Clinton Patrick and our pledge will be by Deputy Mayor Patricia Weeks and then we will proceed to everyone please stand for invocation.
Please ma'am please prove to me let me secure my cell phone and what the floor is yours. >> Thank you sir. Father God we come before you this evening thanking you Lord God for how you bless us to come together
for such a time as this to handle city business. God, we thank you for how you said in your word, Lord God, that you would bless those who keep your commandments, Lord God. You said in your word that we will be blessed in the city, blessed in the
field, blessed when we come, and blessed when we go, Lord God. So, I continue to speak blessings upon the city of Coco, Lord God. I continue to speak peace among the residents and business owners of the city of Koko. God, as we handle
city business tonight, I pray, Lord God, that you would continue to lead us, lead our thoughts, lead our minds, lead our words, that everything would be done pleasing in your sight. And we thank you and praise you for it in Jesus name. Amen.
To the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all. >> Wake up. My goodness.
>> One more like to say happy I know it's one day post Columbus Day. Thank you, sir. >> Post Columbus Day, but um happy Columbus Day. It was a national holiday. We have the cards. Got the cards.
Get this. >> Madam clerk, may we do roll call, please? Ma'am. >> Yes, Mayor. >> Mayor Blake. >> Present. Ma'am. >> Deputy Mayor Weekes. >> Here. >> Council member Goins >> here. >> Council member Hearn >> here.
>> Council member CS. City attorney Gargani >> here. >> And city manager Whitten. >> Thank you. Thank you, Madame Clerk. Uh, we will proceed forward with tonight's agenda. Moving on to item number two-1. Chair
would like to approve the agenda with an amendment added to council business. Item number 7-2, approval to apply for fiscical year 25 communitybased violence intervention and prevention initiative grant
through the department of justice and authorization of the city manager to sign and approve all documents and budget related items. And we will find through the um information portion of it that uh
potentially up to a couple of million of dollars. Several I'm happy to say potentially speaking. So we'll let the city manager elaborate on that when that time comes. And I need a second. >> Second. >> Got a second on the floor by Deputy
Mayor Weeks. Chair's going to call the question. All in favor by saying I. >> I. >> Any nays? Eyes have it. unanimously. Proceeding on to item number 2-2, regular meeting of August the 26, 2025. What are the wishes of council?
>> Move to approve. >> Got a motion on the floor by deputy mayor weeks. >> Second by the chair. Chair is going to call the question. All in favor saying I. >> I. >> Any nays? Eyes have it unanimously. Proceeding forward to awards and
presentations. We would like to acknowledge one of our very own above and beyond recognition for the city of Cocoa Utility Field Service representative Robert Bard. Am I saying that correctly?
Uh the honorable yours truly Mr. Longhorn Stette will do a presentation as well. Will council please join us out front and city manager and city attorney. Please ma'am, please sir. Come on, Robert.
This is for you. >> Come on down. It's the price is right. >> What are you giving away? >> Thank you very much. I guess stand beside me. I'm not sure what the what the protocol is. >> Thank you, mayor, council members. guest
here in attendance today. It's my distinct honor and privilege to recognize one of our our great city of Cocoa employees, Robert Revard. He's a utility field service representative in or about July 11th, 2025. Uh Mr. Revard
was responding to a work order at one of our residents that lives in Vieier, Mrs. Fay. Mrs. Fay had a uh a meter uh issue that he loo took a look at and realized that there may be a leak present. He looked outside to check for leaks. Uh realized it wasn't outside. He assisted
her in getting in contact with her homeowners association and directed them and give them information about what he saw. They were able to find and locate the link for this uh this elderly lady and save her. Led to a lot of cost savings for her and uh so much so that
she thought it worthwhile to write a letter recognizing his efforts. And so on behalf of the city and the mayor, council, and staff, we want to recognize this above and beyond service recognition with with this certificate. [Applause]
>> Wonderful City of Coco above and beyond recognition coin to commemorate this event. And I believe the city manager may have something else he wants to bestow upon you at this time. What's up? >> So, Robert Robert, you don't you don't look like you eat as much as I do, but
just as a just as a token of our appreciation, uh want to give you this gift card to Texas Roadhouse and and say we really do appreciate you going abroad and beyond. >> Thank you. Any anything you want to say or >> I'm just doing my job.
>> Okay. >> Okay. Uh may I say something real quick? No, I don't need a mic. Just want to give you the right handshake of fellowship and commitment and dedication to the great city of sir. We are proud of you and we stand with you. Job well
done my good and faithful sir. And I'm sure the rest of the council will shake your hand too. You make us proud. team call, [Applause] two missing.
folks over here. >> Yes, sir. >> Good job, brother. Anything [Applause] else? All right. And proceeding forward to delegations.
I have one card under delegations and that card belongs to the honorable affectionately known as George Junior Brown. Um, is it Well,
okay. We're going to give you No, no. We'll put you on the public hearing. That's what I have. I apologize. I thought you were on the delegation. >> Okay. Right on, young man. and it's a pleasure to see you having your face in the place with the human race, sir.
Let's give George Brown a round of applause. He has 40 plus years with the city of Cocoa on the code board. >> Okay, seeing none, we have no delegation cards. We will proceed forward with the consent agenda item. What are the wishes of
council? >> Move to approve. >> Second. >> Okay, we have a motion on the floor by Deputy Mayor Weeks and a second by Councilman Goings. Just going to call the question. All in favor saying I. >> I. >> Any nays? Eyes have it unanimously.
Okay, we will proceed forward to public hearing. Item number 6-1 is second reading for ordinance number 11, 2025, sidewalk cafe permit. This is a
no-brainer. Um, this was approved by us in September 20 uh 23rd, 2025. And I do support this. But I will turn this over to our
illustrious industrious super attorney for the state of Florida, but he works in Coco. Yours truly, Mr. Gargani. Sir. >> Okay. Mayor, ordinance um number 11, 2025, an ordinance of the city of Coco,
Florida, amending Chapter 14, Offenses and Miscellaneous Provisions, Article 3, Sidewalk Cafe, Section 14-68, permit fees to specify that an annual permit fee for sidewalk cafes shall be established via resolution of the city council providing for codification,
conflict, severability, and an effective date, public hearing item. And there haven't been any changes since the first reading as you indicated, mayor. very simple change. Uh there's a hard code $25 fee related to sidewalk cafes. Ordinance proposes to remove the hard
coding of that fee and in the future those fees would be adopted by resolution of the city council. Mayor, >> thank you very much. Equini U. Mrs. Webster, ma'am, I think you're next in line, please. >> Of course. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um um
city attorney Gargani is correct. There were no changes since the last reading of the ordinance. So, um it's it's good to go with no changes. >> Okay. Do we have any questions for either Mrs. Webster or the Esquire Gargani or the city at uh manager?
Seeing none, chair like to close this portion to council and open to the public. If you would like to elaborate on this particular item, please come for state your name, submit a card, and you have three minutes to expound on this particular ordinance number 11-25.
Second and final reading for the sidewalk cafe permit fees. Going once, going twice. Chair like to close this portion to the public and return to the council. What are the wishes of council? >> Move to approve. >> Second. >> We got a motion on the floor by Deputy
Mayor Weekes and a second by Councilman Hearn. Chair's going to call the question. All in favor saying I. >> I. Mr. Jim Brown had his hand. >> Oh, okay. I didn't see it. I'm sorry. Mr. Brown, come to the podium. a little slow.
>> Well, this stay right there. We can bring you that microphone. >> I'm gonna make something else. >> Okay, man. >> Thanks. Thank you, sir. >> Let me just blow my nose. When you get old, you got all this stuff.
>> Yes. >> No, I'm I'm I'm fine. >> Okay. >> Thank you. Thank you. >> Okay. >> I always cause such a commotion. Is this baby on? >> Just as sure as you. >> Okay. Stop trying to bend the neck off
it. Uh my name is George L. Brown Jr. I live at 5557 West King Street for over 50 years. Still there. Uh, mayor, I would like to know if I
could have five minutes, please, if you would grant that to me because I got kind of a story I want. >> The sidewalk permit fee. Sir, yours is different now. The card that you submitted. This is not the This is different from
what you submitted to me as a card. >> What's different? >> He might be waiting for U. >> Yeah, he's waiting on three. >> Okay. >> Yes. This is separate from that. It's a separate entity alto together. What we're discussing right now, Mr. Brown,
is the sidewalk permit fee. >> Oh, I thought you were talking about changing the zoning there. >> Not yet. No, sir. >> Not tonight. >> Yes. >> Yes, it's tonight, my friend. >> Tonight I can come up again. >> Yes, sir. >> Don't forget. >> Uh Dick Bankhead will not allow me to
forget. Yes, sir. >> Thank you, Mayor Mike. >> Sir, count it all joy. >> All right. We have we have a motion on the floor by Deputy Mayor Weekes and a second by Councilman Hearn. Chair's going to call the question. All in favor by saying I. >> I.
>> Any nays? Eyes have it unanimously. Proceeding on the item number 6-2. First reading of ordinance number 10-2025 forest future land use map amendment October 22nd, 1985. The ordinance 2585
creation of a core commercial zoning district April 22nd 1997 ordinance number 9-97 zoning of reszone of forest 228 Forest Avenue to CC to RP October
the 1st the planning and zoning board unanimously voted and recommended that the city council approve future land use map amendment ordinance number 10 2025. Five. Okay. Esquire Gargani. Sir. >> Yeah. This is um a comprehensive plan
amendment first reading in a legislative matter. An ordinance number 10-2025. An ordinance of the city council of the city of Koko Bavar County, Florida relating to comprehensive planning amending the future land use map for eight parcels of real property within the city of Coco totaling 1.9 acres more
or less and generally located along Forest Avenue south of Malberry Street and north of Peach Street in Cocoa, Florida. as more particularly depicted and legally described on exhibit A attached here too. Amending the future land use map designation of said parcels
from high density residential to mixed use providing for the repeal of prior inconsistent ordinances and resolutions severability incorporation into the comprehensive plan and an effective date and legal status of the plan amendment. Again, this is uh the first reading of this ordinance.
>> Thank you, sir. >> Thank you very much, Esquire Gargani. Um, this is a no-brainer, but I will turn this over to uh, Mrs. Webster, and I think members from the neighborhood that this would impact. We're in support
of this at the think at the PNZ board, but you can rectify me. I mean, correct me, ma'am, if um, if you like, if I made a mistake. The floor is yours, Mrs. Webster. >> Thank you, mayor, and council members and and city attorney. Yes, this is uh
ordinance 1020 10 20225 a future land use map amendment for some uh parcels along Forest Avenue also in Uptown Cocoa Village and this is the first reading as was mentioned. So, so what we're requesting is uh an official amendment
of the future land use map which is more of a housekeeping item, a map cleanup that we uh would do periodically. Um and it's for a designation for these eight parcels um totaling approximately 1.9 acres and uh as city attorney described
runs along Forest Avenue on the east side of Forest Avenue between Peach Tree Street and Malberry Street. And so um and just also these parcels as I mentioned are located in the uptown subd district of the waterfront overlay district in Cocoa Village. And just a
reminder uh about the relationship between future land use and zoning is that future land use categories are outlined in the comp plan which guides the long-term growth of the city and the zoning code defines districts in each of those categories and establishes
regulations that enable development. And all properties in the city of Coco are assigned a future land use category and a compatible enabling underlying zoning. When these are in conflict with each other, there are barriers to development. With resolution, there will
be guidelines to follow in creating opportunity for improvement and redevelopment. Tonight, we are proposing a future land use map amendment. And so, uh, the subject properties, they were zoned CC, which is core commercial,
back in 1985 when the zoning district was created as part of the Koko uh, redevelopment agency plan. And uh then in 1997 just one of these selected parcels was
reszoned to RP and that was a uh owner initiated request to RP. And that at the bottom of the of your screen is just a little screenshot of the map from 1985 showing that it was CC at that time.
And so um so the current future land use of these properties is highdensity residential which is in conflict with the current zoning of CC and residential professional. And so if one one option to rectify this was to um you know
reszone uh to make it consistent with highdensity residential, but that would require a downzoning which would really limit the future um development for uh this area. And so we're proposing to change the
future land use to mixed use which uh is compatible with core commercial and residential professional zoning and um and just also to illustrate that the surrounding uh future land use is also mixed use. So this is very compatible
with what is already there. And in the in the uh figure one of the future land use category table, you can see that CC and RP are already um applicable zoning districts in mixed use.
And just an overview of what's already there just to kind of show compatibility with the surrounding area. You have um a professional office, some vacant land, a few vacant properties. Um, you have a vacant commercial building, a vacant parking lot associated with that
commercial building. Uh, you have a few residential properties that are rentals, and then of course you have the Pillar of Hope Academy. And as you can see, the variety, it really is a true mixeduse kind of quarter area uh there where you have a just a variety of things between the library being industrial uh excuse
me, institutional zoning and then you have um some commercial and retail uh and multif family. So just a variety of um truly mixed use uh uses. And so part of our analysis was that uh
the um the staff report covered the analysis in chapter 15 um article 2 sections 1510 and 11 for compliance with the comp plan to determine the impacts to budget and economy levels of service, environmental impact, neighborhood
compatibility and housing accessibility. And the determination was just that the future land use change will not negatively or adversely impact the environment, neighborhood compatibility or housing accessibility. It will not be more restrictive. It will in fact enable
the existing allowed uses including um the capacity for 25 dwelling units per acre and a potential five dwelling units per acre bonus. And it resolves the current restriction of the conflict that it's currently currently under. and there would be minimal impact on levels
of service. Uh the existing character is not expected to significantly change. And we also of course do a an analysis with the consist consistency of the definitions in the comp plan
where um with goal 1.1 um this change is u to maximize the city's potential as a growth center while protecting the public health safety and welfare and appearance of the village. and um under the definition of mixed use which is mixture of residential, commercial,
office, recreational, institutional uses along the major transportation corridor. So we feel that this is um very in line and compatible and consistent with the current comprehensive plan regarding mixed use and it does fit in with the characteristics of mis mixed use which
are transitional areas between high and low intensity uses and areas adjacent to those major corridors like 520 US1 compact walkable environment uh unified architectural streetscape themes and then just also as a reminder with it
being in the waterfront overlay district. It would also be subject to the um architectural guidelines for for the waterfront overlay. And so, as mayor stated, um one of the prior actions was on October 1st, planning and zoning
board voted unanimously to recommend that city council approve this future land use map amendment. So staff requests that the city council does approve the first reading of ordinance 10 20225. The city initiated ordinance amending the future land use map for the subject properties from highdensity
residential to mixed use. And as um to um back up what the mayor uh mentioned before, there was a few inquiries from the property owners and um uh in adjoining properties. Uh but it was just kind of clarification on what the issue
was about. There were no concerns after I provided clarifications. There were no objections at the planning and zoning meeting. So, um, if you have any questions, I'd be happy to answer. >> Do we have any questions? >> Uh, Deputy Mayor Weekes.
