Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Change 1253 A1A topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge board to keep Park Avenue parcel residential; board declines to recommend commercial rezoning
Summary
Neighbors told the Planning & Advisory Board that converting 1253 A1A from RM-3 to commercial would harm a pedestrian beach access, create parking and safety problems and set an unwanted precedent; after public comment the board voted not to recommend the change.
The Planning & Advisory Board on Monday heard hours of debate and public comment on a proposed comprehensive-plan amendment and rezoning for 1253 A1A, a small, beach-adjacent parcel currently used as an engineering office. After neighbors warned about pedestrian-safety risks, limited parking and the potential for precedent-setting redevelopment, the board voted to not recommend converting the site from RM-3 (residential mixed-use) to commercial.
Why it matters: The parcel sits adjacent to a heavily used Park Avenue beach access where residents said pedestrians, bicycles and golf carts regularly cross. Residents said small lot size and street parking limitations mean commercial conversion could intensify traffic and alter the neighborhood’s single-family character.
At the meeting, city planner Carl told the board the property has been used commercially for many years but staff could not confirm exactly when the use began and explained that rezoning to commercial would allow, within the limits of code and site-plan review, retail and small-service uses. "It's limited by the size of the property," Carl said, noting stormwater, parking and setback rules would limit more intensive uses.
Neighbor Russell Green (5 Park Avenue) urged the board to keep the designation residential, citing safety near the beach access and the absence of resident support. "When you draw latitudinal lines out from this beach access westward, you will see it is the closest beach access to more homes than any other in the city," Green said, and warned a commercial zoning "kicks open the door" to future, higher-traffic uses. Neighbor Stephanie Hill (30 Park Avenue) told the board she counted multiple vacant commercial lots within a half-mile and questioned the need for additional commercial zoning. Daniel Genovese (135 Park Avenue) said he found a 1993 commercial building permit for the site and asked whether the site could be demolished, elevated and redeveloped in a more intensive way in the future; staff said such redevelopment would be possible in limited circumstances but constrained by lot size and coastal setbacks.
Board members discussed several options — recommending conversion, recommending conversion with a binding development plan, tabling the item to require applicant attendance, or making no recommendation. One board member moved "to keep the code the way it is" and another seconded; the chair put the motion to a roll call and announced the board will not forward a recommendation to reclassify the site to commercial.
What’s next: The board’s vote leaves the existing RM-3 designation in place and does not change the property’s current nonconforming commercial use. The council, which receives the board’s recommendation, will handle any further applications the property owner chooses to file.
