BRADENTON — In what can only be described as a marathon BOCC land use meeting, commissioners on Wednesday heard two linked development proposals that included a shared design agreement. Despite the applicants’ plan to share traffic access and amenities, commissioners ultimately denied one request and granted a continuance to the other.
The two development proposals in question were the Bus Barn rezone with a preliminary site plan for 122 detached single-family homes east of Zipperer Road and north of Uihlein Road, and the other, the Zipperer Road rezone with a preliminary site plan for up to 167 single-family homes located along Zipperer Road and Waterline Road. Both projects are located north of SR 64.
The joint planning agreement between Simply Dwell Homes—an attainable-housing subsidiary of Neal Communities—and M/I Homes proposed that, upon completion, the two developments would share entrance/exit points and amenities. With the project sites adjacent to one another, the agreement would provide both applicants with an additional access point needed to meet the county development code.
Under the joint development agreement, the two proposals were heard in tandem, with public comment and board deliberations conducted simultaneously during dual hearings.
The land use meeting began at 9 a.m., with the Bus Barn and Zipperer Road hearings starting at 4 p.m. and concluding nearly nine hours later. The meeting adjourned just five minutes before 1 a.m. on Thursday.
Along with hundreds of pages of written public comment for both development requests attached to Wednesday’s meeting agenda, over 30 citizens attended the meeting in-person to provide testimony—with some speaking for up to 20 minutes either for or against approval.
Overall, both written comments and in-person citizen testimony weighed heavily toward opposition, by more than threefold, with most of those speaking in support of approval being family members and current landowners of the 55.79-acre agricultural-zoned property proposed for development by M/I Homes.
Besides area residents expressing their concerns about density, increased traffic, potential flooding, destruction of wildlife habitats, and the lack of compatibility with the surrounding rural community, the threat to the oak canopy of Zipperer Road was of particular concern to many of the speakers.
The Bus Barn project (Simply Dwell) had no direct access to Zipperer Road, while the Zipperer Road project (M/I Homes) only had access to Zipperer. Both projects relied on each other’s approval and build to have at least two access points.
Opponents argued that if the two projects were approved, Zipperer Road would be irreparably harmed. They said improvements needed to widen the old rural roadway would threaten its double-sided rows of mature live oak trees. Presenters for the applicants disagreed, arguing that road upgrades could be completed while preserving the trees.
In the end, commissioners found the Zipperer Road project inconsistent with the county’s comprehensive plan and noncompliant with the land development code, voting unanimously, 7–0, to deny approval.
Bus Barn was viewed differently. A majority of commissioners found the proposal included favorable elements—like it being an attainable home project—and was largely consistent with the county’s comprehensive plan. However, without approval of the Zipperer Road project, Bus Barn lacked the access points required to meet land development requirements.
Commissioner Carol Felts acknowledged the strong turnout from citizens both for and against the projects, but reminded attendees that development decisions must be based on county standards and regulations, not the emotional or sentimental testimony that many citizens presented.
While explaining her motion to deny the Zipperer Road application, Felts noted the strong public turnout for both items, which resulted in a public hearing that ran past midnight. She openly questioned proponents who pointed to how the historically agricultural area had changed over the years, asking, “Where were you all when we moved the FDAB? Where were you all when we were fighting to keep our wetland protections? Where was everybody?”
In his comments ahead of the vote, Commissioner George Kruse said he viewed the two projects very differently. Kruse disagreed with the applicants and project proponents that the projects qualified as “infill” projects, but he expressed a favorable view of the Bus Barn.
A motion to also deny the Bus Barn failed 2-5, with only Commissioners Bob McCann and Felts voting in favor. A second motion made by Commissioner Kruse to grant the applicant a continuance to return to the board and present a possible solution to their access point issue—due to its lack of access to Zipperer Road with the denial of the M/I Homes application—was then approved 6-2, with McCann and Felts voting in opposition.
Via the vote, the applicant for Bus Barn may return with a revised proposal for board consideration with no date certain. However, the board seemed skeptical as to whether the access point challenges could be overcome.
