Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Pud topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

PZB lowers minimum PUD size, requires mailed neighbor notice and tighter phasing language

3647515 · June 3, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The board recommended changes to the Planned Unit Development rules that reduce the minimum PUD area from 10 to 5 acres, require mailed notice to property owners within 500 feet, require phasing schedules and timelines, and remove the Final Development Plan requirement in favor of a more detailed preliminary plan submittal.

Nassau County’s Planning & Zoning Board on June 3 voted to recommend several changes to the Planned Unit Development (PUD) section of the Land Development Code aimed at clarifying intent, improving neighbor notice, and tightening timelines for phased developments.

Under the amendments, the minimum PUD site area will fall from 10 acres to 5 acres; the board also approved language allowing smaller PUDs for infill or parcels adjacent to existing development. The code will require developers to mail notice to all property owners within 500 feet of a proposed PUD as part of the application process. For phased PUDs, applicants must provide a phasing schedule tied to delivery of special conditions; failure to submit a site engineering plan within one year of approval or to achieve substantial construction timelines can result in termination of the PUD approval.

Staff said the intent is to preserve PUDs as a tool for unique, superior design rather than as a broad mechanism to seek variances from development standards. The amendments also delete the Final Development Plan (FDP) procedure and require more detailed information at the Preliminary Development Plan (PDP) stage to give neighbors and reviewing agencies clearer information earlier in the rezoning process.

Developer stakeholder Greg Matovino, who testified in the meeting, said the final development plan requirement had been a time‑consuming layer that can slow projects; he described the FDP removal as a positive change while cautioning that PUD processes remain difficult to get through.

The PZB voted unanimously to recommend the PUD amendments to the Board of County Commissioners.