Owner of Cabana Villas told sprinkler upgrade likely after occupancy change; county offers 30 days to present plan

Christopher Walker, owner of Cabana Villas, told the Nassau County Development Review Committee on Aug. 19 that he converted an old motel on Highway 1 to year‑round rentals and was warned by county staff that the change triggered code requirements he had not anticipated. “Because you changed there was a change in the use of the property from what is effectively an old motel…to a full, year long rental, it would require certain code upgrades,” Walker said.

County building staff said the conversion from transient lodging to long‑term apartments created the requirement. Constance Lake of the building department told Walker that the existing motel structure would not have required sprinklers while in its original transient use, but “what triggered it was the fact that someone at some point did an illegal change in occupancy without the proper documentation and inspection.”

The building department and fire representatives described the sprinkler requirement and possible alternatives. A building official summarized the county’s interpretation of code: “Going through our codes, there are no equivalencies or alternatives to a sprinkler system. A new apartment complex is required to have an NFPA 13R sprinkler system as long as they're under 4 stories.” He added that an equivalency could be proposed by a fire protection engineer for review but could not be guaranteed.

Walker told the committee that the cost estimate for installing a sprinkler system would be substantial—he said the current value of a sprinkler installation would “actually exceed the value of what the property is worth,” and estimated $200,000 to $250,000 for the system compared with a purchase price “just over $300,000.” County staff did not confirm those numbers but discussed options that could avoid immediate displacement of tenants while meeting safety requirements.

Health‑department staff and the owner discussed on‑site wastewater capacity. Ronnie from the health department noted the lack of public sewer or water to the site and said the existing drain field had been replaced previously; he estimated the existing drain field could serve “another 15 to 20 units.” Walker said a consultant (PQH) preliminarily estimated the site could support about 10 additional units if expanded, but he had not completed a cost‑benefit analysis.

Building‑code and planning alternatives were discussed. Keith Ellis, building official, said converting to townhomes with two‑hour fire separation could, depending on zoning, eliminate the NFPA 13R requirement: townhouses treated as attached single‑family units sometimes use NFPA 13D rather than 13R for sprinkler requirements. Planning staff told Walker they could discuss whether a townhouse conversion would be permitted for the parcel and whether that pathway could preserve affordable rents.

County staff offered a short timeline for next steps. Ellis and other staff said they would not immediately order evictions; instead they requested the owner provide an action plan within roughly 30 days so staff and the owner could identify feasible options and protect residents while work proceeds. Planning staff also noted the county’s affordable‑housing planner was available to discuss redevelopment or subsidy options.

The owner said he will produce engineering plans and keep county staff copied on communications. Departments advised Walker to work with his fire protection engineer and structural/architectural consultants to document any equivalency requests or to prepare plans for either sprinkler installation or redevelopment.

Ending

County staff emphasized the meeting was advisory: the Development Review Committee provides technical comments and recommendations to department heads, who take final administrative actions. Staff agreed to continue working with Walker and his consultants; Walker said he would return with plans and further information.