
Submitted
This conceptual design by Emily Anne Smith,
of Designs of Significance, shows Lizzie Lus
Island Retreat with offices below and two residential units above.
HOLMES BEACH – Residents opposed to a request for a zoning change at 214 54th Street vented their feelings at last week’s meeting of the planning commission.
“The ultimate end result is that is would be setting a terrible precedent and would have a very negative impact on the residential neighborhood,” Dick Motzer stressed, receiving applause for summing up the sentiment of the group.
However, the meeting almost didn’t take place after planning commissioners learned that they didn’t receive Planner Bill Brisson’s staff reports on the rezone and comprehensive plan amend ment until the meeting.
Member Barbara Hines asked for a half hour recess to read the reports, but Monica Simpson, agent for the applicant, Lizzie Lus Island Retreat, said she had asked for a continuance of the meeting in order to review Brisson’s comments and possibly revise the request.
There were arguments for proceeding with the public hearing because many residents had come to speak and arguments for granting the continuance.
“Don’t try and understand a complex situation in 30 minutes,” Brisson advised.
Chair Sue Normand said board members could open a public hearing, take testimony from Brisson, Simpson and residents, then continue the hearing to a date certain when they could discuss the issues and make a decision. They voted to do so.
Comprehensive plan amendment
Brisson said the subject property is at 214 54th Street, across the street from Island Lumber and contains two residential units and a CPA office. The applicant is seeking to change the future land use designation from medium density residential, R-2, to the most intense commercial, C-3, and to extend the mixed use overlay to include the property.
“Mixed use allows for residential above commercial and that property could have two residential units above the commercial use or four or five resort housing units above commercial,” Brisson explained.
He said while the applicant is seeking two residential units over commercial, any future owner could change that to resort housing units.
“We did not envision extending mixed use to residential,” he continued. “Our recommendation is to deny the change and the expansion of the overlay district. My thought is that it’s the wrong use.”
Simpson said she wished the board had her amended application because “you do not have the benefit of seeing the big picture. It would show you what the owners are proposing.
“There is a structure there with two residential units and historically, for many years, it had a CPA office. Basically, there’s not a huge change in the land use, and it gives us the opportunity to create a buffer between C-3 and R-2.
Residents speak
Motzer said the language in the application stating the project would offer much needed office space, is “flowery language to cover this attempt to encroach into a residential neighborhood and change this area to commercial zoning.”
He also took issue with the implication that there was a business on the property for many years, pointing out that it was a home occupation and subject to strict rules, including no traffic to the home, no signage and no employees.
He said the structure would be a large two-story building with 15 parking spaces next to residential property and would cause more congestion and traffic problems in the area.
“I urge you to reject this deceptive submission and keep it a residential area to try and maintain what is left of the character of the Island,” he concluded.
“Please stop what could be a future commercial takeover of Holmes Boulevard. If the applicant wanted commercial property, they should have bought commercial property.”
“We have the right to enjoy our property and not have somebody intrude next door with a business,” resident David Philips said.
Resident Nancy Deal said she has a major concern with increased traffic and the encroachment of commercial into residential.
“We make our decision based on the evidence and whether it’s compatible with the comprehensive plan,” Normand explained to the group. “We go by the rules and make a recommendation to the city commission.”
The board the opened the public hearing on the rezone request with similar results and voted to continue both requests to Wednesday, May 21, at 7 p.m.