Planning board approves restaurant special exception and variances on A1A despite heavy neighborhood opposition; parking waiver recommended to commission
Loading...
Summary
The board approved a special exception and multiple variances to relocate a restaurant building on a split‑zoned A1A property in the Hammock, but neighbors criticized scale, parking and removal of specimen trees; the board also voted 4–1 to recommend a parking‑waiver flexibility to the County Commission.
The Planning & Development Board approved a special exception and multiple variances for a proposed restaurant at 5949 North Ocean Shore Boulevard (Hammock/A1A), while also forwarding a request for parking‑waiver flexibility to the Board of County Commissioners by a 4–1 vote.
Staff described the application to move the existing nonconforming restaurant building into the RC portion of a split‑zoned lot and construct a new ~2,980‑sq‑ft building with 1,800 sq ft of seating area. Because the lot is irregular and split between RC and C2 zoning, the proposal requires several variances: a 25‑ft variance from the 40‑ft front landscape buffer, a 10‑ft variance from the 25‑ft side landscape buffer, a 25‑ft variance from a 50‑ft building separation standard to the nearest residence, and a 2‑ft fence‑height variance. The applicants are proposing 33 parking spaces (including bike parking) where code parking based on seating area would require 41 spaces; they included a shared‑parking agreement with a neighboring property for employee parking.
The public turnout was large and strongly critical. Neighbors and advocacy speakers raised concerns about insufficient parking, likely spillover parking on A1A and narrow neighborhood side streets (Milwaukee Ave), loss of specimen and historic trees, dumpster placement, lighting and noise. Speakers urged the board to require a smaller building, stricter buffer preservation or to deny the variances.
Applicant representatives said a primary design goal was to preserve an important specimen oak and to provide employee parking via a neighbor lease; they argued the proposed layout improves setbacks and buffering compared with the existing nonconforming arrangement and that the special exception is appropriate to allow restaurant use in the RC district. The board voted to approve the special exception with staff conditions but removed one condition tied to later site‑plan flexibility; the variances were approved by roll call. The board recommended the County Commission consider the parking‑waiver flexibility (4–1).
Next steps: the applicant must seek County Commission approval for parking flexibility and complete site‑plan and permit reviews (including tree‑removal and site‑clearing permissions if required under county code) before construction.
