County Commission in July had asked for another Planning Commission review of height factor
Nine members of the Sarasota Planning Commission voted unanimously on Sept. 18 to recommend that the County Commission refrain from changing county regulations to allow condominium complexes to be rebuilt after voluntary demolition on Siesta Key.
In making the motion, Planning Commissioner — and past three-term county Commissioner — Jon Thaxton referenced the existing county policy that allows nonconforming buildings on the barrier island to be rebuilt to their existing height and residential density in the aftermath of a natural disaster.
Originally, he made a motion to recommend that the Planning Commission call for the County Commission not to approve proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment 1.3.3E, which would allow the voluntary demolition of Siesta condominium complexes, with new buildings to have no more units than the ones that were destroyed.
However, after confusion arose among other members of the Planning Commission, county Planner Everett Farrell — who has been handling the issue — acknowledged that the direction from the County Commission following a July 8 discussion was for the Planning Commission to review and vote on a proposed modification of the county’s Unified Development Code (UDC) to allow reconstructed Siesta condominium complexes to stand no taller than 45 feet over two levels of parking, and then only if those buildings were in districts zoned Residential Multi-Family 3 (RMF-3).
For structures zoned RMF-1 and RMF-2, the maximum height over two levels of parking would be 35 feet, Farrell had explained.
(The UDC contains all of the county’s land-use and zoning regulations. Siesta Key has a special overlay zoning district whose acronym is SKOD.)
Each parking level could measure no more than 12 feet in height, as depicted in a slide that Farrell had shown the board members.
Nonetheless, as Farrell also pointed out, the RMF-3 zoning raises the prospect of 69-foot-tall towers on the Key.
The County Commission tentatively is scheduled to conduct another hearing on the issue during its regular meeting on Nov. 19, the county Planning and Development Services staff told The Sarasota News Leader this week.
All five members of the public who spoke during the Sept. 18 public hearing urged the planning commissioners to tell the County Commission not to approve the proposed voluntary condominium demolition and reconstruction policy and regulations.
In June 2024, the height concerns prompted the Planning Commission members seated at that time to recommend that the County Commission refrain from adopting the necessary new Comprehensive Plan and UDC amendments. The Comprehensive Plan guides growth in the community.
More confusion at the Planning Commission dais
Early during the Sept. 18 Planning Commission hearing on the issue, Planning Commissioner Thaxton addressed county Planner Farrell in noting how confusing the County Commission vote was on July 8, in regard to asking for the Planning Commission review of the height issue.
On July 8, as The Sarasota News Leader reported, County Commissioner Mark Smith had to recuse himself from voting for ethical reasons: He was the individual — prior to his November 2022 election — who launched the voluntary condominium demolition and reconstruction proposal with the County Commission seated in January 2022.
Representing Sea Club V on Siesta Key, Smith — an architect — urged the county commissioners at that time to consider the safety benefits of such an opportunity. Smith stressed that buildings constructed on the coast before the Florida Building Code was implemented in 2000 were much more vulnerable to serious structural problems, similar to those that brought down the Champlain Towers South building in Surfside in June 2021, killing 98 people.
The only provision in county regulations for a condominium association to tear down an old complex and rebuild it with the same number of units is in the aftermath of a natural disaster, Smith has emphasized. He has said he has found that nonsensical.
Especially since his election to the board, Smith has emphasized that no homeowners group would take the issue of voluntary demolition and reconstruction lightly, as rental income from the affected condominiums would be lost for two or three years while a new complex was underway.
“No one’s making anybody do anything,” Smith pointed out of his proposal.
Nonetheless, members of the public, including leaders of three Siesta nonprofit organizations — Protect Siesta Key, the Siesta Key Condominium Council (SKCC) and the Siesta Key Association (SKA) — have been staunch opponents of Smith’s proposal.
Both Lourdes Ramirez, president of Protect Siesta Key, and Neal Schleifer, vice president of the Condominium Council, told the Planning Commission members seated in June 2024 and those who conducted the Sept. 18 hearing that they believe that approval of the UDC amendment — along with adoption of the companion Comprehensive Plan amendment — would result in increased residential density and intensity on the barrier island.
