] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

[00:12:20] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:12:20–00:12:22 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:12:23] Speaker 5

are designated for this zoning category so we see the R215 zoning category as the appropriate designation

[00:12:36] Speaker 5 · Machine re-recognized

The

Flag: the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 00:12:36–00:12:36 · gap filled by a machine re-reading (not checked by a person)

[00:12:36] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 00:12:36–00:12:38 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:12:40] Speaker 5 · Machine re-recognized

compatible with the low, medium, and high density of

Flag: the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 00:12:38–00:12:43 · gap filled by a machine re-reading (not checked by a person)

[00:12:43] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 00:12:43–00:12:44 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:12:44] Speaker 5 · Machine re-recognized

land use designations. And again, the 8.9 dwelling units is the reason for the medium density residential. designation. Again,

Flag: the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 00:12:44–00:13:01 · gap filled by a machine re-reading (not checked by a person)

[00:13:02] Speaker 5

There's

[00:13:02] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:13:02–00:13:06 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:13:07] Speaker 5

We have single family to the north and west and mobile homes to the south. The subject property will not be an isolated district. As previously mentioned, there's an RU215 category nearby, approximately two blocks north. Again, compatibility to the future land use designation abutting properties are categorized

[00:13:35] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:13:34–00:13:39 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:13:39] Speaker 5

15. Opposed

[00:13:42] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 00:13:41–00:13:42 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:13:43] Speaker 5

is consistent with the future land use element policy 1.1.2.4. Staff recommends to the Planning and Zoning Board approval to the City Council through Appendix A, Zoning Article 21, to change the zoning map designation of the subject property, totaling 13.34 acres, to the City of Coco's RU215 multifamily dwelling designation. And myself and Steve Noto are here for any questions.

[00:14:27] Speaker 2

Mayor,

[00:14:28] Speaker 2 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:14:27–00:14:29 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:14:29] Speaker 2

Yes, sir. You had mentioned that ‸ this change of zoning would allow improvements. Are you familiar with what improvements we're looking at to do once the zoning is changed? Are you familiar what their plans are?

[00:14:43] Speaker 5

Yeah, from my understanding, they ‸ wish to seek permits for sidewalk improvements. Other improvements include, was it fencing?

[00:14:56] Speaker 6 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

Yeah, fencing, dumpster enclosure improvements. Aesthetics?

[00:15:00] Attribution uncertain

Mostly

[00:15:00] Speaker 3

aesthetics?

[00:15:01] Speaker 6

Yes, that's correct. Yeah, they're not adding any more dwelling units. We had a pre-app with them roughly a month or two ago. And so it's aesthetic improvements and then just some horizontal improvements to the site. Better pedestrian connectivity, better striping,

[00:15:12] Speaker 6 · Machine re-recognized

etc

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:15:12–00:15:12 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[00:15:13] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice

Now, the sidewalk, since it's going to be

[00:15:15] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · Machine re-recognized

angst

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:15:15–00:15:15 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[00:15:15] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

into the City, correct, are they expecting the City to install the sidewalks? No,

[00:15:19] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:15:19–00:15:20 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:15:20] Speaker 6 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

[00:15:21] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

Oh, internal.

[00:15:22] Speaker 6

Correct.

[00:15:23] Speaker 2

And

[00:15:23] Speaker 2 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:15:23–00:15:24 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:15:24] Speaker 2

Their current zoning does not allow them to do that.

[00:15:26] Speaker 6 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

Since they don't have a sitting zoning category, they

[00:15:28] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

need

[00:15:29] Speaker 6 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

to have one prior to doing any work.

[00:15:31] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

So this is more like a cleanup. It's

[00:15:34] Speaker 6 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

[00:15:35] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

correction to make it fit in simple terms to what we, the city, has established for zoning in our city to be more consistent with our

[00:15:48] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:15:47–00:15:51 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:15:51] Speaker 6 + overlapping voice

That's right. They have the leftover Brevard County

[00:15:54] Speaker 6 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:15:53–00:15:56 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:15:55] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[00:15:55] Speaker 6 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

[00:15:56] Speaker 6 + overlapping voice

‸ So

[00:15:56] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

they need to

[00:15:57] Speaker 6 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

have a city zoning district.

[00:15:58] Speaker 2

All right. Thank you.

[00:15:59] Speaker 6

Yes, sir.

[00:16:03] Speaker 3

Any other questions from the board? No. I see one gentleman in the audience. Did you want to speak on this item, sir?

[00:16:14] No voice detected

No.

[00:16:15] Attribution uncertain

They

[00:16:15] No voice detected

came

[00:16:15] No voice detected · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said); the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 00:16:15–00:16:17 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:16:16] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[00:16:16] No voice detected · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

[00:16:17] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

[00:16:19] No voice detected

Property?

