Council approves Grovestown Center hotel swap after debate over oak hammock and B Road traffic

The Town of Loxahatchee Groves on Feb. 4 approved a package of land-use changes and site plans that swap an assisted-living facility for a three-story, 81-room hotel and shift the planned Town Commons to a different parcel within the Grovestown Center planned unit development (PUD).

The council approved a comprehensive-plan text amendment (Ordinance 2024-09), a master-plan amendment (Ordinance 2024-10) and two site-plan resolutions for the hotel and the Town Commons (Resolutions 2025-06 and 2025-07). Each measure passed on a 3-2 vote after extended public comment and a lengthy quasi-judicial hearing that focused on tree preservation and traffic on B Road and Southern Boulevard.

The vote follows months of revision by the applicant and staff. Planning staff said the hotel was reduced from an earlier 95-room, four-story proposal to a 3‑story, 81‑room design; the applicant removed most waiver requests and revised architecture and lighting to better match the town’s rural aesthetic. Planning staff advised that the changes do not increase the overall approved PUD square footage or trip generation.

Applicant attorney Brian Seymour told the council the developer responded to prior council direction by reducing building height and room count and by funding traffic improvements already underway on B Road. "Developers shouldn't just get everything they ask for," Seymour said during the presentation, adding that the current proposal represented a negotiated compromise.

The debate centered on an oak hammock on the hotel parcel and on traffic circulation where the Grovestown driveway meets B Road and Southern Boulevard. The project team submitted an arborist report and an updated landscape plan; the town’s independent arborist also inspected the trees.

Project manager Matthew Barnes (WGI) told the council the oak cluster includes mature laurel oaks that occupy roughly three-quarters of an acre and that the project’s current site plan does not retain the full hammock. "These are Laurel Oaks," Barnes said. "They are not pristine trees. They do not meet town requirements, all of them, for being preserved."

Town arborist Mark Williams, one of two independent experts who inspected the trees, said preservation is possible only where the full construction layout and staging allow protection of both canopy and root zones. "When you're thinking about trying to preserve trees, you want to try to preserve trees that are in good condition," Williams said. He added that several of the laurel oaks showed storm damage and structural decline, and that some trees are approaching the usual life span for that species.

Council discussion repeatedly returned to whether the hotel parcel could be reconfigured to spare more of the hammock. Council member Robert Shore said his principal concern was the parcel split that would give the hotel a smaller footprint and reserve the remainder of the pod for an undefined future use: "That's my biggest issue — acreage and the ability to save some tree," he said.

Traffic impacts also drew sustained attention. The applicant agreed to maintain temporary flexible delineators (the so‑called "pork chop" delineators) and to install a permanent striping and signage package that would eliminate a westbound turning movement from the Grovestown driveway onto B Road, channeling that traffic north to Tangerine Road instead. The applicant also committed to update wayfinding signs and to work with staff on final striping permits. The developer offered to plant 20 live oaks (minimum 14 feet tall / 4-inch caliper) on the Town Commons parcel (Pod G) prior to the hotel's certificate of occupancy; locations would be coordinated with the town arborist.

Public comment reflected the split in the town. Supporters emphasized jobs and tax base, while opponents and nearby residents urged preservation of the oak hammock, requested a fresh traffic study for the already-congested Southern/B Road intersection, and pressed for limits on 18‑wheeler routing and hours of operation for any heavy trucks. Joe Siciliano and several other residents urged careful monitoring and public reporting if the pilot traffic controls are installed.

Council members debated additional conditions during a recess; the final set of conditions added the tree‑replacement language and a requirement for the applicant to submit and install the striping and signs to block the westbound movement within 90 days of site-plan approval. The developer also agreed to one year of maintenance on the temporary delineators.

Votes at a glance

- Ordinance 2024-09 (Comprehensive Plan text amendment): Approved on second reading, 3–2. - Ordinance 2024-10 (Master Plan/PUD amendment): Approved with revised conditions, 3–2. - Resolution 2025-06 (Hotel site plan, Pod TC): Approved with conditions (including tree mitigation and striping), 3–2. - Resolution 2025-07 (Town Commons/Park site plan, Pod G): Approved with condition that the developer plant 20 live oaks on Pod G, 3–2.

What the approvals mean

The council's actions allow the applicant to proceed with final permitting under the revised PUD plan that substitutes a hotel use for the previously contemplated assisted-living facility, relocates the public Town Commons to Pod G (including wetland areas in the commons parcel), and permits the hotel on the western portion of Pod TC. Staff said the changes do not enlarge the PUD's total square footage or change the previously approved trip allowances; they are a reallocation of use within the approved master plan.

Next steps

The developer must obtain required building and civil permits, satisfy the conditions in the adopted resolutions (including pre‑occupancy tree planting/mitigation and installation of the traffic striping and signs), and complete required agency reviews. Staff will continue to monitor implementation and the council retains discretion to revisit elements if compliance is not met.

The council's approval closes a chapter of multi-year review and on-again, off-again negotiation between the applicant, staff and residents; opponents said they will continue to press for more on-tree preservation and traffic mitigation during the permitting phase.