Commission reopens rezoning of 142-acre Evans property; staff recommends lowest-density RS-1

The Dade City Commission reopened a quasi-judicial rezoning matter on June 10 involving roughly 142 acres owned by Evans Properties Inc., focusing on whether to assign an RS‑1 zoning district consistent with the property’s low-density-residential (LDR) future land-use designation.

City Attorney Patrick Brackens prefaced the hearing with a legal framework emphasizing that zoning decisions must be consistent with the comprehensive plan: "An order granting or denying rezoning constitutes a development order and development orders must be consistent with the comprehensive plan," he told the commission. Brackens summarized the procedural history: the property was annexed in December 2006; the city adopted an LDR future land-use designation in 2020 that became final after state review in June 2021; the applicant initially sought RS‑3 then RS‑2 and later requested RS‑1.

City staff said RS‑1 is the least dense zoning district available under the LDR designation and recommended the commission adopt RS‑1 on rehearing. "Assigning no zoning district would also be inconsistent with the city's comprehensive plan," Miss Ralston, city staff, said, noting infrastructure constraints and that any future development would undergo a full project-level review for roads, stormwater and wastewater capacity.

The applicant’s counsel, Kip Marshall of Hill Ward Henderson, said the applicant relied on prior presentations and that the city must apply a zoning district consistent with the adopted future land use. "The applicant has submitted prior presentations and rests on those records," Marshall said.

Several adjacent property owners who had been sworn as affected parties spoke in opposition or with concern. Paul Vasco said he and other neighbors were not notified about the annexation and expressed flooding concerns tied to local drainage canals and a nearby man-made canal. "Who's going to be liable for this? Is the county liable? City liable? The developer?" Vasco asked. Susan Shelton and Marie McLeod urged the commission to protect existing neighborhood character and raised concerns about drainage and future flooding.

Commissioners asked staff and counsel numerous procedural and technical questions about the 2020 future land-use assignment, the range of zoning options available under LDR, and whether the city could use overlay districts. City Attorney Brackens cautioned that overlay districts targeted to a single parcel would be legally problematic.

The hearing as recorded in the transcript concluded with public affected-party testimony; the transcript does not include a final roll-call vote in this segment. Staff said any actual development would require infrastructure improvements and project-level review, and commissioners asked for additional information and clarification before taking a final vote.