[00:16:20] No voice detected · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said); the recognizer flagged its own output; the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up; a language review questioned the wording · 00:16:19–00:16:24 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:16:24] Speaker 3

[00:16:24] No voice detected · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said); the recognizer flagged its own output; the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 00:16:24–00:16:26 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:16:26] Speaker 3

Okay.

[00:16:28] No voice detected

Great.

[00:16:29] Speaker 3

All right. We'll turn it back over to the board.

[00:16:31] Attribution uncertain

[00:16:31] Speaker 3

we, any more questions? Mr. Greenwood? One last

[00:16:33] Speaker 2

one. Uh, for the record, um, the city has a tree ordinance. By

[00:16:40] Speaker 2 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:16:39–00:16:44 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:16:44] Speaker 2

fit better. Is

[00:16:45] Speaker 2 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:10]

Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:16:45–00:16:55 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:16:56] Speaker 2

oak trees that the city is known for?

[00:16:59] Speaker 6

Yeah.

[00:16:59] Attribution uncertain

[00:16:59] Speaker 6

defer

[00:16:59] Speaker 6 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:16:59–00:17:00 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:17:01] Speaker 6

Sure.

[00:17:01] Speaker 6 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:17:01–00:17:01 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:17:01] Speaker 6

you're asking if, as part of their improvements, they would add additional landscaping? By,

[00:17:05] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

but does the 215 zoning can require ‸ trees? Would they be willing to include that as part of the zoning or do you know?

[00:17:14] Speaker 6

The zoning category defers to the landscape code. And so all of the buffer standards would come from that landscape code. Um, we'd have to look a little closer at the site plan to see if they're deficient. Um,

[00:17:26] Speaker 6 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:17:25–00:17:30 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:17:30] Speaker 6

beyond. I'll use that term. Okay. Well, I'm inclined.

[00:17:34] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

It makes sense to do this correction, but I'd like to see if the city could gain a little bump from ‸ changing the zoning that could include additional. Sure. Landscaping. Understood.

[00:17:45] Attribution uncertain

That

[00:17:45] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

was my only reason. We

[00:17:46] Speaker 6 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

can, we can coordinate with

[00:17:47] Speaker 2

the applicant

[00:17:47] Speaker 6

[00:17:47] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice

that. That's

[00:17:48] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:17:48–00:17:52 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:17:52] Attribution uncertain

Make

[00:17:52] Speaker 3 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

sure they're not deficient. I like that.

[00:17:54] Speaker 2

Well.

[00:17:55] Speaker 3

That's fantastic.

[00:17:56] Speaker 2

Hey.

[00:17:56] Speaker 3 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

I like that. We're

[00:17:57] Speaker 2 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:17:56–00:17:58 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:17:58] Speaker 2

Yeah. Right?

[00:18:00] Speaker 3

You

[00:18:01] Speaker 3 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:18:00–00:18:03 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:18:03] Speaker 3

Oh, I don't want to be boring though.

[00:18:07] Speaker 7

Good and bad on the oak tree.

[00:18:10] Speaker 3

So,

[00:18:11] Speaker 3 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:18:10–00:18:13 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:18:13] Speaker 3

With no more questions. We'd like to entertain a motion. On the item. ‸ I'm going to have the board members.

[00:18:21] Speaker 2

Uh, I'll make one. ‸ Go ahead. Um,

[00:18:24] Speaker 2 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:18:23–00:18:24 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:18:25] Speaker 2

that we approve the staff's recommendation. And, and part of that motion would include looking into the landscaping requirements. Once the zoning is changed. To see if it's possible that that could be, uh, also included or considered. Is that okay with the board? All I just need to hear. If there's a support by vote.

[00:18:43] Speaker 4

[00:18:44] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:18:43–00:18:44 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:18:44] Speaker 2

There is. Okay.

[00:18:48] No voice detected

Second.

[00:18:49] Speaker 4

Second. Okay.

[00:18:50] Speaker 2

We have a.

[00:18:52] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

Um, Mr. Greenwood. Yes.

[00:18:53] Attribution uncertain

Could

[00:18:53] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

you restate what, how do you want it added to the motion?

[00:18:57] Speaker 2

As a, as an amendment. If,

[00:19:00] Speaker 2 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:06]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:18:59–00:19:05 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:19:05] Speaker 2

Correct me if I'm wrong. If I did that wrong. Odo

[00:19:07] Speaker 2 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:19:07–00:19:08 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:19:08] Speaker 6

No,

[00:19:08] Attribution uncertain

no.