>> Um, so you had no none of the, uh, home I mean property owners at all that was against this. And I think I read in here that, uh, it will not make anything that's already there non-conforming. Correct. it it will not create any new non-conforming uses.
>> Are there non-conforming there now? >> Only in parcel size u and that was something that happened back in the 80s. Um but like I said they they've been existing as they are legally for for a long time.
>> So there won't be any new non-conforming issues created by the by the future land use change. >> How will affect the ones that are already non-conforming? You're saying by lot size. How will that affect >> that? It's it's not going to change anything as far as uh we'll have to we
would have to take a look at any new development especially if it was a residential project to see if the existing lot configurations or the the minimum maximum lot dimensions would accommodate um but usewise so we're looking at you
know how are the uses affected um the uses will be able to continue as they are so it really enables what's already there and will allow that to continue. >> I just want to make sure if the folks want to sell that they will be able to, you know, it'll be clear what can be
done on that property. >> Yes. Yes. And like I said, fixing the the fixing the conflict will allow, you know, the sale of the property or future development to move forward, whereas with the conflict, it would not. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, ma'am. Any other questions
for Mrs. Webster? Seeing none, chair, would like to close this portion to council open to the public. Please come forward and state your name. You have three minutes to expound on this first reading of ordinance number 10-205
of town forest future land use map amendment. Going once. Going twice. Sure. Like to close this portion to the public and return it to council. What are the wishes of council? >> Move to approve. Got a motion on the
floor by Deputy Mayor Weeks, second by Councilman Hearn. Chair's going to call the question. All in favor saying I. >> I. >> Eyes have it unanimously. Okay, we have a multitude of cards.
>> Thank you, council. >> Someone call my name. >> I just said thank you so much. >> Oh, yes, ma'am. Okay. You're welcome. Thank you. Okay, we're moving on to item number 6-3.
>> Can they hear us? >> Yeah. >> Yes. >> I will not I will not turn you in to Santa Claus. >> You're okay. Gentlemen, look at the door. That's all. Look at the door.
>> All right, mayor. I'm ready. Thank you. >> Yes, ma'am. Item number 6-3, first reading of ordinance number 02-2025, the LDR amendment creating four corners overlay district.
on this particular item. Consideration of a land development code text and map amendment appendix A, article number 11, code ordinances of the city of Cocoa, creating section 23, four corners overlay district,
establishing permitted special exception and prohibited uses providing for performance standards including setbacks parking landscape signage requirements. Establishing a building design standards, establishing the boundaries
of the four corners overlay. Okay, this is our first reading. And as you all know, the last time we met, we um postponed this until today. So, Mr. Anthony Gargani.
Sir. So this is a first reading of this proposed land development regulation ordinance 02-2025 an ordinance of the city council of the city of Koko Boulevard County Florida amending appendix a zoning article 11 of
the code of of the city of Koko creating and adopting the four corners overlay district providing for its purpose and applicability established establishing permitted special exception and prohibited uses providing for performance standards including setback
facts, parking, landscaping, and signage requirements. Establishing building design standards, establishing the boundaries of the four corner overlay district, particularly depicted and described on exhibit A and B attached here too, providing for the repeal of
prior inconsistent ordinances and resolutions incorporation into the code, severability, and an effective date. Again, this is first reading of this uh proposed ordinance and um the city's consultant will have a detailed presentation. Mayor,
>> thank you. As Gargani, sir, >> proceed. Thank you. >> Yes, ma'am. The floor is yours. >> Uh good evening. Alexis Crespbow. I'm vice president of planning with RVI. It's a pleasure to be before you again. Um, I've got a presentation just to walk you through what is, as um was read into
the record, an amendment to your land development code to establish an overlay district for four corners. Um, and this is intended to primarily uh bring the zoning of the of these properties into compliance with the comprehensive plan
uh with the mixeduse future land use category as well as establish some uh sight specific performance standards meaning setbacks landscaping and treat this area differently as it is a key gateway um to Cocoa Village within the
city. So this is again sight specific. will only apply to the area being defined as the four corners. There's a map in your package and I'll have that on the next slide, but we're generally talking about the key intersection of US Highway 1 and State Road 520 right in between Diamond Square and Coco CRAAS
and again really the gateway to downtown Coco. This area is within your mixeduse future land use category. And the inconsistency we're trying to correct through this amendment is it's currently zoned commercial parkway. Um, and the allowable uses, the form of development
within the CP zoning district is not compliant with the underlying future land use of mixed use. Uh, this is the uh area hatch that would be subject to this overlay district. Uh, I'm going to click that and show you
that north of St. John Street. We did include this parcel initially and based upon input received at planning and zoning board discussing property owners and just direction um uh from the city, we have removed that parcel and so now it's the those areas just right on the
intersection that are that are hatched. So, as I noted, this is kind of sandwiched in between two uh community redevelopment areas. These are areas you're really focusing on as a city to beautify um to allow for quality redevelopment that elevates uh the city and the aesthetics of these areas,
creates economic vitality, better quality housing, all of those things um that you want to see out of your Cas. So, we really see this as a vital intersection to achieving those goals. Um and it's also the entrance to your downtown. Um and we embarked upon a
visioning process which um you can see highlighted in the yellow what we landed on as the four corners overlay district is shown in red on this slide. So it's a bridge but when we went through the visioning exercise that involved community outreach workshops we did
discuss a larger corridor but then bringing this forward tonight we're just looking at the that key intersection. But I want to submit that this area in in its entirety shown in the the yellow dash line was explored um relating to these standards.
So what what is the issue? Uh city adopted the mixed use future land use category in 2010. Um this was a unique uh future land use category introduced into the code. It was intended to balance uh vehicle travel, the need to
move vehicles safely around the city, but also acknowledge pedestrian bicyclists. Walkability is also important, especially as you transition from the uh west side of the city where you're near the I95 interchange. As you
transition to your downtown, you want to have a changing form along that corridor to invite uh pedestrians, walkability, uh encourage a mix of uses and not have solely auto oriented type uses that uh are going to occur in your commercial parkway just based on the uses allowed
in that zoning district as well as the development standards associated with it. And you can see from this image uh again very autooriented in terms of um lack of of streetscape uh orientation of parking lots interfacing with the street
um and travel lanes and the placement of these buildings. So in 2023 uh it was identified by staff that the CP uh district uh is not a consistent or an implementing zoning district for this future land use
category. So this is a a chart in your comprehensive plan and the future land use element was this was brought to you a few meetings ago when we talked about the earbased amendments and this chart says these are our future land use categories and these are the zoning districts that are allowed in by each
category and you can see it was determined and and found that um this chart was not uh did not include CP when it when mixed use was added in 2010. And they really are conflicting ideas as noted where commercial parkway again
much more autooriented in its intent um whereas the mixed use was trying to encourage a more urban form to allow transition to downtown. So to approach this issue uh we started uh community outreach in in late spring of last year and through the summer and
that would be in 2024. So we have been at this a while. Um this is a image I believe many of you were at this meeting. Um in June that's Steve Nodto who was formerly with RVI and and led the the visioning effort. So, in addition to city kickoff meetings, we uh
underwent a a large and well- attended community workshop that was also streamed online and we met with um each both of the CRAAS um and ultimately came to you all in August of last year um and walked through uh this similar elements
of this presentation and noted the uh out input we got through that community outreach um effort and then we were directed by this council to embark upon the land development code amendments to implement the vision of those meetings.
And so we've been working since then to prepare these amendments. Um we um have met with with property owners. We've been to your planning and zoning board and we're here before you. Um again, this would allow for first reading of this and then just transmitt of the comprehensive plan amendment which is
the next item on your agenda. Um this is not a final adoption hearing. So, in terms of of that outreach, just a couple of items to note. Um, it was very well noticed due to the good work by your city staff. This was noticed via
mail in the online in the city newsletters and we did have more than a hundred people in person and then um over two dozen online at that meeting. Since then, we met uh on August 5th of
2024 with the Coco CRA, then after with city council, and then lastly with the Diamond Square on August 19th and got relatively consistent input on the types of uses that the city would like to see redeveloped over time within this intersection. And so some of the imagery we wanted to
introduce through that visioning was how when you have arterial roadways, these are these are large streets. You're going to again have to accommodate vehicles. So, it's certainly a balancing act here, but how can we locate buildings, seating areas, landscaping,
parking so that we are uh again balancing the ability of the pedestrian to use the space for someone to feel comfortable enjoying a coffee on on the uh outdoor seating there, even though they are very close to an arterial roadway. And we think through through
good urban design standards, um this can be achieved. And this is just an example um on SR50 in Orlando. And you can see uh there's a knee wall to shield headlights and and parking areas. There's uh streetscape plantings
including hedge row as well as trees to make the the walking environment more shaded and enjoyable as well as aesthetically pleasing. And then that's also screening the buildings so that you're not just confronted again with with parking and the building itself, but you're seeing a mix of vegetation
along with that uh architecture. And so all these are are tools we can use in our land development codes to have buildings oriented in a way where they are more what we call pedestrian scale where it's more enjoyable for the pedestrian user.
Also of note here, we we know we have chains. We're going to have retail chains like a Starbucks and and other things like that that want to come to town. We have to find a way to accommodate them. And you if you've traveled throughout the United States of America, you've gone to some places and you've seen you can see the same
Starbucks and it looks terrible and then you go one town over and you're like, "This Starbucks looks great." And it's a function of the land development code. The land development code is saying you need a few more trees in there. You need to um screen your drive-thru so you don't see just cars queuing up in the
front. you need to have safe access for pedestrians to get in off the sidewalk, through the parking lot, um, etc. So, it really is a function that starts in this room where you're uh, uh, providing standards that are going to have outcomes that are, uh, attractive.
And so, we just did some imagery using 3D uh, rendering technology. And just if you pull the building to the front, if you have different architectural standards and elements, you see here, this is brick facades mixed in with stucco and uh undelating roof lines and
and uh just building standards as well as through the landscaping, the placement of the parking behind the building, you you get a much better result um in terms of again focusing that gateway to the downtown. We did this on several corners of of how
uh that would look uh from a functional standpoint. And then lastly, the corner with the church also showing you can fit sizable buildings, but the the impact of of good building design, landscaping, and building placement is is quite
impactful. So getting into the meat of the the code change, uh we are proposing that we modify this table to introduce CP. Currently CP is not an implementing district. So it's just the way it sits today on the zoning map. It's inconsistent with your comprehensive
plan. So we would allow CP to be consistent but subject to these overlay standards that I'll walk you through. So first of all, applicability wise, it would only apply to these parcels that are hatched. there was a larger area um addressed through the visioning but this
is what we're bringing forward as the core area that uh should be addressed through the amendment. We also uh proposed minor and major redevelopment thresholds. So if you're doing small small changes to an existing building, you don't need to come into compliance
with the entirety of this code. We do not want to create a situation where people cannot improve their properties um in a in a manner to maintain value or make repairs. So we worked on that and we did start off with with different thresholds and through input of the
property owners we did modify those thresholds to try to be more flexible for properties that are not compliant today with this code and do not want to have to come up to compliance immediately upon adoption. So I'll walk you through that. So minor developments um would would
trigger only certain requirements of this code uh to come into place. So a minor development or redevelopment would include the change of use or or those projects that require a minor site plan if you're increasing expanding an existing building by 30% or more but
less than 50%. Or if you're doing combination of renovation, expansion, again, you can go up to 30%, you can you can expand your building 29% and not comply with any of this code. Once you hit 30%, you're going to be pulled into some minor
development requirements. Then anything over 50 or above is where you're going to come into fully complying with the code. So, if you go in to renovate or expand your building by more than 50%, that's where um you would need to come into compliance. Everything other than that will have limited standards being
applied to them. And at one point we started this with with recommending 15%. If you're going to expand buildings by more than 15% you should come into compliance with the minor elements of this ordinance. However, uh the property owners felt that was ownorous and would limit in
what they could do with their property. So we did increase that to 30%. Um so giving them flexibility to enlarge buildings. So, what would a minor development have to comply with? Again, um you can expand up to 29% without even triggering this,
but if you do go up to 30% of expansion, you would have to install a 10-ft streetcape buffer. So, you're going to put trees along the sidewalk um to to create shade and make a more walkable environment. You would bring your signage up to code. You would ensure
that you have a pedestrian sidewalk to get you from the roadway into the building. So that could be through pavers or just a sidewalk through the the parking lot or a direct entry to the door. And then visual screen and sight design elements. So that those are
fairly minor in nature. These are these could be resolved by having a couple of planters with trees in them near the front decorative planters, a fountain feature, um something to create some visual interest in the site. If you're going over the 50% that's where you
would need to come into compliance with uses um with your building placement being redeveloped etc. So to this is this is not uh easy stuff to digest. It's I'm throwing numbers at
you and um it it is hard to wrap your arms around. So, I want to just kind of frame it up with building expansions and renovations of up to 30% of the building floor area may occur without having to comply with any aspects of this overlay.
