Palm Coast
storylines...

Independent Reporting · Palm Coast, Florida
Palm Coast City Council

Business Meeting — Tuesday, September 15, 2026

Processed 2026-09-22
Source Documents
Agenda PDF
Agenda
A
Call To Order
B
Pledge Of Allegiance To The Flag And A Moment Of Silence
C
Roll Call
D
Proclamations And Presentations
D.1
Proclamation - September 15, 2026, To October 15, 2026, As Hispanic
D.2
Proclamation - September 21-25, 2026, As Stormwater Awareness Week
D.3
Proclamation - September 2026 As Neonatal Intensive Care Awareness
D.4
Proclamation - October 2026 As “raise The Pink Flag With The Pink
D.5
Presentation - Legislative Priorities

Lobbyist Laura Bear of the Southern Group presented the 2026 legislative session recap, noting only 12.5% of nearly 2,000 bills filed actually passed across three special sessions.

Key highlights included the governor vetoing one of Palm Coast's two water project appropriations, passage of a local government spending bill requiring a public budget reduction workshop and quarterly employee compensation reports, and the pending Amendment 3 property tax reform on the November ballot.

Council discussed potentially reappropriating the $124 million in state funds previously tied to the now-withdrawn westward expansion road project, with the mayor and vice mayor identifying SR-100, the Old Kings/Royal Palm intersection, and water production capacity as top legislative priorities; the mayor noted a 3–1 divide on pursuing the reappropriation (Gambaro dissenting due to risk of losing the funds entirely).

Westward Expansion capacity
E
Public Participation
Speaker

Criticism of meeting management practices: speaker argued that the 30-minute public comment window is insufficient, that presenters and agenda length should be restricted rather than citizens, that a resident was turned away from the podium at a prior meeting and never returned, and that public participation is being discouraged.

Also raised a question about whether reappropriated road funds can legally be shifted to water projects.

Speaker

Invitation to the 'Connecting with Palm Coast' community expo on Thursday at the Flagler County Nexus Center in Bunnell, 5:30–7:30 p.m., hosted by graduates of the Citizens Academy class of May 2024.

Dee Galery Candidate — Palm Coast City Council — District 4

Request for staff clarification on two issues raised by Retreat at Town Center residents: (1) whether the city has an outstanding responsibility for a pedestrian connection between the neighborhood and the Southern Recreation Center, and (2) the status of the planned amenity center in the city's review process.

Speaker

Resident from the L section began to speak about a duplex and proximity to the golf course but was redirected by the mayor to wait for the relevant agenda item.

F
Approval Of Minutes
F.1
Minutes Of The City Council: September 1, 2026 Business Meeting

Minutes of the September 1, 2026 business meeting, September 8 workshop, and September 9 budget hearing were approved unanimously.

Vice Mayor Pontieri flagged an error on page 22 where the Cascades Flume tabling vote was recorded with the mayor as the sole nay when it was actually the vice mayor; the city clerk was directed to correct the record.

Vote: 4-0 (Pontieri yes, Sullivan yes, Gambaro yes, Norris yes)
Cascades
G
Consent
G.1
Resolution 2026-xx Approving A Grant Agreement To Assist

A $100,000 grant agreement from the city's economic development budget was approved to assist development of a 7.5-acre industrial site on Commerce Boulevard near US-1, south of Palm Coast Parkway.

Staff explained the grant covers wetland mitigation costs for a second of two industrial buildings (each approximately 40,980 sq ft); the first building already has tenants.

Funds are disbursed only upon certificate of occupancy for the second building.

Vote: 4-0 (Pontieri yes, Sullivan yes, Gambaro yes, Norris yes)
G.2
Resolution 2026-xx Approving The Second Amendment To The

Resolution approving the second amendment to the Interlocal Agreement for Public School Facility Planning was approved as part of the consent agenda without separate discussion.

Vote: 4-0 (Gambaro yes, Pontieri yes, Sullivan yes, Norris yes)
G.3
Resolution 2026-xx Approving Piggybacking The Lake County Contract

Resolution piggybacking the Lake County contract with Alfred & Benesch Company for public safety consulting services (fire assessment fee feasibility study) was approved as part of the consent agenda.

Staff clarified the budget is $100,000 for fiscal year 2027, the study is authorized under the council's strategic action plan, and a fire assessment fee would require a future council vote.

Vote: 4-0 (Gambaro yes, Pontieri yes, Sullivan yes, Norris yes)
G.4
Resolution 2026-xx Approving A Work Order With Jacobs Engineering

Resolution approving a work order with Jacobs Engineering Group for potable water, wastewater, and reclaimed water hydraulic modeling services was approved as part of the consent agenda.

Utility Director Brian Rocher explained the original firm, Wright Pierce, completed about 25% of the work (raw water model) over 18 months but lacked staffing capacity to complete the remaining four of five models; Jacobs, with 45,000 employees, will take over at a total cost of approximately $616,000 compared to the original $450,000 scope.

Vote: 4-0 (Gambaro yes, Pontieri yes, Sullivan yes, Norris yes)
capacity
G.5
Resolution 2026-xx Approving Piggybacking The Tips Contract With

Resolution piggybacking the TIPS contract with ClearGov for budget software and services ($43,000 first year, approximately $25,000–$26,000 annually thereafter) was approved as part of the consent agenda.

Staff noted the current budget software cannot meet new requirements under House Bill 1329, which mandates interactive online budget publication and quarterly employee compensation reporting.

