Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Resilience Flooding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission approves variance to replace Baxter Point mobile home despite flood‑risk objections; opponents urge delay pending resiliency review
Summary
A county variance request to replace a storm‑damaged mobile home at Baxter Point passed 5‑to‑1 after staff recommended approval; commissioners and residents debated sea‑level rise, septic permitting and whether to wait for county resiliency recommendations.
Get email alerts on the Resilience Flooding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission approves variances for Baxter Point mobile home replacement; public commenters and one commissioner urged delay for resiliency review.
The Land Planning and Land Development Regulation Commission approved by a 5‑to‑1 vote a recommendation to County Council to allow seven variances enabling a smaller replacement manufactured home, a new porch and continued use of an existing small shed on a heavily constrained lot in the Baxter Point Fish Camp along the St. Johns River.
Nut graf: The application prompted an extended exchange about flood risk, septic permitting and sea level rise. Staff and the applicant said the lot is legally vested and physically constrained; environmental permitting did not object, but at least one commissioner and several residents urged delaying approval until the county’s Natural Resource Advisory Committee and resiliency planning complete further work.
What the case requested Staff described seven variances (V25‑035) to allow a proposed 480‑square‑foot replacement mobile home, a 400‑square‑foot deck and to legalize an 118‑square‑foot existing shed on a 0.38‑acre lot in an A‑1 (prime agriculture) zoning district. The site sits within the county’s Natural Resource Management Area and is partially within flood zone A, staff said; the previous trailer had been permitted in 1967 and was demolished after hurricane damage.
Environmental and resiliency questions Commissioner Michelle Bush pressed staff on the county’s Regional Resiliency Action Plan and whether the property faces future inundation. Shams and environmental staff said the site is in a repetitive‑loss area for flood insurance claims and that county code requires new structures meet current flood‑based elevation standards. Samantha West, Volusia County sustainability and resilience manager, said the plan (adopted by Council in 2018–2019) identifies repetitive loss areas but that the county currently does not have code provisions requiring higher freeboard universally; she said the Environment and Natural Resource Advisory Committee (NRAC) is considering requiring additional freeboard for some repetitive‑loss areas and expected to discuss the topic at an upcoming NRAC meeting.
On health and septic systems, staff told commissioners Florida Department of Health standards control septic permitting. Shams said the health department would evaluate whether the existing septic tank could be reused or must be replaced and that raised or mound systems are often required where soils are poor or groundwater is high.
Applicant and neighbors Applicant Robert Luking said the property is a family heritage site and that the rebuild is "the only thing we are attempting to do is replace the structure that was destroyed in the hurricane." He and a family member spoke in favor. Neighbors and a nearby homeowner raised concerns about historic drainage patterns on Tatum Boulevard and said nearby developments had increased localized flooding; one resident urged the commission to "listen to your citizens" and to consider downstream effects.
Staff recommendation and vote Overall, staff recommended approval of variances 1–7 with five conditions, concluding the constrained lot met the standards for variances. Several commissioners voiced concern but ultimately a majority voted to approve the variance set; one commissioner (Ms. Bush) said she would vote no, arguing the county should wait for NRAC recommendations and take a more precautionary approach on repetitive‑loss rebuilds.
Outcome and next steps The commission’s approval forwards the variance to County Council; conditions include meeting environmental permitting and building‑permit standards and any state requirements for septic systems. If Council approves the variances, the applicant will proceed to permitting, where the state health department will determine septic requirements and building elevation standards will be enforced.
Ending: The case highlighted tensions between property‑owner rebuilding rights and growing county concerns about rebuilding in repetitive‑loss, riverfront locations; commissioners asked staff to flag related resiliency and septic issues for future policy work.