[00:19:09] Speaker 2 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:19:08–00:19:09 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:19:09] Speaker 2

I'm sorry. ‸ I apologize. Uh, if that is the avenue that we were taking, he was going to suggest bringing it to the, uh, the, the property representatives. If that could be, uh, a possibility. So it would be like an amendment unless the attorney feels that an amendment is not a good avenue to take. So I'm all for advice here. An amendment? Is

[00:19:38] Speaker 2 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:19:38–00:19:39 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:19:39] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

[00:19:41] Speaker 4

A provision to just consider.

[00:19:45] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

Should it be worded differently than just an amendment?

[00:19:50] Speaker 8

Yeah.

[00:19:51] Attribution uncertain

[00:19:51] Speaker 8 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

mean, technically it's not an amendment. It's for ‸ motion.

[00:19:54] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

Right. It's for ‸ motion. But, um, with, um.

[00:19:58] Speaker 8 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

But you're asking for them to apply the tree, the, the, the landscaping requirements. Um, is that what you're asking? ‸ Yes, ma'am.

[00:20:10] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

If they could, would consider, uh, enhancing the property.

[00:20:14] Attribution uncertain

[00:20:14] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

there's a deficiency, as Steve had mentioned. You

[00:20:17] Speaker 3

just want to make sure they're compliant.

[00:20:18] Speaker 4

In the

[00:20:19] Speaker 3

landscaping code,

[00:20:19] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

yes. Yes. Yeah.

[00:20:21] Speaker 2

Yeah.

[00:20:22] Speaker 4

Um.

[00:20:23] Speaker 2

Because

[00:20:23] Speaker 2 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:20:23–00:20:25 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:20:26] No voice detected

[00:20:26] Speaker 2

just don't think it's retroactive.

[00:20:29] Speaker 8 + overlapping voice

Yeah. I

[00:20:30] Speaker 8 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:20:30–00:20:31 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:20:32] Speaker 8 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

mean, that, I think that's the, the, the concern I would have is that they already have an existing site. Um, although I

[00:20:41] Speaker 8 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:20:41–00:20:43 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:20:43] Speaker 8 + overlapping voice

they're planning to make more improvements to landscaping. I'm not sure if the applicant could maybe speak to that.

[00:20:50] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

‸ That's what brought up my question.

[00:20:52] Speaker 8

Yeah.

[00:20:52] Speaker 6 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:20:52–00:20:56 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:20:56] Speaker 6 + overlapping voice

I think as part of the motion, um, for us to coordinate with the applicant on. You know, all the code requirements with emphasis on the landscape code, ensuring there's enough trees.

[00:21:09] Attribution uncertain

And

[00:21:09] Speaker 6

if there's an ability to add more on.

[00:21:12] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

Exactly. So should I present that Steve as an amendment or a consideration for discussion between yourself and them? Because I don't want them to be, um, disenchanted that. Sure. I

[00:21:24] Speaker 6

think it's more of the consideration for the

[00:21:26] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

discussion.

[00:21:27] Attribution uncertain

So instead

[00:21:27] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

of amendment, I'd say a consideration for, uh, overlooking, uh, ‸ the tree ordinance. If there's any deficiencies, how about that? Is

[00:21:35] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:21:35–00:21:38 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:21:39] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

Um, I'll change my motion.

[00:21:41] Speaker 8 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

The motion would be just to recommend a consideration.

[00:21:45] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

Yeah.

[00:21:45] Attribution uncertain

You

[00:21:45] Speaker 3 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

made

[00:21:45] Speaker 3 + 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 · 00:21:45–00:21:49 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:21:47] Speaker 2 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[00:21:47] Speaker 8 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[00:21:48] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[00:21:48] Speaker 8 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

[00:21:49] Speaker 8 + overlapping voice

Um, but it was seconded. So

[00:21:51] Speaker 8 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:21:51–00:21:56 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:21:53] Speaker 2 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

[00:21:56] Speaker 8

It actually belongs to the body as a whole now that it's been seconded. So, ‸ but if there's no objection to you rescinding it, ‸ then you could do that.

[00:22:07] Speaker 2

Okay.

[00:22:07] Speaker 3

Well, I'll wait and see what the board says. Are there any objections from the board members of,

[00:22:12] Speaker 3 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:22:11–00:22:14 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:22:15] Speaker 3

Okay.

[00:22:16] Speaker 3 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:22:15–00:22:16 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:22:16] Speaker 3

No.

[00:22:17] Speaker 2

Okay. So I'll make a motion that this is, uh, to be approved as staff recommended with consideration looked into if there is a tree deficiency or a possibility of enhancing the landscaping per our code. Is that better? Steve? Thank you.