Vote: 4-0 (Gambaro yes, Pontieri yes, Sullivan yes, Norris yes)
G.6
Resolution 2026-xx Sunsetting The Beautification And Environmental

Resolution sunsetting the Beautification and Environmental Advisory Committee (BEAC) was approved as part of the consent agenda.

Vice Mayor Pontieri noted for the public that BEAC's responsibilities are being transferred to the Parks and Recreation advisory board (PREP), not eliminated.

Vote: 4-0 (Gambaro yes, Pontieri yes, Sullivan yes, Norris yes)
Speaker

Question about G.4 (Jacobs Engineering hydraulic modeling): asked what the reclaim water engineering details were.

Speaker

Asked whether the G.3 public safety consulting contract (fire assessment fee study) would continue if Amendment 3 does not pass.

Also asked about G.4: why the original hydraulic modeling firm withdrew after completing 25% of work, whether the new firm's higher cost would cause timeline issues with the FDEP consent order, and what caused the original firm to underbid.

Dee Galery Candidate — Palm Coast City Council — District 4

Two questions about the consent agenda: on G.4, asked what council would be able to determine about future growth and system capacity given that future flow projections are excluded from the $616,000 scope; on G.5, asked what existing system ClearGov replaces and what measurable improvements residents or staff should expect for the $43,000 annual subscription.

capacity
Speaker

After G.1 was pulled and explained, asked what type of industrial use is planned for the buildings, specifically what 'industrial' means in terms of permitted activities.

Speaker

Asked why the city is providing a grant to assist industrial site development and whether the benefit to the city justifies it.

H
Appointments
H.1
Appoint One (1) Member To The Affordable Housing Advisory

Pam Lawler was appointed to the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee as the sole applicant.

Sandra Shank spoke on her behalf, noting Lawler works for Mid Florida Housing Partnership and brings expertise in down payment assistance and first-time homebuyer programs.

Vote: 4-0 (Sullivan yes, Gambaro yes, Pontieri yes, Norris yes)
H.2
Appoint Members To The Planning And Land Development Regulation

Seven applicants competed for four permanent seats and one alternate on the Planning and Land Development Regulation Board.

Six applicants spoke: Andy Dodic (retired consulting engineer, current code board member), Tyler Warner (Marine Corps veteran, 30-something), Adulus Evans (retired HUD community planning official, current AHAC member), an unnamed applicant with 40 years construction experience, David Blushki (local builder), and Jim Sugg (former electrical chief of Pembroke Pines and Broward County).

Written ballots selected Adams, Blushki (Blizowski), Dodic, and Evans for the four permanent seats and Tyler Warner as alternate; all were confirmed unanimously.

Vote: 4-0 (approved by voice vote)
H.3
Appoint Members To The Code Enforcement Board

Five permanent members and two alternates were appointed to the Code Enforcement Board.

Veronica Reinhardt (23-year Navy officer, 100% disabled veteran), Plet Hatfield (incumbent), and Charles Roberts (incumbent chairman) all spoke; Joshua Parker was also appointed.

After a tie on the fifth permanent seat, Bill Romano was approved by motion because he and Jonathan Leman were the only two district 4 applicants; the motion passed unanimously.

Final permanent members: Hatfield, Parker, Reinhardt, Roberts, and Romano.

Alternates: Jonathan Leman and Christy Linquist.

Vote: 4-0 (Sullivan yes, Gambaro yes, Pontieri yes, Norris yes)
Speaker

Spoke in support of Pam Lawler's appointment to the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee, noting Lawler works for Mid Florida Housing Partnership and brings expertise in down payment assistance and homebuyer education.

Speaker

Applied for a seat on the Planning and Land Development Regulation Board; described 12 years as a Palm Coast resident, 40 years as a consulting engineer working with cities and towns, and current service (fifth year) on the code enforcement board from which he would step back.

Speaker

Applied for a seat on the Planning and Land Development Regulation Board; described nine to ten years of on-and-off Palm Coast residency, Marine Corps service, and a track record of fiscal responsibility.

Speaker

Applied for a seat on the Planning and Land Development Regulation Board; described six years of Palm Coast residency, graduation from the U.S.

Air Force Academy (1981), an MBA from Regis College, and 30 years as a HUD community planning and development professional.

Also noted current membership on the Palm Coast and Flagler County Affordable Housing Advisory Committee.

Speaker

Applied for a seat on the Planning and Land Development Regulation Board; described 40 years in construction, a current CGC license, development experience in Indiana and Florida, and experience as an expert witness on development matters.

Speaker

Applied for a seat on the Planning and Land Development Regulation Board; described eight years of Palm Coast residency, current work as a builder and renovation contractor in Palm Coast and Flagler County.

Speaker

Applied for a seat on the Planning and Land Development Regulation Board; described 30 years in planning, development, and permitting including roles as electrical inspector during Hurricane Andrew recovery, electrical chief of Pembroke Pines (2008, largest growing city in U.S. at the time), and electrical chief of Broward and Dade Counties.

Has lived in Palm Coast about five years.

Speaker

Applied for a seat on the Code Enforcement Board; described 23 years as a naval officer, 100% disabled veteran status, experience as legal, executive, and commanding officer, current membership on the Grand Haven Architectural Review Board, familiarity with city development code Chapter 11, and volunteer work as a UF Extension master gardener.

Speaker

Applied for reappointment to the Code Enforcement Board; described one and a half years of prior service on the board and desire to continue contributing.

Speaker

Applied for reappointment as chairman of the Code Enforcement Board; described serving as chairman for the past two years following the passing of longtime chairman Norm Mumford, and prior service as vice chairman.

