Palm Bay, FL – The Planning and Zoning Board on May 6 voted unanimously to recommend denial of a proposed gas station at the northwest corner of Emerson Drive NW and Glen Cove Avenue NW, then voted 5-2 to send a citywide ban on new medical marijuana dispensing facilities to the City Council with a favorable recommendation. A staff-initiated comprehensive plan amendment to set fire and police level-of-service standards was tabled on a voice vote with Mr. Warner the lone Nay.
The board adjourned just before 9 PM for a five-minute recess and one final item on floodplain code housekeeping. The available recording cuts at the recess, so that item is not covered here.
Gas Station at Emerson and Glen Cove: Unanimous Denial
The application was case CU25-00003, a request for conditional use approval to operate a fuel station with a drive-through end cap inside the neighborhood commercial zoning district. Debbie Flynn, Assistant Growth Management Director, presented the staff briefing. Carmine Ferraro of Crossover Commercial Group presented for the developer. The applicant offered a right-turn lane on Emerson Drive as a site improvement. The applicant did not offer changes to Glen Cove Avenue, which residents repeatedly described as too narrow for two cars to pass.
Public opposition was organized and personal. Erica Graver, a Glen Cove Avenue resident, told the board the West Pines neighborhood has fought a gas station at this corner three times in seven years. She described a drag-strip dynamic since the city installed a traffic light at the intersection, with drivers running the stop sign at Napanee Street and Glen Cove. She cited a recent incident in which a child was struck by a car running that stop sign and helicoptered out with severe head, leg, and hip injuries.
Elvatanza Hunt, a 30-year resident of Zaffa Street, told the board about Jasmine Minari, a Heritage High School student killed at the same intersection years ago when it was still a stop sign. Hunt’s daughter, then a medical student, was at the intersection when Jasmine was struck and ran to give life support. Hunt’s testimony anchored the residents’ core argument: the corner is already deadly without the additional traffic a fuel station would draw. Other residents from Glen Cove, Napanee, Jasper, and Zaffa added near-miss accounts and complaints about traffic spillover from the existing gas stations a mile north at Emerson and Heritage Parkway.
Mr. Filiberto moved to recommend denial. He cited Palm Bay code section 174.041, fuel stations, section F, which states that the proposed use will not constitute a nuisance or hazard because of vehicular traffic movement, delivery of fuel movement, noise, or fume generation. At the city attorney’s prompting, he added a parallel ground under section 172.024, conditional uses, sub F7, which carries similar language for any conditional use. Mr. Catalano seconded. Chair Carafa said he could not see how Glen Cove could support what was being proposed and compared the likely traffic backup to the Dunkin’ Donuts off Malabar Road. The chair called the vote: “All of those who are in favor of denial of CU25-00003, designate by saying aye. Aye. Aye. In honor of Jasmine, aye. All opposed? Okay. Unanimously, this is defeated.”
This is a recommendation to City Council. Council holds final approval authority on the conditional use. The board’s vote sends a unanimous denial recommendation forward.
Cannabis Dispensary Ban: 5-2 Recommendation Goes to Council
Council requires two readings of the ordinance on separate days at least a week apart per Florida Statutes section 166.041(3)(a). The first reading is on the May 7 RCM agenda as Ordinance 2026-13. The second reading is set for the May 21 RCM. Both readings must pass before the ban becomes law.
Tanya Early, Chief Deputy City Attorney, presented the cannabis item without an ordinance number on the P&Z record. Early stated for the record, “we don’t have a case number assigned to it.” Chair Carafa repeated the same point during public hearing: “I am for the ban and this is case number. Actually, it doesn’t have one. You can put amendment related to cannabis if you would like.” The recap therefore refers to the item as an amendment to Chapter 120 of the city code.
