There’s a Big Disconnect between Palm Coast’s Needs and Its Proposed Land Development Code

If passed as is, it could affect you in ways you will not like.

July 11, 2007 – Palm Coast, FL – The Comprehensive Plan and Future Land Use Map (FLUM) are complete. The Land Development Code (LDC) is supposed to set forth the rules under which the Comp Plan and FLUM are implemented. At least in the draft form, they do not. Neither do they indicate that the city staff understands the critical need to attract more business and industry to Palm Coast. But what would you expect of a document developed by technocrats in a vacuum.

Palm Coast’s existing Land Development Code (LDC) has few merits. Developed on the fly by a fledgling city, it was a patchwork quilt of Volusia LDC sewn onto the Flagler LDC.  It was time to implement a new code.

But the new code seems to have been developed by city staff without a clear mission statement or guidance from the council clarifying the direction they should take. In my years in the technology industry, we called this a list of specifications. Without specifications, programmers wrote programs that did what they thought people wanted them to do rather than what the end users or stakeholders wanted them to do. The staff has many competent people, hard working and well intended, but without a map, how can anyone get to their destination?

A project of this magnitude (the draft is over 350 pages) needs a manager, someone with an appropriate professional background and the ability to pull the different disciplines (wetlands, landscaping, planning, building codes, civil engineering, architecture, etc.) together to assure that the document is consistent with the goals and that the sections are consistent with each other. After two years, this was not happening. So the City Council engaged departing City Manager Kelton to assume this role in a consulting capacity. As a parting insult to the city, which had endured him for so long, he collected a substantial fee, rumored to be $50,000, for apparently making only marginal notes and suggestions. The draft is rife with internal inconsistencies and without supporting technical documents. The sections appear to have been developed in silos.

Any successful implementation of change requires the participation of, and input from, those affected by the change. In the case of an LDC, these people are not just the builders and developers. They are the moms and pops that are willing to risk their savings to come to Palm Coast to start a new business. They are the retail stores and restaurants that we wish would locate here. They are the potential industries that can help balance our tax base and provide new jobs. They are the nurses, school teachers, police, firemen, wait staff, trades people, and maintenance people who cannot afford to live here because it is too expensive. And they are me and you who would be shocked to find out that the swimming pool or shed in our yard is about to become a non-conforming improvement.

Outsiders were excluded from the code development process. Well over two years in the making, the draft was made public only a few weeks ago. Since, there have been two open workshops but public comment has been severely limited. I’ve been told that as of the end of June, neither City Manager Landon or Planning & Zoning Director, Ray Tyner had read the complete draft and that City Attorney, Lonnie Groot had not finished his review. Yet the council plans to pass the final document by September. Is it just a coincidence that this is before the election, or am I being too cynical?

Companies thinking of locating in Palm Coast have historically been “put off” by:

• High land costs (nothing the city can do about greedy property owners)
• Lack of economic development incentives
• Over-restrictive codes
• A “take it or leave it” attitude from both city and county government
• A pervasive perception in the site selection community that Palm Coast and Flagler County are not friendly places to do business

Community leaders have been heard to say “businesses will come anyway. They need us.” In reality, that’s not how businesses think. Take Target as an example. As a business, they set out a goal to expand at a rate that would get them to 2010 stores by year 2010. This goal required an aggressive schedule of new openings. For each new location selected, there are several more locations from which to choose – all of them having Target’s desired demographics. Yes, Target would eventually have come, but they didn’t have to come this year. In fact, we nearly lost them. To meet their goal, they informed the city that they needed to have final plat approval by December 2006, six months from their original request. Without constant external pressure, that date would not have been met. Target would have moved on to another city.

Meanwhile:

• Flagler County gets less than 1% of its tax revenue from the industrial sector. The new code will further inhibit industrial development.
• There is no plan for workforce housing. City impact fees (read taxes) already account for the first $18,000 of the cost of a new home. The draft LDC is more restrictive on duplex options.
• It takes months to go through the permitting process for new construction. The new LDC will probably add to this time frame.
• Carrabba’s Restaurant is struggling with the city over signage, the same issue over which we almost lost Outback. The sign section of the draft LDC is more restrictive.
• The city wants “more green space” but the draft LDC requires wider roads, sidewalks and parking spaces.
• The city faces future budget constraints brought on by tax reform, but the required mandatory street lighting and wider roads will cost more to maintain in perpetuity.
• The complexity of the draft LDC will require addition of staff to administer.

Several successful development plans have been completed over the past 5 years. How many of them would have been possible under the new code? Good question, but nobody has even looked at it. Doesn’t it make sense that a code that would have prohibited many of our existing successes would also work against future successes?

A good code is more important than hitting a deadline date. But where should we go from here? Many willing and qualified people and organizations in the community can provide input. The staff is dedicated, hard working, and generally competent within their areas of specialty. But they are not trained to write a complex code. Nor should they be expected to be. They need proper direction and supervision. Find a person who can provide that direction. Then, work in consort with experienced community members, associations, and trade organizations to develop a code consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Do it in the light of day, not behind curtains of bureaucracy. And do it in the time frame needed, not under an artificial deadline.