The council deliberated on multiple ordinances and resolutions linked to the RV resort project, which aimed to introduce a new “rural recreation” land use category and amend the comprehensive plan’s future land use map. Despite the applicant’s presentation emphasizing the benefits of a high-end motor coach resort—such as increased tourism and eco-friendly recreational activities—council members raised concerns. These included potential traffic congestion, environmental effects, and the broader implications for local zoning and infrastructure.

The applicant had proposed a series of amendments to accommodate the resort, including a plan text amendment and rezoning ordinances. They argued that the development would align with the town’s rural and equestrian focus, offering amenities like public trail systems and green spaces. However, the council’s primary apprehensions revolved around the strain on local roads, the rural character of Loxahatchee Groves, and the project’s alignment with existing zoning codes.

A significant portion of the meeting was devoted to public comments, where residents like Christy Coleman and Lawrence Gaines voiced strong opposition to the project. Coleman questioned the necessity of a new zoning category, arguing it would disrupt the rural character and inflate the town’s population, currently under 4,000. Gaines echoed concerns regarding inadequate infrastructure to support the additional traffic the RV park would generate.

In response to community concerns, the developers pledged to limit RV stays to under six months, prevent individual lot sales, and offer amenities to the town during off-peak months. They also committed to a $500,000 impact fee and annual contributions to the town, emphasizing financial responsibility and community engagement.

Despite these assurances, the council expressed skepticism about the project’s feasibility and its potential financial and environmental impact, leading to a series of motions to deny the proposed ordinances. The key denial was for ordinance number 202503, related to the comprehensive plan text amendment, which failed to receive a second and was ultimately rejected by a 4-1 vote. This decision set a precedent for subsequent votes, resulting in the denial of other critical ordinances and the overall site plan resolution, number 2025-33.

The council also addressed broader legislative concerns, discussing the implications of new state laws on zoning and land use. While the proposed legislation had not yet been signed into law, council members debated its potential impact on future development approvals and the town’s ability to maintain control over local land use decisions.

Further discussion centered on a proposed ordinance to amend height regulations across the town’s zoning districts. The intent was to clarify height measurement standards, capping buildings at two stories to prevent visually intrusive structures. This ordinance received unanimous approval.