Has lived in Palm Coast since 1996.

I
Ordinances First Reading
I.1
Ordinance 2026-xx Amending The Unified Land Development Code Zoning

Ordinance amending the Unified Land Development Code received first reading and passed unanimously, with second reading scheduled for October 6.

Notable discussion included Vice Mayor Pontieri's question about buffer requirements between new subdivisions and existing infill lots; staff confirmed language requiring a minimum 15-foot buffer where new subdivision elevation is 2 or more feet above existing homes had already been added to Chapter 13.

A public speaker raised several technical concerns (freeboard rules, historical resource survey requirements, coastal view relief ratios, and AC unit screening rules), and staff agreed to address each specifically before second reading.

Vote: 4-0 (Sullivan yes, Gambaro yes, Pontieri yes, Norris yes)
I.2
Ordinance 2026-xx Prohibiting The Transfer Of The City Of Palm Coast

Ordinance prohibiting the transfer of the City of Palm Coast Fire Rescue Department passed unanimously on first reading with minimal discussion; staff noted the item had been fully workshopped and no changes had been made since that session.

Vote: 4-0 (Gambaro yes, Pontieri yes, Sullivan yes, Norris yes)
I.3
Ordinance 2026-xx Prohibiting Direct Potable Reuse

Ordinance prohibiting direct potable reuse passed unanimously on first reading.

Utility Director Brian Rocher explained that 'direct potable reuse' is an industry term meaning treating municipal wastewater to drinking water standards and injecting it into a public water supply, distinct from the city's existing 99% reclaimed water irrigation reuse.

A public speaker raised concern that the word 'direct' leaves indirect reuse unaddressed; Vice Mayor Pontieri clarified the term's technical meaning.

Vote: 4-0 (Pontieri yes, Sullivan yes, Gambaro yes, Norris yes)
I.4
Ordinance 2026-xx Lakeview Estates Comprehensive Plan Amendment - Zoning

Ordinance for the Lakeview Estates Comprehensive Plan Amendment (Application 5576, small-scale future land use map change on 20 acres of Tract 9 from green belt to mixed use) passed on first reading 3–1 with the mayor voting no.

The amendment would reduce remaining residential entitlements from 51 to 39 on the overall property while adding a site-specific limiting policy capping commercial intensity.

Second reading is scheduled for October 6.

Vote: 3-1 (Pontieri yes, Sullivan yes, Gambaro yes; Norris no)
I.5
Ordinance 2026-xx Lakeview Estates Mpd Amendment - Application #5575 Zoning

Ordinance for the Lakeview Estates MPD Amendment (Application 5575) passed on first reading 3–1 with the mayor voting no, subject to applicant consent on three conditions added at Vice Mayor Pontieri's request: (1) deep soil boring of at least 18 inches with remediation language for arsenic before park conveyance on Tract 8; (2) the view protection zone on Tract 9 to remain 150 feet rather than the applicant's proposed 100 feet, with the applicant to work with staff on parking and landscaping flexibility on US-1 to make the geometry work; and (3) the VPZ language on Tract 3 to explicitly read as a minimum 50-foot buffer along the entire parcel boundary with existing homes, not to be cleared.

The applicant also agreed to convey approximately 100 acres of remaining undeveloped land to the city rather than using conservation easements.

Second reading is scheduled for October 6.

Vote: 3-1 (Sullivan yes, Gambaro yes, Pontieri yes; Norris no)
Jeanie Duarte Candidate — Palm Coast City Council — District 2

Raised concerns about land district boundary maps and descriptions disappearing from the city charter since 2018–2019, noting the charter shrank from 66 pages to fewer than 10, and asked why those pages were removed.

Tony Amaral Jr. Candidate — Palm Coast City Council — District 2

Raised multiple specific technical concerns about the LDC amendments: the interaction of the 2-foot local freeboard requirement with the existing 10-inch maximum drainage elevation rule; the historical resource survey requirement in section 1005.03 and its applicability to original ITT lots (estimated $8,000 cost); the 5-year survey validity cap in section 1005.02; the coastal view relief ratio formula in section 1302.03 potentially limiting lot coverage to 60 feet on intercoastal lots; and the mechanical equipment screening requirement in section 1303.04 potentially placing landscaping in drainage swale areas.

LDC amendment
Jeanie Duarte Candidate — Palm Coast City Council — District 2

Expressed concern that the word 'direct' in the direct potable reuse ordinance is a loophole, arguing that indirect reuse (routing wastewater through a treatment step before distribution) is not prohibited and citing a prior tour of city water facilities where staff was reportedly one permit away from making potable reuse a reality.

Questioned the difference between nanofiltration and reverse osmosis and the accuracy of water quality reports.

Jeanie Duarte Candidate — Palm Coast City Council — District 2

Requested that future agenda presentation pages eliminate large black graphic elements for printer-friendliness and that pages be numbered.

Raised concerns about the Lakeview Estates item: maps have changed repeatedly, arsenic testing is not yet complete, the park may not be viable if the parcel is largely wetland, and approving entitlement transfers under current conditions may leave residents without the promised park.

Speaker

L section resident whose property shares a line with Tract 9 argued that: (1) the developer agreed to the 150-foot buffer when the master plan was approved and is now trying to erode that commitment; (2) the park relocation to Tract 8 freed up high-value dry land on Tract 3 for new premium lots; (3) the developer is attempting to use the old golf course pond as buffer distance, effectively measuring from the far shoreline to put commercial uses closer to existing homes; and (4) the planning board recommended denial and council should respect that recommendation and vote no.

