Building Heights in Cocoa Beach

The November election is right around the corner and that means that it’s time to vote on Cocoa Beach building heights! Building heights have been a huge topic of controversy over the last year or so, and it’s important we all take this vote seriously.

Take a listen at what Cocoa Beach City Commissoner canditate, Tim Tumulty has to say about building heights in Cocoa Beach.

By Voting “Yes” on Question #1,  you can protect our city against high-rise developments, establish safer and more environmentally friendly buildings and help to beautify the city of Cocoa Beach altogether.

Let’s continue to make Cocoa Beach a beautiful place to live, work and play!

For more information about Canditate Tim Tumulty visit his website: ttumulty.com

or give him a call (321)-698-9552.

20 Comments Leave a comment

  1. kelley hewitt October 11, 2018

    What happened to the 18-20 comments that were here yesterday? All except ONE was against Question #1.
    A YES vote on Question #1 will increase the building heights currently in law, the details of said law are written in our 233 page
    Land Development Code accessible here.
    https://www.cityofcocoabeach.com/DocumentCenter/View/3293/LAND-DEVELOPMENT-CODE-CITY-OF-COCOA-BEACH-FLORIDA_2018-PDF

    PAGE 39 of the above referenced document has a chart of the current building height laws by zoning district/classification

  2. Resident October 12, 2018

    The current charter requirements are what distinguish our city from many other over-developed beachside communities. Vote No on CB Question One to protect and preserve our town and the Indian river lagoon.
    This site is backed by the same folks that are spreading all the misleading information about question one so I’ll be curious to see how long my comments remain before they too disappear into cyberspace. As these are the same folks that are supporting tumulty it’s no surprise they have him furthering the spread of misleading info, and he does it so well. Follow the money and you will see that the developers and hoteliers are are funding his campaign and Advocating for question one.

    Vote for Skip Williams, the candidate that supports the residents because residents really really really matter.

    PS – tumulty’s attempt to hijack the Skip Williams “Residents Matter” campaign slogan shows a lack of integrity, but I guess I’m not really surprised.

    The only place I’ve seen the true facts presented is on the raisedonhoecakes.com website.

  3. Native October 12, 2018

    Vote No on question one to protect the small town residential character of our city, developers pull this stuff out every few years to try to push the heights up a few more feet. Just say “No” on question one and live within the current requirements which mirror about 50% of other small coastal city’s like ours. Existing buildings/condominiums are already covered in the current charter requirements so the only people this helps are people who want to build new and taller buildings which will make traffic congestion worse and adds additional stress to the indian river lagoon.

  4. Brian Costleigh October 12, 2018

    Hmmm. I too wonder where all the no responses from previous are? I was on the fence and leaning towards voting yes on question 1. But I am also a person who wants to see ALL points of view whether I agree or not! When no vote comments disappear as the election approaches, I start thinking WHY?! And are people trying to silence the dissent. I really hope that is not the case and makes me think voting no may be a better option.

  5. Tom October 13, 2018

    As a long time resident who has witnessed first hand the buildout of our city I really don’t think we need taller buildings, we have plenty and the current charter already provides allowances for changing FEMA flood zones if they need to be rebuilt. I know we can’t go back in time but we can vote No on question one to help protect the lagoon from more development and maintain the small town atmosphere of our town. As real estate values continue to rise you just need to drive around town to see all the redevelopment going on under the current charter requirements, we don’t need to go any higher. I’m voting No on this one.

  6. Angelika Anderson October 14, 2018

    What a lie. Tumulty says voting yes on amendment wouldn’t change the existing height limit??? Only add 10 feet to the top and some more ground level? Did anybody see the ad on utube (last night while watching tv) to vote yes on amendment 1? Amongst a few other images it showed the Cocoa Beach pier. Isn’t that interesting? Yes, citizens matter. Vote no on changing amendment 1!!!

  7. Tom October 14, 2018

    There is so much misleading information on this being financed by the cocoa beach hotel and motel PAC (i.e., developers and the tourism industry) who are financing the so called protect and preserve CB PAC it is definitely disturbing. The city commissioners did not vote to approve this amendment as some of the propaganda is saying they only voted to put it on the ballot to let the residents decide. Approving this amendment does nothing to fix our city spending problems and just kicks the can down the road. If approved we will be right back here in 5 years with the developers saying they need another 10′. Don’t fall for all the misinformation being distributed on YouTube and by certain candidates (see above). If you don’t want taller buildings Vote No on Question One – its that simple.

  8. Angelika October 15, 2018

    To add 10 feet would allow another floor of habitable space to be built. The committee “protect and preserve Cocoa Beach” was formed only to change our current height ordinance and raise it. Meaning more residential traffic, constructing issues, evacuation problems. The current 45 foot limit was overwhelmingly voted in by Cocoa Beach residents. That’s what we did back then to protect and preserve. Why change it now except for somebody’s personal financial gain.

    • Tom October 15, 2018

      Just to clarify, question one will allow for an additional 10′ of uninhabited space (not living space) on top along with increasing the height to accommodate for flood zones. That said, it still means taller buildings in our city. I personally think we have enough tall buildings and don’t need any more. Also, the developers and speculators will not stop here, the higher they can build increases their profits so they will continue down the path of trying to convince residents that taller is better unless residents vote NO to Question One and send a strong message (Again) that we don’t want or need taller buildings. Let’s get the word out to as many residents as possible to vote no on question one.

