Jones Rezoning at Golf Garden in Miramar Beach

Discussion in 'Local Government and Groups' started by South Walton Community Council, Oct 9, 2020.

  1. South Walton Community Council

    South Walton Community Council Community Organization

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2007
    Messages:
    242
    Likes Received:
    58
    Rezoning requested for a 16 acre parcel located adjacent to the Golf Garden parcel in Miramar Beach

    The Jones Rezoning proposal goes before the Planning Commission on Thursday, October 8. SWCC opposes this plan based on a residential density that is not appropriate for an area full of wetlands.

    Here is the background:
    · Property area 16.14 acres
    · Wetland area 10.33 acres
    · Upland (buildable) area 5.84 acres
    · Current zoning Residential Preservation
    · Current entitlement 2 dwellings (one dwelling per parcel)
    · Proposed zoning Low Density Residential 4:1 (4 dwellings per acre)
    · Proposed entitlement 46 dwellings
    · Increased density 23x (2 to 46)

    Language in the Land Development Code allows developers to “transfer” density from wetlands to upland portions of the property and “cluster” housing to minimize wetland impacts. The problem with the Jones proposal is that the resulting density is not appropriate for a low-lying floodplain area.

    The question is – why 4:1? Why not Low Density Residential 2:1? Or better yet why not Conservation Residential 2:1. Or even better Conservation Residential 1:1. Why does the county think that the 4:1 proposal is reasonable given that there has been no engineering evaluation of the stormwater impact of such high density on surrounding properties?

    SWCC recommends denial of this proposal, with a directive that the applicant perform the engineering design to support a DO (Development Order) application. The rezoning application can be processed concurrently with a DO application. There is no justification for premature rezoning.

    We have seen this before with the Forman LSA project – same scenario – floodplain area full of wetlands approved for 4:1 residential with no engineering to support the application. Now the developer is trying to sell the property to Walton County at an inflated 4:1 price.

    That is what this is all about – increasing property values dramatically with very little effort. But what is the cost to taxpayers in terms of flooding, water quality and traffic congestion?

    Please let the BCC commissioners know your position.

    View the staff report >

    unnamed.png
     
  2. South Walton Community Council

    South Walton Community Council Community Organization

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2007
    Messages:
    242
    Likes Received:
    58
    Jones Rezoning
    Miramar Beach
    BCC Meeting
    Tuesday Nov 24 9AM Defuniak
    Rezoning requested for a 16 acre parcel located adjacent to the Golf Garden parcel in Miramar Beach

    The Jones Rezoning proposal goes before the Board of County Commissioned November 24. SWCC opposes this plan based on a residential density that is not appropriate for an area full of wetlands.

    Here is the background:
    · Property area 16.14 acres
    · Wetland area 10.33 acres
    · Upland (buildable) area 5.84 acres
    · Current zoning Residential Preservation
    · Current entitlement 1 dwelling (one dwelling per parcel)
    · Proposed zoning Low Density Residential 4:1 (4 dwellings per acre)
    · Proposed entitlement 46 dwellings
    · Increased density 46x (1 to 46)

    Density
    By utilizing the density transfer provisions in the Land Development Code, the applicant can use the gross area to determine allowable dwelling units on the upland portion. The problem with this approach is that the actual density in one area is over 14 units per acre. SWCC believes that high density is not appropriate in this location and is probably not even achievable.

    Conservation
    The proposed zoning (LDR 4:1) allows the developer to clear cut the entire 5.84 acres of developable land and bring in fill dirt to raise the level. SWCC believes that a land use change to Conservation Residential would be more appropriate as that would require 60% preservation of existing vegetation.

    Access
    The developer proposes to use private roads in the Olde Florida Lakes Subdivision for access. There are no sidewalks anywhere in this area. The roads are narrow. There are no curbs. However, there are a lot of people, who walk and bike in the roadway. To add additional cars in this small area is a safety hazard issue and is not in the best interest of the people that live in this area.

    Stormwater and Flooding
    The applicant has not presented any engineering data to show how the proposed density will impact neighboring properties. Walton County Planning position is that this data will be presented at the next stage, an application for a Development Order. SWCC believes that no rezoning should be approved without that critical information.

    The floodplain map below shows that that 90% of the property is in flood zone A (High risk area with a 1% annual chance of flooding and a 26% chance of flooding over the life of a 30‐year mortgage.) We estimate that only 1.6 acres is truly uplands, i.e. outside the wetlands and flood zone A.

    unnamed.png

    The question is – why 4:1? Why not Low Density Residential 2:1? Or better yet why not Conservation Residential 2:1. Or even better Conservation Residential 1:2.5? Why does the county think that the 4:1 proposal is reasonable given that there has been no engineering evaluation of the stormwater impact of such high density on surrounding properties?

    SWCC recommends denial of this proposal, with a directive that the applicant perform ab engineering design to support the requested density. The rezoning application should be reviewed concurrently with a DO (Development Order) application.

    Please let the BCC commissioners know your position.

    Download Agenda Packet pdf for more info.
     

Share This Page