Edgewater board approves comp‑plan change but tables rezoning for 137‑home PUD after residents press for stronger tree, buffer and stormwater protections

The Edgewater Planning & Zoning Board on Jan. 14 approved a small‑scale comprehensive plan amendment that would change a roughly 41.9‑acre site at 4401 S. Ridgewood Ave. from Volusia County urban medium intensity to the city’s low‑density residential designation, but the board voted to table the related rezoning and planned‑unit‑development (PUD) request to Feb. 11, 2026, to allow the developer and staff to put negotiated protections in writing.

The applicant, represented by attorney Mark Watts of Cobb & Cole and consultants for Taylor Morrison, asked the board to replace a previously approved 165‑lot mobile‑home site plan with a 137‑lot site‑built subdivision. Watts said the proposal reduces allowable residential entitlements and adds measures such as a 40‑foot southern buffer held in a separate tract to be maintained by the homeowners association, increased shoreline protections and an enlarged stormwater system designed to meet current standards.

Watts said, “We’re here with two applications. … We’re asking to reduce the land‑use entitlements” and that the updated PUD would “increase the shoreline protection” while meeting modern stormwater standards. He told the board the revised layout reduces the previously approved unit count and shifts the project toward single‑family homes and larger lots along the southern boundary.

Why it matters: Neighbors and an expert witness argued the protections on the concept plan are insufficient unless codified in the development agreement. Janet Shireh, who identified herself as a former local government planner and expert witness, told the board the plan “proposes to clear cut 97% of that football field” and urged the board to require explicit conservation and tree‑preservation language in the developer agreement rather than leaving those matters to later engineering or preliminary‑plat review.

Residents raised three recurring concerns: (1) tree protection and the fate of historic/specimen trees identified on earlier plans, (2) the width and legal permanence of the southern buffer next to existing homes, and (3) whether the stormwater pond and outfall would protect neighboring properties and local wildlife (residents cited gopher tortoises, scrub‑jay habitat and manatees in the canal).

Technical answers and concessions: Project consultants said the stormwater system is sized to handle a 100‑year event and that the overflow weir discharges to the canal; they said all stormwater infrastructure would be built in the first phase. The applicant committed on the record to several clarifications: limiting the maximum unit count to the 137 shown on the concept plan, preserving the southern buffer as described and working with staff to revise developer‑agreement language to reflect those stipulations.

Watts told the board he was “happy to stipulate” to fixing the southern boundary lot configuration and to capping the total units at 137, and said the applicant would include conservation easement or similar language if the board desired.

Board actions and next steps: On the comp‑plan amendment, the board approved the legislative change by majority vote (one board member recorded a opposed vote). For the rezoning and PUD—the quasi‑judicial action that draws sworn testimony—the board opted to table the matter to the Feb. 11, 2026 planning and zoning meeting so the applicant and city staff can memorialize the agreed changes in the draft development agreement and return with revised documents. The chair swore in speakers for the rezoning portion of the hearing before accepting additional sworn testimony.

Developer and staff responses: The developer said two historically large trees may be impacted by roadway alignment but committed to evaluate relocation viability with an arboricultural firm and to file required state and federal permits for wildlife relocation (for example, gopher tortoise mitigation) during later construction permitting. City staff said remaining detailed code compliance matters—such as specimen and historic‑tree protections—would be resolved at the preliminary‑plat and construction‑plan stage and through provisions in the development agreement.

What remains unresolved: Neighbors asked for explicit numeric commitments (for example, a required number of specimen/historic trees to be preserved) and for the southern buffer to be labeled a conservation easement or equivalent on the plat. The board’s decision to table the rezoning gives members time to see those protections written into the developer agreement and to verify that construction‑level plans will meet code requirements.

The project: Applicant materials say the proposal would replace an earlier Tamarac/Tamarack mobile‑home plan and reduce the previously approved 165 lots to 137 single‑family homes, add open‑space and drainage improvements, and enlarge water‑quality and stormwater storage to meet current city and state standards. The site address is 4401 S. Ridgewood Ave.

The rezoning and the PUD will return to the Planning & Zoning Board on Feb. 11, 2026, unless the applicant withdraws or the board sets a different schedule.