So, if you have a non-conforming use, um there's no gas station, but let's say there was a gas station within four corners, that's now not a permitted use, you can continue that use in perpetuity if you're not making any changes to it.
you can enlarge that gas station up to 29% and continue that use even though this ordinance says no more gas stations. So you're you're vested, you're grandfathered up to that 30% threshold for your use. So we're not saying anyone needs to stop their business tomorrow. We're saying please
continue. You can even make improvements to it beyond what the code allows. So um non-conforming uses can continue indefinitely as long as the building renovation or expansion is less than 30%. And something um city attorney Ike noted to me when we were going through
this is this is actually more flexible than your code. The code says if it's a non-conforming use, you cannot expand it at all. It stays exactly as it is. And then uh if you want to do anything to it, you need to redevelop it to the code. And so um this minor threshold is
actually it's if you look at it this way, it's looking it's it's allowing for expansions to occur of these non-conforming uses. And then ordinary repairs. This, we talked about this at length at the last P&Z was, well, what if I need to put in
a new AC? What if I need to paint my building? What if I need to do some stucco repairs to it? You're you're going to force me out of business. Your code actually, it's one of the few codes I've seen this actually covers explicitly, you can do ordinary repairs
to keep your building in good shape without triggering any of these thresholds. So, um, your non-conforming chapter covers that, uh, very well for existing business owners. Okay. So, and looking at uses, I think the the a lot of what you're going to
hear this evening is kind of disagreement on the uses. Um, we we did follow the direction of the visioning. We did follow the direction when we came before you last summer of what types of uses we wanted to see. Neighborhood serving, retail, entertainment type uses. We included craft breweries. We
allowed churches to be allowed by right, which is currently not permitted. Uh food truck parks, just items that will add some interest to this area and and get people out maybe enjoying outdoor seating, etc. Uh we did eliminate
certain uses at the direction of council and that was really limited to the package store and gas stations. Those are currently permitted in CP and we're recommending that they do not be allowed or they're proposed to be prohibited uses. So based on if you look at CP in
the code today and what we're proposing, gas station and package store go from being permitted to not permitted. New and used vehicle sales is currently a special exception and it's being moved over to not permitted. So those are the
three big changes in terms of use. The other uses that we were discussing with property owners are not permitted today in CP and we're not proposing they be added to CP through this ordinance as it's kind of going away from the intent we're getting. But some of those uses
discussed was car wash, auto repair, um self storage. Those are not permitted today and uh we would submit that those would be conflicting with the intent of implementing your mixed use future land use category. In addition to we talked a lot about
uses and triggering how to come into conformance with this, the rest of the ordinance is just really looking at design and and the visual aesthetics of these sites and proposing some um what we'll tell you are more flexible development standards than exist today
in CP zoning. So we are reducing setbacks to get those buildings closer to the street. We want to have space for the landscape buffering, sidewalks, etc. But um we are actually reducing setbacks which creates more buildable area on these sites. You're actually able to build a larger building. Uh we're
proposing increases to building heights because again we're trying to convert this area to more of an urban form as you enter Cocoa Village and so allowing additional height allowances. Again, you can get more building area on these sites. Uh we're proposing a landscaping
along the streets um to screen the buildings as well as create the the walkable environment. incorporation of some minimal sight in sight elements such as the fountains or planters and then screening of drive-throughs so that you can't see the the queuing lanes from
the roadways, but those would could be screened on the sides or rear of the building. We're also proposing some minimal or minimum architectural standards. We did include a range of architectural styles. So, we know Coco is not just one
thing. There's lots of different architectural styles historically in the city and we think there's a place for all those. We're just proposing some minimum standards to ensure that the buildings have uh we'll call them we'll call it gingerbread but some
articulation along the roof lines, shutters, um decorative roof that go along with the vernacular being proposed. So that if you want to do a Spanish style building or Mediterranean, you must include at least six elements so that the building actually embodies
that architectural style instead of looking like kind of uh minimal or or cookie cutter type uh style there. And so this is imagery of old Florida, Mediterranean, we've got modern and then traditional/colonial are the different architectural
offerings. We submit that this is entirely consistent with your comprehensive plan. This is again introducing a zoning district that will support um and be compliant with your the underlying mixed use land use category that's been in place for 15 years on these properties.
You have many policies throughout the plan that states uh the zoning and land development code should be consistent with the comprehensive plan. We also think this aligns well with your policies for um attractive development, creating a sense of place in Coco and
and allowing for enhanced aesthetics throughout the city. So to kind of to close up, uh this does take time to redevelopment takes takes time and vision and it takes cooperation.
We have had FDOT at our workshops uh last year. We know that in or order order for this to work, we also need to work on enhancing this roadway and FDOT and the leadership in place there has gone through various districts to work
on multimodal roadways and retrofitting some of some of these roadways that were built strictly for automobiles and trying to get get landscaping in place, better sidewalk separation from the pedestrian the roadway so that we can really affectuate um the land use pattern we're looking at here. So we
undoubtedly this is going to require cooperation with FDOT but what the city can control is the land use form um the types of uses that go along this corridor. So we think this is a very important first step and uh allowing for quality redevelopment of the overlay. We
do submit to you that this is balanced with the property owner's interests and allowing their uses to continue again in perpetuity and even be expanded upon without coming into compliance um until such time as they expand uh to that 30%
mark. So with that, I'm happy to answer any questions. >> First of all, um Mrs. Alexis Crespo, I want to say thank you very much and forgive me for not introducing you, ma'am. My apologies.
Gentlemen, no ma'am. No, ma'am. Proud to be from the great city of Cocoa and from Florida. So, I apologize. Second thing, I want to acknowledge that the PNZ unanimously approved this September the
10th, 2025. They approved this together. Um and I was pleased because I was at that meeting in conjunction with the individuals also at the in the audience.
Um my thing is you mentioned and this is we're going to be dealing with Senate Bill 180 which you all know that's clearly is a a a issue dealing with state legislators. Yes, it's been approved, but they are challenging this
and contesting this. Now, this may not be applicable to something, but I would like to get some direction. You mentioned um about package stores, ma'am, liquor stores. I know dare on the four corners not
permissible but there was an episode right there on Fisk Boulevard and 520 where they tried to bring in a package store as well. Does that fall under the opaces of Senate Bill 180 or it does
not? Or or that's a question that maybe the city attorney or or or or either one of the city attorney or the city manager can answer. >> I mean, I think mayor, you're referring to another ordinance that's not related
to this particular ordinance for the four corners. >> Okay. >> So, I mean, as you know, Senate Bill 180 is is being challenged. Um, and there are a lot of uh specific points of those challenges. So, you know, I I think tonight's focus is on the the four corners ordinance, please.
>> Okay. And I thank you very much for the clarification, but I was just want to make sure uh Senate Bill 180 didn't have any influence on it. That's all. Okay. Um, Deputy Mayor Weeks, >> I just wanted to say I've got questions, but I'd like to me personally would like
to hear from the audience before I >> I get Yeah. Okay. All right. Seeing any other questions for either city manager, city attorney, or Mrs. Crespo? Seeing none,
sure like to close this portion to council and open to the public. And I do have my cards in order. Um, and I'm asking that if I if you would grant me an exception so that we can get Mr. George Brown in. I think we all have a
compassionate heart and a heart for uh empathy and empathetic toward Mr. Brown. >> Just bring him the mic if you don't mind, Chief. Now, >> okay. >> Oh, well, >> you can be seating or standing. It
doesn't matter. Sitting. >> You're a gentleman in a scrawler. >> Right back at you, sir. Huh? Well, I already introduced myself. >> Yes, sir. >> Uh, I just Can I get five minutes from you?
>> Speak, Mr. Brown. >> Here's the thing. I want to tell you my little story. It's kind of a sad story, >> but I got to tell it to you. I had an accident. My old car. A lot of you folks
know my old wagon I drove around in. I crashed it one night down on US1. Hit the back of a car. Stop quick. Start the rain. Slide. Old cars don't handle.
So out of that, my seat belt let me slide under the dashboard. I was only going 35 miles an hour. I don't go. But I slid under the dash. Got hung up there. I didn't break one leg. I broke two legs
and I'm healing, but I'm not the same. I'm 82 years old and as you get older, it's tough. I love where I live. I've had my business there for years. Most of you folks go by it all the time. And I
love the area. I've seen a lot a lot of improvement. A lot. I thank the city for it. I thank our chief a lot too and our fire. But uh anyways, I had that accident. I
spent a month in five hospitals. I finally got home, but I can't I can't carry I I can hardly pick up a loaf of bread for God's sake. I lost all my weight and muscles and all. So
to get what I'm getting at. >> Yes, sir. Um, I got to sell my property. I put money in property nobody else wanted at the time. But that was my retirement. When you work for yourself, you don't put a
lot of money away. So, I bought the land and now I got to sell it. And I'll tell you why I got to sell it. I got to sell it before I die. First of all, I would like to have my sister and me are the only ones left in my family. I got some
beautiful friends which you're going to get a good portion of it, but I got charities that I would love to give to while I'm alive and present it. I I got quite a bit of money in that property and all and plus where I live. So, it's
important to me to see if what you folks are going to do about um making it so I have a code so when I get somebody in there, they know if they can put it in. As you probably know, I
had it sold. I had that sold for a lot of money and they said no u car washes. It was a beauty. So anyways, that put a kibos on that.
Right now I'm trying to find out couple of things. One, what I can put there. Two, what I can't put there. So when somebody comes in, I can say yes, we can do it. When I went to sell
that for the car wash and the code said car wash was legal. Now we go to the city to get a permit and they say no. We're waiting to find out if it's going to be an excuse.
Excuse me. But uh anyways, I like to find out what I can do and can't do and that would help me out immensely. But I also want to know
and I think I'm on the right track. Whatever you got here, you want to put down in my area, don't you? I know. >> Is that a question? >> I wanted to, if you're asking me, sir, I would like for it to remain community
oriented. Um, because of the home location, location, location. Sir, >> right. Okay. Here's what I'm saying. I agree with you. I just kind of finding out well whatever goes up there you'd like to have down my way that's all.
>> Okay. >> Is that is that going to be the idea? >> To be determined, sir. >> Okay. So, for me to sell my property, which I'm trying to do something now.
How am I going to list it? Finding out what the zoning is. What zoning is it? Well, that's why we're in this process right now, sir. >> You're in the process, >> correct?
>> So, tell me more. >> It's all cont uh contemplating on the outcome of the votes. >> Yeah. Let me let me try to help. Okay. >> Um and so what's being contemplated tonight doesn't include Mr. Brown's
properties. um his properties have the same conflict between future land use and zoning. And so that's the issue for Mr. Brown. I think he did get a zoning verification letter from us. And so um so he he has a
zoning for the properties. He has a future land use, but they're inconsistent. And so therefore, he can't develop on this property. I think they've been inconsistent since since 2010, perhaps. And so his issue is parallel to the issue that we're
discussing tonight. Recall as uh Mrs. Crespbow, Miss Crespo presented um earlier in the presentation, that was sort of the second phase of the visioning. Um, and so
either we he he needs to clear up the inconsistencies so that it's clear what he can and can't develop or what the uses are on his particular properties there. And so that's the issue with regards to him being able to sell. I have talked to two
uh local realtors that that were in conversations with uh Mr. Brown about that inconsistency. They understand that. And so, you know, again, he's in the difficult spot of future land use and the zoning are are inconsistent, incompatible, whatever the appropriate
term is. >> Can we bring that slide back up with the uh yellow or red? the the slide will show that the area runs from I'll say the railroad tracks to Fisk that fronts 520
>> and so that that area and and and we're we're also going to need to at some point in time talk about within Diamond Square because there are future your land use and zoning inconsistencies there and then anybody on staff or uh
Alexis can help me or fill in um the gaps that I missed. >> So, they're still working on your property, Mr. Brown. Right now, we're on the four corners. >> How long is it going to be before I can
sell my property? >> Well, we have to go through the ordinances. First reading, second reading, sir. We're going to have to vote on it first. >> How does that take? Months, weeks. >> Um, depending on the next council meeting, what what happens tonight will be the initial part. >> That'll get us going.
>> But Mr. Mayor, his his question is when am I going to be able to sell my properties there? Again, what we do tonight, what you do tonight and what you do second reading doesn't doesn't affect his properties. These are for the four corners, the properties that she
has on screen that is uh grayed out. But >> when I bought my property, it was all commercial general. How can they change that from what I already got unless you're already going to change it? You You're not changing it right now. So, it
should be what I bought it as. >> Okay. >> Yeah. You, Mr. Brown, you purchased back in the 70s. >> Yes, I did. >> Yeah. So, you purchased back in the 70s. I don't I don't know how future land use or zoning has changed over time since
you since you purchased your property. I mean, we can research that, but but again, I just don't you know, at this particular point in time, I can't tell you. >> Well, every time I get a tax bill, it's it's under commercial general. >> What' you say, Mr. Brown? I'm sorry.
>> When I get a tax bill, it's under commercial general. CG, that's what I bought it as. >> Yeah, they I don't think the tax bill lists zoning designations. They use they use a use uh designation for their
assessment purposes. That's not not related to the zoning of your property. >> Can I ask real quick, couldn't we remove the future land use that part for him so then he could do the car wash or whatever wants to go on that property?
Well, >> I mean, that's what's holding it up. What happened in 2010? >> Well, then now now you're you're you're talking you either got to change one or the other or both. >> Well, if his is not included in this, can't his be done separately? Just asking.
>> Well, I mean, he Yeah, you could you could take his individually. I don't know if that's spot zoning or not, but the the whole the whole sort of stretch has that that conflict. And so so yes, separately he has to clear up the
conflict or together under the one exercise the conflict has to be cleared up for all. Now I don't know how you do that individually without affecting or without setting the course for the others that may not be the appropriate
course to set. >> I got a question for you. >> Okay. How do we get three marijuana shops on my street? >> How did we do that? >> Three marijuana shops there on 520. He miss down here.
>> There's one right on the corner. There's one out in 520 and there's one up. >> I can I can guarantee it didn't happen on my leadership because my church is right adjacent to that and my church was constructed in 1947. So So I'mma just I will plead the fifth.
That's all I'm going to say. It didn't happen under my watch. >> There's three marijuana shops and I'm not too happy with them. >> Okay. >> So, there's nothing we can do to help him out. >> Now, they're finding out that there's more people that are mentally disturbed
and health problems from the stuff that was fine and dandy for everybody. >> Okay. >> Now, what are they going to do? Come and shut them all down? What do you do with them? So, I mean, they let that in. I don't know what it >> I'mma say it again. It happened under my
watch. >> It happened under my watch. >> That's why I'm here. But, uh, anyways, uh, here's what I would like. >> Okay, you can wrap it up, miss, because I have others. >> I'm sorry.
>> I didn't take all this time. You guys got summer, too. Let me tell you something. If you could just write me a letter telling me, Mr. Brown, you can put this, this, and this in and this, this, and this in right now and what the tenative
future might be. It would give me an idea what to do. I can't even get a relative to take it now. They don't want it because they can't sell it. They don't know, you know, uh, what it fits under. Look at my point. I mean, I'm an old
man. I'm busted up. I I want to I I want to get my stuff straightened out, man. It's important to me. That's why I told you my little story. Everybody's got different things. And and so, Mr. Mayor and Council, what
I'll do is I'll have I'll have um Cindy schedule and we'll sit down and walk him through. I think again, correct me if I'm wrong, he's already received a zoning verification letter. Um, and so we'll we'll sit down with Mr. Brown and and walk him through the issue. Again,
at the end of the day, that's not resolving the issue, but at least try to to to to give him a better understanding of where he are with regards to his properties. >> Thank you, sir. >> All right. Thank you very much. >> Thank you, Mr. Brown. Okay. We will
proceed in this order and um we will give everyone five minutes who submitted a card because I want to be fair and equitable across the board. >> I'm way down. >> Okay. Um Okay, Mr. Cole. Okay, Mr.
Kabort and we have Mr. Brown taken care of. Next on the list is uh Cole Oliver. Sir, you have five minutes. Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mayor Council. >> So, yes, sir. >> Uh, per the rules, as I am representing the Kabort family and five different
properties, uh, if I happen to go over five, I'd like to go up to 10, which is these are the rules as a affected party by the ordinances. >> Is that, let me ask my escar needs additional time requested. I'm still not clear. How many property
owners are you representing? There's five parcels and there's seven different property owners within those five parcels. But >> okay, but see you have Mr. Kabort right behind you. >> He's not one of them. He represents them as a manager.
