Ramirez addresses board about initiative begun with letter from attorney who represented developer of one of proposed hotels
The Siesta Key resident who won two legal challenges against the county a couple of years ago, which stopped the construction plans for two high-rise hotels on the barrier island, has called on the Sarasota County Commission to intervene in a matter that could facilitate a renewed effort to build tall hotels on Siesta.
During the Open to the Public portion of the commission’s regular meeting on Oct. 8, Lourdes Ramirez pointed out that the county’s new zoning administrator, James Ehrmann, provided a determination in a May 6 letter to Sarasota attorney William Merrill III, of the Icard Merrill firm, that hotels and condominium units rented as short-term accommodations — referred to as “condo hotels” — “are commercial in nature and should be treated as such for the purposes of use, land-use, land-use classification, use categories, and development standards …”
(Ramirez has noted in communications this month to members and supporters of a nonprofit she serves as president — Protect Siesta Key — that condo hotels “exist only in Siesta Key’s residential multifamily [zoning] districts.”)
However, Ehrmann did point out in his letter to Merrill that hotels and condo hotels “shall be considered a residential use for density purposes.”
Ehrmann cited Section 124-305 of the county’s Unified Development Code (UDC), which contains all of the land-use and zoning regulations.
That part of the UDC, he noted, defines “transient accommodations” as shown below:
Then, in his letter, Ehrmann emphasized that the county definition of transient accommodations “shall include hotels, motels, inn, extended-stay facility, bed and breakfasts, boatels or other similar uses.” Yet he also stressed the fact that the UDC makes it clear that transient accommodations “shall be considered a residential use for density purposes …”
Further, Ehrmann wrote that, “based on the provisions of the UDC, the Florida Statutes, and the NAICS [the North American Industry Classification System], and given the fact the Hotels and Condo Hotels are advertised or held out to the public as a place regularly rented to guests, provide customary hotel services and facilities that are commercial in nature, and require a license issued by the Florida Department of Business & Professional Regulation Division of Hotels and Restaurants, [it was his interpretation] that Hotels and Condo Hotels are commercial in nature and should be treated as such for the purposes of use, land-use, land-use classification, use categories, and development standards …”
Then Ehrmann pointed out, “Changing the method in which a transient accommodation calculates its unit count, removing the provision that a transient accommodation be ‘considered a residential use for density purposes,’ or any amendment to the standards or definitions applicable to transient accommodations of the UDC, requires a text amendment to the UDC.”
Ehrmann’s LinkedIn account says he became the county’s zoning administrator in April. Prior to that, he served as assistant zoning administrator for four years and four months, the account notes. County staff confirmed for The Sarasota News Leader, via email on Oct. 16, that Ehrmann was promoted to zoning administrator on April 19.
The 2021 County Commission vote and subsequent litigation
In late October 2021, attorney Merrill won a 3-2 vote of the County Commission in favor of amending the UDC to eliminate the counting of hotel and motel rooms for residential density purposes countywide. The County Code allowed for a maximum of 13 dwelling units per acre, with up to 26 hotel rooms per acre allowed by Special Exception, on any parcel zoned Commercial General, as long as none of the rooms had kitchens.
At the time, Merrill was representing a developer who wanted to construct an 85-foot-tall, 170-room hotel on Calle Miramar, on the edge of Siesta Village.
While it takes only three commissioners’ votes to modify the UDC, a supermajority — four — must vote in favor of any amendment to the county’s Comprehensive Plan, which guides growth in the community. The Comprehensive Plan includes Future Land Use Policy 2.9.1, which limits residential density and intensity on the barrier islands to the level in place as of March 13, 1989:
Siesta resident Ramirez pursued two types of challenges of the County Commission vote for the UDC amendment that followed a public hearing held on Oct. 27, 2021. In the first, she filed a complaint with the Florida Division of Administrative Hearings (DOAH), contending that the UDC amendment violated the language in Future Land Use Policy 2.9.1. She initiated action in the 12thJudicial Circuit Court on the same basis.
In December 2023, after Ramirez won both cases in 2023, the County Commission repealed the UDC ordinance.
Yet, in October 2023, Benderson Development Co. launched a process to amend the Comprehensive Plan so it could construct a high-rise hotel on property it owns in Siesta Village. Additionally, attorney Merrill filed a new application with county Planning and Development Services staff, seeking to revive the Calle Miramar hotel project.
As of Oct. 13, the Benderson Comprehensive Plan application remained under review, The Sarasota News Leader learned from a review of county Planning Division actions. However, in May, Merrill withdrew the hotel proposal from consideration, the News Leader confirmed through county records this week.
