Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Nonconforming Use Natureist Park topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Pasco County approves nonconforming use for 12 RV sites at Florida Natureist Park after heated appeal
Summary
After extended testimony and debate, the Pasco County Commission approved a nonconforming-use determination allowing 12 camper/RV sites at the Florida Natureist Park, finding evidence of continuous historical use; the motion passed 3–2. Staff had recommended denying the appeal.
The Pasco County Board of County Commissioners voted 3–2 on Dec. 9, 2025, to approve a nonconforming-use determination for 12 camper/RV sites at the Florida Natureist Park, reversing the planning department’s finding and granting the property limited, historic rights as presented by the applicants.
Amy Toll, Planner with the Department of Planning, Development and Economic Growth, told the board staff’s recommendation was to deny the appeal of PDE’s determination because the department could not verify that 12 improved RV spaces had existed consistently prior to Dec. 1, 1975. Toll summarized staff’s review of aerial imagery and permit records and said the evidence did not meet the standard for the requested nonconforming status.
The property owners’ attorney, Jared Sharva, argued the site had operated continuously since the 1950s as a naturist resort and presented sworn family affidavits, historic plat evidence and county-issued permits for septic, electrical and well work. Sharva said the improvements and use evolved over time but were longstanding: “This camping area has always been there,” he told commissioners, and he urged them to find the operation predated the 1975 zoning code.
Commissioners pressed both sides on the evidentiary record — noting aerial photographs that sometimes showed fewer than 12 units in certain years, and county records documenting inspections, permits and a tax receipt. Planning director David Angle told the board staff could work with the applicant on alternative regulatory paths (special exception) but that a nonconforming finding required the historic-use showing.
After public comment and discussion about seasonal occupancy and what constitutes abandonment, Commissioner Waven moved to approve a nonconforming-use determination for 12 units as shown in the application; Chairman Mariano seconded. The motion carried 3–2.
The board’s action limits the property to the 12 nonconforming units identified in the application. Staff flagged that if the owner seeks additional units beyond that number, the owner would have to pursue the county’s special-exception process.
The decision follows months of review, a stipulated-judgment direction to seek the nonconforming determination, and earlier county inspections and permits the applicants cited as evidence of long-term operations. The county record will reflect the board’s finding and any conditions or limits the board imposes consistent with land-development rules.
The board did not adopt further code changes as part of the motion. The item packet and some referenced exhibits (aerial imagery, permits, affidavits) are part of the public record on the county’s agenda for Dec. 9, 2025. The appellant may pursue other administrative remedies consistent with county code or seek additional approvals if they want to expand beyond the approved 12 sites.