[00:22:35] Attribution uncertain

[00:22:35] Speaker 6

understand the

[00:22:35] Speaker 2

direction. Yes.

[00:22:37] Speaker 4

I second that. Thank you.

[00:22:40] Speaker 3

We have a,

[00:22:41] Attribution uncertain

sir.

[00:22:41] Speaker 3

Um,

[00:22:41] Attribution uncertain

uh,

[00:22:42] Speaker 3

motion and a second on the item. All in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed?

[00:22:50] Speaker 2

Motion carries. And I thank the board for the support. That's a good idea. I think. Thank you.

[00:22:57] Speaker 3

All right. Um, I guess we'll move into B before we get into the tree board or other business. Um, evidently, um, our chairman, uh, resigned last week, moved out of the area. And so he's no longer going to, um, be the chair, which vacates that position. So, um,

[00:23:22] Speaker 3 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:23:21–00:23:26 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:23:30] Speaker 7

I'll make a motion for Mr. Wesley. Part

[00:23:34] Speaker 7 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:23:33–00:23:36 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:23:38] Speaker 1 · Machine re-recognized

I'll

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:23:38–00:23:39 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[00:23:39] Speaker 1

second the motion. I

[00:23:41] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:23:40–00:23:42 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:23:42] Speaker 3 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

[00:23:43] Speaker 3 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:23:42–00:23:43 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:23:44] Speaker 3

Yes,

[00:23:44] Speaker 3 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:23:44–00:23:47 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:23:47] Speaker 7 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

[00:23:50] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

[00:23:50] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:23:50–00:23:51 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:23:51] Speaker 7 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

Yes. Like some other meetings.

[00:23:56] Speaker 2

‸ Especially when we don't have a clock in here.

[00:24:01] Speaker 3 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

We have a motion on the floor and a second. All in favor of the motion.

[00:24:08] Speaker 2

Aye.

[00:24:09] Speaker 3

Aye. Aye. Any opposed? No?

[00:24:13] Speaker 3 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 00:24:12–00:24:35 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:24:16] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:06]

[00:24:25] Speaker 3 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:10]

[00:24:40] Speaker 3 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: flagged by the automatic checks · 00:24:40–00:24:41 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:24:42] Speaker 8 + overlapping voice · Machine re-recognized

I don't think there's any staff

Flag: the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 00:24:42–00:24:43 · gap filled by a machine re-reading (not checked by a person)

[00:24:43] Speaker 8 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:24:43–00:24:44 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:24:46] Speaker 8 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

[00:24:46] Speaker 8 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:24:46–00:24:48 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:24:48] Speaker 8 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

from the planning staff.

[00:24:50] Attribution uncertain

[00:24:50] Speaker 8 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

guess I'll answer on behalf of them. Okay.

[00:24:53] Speaker 3

And any other business from the board members or from staff?

[00:24:58] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice

Yes. All right. I just want to share with the board that the RFPs were submitted for the hotel site. And I highly recommend that on May the 6th, which is a Monday at 5 o'clock in the afternoon, the presentation of those RFPs will be shared with the public. And there might follow a vote or a preference for one of the four. I wanted to make that ‸ been submitted. I just want to make sure the board knew about it. I've

[00:25:30] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:25:30–00:25:34 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:25:33] Speaker 3 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

[00:25:34] Speaker 3

property or the convention center?

[00:25:36] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

It's going to be for the hotel site. I

[00:25:38] Speaker 3 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:25:38–00:25:39 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:25:40] Speaker 2

Oh, here.

[00:25:41] Speaker 3 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

I'm

[00:25:41] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

sorry. City Hall? Yeah. And it's going to be the CRA board meeting specifically. And it's going to be May the 6th on a Monday. May

[00:25:52] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:25:51–00:25:57 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:25:57] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice

They

[00:25:57] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:25:57–00:25:58 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:25:58] No voice detected

Okay.

[00:25:59] Speaker 4

[00:25:59] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:25:59–00:26:00 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:26:00] Speaker 2

Yes, ma'am.

[00:26:03] Speaker 4

Cool.

[00:26:05] Speaker 2

And that's it that I have to share. I don't see any oak trees being cut down. Any other business? ‸ Marcus?

[00:26:20] Speaker 3

Entertain a motion to adjourn? So

[00:26:22] Speaker 3 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:06]

Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output; numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:26:21–00:27:02 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:26:29] No voice detected · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[00:26:30] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

[00:26:31] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[00:26:31] No voice detected · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:31]

[00:27:02] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[00:27:02] No voice detected · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

[00:27:02] No voice detected

you.

Transcript revision built 2026-10-27T12:06:12 · 1,924 ordinary words, 637 in suspect passages, 39 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.