LUZ committee rejects Northeast Development Review Board pilot after heated debate

The Land Use and Zoning Committee voted 0-4 on March 18 to deny ordinance 2024-0851, a proposal to create a Northeast Development Review Board (NDRB) to review land-use matters in the Northeast area of Jacksonville. The committee adopted and revised a rules amendment during the meeting but ultimately recorded no support for the full ordinance in committee, which was reported out as a denial and may be considered by full City Council if discharged by the council president.

Planning staff told the committee the NDRB would “unnecessarily replicate the responsibilities of the Planning Commission and place administrative burden and operating costs on the City of Jacksonville,” warning the new board would mostly issue recommendations that would still be reviewed by LUZ and full council. “Creation of a NDRB duplicates the roles provided by Planning Commission without any clear benefit,” Planning Department staff member Helena Perola said during the staff report.

Bill sponsor Councilman Mike Gay and several neighborhood speakers argued the board would restore local input for residents in the Northeast area. Gay said the version before the committee included constraints meant to limit cost and duplication, and described the measure as a pilot: the amendment adopted in committee set an 18‑month sunset later reduced to 12 months during debate. “Let’s do this for 12 months,” Councilman Mike Gay said in urging colleagues to try the proposal.

The committee debated multiple amendments at length. Members agreed to a rules amendment that specified five members representing the Northeast Development Area, four existing Planning Commission members serving concurrently, and a requirement that the Planning Commission chair serve as NDRB chair. Councilmember Reginald Gaffney offered a map amendment to add a sliver of his district to the NDRB area; it passed. Councilmember Reggie Gaffney later cast a procedural vote that allowed the matter to appear on the next council agenda despite the committee’s eventual denial.

Opponents — including Planning Department staff and multiple residents at the public hearing — said the measure risked inconsistency in decision-making and could be used to resist desired projects. Planning staff also noted calendar and term mismatches between existing Planning Commission appointments and the proposed NDRB appointments as an administrative problem. Several committee members said they worried the approach could create multiple local review boards across the city if it succeeded.

Because only four committee members were present, the chair noted early that any motion to advance an item out of committee required unanimity. After debate the committee approved the LUZ amendment language but then voted 0-4 on the ordinance as amended. Under committee rules, the committee’s denial was recorded and the item will appear on the council agenda with the committee recommendation; the council president could choose to discharge the item to full council for a vote sooner.

What’s next: The ordinance was reported out of LUZ as denied and will be listed on the full City Council agenda. Committee members and the sponsor indicated they could still pursue further amendments or community outreach before council action. The Planning Department and the ordinance sponsor shouldered the bulk of committee questioning, and neighbors on both sides of the issue testified during a lengthy public hearing.