Dee Galery Candidate — Palm Coast City Council — District 4

Asked how durable the site-specific limiting policy for Tract 9 would be for future owners and what public process would be required to change those limits.

Speaker

Characterized the 3–1 vote on the comprehensive plan amendment as shameful, stated the council should table the MPD to October 20 to allow more time, criticized the change in schedule from October 20 to October 6, and expressed the view that maps keep changing and residents are being harmed.

Speaker

Corrected the vice mayor's statement that no residents from Tract 3 had contacted the council: stated she had sent at least four emails to each council member about Tract 3, that the neighborhood has been slowly encroached upon despite earlier assurances that Tract 3 would not be built on, and expressed distress at feeling unheard.

J
Public Comments
K
Discussion By City Council Of Matters Not On The Agenda
L
Discussion By City Attorney Of Matters Not On The Agenda
M
Discussion By City Manager Of Matters Not On The Agenda
M.1
Reporting Of Emergency And Sole Source For August 2026

No emergency or sole-source purchases were discussed separately; the city manager's report was limited to the Cascades scheduling matter noted above.

Cascades
N
Adjournment
N.1
Agenda Worksheet And Calendar
Advisory Notes
— (context, D.5) Vice Mayor Pontieri raised the question of whether $124 million in state appropriations previously earmarked for the now-withdrawn westward expansion loop road project could be reappropriated to other city infrastructure needs. The lobbyist confirmed it is legally possible through legislative action but carries the risk that the legislature could redirect the funds elsewhere. The mayor indicated he would not support pursuing it given election uncertainty and the potential for the next council to handle it; the vote on whether to even explore the reappropriation produced a 3–1 split (Gambaro dissenting), suggesting this will be a contested legislative priority decision for the incoming council.
— (public_comment, I.4) A Lakeview Estates resident living directly on the boundary of Tract 1 adjacent to Tract 9 provided detailed physical measurements of the buffer area behind his home, alleged the developer was counting a pond as buffer space to effectively clear-cut the far bank, and stated the planning board had already recommended denial. He argued the 150-foot view protection zone was a condition of the original master plan approval and reducing it to 100 feet was a material breach of that agreement. A second speaker who was not present at the podium but had sent prior emails (Sylvia Gortz) came forward to correct a statement by the vice mayor, clarifying she had sent at least four emails about Tract 3 impacts. A third speaker characterized the 3–1 vote on the comprehensive plan amendment as shameful and called on the council to table the MPD to October 20.
— (context, K) Council discussion of Project Mellin (a large economic development anchor tenant) and Synergy Sports revealed that the westward expansion MPD applicant withdrew its application without council deliberation, and that the applicant (Radiant) has since signaled interest in an expedited resubmission process. Both the mayor and vice mayor stated on the record that no expedited process would be granted and that the applicant withdrew voluntarily, while Councilman Gambaro expressed concern that Mellin and Synergy Sports would walk away from the project entirely as a result.
← All Meetings

Heard before · Item I.1 · Sep 15, 2026

Ordinance 2026-xx Amending The Unified Land Development Code


History of this matter

Aug 19, 2026 · Planning board · recommendation — Planning board recommended approval with no additional changes (per the Oct 6 packet). Oct 6 packet p.1654

Sep 8, 2026 · City Council · Item E.2 · workshop

Sep 15, 2026 · City Council · Item I.1 · this meeting

Oct 6, 2026 · City Council · Item I.1 · second reading

Related: Historic preservation ordinance — Oct 6, 2026 record →

Previous deliberations

September 8, 2026 · Workshop · Item E.2 (workshop)

Discussion starts at 00:50:14, ends about 02:03:27. Click the frame to watch.

Community Development staff presented a comprehensive package of proposed Land Development Code (LDC) amendments scheduled for first reading September 15 and adoption October 6.

Key discussion topics included: data center definitions and prohibitions (currently requiring supermajority council approval via special exception, with a tiered performance standards ordinance to follow); the neighborhood meeting waiver provision in section 2.05.02, where council directed staff to strike the land use administrator's authority to waive meetings for residential developments of 40 or more units; the development order approval thresholds table (Table 2-1) and concerns about project piecemealing through different LLCs to avoid higher tiers of review; a footnote to Table 3-4 on MPD permitted uses to be expanded to clarify that city council approval and compatibility review is required; kennel and pet boarding definitions and their inconsistency across code chapters; and live local mixed-use provisions reflecting state law amendments.

Staff was directed to highlight changes from this workshop session in the first-read package.

That meeting's full record →

Score sheet: what was raised, and what happened to it

Concern that the 2-foot freeboard requirement may hurt neighboring properties because of elevation differences. Oct 6 packet p.2004

Raised Sep 15 · by not stated · source: agenda packet

Not made Oct 6: Rule kept. Staff cites the floodplain coordinator: homes already built with 2 feet of freeboard have not affected surrounding structures. Oct 6 packet p.2004

Comment at the Sept 15 hearing; the packet doesn't say who raised it.

No exception for existing platted lots from the cultural resource survey — an added cost to homebuyers. Oct 6 packet p.2004

Raised Sep 15 · by not stated · source: agenda packet

Deferred Oct 6: Staff points to the Historic Preservation Ordinance (H.5 on Oct 6), which as drafted would provide the exception. Deferred to: Historic preservation ordinance. Oct 6 packet p.2004

Comment at the Sept 15 hearing; the packet doesn't say who raised it.

