Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Rezoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Trustees reject rezoning request for 33-acre Borba Bush site after residents raise concerns
Summary
Trustees declined a developers request to rezone 33.37 acres on Port Sheehan Parkway from R-1 to R-2 after a split planning commission recommendation, broad resident opposition on traffic, views and site details, and concern that rezoning without a PUD would allow unspecified future development.
Trustees of the Village of Four Seasons voted against a proposed rezoning of 33.37 acres on Port Sheehan Parkway that developers had said would allow multifamily condominiums and some single-family lots. The developers sought a change from R-1 to R-2 zoning to permit a planned mix of attached villas and condominium buildings.
Daryl Barber, chair of the village planning and building commission, summarized the panels public hearing and its split recommendation, noting the commission vote was three in favor and three opposed and that a straw poll of attendees ran 9 to 13 against the request. Barber read into the record six written emails opposing the application and a letter from the local water and sewer district raising concerns about capacity and infrastructure needs.
Developer Mark Kelly told trustees the rezoning request was meant to "protect existing neighbors" by concentrating multifamily development along the waterline and preserving single-family shoreline lots. "The purpose of this request is containment, not expansion," Kelly said, adding that every future phase would return for public review under village ordinances.
Project engineer Matt Barsky outlined the site concept, saying the plan positions multifamily buildings along the lake edge and isolates single-family parcels away from the shoreline. In response to resident questions, Lee Shuman, an engineer on the project, said water and sewer connections had been discussed with Camden County Water and Sewer District No. 4 and that developers estimate connection impact fees at roughly $12,000 per unit; he also noted dock size and channel intrusion are limited by water-patrol rules.
Residents and a homeowners association representative pressed trustees on traffic, short-term rentals, tree loss and visual impact. A Treetop Village board member read a letter stating the associations unanimous opposition and asked for more detailed, legible visual exhibits and a 3-D demonstration of how buildings would appear from adjacent properties.
Trustees debated whether to approve the rezoning application or require a planned-unit development (PUD) with specific, enforceable conditions. Legal counsel reminded the board that approving a rezoning without conditions would allow any use consistent with R-2 zoning, not just the plan presented. The trustees made a motion to approve the rezoning, which was seconded; after a roll-call vote the motion failed and the chair closed the agenda item. Counsel and staff advised the developer they could return with a PUD or a more detailed, conditioned proposal.
The outcome leaves the property at its current zoning. Trustees and staff said they expect the developer may return with a PUD or revised application that includes enforceable conditions and clearer visuals before any zoning change can be adopted.