>> Nonetheless, um if we get through the five minutes and I need some more time respectfully, I request to keep going. >> Um first up, uh you know, I gave Mr. Whitten, the city manager, the Senate Bill 180 letter, um, which as as was previously discussed, this ordinance is
more restrictive and therefore would be against the state law. That letter starts a 14-day clock on the proposed ordinance under which if you know the agreed parties, my clients feel they need to propose the lawsuit and proceed, you know, they may be forced into that.
And there is a fee shifting attorney in that provision and it is the law of the land now. Yes, it is being challenged and yes, it may be addressed in the future state legislature, but as of today, that's the law and if we're my clients forced into that corner, they
reserve their rights to pursue it. Um, you know, second, my client, the Kabort family, have been business owners here for in the in the community for a long time. They do own the two eastern blocks that are at discussion here today. That's the uh smoke shop on the
northeast corner and the uh used and new and used automobile sales on the southeast corner. Uh Mr. Kabort, as he'll discuss later, attended the community meetings in 2024 and attended these council meetings in 2024 after that at which this council,
you know, took the input and and identified four uses that they wanted to be restricted and that was the uh smoke shops, the car washes, the liquor stores and gas stations. Those were specifically identified in the meetings of the menus which council directed
staff to go out and and and address those uses. though my client does own the smoke shop respectfully, he was okay with that use being eliminated. Um, you know, but he would be under the uh grandfathered in under the
non-conforming use as we'll discuss later. Um, then when the ordinance came out, it took away all of the uses, both the smoke shop and the new and used automobiles uses under the guise of being pedestrian
friendly. Um, my client's not here tonight. He's not challenging the architectural provisions of it, the landscaping provisions of it. He's only really asking two things in this ordinance. One is the the dual standard between the major and minor development
um proposal. The 50% more for a major development, 30% or more would be fall under the minor or 30% or less would fall under the minor development standard. That minor development standard is in no other zoning code within the city that
is specially created just for these four corners in the city. And if it's such a good idea, why is that not across the entire area? Tonight, for the first time, we heard that the smoke shop under the rule as presented tonight could
expand 30% in size and still be grandfathered in and and be a conforming use under the code or non-conforming use, but permitted the 30% expansion is what the city planner uh stated. So, we have an issue with that. It was originally 15%. I met with the city
manager and staff. They did increase that to 30%. Respectfully, you know, thank you. But why do we have a different provision than any other section of the code? Um, and the second area was the the uses that are being
taken away and what's being allowed. The my client, as I said earlier, he really only wants to protect his new and used automobile sales which are under the current and that was the provision we provided the city manager in our red lines. In those red lines, we took it
from being a permitted use or we made it a permitted use in the proposed ordinance revision. Currently under the CP district is a special exception. Same as you know, respectfully, mayor, your church is a special exception in the zoning district now and now it's
being made a permitted use. We're requesting the same thing for new and used automobile sales. In talking with the city manager, he asked if we would be okay with removing the I think it's the agricultural and mobile home sales as as being allowed there. And we're
amanable to that, but we do want to remain a permitted use. We feel that that property has been a benefit to the city and it's not, you know, we're not contesting the architectural elements that the city is looking for for its sense of arrival place.
So again, we respectfully would request be permitted as the church is being permitted in the new zoning district. Um, finally, the others will speak some more on the inconsistencies, but I would like to point out that the the path the city
has taken here is inconsistent with the CRA's policies uh for removing blight and for redevelopment and that the city is supposed to work with the owners of the properties on the land use changes. >> Keep going, >> respect on the land use changes. Um, and
this the policy is specifically states assuming the property owner voluntarily consents my property or excuse me my client is is only half of the properties affected here. Not half but you know two of the corners and they would consent to this
provided that the new and used automobile sales could be made a permitted exception or a permitted use under the zoning districts. they would restrict themselves from agricultural equipment or mobile home cells within that use. Um,
finally, real quickly, wrap up, they'll touch it on more. The city's conducted no economic studies on the viability of any of these proposed uses, and there's been no traffic analysis that removing the permitted uses now and making them inconsistent would do anything as far as
the traffic counts, nor the addition of new permitted uses. what those additional traffic counts would do to the pedestrian safety. So, the city is adding uses that will be more traffic intensive than some of the uses that are
permitted now under the guise of being pedestrian friendly. But there's been no evidence permit, you know, presented to the city as to that. I I just don't personally believe that adding a a brew pub as a permitted us where you're serving alcohol to people and then asking to get in their cars on a two
major thoroughares could you know be considered a pedestrian friendly use. Um but there's been no evidence per uh presented on that. So again, in conclusion, from my client's perspective, simply asking that we remove this dual
standard that's being created as it relates to the major and minor developments, just leave it as the rest of the city code has with the um with the non-conforming uses. But to the extent if you do leave it the same, we
request that we incorporate the statements that were made earlier that an increase in 30% of the size of the building is still allowed. Um, and then we would respectfully request that the city add in new and used automobile
cells, x a equipment, and mobile homes as a permitted use. And uh, if you have any questions, uh, I can try to answer them, but emphasis on try. Okay. Um, Councilman Go, your light is
on. >> Yeah. The qu question I had was about the permitted use. >> Yes, sir. >> Um, and then I asked staff about the kind of breakdown the the dual standard major and minor development. I I don't I don't necessarily understand what that means
and what is he asking for, but the the permitted use. So, I just want a quick clarification. And so the only thing they want to take out is the A and the mobile and then add in new and used auto sales.
So we're okay with the staff's uses as they have changed them provided that we can add in that one definition in the city code of new and used automobile sales. And within that code language that we
took straight from the code, it also included um a equipment and um mobile home sales within that that defined code use. And we I guess we're saying we would restrict it even further than that code use as as presently restricted.
>> I got you. >> And Mr. Oliver, just I'm going to try to say it. I think what I what I what I heard you say. So, in the in the existing um code, new and used car sales is by special exception.
And in the presented um ordinance change, it is it is uh not permitted. It's it's not a permitted use. It's not by special exception. It's not by uh by right there. What what Mr. Oliver is
suggesting that it it be put in as a permitted use and they don't have an issue with um no a equipment and no mobile homes. >> I think that's just my plain >> okay >> way of saying it.
>> If I could let you speak for me, city manager would be a lot shorter conversation. But that's I I captured what you got it >> that got it. And and I was just saying similar to the way churches were being um done by taking it from an exist
existing special exception and making it permitted use. >> Making it permitted use >> the dual standard. >> Yes. Let me take a run at that again. It's complex, but the the current code uh says non-conforming uses. There's
there's one standard, the 50% rule is what it's commonly called. So, if you have a non-conforming use and you enlarge it, expand it, renovate it, combination thereof to 50%, you have to come in full compliance with all the codes.
We in our opinion our proposal is more flexible and allows them to make minor modifications without having to come into compliance with the code today. So we have the 30% there. Our initial threshold is 30%
uh so you can do up to 29% and only comply with certain elements of the code. >> Uh Deon mayor weeks. So, um, so it then, >> oh, can I may I add something critical? And I'm surprised she didn't nudge me to say >> under the current code,
any expansion of a non-conforming use is going to that that is not allowed, though. So, you can actually under this, the key difference and why it's more flexible is because you can actually expand an existing use up to 30% and not
trigger any of the code. Whereas there's no expansion allowed at that building. >> Did I do that better? Okay. >> My my question on that is so all throughout Coco if it's a non-conforming use that is the standard, but for this
you're going to allow them to do some modifications and not trigger it. Is that what I'm hearing? >> Correct. The car for we can use the car dealership which is a valid existing example. They can expand their building. they can renovate their building up to that 29% threshold without losing the
use. Whereas any expansion of that building under the current 50% rule would >> Yeah. Well, I I understand that for the four corners, but I'm just saying elsewhere in Coco >> Citywide. Yeah. >> Citywide. >> If it's a non-conforming use, you cannot expand it. >> Okay.
Because the idea is we'll allow you to stay but we don't but if you you can't enhance it or expand it because we do want to redevelop properly at some point. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Is that it?
>> Okay. Thank you very much. >> Um John Kabort is next and then after that will be is it Mary? Um, so Esquire Mary Solic. Yes.
>> Hello, council. Uh, my name is John Kabard. We own the two eastern corners that Cole Oliver just uh spoke to you about. We uh attempted to when this first when I
first got notice of it, I was excited. I was like, great, you know, let's let's let's try and get something good for the city here. and we're always open. >> Would you give me one minute, please? I want to be fair and equitable. Um, a total of eight minutes for everyone, please.
>> Okay. Just want to be fair and equitable. >> So, we uh I I personally attended the visioning ceremony and uh introduced myself to the city manager and I said, "This is this is a great idea. You've got four corners. You've got a couple of owners. Let's get together and and
figure out a solution so we can deliver something." because that's how uh we own a fair amount of commercial property. That's how redevelopment traditionally goes. The visioning is great. You want to get the city and the the the people involved and you want their input, but you got to talk to the owners and you
got to get the owner's input because they're the ones that have to invest the capital to make it happen. Uh and the the art of, you know, the the city's role is getting getting a win for both people. Regrettably, uh it didn't quite
go down like that. I we weren't none of the owners were really able to get a meeting with uh the city until we got our notice that it was going up for P&Z. So, we show up to PNZ and we say, "Look, we haven't really had a chance to give any feedback on this." A lot of other people have given feedback, but not the
four owners, and you're not going to get any redevelopment. You're going to have you're going to sell the people on a bunch of uh exciting pictures of Starbucks, but if you don't talk to the four people who own it, you ain't going to get that. So, uh, and and we wanted to make sure that the people get what
they want and everyone's represented. So, PNZ kicks it back and says, uh, meet with the owners and get the owner's input. So, uh, at that point, we finally get our meeting and we were opposed because the the proposed code is outlawing my
two uses. So, I've got a smoke shop and, you know, a used car dealership. And in talking with everyone, I understood that the smoke shop was not popular and I understand why. And we went in, you know, I went in ready to concede. That's fine. I don't need that as an allowed
use, but I've had a car dealership there for a while as a tenant. I'm not the operator. We're just the owner. And uh we were hoping that that use would be protected, you know, and we really wanted to be able to work with the city. The other issue I had is that the um
that minor and major thing was more ownorous on us than it was anywhere else in the city. Now, one of the issues that I do want to raise is the points that they had said about it being more permissive um and allowing stuff. This is the first time that I'm hearing about this tonight. And I would really like my
attorney to have an opportunity to review that actual code because during our meetings, we tried to go through the code uh because we took issue with that the way that minor and major was. What we've heard testified tonight and what we've actually been able to review in terms of code is a little different. and
I need to know which one I'm supporting. What they said sounds good. I haven't seen code language that says that yet. And we I mean I've been paying thousands of dollars to an attorney to see the code language and read the code language and we've been trying to meet with the city. So what they say looks great. just
due to the way this process is kind of going before there's a vote or before I say whether I support it or not, I'd really like the opportunity to review it because uh the way that this process has gone has not been the greatest. Uh but we want to work and we're we're committed to to working with the city to
try and find a win for the for the citizens and the owners. So, what I'm asking for tonight is I I don't mind having a smoke shop not as a permitted use. What I would like is I would like my I would like my car dealership, which I've been operating
there, or which I've had a tenant there as an owner, to to get the same as a business and property owner. I'd like to be shown the the same uh be treated the same as we're treating the church. I would like that to be a permitted use
for my car dealership. Uh you know, and I'm like I said, I'm there's no opposition to uh not having a smoke shop there. The other thing that I'm requesting is the opportunity to get a chance to to reconcile what was said about having this new permissive major
and minor thing. I I need to see that in the code because that's I haven't been able to see that yet. There were I they the city did make some changes on that. That being said, even the 30% threshold is more owner if it's only these four
corners that has a 30% threshold. The rest of the city has a 50% threshold. I don't understand why these have a more restrictive threshold than the entire rest of the city. All I want is to be treated fairly like the rest of the city
or in the event that this is uh more permissive, I need to be able to review that because my previous review did not show it as being more permissive or equally permissive. Um so that's all that we're asking. Uh just we're fine
with conceding a smoke shop. I would really like that the use for um the auto shop be allowed because right now none of the owners support this. So we've got this thing where we're coming in and we're saying redevelopment and we're showing these pictures and stuff. All
the people whose stuff it is are like we don't want this zoning. You're not fixing anything for us. You're not solving any problems. You're making it more restrictive. We personally as an owner, I really want to work with the city and I really want to find something that works for the city and works for
us. Regarding Senate Bill 180, Senate Bill 180 is pretty clear that if that a for the state says for a hurricane affected area, which we are, if you give zoning that is more restrictive
that the property owner can challenge that and that the city is going to have to pay attorney fees and all of that. I don't want that. I just want one of my uses protected and I'd like the rest of my stuff to be treated fairly. You know, that's I I we are not I'm not in the
business of litigating. I'm in the business of just trying to run my businesses and my properties. And that's what I want to do. And I'm here asking you to work with me because I haven't necessarily gotten the help that I've needed from the city up to this point to make that happen. I don't want to do the Senate Bill 180 thing. It's not a win
for me. It's certainly not a win for the people. It doesn't make me feel good, but I want to do it. I just want to be able to run my car dealership. Um, and like I said, I'll concede the other ones, and I'm just asking to be treated fairly like anyone else would be in terms of how the major and minor applies
to being grandfathered in. So, that's all that I have. I'm happy to answer any questions. >> Deputy Mayor Weeks. >> So, on the corner where the smoke shop is, what would you envision putting there? the the current co the proposed code is
very very restrictive and I don't to be honest that's going to be determined by the market it's going to be whoever comes to me it's a small lot my my big concern with all of this is and where my energy and focus and that my resources and money is trying to figure out the
solution to my car dealership lot because that's a much more profitable lot. Uh the smoke shop is such a small lot on a small footprint. It's just going to depend what kind of tenant would want to come in there and would want to rent. But in terms of uh
proportionally in terms of my income, the much larger one across the street is the car dealership. And that's why that's why I'm willing to concede the smoke shop. I understand that it's unpopular and like I I get that and and you know hopefully there's some fin we had a financial institution that was in
there before. So maybe a financial institution or you know >> I gotcha. And when you say that, um, you know, I agree the city should have met with the homeowners before any of this even started to say they wanted to do it. So, um, I'm sorry that that didn't
happen, but I'll try to work with you now. So, >> Well, I appreciate it, >> city manager. >> Yes, sir. And I and I said this, John, last at the planning and zoning meeting when you said that very same thing. 4:30 2025
there's a meeting at least on my on my schedule uh July 9th 2025 and August 14th 2025 >> and so those were three meetings three
opportunities for meetings I think the three meetings did actually occur so >> can I respond to that I stocking Uh Mr. Whitten, I attended the uh visioning thing. I introduced me
to myself personally. I sent a couple of emails beforehand saying, "Hey, we're really interested in this and we want to work together." Um I think the other owners had the same thing. We are easily available. I personally introduced myself and asked to be kept at rest and was very willing to work. At this point,
I mean, I'm not I don't think that solves anything. Uh but I I'm happy to further discuss that. But I mean you you guys have all my contact information. I've reached out. We we really wanted to be collaborative in this
>> and this started 2023. >> Yeah. But he he Well, when you say again this is a these are the facts. Absolutely. Did meet him at the visioning. He introduced himself. >> I understand visioning didn't happen in 2023. And so so he had an opportunity to
present uh his proposals. We met on three occasions there. So I I reject his facts that we didn't meet. >> I'm saying before all of even before visioning, I would have thought you would have talked to the owners to say,
"Hey, we're looking at doing this." Um that that's all I'm saying is that to me, >> did they get a letter? Did they give a do they get a letter city manager? How do they inform the public? >> Yes, sir. The the letters the letters
went out um you know this is a 2010 issue and so 2023 um the issue was raised 2024 uh we had the visioning uh workshops
that's taken some time. we've gone to planning and so there's ample opportunity for everybody's input. Again, um you know, meeting is an issue.
