Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rezoning 1253 A1a topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Neighbors urge Planning Board to deny rezoning request for 1253 A1A; board votes not to recommend
Summary
Residents told the Planning and Advisory Board that changing 1253 A1A from RM-3 to commercial would worsen pedestrian safety, parking and set an undesirable precedent; the board voted to not recommend the zoning and comprehensive-plan change, leaving the current residential designation in place.
The Planning and Advisory Board heard public opposition and voted to not recommend reclassifying 1253 Highway A1A from residential mixed-use (RM-3) to commercial.
City staff, addressed as Carl by the chair, said the parcel has functioned as a small commercial use for years but that the planner could not verify when the use began. "1253 Highway A1A has been commercial use for years and years and years," Carl said in describing the applicant’s request to align the comp plan and zoning with current use.
Neighbors who spoke at the meeting urged the board to preserve the area's single-family character and warned of safety and parking impacts if the designation were changed. "This access has only one street parking spot... a commercial zoning may perpetuate safety issues," said Russell Green, a Park Avenue neighbor, who asked the board to deny the change or, if approved, to restrict future uses to low-impact office space. Stephanie Hill, representing nearby homeowners, said there are "nine open commercial zoned lots" within a half mile and that adding businesses by the beach would worsen existing parking problems.
Daniel Genovese, another resident, said permitting records show a 1993 commercial building permit for the site and warned that a future investor could demolish the existing building and seek a larger, taller redevelopment if the property were rezoned. "If someone wanted to knock the building down, elevate it, put parking underneath... there's that possibility," he said.
Board members and staff discussed constraints on the site, including its small lot size (staff said it is about 0.16 acres) and minimal parking (staff estimated roughly six spaces), and noted coastal-construction setbacks that limit rebuilding in some cases. Members also raised the option of recommending a binding development plan (BDP) to limit uses, but staff and the chair said the board could not impose a BDP without the applicant’s agreement.
With the applicant absent and public comment largely opposed, a board member moved "to not recommend" the requested comprehensive-plan and zoning changes. The motion was seconded and, after a roll-call vote in which members recorded "Aye," the board's action means city council will receive the recommendation that the change not be approved. Because the board did not forward a favorable recommendation, the parcel remains in its current RM-3 designation unless council later votes otherwise.
The board said there was no immediate urgency and noted the option of tabling the matter for applicant appearance, but members expressed reluctance to alter designations given community concerns. The item will proceed to the council with the planning board’s recommendation to maintain the existing residential classification.