Coastal building visual relief rule (views to the Intracoastal). Oct 6 packet p.2004

Raised Sep 15 · by not stated · source: agenda packet

Clarified Oct 6: Staff clarifies the rule applies to non-residential buildings only. Oct 6 packet p.2004

“Staff further clarifies that this condition applies to non-residential buildings only.”

Whether mechanical equipment must be screened more than before. Oct 6 packet p.2004

Raised Sep 15 · by not stated · source: agenda packet

Clarified Oct 6: Only change is adding back-flow preventers as an example; equipment still screened if visible from the right-of-way or an access easement. Oct 6 packet p.2004

Buffers between new subdivisions and existing homes at a lower elevation. Oct 6 packet p.2005

Raised Sep 15 · by not stated · source: agenda packet

Made Oct 6: New language requires buffers between residential areas because of vertical difference (Section 11.03.05). Oct 6 packet p.2005

“New language to require buffers between residential areas due to vertical difference.”

Staff will add a statutory definition of 'data center' to the glossary (chapter 14) before the first reading.

Raised Sep 8 · by staff · source: meeting video (captions) · 01:47:20

Not addressed in the pages reviewed Oct 6: The packet pages do not mention adding a statutory definition of 'data center' to the glossary (chapter 14).

Not yet checked against the video.

Staff is directed to research how other communities prevent applicants from piecemealing or artificially splitting related projects across separate LLCs to avoid higher-tier public review thresholds.

Raised Sep 8 · by council · source: meeting video (captions) · 01:26:26

Deferred Oct 6: The packet states that research and analysis to address 'parcelization' of projects to avoid LDC review process will be brought forward after adoption of the LDC updates. Oct 6 packet p.1657

“Research and Analysis to address "parcelization" of projects to avoid LDC review process”
Not yet checked against the video.

Staff will draft expanded language for table 3-4 footnote 1 to clarify that MPD 'permitted' uses require city council approval and are not automatically granted.

Raised Sep 8 · by staff · source: meeting video (captions) · 01:42:14

Not addressed in the pages reviewed Oct 6: The packet pages do not mention any expanded language for table 3-4 footnote 1 clarifying that MPD 'permitted' uses require city council approval.

Not yet checked against the video.

Staff is directed to ensure the definition of 'kennel' is consistent across chapters 8 and 14, to separate 'kennel' from 'pet boarding' in the use table, and to consider precluding residential kennels in MPD zones.

Raised Sep 8 · by council · source: meeting video (captions) · 01:56:50

Not addressed in the pages reviewed Oct 6: The packet pages do not mention any changes to the definition of 'kennel,' separation of 'kennel' from 'pet boarding' in the use table, or preclusion of residential kennels in MPD zones.

Not yet checked against the video.

Staff will review kennel and pet-related definitions across chapters for consistency, research Flagler County's puppy-mill ordinance language, and bring revised provisions back to council.

Raised Sep 8 · by staff · source: meeting video (captions) · 01:58:55

Not addressed in the pages reviewed Oct 6: The packet pages do not mention review of kennel and pet-related definitions, research of Flagler County's puppy-mill ordinance language, or revised provisions.

Not yet checked against the video.

Staff is asked to delineate in the first-reading packet exactly which changes were made as a result of today's workshop session so council can track them.

Raised Sep 8 · by council · source: meeting video (captions) · 02:02:39

Made Oct 6: The packet includes a 'Summary of Amendments from Sept 8 CC Workshop' as an attachment and references that requested changes from the September 15 meeting are summarized in a table attached to the agenda package. Oct 6 packet p.1654

“4. Summary of Amendments from Sept 8 CC Workshop”
Not yet checked against the video.

Staff will clearly mark the amendments arising from the September 8 workshop in the September 15 first-reading document so council can see what changed.

Raised Sep 8 · by staff · source: meeting video (captions) · 02:03:16

Made Oct 6: The packet includes a 'Summary of Amendments from Sept 8 CC Workshop' attachment intended to show council what changed as a result of the workshop. Oct 6 packet p.1654

“4. Summary of Amendments from Sept 8 CC Workshop”
Not yet checked against the video.

Staff will bring back performance standards for data centers at a future date.

Raised Sep 15 · by staff · source: meeting video (captions) · 02:16:48

Deferred Oct 6: The packet explicitly states that an ordinance to address performance standards for data centers will be brought forward after adoption of the LDC updates. Oct 6 packet p.1657

“An ordinance to address performance standards for Data Centers”
Not yet checked against the video.

Staff will bring back an ordinance to establish penalties and fines for unpermitted tree removal.

Raised Sep 15 · by staff · source: meeting video (captions) · 02:16:58

Deferred Oct 6: The packet explicitly states that an ordinance to establish penalties and fines for unpermitted tree removal will be brought forward after adoption of the LDC updates. Oct 6 packet p.1657

“An ordinance to establish penalties and fines for unpermitted tree removal”
Not yet checked against the video.

Staff was directed to highlight in the chart of changes, for the second reading, the location of the buffer language between new subdivisions and existing infill residential lots.

Raised Sep 15 · by council · source: meeting video (captions) · 02:24:36

Made Oct 6: The packet includes a response table for September 15 comments, and the buffer language between new subdivisions and existing residential lots is highlighted with the new footnote 1A in Table 11-5. Oct 6 packet p.2005

“Buffer requirements only when the Finished Floor Elevation differs by 2' or more.”
Not yet checked against the video.

Staff confirmed a 15-foot buffer and enhanced landscaping requirement for new subdivisions adjacent to existing residences where elevation is 2 feet or more higher has already been added to Chapter 13 of the LDC.