Meeting and not agreeing is a is a is another uh basis of fact. >> That's all. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you very much, Mr. Kabort. Um, Mrs. Sole, Esquire, and
then after Esquire will be um, Pablo, excuse me, Pablo P >> Compasano. >> Composano with the glasses. >> Yes. Yes. Have they been passed out?
>> Okay, great. Thank you. Um, I'm going to talk fast. Uh, Mary, >> ma'am, you have eight minutes. >> Well, I got a lot to say. Um, good evening. I'm Mary Solic, 121 South Orange Avenue, Sweet 1500 Orlando, Florida. I represent Biscaya Cocoa Holdings LLC, which is the owner of the
property on the southwest corner of the Four Corners intersection. It is the only vacant and unimproved property that you're discussing tonight. The principles of Biskaya Koko are Max Kaiser and Pablo Composano. They're here with me tonight. They both intend to speak. Our position is that you should
simply amend the comp plan to add CP, commercial parkway zoning, which is the existing zoning on all these properties as a zoning district consistent with mixed use. You'd make us happy. You'd fix Mr. Brown's problem if you did that.
If you've just changed, if you just added CP as an allowable zoning district in your comp plan under mixed use, um the overlay district is not necessary to implement the goals of the future land use designation or the CRA. The
future land use mixeduse policy. Commercial uses are deemed to be consistent. There are no specific on uses and there are no limitations on commercial uses in your future land use mixeduse designation. It states that this category is to be applied to the US
1 and 520 corridors as the most intense commercial areas in Koko. Reasonable and logical planning would dictate that the most intensive commercial uses should be along these corridors. The CRA states the goal is highquality development and
architecture, no restrictions on particular uses. And highquality development is something we can all agree on. The overlay district limitations on uses do not reflect the direction of the mixeduse future land use or the CRA for commercial uses and
certainly don't reflect reality. The first the top page on the exhibit that I've handed you shows you that the largest single land owner in the four corners area is FOT. They have six lanes of travel on US1 at a fairly high speed.
There's four lanes of travel on 520 with seven lanes at the intersection and plenty of rideway to at to widen 520. The second page in that package is the DOT um trips information. It's from 2024. The average daily traffic counts
at 520 at that intersection are 28,000 cars a day on US1 is 30,000 cars a day. The predominant use in this area is a regional transportation networks, including roadways and rail for freight
and passenger service. The largest landowner's goal is to move as much traffic as qu as quickly and simply as possible along these two roadways. Traffic is never going to be any less in these intersections and the addition of the Bright Line station in
north of uh Coco will only add to this traffic. You as a city don't control the rideway. You don't control curb cuts, driveway cuts, signals, medians, road widenings, pedestrian crosswalks, bike lanes, sidewalks in the rideway, or utilities. You want this area to be
walkable, but you are out with you are without authority to manage pedestrian safety amongst vehicular and train traffic. The next piece of reality is the small parcel size. Um the Biscayia Coco property is 1.39 acres. The other
properties in the area are similar in size and they're never going to get any bigger due to physical constraints. There's the cemetery, the railway, and um existing roadways. There's no opportunity to assemble these small properties to larger properties to
accommodate the uses that have been proposed. And unlike your uses downtown that you would like to see here, there's no on street parking available to support any of these properties there and they're not going to be large enough to handle
employee parking and user parking for the users uses that have been proposed. Another factor of reality is economics. The overlay list of uses, lots of lovely ideas for proposed uses, but we live in the real world and projects have to be
feasible. The rents have to be high enough to cover construction costs. The endusers need the demographics to be profitable and there has to be enough parking to support the use. My clients have owned this property since 2016 and 2017. It was purchased in two separate
transactions. They've been engaged in substantial marking efforts throughout that whole period to try to find users from that for that property. You're going to hear from Pablo Composano about the efforts they've engaged in to find users on the property. Um, but the only serious
interest they've had is for a gas and convenience store. And we really don't understand why this use is being villainized at this location. The intersection is exactly where you would expect to find this use. An intersection of the highest concentration of motoring
public in the county. The product is uh something that most of us purchase regularly. It's not a vice. It can be legally sold to minors and most people think it's a necessity. We think it's been villainized because
it may not some of the uses that you've seen may have not been designed with care, but it's possible to do so. The next sheets in your package are slides that were taken. They're in your agenda package tonight. They were used at the RVI visioning workshop. They're the
slides that follow the Starbucks slides. It's a property right across the street from that Starbucks in Orlando. And it's a 7-Eleven convenience store. And those slides demonstrate that you can use the same principles that Miss Cresbow pointed out for the Starbucks to design
and site a very attractive and walkable gas and convenience store. Uh, with all due respect to the other property owners in the four corners, I would urge you to focus on our property. The other owners are fighting to keep
the uses they already have. They're fighting to keep the status quo. Our property is vacant. I don't blame those other property owners for trying to maintain the status quo. They're enjoying a return on their investment. My clients are not and they're they're
motivated to do something with this property. This property could be the domino that kicks off other development in the area. So, please leave our current zoning CP in place
and it and um don't limit our uses. that would make uh the CP zoning leaving the uses in place would make it in uh consistent with the intent of the CP district. You at one point thought CP zoning was the appropriate zoning on this property and the intent of that
district as set forth in your code is to serve the needs of the motorist and provide an amimable impression on the city. We can do that with a carefully designed product. We we can live with architectural standards. Just don't take
away the CP uses. So, I'm going to leave you with one final thought. Ask yourself this. What is worse for your community? a well-designed gas and convenience store that provides goods,
services, employment, and tax base, or a major intersection that screams to 30,000 cars a day that no one wants to make an investment in your community. Pablo's going to come up and talk to you about their efforts to market the
property. I have a question for you as well. >> Yes, sir. >> Go ahead, sir. >> Um, I just needed some clarification. >> So, the portion of Blake I'm sorry, not Blake Stone Avenue, Stone Street um that's now part of that property. Was it
the city that uh made that possible to uh incorporate that into that property? >> That rightway was vacated. Yes. And that is a process you have to go through with the city. >> Okay. and the city approved that. >> And do you know what the purpose of that was that the city vacated that?
>> I think Max and Pablo are better to to because that was part of the >> have the part of the the transaction they purchased the property in. >> So you can ask them that >> question. I can answer but I just let my man. >> Okay.
>> Okay. Anything else for me? >> That's it. >> Well, I'm going to add one thing. We uh my clients came to me in late 2023 about this problem. They they knew they had a comp plan zoning inconsistency. They can't do anything with the property. What can we do?
Um we filed a reszoning application to downzone it to CN just to create consistency so we could at least market the property and tell potential users here's what you can do on the property. That's what triggered you in your
visioning process was our reasonzoning application and we were set to be heard by the PNZ by the city council. I'm sorry. We went through P&Z and Steven Notto with RVI called me and said, "We're going to add CP zoning to the comp plan. We're going
to fix your problem. Will you hold off?" And we did. And look where we are now. We're worse off than we would have been if we had gotten CN zoning. So that's that's how you've worked with
us. >> Okay. >> Good afternoon, esteemed uh mayor, council, and everyone here. Thank you for your time, your consideration. Um, I want to start off, Mr. Brown. I I
am very in I feel your pain. I, you know, I I wasn't born in the 70s. I was born in 1980. I'm only 45, but I did buy this property in 2015. I have a lot of money invested here. This is the single largest asset where I have money. I have children now. Uh, I bought this before
being married and um over the years to answer the question about Stone Street. Yes, that was vacated. It was vacated. >> Give us your name, please. >> Pablo Camposano. I'm sorry. >> Go ahead, bro. >> Yeah. So, um, Stone Street was vacated. It was vacated to uh to do a Cumberland
Farms, which is a gas and convenience store uh that, you know, we were trying to do with the city um when when that took place. So, um, essentially like Mary said, I want to give you a little bit of my background, uh, what it
is that I do for a living, uh, which relates directly to the efforts that have been undertaken with this property. But before that, I just want to give you a little a little note and maybe share a little common sense with you guys. Uh, like I said, I have a I have a
four-year-old and a six-year-old. Um, I have, you know, very energetic four-year-old. I I have um I have, you know, very energetic pets, you know, dogs. I have a grandma that's 90 years old. She's, you know, she's el she's elder. Um when we try to understand
mixed use and what is mixed use and what isn't mixed use, let me give you an example. You don't have to answer. This is just for you guys to take home and think about it. Okay. Um mixed use is is is a place that is walkable. I would, you know, I saw that
you guys were were passing the ordinance 1025. You guys know where that's located. You guys are locals. Pictured it in your brain. You would take your grandma there. You would take your kids if you have kids, your grandchildren. You would take them there. You would take your
pets and you would probably go for a walk in that area. Very different than these four corners. This is not mixed use. We made a mistake in 2010 when we tried making this mixed use. Because we make a mistake doesn't mean, you know, doesn't mean that it, you know, that it
has to continue being wrong because we can pass this. You're not going to see any development. It's going to continue getting fought. If this is going to be your legacy, you know, it's probably going to continue to be challenged in the future because there will be no progress if we do this. That's not mixed
use. If you guys wanted to go for a walk at 8 in the morning when it's hot, when it's rush hour, bring your grandma, bring your grandchildren, bring your kids, bring your pets to you as one and let's go for a walk. You will not do that because if my energetic son runs
away, he gets run over. I also skid out of a road twice in the rain in a in a roadway similar to US1. I got into two car accidents. And that's the type of stuff that you're going to see on US1. That's not a mixeduse corridor. That is
a heavily traffked vehicular artery where you're supposed to have stores that service things that you can be out that you can do out of convenience. Anyways, getting back to my experience, um I'm a commercial real estate broker. I've been
practicing real estate since 1998. Uh when I was in high school, I would go to I started as a property appraiser. I would go to Miami date community college at night while in high school so that I could get licensed since a very early age. You know, I'm self-made. I would go to school full-time and work full-time.
I paid for my own college at a public university and uh ever since, you know, I evolved. I got into the brokerage business. I've been doing this for quite some time. I joined Collier International, which is the firm that I work for now. uh about six or seven
years ago. We're a leading national and uh and local provider of commercial brokerage services. We have nine offices in the state of Florida. So, we have a global reach, national reach, but we also have a very strong local presence. Um I'm particularly in the in the retail
services division. Um and as a result, we you know, we tend to handle these types of deals, you know, retail retail transactions. Our marketing efforts at this property have undergone three years and thousands and thousands of dollars of of efforts.
Um the the the subject property as again is a hightraic intersection which you know appeals to vehicular driven businesses. Um you know the Bright Line station is an element that has definitely put Coco on the map. Uh,
I happen to take the Bright Line, you know, numerous times to go to our Orlando office, to go to our Palm Beach office, our four lot offices. Most of our offices are walking distance to to the Bright Line. It's a phenomenal amenity that I think you're going to benefit tremendously for from I'll probably take the Bright Line, you know,
in the future when I come here. Um, the property has a lot of limitations. Um, you know, the railroad tracks, the fact that, you know, you have two major roadways surrounding it. the FPL electric transmission and distribution
lines that limit its potential tremendously. You know, you have requirements from the transmission lines that just make it you can't you can't do apartments there. You know, you can't you can't go vertical. You know, it's it's going to be too too too expensive. Coco has improved substantially over the
years, but when we compare the 1, three, and five demographics for Coco versus the average of Brevard County and the state of Florida, we're still lagging. Most of the retailers take that into account, you know, they they take that
into account and that's how they map out their expansion strategies. at this point, you know, there's a lot of retailers that we think might be a good idea, but for the reasons that I just explained, you know, it just probably doesn't work. Number one, it's not it's not in it's not in, you know, an area
where they want to expand to at the moment, unless we start seeing the domino effect of, you know, growth and and and potential, which we we want to push uh by by by by working together. Um,
and you know, we've, you know, we we've marketed this, you know, professionally. Eblast, it's one of the packages that was introduced. You can see the thousands of of eyeballs that have, you know, that have looked at it. And I can tell you firsthand, we we we've had
multiple um gas and convenience stores that are interested. We've presented we've put this in front of, for example, supermarkets. Site doesn't work for a supermarket. you know, you know, they wouldn't be able to bring in the loading docks that are required. They wouldn't be able to uh,
you know, to provide the parking. They wouldn't be able to make it work with the limitations of the of the of the transmission lines. We've put this in front of Starbucks. They don't have an expansion plan in this area. That's that's that's the answer that they've told us. Um, you know, Raising Cane,
Seven Brew, Burger King, they actually closed the location down the street. Um, McDonald's, they they have the area already covered in their opinion. Del Taco at one point was interested. It's a it's, you know, it's it's a it's a it's a taco QSR, you know, similar to
to Taco Bell. Um, Popeye's, Save a Lot, Poo, Pical, Checkers, you know, Chick-fil-A, all of them have passed. This has been in front of them. We've actually gone to, you know, I've gone to the conventions. I've sat down with the real estate managers. I know them. I call them, you know, and it's it's it
just doesn't work. So in essence, the constraint site doesn't support mixed use. Believe me on that. And you know, it would it would it will support a use that would be uh driven by vehicular traffic. So that's
really what I have for you guys. If if anyone has any questions, I'm happy to respond to the best of my ability. Is that permissible esquire? Can I >> I mean, yeah, he could give us he could give his time to speak on >> all your time to Pablo at least half.
>> He has he he owns that southwest corner that bacon lot right there on Stone Street where you were talking about the old my place. He's empty now. That used to be the coffee joint there. Old mobile station. He's right here.
