Concern about public notice prompts city attorney’s recommendation
The public hearing scheduled before the Sarasota City Commission on April 21, regarding a homeowners association’s appeal of the city Planning Board’s vote to allow construction of what would be the tallest structure in the municipality, has been rescheduled to May 13.
Just after the invocation at the start of the commission’s regular meeting this week, City Auditor and Clerk Shayla Griggs told Mayor Liz Alpert that the hearing on the Bay Plaza Owners Association appeal over the Planning Board’s approval of adjustments for the construction of the 18-story, 14-unit 1260 N. Palm Residences project would not take place that day.
The condominium tower, with retail space on the first and second floors, would stand 327 feet in height. It also is known as the Obsidian, a fact that has been made clear on Realtors’ webpages.
Griggs added that City Attorney Joe Polzak would provide more details.
“Commissioners,” Polzak began, “as you’re all aware, an issue’s been raised as to notice … in this matter.” He was referring to the formal city alerts to the public in advance of a land-use hearing.
“Out of an abundance of caution,” Polzak continued, “I’m strongly recommending we continue this matter” until May 13. The commissioners could conduct the hearing that day during a special meeting, he added.
The shift to that date, Polzak pointed out, would allow city staff plenty of time to “perfect our notice …”
The commissioners already had been scheduled to conduct a workshop that day, he said.
Polzak reported that he had spoken to the attorneys for both the developer of the North Palm Avenue project and the attorneys for the Bay Plaza Owners Association. “And I don’t believe they have any objection to the continuance.”
Mayor Alpert asked whether staff felt that eight hours should be allotted for the May 13 hearing. She also inquired about the time staff believed it should begin.
Griggs responded that since a workshop had been set for that date, she hoped all of the board members would be available for the full day. Moreover, she said, “I think we should start at 9.”
However, a day later, Jan Thornburg, general manager of the city’s Communications Department, alerted The Sarasota News Leader to the change in the starting time from 9 a.m. to 10 a.m.
The Planning Board hearing of the Bay Plaza appeal lasted approximately four-and-a-half hours; it was conducted on Feb. 12.
Commissioner Kathy Kelley Ohlrich made the motion for the continuance; Commissioner Jen Ahearn-Koch seconded it; and it passed unanimously.
After the commission vote, Ron Shapiro, a leader of the Bay Plaza Owners Association, sent out an email blast to report that his group would reschedule until May 13 a rally that it had planned for noon on April 21.
In response to a News Leader inquiry about the notice issue, Thornburg of the city’s Communications Department wrote in an April 22 email, “The issue was regarding the posting of a physical sign at the site announcing the public hearing. Out of an abundance of caution, the City Attorney recommended continuing the hearing.”
Staff recommendation for denial of appeal
The Agenda Request Form included in the April 21 City Commission packet called for the board members to deny the Bay Plaza appeal. The staff materials in the packet pointed out that the “Administrative Site Plan has been found to meet the applicable standards and criteria of the Zoning Code,” referencing the fact that the City Commission was not tasked with approving the plans at the conclusion of staff’s review of the application materials, which were tweaked over time in response to staff comments.
Opponents of the proposal have stressed that the tower would be incompatible with its surroundings. The Bay Plaza Owners Association has been displaying a graphic showing how much higher the 1260 N. Palm Residences structure would be than their building.
Yet, in an explanation of staff’s position that the project conforms to city standards — even with three adjustments to those standards — the staff document for the April 21 meeting cited multiple portions of the Zoning Code. Among them, it noted Section IV-1903(e)(2)(b), which says, “The proposal will not significantly detract from the livability or appearance of the downtown neighborhood zone district or the proposal will be consistent with the desired character of the Downtown Neighborhood Edge, Downtown Core and Downtown Bayfront zone districts.”
In regard to the 1260 S. Palm Residences plans, staff also wrote, “The intent and purpose of the downtown zone districts is to produce an urban area that is diverse, compact, and walkable. The Downtown Bayfront zone district [which is the district in which the building would stand] is further intended to create a very dense mixed-use urban area with residential dwellings in multi-family developments in tall structures and mandatory ground floor retail on certain designated frontages. The frontage and habitable space required [by the Zoning Code] and the required retail at the sidewalk level in [the Code] produce a high level of positive stimulus and interaction for pedestrians. The requested adjustments and the corresponding proposed development provide a multi-family development in a tall structure with ground floor and second floor retail. The requested adjustments have been mitigated with additional depth of habitable space in the ground floor retail space and one of the second floor retail spaces. The proposed development with the requested adjustments does still contribute to a diverse, compact, and walkable urban area and thus, the adjustments are consistent with the desired character of the Downtown Bayfront zone district.”
During testimony to the Planning Board members, when they conducted their hearing in February, Noah Fossick, the city’s chief planner for development review, explained, “The redevelopment of sites always leads to a transition from low-story buildings to higher-story buildings, where there will be periods of time with differences in height.”
He also noted, “Growth is incremental, and we should expect and encourage differences in height, which add interest to our skyline.”
Differences in height, he continued, are seen in cities worldwide.
Yet attorney Morgan Bentley, of the Sarasota firm Bently Goodrich Kison — who is representing the Bay Plaza Owners Association — told the Planning Board members, “The whole purpose of the [Zoning] Code is to have height limits.” He then read from Article VI-1005(g) in the Code, which regards building height:
‘A tremendous amount of evidence’ for denial
Chair Daniel DeLeo, the only member of the Planning Board to vote for the Association in its appeal, stressed, “I think there’s a tremendous amount of evidence in this record to turn this building down. A tremendous amount.”
Pointing to the city’s Standards for Review, he cited No. 4: “Whether there are ways in which the configuration of the development (e.g. location of use(s); intensity; density; scale; building size, mass, bulk, height and orientation; lot coverage; lot size/configuration; architecture; screening; buffers; setbacks; signage; lighting; traffic circulation patterns; loading area locations; operating hours; noise; odor; and other factors of compatibility can be changed which would mitigate or improve the effect of the development on adjoining and nearby properties and on the community.”
“There has been a lot of talk about the height [of the project],” DeLeo continued. “It is extreme, I think, by any measure, as it relates to those properties around it and the history of Sarasota.”
Conversely, attorney Brenda Patten of the Berlin Patten Ebling firm, who was a member of the 1260 N. Palm Residences project team, stressed to the Planning Board members, “Your staff has gone to extreme lengths to show you that this [building] complies with the [city Zoning] Code. If you deny it, and [this] eventually ends up in Circuit Court, it would be a most awkward situation for the city attorney.”
She further emphasized that the city attorney would be arguing “that staff is incompetent and made errors, and their staff report [for the hearing] would be trashed.”
The developer of the complex is Palm Properties LLC, whose manager is Matt Kihnke.