Commission approves New Smyrna medical complex PUD after agreeing to stormwater bond; historic tree removal also approved

The New Smyrna Beach City Commission on July 22 approved Ordinance 39‑25, rezoning 3.3± acres along State Road 44 for the New Smyrna Beach Medical Center and Wellness Complex and adding a condition requiring a stormwater bond to guarantee on‑site stormwater improvements.

The PUD vote followed related action earlier in the meeting to approve an application (HTR‑4‑20) to remove three large historic trees—measured at roughly 40, 45 and 53 inches in diameter—on the same property. Commissioners framed the two votes as linked but separate quasi‑judicial items: the tree removal was approved first; the PUD passed later with the added stipulation for a bond to secure the stormwater system.

Why it mattered: supporters said the project would expand local access to primary care and keep a growing medical practice in the city, reducing travel and wait times for patients. Opponents warned the site is flood‑prone and that removing large, established trees would change neighborhood character and could shift stormwater burdens onto residents.

Planning staff and the applicant presented the site as tightly constrained by a 75‑foot corridor overlay frontage buffer, wetlands and required open‑space minimums. Development Services Director Shane Corbin told commissioners the plan preserves six of nine on‑site historic trees and that mitigation for the three proposed removals would require substantial replanting (the applicant’s mitigation example totaled about 103 two‑and‑a‑half‑inch replacement trees, or fewer if larger stock is planted).

Engineer Mark Dowst, representing the applicant’s design team, told the commission the design team "went through 20 to 25 different layouts" and that the project team would "be exceeding the city requirements" for stormwater where practicable. The applicant agreed voluntarily to meet the city’s enhanced stormwater standard and to place the on‑site retention in an easement naming the city as a party so maintenance and repair are assured.

The applicant, represented by Joey Posey, emphasized the medical benefit. Dr. Ellis Fort, a local provider who plans to base his practice in the new building, said the clinic faces long new‑patient waits and that keeping and expanding local primary care is "essential" for the aging and growing population; he called the city a "medically underserved community," citing shortage metrics.

Commissioners debated tradeoffs: several members described the decision as a difficult balance of preserving mature canopy and allowing a medical facility that staff and the Planning & Zoning Board found consistent with code. Commissioners also asked for assurances about access on the narrow Wild Orange Drive and whether the detailed site plan should return to the full commission; the body decided that site plan review would remain at staff level but added the stormwater bond requirement to the PUD motion.

Voting and conditions: the historic tree removal motion passed (recorded roll: three yes, two no). The PUD ordinance was adopted with the added stipulation that the developer post a stormwater bond to secure construction/maintenance of the stormwater system; the roll call recorded the motion carrying with a single no vote by Vice Mayor Martin.

What’s next: the PUD approval allows the applicant to proceed to site plan review, where staff and third‑party reviewers will check detailed engineering for stormwater, traffic and emergency access. The bond requirement is intended to ensure construction and long‑term maintenance of the stormwater system before certificates of occupancy are issued.

The commission’s action reflects a compromise: the city accepted mitigation and bond commitments to address neighborhood stormwater and canopy concerns while clearing the path for a local health provider to expand services.