>> Yeah, he's on he's on the he's on the >> southwest. >> Yeah, we're on the southwest corner. You know, you have the map right there. So, it's on the bottom left of the of the area being discussed of the four corners. >> Yes, they own the property together. >> Yeah. >> And as Mary, our attorney saw, the the
easy fix even to fix Mr. Brown's problem is if you guys just added the CP designation. I mean, look, we're not proposing this. We didn't wake up today and think about this. You know, we we filed the application in 2023. I've spent tens of thousands of dollars
in legal fees trying to fix this and we've been going at it aggressively since 2023. We had the property under contract with a car wash and we weren't able to close it. The car wash actually lost their deposit, >> you know. So, we we we can't sell it. We can't lease it. We can't do anything
with it right now. >> I got I got a question. All right, we have a question. >> Yes, sir. >> Uh, take take me back to um the time when the Cumberland Farm conversation. Why
why did that project not move forward? >> Cumberland Farms ended up selling the company. The entire company sold to a different company and that's public public information. Um, when that happened, there was a reassessment on
their on their side of every single deal that hadn't come out of the ground. There was there they they actually had filed permits with the city. You you must have records of of of of these of these >> and the inconsistency. >> Yeah. And and you know, and there was, you know, we're finding out that there
was also the inconsistency, you know, with uh, you know, with future land use and the Sony, you know, which was probably what was causing the delay. When they came in, they said, you know, no, we're pulling out. >> All right. >> I'm good. >> Okay. Is that it >> for now?
>> That's it. >> Okay. >> Thank you, >> Pablo. >> Max. >> Max, you have three minutes. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Max, you do it from sitting down. Um, Max Kaiser, Biskai, Cocoa Holdings.
Um, yeah, I mean, they Mary and Pablo pretty much covered it. You know, I've been I know Mr. Blake for many years before he before before the round of the mayor. He was a councilman when we did the Cumberland Farms. That deal fell through. Um,
I mean, the only thing I have to say is, you know, we're trying to make this deal work and putting more restrictions on what's there on under the CP is going to make it harder for us. That's all. So, we're trying to make something happen there. Right now, it's a sitting vacant.
My landscaper loves it. He cuts the grass every few weeks. He's the only one making money. >> It would be nice if we made a little money, too. So, >> um, yeah. So hopefully we can get to a place where everything works for everybody and uh and that's it. Move move on and it'll be whatever is there
is going to be something nice. No matter what it ends up being, it's going to be something nice. We don't have anyone on the table now. We're just talking to a lot of people. Um but we need to we need to get the ball rolling and move forward because this staying in this situation isn't helping anybody. That's all.
>> Thank you. >> Thank you, sir. Next will be at um Esquire Kim Ranka. And are there any additional cards out? Because this is the last card I have. Okay. Yes, we can.
Thank you ma'am. Thank you very much. Thank you. >> With the approval of council after Esquire Zena um presents herself, then um would like to
request say a 10-minute recess. >> Good evening, mayor. >> Good evening, mayor. >> Members of city council. My name is Kim Rosena. I'm with the law firm of Lacy Rzena in Melbourne. I'm here on behalf of East Florida Motor Sales, Inc. Um, owned by Mike Erdman. He owns two
parcels in the northwest corner. That tiny little one and the one that's the larger one that's not uh the pizza place. Um, this is a 2010 issue. Uh, it was also a 2022 issue when I represented the
property buyer for Mr. um for for Max's property for a car wash. uh it was not wellreceived and uh at that point the issue was it wasn't compatible between the future lane use and the zoning. So
we are here due to something that happened by the city in 2010. This was created by the city. It's been over 15 years. This property might have redeveloped all this property might have redeveloped had this not been caused by the city so long ago.
Um, I would like to state that I was at PNZ, both PNZ meetings, and there was lots of discussion about how this was supposed to be transit oriented like the CP zoning stated, and it was not pedestrian friendly. In fact, I remember
the vote being 52. I remember two people in opposition on P&Z to both ordinances. Uh, you don't have the PNZ minutes in your packet. I've hope you reviewed them because we all spoke at length at both of the public hearings. I provided packets. I went through them and had much to say at that time. We did have
two meetings with uh Mr. Whitten and we were asked to make our suggestions and all of them were rejected. We hired Cindy Thurman, a wellrespected planner, an expert. She provided a 20page memo to you all in rebuttal of
the staff's opinions. I hope you have read it. I have copies if you need it. that will form the basis of any lawsuits that may be that may be undertaken because you all are impacting the property rights here. No one has addressed the violation of your property
rights element um by this ordinance. There's been no business impact estimate. I understand it's not required at this time, but I would think you would want to know the actual impact on these property owners before you vote on this. that has not been provided and
there's strict requirements of uh cost estimates and things like that that should be known to you before you vote on this ordinance. Um this four corners area is not Cocoa Village. The entrance to Cocoa Village is on Huelet where you guys have paid to
put in signage and decorations. That is the center. This is different. This is truly pedestrian pedestrian not friendly and transit oriented. Mr. Erdman's property is next to a cemetery. There is no way residential is
going to go there. That doesn't make sense to have mixed use on less than 2 acres of property anyway. It's access challenge due to traffic. You have high volumes of traffic. You have lots of speeders and you have very short entranceways that are often closed by uh
parked or cars trying to go through the intersections. All of this property would have redeveloped if the market demanded. You are trying to force something that is not naturally occurring and nothing is going to change the traffic on the FDOT roadway and that bright line is going to increase. I have
two commercial developers and MIMS that are going to be adding at least 10 trips a day onto that trap that trip right the uh road railway right there. Um what I provided to you is information I got through public records and it's the um
work order for RVI. Um this process apparently started in January of 2024 and if you read the proposal this was pre-ordained. They knew what they were going to do when they started all those visioning workshops. That's all made up just to make this make sense because these uses don't make sense here. as
Mary Sullik explained and as um was defined by the property owners that said they've tried everything to develop their vacant property. Um it talks about what's incompatible um what they're going to do. They talk about having stakeholder meetings yet no one spoke to
the four property owners. Sure, they might have received notices but you would have thought they'd have been called. Uh it even says on page two of this they want to talk about prohibited uses which are things that are already there. This was pre-ordained. Somehow this was
designed to get to this exact position. Um interesting to note um there have been almost $65,000 of payments for just this project. More after the me the more recent meetings. What I want to do is go
through this ordinance and tell you why it is more restrictive. I spent a lot of time looking through your land development code as it is now and starting um with exhibit A which is the ordinance proposed I have highlighted everything that is more
restrictive everything and you will see as you go through it all the yellow that is more restrictive um key gateways that's not more restrictive and it says it implements the redevelopment plan's vision it doesn't as defined by Miss Thurman's memo but if you look on page
six of the ordinance Gym and fitness facilities are now limited in size. Mixed use have to be vertically integrated. Retail stores can only cannot exceed three uh 30,000 ft. These are things that are not in your code today. These are more restrictive. If
you look on page seven, the prohibited uses 12 uses are included in here that were allowed previously in your ordinance. You have automobile repair, which is technically a service station. You go through page eight. All of those things that are highlighted are things that
were allowed previously are no longer allowed. If you look at the setbacks, the requirements for rear, that 15 ft is more restrictive. You look at the parking, that's more restrictive because you can't have it in front of the buildings. You look at the landscaping, they requires a 10-ft buffer, we only
require a 5ft buffer currently. You look at the canopy trees, they say they have to be 3 ft in height. They only have to be 2 feet in height right now. foundation planning is equal to 10%. That's not in the code currently. If you look at page 11, none of these building design standards are currently
in your code. All of these are new and they are more restrictive to the property owners that currently exist there and to the uses that currently exist there. Um, I would ask that you not adopt this ordinance or if you do adopt the ordinance because it's such a fabulous
ordinance, take out the 21 property owners. At least take out Mr. Erdman's property. Those properties are the ones in the corner uh with um 251 and 8 are the last numbers of the property. but
take out the requirement of these properties and if it if it's going to work for people, let anyone use this overlay district. Um, and I have to repeat what Miss Sull said with the future land use amendment, just take out
within the FCOD and just keep CP. That will fix Mr. Brown's problem. will fix all of these problems and we can go forward and develop this. Um, this ordinance unreasonably and unfairly burdens the property and it
runs contrary to the investmentbacked expectations of Mr. Erdman and I ask that you deny this ordinance. Thank you. >> You have a question, ma'am. >> Yes, sir. >> Uh, so if I heard correct, you represent uh Mr. Man's property, correct?
>> Yes, sir. So there are plans or there is a want to develop that property is that that's what's in process. It's just this is holding it up. Correct. Uh it there Mr. Erdman doesn't have anyone looking to buy the property currently. It's it's the property to the south that
that wants to build and this they can't build because it's inconsistent. Truly, we couldn't do anything right now. >> Gotcha. >> We can't we can't redevelop, but we can use the building as is for the uses that are allowed or may be allowed. Deputy Mayor Weeks. Ma'am,
>> it is for sale. The property has been for sale, but you can't sell it because you don't know what they can do with it. That's correct. >> That that that's correct. But >> but yeah, but it it's it's a hard intersection. >> It is. But I just wanted to clarify because I thought it was for sale at
some point. Yeah. >> There was a suggestion to Mr. Whitten that maybe it could be purchased for a bus stop, but he did not respond. >> That was my suggestion. I texted it to you. >> Yeah. >> Do we have any other questions for
>> Esquire or Zanka? Seeing none. Thank you very much, ma'am. Um, chair like to close this portion. >> We've given you the opportunity to speak. Mr. Brown, I will allocate you
one minute. One minute will do it. >> Oh man, there's 60 seconds. So go ahead. >> Everything they say makes sense. Everything. >> Everything. >> Okay. >> They all make sense. Please consider that. It's been vacant for so long.
They're going to bury me up there. >> Thank you, sir. >> Please consider it. And the car lot. Take that out. That's the one of the nicest looking places we got in the whole city of Cocoa.
You going to take that out? >> No. Thank you. Thank you very much. >> Thank you very much, sir. Uh uh uh the city manager has his light on and then Councilman Hearn and then I will entertain a motion for a 10-minute recess.
>> Well, let me let me just verify with staff. I've been told this. I just want to verify um Mr. Brown's property is not zoned CP. It's zoned CG, >> correct? >> Yes, sir. That's correct. >> And so
>> Mr. Brown's property is zoned general commercial, not commercial parkway. >> And so this this would not fix his problem. >> That's right. At all. >> Well, if we took out this doing the CP thing, that would not fix his problem >> because he he currently at CG right now.
He's a different zoning. >> So then what's keeping him from being able to do anything with it? >> Still has the inconsistency >> between future land use and zoning. He just has a different zoning, but it's still inconsistent with future land use.
>> Show you in the chart. Bring his back. >> Separate separate occasion different times. >> All right. I'll make a motion to uh do a 10 minute. >> Okay. He has his light on. >> Okay. >> And then after that, >> is that it, Mr. City Manager?
>> Yes, sir. >> Okay. Council, >> uh, my question is to the property owner on the south uh, property. Um, so your dilemma is >> currently as the uh, current uh, use,
you can't sell the property and have it or have it developed. Correct. So, as outlined in the visioning pictures, there was a plaza, a commercial plaza, uh, that looked like it hosted multiple businesses. Um, I've heard that you went out and tried to get
interest if there was businesses businesses currently interested in coming in there into something like a commercial plaza, uh, would you still have an issue with uh, the current proposal? So, >> because I've had multiple, and I'll say
this before you start, I've had multiple businesses, uh, franchise businesses that had interest in coming to Coco. They just didn't have the commercial property to move in. >> Yeah. So, so look, the the situation here is that since it's a it's a vacant
lot, um if if if you are to develop the property, if we get over this the issue that's at hand, which is the inconsistency between the future land use and the zoning and you're able to develop it, um then you have the
economic the economics kick in. And you know, the the easiest path for this property would be a ground lease with the tenant >> paying for the development >> because that's that's what a ground lease is. Essentially, they pay rent on the ground and then, you know, and then
they they they they foot the bill for for whatever is constructed. You know, obviously they go through the permitting process. the the the the the best interest that we've had in the property has been from uh tenants that are interested in doing a ground lease and those are typically going to be national
national national tenants single tenant you know users. Yeah. So the interest that we've been able to garner outside of Cumberland Farms which was a real deal that was brought upon the you know the city has been as of recent it's been to other gas and convenience stores and
then the car wash clearly that you know they they actually they weren't interested in ground leasing they wanted to buy it but you know we went through we we we went through a PSA purchase and sale agreement they put money in deposit they hired Kim they thought that they
were going to be able to navigate uh the incon consistency. They lost their deposit and they cancelled the deal. They walked away. Uh they weren't able to, you know, they weren't they didn't close because they just weren't going to be able to get through with this. And you know, it was going to be a very good-look car wash. There's car washes
that, you know, that have strict design criteria that make it work. But those are the main users. It's, you know, gas and convenience and car wash has been have been the the main you know, the main >> interested parties in the in the property. Yes.
Thank you. >> Councilman Goins, your light is on. >> So, we we've had a a major conflict with what we want
and what the developer and the return on invest investment. Um what the two benefits are are not together, right? We we we had the issue
downtown with hotel and people not wanting this or not wanting gas station, not wanting condos. There has to be a happy medium because what we want may not be what
um those commercial businesses um they don't desire to be in a particular address. And so that's where the conflict lies and that's what make this decision so difficult for me. Um because I did see his marketing
strategy. I did I I've I've talked to many different businesses where you know or or citizens say, "Oh, well, we want this um Chick-fil-A on this corner. Why don't we have I don't want to say Cheesecake Factory,
but those style of restaurants, why why we don't have that here?" But then they'll go to a Vieira or Sunry, right? And so, and it's not it's they look at the bottom line where we looking at our desires. And I think that's
that's where the conflict is is in far as decisions like this, you know, and I don't want to see I don't think none of us want to see that corner being a desert, right? We don't we don't want to see it empty. I think
that's that that's where I am right now. I'm very conflicted because I think the initial conversation I know for me and members in my district started because of the railroad closing on Stone Street. All those different conflicts of uh community feeling left behind. Um at one
time it was supposed to be a gas station, not a gas station. Community is in the uproar about what is it going to be? And and now here we are, you know, 25 years later dealing with the same conversation. And so whatever decision that we we we
make, I I know it's going to be a difficult one for me personally because I just I'm aware of return on investment. I know what that looks like for these for these owners. And I don't I don't believe they're looking to sell. Maybe they're just waiting around for us
to leave. I don't know. But but speak for yourself. >> But but what what what I'm what what I'm saying it's a it's a reality that we have owners that that have a difference of um
opinion uh and a financial um commitment for their properties that they're currently paying taxes on, especially on the vacant piece. >> They're paying tax on that property and not getting a return on investment right now. And so >> well, that's not a good chance.
