- April 25, 2024
-
-
Loading
Loading
The city government wants to know what locals think about Palm Coast's housing stock. But the city is still determining how to phrase the question — and what it could do in response to the answer.
The city's attorney, Neysa Borkert, warned that banning multifamily housing on land that's already zoned for it "would result in huge legal liability to the city."
City Councilman Eddie Branquinho suggested at a June 28 City Council workshop that the city look into placing two questions on the upcoming November ballot.
His proposed questions were:
"Are you in favor of additional multifamily housing development in the city of Palm Coast?" and, "Are you in favor of Palm Coast allowing single-family homes to be built on lots less than 60 feet wide?"
"I think those questions are fair, they’re simple, and let the people of Palm Coast decide what they want," Branquinho said.
As of late last year, Palm Coast's housing stock was about 9% multifamily.
Branquinho generally votes against potential new apartment complexes when they come to the council for approval, and has criticized proposed single-family developments with narrow lots, saying that increased density could degrade local quality of life.
In March, Branquinho suggested that the city implement a moratorium on the construction of any multifamily housing east of U.S. 1. He later canceled his call for a moratorium, deciding instead to raise his concerns about housing density during a review of the city's Comprehensive Plan.
City staff members were updating the council on that proposal during the June 28 meeting, saying they expected to present the council with potential survey questions to approve at an upcoming meeting on July 12, when Branquinho passed fellow council members sheets of paper containing the proposed questions he'd written himself.
Since a survey could be expensive for the city government, Branquinho said, he'd asked the Supervisor of Elections Office about placing the questions on the ballot.
He said he was told that a referendum wouldn't cost the city anything unless the questions bumped the ballot length up to an additional page.
He suggested the city look into it.
With a referendum, he said, "Instead of 10,000 or 12,000 people, we put it out to everybody in Palm Coast."
Mayor David Alfin asked if it might be better to survey people about their impression of a range of housing types, rather than singling out multifamily.
And, Alfin asked, is "multifamily" too vague a word? For instance, does it include duplexes or condos?
He suggested using more precise language.
Branquinho said he wasn't thinking of duplexes or townhouses as multifamily, and that he meant buildings with more than two floors. He thought the word "multifamily" was clear enough.
But his definition of "multifamily" would be out of step with the definition in the city's Code of Ordinances, which states that "multifamily" includes duplexes, triplexes, quadraplexes and condos, as well as trailers and apartments.
Councilman Ed Danko asked what the city could do with the information it would gain from a referendum.
Would it even have the legal authority, for instance, to ban multifamily housing on land that's already zoned for it?
Branquinho said that the council, as a legislative body, should have the authority to pass such an ordinance.
But the city's attorney, Neysa Borkert, warned that banning multifamily on land that's already zoned for it "would result in huge legal liability to the city," and that a referendum wouldn't be the right mechanism to solicit resident feedback.
The council will discuss the issue at a future meeting.
