Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Planned Unit Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
DeLand‑area PUD continued after residents press stormwater, character concerns
Summary
A proposed 147‑home Planned Unit Development near State Road 44 and Kepler Road was continued to Sept. 17 after neighbors raised flooding, drainage and character concerns; the applicant agreed to additional neighborhood meetings and to refine stormwater and trail coordination.
The PLDRC continued consideration of PUD‑24‑005, a 52.85‑acre planned unit development near State Road 44 and South Kepler Road, to the September 17 meeting after lengthy public testimony about stormwater, flooding and neighborhood character.
Staff described the project as a two‑phase development proposing 147 detached single‑family homes and a commercial parcel; staff recommended forwarding the rezoning and PUD concepts to county council subject to further engineering and review. The applicant team emphasized protection of a regionally significant drainage corridor on the eastern side of the property, proposed clustering development on higher ground and dedicating the low‑lying corridor as a conservation easement. The team also said it will employ low‑impact development (LID) stormwater practices and coordinate pedestrian/trail connections with the adjacent Trinity Gardens project and city plans.
Several neighbors who live on Siesta Court and adjacent streets urged the commission to deny or at least delay the application, saying prior nearby development has increased flooding and that the proposed pond and grading could direct water toward low‑lying homes. Residents asked how reclaimed water would be managed, whether the outfall would increase groundwater levels, and how finished‑floor elevations and stormwater outfall elevations would relate to existing yards. The applicant’s engineer described the pond design, said the outfall elevation would be lower than nearby finished floors, and committed to working with county engineers, SJRWMD and the city of DeLand through the construction‑plan process.
Commissioners and staff said neighborhood coordination and additional technical follow‑up would be beneficial; the applicant scheduled a meeting with residents and agreed to return with revisions or clarifying documentation. PLDRC voted to continue the PUD to the Sept. 17 meeting to give time for those discussions and engineering clarifications.
What to expect next: The applicant will meet with residents, refine stormwater and trails plans and submit additional technical documentation. The commission and staff signaled preference to keep the application under county review so standards and conditions remain subject to PLDRC oversight rather than risk map‑color changes through a city annexation pathway.
