Member of project team notes changes in correspondence to senior planner for City of Sarasota
The developer of the proposed Adagio mixed-use project in downtown Sarasota has given up on the initial plans and, instead, opted for a revised undertaking that will comprise one structure instead of two, as shown in recent documents submitted to the City of Sarasota.
Moreover, the new design has a new name: Lumora.
When the project team appeared before the City of Sarasota’s Development Review Committee (DRC) on Oct. 7, Joel Freedman, whose eponymous consulting firm is located in Sarasota, also announced that the developer no longer was going to pursue a Live Local Act project in accord with the state affordable housing law guidelines.
Kemal Muskara, project manager with the Kobi Karp architectural firm in Miami — which designed the Adagio and the Lumora — further noted the reduction in overall height. (A Sarasota News Leader search of the Kobe Karp website late in the afternoon of Oct. 19 did not find any reference to the Lumora. The developer is The Lutgert Companies of Naples. Formally, the applicant for the project is DT Sarasota Development LLC. Mike Hoyt, vice president of the company, has been present for project team meetings with the DRC.)
Additionally, Freedman explained in a Sept. 14 letter to Cristian Toellner, senior planner for the city, that the revised plans do still call for the building to stand on the property where the Adagio was proposed. “As you know,” Freedman wrote of the site, “it is bounded by Palm Avenue to the west, Ringling Boulevard to the north, Pineapple Avenue to the east and Burns Court to the south.” With all the parcels comprising the site having been combined earlier this year — as city documents show — the formal address of the Lumora would be 300 S. Palm Ave., Freedman pointed out.
The new concept calls for “a total of 169 Independent Living residential units and nine (9) attainable rental units,” Freedman continued.
Life Enriching Communities explains on its website that “Independent living is a residential setting for senior adults who want to continue living independently while having access to amenities, programs, and services.” It adds, “If you want the fun atmosphere of living in a complex of apartments, condos, or single-family units, this is a great choice for adults ages 55 and older.”
The Lumora’s market-rate units would have two or three bedrooms and average 2,385 square feet, Freedman pointed out. Five, one-bedroom units averaging 900 square feet and four, two-bedroom units averaging 1,185 square feet would make up the attainable units.
The latest series of DRC comments about the Adagio — before the project details changed — included the Planning/Zoning note that the required attainable housing units would need to “have an exterior appearance that is indistinguishable from and functionally equivalent to the market-rate housing units in accordance with the definition of Attainable Housing per Section II-201 [of the city’s Zoning Code].”
“There is now a single tower with consistent glazing and exterior finishes,” Freedman explained in his Sept. 14 letter.
Additionally, he wrote, the Lumora will consist of a four-level podium with a six-floor residential tower on top of that podium, creating a 10-story building. “The Podium includes a Basement and Mezzanine between the Ground Floor and Level 2,” he added.
As a Ronco Construction blog points out, “In its simplest form, podium construction refers to a multi-level building where one or more floors, usually made of concrete or steel, form a ‘podium’ base that supports several stories of wood-framed residential units above.
The company adds, “This approach gives you the right unit count without sacrificing parking, retail or amenity space at the ground level. Unlike traditional garden-style apartments or full concrete high-rises, podiums offer a middle ground. Garden-style developments spread horizontally, requiring more land, while all-concrete towers push costs significantly higher. Podium construction delivers the benefits of a high-rise without the price tag, making it especially appealing for developers in land-constrained or high-value urban areas.
“ ‘If you had to make room for a parking lot, the building becomes 25% of the size,’ ” Senior Project Manager Nate Bledsoe explains in the article. “ ‘By building a podium, you stack residential over parking or retail. You’re killing two birds with one stone.’ ”
Among other details in the Sept. 14 documents Freedman sent Senior Planner Toellner, Freedman wrote that the plans call for a 6,500-square-foot restaurant with 260 seats and a total of 26,240 square feet for retail shops.
Freedman’s letter said the plans for the 32,740 square feet of space on the ground and mezzanine floors of the Lumora include “a proposed fine dining restaurant, coffee bistro, medical offices, [an office for the Church of the Redeemer] and general retail spaces.” He added, “The previous plan included 31,315 [square feet] of non-residential [uses].”
Muskara told the DRC members on Oct. 7 that the fourth floor of the Lumora would feature the “amenities deck.”
The application for the Adagio called for one 18-story structure with market-rate units and a companion nine-story building. As The Sarasota News Leader has reported, the approximately 2.24-acre site is zoned Downtown Core, which allows for 10 stories by right.
During the March 5, 2025 DRC meeting, Noah Fossick, then the city’s chief planner, told the project team members that, as designed, the Adagio would be “maybe the largest bulk of any building, other than potentially The Vue, in the city at this point.”
The Vue combines the Westin Sarasota and condominiums at the intersection of U.S. 41 and Gulfstream Avenue.
The Development Review Committee (DRC) members represent the city departments and divisions that deal with land-use issues. Additionally, the committee has representatives of the Sarasota County School Board and the Sarasota County Fire Department.