>> That that's the that's investment. >> Well, that's that's the that you're absolutely correct. But that there lies the conflict. So your attitude towards that, that's where which is not a I'm not saying it's a bad thing. I'm just letting you know
that's where the conflict lies. So that's where in these 10 minutes, you know, I'm pretty sure there going to be a lot of thoughts and questions about what to do with that. And I just I just wanted to make that make that point. So the mayor, that's that wasn't a whatever the opinions that we have and thoughts
that we have. I just know for me it's going to be a very difficult decision on this to me based on the conversations I've had with the owners. So, >> okay. I
>> I I will let you go, ma'am. But let me say it this way. My house is the closest to that intersection than anyone else's house. And I've been living at that that my house where I'm at now for over 60 plus years in my life. and I'm 65, my
grandparents home. Um, we've attended meetings held there at Jolie Smith and clearly beyond a shadow of a doubt the citizens in that area ask for certain things. They want to address the community as a whole issue because of
the location. it is a food desert because that area if we want to go to a grocery store and I'm aware that that it is restrictive there to um not allow a a a grocery store there but beyond a shout
out of a dog there's nothing says that a crispy cream can't go in there or even raisin cane chicken location because at the car lot dealership used to be both jangles >> or it was a chicken joint let me say it that
Now I'm telling my age, but see and I don't mind telling my age. there again they're going to get in their vehicle and leave and but here we are still dealing with that issue there and the citizens of that area and that is the reason why I want them to make I'm a
staunch supporter of capitalism but then again when the community ask for certain things then we should address the community because the community votes if we're going to get hardcore and and
grind knuckles that community votes religiously. So on that note, you know, that's why they pay us the big bucks >> to make those difficult decisions. And there's money to be made because of
the volume of vehicles that travel that road daily, >> but they're going to get in their luxury vehicles and say, "Adios, muchachos and muchachas." Deputy Mayor. >> Well, I have a lot I want to say, but I
would like a 10-minute recess first. >> Okay. >> Make a motion for a 10-minute recess. >> Second. >> All in favor saying I. >> Go in peace. Are we breaking? I have a motion on the floor. >> Second by Deputy Mayor Weeks.
Okay, we're good in the audio room as well. Okay, Deputy Mayor Weeks. Ma'am, >> um well, I've got a few things. Uh the one that came up tonight, the biggest was the 58,000
in cars that go through that intersection. When you do what's the the 28 and the 30 the other direction, that's 58,000 cars going through that intersection a day. That is not a walkable intersection. Um as far as I'm concerned, and I was really shocked to
hear that. Um and then um I drive past all those properties all the time and uh I don't know about traffic going in and out. Obviously there's not room uh when you look at the properties um to have say m if you had
mixed use where you had residential upstairs and commercial downstairs. there's not room parking for for the uh tenants or the owners of the condos or whatever is above, much less parking for employees and um and people who would
come to say a clothing shop or one of those shops. So, it makes sense to have stuff where people are moving through quickly. Um the picture that was brought up of the 7-Eleven, there's a beautiful 7-Eleven in Vieira at Vieier Boulevard right next to um the ball fields that
you don't even know it's a 7-Eleven. It's brick. It's really nice. So, I know that gas stations can be done well where uh they look they look very nice. It's the nicest 7-Eleven I've ever seen. Um the um all the owners I mean this
happened in 2010 with the with a comprehensive plan uh making all their properties un unsailable, unbuildable and for 15 years now. I know the one gentleman bought his after that, but
the council wasn't us. We weren't here then, but uh has put this on them and and now it's up to us to fix it. And I don't think going to a mixed use is the best way to to do that. I I like the
idea of adding CP into the comprehensive plan. I know it won't fix Mr. Brown's issue, but I think that that's the best way to do it and let the market determine what will work on those intersections. I mean, they've all
agreed that they would do the architectural stuff uh that we ask of them. Um and uh I have no problem with the car dealership. I do remember when it was the chicken place. Uh but um and when they put the car dealership there, I thought they were nuts. But look,
they've been a car dealership there for a long, long time. I mean, when we moved here in 1980, it was the chicken place. And um so car dealerships have gone through there like crazy. And uh I mean they I mean they've done very well there. So I
mean it used to be the Kia dealership till they outgrew it. Um or Hyundai. It was Hyundai. That was what it was. Yep. So, um, again, they're willing to even put up more more, uh, plantings or whatever it takes to make, but that
corner looks very nice. They've done a great job there. Um, and, um, um, let's see here. Um, the economic, uh, no economic study and
that kind of stuff. um bothers me that uh nothing's been nothing's been done on any of those fronts. Um again, I I just cannot see this being mixed use at all. I mean, I love the renderings when it first came out. I thought, "Oh, wow.
That looks wonderful." Then I looked at the properties and could not figure out how those would work there. And then um to hear that the home the lot um land owners uh were not in in you know it they were not going along with this and
if without them those lots are going to sit just the way they are. You know we can't force somebody to build something there that we want. There's um so let's make it where it's a win-win. Let's do it so that the the land owners and the
city win by making them look nice but allowing development there that goes with a corner that is deemed to be uh heavy traffic and that's all I have to say on
>> Okay. Uh Councilman her and then I would like to make a motion. Okay. So, uh, all the things that council, I'm sorry, Deputy Mayor Weeks, you said, those are
some good points. Um, especially as far as, you know, um, the wants of the property owner. Um, when I first heard of a gas station there, I really didn't see much issues with it as as well until I spoke to some of the residents within that that community that will be
affected. Uh, some of those are generational homes. People have been living there longer than I've been alive. And uh just thinking about recent events with the noise in the village. We've been having huge complaints with the noise. We know that downtown has
become a uh a nightlife hub. Uh we talked about our police officers uh I'll say escorting those people out of the village. Um we've seen issues where they go straight to the Waw Wa which which we currently have now. And I can only
imagine if that if a gas station was built on that corner uh where those people would go you have another section of uh citizens that would be affected. And um I certainly don't want to tell property owners what to build, what they can or can't do. Uh but I also um you
know being an elected official by the people um I have a duty to them to keep the harmony within their communities. U so that's where I'm at. That's my dilemma and I just wanted to put that out there. Okay.
All right. Um, I'm a firm believer in being the great compromise. And let me read something to you that I'm just trying to be fair and equitable across the board. I want to do what's best for the community as a whole
because of, you know, like you alluded to, you're right, Councilman Hearn, lifelong citizens. You're right, Deputy Mayor. Um, and Councilman Goins, you're looking at it from a business perspective, too, as well. So, based on reading the two the tea
leaves, and I know we have a two two tie here potentially, and I would think maybe it comes with a stalemate in regards of the council vote. So what I would like to do
with your blessings since I made a couple of notes because in 2010 a decision was made concerning two designated spots of mixed use for land use and that was used for designation.
The market may be different now than it was back then. So what I am proposing is what I'm requesting from council that for tonight we have staff sit down
with the land owners and determine if there is a way that we could along in conjunction with their attorneys of course that we can have a happy medium a fair and equitable compromise. Once that is accepted
and approved by the land owners, then the community will have a meeting. So, I'm asking that we do postpone this first meeting for tonight. Sit down with staff and the land owners.
Also have additional public meetings at um Jolie Smith like we did previously. So then we can have a more contemporary um concerns from the citizens of Coco. So I would ask that we have three
meetings at Jolie Smith. Name of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. >> Yes. And we've done it before. Um that it takes place at Jolie Smith. So that would be my recommendation. And I'm looking for a second, please, that
we sit down and talk with the home own, excuse me, with the business owners, have a community meeting, staff, city manager, city attorney, collaborate, and then bring it back to us with the proposal and I
>> What's your postpone? >> I would say what would be a fair and equitable two months from now or you think of January? >> Yes, sir. January. >> No. No. Yes. We would have the meetings
prior to bringing it back to council. So, we are in the month of October. Well, this month is halfway over because we have one um one more for this month. I think we have for November. We will
have a meeting then because I think the other what's the second meeting? What's do we have a second meeting for November because that's Thanksgiving. >> Um we only have one meeting scheduled in November which is the 18th, >> right? And then and then in December we
will only have but one meeting and this will give us um a adequate amount of time to collaborate with the business owners community and then bring it back to uh staff bring
it back to council and then we make a decision then. So that's what I'm asking that we postpone this until the um first meeting in January. What is the first meeting in January, Mrs.
or Ms. um Arsenal, please? Ma'am. >> Sure. Let me take a look at my calendar here. >> Yes, ma'am. >> Um it's going to be January 13th. >> Okay. And I need a second, please. >> I got a second. Okay. would I got a
second by councilman Hearn sinkle. >> Okay, council. >> The only the only question that I have um is we we went through a lengthy process with RVI previously.
I I also don't want to waste staff time with three meetings. I I believe our community will come out because it's important. three meetings. To me, in my opinion, it might be overkill.
Um, we only have until January. And we also don't want to make it seem like we're rushing it either, right? And so if we do if we do that one meeting give them three or maybe four to five weeks from today make a date certain at Jolie Smith
Center in my opinion I think we'll get an understanding where the community is at that particular date because we know community will come out if they feel like it's important they're going to make it a priority and
I just that that's my only uh concern and I don't know if RVI is a part of that. That mean we paying them more. That's another conversation. I don't know if that's part of I'm sorry I said that but I don't know if that's part of the conversation which it may be and maybe somebody can answer that part. Is
that >> Yeah. And I I I'll talk based on what I heard and both based on the feedback logistics there. And so, and so if we're going to be back in January, um, and it's it's going to be, uh, to me a workshop style meeting between staff,
the planners, uh, the property owners, and at which the public is invited. And so, we're at Jolie Smith and we're we're we have a product, they have reaction to that product, they have suggestions there. And so we'll go back and and work
on is there a gap that can be bridged uh you prod you produce that product uh in in front of the public as a work session. Um they have an opportunity to go to to get that
product to go back and react to that product and the public does at the same time. And so I think it's more than a one meeting sort of process. Um, you know, again, yeah, there there's going to be cost involved with regards to I don't know if what we have under the
work order, the task order with RVI, but but again, I I think that the community would appreciate and again, you're building the product. You're building the uh the compromise, if you will, in front of the public. you're giving that
uh to the public to react to cuz it's not going to be created at that first initial meeting. There's going to be the sort of the brainstorming. You're going to have to come back with a hey this is the product that we would suggest as staff which may be different than what they would suggest as the property
owners. That's a second meeting and then maybe there's some tweaking of that. That is a it is potentially a third meeting there. So, so I don't know if the mayor said um a maximum of three or a minimum of three or beginning with three or it takes the number of meetings
that it takes, you know, and so and so for me, these are working sessions that are uh built with the community there. Um obviously giving us a reaction to the dialogue that's taking place and ultimately the product that's brought
back to them prior to bringing it back to you guys. So, so you you would just my question would would you meet with the owners probably more than likely going to be separately I'm assuming would you meet
with them in a prior to that first >> I don't know why meeting I don't know why I would meet I mean I mean again it's I mean they they've pretty much put on the table where they are we know where we are and so and so why can't that happen in front of the public as is
sort of a roundt um um work session. I only reason only reason I said that because sometimes we get community come to meetings like that they don't necessarily understand the complete process of step one step two
step three and just in my opinion I could be completely wrong but from what I've seen if we give them a product they know like you said they know what they want but Skaya knows they want this thing they come up with that product for
for whatever they think that should look like they allow the community to b to tap into whatever that ideal is and then step two just I'm I'm not telling you what to do but I'm just I'm just thinking >> well it it is direction of the council
and so and so for me the way I envision this thing is is that we're we're sitting across the table um they're sitting across the table um we we're we're we're talking concepts we're talking disagree agreements. We're talking agreements. Uh the community is
there. The community gets a public comment portion to react to all of those conversations, all of that dialogue, and then we go back and we build a product. Uh bring that back to the community. They may still have some disagreements with that, but we bring that back to the
community and maybe there's a second session and then a a a reddrafting of of the proposal. >> Can Can I add to that. Um, time is money. Obviously, they're paying their attorneys over there like crazy. I mean,
and that's more time that they can't do anything with their properties while we're again going back again. And so, I hate that for them because, you know, time is money. It's going to cost the city more and it's costing them more.
Um, I mean, I like the idea of of of holding off at this point because I do think maybe we can come to a compromise, but to go through month after month series of meetings, well, however long that is.
>> Yeah, it's the same time. I mean, when you look at going into the holiday season, >> um, their suggestion where you just simply add uh I think it was CP as a as a which I like as an allowable zoning under the mixed use there. That still
has to go back to P and Z, right? >> You guys correct me if I'm wrong. >> And so and so it's the time that it takes that's going to be the same time in my estimation. >> Okay. >> So that go ahead. Oh, I I I was just going to say, so if we don't vote to
postpone and instead uh maybe bring up about putting in CP, it it's going to be uh but we can't do that because we don't have that before us. >> Well, you're starting over. >> You're starting over. I got you. Okay. So, at this point, the best thing is
probably to postpone. I just hate for months on end to go by. So, I want to make sure our timeline is short. So, you're saying two meetings? >> I said three public. >> He said three public and I think >> No, I'm I'm saying we we'll we'll it it
takes what it takes. The the direction is postpone the item until the first meeting in January staff to sit down with the land owners. The public is invited to those work sessions. >> Okay. Well, I I will go along with that
then. >> All right. I just >> Okay, then let's call the question. >> You we're clear on the direction. Yes, ma'am. Yes, sir. >> Yep. Let's roll with it. >> She was going to call the question. All in favor saying I. >> I. Any nays? Eyes have it unanimously.
So, if we are going to postpone number item number 6-3, then postpone item number 6-4 because it goes hand in hand with the two. >> Yeah. Correct. Okay. So, you want anybody want to make the motion or if
not I'll make the motion. >> Go ahead. >> I make a motion to postpone the first reading of ordinance number 01-2025 large scale comprehensive plan text amendment for the four corners overlay district.
>> I'll second. >> We have a second on the floor by Deputy Mayor Weeks. Do you have that, Madame Clerk? >> Yes, sir. >> Thank you, K. All in favor by saying I. I >> eyes have it unanimously. Proceeding on to item number Thank you, Miss Quest and
Staff. >> Thank you, business owners. >> Just make sure I got the postponement correct. That's January 13th, correct? >> Correct, sir. Monica >> 6 p.m. >> Yes. Okay. >> Thank you.
