Planning panel backs Clearview Estates PUD amendment to allow flexible access, internal out‑parcels

Citrus County Planning and Development Commission members voted unanimously at their February 2025 hearing to recommend approval of application PUD 3,026, an amendment to the Clearview Estates planned unit development that would allow flexibility in locating access points on State Road 44 and permit outparcels accessed from internal roadways instead of requiring direct frontage on 44.

The application, filed by Citrus Hills Investment Properties, LLC, seeks to amend the Clearview Estates master plan for roughly 77–78 acres of commercially designated land east of South Kensington Avenue along State Road 44 in Inverness. Applicant Eric Abel told the commission the change would let future developers “eliminate and or exchange specific designated access points from 44 and or Kensington” and would permit internal access to outparcels so customers “can access the internal [roadways]…and it keeps traffic off of entering and exiting to and from 44.”

The measure matters because the master plan currently shows multiple specific access points onto State Road 44. Staff and the applicant said the amendment is intended to reduce delays and the need for repeated PUD amendments when a prospective tenant requests a different driveway configuration. Joanna (planning staff) told the commission the property remains commercially designated and that engineering has proposed a condition requiring county‑engineer approval for any changes. Joanna read the engineering condition into the record: “The access and roadway must comply with all applicable standards in effect at time of development and receive approval from the county engineer.”

Planning staff framed the request as limited to two changes: (1) allowing flexibility to relocate or modify existing access points shown on the DRI/master plan, subject to county and state approval, and (2) permitting the creation of outparcels without road frontage when those lots are accessed from internal driveways, subject to the county engineer’s approval. Staff reminded the commission that Clearview Estates is a Development of Regional Impact (DRI) created in the 1970s and that most of the site’s commercial uses (for example big‑box retail) are already allowed under existing commercial designations.

Commissioners pressed the applicant and staff on traffic, roadway capacity, and buffer protections for nearby residential neighborhoods. Technical services staff said Kensington is currently built at a 50‑foot right‑of‑way (short of typical collector widths) and that an applicant may need to dedicate right‑of‑way or construct turn lanes depending on the eventual use. Commissioner Bozeman noted that the Home Depot site under review in separate building‑site review materials is approximately 15.5 acres with one or two small outparcels and that Kensington is likely to be the preferred ingress/egress if the anchor tenant requires significant truck access. Staff and the county engineer said the specific improvements (turn lanes, right‑of‑way dedication, signals) will be determined when an end user submits detailed engineering and traffic studies and that FDOT will also have jurisdiction over access to State Road 44.

Public commenters raised concerns about potential traffic entering residential streets, buffer widths, noise, and the prospect of a driveway that would route commercial traffic near Crown Of Roses or Run For The Roses. Walter Belt asked, “what's to prevent [the applicant] from moving one of those access points to South Run For The Roses, which goes into residential property?” Eloy Nunez urged the commission to require review “each and every time” to avoid unintended consequences for neighbors. Applicant Eric Abel responded in rebuttal that the requested change would not stop development but would “allow us to lessen the impacts of that commercial development” by enabling internal access and reducing trips onto State Road 44.

After discussion the commission moved to find PUD 3,026 consistent with the county comprehensive plan and recommended approval to the Board of County Commissioners with amended conditions reflecting the county engineer’s memo. Commissioner David Bramlett made the motion; Commissioner Michael Facemeyer seconded. The vote was 7‑0 in favor. Technical staff noted that existing DRI conditions remain in effect, including the existing requirement that when traffic signal warrants are met at Run For The Roses the developer(s) pay the costs of design, permitting and installation.

The commission recorded its recommendation as a transmittal to the Board of County Commissioners; staff said the item is scheduled for the BOCC on March 11 at 5:01 p.m. in Inverness.

Votes at a glance: PUD 3,026 — Recommendation to BOCC Motion: Recommend approval of application PUD 3,026 with the staff findings and amended engineering condition (county‑engineer approval required for access/roadway improvements) Mover: Commissioner David Bramlett Second: Commissioner Michael Facemeyer Vote: 7 yes, 0 no (motion passed) Outcome: Recommendation to Board of County Commissioners (scheduled March 11, 2025, 5:01 p.m., Inverness)

Funding, next steps and other conditions: Staff and commissioners emphasized that specific roadway improvements, right‑of‑way dedications, and signal installation remain subject to later engineering review and FDOT approval where State Road 44 is involved. The DRI’s other conditions, including a 50‑foot planted berm buffer along Crown Of Roses, were not changed by this amendment and remain in effect.