On May 20 of this year, Lucia Panica, director of the city’s Development Services Department, notified the Adagio project team on May 20 that the plans had received partial sign-off from staff — a fact that Toellner reiterated during the Oct. 7 DRC meeting.
Controversial plans regarding trees on the site
The initial plans for the Adagio prompted community opposition to the proposed removal of numerous trees on the site, as the News Leader also has reported.
Among DRC comments that Freedman addressed in his Sept. 14 letter, he directed Jackie Hartley, the city’s senior arborist, to the “updated tree impact narrative” that he had attached.
Hartley had pointed out that the project team would need to prove that “all reasonable efforts have been made to relocate the infrastructure improvements or structure to preserve the two grand Slash pines” on the site.
Grand trees are so called because of the diameter of their trunks at breast height, a standard measurement for arborists, city staff has explained.
Freedman’s attachment combined three alternative design plans and accompanying narratives. It said that they “support a determination that two pine trees that qualify as ‘grand trees’ (Tree #43 & #44) in the northwest area of the development site may be removed.”
The attachment continued, “The development site is zoned DTC [Downtown Core] and has frontage on Ringling Boulevard that is designated both a Primary Street and a Required Retail frontage. Given the location of the two grand trees, it is impossible to build any structure meeting the required retail frontage, parallel frontage, required layers, and required corner treatment provisions imposed by the Zoning Code.”
It further pointed out, “Central to each of the Alternative Designs is that the footprint of the building podium (from the Basement to Level 3) does not substantially change. This is due to the location of the two slash pine trees rendering a significant area of the site unbuildable. Within this constraint the podium in each design was maximized in an attempt to make the design viable.”
Further, the attachment said, “The Applicant engaged both a state-registered Landscape Architect and a certified Master Arborist to inspect the trees. The Master Arborist’s Report suggested a 30-foot buffer outside of the root protection zone to protect the pine trees from future construction,” adding that that buffer was used in the alternative designs.
“Additionally,” it continued, “the development site is subject to a constraint: an off-site parking easement favoring the Church of the Redeemer requires additional parking spaces be set aside and available to the Church.”
Freedman confirmed during the Oct. 7 DRC meeting that those spaces had been reserved for the Church of the Redeemer.
“This requires the Applicant to exceed code requirements for parking,” the attachment added.
The Sept. 14 letter also included a Tree Protection Plan written by Richard Bailey of Gainesville, who was identified as an ISA (International Society of Arboriculture) board-certified master arborist. The date on the document was April 14.
He explained that he had conducted an initial site visit in October 2025, followed up by a trip to the property on April 2.
Bailey described Slash Pine No. 44 as being “in good condition with no obvious defects,” though he noted, “It does lean to the South slightly with the majority of the canopy on the South side,” and it has “flattened canopy.”
Bailey reported the same good condition for Slash Pine No. 43, noting that it is the northernmost of the two pines.
Then he explained, “It is my opinion as a Forester and Board Certified Master Arborist that this species of trees is notoriously difficult [to] preserve and [has] a greater risk of death than hardwood species when near new development. It is uncertain that they will survive and thrive even with the best preservation techniques. Factors such as bark beetles, drought, lighting, and windstorms are not completely manageable during the construction project.”
In fact, he pointed out, “The same species are dying in other locations in the city with no site disturbance. It is opined that wind damage from hurricanes, drought, and presence of Bark Beetles have led to the losses. Even applying the best-known conservation practices,” he continued, “there is a significant chance that an unknown factor may cause the failure of the preservation effort.”
The future of the historic U.S. Garage building
Near the end of the Oct. 7 exchanges with the DRC members, Freedman also noted that the team will need an extension of time for the demolition permit that it already had received from the city. He never mentioned the historic U.S. Garage building that the developer has planned to demolish, so that land can be part of the Adagio initiative.
The Sarasota Alliance for Historic Preservation (SAHP) filed a petition in June in the 12th Judicial Circuit Court, asking that a judge overturn the decision of the City of Sarasota’s Board of Adjustment to deny the nonprofit’s appeal of a demolition permit city staff had issued for the historic structure.
The Board of Adjustment (BOA) members had to determine first whether the SAHP qualified as an “aggrieved person,” so the appeal could be heard.
Ultimately, the BOA members agreed that the Alliance did not meet the city Zoning Code’s definition of an aggrieved person; therefore, the Alliance lacked “standing” to proceed with the appeal, as Sarasota attorney Corinna S. Coser, of the Bentley Goodrich Kison firm, explained in the petition.
Cornell Law School’s Legal Information Institute explains that standing “is the capacity of a party to bring a lawsuit in court.” The Institute adds, “To have standing, a party must demonstrate a sufficient connection to and harm from the law or action being challenged.
Circuit Judge Andrea M. Johnson has scheduled an hour-long hearing — in her courtroom and via Zoom — at 10 a.m. on Tuesday, Oct. 27, during which she will conduct oral arguments in the case, the Leader learned from a review of the case docket.
The City of Sarasota, the Sarasota Board of Adjustment and DT Sarasota Development all are defendants in the litigation.