  9. Brian Costleigh October 17, 2018

    As I stated in a previous response that was deleted, if the question just allowed starting the height at the base flood elevation rather than from the crown of the road, that alone would have given a few more feet for the builders. That would have been very reasonable. Instead they wanted to squeak in an additional 10 feet. Now it will be voted down.

    • Tom October 17, 2018

      I wish I was as optimistic as you but the developers and special interest groups are flooding the city with signs and misleading information on social media. This is going to take a real grass roots effort of residents to spread the word and get the facts out in order to vote this thing down. I am all for development within the existing height limitations that have been in place since 2003. The current charter is what makes our city a great place to live – spread the word to vote no on CB question one when you go to the ballot.

  10. Resident October 17, 2018

    Checkout the “raisedonhoecakes.com” website to see their recent posts on this topic. They present the facts in an unbiased manner and state it’s ultimately up to the residents to decide if they want taller structures. They also have a post that digs deeper into who is supporting the amendment and some of the underhanded things they have been doing. Again, they don’t take sides, but they do call out the folks putting out the misleading information. Get the data so you can make an informed decision this election.

  11. kelley hewitt October 19, 2018

    MAKE your OWN signs that say. VOTE NO ON QUESTION #1

    we don’t have the $$ the developers have, but talk to your neighbors and make your own signs. I have one in my yard and people stop and read it and when I see them doing so, I go out and talk to them, educate them, even if they’re tourists!

  12. bob October 23, 2018

    Attention Residents: If you make or purchase a Vote No Sign electioneering requirements are that it contain a disclaimer statement so don’t forget to add:

    “Paid electioneering communication paid for by (name and address of person paying for the communication)”

    This will help ensure compliance with electioneering communication regulations and keep everyone happy. If you’ve already made your sign, just grab a sharpie and add it to your sign in order to be compliant.

    • Bob October 23, 2018

      The Raised on Hoecakes website (raisedonhoecakes.com) has a better explanation on what needs to go our your signs.
      Looks like the more correct answer is:
      It should be marked “paid political advertisement” or with the abbreviation “pd. pol. adv.” and state the name and address of the persons paying for the advertisement.

  13. Bud October 24, 2018

    Anyone know where I can purchase my own “Vote No on Question One” sign? I’d like to put one up out front to support this residents effort. I promise I’ll get a sharpie and put the disclaimer on the bottom to make it legal. I don’t have $34,000 to throw at this thing like the developers have but I’m hoping a yard sign might be a little cheaper.

  14. Resident October 25, 2018

    We got two Vote No signs from a recycle bin (with the owners permission), added the required disclaimer and bought two sign stakes from the local hardware store for about $7.00. If your so inclined you can probably just take a picture and bring it to a local print shop to have your own signs made. Just be sure to stay below the $500 limit, or you need to form an official committee, also,make sure to add the disclaimer to the sign to be compliant with state requirements.

    Not sure if my signs will do anything to let folks know they are being misled or not, but I feel doing something is better than doing nothing and then whining about it later.

  15. Resident October 28, 2018

    Just to add some clarication, the amendment that ended up on the ballot as question One is not what what Commissioner Williams proposed as a compromise. Basically, it was modified to add another 10′ on the top and permits developers to now build above the flood elevations on their entire property if even a tiny portion (i.e. 1″) has a defined flood elevation. So it would allow some structures to be built above the flood elevation even if the structure isn’t located in an area with a defined flood elevation. To understand who is pushing so hard to get this approved you only need to look at the city website to see that developers have hired a marketing firm and spent $35,000 dollars to convince the residents this is a good thing. The recent fish kill along the beaches and the sorry state of our lagoon are why we don’t need any more tall buildings, I’m hoping the residents can pull together and vote No on Question One. Let’s save the character of our small town and vote no on one. We already have a great town, let’s keep it.

    The same special interest groups are financially backing candidate tumulty, which is the reason he is backing this amendment. Don’t let the big development special interest groups ruin our small beachside community. The current charter requirements allow for new and safe structures to be built, while controlling overdevelopment and allowing for smart redevelopment. Vote no on both Question One and candidate tumulty.

  16. Local October 29, 2018

    Tons of misleading info and outright lies out there and the FB trolls attack anyone who dares to have an independent thought. I noticed the PAC supporting this has now spent over $41,000 to convince us how great an idea it is, I believe if it’s such a great idea they wouldn’t have had to spend a penny. Oh well, it is up to the residents to decide if we want to start down the “go higher” pathway to solve our fiscal problems, if we do I imagine we’ll be right back here in another 5-10 years having this same discussion.

    Step One: If you don’t want to see taller buildings in Cocoa Beach you should Vote No on Question One.
    Step Two: Re-Elect Commissioner Williams (who supports the residents) and get some Fiscally responsible officials elected to support him.

  17. Bill November 1, 2018

    Vote No on CB Question One to save the height restrictions and protect our community, the ocean, and the Indian river lagoon from further overdevelopment. CB has a spending problem, not a revenue problem. Our city budget is already twice that of cape canaveral and satellite beach combined. Say no to the out of town special interest groups who have alreadtpy spent over $41,000 trying to sway this election in their favor.

Leave your comment