Margate debate intensifies over Carolina Club golf course redevelopment, rezoning and traffic impacts

A proposal to redevelop the shuttered Carolina Club golf course into a mixed-use downtown drew extended public comment and sharp exchanges among Margate City Commission members on Aug. 31.

Supporters for the project say the plan would convert a deteriorating, unused golf course into housing, lakes, walking trails and open space. Opponents told commissioners the proposal would harm neighborhood quality of life, increase traffic on State Road 441 and pose health risks if contaminated soils are disturbed.

The debate began during public comment. Philip Clepia, identifying himself as a Carolina Club resident, told commissioners he opposed the project and said soil chemicals at the golf course, "full of arsenic and stuff," raised health concerns if excavation began. "Everybody's gonna die," Clepia said, adding he suffers breathing problems and worries about dust from digging and retention-pond work.

Commissioner Rosano pressed the record and described a longer history of public opposition. "I've been agreeing with residents for 6, 7 years now that nothing should go on that golf course," Rosano said, urging the commission to keep the site's recreational zoning. Rosano said the property's lot lines and green-space purpose weighed against apartment-style redevelopment.

City staff told residents the process remains procedural. The acting chair said the city has "selected the developer," but city staff clarified there has not been a final contract execution. City Manager Kale (first referenced in staff remarks during employee recognition) told the public the item could go to Planning and Zoning in September and, if recommended, reach the commission for a first public hearing in October, with a tentative date given as Oct. 3.

Commissioners and others reminded the public that a comprehensive plan amendment and quasi-judicial review are part of the process. One commissioner noted receiving legal advice that commissioners must act as quasi-judicial decision-makers when the application comes before them and that public comments by commissioners now could expose the city to legal challenge.

Residents also raised infrastructure and traffic worries. A business owner who identified herself as leasing space off 441 asked where to find traffic and water/sewer studies; staff replies indicated specific studies and detailed build-out numbers were not presented in the public comment record at that time. Another commenter, Rich Zucchini of Lakewood on the Green, urged commissioners to oppose rezoning and proposed negotiating housing benefits for city employees and firefighters if development proceeds.

Commissioners emphasized competing considerations: keeping green space under the comp plan versus addressing a long-abandoned property that some commissioners say is deteriorating and costly to restore. One commissioner argued that the proposed redevelopment would preserve more than 60 acres of green space and walking trails and that property owners adjacent to a redeveloped site could see property-value increases.

What happens next: staff indicated the developer selection does not guarantee final approval. The item will proceed through Planning and Zoning review and public hearings; a comprehensive plan amendment is anticipated. Commissioners were advised by the city attorney that they must avoid pre-judging the matter ahead of the quasi-judicial hearing.

Residents were urged to attend upcoming public meetings to review project materials and studies when they are made available.