Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission recommends denial of drive-through oil‑change plan in coastal high‑hazard area
Summary
The Citrus County Planning & Development Commission voted unanimously June 4 to recommend denial of PUB-2025-00009, a proposed Take Five drive-through oil‑change and subdivision on US 19, citing self-imposed nonconformities and environmental risks tied to coastal flood hazards and uncertain oil-handling safeguards.
The Citrus County Planning and Development Commission unanimously recommended denial June 4 of a proposal to establish a Take Five drive-through oil‑change operation and subdivide an existing parcel on U.S. 19 (application PUB-2025-00009).
Edward McDonald of Thomas Engineering Group, representing the applicant, asked the commission to approve a planned unit development and several deviations — including allowing a drive-through without a bypass lane, no designated loading area, a three‑foot sign separation variance and lot widths of 71 and 94 feet — for a site north of a recently built Dollar Tree. McDonald said the proposed finished floor elevation would be 14 feet and that “everything where we're building is above the FEMA” elevation, arguing that the development would sit above mapped flood elevations and operate like other Take Five stores.
Staff and several commissioners pressed for specifics about waste‑oil handling and containment. Principal planner Joe Hawkel told the board the site lies partly within the coastal high‑hazard area, a Category‑1 hurricane flood designation, and noted staff views the requested deviations as driven primarily by the owner’s decision to subdivide an otherwise conforming parcel.
“It seems to me that that's what's really driving your request for deviation,” Commissioner Robert Sherah said during questioning, urging the board to weigh whether creating two nonconforming commercial lots is appropriate. Public commenter Tracy Duncan of Lanto asked the commission “to consider not accepting this application due to the risk, the potential risk it has for the environment.”
Commissioners repeatedly requested evidence of secondary containment for above‑ground waste‑oil tanks and clearer procedures for removing used oil before storms; the applicant said typical industry practices are used and provided operational videos for review but deferred some technical details to architects and service contractors.
After deliberation, the commission adopted a motion finding PUB-2025-00009 inconsistent with the Citrus County Comprehensive Plan and the Citrus County Land Development Code and recommending denial to the Board of County Commissioners. The motion, made by Robert Sherah and seconded by Michael Face Meyer, passed unanimously. The commission also set the matter for a hearing before the Board of County Commissioners on July 28.
