Planning board delays Beach Walk PUD rezoning after county attorney and staff raise incompleteness concerns

The Flagler County Planning and Zoning Board on Jan. 30 voted to table two Beach Walk applications — a rezoning to Planned Unit Development and the related PUD site-development plan — to the Feb. 12 meeting after staff and the county attorney’s office said the submittal lacked required analysis.

The board’s action came after Assistant County Attorney Patrick Moylan circulated a memo saying the timing between the planning board hearing and the Board of County Commissioners meeting did not allow adequate time to address issues that may arise and recommending postponement. Planning staff also said a Technical Review Committee (TRC) member had concluded the application was incomplete and that certain required demonstrations for a PUD were not provided.

The memo and the TRC concern prompted the applicant, represented on the record by John Kitty, to tell the board he would accept a continuance. Kitty said the team had prepared to present but received the county attorney memo “as I’m pulling into the parking lot” and agreed it was “in the best interest” to defer if both staff and the applicant proceed in good faith.

Residents and stakeholder groups urged the board to postpone action and raised substantive concerns. Janet Sullivan, a Hammock resident, quoted the county’s comprehensive plan and the land development code and said Beach Walk “does not move the county forward” and “is not special,” arguing a PUD should be used only where the project demonstrates innovative design and public benefit. Dr. Lynn Bravo Rosewater, an A1A board member, said the Hammock is a wooded barrier island and warned the plan’s proposed 54 three-story homes would remove too many large canopy trees and set a precedent for increased density on the scenic corridor.

Greg Pew, district manager for the Dunes Community Development District, told the board the district “does not support any additional private or commercial entrances or curb cuts on Hammock Dunes Parkway.”

Staff explained the central technical concern: PUD approval requires the applicant to demonstrate how the plan achieves PUD purposes such as “innovative urban design techniques, improved use of land, protection of valuable natural features, desirable land use mix, open space, and more economical public services.” In the TRC member’s view, the current submission for a roughly 54-lot single-family scheme with reduced lot width and the proposed open-space accounting did not adequately show that threshold justification.

Board members and staff discussed options including proceeding with the hearing, tabling to a date certain so staff and TRC can complete review, or taking no action (which would require re-advertising). The board chose to table both items to Feb. 12 at 6 p.m. in the county chambers. Planning staff said the postponement will preserve the existing advertisement and allow time for the applicant to respond to TRC and county attorney issues.

The board did not decide the merits of the rezoning; the postponement was procedural to allow the county and applicant to present a single, complete record for review.

The board asked staff to confirm which technical materials the TRC requires at the next meeting; residents requested that tree-caliper and tree-preservation information, open-space accounting, and detailed stormwater/irrigation plans be included in the updated submittal.

The Feb. 12 hearing will include both the PUD rezoning (application 3150) and the PUD site development plan (application 3158).