Planning commission tables PUD for family compound after dispute over Development Review Committee process

The Putnam County Planning Commission on June 11 unanimously voted to table PUD25-00001, a request to rezone 9.37 acres at 689 North Highway 17 in Palatka from Agriculture to Planned Unit Development to allow a nine-unit family compound, after members raised procedural questions about whether the application had been reviewed by the county Development Review Committee.

Michael Graves, Planning and Development Services, told the commission the parcel (parcel ID 13O92600000310012) is designated Agriculture and has about 70 feet of frontage on U.S. Highway 17. Graves said the applicant seeks approval for a family compound to keep multiple residences in a family trust and that the parcel is in FEMA Flood Zone X. “Staff recommends approval of the request to amend the zoning map from agriculture to planned unit development with the staff amended development agreement,” Graves said.

Commissioners pressed staff on a requirement in the Putnam County Land Development Code that “the PUD application, including the development plan, shall be reviewed by the development review committee” prior to public hearings. Commissioner Matt Hafner and others said they were concerned the DRC had not reviewed the application before it reached the commission. Graves and Zachary Baker, Planning and Development Services, explained the department had previously directed that DRC review could occur after the planning commission and Board of County Commissioners hearings so applicants would not be required to go through duplicative reviews, and that practice dated to a prior director’s guidance.

Legal counsel advised commissioners that the operative code language uses “shall” and argued that, as written, the application must be routed to DRC before the commission acts. “Words have meaning. Shall means shall,” counsel said during the hearing.

After extended discussion about precedent and fairness to applicants, the commission voted unanimously to table PUD25-00001 and direct staff to route the application to the Development Review Committee for review and return to the commission at a later date.

Applicant David Miner, who identified himself at the hearing as the property owner, said the project is not intended for sale. “This is not a development for me to sell off. I have 5 kids,” Miner said, describing the plan as a way to keep property in the family trust. Miner asked the commission to expedite any DRC review; staff cautioned that DRC scheduling, public-noticing requirements and possible resubmittals typically make a one-month turnaround unlikely. Staff also noted that a recently adopted impact-fee schedule takes effect 90 days after adoption, and that timing could affect fees for building permits if the applicant cannot obtain permits before that implementation date.

Discussion points

- Staff explained the DRC will include multiple agencies during review, including the sheriff’s office, fire marshal, Florida Department of Transportation, St. Johns River Water Management District and the State Department of Health. - Staff said the application includes a development agreement allowing either individual wells for each home or a single well if approved by the health department at DRC review. - Commissioners noted a past practice of routing PUDs to DRC after public hearings but said the land development code’s current language requires preliminary DRC review.

What happens next

Staff will schedule the application for DRC review so the committee can assess site plans, utilities, drainage, fire access and other technical requirements; the applicant and staff noted DRC routing and public-noticing timelines may delay the project’s return to the commission and the county commission.