Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Rezoning Costco Fuel topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee denies PUD rezoning for Costco members-only fuel station at St. John's Town Center
Summary
The Land Use & Zoning Committee voted 6–1 to deny a Planned Unit Development rezoning that would have allowed a members-only Costco fuel facility on about 13.9 acres near JTB Boulevard and Gate Parkway. Planning staff recommended approval with a required traffic circulation study; several council members cited traffic and access concerns.
The Jacksonville City Council Land Use and Zoning Committee on May 20 denied PUD rezoning ordinance 2025-0249, which sought to permit a members-only Costco fueling facility on about 13.9 acres north of JTB Boulevard and east of Gate Parkway in the St. John's Town Center.
The proposal would have located the fueling station within the existing Costco parking area. Planning staff told the committee the site would retain required parking minimums even after the project removes approximately 123 parking spaces; staff concluded the project “is consistent with the comprehensive plan” but recommended approval with a condition requiring a traffic circulation study to address internal circulation and safety.
The sponsor’s attorney, Steve Debonau, said Costco’s engineering analysis estimated about 56 peak-hour a.m. trips and 77 peak-hour p.m. trips and described those as “new trips” only; he told the committee, “we stand by the recommendation. We agree to the condition that’s proposed and, happy to answer any questions you may have.” Planning commission members had unanimously recommended approval with the traffic-study condition after a public-comment speaker expressed traffic concerns.
Several council members opposed the rezoning on grounds of existing congestion at the Gate Parkway–Town Center Boulevard intersection and uncertainty about how the facility’s vehicle trips would affect local circulation. Councilmember Joe Carlucci and others argued the Town Center already experiences severe peak-period backup and said they did not think conditions could ensure safe ingress and egress. Councilmember Raul Arias and others pressed the applicant on daily-trip estimates and whether the study would evaluate the full-day impacts beyond the peak hours.
After debate, the committee adopted an amendment requiring a traffic circulation study at civil site plan review, then ultimately voted to deny the ordinance. The committee recorded a final vote of 6 yeas, 1 nay on the motion to deny; the ordinance failed to advance.
The committee’s action halts the rezoning at the committee level; the record shows the Planning Department and Planning Commission had reached different recommendations (staff: approval with conditions; commission: unanimous approval with condition), and committee members prioritized local traffic and access concerns when voting to deny.
Votes at a glance: ordinance 2025-0249 — denied by committee, tally 6–1.
Next steps: Because the committee denied the rezoning, the application does not move forward as presented. Any future proposal would need to return through the usual rezoning and PUD review process and address the traffic and access concerns the committee cited.
