- October 5, 2026
The Palm Coast City Council voted 3-1 on Sept. 15 to advance amendments allowing additional residential and commercial development on the former Matanzas Woods Golf Course property.
The council approved the Lakeview Estates comprehensive plan and master planned development amendments on first reading, with Vice Mayor Theresa Pontieri and Council members Charles Gambaro and David Sullivan voting in favor. Mayor Mike Norris voted against both measures.
The applications are scheduled to return to the council for a final vote on Oct. 6.
The council previously tabled the applications on Sept. 1 to give the developer time to address concerns involving wooded buffers, possible arsenic contamination, the proposed city park and the future of the property’s remaining undeveloped land.
Under the proposal, the developer would be able to build the project’s remaining 39 homes on Tract 3, with access limited to Lakeview Boulevard. The amendment would also change about 20 acres of Tract 9 along U.S. 1 from Greenbelt to Mixed Use, allowing up to 250,000 square feet of commercial development.
The property originally had entitlements for 272 homes. City staff said 221 lots have already received varying levels of approval, leaving 51 residential entitlements. Converting the 20-acre portion of Tract 9 to commercial use would reduce the remaining number to 39.
The proposal also calls for the developer to convey Tract 8 to the city for a future park at no cost and without receiving park impact fee credits.
Pontieri said the city needs to make sure the land is suitable for an active neighborhood park and not simply undeveloped open space.
“This is supposed to be the public benefit,” Pontieri said. “We need to actually make sure it’s a public benefit.”
Senior Planner Michael Hanson said Tract 8 is approximately 11.5 acres, although the city does not yet have a formal wetland delineation for the site. Staff agreed to further evaluate how much of the property could support playground equipment, parking and other park features before the second reading.
Pontieri also requested that the agreement require soil boring to a depth of at least 18 inches on Tract 8. If arsenic is found above levels considered safe for human use, the developer would be required to remediate the property before conveying it to the city.
Attorney Michael Chiumento III, representing property owner Matanzas GC Palm Coast LLC, said an arsenic study had been completed years ago and had received approval from the city. However, he said he could not confirm during the meeting how deep the testing went.
“Clearly understood that at any point in time when we convey the property to you all that it needs to meet those requirements for arsenic,” Chiumento said. “And we’re fine with that.”
The amended agreement would also require a minimum 50-foot view protection zone along Tract 3 where the proposed homes would border existing residential lots. The buffer could not be cleared during development.
Chiumento said the developer also intends to preserve an existing stand of mature trees behind the homes.
Pontieri pushed to retain the existing 150-foot view protection zone along Tract 9. The developer had proposed reducing it to 100 feet but agreed to work with city staff on revisions before the final vote.
Pontieri said maintaining the buffer was important for residents whose homes border the proposed commercial area.
“I’m very cognizant of how these residents will feel about this and how I would feel if I were in their shoes,” she said.
The developer also agreed to give the city about 100 acres of undeveloped land, in addition to the proposed park site. The land could be preserved or used for stormwater management, helping ensure it is not developed in the future.
The Planning and Land Development Regulation Board voted 5-1 in May to recommend approval of the comprehensive plan amendment with limits on development intensity. However, the board voted unanimously to recommend denial of the master planned development amendment after hearing opposition from residents.
Norris said he could not support the proposal because of its effect on nearby homeowners.
“These are my neighbors, and I’m not willing to sell my neighbors out in their views for a park,” Norris said. “I know we need commercial on U.S. 1, but it’s not in the best interest of the city, in my view.”
Pontieri called the revised proposal a compromise that reduces the number of homes, provides land to the city and could prevent another attempt to change the development plan in the future.
“I think this is a really happy medium,” she said. “I think at this point this is the best way to kind of put this to bed and still come up with a good plan.”
