Land use panel approves commercial rezoning along Beach Boulevard after residents voice safety and environmental concerns

The Duval County Land Use & Zoning Committee approved a land‑use amendment and a companion planned‑unit development (PUD) rezoning Feb. 3 that will allow expansion of a shopping center on Beach Boulevard at Cortez Road.

Planning staff recommended approval of Ordinance 2025‑487, a small‑scale land‑use amendment to change roughly 1.81 acres from low‑density residential (LDR) to community general commercial (CGC) within a 6.84‑acre parcel. The companion rezoning, Ordinance 2025‑488, would convert the same portion to a PUD that would set site‑specific standards for setbacks, heights and permitted uses. Staff told the committee the revised written description dated Feb. 3 removes live‑animal processing and several other intense uses and that the Planning Commission recommended both actions.

Neighbors filled the public‑comment period to oppose the change. Residents repeatedly raised truck and pedestrian safety at the narrow Cortez Road intersection, citing photographs and statements about trailer turning difficulties and an increased number of parking spaces that, opponents said, would spur truck traffic into residential side streets. George Cheshire expressed environmental concerns about dewatering pumps and private wells, warning of possible sinkhole risk if the water table were altered. Several speakers also criticized the PUD process as “conceptual,” saying promises made outside the ordinance would not be binding.

Atlantic Beach Commissioner Jessica Ring, who said her parents live on Cortez Road, asked the committee: “Have you thought about the consequences for the neighbors?” Residents also argued the change would undermine the city’s comprehensive plan and create a precedent for piecemeal encroachment on residential areas.

Applicant attorney Cindy Trimmer said the owner removed all live‑animal and slaughterhouse uses from the PUD and had tightened the written description to prohibit a range of uses allowed in standard CCG‑2 zoning. “The PUD in front of you is solely for a commercial shopping center,” Trimmer said, and she presented new restrictions the applicant added, including making boatyards a use‑by‑exception and adding standards for tire operators and vehicle storage.

Planning staff and General Counsel emphasized the revised written description would not permit butchering or live‑animal processing. As Dylan Rangel stated on the record: the written description presented removes “butchering and live animal processing” entirely from the ordinance.

The PUD includes a 25‑foot buffer along property lines adjoining residential zoning and a height transition that limits new buildings adjacent to residences to 35 feet within the first 30 feet, while allowing up to 60 feet elsewhere. Planning staff also noted the site has centralized water and sewer service and access to a JTA Bus Rapid Transit route, which factored into their recommendation.

Committee discussion mixed caution and support. Some members said removing the slaughterhouse component addressed the primary neighborhood fear; others cited continuing traffic and safety worries on Cortez Road and voiced skepticism that signage alone would prevent large commercial vehicles from turning into the neighborhood. Council President Kevin Carico and Council Member Diamond said they would oppose the measures on safety grounds. Several other members said the revised PUD provided more protections than current zoning and that outstanding technical details would be handled during permitting.

By recorded action, the committee approved Ordinance 2025‑487 (land‑use amendment) 5 yeas, 2 nays, and later approved Ordinance 2025‑488 (PUD rezoning) as amended — including striking language referring to butchering and live‑animal processing — by the same committee tally.

What happens next: both ordinances were approved by the Land Use & Zoning Committee and, per the city’s legislative process, will move forward according to the municipal schedule for final approvals and any subsequent hearings or full‑council action.

Clarifying details: the parcel is approximately 6.84 acres; the amended land‑use request changes about 1.81 acres from LDR to CGC; opponents referenced an asserted increase of roughly 250 parking spaces in conceptual plans; wetlands of about half an acre were called out in the staff report as subject to elimination in build‑out scenarios and raised by speakers as an unresolved environmental concern.

Authorities cited in committee and staff reports include Ordinance 2025‑487 (land‑use amendment), Ordinance 2025‑488 (PUD rezoning) and references to the city’s 2045 Comprehensive Plan and relevant zoning district standards (CGC/CCG‑2, LDR). The record shows the revised Exhibit 3 written description dated 02/03/2026 and a site plan dated 12/09/2025 were presented as controlling documents for the PUD.

Speakers quoted above are drawn from the hearing record; direct quotes are attributed to the speakers who produced them during the public hearing. The committee’s votes on both ordinances are shown in the official record of this meeting.