Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Planning Approvals topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Commission approves special exception for 410 Reed Ave. and a 43-lot development order

5397819 · July 16, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The commission approved a special exception to allow two residential units above a commercial building at 410 Reed Avenue and approved a development order to plat 43 lots for the Midmark Beach/Port Bays project; both items were previously recommended by the planning board.

The City Commission approved two planning items July 15 after the planning board's recommendation: a special exception to allow two residential units above commercial space at 410 Reed Avenue and a development order for Midmark Beach/Port Bays to develop 43 platted lots. Jim (planning staff) told commissioners the request for 410 Reed Avenue sought density relief to allow two residential units above a commercial building on a 30-foot lot, mirroring a prior project across the street that had two upstairs residential units and rear parking. Jim said the immediate downtown area currently does not require on-site parking, though that policy could be revisited if downtown parking needs change. Commissioner Carey moved to approve the special exception at 410 Reed Avenue; Commissioner Lowery seconded. Bill King, representing DKS Holdings, spoke in favor and said the developer plans to use local labor. The motion passed 5-0. The commission then considered Midmark Beach/Port Bays Unit 1, a request to proceed with 43 lots of a previously approved larger development (the original development order had covered roughly 193 lots). Commissioner Hoffman made the motion to approve; Commissioner Carrigan seconded and the motion passed 5-0. Jeremy Novak, representing the county at the meeting, asked about DRI (Development of Regional Impact) communications and whether the county had been copied on correspondence; city staff said they sent support materials to FDOT and would share copies with county staff who requested them. Both approvals were presented as consistent with planning board recommendations and the city's development regulations; commissioners recorded aye votes with no recorded opposition.