A proposal to create a special development review board for Northeast Jacksonville was unanimously rejected by a Jacksonville City Council committee Jan. 21, with committee members raising concerns about opening the door to copycats that would create an additional layer of government in Duval County.
The Neighborhoods, Community Services, Public Health and Safety Committee voted 7-0 against legislation introduced by Council member Mike Gay, Ordinance 2024-0851, to create a Northeast Development Review Board.
According to a bill summary attached to the ordinance, the board would provide recommendations on rezoning requests in an area roughly bordered by the St. Johns River to the south, Main Street to the west and the Duval County line to the north and the Atlantic Ocean to the east.
Later Jan. 21, after several members of the Council Rules Committee also raised concerns about the ordinance, Gay agreed to allow it to be deferred so he could work on revising it.
Gay, whose District 2 includes a portion of the area that would be covered by the board, said the panel was modeled on the Downtown Development Review Board, which serves as the planning commission for Downtown. If the northeast board were created, it would supplant the planning commission in making recommendations to Council on zoning applications.
The nine-member board’s members would be appointed by the mayor’s office and confirmed by Council, with terms of up to three years. Residency for five years or more in the area would be a requirement to serve on the board.
Gay said the northeast area, like Downtown, offers a unique makeup that justifies the creation of a specialized board to review proposed developments within its boundaries. The area is home to a mix of property that ranges from heavy industrial operations to city and state parks and preserves, three beaches and 15 islands.
Citing a need to “get our businesses moving forward,” he said a critical need in the northeast area is to create “industrial sanctuaries” where companies could operate free from encroachment by residential development.
He said he was hoping to prevent situations in which residents in newly built homes near industrial properties complain about the industrial operations, pressuring companies to either relocate or curtail their work.
“We talk about affordable housing, but it’s hard to get affordable housing when it’s hard to get an affordable 2-by-4 or affordable concrete,” he said.
Committee members commended Gay for working to further his constituents’ interests, but several expressed concerns that it would duplicate the work of the Jacksonville Planning Commission and could come with added costs for staffing and support.
They also noted that the city’s seven Citizen Planning Advisory Committees were created to provide district-specific recommendations on development.
Members urged Gay to work with the Planning and Development Department to improve the current process as opposed to creating a new board.
“My concern is we could have seven or eight of these before long if we approve one,” member Ron Salem said.
“I would agree with Council member Gay there are some unique aspects of that part of town, but I’m concerned that other Council members could make arguments about the uniqueness of their parts of town.”
Committee member Ken Amaro agreed, saying that he would likely seek to establish a special development board in his District 1 if Gay’s ordinance were adopted. Assuming other boards would pop up, he said, “All that does is create a bigger government and lead to an administrative state.”
The city Planning and Development Department recommended denial of the legislation. The department’s director, R. Brett James, said staff members were concerned about duplication of efforts and costs and a possible weakening of efforts to apply consistent planning and zoning across the county.
James told Gay and the committee that he was interested in discussing ways to improve the current system.
“If the Planning Commission is missing a mark somewhere, for example with the uniqueness of this area, I’d like to have that conversation,” he said.
Gay said the creation of the board was in line with the city’s 2045 Comprehensive Plan, its master set of land use and zoning regulations, and would not be precedent-setting given that the DDRB already is in place. As for the idea that it could lead to similar boards in all 14 Council districts and fuel patchwork development, he called that notion “speculation.”
Committee member Michael Boylan said that between public hearings before the Planning Commission, the Council Land Use and Zoning Committee and the full Council, there were several opportunities for residents of any district to provide input on developments.
Committee Chair Joe Carlucci said he believed the ordinance would water down the Planning Commission as more district-level development boards came online. Citing a need for unbiased and objective decision-making on zonings, he said, he also was concerned about boards’ ability to put aside their personal interests and emotions in forming recommendations.
During the Rules Committee meeting, a member of the North District Citizens Planning Advisory Committee urged members to support Gay’s bill.
Charles Barr, the vice chair of the North District Citizens Planning Advisory Committee, urged the Rules Committee to support Gay’s bill. Saying he routinely fields complaints regarding the CPACs, Barr said he did not believe the citizens’ committees were a solution for giving residents of districts more influence in decisions on development in their areas.
“The complaints I hear are that nobody listens to the CPACs,” he said.