Raised Sep 15 · by staff · source: meeting video (captions) · 02:23:24

Made Oct 6: Table 11-5 now includes footnote 1A requiring buffer requirements when the Finished Floor Elevation differs by 2 feet or more between new subdivisions and adjacent residential properties. Oct 6 packet p.2005

“1A Buffer requirements only when the Finished Floor Elevation differs by 2' or more.”
Not yet checked against the video.

The public commenter asked staff to clarify whether the 2-foot local freeboard requirement in Chapter 1002 conflicts with the existing 10-inch-above-neighbor drainage rule.

Raised Sep 15 · by public comment · source: meeting video (captions) · 02:27:40

Partly made Oct 6: The packet addresses the freeboard concern by noting that homes built with 2-foot freeboard have not caused impact to surrounding structures, but does not explicitly resolve the conflict with the 10-inch-above-neighbor rule. Oct 6 packet p.2004

Not yet checked against the video.

The public commenter raised concern that the five-year cap on survey validity in section 1005.02 would require new surveys for all originally platted 80-by-125 lots.

Raised Sep 15 · by public comment · source: meeting video (captions) · 02:28:46

Partly made Oct 6: The packet addresses concern about the five-year survey cap by noting the City Attorney has drafted a Historic Preservation Ordinance that would provide an exception for existing ITT lots, with comprehensive changes deferred to that ordinance. Oct 6 packet p.2004

Not yet checked against the video.

The public commenter raised concern that the coastal view relief ratio in section 1302.03 effectively limits building width to 60 feet on 80-foot intracoastal lots, restricting property rights.

Raised Sep 15 · by public comment · source: meeting video (captions) · 02:29:31

Made Oct 6: The packet clarifies that the coastal building visual relief ratio in section 13.02.03 applies to non-residential buildings only, addressing the commenter's concern about restriction on residential intracoastal lots. Oct 6 packet p.2004

“Staff further clarifies that this condition applies to non-residential buildings only.”
Not yet checked against the video.

The public commenter raised concern that the mechanical equipment screening requirement in section 1303.04 mandates landscaping on neighbor-facing sides, which would impede drainage in tight side-yard spaces.

Raised Sep 15 · by public comment · source: meeting video (captions) · 02:30:28

Made Oct 6: The packet clarifies that mechanical equipment screening in section 13.03.04 only requires screening from public right-of-way and access easements, with no material change for side-yard buffering requirements. Oct 6 packet p.2004

Not yet checked against the video.

Council directed staff to note the public commenter's specific concerns, describing him as an actual builder with valid points, so they could be addressed specifically before second reading.

Raised Sep 15 · by council · source: meeting video (captions) · 02:31:24

Made Oct 6: The packet includes a response table specifically addressing each code-section concern raised by the public commenter at the September 15 meeting. Oct 6 packet p.1657

“Staff has addressed comments from the September 15 City Council business meeting (September 15) and response is summarized in Table attached to the Agenda Package.”
Not yet checked against the video.

Staff asked the public commenter to email the specific code-section concerns so staff could review them prior to the second reading.

Raised Sep 15 · by staff · source: meeting video (captions) · 02:31:43

Made Oct 6: The packet's response table demonstrates that staff reviewed and responded to the specific code-section concerns, consistent with the request that the commenter email them prior to second reading. Oct 6 packet p.1657

“Staff has addressed comments from the September 15 City Council business meeting (September 15) and response is summarized in Table attached to the Agenda Package.”
Not yet checked against the video.

Promised next

Promised An ordinance setting performance standards for data centers, after the code update is adopted. Oct 6 packet p.1657

Promised An ordinance setting penalties and fines for unpermitted tree removal, after adoption. Oct 6 packet p.1657

Promised Research and analysis on "parcelization" of projects to avoid code review, after adoption. Oct 6 packet p.1657

Promised Staff will bring forward an ordinance to address performance standards for data centers after the LDC updates are adopted. Oct 6 packet p.1657

Promised Staff will bring forward an ordinance to establish penalties and fines for unpermitted tree removal after the LDC updates are adopted. Oct 6 packet p.1657

Promised Staff will conduct research and analysis to address 'parcelization' of projects to avoid the LDC review process after the LDC updates are adopted. Oct 6 packet p.1657


Sources: the Sep 15, 2026 agenda packet (page numbers link to the page), and PalmCoastStorylines meeting records for September 8, 2026, built from the city's agenda packets and meeting video. Summaries and votes from those meetings are generated from the captions and are unverified unless marked otherwise; the video is the record. Full packet →

Heard before · Item I.2 · Sep 15, 2026

Ordinance 2026-xx Prohibiting The Transfer Of The City Of Palm Coast


History of this matter

Sep 8, 2026 · City Council · Item E.3 · workshop

Sep 15, 2026 · City Council · Item I.2 · this meeting

Oct 6, 2026 · City Council · Item I.2 · second reading

Previous deliberations

September 8, 2026 · Workshop · Item E.3 (workshop)

Discussion starts at 02:03:27, ends about 02:16:37. Click the frame to watch.

Fire Chief Kyle Berryhill provided historical context on the Palm Coast Fire Rescue Department, noting the department predates the city's 1999 incorporation and that fire protection was a primary driver of cityhood following the catastrophic 1985 and 1998 wildfires.

City Attorney Marcus Duffy presented a draft ordinance that would prohibit transfer of the fire department without a supermajority council vote followed by a public referendum, while carving out exceptions for mutual aid agreements, equipment sales, and similar operational matters.

Council expressed unanimous support and no proposed changes; the ordinance will proceed to first and second readings.