‘Any policy change of this magnitude requires Commission approval’
During her Oct. 8 comments to the County Commission, Ramirez referred to Ehrmann’s May 6 determination letter that said hotels have a commercial classification.
“While that might be true for the mainland,” she said, “it contradicts two court decisions I have won for the barrier islands.”
She added, with emphasis, “We don’t need to debate whether hotels and condo hotels are a commercial use for Siesta Key, since it was already decided by the court that it’s a residential use.”
Then Ramirez said, “I’m just asking for the county to send a revised letter — or maybe a supplemental letter — to make sure that is clear.”
On Oct. 6, Ramirez had written an email to the commissioners about Ehrmann’s actions.
She pointed out in it that while Ehrmann’s “interpretation is partially correct, it is incomplete and, as applied to the barrier islands, conflicts with the Sarasota County Comprehensive Plan — specifically Future Land Use (FLU) Policy 2.9.1, which prohibits any increase in density or intensity on the barrier islands beyond what was allowed prior to March 13, 1989.”
Ramirez then pointed out, with emphasis, “As confirmed through two successful legal challenges I brought against the County, the controlling ordinance governing transient accommodations (hotels) on the barrier islands is Zoning Ordinance 83-08,” a copy of which she had attached to her email. (It was the basis of Circuit Judge Hunter Carroll’s ruling for Ramirez in August 2023 in the hotel litigation.)
She added, “This ordinance clearly states:
“ ‘A transient accommodation shall be considered a residential use.’
“This definition is not limited to density purposes — it applies to all aspects of land use and zoning. Therefore, the Zoning Administrator’s current interpretation, which reclassifies hotels and condo hotels as commercial uses for land-use classification and development standards, directly conflicts with both the Comprehensive Plan and established County ordinances.
“Moreover,” she continued — again, with emphasis — “redefining condo hotels — such as the Hyatt at 915 Seaside Drive which is located on an RMF [residential multi-family] property — as commercial uses amounts to a de facto rezoning of residential property to commercial use, a change that can only occur through a supermajority vote of the County Commission. And it conflicts with FLU Policy 2.9.3, which strictly prohibits new commercial rezonings on the barrier islands.”
Ramirez also pointed out, “When [Zoning Administrator Ehrmann’s] redefinition of condo hotels as a commercial use is combined with the extensive amenities typical of such developments and the proposal to allow voluntary condo rebuilds to maintain high density and expand in size, the result would be the transformation of our residential multifamily neighborhoods into commercial hubs.”
She was referring to an initiative that Commissioner Mark Smith of Siesta Key began in January 2022, before his election to the board. He has advocated for changes in the UDC and the Comprehensive Plan to allow owners of condominium complexes to demolish them voluntarily and rebuild them with the same number of units. However, they would have to conform to all county regulations and the Florida Building Code.
Ramirez added in her email to the board members, “This action by the Zoning Administrator effectively bypasses the County Commission’s legislative authority and creates significant legal exposure for Sarasota County by undermining long-standing protections that limit intensity and preserve the residential character of the barrier islands.
“For these reasons, I respectfully urge the County Commission to:
- “Review this zoning interpretation and its compliance with the Comprehensive Plan;
- “Direct that a revised interpretation letter be issued to Mr. Merrill, correcting the inconsistency; and
- “Ensure that staff understand that any policy change of this magnitude requires Commission approval, not administrative redefinition.”
Chair Joe Neunder thanked Ramirez for the letter the same day, copying County Administrator Jonathan Lewis and County Attorney Joshua Moye, as well as Zoning Administrator Ehrmann. Neunder then asked to speak with Lewis and Moye about Ramirez’s information.
None of the commissioners addressed the issue after she offered her public comments during the Oct. 8 board meeting.
A warning to the zoning administrator
Prior to sending her letter to the commissioners, Ramirez wrote Zoning Administrator Ehrmann on Sept. 30, explaining that she had learned of his May 6 letter to Merrill through materials she received as a result of a public records request.
She made many of the same points she had included in her letter to the commissioners.
Then Ramirez added, “The potential consequences of redefining transient accommodations and condo hotels as a commercial use for land-use classification, use categories, and development standards can be significant on Siesta Key and create conflicts with the Comprehensive Plan.
“For this reason, I respectfully request that a revised letter be issued to Mr. Bill Merrill, with copies provided to me and my attorneys, Jane Graham and Richard Grosso. Due to the legal nature of this issue, I have copied Matt Osterhoudt and David Pearce who should be made aware of our concerns over this issue.”
Osterhoudt is director of the county’s Planning and Development Services Department, while Pearce is the deputy county attorney who handled Ramirez’s legal challenges regarding the proposed high-rise hotels on Siesta.