Palm Coast
storylines...

Independent Reporting · Palm Coast, Florida
Published
City Council  ·  Tuesday Preview

Tuesday’s City Council Meeting: Seminole Trace Returns


Previously, in the room.

Late August. Council approves for roughly 260 acres of Town Center land.

It settles the Palm Coast Holdings lawsuit.

Early September. Council Seminole Trace.

The developer and staff go back to rework the agreement.

Mid-September. Three proposed city laws get their .

The land code rewrite. A Fire Rescue transfer ban. A ban on recycled drinking water.

Roll call.

Seminole Trace. Back, and changed.

Same 330 acres, formerly Cascades. The cap still goes from about 400 homes to about 750.

What the developer : open space up to 40 percent, a cap on townhomes, wider lots, deeper setbacks, a buffer strip.

And an offer of land for a .

Staff says the changes address the three reasons it had recommended denial.

Its remaining worry is the skate park: when it gets built, and whether the fees will be enough.

The . That was before these changes.

Tuesday is the first of two votes. The tentative calendar puts the second on .

After the Nov. 3 election.

Town Center. How the $17 million gets paid.

Two pieces: a line of credit, and any advance from the city’s General Fund.

The redevelopment agency’s tax money would pay them back.

The packet holds of the same amendment.

The agency’s version ends that support in 2034. Anything still owed after that comes from other revenues.

The council’s version leaves that sentence out.

A “” is on the calendar for later this month. The calendar doesn’t say what it covers.

Maintenance center. About for the next phase.

Most of it builds the fleet maintenance and wash buildings.

Whatever is left from the approved expenses can go to Phase 2.

Land code. Final vote.

The draft sets which projects the land use administrator , and which go to a board or to council.

Council asked for changes at first reading. Staff answers in writing.

On flood height, it cites the floodplain coordinator. On historic surveys, it points to a separate law. On buffers, it adds new language.

Fire Rescue and drinking water. Two .

One bans the transfer of the city’s Fire Rescue Department. The other bans direct potable reuse — recycled wastewater sent straight back into the drinking supply.

Both came out of a council workshop in early September. Neither has changed since.

That’s the board.

The rest happens in the room — and the room is open.

— Johnny Diamond  ·  PalmCoastStorylines.com

Next Up

City Council meets Tuesday, Oct. 6, at 6 p.m. in the Jon Netts Community Wing at City Hall, 160 Lake Avenue. Proclamations start at 5:30.

Every major item has its background and the earlier deliberations on the Oct. 6 meeting page.

The $17 Million Settlement


On Aug. 19, 2026, council approved a Purchase and Sale Agreement/Settlement Agreement with Palm Coast Holdings, Inc., Florida Landmark Communities, LLC and Palm Coast Land, LLC.

The plan amendment on the Oct. 6 agenda lists 258.37 acres for acquisition at $17,000,000. The parcels are listed under Florida Landmark and Palm Coast Holdings.

The agreement settles the lawsuit the item identifies this way:

“…designated as Case No. 2025-CA-000670”

Tuesday’s items deal with how the $17 million is financed.


Source: Agenda item E.1, Aug. 19, 2026, item p. 2. Read it → Agenda item J.1, Oct. 6, 2026, item pp. 10 and 12. Read it →

The Sept. 1 Tabling


On Sept. 1, council voted to table both Seminole Trace ordinances: the land-use map amendment and the rezoning.

The Oct. 6 packet records what council asked for next:

“The City Council at their September 1 public hearing voted to table the FLUM amendment and Zoning Map amendment for Seminole Trace. The Council directed the applicant and staff to discuss changes to the MPD agreement.”

Both ordinances return Oct. 6 as first readings.

Tabled is not decided. Both items are back Oct. 6.


Source: Agenda item H.4, Oct. 6, 2026, item p. 1. Read it →

The Sept. 15 First Readings


Three items that council took up at its Sept. 15, 2026 Business Meeting are back Oct. 6.

The land development code update:

“City Council heard this item at the September 15, 2026, Business Meeting and requested changes that are attached to this item.”

The Fire Rescue transfer ban, and the direct potable reuse ban. The packet uses the same sentence for both:

“City Council reviewed the item at their September 15, 2026, Business Meeting. There were no changes made to the item.”

All three are on the Oct. 6 agenda for a final vote.


