Planning board recommends denial of rezoning to GC2 for Parker Drive parcel, citing adjacent residences and utility concerns

The Panama City Planning Board voted to recommend denial of a small-scale land-use amendment and rezoning request for a 0.555-acre parcel on Parker Drive, saying the proposed change to General Commercial 2 (GC2) would abut residential properties and could increase long-term intensity on the site.

The request (case number listed in the record as 0376) was filed by the property owner and applicant, identified in the record as Benjamin Gireknis. He told the board he would consider using the property for outdoor storage such as boat and RV trailer parking if rezoned. Planning staff recommended denial, citing that the property is surrounded by R‑1 residential lots and noting potential fire-flow limitations in the area that could require upgrades to utility infrastructure if a commercial use were developed.

Staff explained that fire-flow and utility capacity concerns are typically addressed during the commercial development-order stage, once engineered plans are available; however, staff said the location’s adjacency to residential parcels and the permanence of a GC2 zoning designation weigh against rezoning at this time. Staff also summarized relevant site standards including a 10-foot landscape buffer, and a rear setback for buildings and structures that the staff described as effectively 20 to 25 feet; a screening fence on the property line also would be required where dissimilar uses abut.

Board members expressed concern that rezoning from residential to GC2 could permanently increase the intensity of uses on the site and create nuisance risks for immediately adjacent homeowners. One board member said that, because GC2 is the most intense commercial district in the city, allowing the change where houses back up to the site could be problematic. The owner said he had not yet solicited neighbor feedback and acknowledged he would need to do additional preparatory work before the item could advance.

A motion was made and seconded to recommend denial; the roll call recorded affirmative votes from Board member Carroll, Board member Stamps, Board member Barker, Board member Rich, and Chairman Neubauer. The motion to recommend denial carried (roll call recorded all yes votes). The recommendation will be forwarded to the City Commission for final action at a future meeting (staff mentioned May 13 in the record).