Early walked the board through the legal posture. Florida’s medical marijuana referendum passed in 2016. Section 381.986, Florida Statutes, gives municipalities a binary choice: ban medical marijuana dispensing facilities outright, or allow them by right wherever pharmacies are allowed. There is no middle path. Cities cannot zone, permit, or condition them. Palm Bay’s existing code allows them under Chapter 120. The city council directed staff in December to look at limitations. Early told the board the ban is the only mechanism state law leaves available. The proposed ban is prospective only; existing dispensaries have a vested right to continue operating.
Public comment was thin. Gina Choquette spoke in favor of the ban, citing her own Google search showing 13 dispensaries already operating in Palm Bay. Byron Boyer spoke against, arguing the city does not know its own concentration numbers and that dispensaries take over abandoned buildings and put people back to work. Bill Batten spoke against, arguing the city should not pick winners and losers among small businesses and tax revenue.
Before opening the public hearing, Chair Carafa expressly invited any board member with an ex parte conversation on the item to speak. None did. After the hearing closed, Mr. Norris moved to adopt the ban. Mr. McNally seconded. Mr. Norris said his concern was local control: “Palm Bay deserves the control.”
Mr. Filiberto spoke against. He said dispensaries are “basically a pharmacy for people who need medicine” and noted that the southwest section of the city has zero dispensaries, forcing patients in the Bayside area to drive to the northeast section. He said: “I’m not going to be the one to ban this commercial business. I’m surprised that it’s actually cannabis being banned instead of Dollar Generals and storage sheds.” Mr. Warner also voted against. The roll-call result, in transcript order: Warner Nay, Catalano Yay, Filiberto Nay, Higgins Yay, McNally Yay, Norris Yay, Carafa Aye. Tally: 5 Yay, 2 Nay. The recommendation goes to City Council.
Fire and Police Level-of-Service Amendment Tabled
CP26-00001 is a staff-initiated comprehensive plan amendment to add level-of-service standards for fire rescue and police to the city’s capital improvement element. Althea Jefferson, Growth Management Director, presented. The amendment would let the city require new development to demonstrate that public safety services can be maintained at adopted standards as a condition of approval, similar to how the city already handles utilities, drainage, parks, and transportation. Tanya Early confirmed the standards apply to new development, not as a duty of care on the city for existing residents.
Fire Chief Richard Stover testified that Palm Bay is currently seven fire stations short of full build-out for the 97-square-mile city. Current response times run seven to eight minutes against a national NFPA 1710 benchmark of four minutes for fire and six minutes for medical, measured at the 90th to 95th percentile. Palm Bay carries an ISO Class 3 rating and is in the process of transitioning to Class 2, with Class 1 expected by mid-to-late next year as new equipment lands. A new station and apparatus runs $8 to $10 million for the building, $930,000 to over $1 million for an empty engine, and $2.5 million for a ladder truck. Stover said the LOS amendment would shift those capital costs to developers, who can spread them across 30-year mortgages.
Attorney Kim Rezanka of Lacey Rezanka in Melbourne, appearing on behalf of JKN Acquisitions LLC, the project known as Lotus, argued the comprehensive plan cannot impose concurrency on facilities the state has not classified as public facilities under Chapter 163. Tanya Early disagreed, citing F.S. 163.3164 and noting the statutory list of public facilities is illustrative and not exclusive. Mr. Filiberto moved to table the item pending further data from the police chief and exploration of metrics other than population, such as response times. The motion was a voice vote and carried. Mr. Warner cast the lone Nay and stated for the record, “I think we need to move forward with this somehow.”
The board recessed at 8:53 PM with one final item remaining.
Floodplain Code Item Not Covered
T26-00003, the floodplain code revision (LDC Chapter 179 housekeeping), was the last item on the agenda. The available recording cuts at the 9 PM recess before the board reconvened for that item. This recap does not cover T26-00003. The Palm Bayer will pull post-recess audio and report on the floodplain item separately if material discussion took place.
This story is also published at thepalmbayer.com/p/planning-board-may-6-2026-recap on Substack.
