Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Rezoning Greenacres topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Commission denies rezoning for auto‑sales parcel near Greenacres Boulevard after residents raise access and compatibility concerns

Okaloosa County Board of County Commissioners · February 17, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The board voted 4–0 to deny a future land use and rezoning request to convert a 0.51‑acre parcel from mixed use to general commercial for a proposed used‑car sales lot, after neighbors testified the site fronts a residential boulevard and that commercial auto sales would be incompatible.

Okaloosa County commissioners on Feb. 17 denied a request to change a roughly 0.51‑acre parcel’s future land use and zoning to permit an automobile sales business in a residential area.

Staff described the request as a small‑scale amendment and rezoning near the intersection of Greenacres Road and Greenacres Boulevard. Neighbors and a sworn speaker, Tabitha Nabulsi, testified that the deed lists the parcel with an address referencing Greenacres Road but the property’s only practical access is from Greenacres Boulevard, a two‑lane residential corridor. Residents said approving Commercial C‑3 use for automobile sales would introduce outdoor vehicle inventory, test drives, and additional traffic on a street with many homes, schoolchildren and no sidewalks.

Commission discussion focused on whether the public had adequate notice and whether a move to C‑3 would undermine transition‑zone planning that places mixed use as an intermediary between residential and major corridors. Commissioners cited the address/frontage confusion and long‑term neighborhood character. Commissioner Patricia Cox and others expressed concerns about precedent and compatibility.

Commissioner Patricia Kechel moved to disapprove the Future Land Use Map amendment; the motion was seconded and passed 4–0 (Commissioner Mixon absent). Because the land‑use amendment failed at the legislative stage, the related rezoning action was not taken.

What’s next: With the future land use amendment denied, the applicant would need to either withdraw or refile proposals consistent with the existing mixed‑use designation if they wish to pursue other commercial options; residents asked staff to ensure notice and clarity on parcel descriptions in any future filings.