Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Final Plat topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board recommends Flagler Dunes final plat amid resident traffic, safety concerns; site plan vote ties
Summary
Planning staff recommended approval of the Flagler Dunes final plat for an 80‑unit townhouse development; the board recommended the plat 4–2 with a request that the developer and city engage the county on driveway/egress safety, but the connected site‑plan motion failed in a 3–3 tie and must return for further review.
City planning staff on Oct. 6 presented the Flagler Dunes final plat and site plan, a 10.323‑acre townhouse project adjacent to a high school that would include 80 townhome units, internal private roads, sidewalks, a retention pond and a pickleball amenity. The staff report said the development meets R‑4 zoning requirements, would generate an estimated 559 daily vehicle trips and that on‑site stormwater was designed to meet St. Johns River Water Management District standards.
Developers and consultants told the board the site plan complies with city code, but that the project’s driveway and egress are constrained by Volusia County’s roadway requirements because 10th Street is a county right‑of‑way. Traffic consultants said the design is right‑in/right‑out and the applicant debated left‑turn options that the county rejected due to signal upgrade costs.
Scores of nearby residents, including speakers from Coastal Woods and adjacent neighborhoods, urged the board to press for a safer access design, citing peak school traffic, difficulty performing the U‑turn movements anticipated by the design and concerns about emergency‑vehicle access. One resident described peak‑hour congestion near the high school as “atrocious,” and others cited train and signal constraints on the corridor.
Board members discussed options including adding recommendation language urging the city to continue discussions with the county. The board voted 4–2 to recommend approval of the final plat contingent on the developer and city engaging county road planners about egress, turn movements and safety. A separate motion to approve the site plan conditioned on final‑plat approval failed 3–3, so the site plan does not carry and will be returned for further review.
The record shows the board asked staff to attach the board’s concerns to the commission packet so commissioners and county staff will see the request for continued engagement. Because 10th Street is a county road, the county has the permitting authority for signal and lane modifications; the developer said it will continue talks but that some options would require substantial additional cost to upgrade the signal.
Next steps: the final‑plat recommendation will go to the city commission with the board’s note urging county engagement; the site plan must return to the planning board if the plat and/or county decisions change the proposed access configuration.