Source: Agenda items I.1, I.2 and I.3, Oct. 6, 2026, item p. 1 of each. I.1 → I.2 → I.3 →

Seminole Trace: What Came Back


The land-use map amendment raises the maximum number of homes in the 331-acre Seminole Trace planning area, formerly Cascades, from 416 to 743.

After Sept. 1, the applicant’s amended agreement caps townhomes at 130. The total stays at 743 homes.

Open space goes from 20% back to 40%.

Minimum townhome lot width goes from 18 feet to 20 feet. Minimum front setbacks go to 20 feet for single-family homes (from 15) and townhomes (from 10).

A new minimum 15-foot landscape buffer separates townhomes from single-family homes.

Staff writes that these changes address the three reasons it had recommended denial: open space, townhome lot width and front setbacks.

“The applicant’s amended MPD-DA has addressed the issues above”

Capacity, as the packet states it: for the 327 added homes, a maximum potential net increase of 818 residents at 2.5 persons per home, 317 additional PM peak-hour trips, 77,663 gallons a day of drinking water and 67,035 gallons a day of wastewater.

“the proposed amendment results in a potential increase of 327 dwelling units and 818 persons (2.5 persons/dwelling unit)”

Staff writes that the increases will not push any public service below its adopted level of service, and that capacity is reviewed again at the site plan and plat stage.

“The increases will not cause any of the public services and infrastructure to fall below the adopted Level of Service.”

Same 743 homes. Different terms.


Source: Agenda item H.3, Oct. 6, 2026, item pp. 1, 2, 12 and 72. Read it → Agenda item H.4, item pp. 1–2. Read it →

The Skate Park Offer


The developer would convey a 3-acre site to the city at no cost for a city-owned and maintained skate park.

The city would be co-applicant for wetland permits and would pay for wetland impacts. The conceptual site plan shows about 0.56 acre of impacts on the site, and possibly 1.39 acres more for a shared entrance road.

The developer would grade the site, extend utilities and size a lift station at its own cost. It would receive park impact-fee credits equal to its actual cost for clearing, grubbing and grading, plus credits for 50% of the shared entrance road.

The city would set aside park impact fees collected from the development to build the skate park. It is otherwise responsible for design, permitting and construction.

Staff remains concerned about when the skate park would actually be built, and says the adequacy of the impact fees to pay for it is not yet determined.

“the adequacy of impact fee collected is undetermined at this time”

The site is free. Whether the fees cover the build is undetermined, in staff’s words.


Source: Agenda item H.4, Oct. 6, 2026, item pp. 1–3. Read it →

The Planning Board’s Recommendation


For the rezoning, the packet says the Planning and Land Development Regulation Board held a hearing on Aug. 19 and recommended denial.

“RECOMMENDED THAT CITY COUNCIL DENY THE PROPOSED ZONING MAP AMENDMENT”

For the land-use map change, the staff report still carries a template line that was not filled in:

“THE PLANNING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATION BOARD HELD A PUBLIC HEARING ON AUGUST 19 AND RECOMMENDED THAT CITY COUNCIL APPROVE/DENY THE PROPOSED FLUM AMENDMENT. STAFF WILL PROVIDE THE OUTCOME AT THE CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING.”

Both recommendations predate the changes the applicant made after Sept. 1.

Denial on the rezoning. On the land-use map change, the packet’s line is unfilled.


Source: Agenda item H.4, Oct. 6, 2026, item p. 4. Read it → Agenda item H.3, item p. 2. Read it →

The Tentative Calendar


The agenda worksheet in the Oct. 6 packet lists the council’s tentative calendar.

Oct. 20 Business Meeting, 9 a.m.: a “Loan Resolution.” The calendar does not say what it covers.

Nov. 3 Business Meeting: Election Day.

Nov. 17 Business Meeting: the oath of office for newly elected council members.

Dec. 1 Business Meeting, 6 p.m.: second readings of the Cascades/Seminole Trace land-use map amendment and master planned development.

“Cascades/Seminole Trace FLUM”

On this calendar, Seminole Trace’s final votes come after the Nov. 3 election and the Nov. 17 swearing-in.


Source: Agenda item P.1 (Agenda Worksheet and Calendar), Oct. 6, 2026, item p. 2. Read it →

Two Texts, One Amendment


Item J.1 is the State Road 100 redevelopment agency’s recommendation. Item K.1 is the council resolution that adopts the plan amendment.

