Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission approves Sutton Crossings Phase 1: Ace Hardware and Chick‑fil‑A cleared with conditions, tree mitigation required
Summary
The commission approved final engineering and development agreements for Sutton Crossings Phase 1 (Ace Hardware plus tenant spaces) and a separate Chick‑fil‑A site, subject to tree mitigation fees, required state environmental permits, and right‑of‑way actions.
The City Commission on May 12 approved final site plan and development agreement actions for Sutton Crossings Phase 1 — the Ace Hardware anchored retail project — and separately approved a related Chick‑fil‑A drive‑through site within the same master development.
Sutton Crossings (item 403) was approved with conditions recommended by staff and the Planning & Zoning Board. City staff accepted a statistical tree survey approach for heavily vegetated areas but recommended, and the commission required, mitigation payment for an identified set of small trees that will be removed and not replaced. Staff calculated a fee of $52,800 to mitigate removal of 176 trees between 4 and 9 inches in diameter; an additional specimen tree (42‑inch DBH) in the Chick‑fil‑A building footprint triggered an additional maximum mitigation payment of $2,400 (8 credits). Commissioners approved the project and conditions and required the applicant to pay into the city’s tree mitigation bank as part of the development agreement.
Chick‑fil‑A (item 404) was approved with waivers: site plan staff recommended waiver approval for a drive‑through lane that wraps most of the building, continuation of an existing 5‑foot sidewalk (city code calls for 6 feet), and monument sign waivers; staff said the revised elevations include larger, street‑facing windows to address Town Center design concerns. Both projects must obtain environmental resource permits (ERPs) from the St. Johns River Water Management District, FDOT access permits, and final engineering approvals; staff noted site infrastructure (stormwater ponds/underground work) must be in place before above‑ground building construction.
Why the tree mitigation was important: The applicant commissioned an arborist and, with staff, used a statistical sample method to assess hundreds of small trees that were heavily vine‑encroached. Staff accepted the method for larger trees but said the code requires mitigation (replacement or payment) for trees 4 inches DBH and greater if removed. The commission followed staff counsel and the Planning & Zoning Board recommendation to require payment for the unaccounted small trees rather than exempting them.
Next steps: The developer must complete several conditions — right‑of‑way vacation for internal access (staff said it will appear on the June 9 agenda), obtain the required ERPs, submit final plats and covenants for maintenance of stormwater infrastructure, and finalize development‑agreement obligations before construction permits are issued.
