Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Satellite Beach residents urge planning board to oppose rezoning of 1253 A1A
Summary
Neighbors told the Planning & Advisory Board that converting 1253 A1A from residential mixed-use (RM-3) to commercial would threaten a nearby pedestrian beach access, worsen parking and set an unwanted precedent; the board moved to not recommend the rezoning and encouraged follow-up with the absent applicant.
The Satellite Beach Planning & Advisory Board on the rezoning request for 1253 A1A heard a string of resident objections and moved to not recommend converting the site from RM-3 (residential mixed-use) to commercial.
Russell Green, a neighbor at 5 Park Avenue, told the board the property sits on a narrow pedestrian beach access used by walkers, joggers, bikes and golf carts and said the area already has only one on-street parking space. “A commercial zoning may perpetuate safety issues,” Green said, urging the board to leave the parcel as residential and warned that rezoning would set a precedent for the similar-sized lot at 30 Park Avenue.
Stephanie Hill, speaking for homeowners Joan and Bobby Morris, said there are several vacant commercially zoned lots within a half-mile and said extra commercial traffic would exacerbate neighborhood parking shortages during storms and busy weekends. “Any extra traffic would definitely put a damper on things,” she said.
Daniel Genovese, another Park Avenue resident, cited the city permitting website and said a 1993 commercial building permit exists for the parcel, arguing that while the site has long been used for commercial activity, its small footprint limits intensive redevelopment. “There’s that possibility” of a buyer demolishing and elevating the site and seeking added stories, Genovese said, adding that parking and lot size will likely limit more intensive uses.
Planner Carl told the board the site has been a longstanding, nonconforming commercial use but that staff could not confirm exactly when that use began. Board members discussed options including asking for a binding development plan from the applicant to limit future uses, but several members said that without the applicant present they could not impose conditions. A motion to recommend keeping the zoning as-is was made and seconded; the transcript records the motion and second but does not record a formal roll-call vote for that first motion in the provided segments.
The board emphasized there is no urgent deadline for making a recommendation and said they could request the applicant appear at the next meeting to answer neighbors’ questions. The rezoning recommendation would be forwarded to City Council as the Planning & Advisory Board’s advisory position.
