For the Cascades development in Seminole Woods, what originated this year as an 850-home proposal has resulted in setbacks, public opposition and forced retrenchment, the latest resulting from an approving vote by the Palm Coast City Council, but conditional on a limit of 416 homes. That should have cleared the way for the Cascades to move forward as decided.
But Michael Chiumento, the attorney representing both land owners whose parcels will form the Cascades development, requested and won–over one council member’s objection–an unusual re-hearing on one of the land use issues that led to the council’s Nov. 7 vote. As such, the re-hearing could again put in play contested issues debated in November, on what Council member Theresa Pontieri described as a “slippery slope.” The re-hearing will be in January.
Like the weirdly irregular boundaries of the properties in question, the intricacies behind the re-hearing may seem complicated. But they can be broken down this way: The full Cascades property spreads over 375 acres. Most of it is owned by Byrndog PCP, represented by Jeff Douglas. Of that, 44.3 acres are owned by JTL Grand Landing, represented by David West. Because of their shape, those 44 acres have been referred to as the “fishhook property.”
In November, the council approved a so-called future land use map (FLUM) amendment, meaning a change to the comprehensive plan, from what had been a county designation to a city designation of residential and conservation. (The land was annexed into Palm Coast.) That change applied to Byrndog’s 331 acres. It did not apply to JTL’s 44 acres. The Nov. 7 action had a second vote that applied various rezonings to both properties.
“There was some activity during the meeting that kind of got away from me, so I apologize for being part of this confusion,” Chiumento told the council on Tuesday. “When the ordinance was approved by city council, it did not have the authority to change the Comprehensive Plan designation for JTL Grand Landings.” The error was in the first of the two Nov. 7 votes–when the council voted on the future land use map (FLUM).
Neither the city administration nor the council are disputing Chiumento’s request or that an error was made. But it gets more contentious beyond that. Ray Tyner, the city’s planning director, described it as a “miscommunication.” Mayor David Alfin called it an “error in the facts that were presented to city council.” But on whose part? Most of the council was willing to grant the re-hearing without getting into those details. City Council member Theresa Pontieri was not.
Addressing Chiumento, Pontieri said there were two meetings when the matter was presented to the council (the first and second reading of the ordinances). She had a different interpretation of the section of city code that provides the opening for a re-hearing. That opening is predicated on whether the council “has overlooked or mis-apprehended some facts or point of law.”
“We haven’t misapprehended anything,” Pontieri said. “We used the information that was provided during those presentations by the applicant. Specifically, there are no less than five maps just in the [future land use map] ordinance alone, just in that presentation,” that included the fishhook property. “So I have a real issue saying that this council or our staff erred in some way. That’s simply not the case.” Chiumento does not dispute that the mistake was on his end.
Pontieri then went through a string of emails that point to all those involved in the application clearing the way for the hook property top be included in the land use change proposal that the council voted on, including a “certification from the owner of JTL, David West, stating everything in the application was correct. He signed it.”
“My issue with the rehearing is that this provides a slippery slope for people to come before this council to take up staff time and resources,” Pontieri said, “and asked for a rehearing because things were not buttoned up in the application and were not put before this council properly on two different occasions and PLDRB on one.” The acronym refers to the Planning and Land Development Review Board, which first heard the applications and recommended approval.
The council’s limit on the development to 416 housing units applies to the entirety of the development, so while the rehearing may bring certain issues back on the table, it is unlikely that the limit would be re-visited. The focus of public opposition was on the number of units, and the fear that the development would include apartment housing, even though the city is still facing a dire shortage of apartments.
Pontieri voted against granting the hearing–not because she had an issue with it, but because she insisted that “we did not err and staff did not err.” She recommended that the council study the material surrounding the application before granting the hearing.
Mayor David Alfin by then had notably passed the gavel so he could himself make a motion to grant the rehearing, which he appeared eager to do. The remaining members of the council–Ed Danko and Nick Klufas–had no objections. (Council member Cathy Heighter was absent.)
“We’re kind of coming down to semantics on where the mistake came through if Mr. Chiumento is admitting that the fault was on their side,” Klufas said. “I’m more curious about the legal repercussions that could occur. If we decided to not read here this I assume they would basically instantly trigger a lawsuit and that process would be timely and also cost prohibitive. But I agree that it could be a slippery slope but I think in this case, it was timely.
