Commissioners approve rezoning for large North Olga clustered residential plan despite heavy public opposition

Lee County commissioners on March 5 approved a request to rezone roughly 788 acres in the North Olga area from agricultural to a residential planned development, a decision the applicant and hearing examiner say will allow roughly 1,099 dwelling units while placing about 483 acres — including roughly 420 acres — under permanent conservation easement.

The rezoning, filed as DCI 22‑67 (Carrie Duke/Covia residential plan development), drew the largest public turnout at the zoning hearing. Dirk Danley, Lee County Community Development, introduced the case and noted the hearing examiner recommended approval with conditions after multiple days of hearings and 36 participants of record.

The applicant's planning team said the design preserves more than 60% of the site as open space and includes extensive buffers. Lehi Crespo of RVI Planning and Landscape Architecture, the applicant’s planner, said the plan relies on an incentive density bonus to create “rare and unique upland habitat” and restore impacted pasture land, and that the developer will record conservation easements for the preserved acreage. Crespo said the project is proposed to connect to centralized water and sewer and would eliminate an estimated 788 potential septic systems on the property.

The hearing drew sustained opposition from residents who said the development is incompatible with the area’s rural character and raised substantive concerns about traffic, emergency response, flooding and wastewater capacity. Several speakers cited a FEMA flood‑map change filed during the permitting process and asserted the change was not adequately publicized. Roxanne Goss, a retired environmental engineer, and other commenters pointed to ongoing enforcement issues at the regional sewer plant and said shifting more flow there raised public‑health and water‑quality concerns.

Other residents described the project as too dense for the surrounding area and warned of degraded emergency response times and increased traffic on two‑lane county roads. Susan Allen, a retired nurse, said she worried about longer emergency response times and said county data show the area is already outside target response windows for some life‑threatening calls. William Fields, a North Olga resident, told commissioners, “There’s only four rural communities left in Lee County… I have not heard of one person that is for this project,” summarizing the opposition from the audience.

Applicant counsel and the hearing examiner’s report said the application meets the local plan and land‑development code standards when read with the conditions recommended at the hearing. Neil Montgomery, speaking for the applicant, summarized the record defense: “As you look at the extensive hearings and analysis, and you look at the conditions that were recommended by both the staff and the hearing examiner, the concerns raised by the public have been addressed.” Montgomery also pointed to specific conditions requiring a long‑term indigenous vegetation restoration and a recorded conservation easement for preserved lands.

County legal staff reminded the board this is a quasi‑judicial proceeding: the board must base any denial on competent, substantial evidence in the hearing record or risk legal challenge. That framework limited commissioners’ ability to act on some public policy concerns presented during public comment, the county attorney said.

The commission voted to approve the rezoning after deliberation. A commissioner moved to approve, another seconded, and the motion carried with no recorded objection. Staff said details such as required roadway improvements and specific utility connections will be addressed later in development‑order review, when the county will evaluate traffic impact studies and require any developer‑funded roadwork or impact‑fee payments tied to new units.

What happens next: approval of zoning transmits the plan development; the project must later clear development‑order review, engineering permits and recorded conservation easements before building permits are issued. Opponents at the hearing indicated they planned to pursue administrative and legal avenues available after the board’s decision.