Staff presented a FLUM amendment for 20,144+/- acres owned by Radiant Palm Coast LLC, proposing to change the designation to Master Plan Mixed Use.
The amendment would accommodate up to 21,920 dwelling units and 6.6 million square feet of non-residential uses.
Staff recommended approval as consistent with the comprehensive plan.
The applicant's team presented the westward expansion concept including a greenway overlay, regional activity center, and employment centers.
Board members questioned the ratio of industrial/commercial to residential, infrastructure funding, and the binding nature of mitigation obligations.
Public comment raised concerns from the Flagler County School Board, Flagler County government, adjacent landowners, historians, and residents about infrastructure adequacy, school mitigation, historic resources, and the lack of concrete commitments.
After deliberation the board voted 5-0 to recommend denial due to lack of sufficient information.
Companion to D.2, the zoning map amendment sought to rezone the same 20,144+/- acres to Master Plan Development with a development agreement.
Staff presented criteria analysis finding it consistent with the comprehensive plan and LDC, recommending approval.
Board concerns mirrored those from D.2, particularly the non-binding nature of industrial/commercial commitments, lack of phasing guarantees, and absence of county and school board in the mitigation framework.
The board voted 5-0 to recommend denial due to lack of information.
Speaker expressed support for preserving the historical and cultural value of the western area, suggested a historical museum attached to a luxury rail line with a library, walking trails, horseback riding, and camping rather than mass residential development, and asked that wetlands be preserved.
Attorney representing the Flagler County School Board raised concerns about the step-two mitigation process for schools: a projected $188 million impact, approximately $111 million in impact fees leaving a $77 million deficit, loss of $74 million in existing DRI mitigation commitments and 155 acres for schools, and argued the DRI abandonment statute requires no future development as a condition that is not met here.
Also raised concern the proposal violates the comprehensive plan's 'user pays' policy.
Flagler County Assistant County Attorney noted a county letter of concern was not included in the meeting packet, requested it be made part of the city council record, stated the county represents approximately one-third of the subject property, raised concern about the development agreement being an 'agreement to agree' that cuts the county out of future processes, objected to at-grade crossings over Old Brick Road preferring flyovers, noted the development agreement is now silent on Old Brick Road, and requested the county be explicitly named as a party in the step-two mitigation process.
Flagler County interim growth management director requested that language be added to the development agreement requiring a mitigation agreement — bilateral or tri-party — addressing impacts to County Roads 13 and 205, noting that county roads may be the primary access until the loop road is built and that waiting until the right-of-way permitting stage is too late.
Palm Coast city historian raised concerns about proposed County Road 2209 alignment appearing to sit on top of Old Dixie Highway on the maps shown, potential loss of Old Dixie Highway's National Register of Historic Places eligibility due to road crossings, damage to Old Brick Road from logging trucks contrary to a 2004 cultural resource management plan, and the fact that none of the identified historic sites on the property are currently protected.
Also corrected a board member's identification of the small brick building at US1 and SR100 as a telephone exchange rather than a post office.
Speaker raised concerns about the greenway overlay's governance and enforcement — specifically that the acreage in the old DRI for environmental set-aside was not listed in the new project, that an HOA should not be responsible for maintaining the overlay district, that the developer should address sandhill crane and gopher tortoise habitat, work with US Fish and Wildlife on species reintroduction such as the indigo snake, and provide hurricane evacuation shelters on the property rather than relying on evacuation routes.
Adjacent property owner on County Road 13 in Bunnell asked what buffer would be provided between the development and his property line, expressed concern about potential impacts to his well water, and asked whether development would be immediately adjacent to his property.
Palm Coast resident thanked the board for focusing on industrial development needs, noted that the project increases total acreage by approximately 72% compared to existing DRIs but only increases industrial by approximately 40%, expressed concern that industrial zoning categories (industrial one versus industrial two) are not distinguished early in the plan, and argued that clearly marking industrial areas early would prevent future NIMBY conflicts.
Palm Coast resident characterized approval of the FLUM amendment at this stage as granting a blank check before securing commitments in return, called for negotiating upfront requirements including a dedicated industrial park for manufacturing, workforce housing, and land for road expansion, and urged the board to obtain all commitments now rather than deferring to later phases.
Palm Coast resident stated he has spoken before City Council for nearly three years about infrastructure issues starting with flooding at his home, argued that infrastructure must lead growth rather than chase it, noted the staff report acknowledges no existing infrastructure to serve the subject area, referenced approximately $330 million in utility bonds already approved to address existing water and wastewater needs, and asked what objective standards ensure infrastructure will be in place before residents move into new communities.