That meeting's full record →

Score sheet: what was raised, and what happened to it

Staff was directed at a previous business meeting to draft an ordinance prohibiting the transfer of the City of Palm Coast Fire Rescue Department, which is what was presented at this workshop.

Raised Sep 8 · by council · source: meeting video (captions) · 02:13:06

Made Oct 6: The packet confirms the City Attorney drafted and presented an ordinance prohibiting the transfer of the City of Palm Coast Fire Rescue Department, as directed at the September 8, 2026 Workshop Meeting. Oct 6 packet p.2339

“City Council directed the City Attorney to draft an ordinance prohibiting the transfer of the City of Palm Coast Fire Rescue Department which is attached to this item for consideration and direction.”
Not yet checked against the video.

Any future transfer of the fire department would require approval by a supermajority of City Council before going to the electors for a ballot vote.

Raised Sep 8 · by staff · source: meeting video (captions) · 02:13:27

Made Oct 6: The ordinance requires a supermajority vote of City Council before calling a citywide referendum, fulfilling the condition that council approval precede any ballot vote on transferring the fire department. Oct 6 packet p.2341

“the City Council approves such action by a supermajority vote and the action is approved by a majority of electors voting in a Citywide referendum. The City Council's vote shall occur before the referendum is called.”
Not yet checked against the video.

Promised next

Promised The ordinance is scheduled for adoption on second reading after due public notice and hearing on October 6, 2026. Oct 6 packet p.2343


Sources: the Sep 15, 2026 agenda packet (page numbers link to the page), and PalmCoastStorylines meeting records for September 8, 2026, built from the city's agenda packets and meeting video. Summaries and votes from those meetings are generated from the captions and are unverified unless marked otherwise; the video is the record. Full packet →

Heard before · Item I.3 · Sep 15, 2026

Ordinance 2026-xx Prohibiting Direct Potable Reuse


History of this matter

Sep 8, 2026 · City Council · Item E.4 · workshop

Sep 15, 2026 · City Council · Item I.3 · this meeting

Oct 6, 2026 · City Council · Item I.3 · second reading

Previous deliberations

September 8, 2026 · Workshop · Item E.4 (workshop)

Discussion starts at 02:16:37, ends about 02:22:46. Click the frame to watch.

City Attorney Duffy and Utility Director Roche presented a draft ordinance prohibiting direct potable reuse within the city's water supply system, defining the practice and explicitly banning construction, operation, or funding of any such infrastructure.

The ordinance preserves the city's existing non-potable reclaimed water program for irrigation and industrial uses.

Council members noted no current plans for direct potable reuse exist in Palm Coast but said the ordinance is a proactive protective measure against growing statewide interest in the practice and as an indirect check on overdevelopment.

No changes were requested and the item will proceed to formal readings.

That meeting's full record →

Score sheet: what was raised, and what happened to it

Council directed staff to bring the ordinance forward for first and second reading.

Raised Sep 8 · by council · source: meeting video (captions) · 02:22:08

Made Oct 6: The ordinance was brought forward, approved on first reading September 15, 2026, and is presented for second reading and adoption on October 6, 2026. Oct 6 packet p.2349

“APPROVED on first reading this 15th day of September 2026. ADOPTED on second reading after due public notice and hearing this 6th day of October 2026.”
Not yet checked against the video.

A member of the public asked that the ordinance address indirect potable reuse, arguing that the word 'direct' leaves a loophole allowing treated wastewater to be introduced indirectly into the drinking water supply.

Raised Sep 15 · by public comment · source: meeting video (captions) · 02:39:48

Not made Oct 6: The packet states there were no changes made to the item after the September 15, 2026 meeting, and the ordinance remains limited to prohibiting Direct Potable Reuse only, without addressing indirect potable reuse. Oct 6 packet p.2346

“UPDATED BACKGROUND FROM THE SEPTEMBER 15, 2026, BUSINESS MEETING: City Council reviewed the item at their September 15, 2026, Business Meeting. There were no changes made to the item.”
Not yet checked against the video.

Promised next

Promised The City Utility will continue to utilize reclaimed water exclusively for non-potable applications including landscape irrigation, zero liquid discharge, and brackish groundwater as alternative water supply sources. Oct 6 packet p.2347


Sources: the Sep 15, 2026 agenda packet (page numbers link to the page), and PalmCoastStorylines meeting records for September 8, 2026, built from the city's agenda packets and meeting video. Summaries and votes from those meetings are generated from the captions and are unverified unless marked otherwise; the video is the record. Full packet →

Back after being tabled · Item I.4 · Sep 15, 2026

Ordinance 2026-xx Lakeview Estates Comprehensive Plan Amendment -


History of this matter

Sep 1, 2026 · City Council · Item I.1 and I.2 · tabled — 4-1 to table (Miller yes; Pontieri yes; Sullivan yes; Gambaro yes; Norris no) (from the captions; not yet checked against the video)

Sep 15, 2026 · City Council · Item I.4 and I.5 · this meeting

Oct 20, 2026 · Scheduled: Tentative calendar: second readings of the FLUM and MPD amendments (Oct 20 Business Meeting). Oct 6 packet p.2518

Previous deliberations

September 1, 2026 · Business · Item I.1 and I.2 (tabled)

Discussion starts at 02:26:00, ends about 03:55:43. Click the frame to watch.

Ordinance on first reading for the Lakeview Estates comprehensive plan amendment (Application #5576), redesignating 20 acres of Track 9 from Green Belt to Mixed Use with a site-specific limiting policy capping density, intensity (trips), and building height at 35 ft.

