Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rezoning Twig Street topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning board deadlocks on Twig Street rezoning; continues case after divided debate
Summary
The Planning Board deadlocked on a request to rezone a 0.39-acre parcel on Twig Street from R-1A to R-2 (case PB24-24). After an initial tie and discussion about inconsistent future land-use designations in the block, the board voted unanimously to continue the item to the March 4 meeting for further review and to await additional members.
The Palatka Planning Board was unable to reach a decision on a rezoning and future land-use amendment for a 0.39-acre parcel on Twig Street (PB24-24) and voted to continue the matter to the planning board’s March 4 meeting after an extended, divided discussion and a tie vote on a motion presented during the hearing.
City planner Lorenzo described the request as a rezoning from residential single-family (R-1A) to two-family residential (R-2) to allow development of a duplex on a parcel between 1900 and 1814 Twig Street. Staff recommended approval after reviewing the application against state law and local standards, and noted that the parcel and the surrounding block contain inconsistent future land-use and zoning designations. Lorenzo told the board the future land-use map currently labels the block “Other Public Facilities” (OPF) in places that are in fact single-family residential and commercial; staff said adjusting this parcel would create at least a local consistency though it would not resolve all inconsistencies in the neighborhood.
Applicant Preston Sloan Jr., who described having rebuilt blighted houses in Palatka and stated he intends to build a duplex on the parcel, told the board the lot is unusually large (it contains half of an abandoned roadway) and that a duplex would not be out of place within the broader block. He said he bought and rehabilitated other properties nearby.
Board members expressed divergent views. Member Earl Wallace and others emphasized the broad pattern of inconsistent future land-use and zoning designations across the block and questioned approving a single rezoning that could further “muddy the water.” Conversely, other members said approving this rezoning would correct an inconsistency for this parcel and that a comprehensive future land-use update is underway and expected to be presented to the planning board in coming months.
During voting, the board recorded a tie (two in favor, two opposed) on a motion related to the comp plan/future land-use change so the motion failed. Later, after additional discussion about the need for more board members to avoid repeat ties, the board voted unanimously to continue PB24-24 to the March 4 meeting so more members can participate and so staff can provide additional context, including forthcoming Comprehensive Plan update materials and a reminder that the City Commission will hear an accessory-dwelling-unit ordinance next week that may offer alternative development options.
Public commenter Allegra Kitchens provided historical context that the area was recorded as a residential subdivision (Flathead Subdivision) in 1976 and said the neighborhood has been primarily residential. No final rezoning or future-land-use change was adopted at the meeting.
