Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Property Surplus topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
School district declines to declare 1.3‑acre Town Center parcel surplus after staff flags conservation easement and stormwater role
Summary
The board heard a report on a 1.3‑acre parcel adjacent to Olive Garden in Town Center; staff advised the land contains a conservation easement held by the St. Johns River Water Management District, functions as stormwater mitigation for the school property and is not recommended for surplus sale without extensive mitigation and legal steps.
Get email alerts on the Property Surplus topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
District staff presented a letter of intent from a private party seeking to buy a 1.3‑acre parcel adjacent to Olive Garden in Town Center. The presenter explained the parcel contains wetland areas, is part of the detention/mitigation system that receives stormwater runoff from the Town Center and carries a conservation easement in favor of the St. Johns River Water Management District recorded in 1999 as mitigation for stormwater. State Requirements for Educational Facilities (SREF) were cited to note safety and access constraints near school sites.
Staff told the board that because the parcel is part of the district’s stormwater infrastructure and because an easement held by the St. Johns River Water Management District restricts development, the district would face a complex process to sell the property. A release of the easement would require St. Johns River Water Management District approval and likely additional mitigation elsewhere, and the Department of Transportation holds underground easements that would complicate creating a new vehicular access off Moody Boulevard or Transportation Way.
The private party’s unsolicited offer was reported at approximately $759,000. Board members said the parcel’s role in managing runoff and the easement limitations make immediate sale infeasible; staff recommended not declaring the parcel surplus in its current condition. The board directed staff to respond to the inquiring party with the findings and said any future consideration would require appraisals, mitigation plans and likely further board action.
No surplus declaration or sale action was taken; staff will notify the inquiring party that the board does not consider the parcel surplus and will report back if the petitioner submits a materially different proposal that addresses easement and mitigation requirements.