When the city attorney tentatively interjected to suggest that the rehearing “should be limited to whether or not the JTL property should be removed” from the Nov. 7 decision, Alfin dismissed the suggestion outright: “That was not my motion,” he said.
Mike says
Corruption from the city always prevails! City council and developers don’t care how residents feel because it’s all about money and greed! When they cash in and are done they are out of here and leave us the mess. The roads are to their limits already. There should be at least for one year a building moratorium.
TREEMAN says
Agreed, the zoning code must be written to STOP the Flooding issues! White Mill Village is causing Flooding Issues on White Mill and Pine Lakes! A one year moratorium is needed NOW!
Dennis C Rathsam says
Mike, How much money do you need? Are you that desperate, that you need to continue to represent every builder that wants to kill whats left of P/C? Between you & Stuff Em in Alvin, Ya,ll wont stop til theres no woods left in town….Or a vacant lot! The Tree City, my ass C”mon Mike, do the right thing, stop helping ripping the guts out of P/C. Remember Ebenizer Scooge, its Christmas Mike, The birth of our lord Jesus of Nazzarath. He part of the solution, not part of the problem!
Jane Gentile-Youd says
Oh no! Not again. Palm Coast as well as Flagler County is apparently for sale to the highest ‘ bidder’ without any consideration for state statutes, local zoning ordinances, quality of life of residents, consistency, compatibility, necessity, effect on the environment , nor the negativer effects on their ( our) health,welfare and safety.
Billy says
Of course! Might as we asphalt the whole county and put strip malls on every corner ! Then tent areas for illegals, make it like Orlando and la as fast as we can for city growth! Unbelievable!
BLINDSPOTTING says
It’s all about the city putting it back on the table thinking that the
homeowners will get tired of fighting, they depend on homeowners
not coming together for a lawsuit or to “just move” is their old adage
because they are use to getting away with their BS. At first they make it
seem that they will do something but when it comes dwon to the nitty
gritty they will do NOTHING, can’t wait for the potential buyers from
where ever they come from to learn that this whole county is corrupt
except for a few on the county/city and not to purchase in PC , what
these scoundrels need is a good dose of bad publicity so spread the word
and we need a new slate of elected officials come this election season so vote
accordingly.
TR says
I would say make it three years and straighten out the roads that need repair, re time the traffic signals, and fix the swale drainage problem from all the construction. Come to think about it three years won’t be enough to fix all that mess. They let it go to long and should have been doing it all along.
Mark says
Any manufacturing or big warehousing coming to Palm Coast? No, just more developments, dollar stores, a big box store, same old same old. More houses and the current residents get to pay more for infrastructure to accommodate developers wishes that the Council is willing to accommodate more and more.
jeffery c. seib says
The developer won’t take no for an answer. This is a stark example of just how messed up our Citys development approval process is. The builder’s attorney, staring defeat in the eye, pulls out his ‘ace in the hole’ of a mistake that requires doing this dance all over again. The amount of time and city resources spent on this makes it a bigger slap in the face of residents, especially those that will have to walk out their front door and see hundreds of apartments or row houses in their faces, where now stands a beautiful forest. Sadly, it’s a losing battle. They are all ganging upon council member Pontieri to ram this thing through. The fact that this mistake went all the way through the city staff review for months, the Planning and Land Development Regulation Board approval, and two council meetings already would make this all a big joke except that it is such a serious blunder the developer and their attorney should have to start the process all over. Let’s see what they actually do.
Tim says
Looks to me to be an end run to see if they can get in approved the 2nd time and hope no one shows up to stop it this time
dave says
Just awesome ( not !) the continued destruction of trees all in favor of hardened concrete seeded with developer greed. All directed by City and County personnel.
CELIA PUGLIESE says
I am deeply appreciative to Councilwoman Pontieri for calling a vote of only 416 site in the last council meetings…Now on January 2 lets see ivel hugly head resurfacing trying to undo her great work for us the residents. If so lets do not forget in 2024.\
Paul D Feeley says
When is the re-hearing…?
CELIA PUGLIESE says
January 2nd at 6 PM council meeting at the City Hall in Town Center Lake Avenue. Please attend a let council, mayor, administrators and developers that greed equals missery for us the existing residents in Palm Coast.
Paul D Feeley says
I will be there…!!!