During the July 8 County Commission discussion, Chair Joe Neunder asked his colleagues to consider each subsection of the proposed UDC amendment.
Commissioners Teresa Mast and Tom Knight expressed their preference for maintaining the potential that rebuilt condominium structures could stand as tall as 65 feet over parking, as shown in one slide that Planner Farrell had presented that day. Both emphasized their focus on resiliency, noting an earlier board discussion the same day during which the commissioners agreed to modify a county policy to allow property owners to provide as much as 3 feet of freeboard in new home construction in county flood zones.
However, Smith stressed the public concern over such tall buildings on the Key. By the conclusion of the discussion, Neunder and Commissioner Ron Cutsinger agreed with Smith that the reconstructed condominium complexes would have to comply with the maximum height already provided for in county zoning regulations.
During his comments at the close of the Sept. 18 Planning Commission hearing, Thaxton noted that the Comprehensive Plan has several policies indicating that the county to maintain the residential density and intensity on the island at the level in place as of March 13, 1989. A number of those policies relate to hurricane evacuations, Thaxton said.
Further, he told his colleagues, he had looked up the state’s definition of intensity. It is “an objective measurement of the extent to which land may be developed or used,” he read.
Thaxton added, “I can’t help but think that taller and wider buildings are an objective measurement. I can’t help but equate that to an intensification of intensity …”
Then Planning Commissioner Mitzie Fiedler pointed out that the board members were supposed to consider the height issue only. “However,” she said, “I just have a problem with 7,000 people objecting to this whole thing.”
She was referring to Schleifer’s statement during the hearing that the Condominium Council represents 1,000 associations on the Key, with a total of about 7,000 households.
Fiedler added, “I think that before I could give a reasonable discussion on height, I would have to actually go back and talk to the people and find out what they think, because they live there [on the barrier island]. … They have concerns that they face very day.”
Next, Planning Commissioner Justin Taylor indicated that the average person, upon hearing a proposal for voluntarily demolishing condominiums and rebuilding them to the current construction standards, would think, “ ‘What isn’t great about that?’ ” Yet, given the public comments during the hearing that evening, he continued, he wondered about the consequences of such rebuilding.
Taylor then told his colleagues, “As a proud resident of Venice for pretty much my entire life, I have … empathy for the residents of Siesta Key, wanting to maintain the charm of their Key,” which distinguishes it from other beach communities.
Taylor further noted that he believes that during his time on the Planning Commission, he has voted against every proposal related to Siesta Key that would necessitate the modification or replacement of county Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Policy 2.9.1, which Thaxton specifically had referenced in regard to residential density and intensity on the island. In fact, Taylor said, the believes that policy “is going to be ingrained in my brain for the rest of my life.”
He won appointment to the advisory board in January 2020.
Taylor emphasized that the typically lower building heights on Siesta Key also distinguish it “from some of these other mega beach towns.”
Working to craft the final motion
Following further board member exchanges, Thaxton made a new motion, calling for the Planning Commission to recommend, for the second time, that the County Commission refrain from implementing the necessary new Comprehensive Plan policy and UDC amendment to allow voluntary demolition and reconstruction of Siesta condominium complexes except in the aftermath of a natural disaster.
When Planning Commissioner Bruce Franklin sought clarification about whether Thaxton’s motion should reference the proposed new Comprehensive Plan policy, Thaxton explained that that policy would have to be enacted to enable the voluntary condominium demolition and reconstruction process to become possible.
Yet, Franklin said, he thought the board members were to consider only the UDC amendment that night.
Assistant County Attorney Stephen Shaw, who is the Office of the County Attorney liaison to the Planning Commission, said it was his understanding that the County Commission wanted the Planning Commission just to focus on the height issue.
“I’m a little confused myself, I admit,” Thaxton acknowledged.
Later, when Planning Commissioner John LaCivita announced that he still was confused about the framing of a motion that evening, Planner Farrell clarified, “The task before you tonight” is just to review the height issue. “The Comp Plan amendment is not something that’s before us today.”
Thaxton said he would suggest a motion recommending that the County Commission maintain the policy that allows the rebuilding of condominium complexes on the barrier islands in the aftermath of storms, not on a voluntary basis.
Fiedler seconded Thaxton’s new motion, and it passed unanimously.