5 comments on this item
Only paid subscribers can comment
Please log in to comment by clicking here.
Kelly
Chairman Siddique is incompetent for mismanaging the January 28, 2026 meeting agenda. The overloaded agenda with known contentious items resulted in a 16 hour meeting. This is a disservice to citizens, commissioners and rezone applicants alike. This "sweatshop" mentality must not continue. Unnecessary overload and undo stress does not make for good deliberation or decision making. This was all completely avoidable. But, it is no wonder that Siddique does not understand "overdevelopment." LA and Miami urban densities must be what he likes.
Thursday, January 29 Report this
Kelly
TAL SIDDIQUE AND GEORGE KRUSE ARE LIARS. AT THE BCC MEETING MAY 8, 2025 THEY PROMISED TO PROTECT WETLANDS AND WETLAND BUFFERS. AT THE BCC MEETING JANUARY 28, 2026 THEY VOTED TO BACKFILL 3 ACRES OF WETLANDS NEXT TO THE LAKE MANATEE STATE PARK RIGHT ON THE FDAB, (SR64 and Bourneside Blvd).
I HOPE TAL'S WIFE KRISTEN TRUONG IS NOT A LIAR.
Friday, January 30 Report this
cusickr
The current Board deserves wide support for their efforts to stop the damage that was being done under the prior commission. Note sure what Board KELLY has been monitoring or whose interests she represents. How about these recent actions...
The board unanimously approved the protection of 1,483 acres of agricultural land in Jan 2026, reinforcing efforts to preserve, not develop, natural areas and water quality.
The Board voted unanimously, in line with the recommendations of the planning committee, to deny Zipperer and Bus Bard projects for sound reasoning. The length of the meeting did not influence an outcome that clearly supports the needs of existing residents.
The commission recently protected 438 acres at Mossy Island Ranch and 1,045 acres at Thundercloud Ranch.
The 2020 voter-approved conservation fund is almost depleted, with officials considering a new referendum for the Nov 2026 ballot to continue purchasing land.
They are clearly focused on large scale preservation of land and water. If the state had not stepped in with SB 180, our wetland boundaries would also have been restored.
Clearly the newly elected commissioners heard the voices of the residents in voting out Van Ostenbrige, Satcher, and Turner, along with Pedicini's manipulative tactics.
Let's pay attention to FACTS rather than Kelly's "influencer" rhetoric.
Friday, January 30 Report this
teamj1009
Well at least at this point we are seeing more "NO"s that approvals. I hope this continues. Now mention of how we are running out of water.......
Friday, January 30 Report this
Kelly
Yes, I agree with this board’s improved record for preservation over past commissions,
I applaud their saving (at least for now) the canopy road and the many 100 year old oaks. I’m not so sure they are living up to their promises or rhetoric. The proposed wetland and other surface water destruction by the Bus Barn development should not be tolerated. Bus Barn should have been denied, not continued. Fact- the continuance procedure was not lawfully done.
FACTS:
Land conservation/preservation is presently required by County law and voter mandate by the tax referendum in 2024. This is something commissioners are required by law to do primarily using ELMAC. Yes, the citizens applaud the commissioners for following the law.
Fact: Zero is less than 30. Commissioner Kruse said he will vote to deny any project with wetland buffers less than 30 feet (5/8/2025 BCC meeting). Dumping concrete and fill into roughly 3 acres of wetlands results in zero feet of buffer.
Wetland mitigation banks are legal in Florida but remain a very questionable practice among environmental engineers. Some see it as a Ponzi scheme- robbing Peter to pay Paul. Mitigation banks do not provide the wetland benefit to the hydrological area in need where the removal occurs. They essentially export any wetland benefits.
Wetland restoration and rewilding are growing recommendations/mandates by environmental engineers and are being successfully done worldwide. It is proven science. Although not inexpensive, wetland restoration will reduce flooding and the costs resulting from flooding.
Saturday, January 31 Report this