Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Change 1253 A1A topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Satellite Beach residents urge denial of rezoning for 1253 A1A; planning board declines to recommend change
Summary
The Planning & Advisory Board heard neighbors oppose converting 1253 A1A from RM‑3 (residential mixed use) to commercial, citing safety near a busy beach access, parking limits and precedent; after public comment the board voted not to recommend the rezoning to city council.
Get email alerts on the Zoning Change 1253 A1A topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Planning & Advisory Board on Monday declined to recommend changing the comprehensive plan and zoning for 1253 A1A from RM‑3 (residential mixed use) to commercial after residents raised safety and neighborhood‑character concerns.
Carl, the city planner, told the board the parcel has been used commercially for years and is currently an engineering office but is a nonconforming use under RM‑3. He warned that any new development would still need to meet site‑plan rules such as parking, stormwater controls, setbacks and height limits.
The decision followed a string of public comments. Neighbor Russell Green of 5 Park Avenue urged the board "on behalf of the residents" not to alter the zoning, citing the parcel’s location adjacent to a pedestrian beach access with limited street parking and noting two nearby fatal pedestrian crashes in the last 18 months. He said a commercial rezoning "may perpetuate safety issues" and could set a precedent for nearby parcels.
Stephanie Hill, who said she represents nearby homeowners, told the board there are multiple vacant commercial‑zoned lots within a half‑mile and argued the city does not need additional commercial acreage. Daniel Genovese said he found a 1993 commercial building permit for the site in the city permitting records and warned that, if redeveloped after a storm, the lot could be rebuilt in a way that changes the neighborhood’s character.
Several board members pressed that the site’s small size and coastal construction setbacks limit the intensity of any future use. The board also noted the PAB only makes a recommendation to city council and that the applicant was not present to answer questions about specific plans or any binding development plan.
A member moved "to just keep the code the way it is"—effectively not to recommend approval of the comprehensive‑plan and zoning change—and the motion was seconded. The board then held a roll‑call/voice vote; multiple members vocalized "Aye" and the chair declared the motion passed. As the PAB noted, making no recommendation leaves the parcel’s zoning unchanged for now and the council will receive the record of the PAB’s discussion.
What happens next: The item will be sent to the city council with the PAB’s recommendation not to support a change; the applicant may choose to attend council hearings or to present more detailed plans at a later date.
