Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rezoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Applicant seeks rezone of 1213 Academy Boulevard from professional to low‑rise multifamily; staff recommends denial
Summary
An applicant asked the City of Cape Coral hearing examiner on June 3 to rezone 1213 Academy Boulevard, a 0.34‑acre parcel, from Professional (P) to Residential Multifamily Low (RML).
Get email alerts on the Rezoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
An applicant asked the City of Cape Coral hearing examiner on June 3 to rezone 1213 Academy Boulevard, a 0.34‑acre parcel, from Professional (P) to Residential Multifamily Low (RML). The applicant, who identified himself as Jonathan and said he owns 1213 and 1219 Academy Boulevard, told the hearing that surrounding lots are developed as multifamily and that rezoning would better match existing uses.
City planning staff recommended denial. Wyatt Daltrey, planning team coordinator, told the hearing examiner that while the site lies near other multifamily development, the city is also deficient in nonresidential land and has a policy of retaining professional/commercial land where feasible. "The city of Cape Coral is deficient in both nonresidential and multifamily residential land," Daltrey said, summarizing staff’s view that rezoning professional land to residential would work against a documented need for employment and tax‑base expansion.
The applicant said he previously succeeded in rezoning the neighboring 1219 Academy property to low‑rise multifamily and argued that the subject property is effectively surrounded by multifamily uses. "On all sides of this property, it's all multifamily," the applicant said, and asked that the two lots be considered together for future multifamily development.
Daltrey presented the city’s land‑use analysis under Section 3.4.6 of the Land Development Code and referenced the comprehensive plan. He said the property’s future‑land‑use designation was amended from commercial professional to mixed‑use but that both the current Professional zoning and the proposed RML zoning can be consistent with mixed‑use future land use. Staff’s specific findings included that the parcel has frontage on a collector roadway, is proximate to municipal uses, and that the RML district would limit height and density compared with other multifamily districts.
Daltrey concluded that, because the city has a continuing need for nonresidential and professional land and because the site is reasonably serviceable for office uses given its proximity to the municipal center, staff recommends denial of the private rezone request. The applicant disagreed, saying the lot’s location on an interior residential street and the prevalence of nearby multifamily make multifamily a more realistic outcome.
No members of the public offered testimony during the public‑comment period for this case. The hearing examiner took the testimony and written materials under advisement and said she would issue a written recommendation as soon as possible.
Clarifying details from the hearing record: the applicant said the two lots (1213 and 1219 Academy Boulevard) are being considered together; the subject parcel is roughly 0.34 acres; staff noted the minimum lot size for RML development is 10,000 square feet and that RML commonly yields duplex development on lots of that size.
The examiner closed the hearing and will issue a written recommendation to be forwarded to the City Council; no final decision was made at the hearing.

