Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Trees Annexation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning board backs Sunglow Mini Storage amendment, recommends annexing 0.61 acres under tree-preservation easement
Summary
The Planning Board recommended the Sunglow Mini Storage PD amendment that would annex 0.61 acres into the development and place the parcel under a tree-preservation easement, after the applicant and staff said a tree-count miscalculation means the project meets code tree-preservation requirements without a waiver.
The Daytona Beach Planning Board on Nov. 20 recommended approval of a second amendment to the Sunglow Mini Storage plan development to annex a 0.61‑acre parcel and revise landscape and tree-preservation rules.
Senior planner Danalee Pedic described the amendment as adding the east‑side parcel to the PD boundary and placing it under a tree‑preservation easement so it will remain undisturbed and not entitled for development. Pedic told the board the amendment would also clarify how trees on the annexed lot may count toward the original development’s minimum tree preservation and canopy coverage requirements.
Jessica Gao, the applicant’s representative, told the board the change reflects a policy choice to preserve natural areas rather than plant equivalent landscaping on site. “It’s got 221 trees in there, some great oaks,” Gao said, and she asked the board to add the 0.6‑acre strip to the PD so it “will remain untouched and serve as a buffer for the residents in perpetuity.” Gao also said a counting error discovered earlier that day meant the off‑site parcel already provides sufficient existing tree inches to meet the city’s 6 inches per 2,500 square feet requirement, so the planned waiver is no longer necessary.
Board members asked about species and counting methodology; Gao listed species proposed for the project and said staff should verify the recalculation before the City Commission hearing. Danalee Pedic confirmed staff would remain neutral on a policy recommendation to the commission but recommended the board forward the item, noting the City Commission first reading was scheduled for Jan. 7 and second reading for Jan. 21.
A resident who spoke in favor of the preservation noted frequent clear‑cutting on other projects and praised the proposal to conserve the natural strip. The planning board moved to recommend approval of the PD amendment with a condition that staff verify the tree‑count recalculation; members voted to forward the item to the City Commission.
Next steps: the Planning Board’s recommendation will go to the City Commission on the dates Pedic provided; staff verification of the tree-count and the final PD exhibits will be part of the administrative record for that hearing.
