Neighbors challenge administrative split at 2201 Chesco Road; county staff says Class D approval misapplied

Residents from a small Spring Lake subdivision told the Board of County Commissioners on Tuesday they were surprised and upset that an administrative Class D subdivision was approved for 2201 Chesco Road without wider notice to nearby property owners.

Jason Branch said he first learned the property was being split when neighbors saw a listing on Zillow; the property reportedly closed the day after the previous meeting, and Branch said he and neighbors were not notified or given an opportunity to speak. Stephen Bailey and Carl Brown, who also said they had deed restrictions in their subdivision dating to the 1990s, described confusion and frustration and asked why county staff had not returned repeated calls about the request.

Omar De Pablo, the county’s development services director, told the board staff had reviewed the file and determined the parcel’s treatment had an administrative error. De Pablo explained the parcel is part of an unrecorded subdivision that had been treated in files as a parent parcel; that classification allowed a Class D split by right. After residents questioned the administrative approval, staff re-examined the history and concluded the parcel should not have been processed as a parent parcel and therefore should have gone through a formal review.

De Pablo said he had determined a portion of the owner’s nonconforming uses had been lost because of permitting and replacement rules and that the matter will come before the board in August for a full analysis and final decision. He told residents the county has authority limits: county code does not enforce private deed restrictions; only fellow property owners have standing to enforce such restrictions under Florida case law, so deed-restriction disputes must be resolved among property owners (or in civil court) before the county can take certain actions.

Owner David Collins told the board he had intended to reserve a 2.75-acre parcel in a Collins family trust for his son and that approximately 14.8 acres had been sold to new buyers; Collins said his attorney and title company would address any title and trust questions. Commissioners pressed for clarity about whether the owner had testified under oath in the previous hearing about family hardship and whether the sale changed that claim; the board discussed possible legal follow-up if testimony was found to be inaccurate.

De Pablo said staff will bring a full analysis of the property’s history and the administrative approvals to the board in August so the commissioners can determine whether a hardship exists and whether the prior administrative approval should be upheld or denied.

Ending: The board asked staff to review procedures and notification practice for future Class D administrative approvals; De Pablo said the department is reviewing standard operating procedures and anticipates code revisions to clarify “hardship” language and notification. The matter will return to the board in August for a final decision.