Flagler County approves $400,000 settlement and permit credits in long legal fight over Hammock Harbor project

The Flagler County Board of County Commissioners voted on Feb. 9 to approve a conditional settlement with Hammock Harbor LLC that resolves more than six years of litigation over a proposed marina and dry‑stack boat storage development in the Hammock area.

County attorneys said the settlement, reached after court‑ordered mediation, requires the county to pay the developer $400,000 in cash and grant up to $50,000 in building‑permit credit and up to $100,000 in nontransferable impact‑fee credits; in return, Hammock Harbor will dismiss its federal lawsuit with prejudice. County counsel told the board potential exposure and attorney fees if the county lost at trial would have been substantially higher than the settlement amount.

The item produced sustained public comment. Hammock residents and the Hammock Community Association argued the proposed development violates the A1A Scenic Corridor overlay, that a large dry storage warehouse and outdoor slips amount to prohibited commercial warehousing and outdoor storage, and that required reviews (special exception, traffic studies and buffer requirements) have not been satisfied. “This development is nothing more than a commercial warehouse,” one resident said during public comment.

Counsel for Hammock Harbor and the developer’s attorney countered that the use is a permitted commercial‑recreation use under the county’s comprehensive plan and zoning code and argued the company purchased the property after being told by staff that the proposed marina use was permissible. The developer’s counsel said continued litigation would cost taxpayers more and delay economic activity on the site.

Commissioner debate focused on legal risk, code compliance, and protecting neighboring property owners. Commissioners ultimately approved the settlement; the motion carried with a majority in favor and at least one recorded dissent. Commissioner Hansen recorded a "no" vote; the clerk recorded the motion as approved.

The settlement includes commitments by the developer about site design and parking that staff said would be enforced through the permitting and technical review process. County attorneys told the board that the settlement language preserves site‑plan conditions and that any site‑plan permitting would follow standard review procedures, including state and FDOT reviews where applicable.

Next procedural steps: County staff will finalize settlement paperwork, process the credits as permitted by the agreement, and proceed with staff‑level site review and permitting for the plan described in the mediation materials. Residents and advocacy groups signaled they may continue to monitor implementation and may use administrative or legal channels if they assert the development violates the land‑development code.