Planning board recommended approval 5-1 conditioned on the limiting policy.

Tabled to September 15 by a 4-1 vote (Norris no) along with I.2, pending resolution of arsenic soil testing, view protection zone language, conservation of remaining lands, and other issues.

Vote, per the draft minutes: motion to table Ordinance items 1 and 2 to the next business meeting on 9/15 — Passed 4-1 — yes: Pontieri, Gambaro, Miller, Sullivan; no: Norris Moved by Pontieri, seconded by Miller. p.20

These are draft minutes. On Sep 15, council asked for a correction to an incorrect recording of the vote for Items I.3/I.4 before approving them; don't rely on that vote until the approved minutes or the video confirm it.

Vote, per our caption record: 4-1 to table (Miller yes; Pontieri yes; Sullivan yes; Gambaro yes; Norris no) Taken from the meeting's captions; not yet checked against the video.

That meeting's full record →

Score sheet: what was raised, and what happened to it

Deep soil boring of at least 18 inches, with arsenic remediation language, before the park land (Tract 8) is conveyed.

Raised Sep 15 · by council · source: our meeting summary, generated from the captions

Pending Sep 15: Condition attached at first reading, subject to the applicant's consent; check the second-reading packet.

From our caption-based meeting summary; check the video. Not yet checked against the video.

View protection zone on Tract 9 to stay at 150 feet rather than the proposed 100 feet.

Raised Sep 15 · by council · source: our meeting summary, generated from the captions

Pending Sep 15: Condition attached at first reading; check the second-reading packet.

From our caption-based meeting summary; check the video. Not yet checked against the video.

Tract 3 view protection zone to read as a minimum 50-foot buffer along the whole boundary with existing homes, not to be cleared.

Raised Sep 15 · by council · source: our meeting summary, generated from the captions

Pending Sep 15: Condition attached at first reading; check the second-reading packet.

From our caption-based meeting summary; check the video. Not yet checked against the video.

Sources: the Sep 15, 2026 agenda packet (page numbers link to the page), and PalmCoastStorylines meeting records for September 1, 2026, built from the city's agenda packets and meeting video. Summaries and votes from those meetings are generated from the captions and are unverified unless marked otherwise; the video is the record. Full packet →

Back after being tabled · Item I.5 · Sep 15, 2026

Ordinance 2026-xx Lakeview Estates Mpd Amendment - Application #5575


History of this matter

Sep 1, 2026 · City Council · Item I.1 and I.2 · tabled — 4-1 to table (Miller yes; Pontieri yes; Sullivan yes; Gambaro yes; Norris no) (from the captions; not yet checked against the video)

Sep 15, 2026 · City Council · Item I.4 and I.5 · this meeting

Oct 20, 2026 · Scheduled: Tentative calendar: second readings of the FLUM and MPD amendments (Oct 20 Business Meeting). Oct 6 packet p.2518

Previous deliberations

September 1, 2026 · Business · Item I.1 and I.2 (tabled)

Discussion starts at 02:26:00, ends about 03:55:43. Click the frame to watch.

Ordinance on first reading for the Lakeview Estates comprehensive plan amendment (Application #5576), redesignating 20 acres of Track 9 from Green Belt to Mixed Use with a site-specific limiting policy capping density, intensity (trips), and building height at 35 ft.

Planning board recommended approval 5-1 conditioned on the limiting policy.

Tabled to September 15 by a 4-1 vote (Norris no) along with I.2, pending resolution of arsenic soil testing, view protection zone language, conservation of remaining lands, and other issues.

Vote, per the draft minutes: motion to table Ordinance items 1 and 2 to the next business meeting on 9/15 — Passed 4-1 — yes: Pontieri, Gambaro, Miller, Sullivan; no: Norris Moved by Pontieri, seconded by Miller. p.20

These are draft minutes. On Sep 15, council asked for a correction to an incorrect recording of the vote for Items I.3/I.4 before approving them; don't rely on that vote until the approved minutes or the video confirm it.

Vote, per our caption record: 4-1 to table (Miller yes; Pontieri yes; Sullivan yes; Gambaro yes; Norris no) Taken from the meeting's captions; not yet checked against the video.

That meeting's full record →

Score sheet: what was raised, and what happened to it

Deep soil boring of at least 18 inches, with arsenic remediation language, before the park land (Tract 8) is conveyed.

Raised Sep 15 · by council · source: our meeting summary, generated from the captions

Pending Sep 15: Condition attached at first reading, subject to the applicant's consent; check the second-reading packet.

From our caption-based meeting summary; check the video. Not yet checked against the video.

View protection zone on Tract 9 to stay at 150 feet rather than the proposed 100 feet.

Raised Sep 15 · by council · source: our meeting summary, generated from the captions

Pending Sep 15: Condition attached at first reading; check the second-reading packet.

From our caption-based meeting summary; check the video. Not yet checked against the video.

Tract 3 view protection zone to read as a minimum 50-foot buffer along the whole boundary with existing homes, not to be cleared.

Raised Sep 15 · by council · source: our meeting summary, generated from the captions

Pending Sep 15: Condition attached at first reading; check the second-reading packet.

From our caption-based meeting summary; check the video. Not yet checked against the video.

Sources: the Sep 15, 2026 agenda packet (page numbers link to the page), and PalmCoastStorylines meeting records for September 1, 2026, built from the city's agenda packets and meeting video. Summaries and votes from those meetings are generated from the captions and are unverified unless marked otherwise; the video is the record. Full packet →