Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rezoning Notice topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents object to lack of notice as Port St. Joe moves to rezone parcel
Summary
Residents told the Port St. Joe commission they learned late about a planned change of zoning from residential to commercial, urged stronger notice and said the change could hurt property values; city staff cited state statute 163.3187 and the planning-board review process.
Port St. Joe residents pressed the City Commission over a proposed zoning change that would reclassify a parcel from Residential R-1 to Commercial 1.
Several neighbors said they were surprised by the proposal and questioned whether the city had given adequate notice. ‘‘You’re decreasing the value of my property by doing the commercial zone there,’’ said Eric Thompson, a nearby homeowner who described walking the site and expecting a residential buffer around the pond. Tommy Cornish, another resident, told commissioners he had learned about the proposal only that morning and said parts of the process felt ‘‘hidden’’ to neighbors.
Christy McElroy, who said she formerly served on the planning board, told the commission she believes state law requires posted signs for proposals under 10 acres and urged the city to follow a more robust notification practice so affected neighbors have a chance to comment.
City staff and a commission member responded that the small-scale map amendment process is governed by state statute and the city’s land-development rules. A staff speaker read ordinance language citing authority under Florida statute 163.3187 and described the amendment as a small-scale map change; another staff member said the form on the city website included a notary field but that the sign language on that form should be revised.
Commission discussion focused on two separate issues: the technical legal requirements for notice under Chapter 163 and the community expectation of additional, visible notice such as posted signs. One commissioner argued the planning board review takes politics out of site decisions and that the planning board’s recommendation carried weight; another commissioner said while the law may have been followed, the city should consider going ‘‘beyond that’’ to provide more transparency to neighbors.
The ordinance language was read into the record describing the parcel ID change (0606R) from R-1 to Commercial 1 and reserving appeal rights per the ordinance text. No final vote on the rezoning was recorded in the transcript excerpt reviewed for this article.
The commission gave residents time to speak and acknowledged the concerns; staff said the city will review its published application materials and the notices to ensure they align with statutory requirements and local practice.