>> Thank you. Proceeding forward to item number 7-1. Consider the donation application for the success center in the amount of $1,000 consideration of the 2025 city council
meeting date addition. Mr. Mayor >> Okay. You want them to >> I need to uh clarify something on the last item. >> Go ahead. >> Uh I think I need the city attorney and Mr. Oliver. Hey, on your letter,
your letter was dated today. I think there is a clock that starts with his letter and so Anthony, I don't know how we handle that if we postpone the item. >> Sorry. I mean, can we can we handle it the same way it was handled the first
time? >> Go ahead, brother. >> You know, my client's here. If you give me a second to confer with him, I might see if we can postpone our letter, but I can't speak for the other property owners there. There's certainly discussion of sending their own letters
to secure their own rights to attorneys fees should the city decide to proceed under Senate Bill 180. So, if you just give me a couple minutes, uh we can come back to that part while you do the next item. These these gentlemen have been waiting here
throughout our discussion. >> Okay. >> Thank you. All right. See, you return. Well, >> all right. Um, consideration of the donation application to success center in the amount of $1,000.
What are the wishes of council? >> Move to approve. >> We have a motion on the floor by Deputy Mayor Weeks, second by the chair. All in favor saying I. >> I. >> Eyes have it unanimously. Congratulations.
Um, moving on to the next item number two, a federal fund for the juvenile violence. As you all know, it is a $2 million grant with the approval of uh council fiscal year 25 communitybased
violence intervention and prevention initiative grant through the department of justice authorizing the city manager to sign and approve all documents and budget related items for this particular grant. It's a no budget impact. So chair
like to make a motion to approve second that the deadline is October the 22nd 2025 >> a second. >> Okay. All in fa Okay. You got the motion and you got a second. You have it madame clerk. >> Yes sir. >> Thank you ma'am. I just want to make sure.
>> All in favor by saying I. >> I nazy eyes have it unanimously. This is going to coincide with Cocoa High School. >> Walk her out. Where you parked at, ma'am? >> I was right outside. >> Oh, we just going to walk right outside
there with you. >> You to do it. Oh, no. Chief Chief as well. Oliver Cole. Thank you, mayor. I was hoping I could get permission tonight, but I'll have to consult with my client and um hopefully
get you guys an answer in the next day or so on at least my client's Senate Bill 180 letter. >> Okay. Uh what's your recommendation, city manager, city attorney? City attorneys
may >> I think you proceed with your with your direction that you've given. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Just for clarity, was the motion was the ordinance tabled or was it with >> postponing? Yes, sir. >> Okay. Thank you.
>> Sir, >> y >> January the 13th, ma'am. Second Tuesday in the month of January. and we will have community meetings and you all will be invited >> so we can have another public flogging. >> I won't say all that ma'am. No, I I I
didn't I presented it as a it's a work session with staff and there's a there's a the public is invited um and the public and there will be a public comment se section on uh the discussions you know and so
>> okay >> okay thank you >> okay proceeding forward for reports. City manager reports. >> Not sure that I have any. Um I'll ask
staff, but I don't think we have any. Uh Mr. Mayor. >> Okay. City attorney report. >> Thank you, sir. Uh and ma'am, um >> Oh, I didn't have no no should I ask.
>> Okay. Right. >> Okay. And and ma'am, you left your little >> shandig here. >> Oh, yeah. I've got to undo all of that. >> It's gonna take me a minute. Do you mind
if I do it while you're talking? >> Um, no, ma'am. We're recording. Okay. Thank you. Um, okay. Who's is it odds today or >> even? >> Even real quick. >> Take your time, man. Go ahead.
>> Do we have a clicker? >> It might be over there for their presentation. >> Oh, yeah. >> I'm just excited. I actually got my photos in on time this week. So, >> by the way, did you have to send the one with the snake?
>> I got you. I got you. Thank you. John Cash, >> go ahead, sir. Oh, you're waiting on Mitch. I'm sorry. >> So, District 2 looks so nice up there. District 2
reports. I haven't seen that in a while. >> All right. >> Okay. I didn't know they wanted to start off with such a good looking picture, but uh >> Mr. Deonire. That's Mr. Deonire. >> So, uh this is my attendance at the Emma uh Charter Academy annual gala uh where
we raised money. Uh well, the organization raised money. Uh it was a great turnout. Um a lot of people from the community showed up. uh they're going to be making improvements to their uh facility um based off these funds that raised. So I attended uh as well as
our mayor looking nice and sharp be like in that raer blue >> rad. So uh you said it right. >> So yeah, it was a great turnout. Um happy to be there with the mayor and uh represent the city.
Uh I wanted to present this last meeting. Uh this was the um the pinning ceremony for our two new officers. Uh I was excited to attend that. Uh Chief and your staff, as I stated last meeting, you're doing a good job with recruitment. Uh like I stated, we're
getting wellqualified candidates. I believe one of them is former military if I'm correct. U great family, so I'm excited to have them on board. Uh continue the good work. uh some of the photos from the uh finishing product
uh of the Broadmore acre project. Uh a lot of the citizens in this community, they are so excited about the uh work, the finished product. Uh we had we had some excessive rain over the weekend um last week and I can say for certain the
project is working. There was no flooding in this location here. Um, the citizens are happy about that. I'm happy. So, that was money well spent. Um, also had a chance to go out to the Oh,
my mind just went blank blank for a second. Had a park. >> Sorry. I had a uh some a time to go out to Braco Pond and uh observe some of the the trees that we planted uh previously and they're doing good out there. The park is looking great. Um, so that's
good initiative that we've been doing by planting those trees out there, providing shade for the citizens that go out, enjoy this park. Um, and that's it. All is well in district two. Um, keep up the good work, everyone. >> Doesn't matter.
>> Whatever y'all like. >> Okay, >> you're next. >> Yep. I'm I'm up next. Um, let's see here. It'll pop up and then I start hitting the right arrow. Right. >> Yes, ma'am.
>> Okay. As I always start hitting the right arrow and then I've already skipped. >> So, the first one that's coming up is uh the Cocoa Village Playhouse went to the School of Rock. It was very good. They're getting ready to do Annie. If y'all haven't been, you need to go to these plays and musicals. They do
phenomenal job. The kids in this actually played their musical instruments. It was amazing. Um then I went to the uh League of Cities. I'm on the legislative and taxation committee and so this was all of the committee uh
meeting. Um I had got a tour of uh Vaia I always say it wrong. Voya space. Vaia Vaia. Y'all have been out there. Unbelievable what they're doing. They are reinventing or they're coming up with such neat stuff and to get to hold their uh fuel made out of recycled
beads, plastic beads and oxygen was amazing. You can't take pictures inside so I took a picture of the sign. Um and then this was all the group that took the ethics uh training. I went over and took my yearly ethics thing that we have to do and that was all the uh group that
took that. Actually, we did it down in the in Vieira the same day as the uh uh legislative uh delegation meeting and those were all them up there. They had a huge turnout and all the cities were up giving um uh we didn't have anybody who
did who spoke at that, but um anyway, they uh League of Cities did, but they uh did a great job there. And then this was state of the cities where our city manager uh came with a bunch of other city managers and did a state of the
cities. He did a great job and uh so thank you very much for doing that. That was put on by the chamber of commerce and uh of course Samantha was there. So it was a it was a very well attended event. This was the uh night out. Uh I all of a sudden realized I had not taken
any pictures. So, I took some pictures of the night out in Provos Park that also was well attended. And uh I still say those girls who did the stepping from the Emtt Jewel Academy, amazing. Um then I left there and went to the
fundraiser that Koko High School was doing, the theater department and which that's my granddaughter in the middle there, the advanced theater department. They're fundraising because they're putting their play on this year at the Cocoa Village Playhouse and so they got to raise money for that. Um then this is
tip a cop and uh so my husband and I went to that and um the mayor was there as well. Um and they did a great job. I hope that y'all raised a lot of money. But this is my particular favorite. If it's a video, I hit it again, right, >> Mitch? >> Uh yes.
>> Okay, watch this. I was so excited. I got uh you'll see uh the third person or fourth person in line there. [Laughter] >> I'm sorry. I had to do it, Chief.
[Laughter] I had to get him dancing down the aisle there. So, anyway, >> for a good cause. >> It was for a good cause. And I hope you raised a lot of money. We tipped well. Then I was in Arkansas last week. That
is my mom on the left who turned 91. >> Uh doesn't she look great at 91? And this was 24 of our family members who all got together for her 91st birthday. Um and so we my my husband and I flew to Arkansas last week and she lives like 30 minutes south of Harrison, Arkansas. Um,
one last thing that I've got. Um, I've found out today that Stradley Park, I know we've put in to do spend some money there, but uh, we are charging a whole lot of money for the poor softball teams to play there. Um, and uh, they first uh
were asking $6,500 for a 10-week softball. I know, right? And then they got them down to 21,00. And they only do foul lines. They don't provide. We don't provide. The safety bags that everybody else does. The
dugouts are in bad shape. The bleachers um are uh need work. I was writing down everything she told me. Field one was used by the football team and they're ruining them with their cleat, so they can't even use that. Um field two and
three have no roofs on the dugout. Um uh we don't chalk the fields. They're having to buy their own chalk and their own machine to chalk the fields. and yet they're paying $2,100. Um, and football players keep coming on the field while they're doing batting practice. Um, and
so and they don't even put trash bags in the trash cans. So, uh, the grass was not mowed. They went to play and the grass was knee high out there. So, um, this is a women's league and they have seven teams that are trying to play there. Um, they call it a league of
their own, I think. Uh anyway, um so I don't know what's going on or who to who. >> So So this is not Coco Little League. This is an outside. >> This is a women's they live in Coco, but it's a women's a slow pitch softball team. >> So So what you need to do
>> relate to them. They need to become wreck partners with Bard County Parks and Rec. They are not WCK partners. If they become wreck partners, they will be able to use it for free. >> Okay. >> Okay. She's new at this. She's not done it before.
>> Okay. >> They don't have a partnership. >> Okay. >> So, they need a partnership. >> Okay. So, say that again. Let me write down. >> They need to be nonprofit and they need to contact them to become a wreck partner with Bvoulevard County Parks and Recck.
>> Okay. >> They don't have either. That's why they're being charged. >> Okay. >> W partners don't charge. >> They provide anything either. I mean, >> no. No. No. Normally they like say for example football we don't they don't get any money from us per se. They have to paint their own fields. They have to get
their own equipment. They charge the the kids a fee >> to play and that's and then concession and sponsorships and stuff like that. So >> Okay. >> Yep. >> Thank you. >> Yeah. No problem. >> That's all. Got a lot of problems.
All right. Um, Miss Abigail, thank you. And the streets, I believe it was streets and public works together. >> Grounds and storm water. >> Oh, grounds and storm water. >> Streets and storm water. >> I better say that their names right because they get mad at me. So this this
this is a rightaway owned by the city of Coco. Um it was used by many people as a dumping ground in between Lucas and Washington Street. And so it connects Lucas and Washington connects together.
So this rideway this is so what you're doing you're facing east Washington street is all the way at the end and so it was used for a homeless dump ground tires car engines
everything you can possibly think of. Um, few residents been complaining. As you can see, you see brand new houses being built. On the lefth hand side, you see the brand new white picket fences coming in. Um, and and residents are just tired of it. Um, I really
appreciate the guys um for getting out there and getting this done. I believe they did it over maybe two weeks or so, two and a half weeks. Um, they did a great job and our guys did this. We didn't contract this out. I I really do appreciate them getting it done because
it was really really bad in the eyesore. Um so this is one of the guys, Mr. Jeff. Uh he's been with us for 25 years. Um he says he has five years left of the drop. Um but I told me he got to stay for like another 10. But he's uh really is one of
the leads that was out there. I think he he drove the grapple truck. Um but man, they they really put in a lot of work out there to get it done. And so I appreciate them for for doing that. So this is the end result. This how it looks now. Um if you would have seen it
before, I I believe you Miss Abby, you probably have some photos of the before, but it was it was really really bad. I don't know how many loads they took out of there, but appreciate that. Thank you. Um this was for Lee Bravar. I was on a
panel with other city u and county leaders. Um it was a a great opportunity to all to highlight uh city of Aokco. Thank you Samantha for giving me all the um marketing um items um pens and
pamphlets and and different things and everybody at Leadership Boulevard really appreciated um Coco cuz we were the only city that brought anything. So that was a that was a good thing as well. But it was a good opportunity to highlight all the things the council staff are are
doing. So um this was a uh pastor appreciation uh in the middle is pastor Jarvis and and Miss uh Eloise um Wash um me and uh uh Councilman Hearn went and did a
proclamation. Thank you mayor for signing that proclamation um for pastor Wash. Pastor Wash is not just a pastor. um he is a true leader in our community. He's helps a lot of um people in our community. So um we commend him for all
the work that that that he's doing along with his wife and their um congregation. Um this was at Emma Charter Academy. I made them hold Cookman signs up. Uh as you can see their teacher is a FAMU fan. Um but it was another it was a spirit
week last week at Emma Jewel. Each day they had a different theme. Um, so from time to time I sneak them pizza cuz uh Mr. Cole don't like them eating junk food. U so they love when I when I show up. Um this was Saturday. I took some
kids to the Bthoon Cookman and Southern University game. Some of these kids and parents have never been to a college football game ever in their life. So there was a great opportunity. Um >> yeah, Councilman Hearn's son is there number six. And that's my son looking
crazy. number seven. Um, but it it was a great opportunity to take some kids uh from Coco. Um, 45 minutes is a college playing ball and they got to go for free. So, thank you to Bthoon Cookman for giving us uh 30 tickets um for free
um and allow our young people and their parents to um to show up. >> They win >> and they won. Yes, they did. So, this young man, he's from Coco, Florida. He is the starting dackle for um Bthoon Cookman. Uh his name is AJ Hall. Um he
graduated from Rock Ledge. Um but he he is a a great um person for these young people to see and give them something to look forward to. Um and and that that that was it. Um also shout out to uh police department as
well. Um it's a lot of things going on in the community. I commend you guys for all the hard work that y'all are putting in. Um, and I I really do appreciate everything that y'all have done, all the first responders. Um, it's a lot happening
behind the scenes that we don't see. And so, and Lord knows what y'all go through. And so, I I I appreciate y'all again. So, thank y'all for doing all the hard work. And that's it. >> Okay. What I'm going to do because of sake of time, because of what's next, I will
forgo on my photos and just wait till next council meeting. You can beat me up later, Mitch. That's not a problem. Just want to say thank you to all the 400 plus employees for doing a phenomenal job. Your works are being recognized and
I just want to say with all my heart, thank you very much. Um, you make our city supersede all of its e levels of expectation and I'm very proud to be considered as a cocoa and I'm thankful
for you all because even even broken crayons work. They color and we're not broken by no stretch of the imagination. I'm just saying how much I appreciate you all. Job well done, my good and
faithful servants for the citizens of Coco and beyond. The chair entertains a motion to adjourn. >> Move to adjourn. >> All right, we have a motion floor by Deputy Mayor Weeks. >> Second. >> Second by Councilman Gins. We ask that we all go in peace. All in favor saying
I. >> I. I said,