The agency’s version says tax-increment money would repay the line of credit and any General Fund advance:

“for the repayment of the line of credit, including principal and interest, and of any interfund advance made from the General Fund”

It also limits that support to 2034 and says where any balance after that is paid from:

“increment support for the financing described herein is limited to the Plan’s existing 2034 time certain, and any obligation outstanding after that date is payable from other lawfully available revenues”

The council resolution’s version of the same amendment is worded differently and has no 2034 sentence:

“for repayment to the General Fund, and to assign future CRA dollars for the repayment of Line of Credit and Interest as Incurred”

We searched the full text of K.1 for “2034,” “time certain,” “lawfully available” and “interfund.” None appears. J.1 contains all four.

The amendment text in the agenda documents reviewed does not name a lender or state the rate, term or amount borrowed.

The packet holds two texts of the same amendment. Only one includes the 2034 sentence.


Source: Agenda item J.1, Oct. 6, 2026, item pp. 7–8. Read it → Agenda item K.1, item p. 7. Read it →

The $41.4 Million Maintenance Center Request


Project expenses of $41,400,496.89 for the Maintenance Operations Center.

The total is a guaranteed maximum price amendment with Gilbane Building Company for Phase 1C, the fleet maintenance and wash buildings ($37,050,539); a change order with Pond & Company for construction administration ($474,885.11); and additional expenses and project contingency ($3,875,072.78). The three add up exactly.

The cover sheet’s Amount field shows $37,052,889.00. That is $2,350 more than the Gilbane amendment amount stated in the same item.

Any money left from the approved expenses may be used to advance Phase 2:

“Any balance of the Approved Project Expenses is authorized to be utilized to Advance Phase 2 of the project”

Council approved Phase 1 (site development, now under construction) on Oct. 15, 2024, and Phase 1B (more site work, Peavy Grade improvements and the fuel depot) on Oct. 21, 2025.

The three pieces sum to the total. The cover sheet’s amount field differs from the contract figure by $2,350.


Source: Agenda item K.3, Oct. 6, 2026, item pp. 1–2. Read it →

The Land Development Code Update


Under Table 2-1 in the ordinance, the Land Use Administrator has final approval of Tier 1 projects: nonresidential site plans up to 40,000 square feet of building and multifamily projects not exceeding 40 units, among other application types.

The same table gives the Land Use Administrator final approval of subdivision master plans for residential up to 100 units, and of developments under the Live Local Act regardless of size or number of units.

“Developments pursuant to the Live Local Act regardless of size or number of units”

Larger projects (Tier 2 and up) go to the Planning and Land Development Regulation Board or to council.

Staff answers the comments from the Sept. 15 hearing in a table in the packet, “Response to Comments from September 15 City Council Public Hearing.”

Freeboard: a concern that the 2-foot freeboard requirement may negatively impact existing adjacent properties because of elevation differences. Staff’s response cites the floodplain coordinator. It does not describe a change to the language.

“Based on correspondence with Floodplain Coordinator. Homes are being built with a 2' freeboard (although not required) these homes have not caused an impact to surrounding structures.”

Cultural resource surveys: a concern that there is no exception for existing platted lots. Staff’s response says the City Attorney has drafted a Historic Preservation Ordinance that, as currently drafted, would provide an exception to existing ITT lots. Staff recommends that further historic preservation changes be addressed in that ordinance, which is item H.5 on this agenda.

Buffers: new language requiring landscape buffers between residential areas where there is a difference in elevation (Section 11.03.05).

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

Changes requested at the Sept. 8 workshop are attached as a separate summary.

Staff says three items will come after the code update is adopted: performance standards for data centers, penalties and fines for unpermitted tree removal, and research on “parcelization” of projects to avoid code review.

Table 2-1 sorts projects by size and type: who decides, and who hears it.


Source: Agenda item I.1, Oct. 6, 2026, item pp. 1, 4, 12 and 351–352. Read it →

Fire Rescue and Direct Potable Reuse


Item I.2 prohibits the transfer of the City of Palm Coast Fire Rescue Department. Item I.3 prohibits direct potable reuse.

Council directed the City Attorney to draft both ordinances at the Sept. 8, 2026 workshop.

Each item’s background records the same result at the Sept. 15 Business Meeting:

“City Council reviewed the item at their September 15, 2026, Business Meeting. There were no changes made to the item.”

The recommended action on each is to adopt the ordinance.

Two ordinances, unchanged since council first reviewed them.


Source: Agenda items I.2 and I.3, Oct. 6, 2026, item p. 1 of each. I.2 → I.3 →